HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-09-12; City Council; 10256; AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN, LOCAL COASTAL PLAN AND THE ZONING CODE TO PROHIBIT ON-SHORE OIL AND GAS SUPPORT FACILITIES UNLESS CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DISCRETIONARY PERMITS ARE APPROVED. GPA/LU 89-2/LCPA 89-1/ZCA 89-1k
0 m m
cn I
03
4
cT\ N ffl
cn I
co
(I)
.m
d
-TI u 1 rl 0
(I] aJ d
b
TI a, u a
a 0
4
.m r: 0 -d u (d
$4
(d rl U
nr- a,.
m aJI
-rl z ?m
u
%$
zcd a!=
d
SG a, .rl
u-d
a0 $4
a, g: kU a3 aa (do
riu u
*rl G UH d 3a
ucd Od
cn co \
c\l
\ rl
cn
7 * Clm OF CARLSBAD - AGENW BILL
AB# /'el i &fj i-
AND GAS SUPPORT FACILITIES UNLESS CERTAIN FINDINGS MTG. 9/12/89
DEP AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN, LOCAL COASTAL
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
CITl DEPT.
CITY MND THE ZONING CODE TO PROHIBIT ON-SHORE OIL
PLN AND DISCRETIONARY PERMITS ARE APPROVED.
GPA/I U 89-7/1 CPA 89-1/7CA 89 1 TY OF CAWAD --
Both the Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Cour
APPROVE the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director introduce Ordinance No. J,5 -.27 z APPROVING ZCA 89-1, ADOPT City Cour Resol uti on No. %(I - '3 $?j APPROVING GPA/LU 89-2, ADOPT City Cour Resolution No. %"I- 3 -3C- APPROVING LCPA 89-1, and direct staff to n application to the Coastal Commission.
n 9
2
0 z a
h
-?? q *
~~
.. z 0 F 0 a s z 3 0 0
ITEM EXPLANATION
On March 21, 1989 the City Council passed a Resolution of Intention to ar the six Local Coastal P1 ans, General P1 an, and Zoning Code to prohibit shore oil and gas support facilities unless they are found to be cornpat. with the plans, policies and ordinances of the City. Council also dire the Planning Director to bring the matter before the Planning Commission publ i c hearing and recommendation to the Counci 1 . The P1 anning Commi s recommended approval of the amendments on August 2, 1989. On-shore oil gas support facilities include, but are not limited to processing pla refineries, storage facilities, transfer stations, pipelines, warehou offices, tanker terminals and helicopter pads. The amendments include proposed findings that must be made by the Council in order for facilities to be permitted. Generally the findings deal with compatibi with the neighborhood, the potential threat of damage or injuries to ne residents, possible adverse environmental effects, and whether the pro is permitted in the underlying zone.
The proposed Zone Code Amendment would prohibit on-shore oil and facilities in all zones except C-M (Heavy Commercial-Limited Industrial (Industrial), and P-M (Planned Industrial). In those zones suck faci 1 i would require a planned industrial permit pursuant to Chapter 21.34 a conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 21.50.
The proposed amendment to all six segments of the Local Coastal Plan was available for a six week public review period. That review period sta on May 24, 1989 and ended July 5, 1989. An oversized publ i c notice of proposed amendment was publ i shed in the B1 ade Tribune. Six 1 etters received all in support of the proposed amendments. General Plan and I Coastal P1 an amended pol icy 1 anguage states that the support facil itie: prohibited because of potential adverse impacts and incompati bil i ty adjacent existing uses unless the six findings are made.
The City Attorney is recommending that the amendment not absolutely pro1
provides administrative remedies and has been modeled after other ordin'
that have not been successfully challenged. The proposed amendments pri policy direction and a regulatory means to restrict the areas of use an conditions under which the uses may be allowed. For further inform
the uses pending litigation in other communities. The proposed amen(
, please see the attached report to the Planning Commission.
i
i 7 T a 0
Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. 1L.12.5k
;'r
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that this project Mill not cause
significant environmental impacts and, therefore, has issued a Negat Declaration, dated June 7, 1989, which was approved by the P1 anr Commission on August 2, 1989. A copy of the environmental documents iz
file in the P1 anning Department.
FISCAL IMPACT
No direct fiscal impacts are anticipated.
EXHIBITS
1. Resolution Nos. %'/ - 3%';
2. Ordinance No. OS -d7 3. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2898, 2899, 2900 & 2901 4. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes dated, August 2, 1989
and 5 c, T ,J r;! [;:
5. Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated, August 2, 1989
1 '11 1 e a
L .I I/ 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
RESOLUTION NO. 89-329
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF
THE GENERAL PLAN TO PROHIBIT ON-SHORE OIL
AND GAS SUPPORT FACILITIES EXCEPT UPON THE CITY COUNCIL MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS. GPA/LU 89-2
WHEREAS, on August 2, 1989 the Carlsbad Pitann
Commission adopted Resolution Nos. 2898 and 2899 recommend
8
Amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan GPI! 9
to the City Council that the Negative Declaration,
10
11
l2 on September 12, 1989 held a public hearing to consider
13 recommendations and heard all persons interested in
14 opposed to General Plan Amendment GPA/LU 89-2; and
15
16
17
18
19
20 Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows:
21
22 correct.
23
24 Planning Commission in Resolution No. 2898 on file with
25 City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference consti
26 the findings of the City Council in this matter and
27 Negative Declaration is hereby approved.
28
89-2 be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsk
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was issued on i
7, 1989 and submitted to the State Clearinghouse for a 30
review period. No comments were received from that re1
period.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the (
1. That the above recitations are true
2. That the findings and conditions of
* '/I '
# 0
dk ll 3. That the findings and conditions of
I ll Planning Commission in Resolution No. 2899 on file with
2
3
4
5
6
7
City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference constit
the findings of the City Council in this matter and
General Plan Amendment GPA/LU 89-2 is hereby approved.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meet
of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California,
the 12th day of September , 1989 by the following vote
8// wit:
9
10
11
12
13
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Pettine, Mamaux '
NOES: None
ABSENT : None
14
15
16
I? (SEAL)
18
ATTEST :
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City\ Clerk
19 I
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 I1
27
28 -2-
J '/I ' m 0
6 /I
L.
1
2
3
4
RESOLUTION NO. 89-330
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING
ALL SIX SEGMENTS OF THE CARLSBAD LOCAL
COASTAL PLAN TO PROHIBIT ON-SHORE OIL AND
GAS SUPPORT FACILITIES EXCEPT UPON THE CITY COUNCIL MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS. LCPA 89-1
5
6
WHEREAS, on August 2, 1989 the Carlsbad P:Lann
Commission adopted Resolution Nos. 2898 and 2901 recommend 711 to the City Council that the Negative Declaration, and LC
a Coastal Plan, LCPA 89-1, be approved: and
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsk
on September 12, 1989 held a public hearing to consider
recommendations and heard all persons interested in
opposed to Local Coastal Plan Amendment LCPA 89-1; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was issued on J
7, 1989 and submitted to the State Clearinghouse for a 30
review period. No comments were received from that re\
l6 11 period.
17
18
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the C
Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows:
19 I 1. That the above recitations are true
20 1 correct.
21 Ij 2. That the findings and conditions of
22 11 Planning Commission in Resolution No. 2898 on file with
23 11 City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference constil
24 /I the findings ' of the City Council in this matter and
25
26
27
28
Negative Declaration is hereby approved.
....
....
.... ll II
' /I 0 m
I! c
3. That the findings and conditions of 1
Planning Commission in Resolution No. 2901 on file with '
City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference constit'
1
2
3 )I the findings of the City Council in this matter and the Lot
4
5
6
7
Coastal Plan Amendment LCPA 89-1 is hereby approved.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meet
of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California,
the 12th day of SeDtember , 1989 by the following vote,
8// wit:
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Pettine, Mamaux :
NOES: None
ABSENT : None
ATTEST :
LiLLQxL R. 6?oL ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Cherk
(SEAL)
I I
-2-
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
ORDINANCE NO. NS-87
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSB,AD,
CALIFORNIA AMENDING TITLE 21, OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL
CODE TO PROHIBIT ON-SHORE OIL FACILITIES EXCEPT IN THE C- M, M AND P-M ZONES UPON CERTAIN FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS.
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad does ordain as 1
SECTION I: Title 21, Chapter 21.42 of the Carlsbad IYunic
is amended by the amendment of Section 21.42.010 to add :
21.42.010(15) to read as follows:
"(15) In the C-M, M and P-M zones, on-shore oil and gas including, but not limited to processing plants, refineries facilities, transfer stations, pipelines, warehouses, office: terminal s, he1 icopter pads and the 1 i ke are prohibited except upon f the City Council that: (a) Approval of the proposed project and facilities
no danger to life and property to residents of the neighborhood, COI
City. (b) Approval of the proposed project will nc
potential threat of damage or injuries to nearby residents. (c) The benefits of the proposed project clearly ou
possible adverse environmental effects. (d) There are no feasible a1 ternatives to the project ; and
(e) The location and approval of the on-shore fac
the particular location clearly outweigh any potential harm to pub1
safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons r(
working in the neighborhood or community and will not be detri
injurious to property in the neighborhood, community or to the gener
of the City.
Such facil ities shall require a planned industrial permi to Chapter 21.34 and conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 21.
SECTION 11: That Title 21, Chapter 21.53 of the Carlsbad
Code is amended by the addition of Section 21.53.250 to read as fol
"21.53.250 On-shore oil and qas facilities. In all zo
C-M, M and P-M on-shore oil and gas facilities including, but not 1
processing plants, refineries, storage facilities, transfer
are prohibited. I'
pipe1 ines, warehouses, offices, tanker terminals, he1 icopter pads ar
SECTION 111: That Title 21, Chapter 21.30 of the Carlsbat
Code is amended by the addition of subsection 21.30.010(29) to read i
"(29) On-shore oil and gas facilities subject to the prc
,. -.
~
t-
-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
Section 21.42.010(15)."
SECTION IV: That Title 21, Chapter 21.32 of the Carl sbad
Code is amended by the addition of subsection 21.32.010(35) to read a
"(35) On-shore oil and gas facilities subject to the pro
SECTION V: That Title 21, Chapter 21.34 of the Carlsbad
Code is amended by the addition of subsection 21.34.020(11) to read a
"(11) On-shore oil and gas facilities subject to the pro
Section 21.42.010(15)."
Section 21.42.010(15)."
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty
its adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoptio
ordinance and cause it to be published at least once in the Carlsb
within fifteen days after its adoption.
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Car
Council on the 12thday of September , 1989, and thereafter
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
..*
...
. ..
...
...
-r
b ' ii @ e
ll
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Counc
1
2
City of Carlsbad on the 26th day of September, 1989, by the fcdlow
to wit:
3
4
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Pettine, Mamaux and Larson
1 NOES: None 5
6
ABSENT: Council Member Kulchin
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
7
a
9
10
11
12 I
13
ATTEST:
aRexRch- 7!- & - 14
17
16
15
20
19
18
23
22
21
26
25
24
27
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANI, City Clerk
28
I
a m
"
3
2
3
4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2898
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLS
CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO
GENERAL PLAN, LOCAL COASTAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE TO PROH ON-SHORE OIL AND GAS SUPPORT FACILITIES EXCEPT UPON THE
COUNCIL MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS.
APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD CASE NO.: GPA 89-2/LCPA 89-1/ZCA 89-1
5
6
7
8
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 2nd day of August,
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider sai
and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and cansic
9
10
11
12
13
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the i
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, tt
Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Dec'larai
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Corn
foll ows :
14
15
16
17
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, t~
Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative I
according to Exhibit "ND", dated June 7, 1989 and "PII", da'
findings;
1989, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based 0" thf
l8 1 Findinqs:
19 I 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial eviden
. proposed amendments may have a significant impact on the enw 2o I
21 2. The proposed amendments will serve to provide a review proces!
enable site specific environmental review to take place.
22 3. The findings included as part of the proposed amendments requi
23 consideration of adverse environmental impacts often associat,
facilities prior to granting approval of on-shore support fi 24!i ....
25 26 "
27 il I,
28 'I
....
....
" '11 '
0 0
" I! PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regul ar meeting of the '11 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day t
2 11 1989, by the following vote, to wit:
3
4
AYES: Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, McFadden, Holmes and Marcus.
5 NOES: None.
6 ABSENT: None e
7 ABSTAIN: None.
8
9
10
11 ATTEST:
rn?&&!
MATTHEW HALL, Chairman -
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
12
13 4tLt- \. ., , 4
/-
MICHAEL J. HOLBILLEU
14 11 PLANNING DIRECTOR
15
16
17
18
19 I1
20
21
22
23
24
25 I 26
27 PC RES0 NO. 2898 -2-
28
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: City of Carlsbad
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: An Amendment to the General Plan, Local Coastal P1
Zoning Ordinance to prohibit on-shore oil and gas support facilities (excel the City Council making certain findings.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above de: project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Cali
of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (decli
that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is
issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file
Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file
Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 920051. Cf from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the P
Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance.
Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of tl
DATED: June 7, 1989
CASE NO: GPA 89-2/ZC 89-1/
LCPA 89- 1
' \/\\,L<' (;I i i k \' ,\ \ \f& 7. i, "~~ ,I i.i L', ". MICHAEL J. HOLZ~ILLER 1
P1 anni ng Director
APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
PUBLISH DATE: June 7, 1989
ON: af
"_
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad. California 92009-4859 - (61 9) 4
~_"~ """ .." . .
" # r 0
ENVIRON~~ENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11
" (TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. GPA 89-2/ZCR 89.
LCPA 89-1 DATE : MAY 26. 19891
I. BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT! 2075 Las Palmas Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92009
(619) 438-1161
3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: Mav 17. 1989 -
11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written under Section I11 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation)
- YES MAY BE
1. Earth - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering
of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground
surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering of modification of any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in
which may modify the channel or a river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
siltation, deposition or erosion
"
. e C
2. & - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
c. Alteration of air movement,
moisture or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally or regionally?
3. Water - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patters, or the rate and
amount of surface water runoff?
c, Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters,
or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or
rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
or excavations?
interception of an aquifer by cuts
h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?
-2-
w
- YES MAY BE
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
1 - A 0
- YES MAY BE
4. Plant Life - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? "
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of plants? -
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species? -
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? -
5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of
animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
6. Noise - Will the proposal significantly
increase existing noise levels?
7. Lisht and Glare - Will the proposal sig-
nificantly produce new light or glare? "
8. Land Use - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area?
-3-
..
-.. 1 e w
"
9. Natural Resources - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resources?
natural resource?
10. Risk of UDset - Does the proposal involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
11. PoDulation - Will the proposal signif-
icantly alter the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area?
12. Housinq - Will the proposal signif- icantly affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation - Will the
proposal have significant results in:
a. Generation of additional vehicular
movement?
b, Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking?
C. Impact upon existing transportation systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
YES MAY BE,
"
"
"
"
-4-
L 0 - YES
"14. Public Services - will the proposal have
a significant effect upon, or have signif- icant results in the need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
15. Enersv - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources of
energy, or require the development of new sources of energy?
16. Utilities - Will the proposal have significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17. Human Health - Will the proposal have
significant results in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)?
-5-
MAY BE
-
-
-
-
-
"
0 0
- YES MAY BE
" 18. Aesthetics - Will the proposal have significant results in the obstruction
of any scenic vista or view open to the
public, or Will the proposal result in
creation of an aesthetically offensive public view? "
19. Recreation - Will the proposal have
significant results in the impact upon
the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? -
20. Archeoloffical/Historical/Paleontolosical - Will the proposal have significant
results in the alteration of a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure, object or
building?
21. Analyze viable alternatives to the proposed uroiect such ilS:
a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site desiq c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the
e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and 9) no project alternative.
a) The project consists of proposed General Plan, Local Coastal PI; and Zoning Ordinance Amendments which would prohibit on-shotre (
and gas support facilities unless the City Council makes all the six proposed findings developed for such uses. Propos facilities would be subject to review through either a Plan1 Industrial Permit or a Conditional Use Permit dependent upon 1 particular zone. Since there are no applications presenl pending for such facilities there is no reason to phase I applicability of the amendments.
b) The proposed project does not include a site design or des:
standards, therefore, alternative desiqns were not evaluated,
c) A specific construction project is not proposed as part of tl project. Because of this an alternate scale of development can1
be evaluated.
d) A site specific project is not a part of this project. As result alternate uses for a specific site could not be evaluatt
-6-
Question 21 (Continued) 0 . 0
-_ e) Adoption of the proposed amendments at some future time WQ{J~~
be beneficial as exploration and drilling for oil off Carlsbad Coast Could occur in the near future should the fede government lease those tracts. The proposed amendments w prevent adverse environmental impacts associated with related shore support facilities unless the City Council finds am other things that there are no feasible alternatives and that
project's benefits clearly outweigh the possible adve environmental effects. In addition, the amendment provide: means to review such proposals for those zones where it may
permitted.
f) Alternative sites were not evaluated since a specific site is proposed for development.
g) The no project alternative would result in the City not adopt policies directed at on-shore oil and gas support faciliti.es ( not providing a process within which such proposals can
reviewed. Therefore, the no project alternative has environmental advantage.
- YES MAY BE
22. Mandatory findinss of sisnificance -
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory.
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) -
-7-
e 0
c. Does the project have the possible
environmental effects which are in-
dividually limited but cumulatively
considerable? (l'cumulatively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? "
111. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The proposed amendments will reduce the potential for adverse envir effects which can be caused by on-shore suport facilities. Such
effects can include increased air pollution, water pollution,
noise, visual, scenic and aesthetic impacts.
11.1. Earth:
The proposed project, consisting of various code and plan ame contemplates no grading.
11.3 Water:
The proposal will not impact existing drainage courses or change ab rates.
11.4 Plant Life; 5. Animal Life:
No impact to plant or animal life will occur as the proposed amend not include development of a particular site.
11.8 Land Use
The proposed amendments will prevent to the greatest extent poss alteration of the planned land use of areas designated for Heavy com
Limited Industrial, Industrial, and Planned Industrial Developmen
will be accomplished by prohibiting the establishment of on-shore
facilities except upon the Council making the proposed findings and a Planned Industrial Permit or Conditional Use Permit depending zone of the property.
-8-
. ? m DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMEN AL EVALUATION (Continued)
-11.9 Natural Resources
The proposal Will assist in the preservation of natural resoul reducingthe potential for adverse environmental impacts related to 0 support facilities.
11.12 Housing
The proposed amendment will not create a demand for additional housir
prohibiting on-shore support facilities will not create job opport
resulting in increasing the need for housing.
11.18 Aesthetics:
The amendments provide a review process for on-shore support fac
which enables future environmental review to take place for visu,al i
11.19 Recreation
The proposed amendments will protect the quality and want recreational opportunities by prohibiting on-shore oil and gas facilities unless specified conditions are found to exist. The process for such facilities will provide for consideration of imF recreation areas such as public beaches and related uses.
-9-
TV. DETERMINATION (TO e Be Completed By The Planning w Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a siqnific,
effect on the environment, there Will not be a significant effec
this case because the mitigation measures described on an attack sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Neqative
Declaration will be proposed.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on thl environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
n
573 1/87 An % -
/ ' Date Signature
1". / '., Gc -1 j,ii Lt . L.~ L. & I .* ,i :c -4ILL I'
Date Plannind Dir&tor:
V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable)
-10-
kITIGATING MEASURES (Conclnued) a. w
VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING ME4 AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date Signature
-11-
‘I W W
1
2
3
4
5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2899
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO
UPON THE CITY COUNCIL MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD CASE NO. : GPA/LU 89-2
PROHIBIT ON-SHORE OIL AND GAS SUPPORT FACILITIES EXCEPT
ll WHEREAS, a verified application for an amendment to the
6 /I General P1 an Land Use Element, has been filed with the P1 anning Comm
7 I/ WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a r 8
9
amendment as provided in Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code;
II WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 2nd day 10 I 1989, hold a duly noticed publ ic hearing as prescribed by law t.o co
11 request;
12
13
14
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and cons
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be ~
Commission considered all factors relating to the General Plan Arne
15 11 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the P1 anning Co
16
17
the City of Carlsbad, as follows;
I1 A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
l8 // B) That based on the evidence presented at the publ ic h
19 1 Commission recommends APPROVAL of GPA/LU 89.-2, ba:
I I following findings: 20
21
Findinqs:
1. The proposed amendment clearly states the City’s policy towa
adverse impacts to the environment and the comnunity whicl 22 oil and gas support facilities by prohibiting them due t
23
2. The amendment includes six findings which the Council is requ 24
caused by such facilities.
that all potential impacts are adequately assessed. 25
to approve on-shore support facilities should they be propose1
26 3. The proposed amendment will not cause any significant er
impacts and a Negative Decl aration has been issued by t
27 Director on June 7, 1989 and recomnended for APPROVAL by t
I Commission on August 2, 1989.
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27 i
28
W m
Amendment:
The 1 and use element of the general plan is amer
amendment of Section V, D, 14 to add a paragraph to read as folloh
"Since the location and maintenance of on-share 1 support facilities including, but not limited to, processi refineries, storage facilities, transfer stations, pipe1 ines, 1 offices, tanker facilities, helicopter pads and other support present adverse environmental impacts which may include c, environmental damage to the marine ecosystem along Carlsbad's co; such further adverse environmental impacts as increased air plollu' pollution, noise, traffic, visual, scenic and aesthetic adverse iml on-shore facilities are prohibited except upon a finding by the C. that all of the following are true: (a) Approval of the proposed project and will pose no danger to 1 ife and property to residents of the ne community or City . (b) Approval of the proposed project !will potential threat of damage or injuries to nearby residents. (c) The benefits of the proposed proje outweigh the possible adverse environmental effects. (d) There are no feasible a1 ternatives to t~
project . (e) The 1 ocati on and approval of thl facilities at the particular location clearly outweigh any potenti public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare residing or working in the neighborhood or community and wi detrimental or injurious to property in the neighborhood, communit: general welfare of the City, and
under1 yi ng zone. "
(f) The proposed project is permitted
And further resolves that the appropriate sectic
applicable local coastal program segments be similarly amended i
carry out the intent of this prohibition.
....
....
....
....
....
....
PC RES0 NO. 2899
w w
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
11
~ 1
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of: th,
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day
1989, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, McFadden, Holmes & Marcus.
NOES : None.
ABSENT : None.
ABSTAIN: None.
MATTHEW HALL, Chairman CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
< bb!vu, MU(& -:
MICHAEL J. HOLZPriLLER u P1 anni ng Di rector
PC RES0 NO. 2899
1
2
3
4
5
w
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2900
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLS
CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONE CODE AMENDP AMENDING TITLE 21, CHAPTER 21.42, 21.53, 21.30, 21.32, and 21
OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, BY THE ADDITION OF SUBSECTIC
21.42.010(15), 21.53.250, 21.30.010(29), 21.32.010(35),
21.34.020(11), TO PROHIBIT ON-SHORE OIL AND GAS FACILITIES.
APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD
CASE NO.: ZCA 89-1
6
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said.! 7
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 2nd day of August
8 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and (cons
g
Commission considered all factors relating to the Zone Code Amendme 10
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be
11
fol 1 ows : 12
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the PI anning COI
13 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
14
15
16
17
I.8 I
19 ~
20
21
22
23
24
B) That based on the evidence presented at the pub1 ic hc Commission recommends APPROVAL of ZCA 89-1, according to E
dated August 2, 1989, attached hereto and made a part hereo
the foll owing findings.
Findinqs:
1. The proposed amendment will prohibit on-shore oil and c
which will generally be more compatible with such facilitie
2. On-shore support facilities will require the approval of a
facilities except in the C-M, M, and P-M Zones which allor
found in other zones. j
use permit in addition to determining that all of the propos
are true which will assure that a1 1 potential adverse identified and mitigated.
3. The proposed amendments will not cause any significant er:
impacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued by t
Director on June 7, 1989 and recommended for APPROVAL by t
Commission on August 2, 1989.
25
26
' ....
....
27 ! 28
* 1 rn W
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day (
1989, by the following vote, to wit:
1
2
3
4
AYES : Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, I McFadden, Holmes & Marcus.
5 NOES : None.
6 ABSENT: None.
7 ABSTAIN: None.
8 I(
9
10
11 ATTEST:
MATTt!EW HALL, Chai -
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
12
13
14 P1 anni ng Di rector
15
16
17
18 I
19 I
20
21
22
23
24
25 /I
26
27 i PC RES0 NO. 2900 .2-
28
* w w
1
2
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2901
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLS
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ALL SIX SEGMENTS OF THE CARLSBAD LOCAL. COA
APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLAN TO PROHIBIT ON-SHORE OIL AND GAS SUPPORT FACILITIES.
4 II CASE NO.: LCPA 89-1
I1 WHEREAS, Cal ifornia State 1 aw requires that the Local Coa:
5 11 General Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal
6
conformance; 7 WHEREAS, a verified application for an amendment to the Loc, *I1 Plan has been filed with the Planning Commission; and
9
10
11
12
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for
as provided in Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 2nd day of August,
a duly noticed publ ic hearing as prescribed by law to consider thc
l3 11 Local Coastal P1 an Amendments shown on Exhi bi t(s) "A" through 'IF",
14
15
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and consid
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be hc
16(( Commission considered all factors relating to the Local Coastal Plan
I.7 I/ WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six week publ
18 1i period for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program.
19 I NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Cornmiss
20
21
22
B) That the State mandated six week review period, was provided. 23
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
on May 24, 1989, and ending on July 5, 1989 and, staff has prl
24 the Planning Commission a summary of the comments received.
City of Carlsbad, as follows:
25
~
C) That based on the evidence presented at the public heal
Commission recommends APPROVAL of LCPA 89-1 as shown on Exh
26 1 through 'IF", dated August 2, 1989, attached hereto and made a pi based on the following findings:
27
28 I I
b. I 7 v w
Findinss:
1. The proposed Local Coastal P1 an Amendment is consistent with PC 1
2 the Coastal Act in regard to protecting the environment from si adverse impacts.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 2nd day of August, 19~
following vote, to wit:
3
4
5
6
7
AYES: Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, f McFadden, Holmes & Marcus.
8 11 NOES : None.
9 I/ ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None. 10
11
12 . . . . . . . . - . .
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMI:
MATTHEW HALL. Chairman SION
I.3 11 ATTEST:
14 "
l5 ic"k!*3dG i ,, 16 11 P1 anning Director
I? !I l8
19 ! j i
2o ~
21
22
23
24
25 ! 26 I PC RES0 NO. 2901
27 28 ! -2-
1 a 0 EXHIBIT "A" DATED AUGUST 2,
MELLO I SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
SECTION ACTION
2. Standard Pacific (p. 3)
3. Occidential Land, Inc. (p. 8)
Add Policy 6: On: Oil and Gas Suppol Facilities.
Add Policy 5: On?
Facilities. Oil and Gas Suppol
4. Rancho La Costa (Hunt Properties) (p. 18) Add Policy 7: On: Oil and Gas Suppol Facilities.
Proposed Policy: ON-SHORE OIL AND GAS SUPPORT FACILITIES
Since the location and maintenance of on-shore oil and gas support facil including, but not limited to, processing plants, refineries, storage facili. transfer stations, pipelines, warehouses, offices, tanker facilities, helicc pads and other support facilities present adverse environmental impacts \ may include catastrophic environmental damage to the marine ecosystem , Carlsbad's coastline and such further adverse environmental impacts as incrc air pollution, water pollution, noise, traffic, visual, scenic and aestl adverse impacts, such on-shore facilities are prohibited except upon a fil by the City Council that all of the following are true:
(a) Approval of the proposed project and facilities will pose no d to life and property to residents of the neighborhood, communi City.
(b) Approval of the proposed project will not pose a potential t of damage or injuries to nearby residents.
(c) The benefits of the proposed project clearly outweigh the pos adverse environmental effects.
(d) There are no feasible alternatives to the proposed project.
(e) The location and approval of the on-shore facilities at particular location clearly outweigh any potential harm to p health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general we1 fa) persons residing or working in the neighborhood or community anc not be detrimental or injurious to property in the neighbor community or to the general welfare of the City, and
(f) The proposed project is permitted within the underlying zone.
a EXHIBIT I'B"
DATED AUGUST 2, 1
MELLO I1 SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
SECTION ACT I ON
9. Exhibits
Create new Section 9
Change to Sectior
Exhibits.
Title new Sectior Onshore Oil and I Sucmort Faci 1 i ti E and establish ., Pol icy 9-1.
Proposed Policy 9-1 ONSHORE OIL AND GAS SUPPORT FACILITIES PROHIBITED
Since the location and maintenance of on-shore oil and gas support fiici1. including, but not limited to, processing plants, refineries, storage facilii transfer stations, pipelines, warehouses, offices, tanker facilities, helicc pads and other support facilities present adverse environmental impacts \ may include catastrophic environmental damage to the marine ecosystem i Carlsbad's coastline and such further adverse environmental impacts as incrt
air pollution, water pollution, noise, traffic, visual, scenic and aestl adverse impacts, such on-shore facilities are prohibited except upon a fil by the City Council that all of the following are true:
(a) Approval of the proposed project and facilities will pose no di to life and property to residents of the neighborhood, communi' City.
(b) Approval of the proposed project will not pose a potenti a1 ti of damage or injuries to nearby residents.
(c) The benefits of the proposed project clearly outweigh the pos adverse environmental effects.
(d) There are no feasible alternatives to the proposed project.
(e) The location and approval of the on-shore facilities at
health, safety, peace, moral s, comfort, and general we1 far persons residing or working in the neighborhood or community and not be detrimental or injurious to property in the neighbor community or to the general welfare of the City, and
particular location clearly outweigh any potential harm to p
(f) The proposed project is permitted within the underlying zone.
I 0
EXHIBIT ‘IC” DATED AUGUST 2,
AGUA HEDIONDA SEGMENT OF THE
LOCAL COASTAL PLAN
SECTION ACTION
111. Land Use Plan, Section 1. (p. 17) Add policy 1.11
Pol icy 1.11
Since the location and maintenance of on-shore oil and gas support facil
including, but not limited to, processing plants, refineries, storage facili transfer stations, pipe1 ines, warehouses, offices, tanker facilities, lhelic pads and other support facilities present adverse environmental impacts may include catastrophic environmental damage to the marine ecosystem Carlsbad’s coast1 ine and such further adverse environmental impacts as incl air pollution, water pollution, noise, traffic, visual, scenic and aesi adverse impacts, such on-shore facilities are prohibited except upon a f1 by the City Council that all of the following are true:
(a) Approval of the proposed project and facilities will pose no c to life and property to residents of the neighborhood, communi City.
(b) Approval of the proposed project wi 11 not pose a potential t of damage or injuries to nearby residents.
(c) The benefits of the proposed project clearly outweigh the pos adverse environmental effects.
(d) There are no feasible alternatives to the proposed project.
(e) The location and approval of the on-shore facilities at particular location clearly outweigh any potential harm to p health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfal persons residing or working in the neighborhood or community anc not be detrimental or injurious to property in the neighbor community or to the general welfare of the City, and
(f) The proposed project is permitted within the underlying zone.
0 ' EXHIBIT "0"
DATED AUGUST 2
EAST BATIQUITOS LAGOON/HUNT PROPERTIES
SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
SECTION ACT ION -
a. Land Uses Permitted Pursuant to a Master P1 an (Page 1) Add the proposed , ment 1 i sted below to the sentence wI reads "Speci f i cal the uses shall be foll ows: 'I
ProDosed Amendment:
Since the location and maintenance of on-shore oil and gas support faci' including, but not limited to, processing plants, refineries, storage facill transfer stations, pipelines, warehouses, offices, tanker facilities, helic pads and other support facil i ties present adverse environmental impacts may include catastrophic environmental damage to the marine ecosystem Carlsbad's coastline and such further adverse environmental impacts as incr air pollution, water pollution, noise, traffic, visual, scenic and aesl adverse impacts, such on-shore facilities are prohibited except upon a f. by the City Council that all of the following are true:
(a) Approval of the proposed project and facilities will pose no ( to life and property to residents of the neighborhood, commun. City.
(b) Approval of the proposed project will not pose a potential I
(c) The benefits of the proposed project clearly outweigh.the PO:
(d) There are no feasible alternatives to the proposed project.
(e) The location and approval of the on-shore facilities a. particular location clearly outweigh any potential harm to r: health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general we1 fa persons residing or working in the neighborhood or community an1 not be detrimental or injurious to property in the neighbor community or to the general welfare of the City, and
of damage or injuries to nearby residents.
adverse environmental effects.
(f) The proposed project is permitted within the underlying sone.
0 EXHIBIT "E"
DATED AUGUST 2,
WEST BATIOUITOS LAGOON/SA"IS PROPERTIES
SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
SECTION ACTION -
Land Use (p. 5) Add Section fl.
Onshore Oil and E sumort facilitic
Proposed Section R. Onshore Oil and Gas SuDDort Facilities
Since the location and maintenance of on-shore oil and gas support facili
transfer stations, pipe1 ines, warehouses, offices, tanker facilities, he1 icc
pads and other support facilities present adverse environmental impacts h may include catastrophic environmental damage to the marine ecosystem 2 Carlsbad's coastline and such further adverse environmental impacts as incrc air pollution, water pollution, noise, traffic, visual, scenic and aestk adverse impacts, such on-shore facilities are prohibited except upon a fir by the City Council that all of the following are true:
including, but not limited to, processing plants, refineries, storage fatilit
(a) Approval of the proposed project and faci 1 i ti es wi 11 pose no d; to life and property to residents of the neighborhood, communi1 City.
(b) Approval of the proposed project will not pose a potential tt of damage or injuries to nearby residents.
(c) The benefits of the proposed project clearly outweigh the pos: adverse environmental effects.
(d) There are no feasible alternatives to the proposed project.
(e) The location and approval of the on-shore facilities at particular location clearly outweigh any potential harm to pt health, safety, peace, moral s, comfort, and general we1 far persons residing or working in the neighborhood or community and not be detrimental or injurious to property in the neighbor1 community or to the general welfare of the City, and
(f) The proposed project is permitted within the underlying zone.
0 @ EXHIBIT “F” DATED AUGUST 2,
THE VILLAGE DESIGN MANUAL (REDEVELOPMENT AREA1
SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
SECTION ACTION -
V. Design Guidelines for the Village Redevelopment Area (p. 3)
Add a new paragr fol 1 owing paragr three. Onshore and gas support
facilities prohibited.
Since the location and maintenance of on-shore oil and gas support facil including, but not limited to, processing plants, refineries, storage facili transfer stations, pipelines, warehouses, offices, tanker facilities, helic pads and other support facil i ties present adverse environmental impacts may include catastrophic environmental damage to the marine ecosystem Carlsbad’s coastline and such further adverse environmental impacts as incr air pollution, water pollution, noise, traffic, visual, scenic and aesl adverse impacts, such on-shore facilities are prohibited except upon a fl by the City Council that all of the following are true:
(a) Approval of the proposed project and facilities will pose no ( to life and property to residents of the neighborhood, colnmun. City.
(b) Approval of the proposed project will not pose a potential 1 of damage or injuries to nearby residents.
(c) The benefits of the proposed project clearly outweigh the pol adverse environmental effects.
(d) There are no feasible alternatives to the proposed project.
(e) The location and approval of the on-shore facilities a particular location clearly outweigh any potential harm to I health, safety, peace, moral s, comfort, and general we1 fa persons residing or working in the neighborhood or community an not be detrimental or injurious to property in the neighbol community or to the general welfare of the City, and
(f) The proposed project is permitted within the underlying zone
W e
EXCERPTS OF DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 2, 1989 DRAFT
3) GPA/LU 89-2/LCPA 89-1/ZCA 89-1 CITY OF CARLSBAD -
Request for approval of an Amendment to the Land Use
Element of the General Plan, Local Coastal Plan
Amendment, and Zone Code Amendment to prohibit on-shore
oil and gas support facilities except upon the City
Council making certain findings.
Gary Wayne, Principal Planner, reviewed the background of the
request and stated that the proposed amendments to the Land
Use Element of the General Plan, all six segments of the
Local Coastal Plan, and a Zone Code amendment were initiated
by the City Council on March 21, 1989. The Council on that
date adopted a resolution declaring its intent to consider
amending the above documents to prohibit on-shore oil and gas
support facilities unless they are found to be compatible
with the plans, policy, and ordinances of the City. The type
of support facilities considered were processing plants,
refineries, storage facilities, transfer stations, pipelines,
warehouses, offices, tanker terminals, and helicopter pads.
The findings that would be required by the Council deal with
compatibility with the neighborhood, the potential threat of
damage or injuries to nearby residents, possible adverse
environmental effect, and whether the project is permitted in
the underlying zone. The proposed ZCA would prohibit the
location of these support facilities in all zones except our
three industrial zones (C-My M, and P-M) , In those zones
such facilities would require a planned industrial permit
pursuant to Chapter 21.34 and a Conditional Use Permit.
The proposed amendment has already undergone a six-week
public review period where copies of the amendment were
circulated to interested parties as well as publication of an
oversized ad in the Blade-Tribune. During that six-week
AugusE 2, 1,989 Pw COMMISSION Page 8 0
review period, only six letters were received, all in support
of the proposed amendments, which are on file in the Planning
Department. The City Attorney's office is recommending that
the amendment not absolutely prohibit these uses due to
pending litigation in other communities that have established
similar ordinances. The ordinances were modeled after the
ordinances of other cities which have not been challenged.
Staff feels that the proposed amendments provide policy
direction and recommends approval.
Commissioner Holmes requested confirmation that the ordinance
will not be retroactive. Gary Wayne replied that this is
correct.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if the SDG&E facilities at Encina
would be affected in any way. Gary Wayne replied that SDG&E
is not affected because they are an existing use and their
storage facilities are for the generation of electricity
rather than off-shore drilling. Any expansion of that use
would require an amendment to the Specific Plan and would
require discretionary action.
Commissioner McFadden inquired if pending litigation is due
to a total ban of support facilities. Ron Ball, Assistant
City Attorney, replied that a trial court ruling was made
partially in favor of the Western Oil and Gas Association,
which is on appeal before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Chairman Hall opened the public testimony and issued the
invitation to speak.
There being no persons desiring to address the Commission on
this topic, Chairman Hall declared the public testimony
closed and opened the item for discussion among the
Commission members.
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired of the City Attorney if
Resolution No. 2898, line 21, could be reworded to strike the
reference to discouraging on-shore support facilities. He
would like Finding #2 to read, "The proposed amendments will
serve to provide a review process which ...'I. Ron Ball
replied that the comment is well taken.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt Erwin
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2898 approving the Hall
Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and Holmes
adopt Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2899, 2900, and Marcus
2901, approving GPA/LU 89-2, LCPA 89-1, and ZCA 89-1 based McFadden
on the findings contained therein, with the correction Schlehuber
to Line 21 of Resolution No. 2898 as suggested. Schramm
0 A 8 ICATION COMPLETE DP May 17, 1989
STAFF REPORT a
DATE : August 2, 1989
TO : PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM : PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: GPA/LU 89-2/LCPA 89-1/ZCA 89-1 - CITY OF CARLSBAD - An Amendmen the General P1 an, Local Coastal P1 an and Zoning Code to proh on-shore oil and gas support facilities except upon the City COu making certain findings.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution iNo. APPROVING the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director, a.nd fi Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2899, 2900, and 2901, approving GPA/LU 2, LCPA 89-1, and ZCA 89-1 based on the findings contained therein.
11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The proposed amendments to the Land Use Element of the General Plan, all segments of the Local Coastal Plan, and the Zoning Code were initiated bj
declaring its intent to consider amending the above documents to prohibit shore oil and gas support facilities unless they are found to be compatible the plans, policies and ordinances of the City. Council also directed Planning Director to bring the matter before the Planning Commission for PI hearing and recommendation to the Council. On-shore oil and gas SUI facilities include, but are not limited to processing plants, refineries, st( facilities, transfer stations, pipelines, warehouses, offices, tanker term and helicopter pads. The amendments include six proposed findings that mu made by the Council in order for such facil ities to be permitted. General 1 findings deal with compatibility with the neighborhood, the potential thre damage or injuries to nearby residents, possible adverse environmental effl and whether the project is permitted in the underlying zone.
The proposed Zoning Code Amendment would prohibit on-shore oil and gas facil in all zones except C-M (Heavy-Commercial -Limited Industri a1 ) , M (Industr and P-M (Planned Industrial). In those zones such facil i ties would requ planned industri a1 permit pursuant to Chapter 21.34 and a conditional use p
City Council on March 21, 1989. The Council on that date adopted a resoli
pursuant to Chapter 21 30.
The proposed amendment to all six segments of the Local Coastal Plan was available for a six-week public review period. That review period start May 24, 1989 and ended July 5, 1989. An oversized public notice of the pro amendment was published in the Blade Tribune. Six letters have been, rec all in support of the proposed amendments.
CITY OF CARLSBAD a
GPA/LU 89-2/LCPA 89-1/ZCA 89-1 August 2, 1989
PAGE 2
111. ANALYSIS
Planninq Issues
1. Does the proposed amendment provide adequate policy justificatio prohibiting on-shore oil and gas support facilities?
2. Does the proposed amendment include findings which address the locat concerns associated with on-shore oil and gas support facilities?
3. Will the proposed zone code amendment provide adequate controls fc
siting and review of such facilities should they be proposed?
DISCUSSION
A. General Plan Amendment and Local Coastal Plan Amendment
The proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan and Coastal Plans would prohibit on-shore oil and gas support facilities excep the City Council finding that all of the proposed six findings are true.
amendment includes policy language stating why such facilities are proh.
such as that they present adverse environmental impacts which may il catastrophic environmental damage to the marine ecosystem. In addition, fl adverse environmental impacts as increased air pollution, water pollution, I traffic, visual, scenic and aesthetic impacts may occur as the result 01
facilities.
The City Attorney is recommending that the amendment not absolutely prohi b shore facilities as litigation is pending on whether it is legally permi' to do so. The proposed amendment provides certain administrative remedies
must be exhausted prior to resorting to the courts for judicial re1 ief. includes the City Council making all of the proposed six findings. The la
proposed for the General P1 an.
B. Zone Code Amendment
As stated previously, the proposed Zone Code Amendment would prohibit on oil and gas facilities in all zones except C-M, M and P-M. In those zl
conditional use permit would be required. The findings required to be rn
grant a conditional use permit are found at Section 21.42.020 of the Zoning In addition five findings are proposed specifically for on-shore s
facilities. By limiting the potential location for such uses to the three
districts specified there is less likelihood for land use conflicts to o
The findings required to be made to site such facilities require the eval
of potential environmental, land use, and health and safety impacts of pr facilities. Being able to make all of the required findings for a specifi
will be difficult. This will serve to discourage such facilities and assur
be proposed.
for the amendment to each of the six local coastal plans is identical ti
all of the potential impacts associated with such uses are evaluated shoul
CITY OF CARLSBAD 6 0
GPA/LU 89-2/LCPA 89-1/ZCA 89-1 August 2, 1989 PAGE 3
SUMMARY
The proposed amendments do not completely prohi bit on-shore support facil it This is a result of pending litigation on whether or not local absc prohibitions against on-shore facilities are legally permissible. The pror amendments provide policy direction and a regulatory means of restricting tc greatest extent possible, the areas in which these facilities may locate : the current legal parameters. A1 1 proposed on-shore oil and gas sur facilities would require the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit in addi to making the proposed findings. Staff recommends that the Planning Commi: recommend APPROVAL of the amendments to the City Council.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that the proposed amendments will not a significant impact on the environment and, therefore, has issued a Neg; Decl aration on June 7, 1989.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2898 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2899 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2900
4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2901 5. Comments Recei ved 6. Local Coastal Program segments boundary map
DN:1 h July 6, 1989
iux OF CAARNIA-AICE OF THE coma w GECRGE
. OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
-1400 TENTH STREET
SACRAMENTO, CA 958 11
hlr. 1,011 NPII
City ol' Cnrlsbnd
20;s Ltls Yahtis Urive
Carisbad, CA 92009
1111\ 7
Subject: On-shore Oil & Cas Support Facilities Plan & Code Amendments/ SC:t[#
bar Rlr. Neu:
The State Clearinghouse submittad the above named environmental docum
selected state agencies for review. The review period is now close
none of the state agencies have comments. This letter ac!wnowledge:; th;
have ccmplied with the State Clearinghouse revic.4 rsquirenents for
environmental documents, pursuant to the Czlifornia Environrnentll (2
Act 0
Please call Garrstt Ashley at 916/445-0513 if you hzv? xny 'ql~es
regarding the environmental rsview process. '!hen contnz t in:
Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eightdigit St.zte Clezrinr
number so that we rnay respond promptly.
Sincerely,
f &LL-Lsy/_ "- - /
David C. Nunenkamp
Cnief Office of Permit Assistance
e w
ibL &.h i-
"" d- .-~t&mG 4 ') ;\ . ' I [I \ & \A &,L, 9 hslj (h:;-,.-(:c- rl -+dd -CL" Ip pr Lf
-\,.I) &LA:L\\:\ G rL bb,y 4 c1- (dl
"3 &. 't.\ra ~5: '*/'" <:, S-r.2-
CB O,),." \?,J cT nx ):)4 y)u-
+Q rn -3 (p \ {\&.,\; ' I vJ9-
p" ' Q'W ,&(. GL e '1"" -. 1 3 )
P
* \ao2+.3yL3 ','4.h , yLVJd'''?iy" \*,\ \A. (2 ,:-Ly?J -I,. .. -.?A "u uf!.: c-.L
\ ' \'1 cJ&
( GL- '> , . - -eJ, JT\GFj a;Lcut,\ #< ct t.k.) .Q ,'/-<?'/*
4- c j J-3 &> .L/ \ 1) (; <jJ.JJ
'$ \' : 2
.? 1 L-
"%L
:\ . (23 0,cc
r L- iL a:&:\; td I. -b , (- 42( r
/- A 'z'Lcic
p
\c1
10, ! I 0
I
I
i
I pa7 mL&, pu
*&AAaqmA
q7-i
6
&G & “4?d
A 2% Lk&d Md
fqw, d &!?z 3- +p
A? &&?5 and my 0h-L
pzQ. Ad #y w m- 2
6% ace @pfl&& gy -222 A6V.l I
De -
?dm +vi d&I
I ;md I MOWmMt @m & MWh
! !
!
I
I
~
%T,
Myo&m
I
,
I
I
I
I,, /i @ a + &tl)!!, c / , y /?;QJy ~ f. ('4 x. JL 4hi) Lc,v i 'LA IL - '.J.:+L; ; i i 2- le) (.~d ~ : <<.( (- c, J I' d*,,t c Ui co, 1 I/ j ,/L,l\ L i' CL ' Ll 'LC L I !i i -2 - ' L j'( - Lh6LCe- ci l&i& ric
( ,' 1
&)J & L( JQ,&{[ ,C( / jlJ # @y(PsLGC/ is i2:bf j' 'i' zih i. ca 'p " f c- s.pC. L(
q*- 'NJ (Ct, (3-c tb
&.)?Xh&LiLL& (LLC'CC \>, i\ ?Ij
Jk. lit c ' &a !L+ &-,u ' 7 . c.ii -, I.{ <,
v$fJxd %Jii- ~ A'! r , [) (- c i-t f :;,," i
- ,..-*,. ' _I, ,, .~ @ - ./ .;:.
yAU .i
(1 / i )~)/_.C'~C
,2/%J iG [I kt c. 1 ) )C/ c (. . c_i I >< /
c/b- /*, u. L/-ccel'C/ &(.I ;j
c ,&? /A3 0' ci&d v INC." c c- k/h& ( (,/; i(! ' iL/cc,' 5 'I +
4 Lh,) 12. c C."C
I, . . ,. <. (y& /)/I,- /.\ / 1 )( '"'-(,
(
i \ '_" . \ .. ''. 1 1 1 '. (""- %.
e W 1855 South View Drive Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 June 30, 1989
Planning Department City of Carlsbad' 2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, Cqlifornia 92009-4859
Re: On-shore oil and gas facilities in Carlsbad
As residents and property owners in Carlsbad, we would like to -1oice our support for the adoption of any changes in the general plan, local coastal plan and zoning ordil;ances that
will protect this area from off-shore oil drilling e
It is our hope that Ir,ilitary, city and county governmental bodies, the real estate and business community and residents of the -.reas that will be damaged by these proposed leases will band together to prevent what is clearly not in the best interest of our tourist and agricultural business, economy and '.ppeal as a community in which to live.
yely 9 ,m P fl -A
)?%&d \ niane L. Beard &Y/l&d AJ- - rz!LA0(
c: ( . "
c-
1 I, a e a
June 1, 1989
Yr. Donald Neu, Planning Commissioner
City of Carlsbad -- Planning Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859
To ILThom It May Concern:
!de \.!ish to go on record as beiv,p, veh~rn~ntly oppos~d ro any
oil drilling/exploration off the Carlsbad coast.
The records will show that, because there is always room for
human error, we do not wish to be exposed to any threat of
explosions, spillage, leaka,ge or any other hazards that may
arise from such activity.
Furthermore, we oppose the construction of any on-shore oil
and gas facilities in Carlsbad, as might also be contemplated
Inasmuch as the cities of Oceanside and San Diego have alread:
taken steps to forbid such oil/gas-related activity, we feel
that Carlsbad MUST take similar action.
We oppose Lease Sale 95!!!
Sincerely,
fi -,". + % (2"L-hu (:&ycc r&%w
nic F. Colombo Constance " ,. , , ..-.d u 1 Domi v. COlOmDO
1856 Eastpointe Avenue Carlsbarf , CA 0200H
.~ W w
).
dc(AceQ \ylq - i \
* \'j cll f i i {.A -
\.-- ) L\ C.1 J\.Q CQ LA- id4 CCQ k fi ' I k (w-% - Ll .*Q
CrA -.dlJ i. 0; \ q. I ,(LC-) *. ccu L .4J '1 &&A LAJ,
I'
(-1 b\ Q.nrc c. b k h\e&kc.&uA L3 JOY CG-h,]
c 1.j dw\J\ u ~~'I;,~~ o ;L . \fIi 4' A- LyfT c uaq ' ita cazL&(d
\J 1 * !I "[-* :.,I i u.fl( i \ " [:+ \.'.x.+& &."..e+ L-bI4.3 ?$-"-"J dl C2bL.L
\ -.If . t. c3 ., .p6c t3 - -n qLCLi r- I
i. 0
< " ') \ /
. \ L c4 (?id! c.~.';c \[ L~.~ :.i;(u- &dy9 ;' (JLt e ,+ LdL . J cc "
('A?( (4 ' \'- ( ((4, (\ P ,lA- i1.L 'LC\ c5f2 .f" (6:) u C*QUa L4 (pjlmt
(.A 1( -1 . t\ ' \L b, ac.'i t..; I &. k- ' ("atj- c: c-. ~y~u-,-c*c
! ('
(. "a
r I1 L 0 0
< 4612 Drlftwood Circle Wm k Andrea Sachs - Carlsbad. CA 92008
rn b cu h JL ~~~--~. -. d\ 6 \-g.-(.4> Q.<-l
LL4s.m -tb ('4 L
cj,~ O' & t&a=L - I &;s cc ct-Q- tl Ic ckJ 4 Jt..q 1,.
3- i b"Q -' - Q Lo" QC"a + ULI -. (1. <. < -c- 4-q -1 C?<.&L!i '
,-
\Z
-.\
' L), .b * "__ . (J ,LC c, < I.cnC"-I\ 1.
- L-t-wc 'a&&: "-- 0.c c " c- L (!:SI ,*! i7 Lt LC- (3 .
4)-
/"--$ +Q p&+ $(Jy(( '( \\(.(,,I\. ./ WLtIfLb, (
mlica &- \ -\f,.La ' \'&I r '\ 1.8-
"7 - (
, \L N 1 CtLQA- CLW- Lc_.C~LCCL~C.~- , r!, (,ILr 91 - o/ LdL
A&-% G2-K LQ- cg €r-Kc- I ii ( ,!I$ 'd'L-,_l Lf? Ort. ( p c7*.40 ,
,' I
\
(3d &ki.weiz\, I
(7) -p - .,I
b i\ 1)
i (' ' ('> " [ , l~..L,LCA" c I). s-!u 1
4- ~-~ deaths t8p
23,000
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) - Dead animals are Piling up in refrigerated trailers on the coast as officials collect evidence of
the vast damage cnuscd by the oil spilled from the tanker Exxon Valdez. The carcasses of 22,818 migratory birds, 733 sea otters and 51 birds of prey, most of
lected, tagged and stored by
Tuesday at four coastal cities. “It’s a morbid milestone we
have reached this week: more than two months after the oil spill from the Exxon Valdez. we are still counting its victims,” said Walter Stieglitz, Alaska regional director of the US. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The gooey fingers of the spill have drifted more than 500 miles from Prince William Sound
across the Gulf of Alaska and beyond Kodiak Island. About 11 million gallons of oil spilled from gashes in the Exxon Valdez when it ran aground March 24.
More than 70 species of birds have been affected, the wildlife
them bald eagles, had been col-
service said. About GO pcrcerlt of the dead birds are murres, an upright seabird with tuxedo-like markings. b.
I ~
When E A Little
The school year may be mer give your child a hex S.K.I.L.L.S. (Specia gram especially designed with language difiiculties.
The S.K.I.L.L.S. pro arts and crafts. games, am
base. Recreational tl
into our program.
. Ill 3
IyI experit schoo
when
p.: ..:\
Its DevaS;:drm, I/ I.
Toll on Wildlife 11
From United Prcss International
ANCHORAGE. ALaska-The Exxon oil sp~ll has continued to klli nlllrnals and devour prlstlrlc wltrrq off aouth(.rrl Alnsk;). ;III(I offic.l.tl< t1,acking thc oil s;rltl Wedllcsday It has covered 9,600 square miles. The animal death toll also has continued to mount. Workers have collected 22.868 dead, o~ly birds and 743 sea otters, the US. Fish arid
represents a fractlon of the wtldllfc kllled by the oil. and regional director Walter Sticglltz said:
More than 5155 mlllion has been spent by Exxon and the state and federal governrncuts on clcanup slncc March 24, wtrcti the Exxo~ Valdez ran aground and spilled about 11 million gallons of oil Into waters south of the Valdez oil terminal. Alaska Gov. Steve Cowpcr ap- pointed a task force Wednesday to Investgate the sp~ll and recorn- mend ways to prevent future spills.
A new 5-cent tax on cach barrel of
oil from Alaska will finance thc panel. which is made up of five Alaska residents. a forrncr science adviser to thrrc preslctcrlrs ant! ,111
cnvlronmcrrtnl scimltist. 011 tracker M3rsII:II Kclltlzlorck of thc Department of Erlvlrnnmcrl- tal Corlservation has mnppcd thc spill, and his documcnts show that 9,600 square n~~lcs of sor.ltherli Alaska coastal wntcrs hnvc tlccn affected by the oil. That ninkcs thr country’s largest 011 sptll as big in size as the state of Vermont, he said. Oil has spread for eight weeks and has been tracked down Sheli- kof Strait to Wide Bay, 475 miles from where the Exvon Valdez ran aground. Kendziorek said.
Wildlife Service reported. ‘[’hat
“We’re stdl counting its victims.”
0 I I, c LOGAL C WSrAL PROtiI
5
I:OUND/
~cp SEGMENT
1\11 M E L L 0 I
~MELLO I1 n " AGUA HEDIONDA a EAST BATIQUITOS LAGOONIHUN' x LA WEST BATIQUITOS LAGOON/SAh1hlIS
IT1 REDEVE' OPMENT AREA
lily of Car~al~
* I& L 0 e
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
GPA/LU 89-2/LCPA 89-l/ZCA 89-1
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hol
public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, Galij
at 6:OO P.M., on Tuesday, September 12, 1989, to consider an amendment tlo thc
Land Use Element of the General Plan, Local Coastal Plan Amendment, and Zone
Amendment to prohibit on-shore oil and gas support facilities except upo-n tht
Council making certain findings.
If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at 438-1161,
If you challenge the Amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan,
Local Coastal Plan Amendment, or the Zone Code Amendment in court, you may b
to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearin
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City
Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at or prior to the public hearing.
APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
PUBLISH: September 1, 1989 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
* tr "
v 0 a
L
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad h hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlst California, at 6:OO p.m. on Wednesday, August 2, 1989, to consider approval
Amendment, and Zone Code Amendment to prohi bit on-shore oil and gas sup^ facilities except upon the City Council making certain findings.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to at1 the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Planr Department at 438-1161.
If you challenge the Amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan, Local Coastal P1 an Amendment, or Zone Code Amendment in court, you may be 1 imi to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the pub1 ic hear described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the CitJ Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing.
an Amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan, Local Coastal F
CASE FILE: GPA/LU 89-2/LCPA 89-1/ZCA 89-1 APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLISH: JULY 21, 1989
CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
F4-u //s Py a$y lC0 LL.k-5 R. k-b b 4'"p Qt I"ljbl&d
L/lu Cqy.
2OOd / "1' -4 /
* 'yc 'l , *' b e e
(Form A) .
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
FROM: Planning Department
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice "
GPA/LU 89-2/LCPA 89-1/ZCA 89-1 - CITY OF CARLSBAD
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the council meeting of -
-"&@9-" T i.2- , .::--: '. .
Thank you.
8/16/89
Assistant City Man" - Date
-~ .= ClXy W ge-mower B urlsulal qu". JAJb W-UGIIGL. -.lll ,
L
k~age~~ -.
'. . i allegiih -have not been showh Gier .was asked to investigate i i. - -
h CCUlkad, While w&XUSOa Red& said 2 &&hg the- city employee) mnF&g bci- i f ~
.. ~ .. a0 the scil. .- "facfual stateme- madsby (the I
R-Y -have -refused to origi allegatimsk.ould be uan dents at his prim employment." Iment. ~ - ~. -unwarranted' I invasion of ' . The.Blad6-Citir.m leamed that i . . .
1e "' 1551 PiIvak L- privacy". of private citizens mntice was called. befo& an ... . - Wbr John i -Gie* I was named in fiat document. Revlett Orange .cormty. Grand Jury -11 ; .
aSed bu Revla er a E- - als~ dismissed pa~ished reports years ago to testify about mistise : st bY &e BhdeCltlzen end that the whistle-blower is Public of public funds at his former I !r newspaWm mder the Services -Director -Glenn Pren- employer, - the. Mdtm Niguel -. . e Public 'Records Act. . .tice. Water- District. ,'"
he --request stated, w .- - ~cwide~pre~d ~pid&~'~&, !r argument%, that the sur&" &.j' a,,&m*s idatity, dpes M . ~d& -&i & &,&d - i
7 by PriVab hv-tigabr undermine. -@e city's legal that would- not be &leased in- ' n -G3er- . bad ahdY been authority for respecting .the eon- elude ma-s gathered from I wn to all five members bf the ~ fiden~aJity , af ib .:informant,*r -private meg. as w.. as 1 .
iddoor session on Aug. 9. . He denied mat &i .city &+- a- available freely and'opet".'' f
"
.*
-~
r Council in BU UnSChedded -avlett sdd.~ ' "documents "wUh as-alr&iy'-.
.. .. 'i I tU;I~T{C~~--~~F~-~pUB~~C~:-HE-ARlNG~~'
GPNLU 894JLCPA. 89-1 IZCA 894 .- $! :fl:
. ~. . i ..
" .- ." - ~
~ "r - " z ~ =c . ?e
"I." .~ - -4 .r ?-. - . .. . .. 4:owE ,s "EREBV&-fiEN. t(&tiig ew c?&l 6f:&"w.af & -.], ho,d. .~
rpDMc. hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue-, ,Caflsbad,;
Zalifornia, at 6:OO :P.M., -on. Tuesday, SeptemWr 12, 1989,. to consider. an imendment to- the Land Use mement ;df the General PI&; Lokl Coastal Plan- ~~~.~b~~~-~~ttppm'#~
=SF& upan t+w ci council maHng certain fiMi"gs.- - ~ . . .. .. .- . ..- .- .> . .. .. /. f$&l&e &y :weA;ls, pk&"&ll&e Piandrig h-hdrnent at ~wi11 ej +A .*.. -ey
f.y&.challe-hge the Amnciment to- th&rrd-U& &#meM offhe Gen&al PIah,the &tal Coastal Plan Ameridment, or the Zone Code AmerPdrnent.in-7murt,.yau may m limited to mbing : mly .those Bsues yW or someone else iaised at 'the public learing described in ihis -noti-, 'or in written-correspondence deliired tb the City
3f Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at or prior to the public hearing.
L -. -. - . 1 .=%?. :4 .; + .~ - * . ,. - . 'y:
,. . : ~..S .: .. .. x-
.. .. .- .. .a ~I" .L <. ~. ~
.. .. 7
, . "><.. :.: I: :. . I. ." .~ .~ .=
. . .~ . ~. !.. ..i_ .~ .~ ,: ..F
.. . .. . ~. .- ippkm: ~ 'City& c;a~
.< PUBLISH: ... : - September 1, 1989 ...-- ..:
..
. -.
., .- .l_ -- ,
I
I " T 1:
I;
..
..
'1
~ "
~* . . ~.
,
~ ":
-