HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-10-10; City Council; 13349; Biological Habitat PreservesI 3) i-4 Q==Y OF CARLSBAD - AGE”“)A BILL /-I’:’
BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES -
ZCA 95-02/LCPA 95-08 CITY MGR. -w
IECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council ADOPT City Council Resolution No. 9seJ% APPROVING the
Negative Declaration and ADOPT City Council Resolution No. c/ 5 -29 6 APPROVING
the Local Coastal Program Amendment and INTRODUCE Ordinance No. nIS-32$
APPROVING the proposed zone code amendment defining Biological Habitat Preserve
and requiring a Conditional Use Permit for biological habitat preserves.
ITEM EXPLANATION
On August 2, 1995, the Planning Commission approved (8-O) a resolution
recommending approval of ZCA 95-02/LCPA 95-08 to the City Council. This zone code
amendment proposes to define biological habitat preserve and to add a new section to
Chapter 21.42 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code requiring the processing of a conditional
use permit for biological habitat preserves to ensure that designated preserves are
consistent with the City’s General Plan, Growth Management Plan, Local Coastal
Program and habitat management planning efforts. The Local Coastal Program (LCP)
amendment is necessary to ensure consistency between the City’s Zoning Ordinance
and its Local Coastal Program.
In early 1995, the City was notified that the property formerly known as Carlsbad
Highlands, located in Zone 15 on the eastern boundary of the City was being
considered as a “conservation bank”. The establishment of a conservation bank in the
City raised several issues including whether the preserve would preclude providing
necessary facilities under growth management and whether the proposal was consistent
with the General Plan. The timing and start-up of the conservation bank and the
mechanism for authorizing it were initially unclear to staff. Ultimately, staff was informed
that the property owner and the wildlife agencies had negotiated a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) to establish the conservation bank. Because no formal
mechanism existed in the City requiring a permit for biological habitat preserves, there
was no way for staff to require the property owner to address issues of concern to the
City. In this case, the City was able to resolve these issues, but a formal process would
have made the resolution quicker and easier.
The proposed zone code amendment will require that a CUP be obtained for proposed
biological habitat preserves. A CUP will not be required for preserves that are proposed
as part of a development proposal requiring environmental review nor for land zoned
as Open Space (OS). Although a CUP is required for biological habitat preserves under
this new code section, there will be no way to guarantee the processing of a CUP on
lands being purchased with the idea of using them for mitigation. Unless the City is
notified that property is being considered for a formal biological habitat preserve, there
is no way of knowing that land is being used as mitigation for projects outside of the
City of Carlsbad. Upon adoption of this ZCA, staff will officially inform the resource
agencies of the CUP requirement and enlist their cooperation. This will ensure that in
the future, the City is notified early in the process of identifying biological habitat
preserves and that property owners are notified in a timely manner that a CUP is
required before a biological habitat is formally designated.
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. 13,349
Because the proposed zone code amendment does not condone any site specific
development and because future projects will be individually reviewed to evaluate
environmental impacts, the Planning Director determined that no significant adverse
environmental impacts will result from this proposal and has, therefore, issued a
Negative Declaration on April 12, 1995.
FISCAL IMPACTS
No direct fiscal impacts are anticipated.
EXHIBITS
1. City Council Resolution No. 95’-a%
2. City Council Resolution No. 95-29 67
3. City Council Ordinance No. /2/J-s
4. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3782, 3783 and 3788
5. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 2, 1995
6. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated August 2, 1995.
s
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
RESOLUTION NO. 95-295
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CODE
AMENDMENT, AMENDING TITLE 21, CHAPTER 21.04
OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, BY THE
ADDITION OF SUBSECTION 21.04.048 TO DEFINE
BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVE AND AMENDING
TITLE 21, CHAPTER 21.42 OF THE CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADDITION OF SUBSECTION
21.42.010(15) TO REQUIRE THE PROCESSING OF A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BIOLOGICAL
HABITAT PRESERVES AND FOR A LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY
BETWEEN THE CITY’S ZONING ORDINANCE AND ITS
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM.
CASE NAME: BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES
CASE NO: ZCA 95-02/LCPA 95-08
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning
Commission did, on August 2,1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law
to consider said request; and,
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors
relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Carlsbad as follows:
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Findings and
Conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3782, on file with the City
Clerk and incorporated herein by reference constitute the findings of the City
Council in this matter and that the Negative Declaration is hereby approved.
-
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
26
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the day of OCTOBEI~ 1995, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Nygaard, Kulchin, Finnila, Hall
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
AT’kEST:
-2- 3
f.
, I
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
RESOLUTION NO. 9 5 - 2 9 6
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT
TO ALL SIX SEGMENTS OF THE CARLSBAD LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM (LCP) TO ENSURE THAT THE CITY’S
ZONING ORDINANCE (WHICH FUNCTIONS AS THE
IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY’S LCP) AND
THE CITY’S LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM ARE
CONSISTENT IN REQUIRING THE PROCESSING OF A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BIOLOGICAL HABITAT
PRESERVES.
CASE NAME: BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVE
CASE NO: LCPA 95-08
WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program, General
Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in conformance;
WHEREAS, a verified application for an amendment to all six segments of the
City’s Local Coastal Program has been filed with the Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for an amendment tc
all six segments of the City’s LCP as provided in Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; ant
WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 10th day of OCTOBEP 1995, hold a dul)
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the proposed Local Coastal Program
Amendment shown on Exhibit “X”, dated August 2, 1995, attached to Planning Commissior
Resolution No. 3783; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony ant
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Council considered all factors relating
to the Local Coastal Program Amendment; and
i
5
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six week public review period for 1
any amendment to the LocaI Coastal Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Carl&ad, as follows:
. . . .
*
t
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That at the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on July 20,
1995, and ending on August 31, 1995, no comments from the public had been
received.
Q That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Findings and
Conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3788, on file with the City
Clerk and incorporated herein by reference constitute the findings of the City
Council in this matter and that the Local Coastal Program Amendment is here by
approved. .
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 10th day of OCTOBER, 1995, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Nygaard, Kulchin, Finnila, Hall
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Al-TEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Cle
1 (SEAL)
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
ORDINANCE NO. NS - 3 2 2
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, TO DEFINE BIOLOGICAL
HABITAT PRESERVE AND TO REQUIRE THE
PROCESSING OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES TO ENSURE THAT
BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES ARE CONSISTENT
WITH THE CITY’S GENERAL PLAN, GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AND HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLANNING EFFORTS.
CASE NAME: BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES CASE NO: ZCA 95-02/LCPA 95-08
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: That Title 21, Chapter 21.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
is amended by the addition of Section 21.04.048 to read as follows:
“21.04.048 Biological Habitat Preserve. Any area which is designated and
accepted by a Federal, State or local agency as a permanent or temporary sanctuary, reserve
or protected area for biological species of any kind.”
SECTION 2: That Title 21, Chapter 21.42 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
is amended by the addition of Section 21.42.010(15) to read as follows:
“(15). All zones except Open Space:
(A) Biological habitat preserve, as defined by section 21.04.048 of this
code, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The biological habitat preserve shall not adversely impact
the City’s ability to provide public facilities and improvements such as, but not limited to,
Circulation Element roadways, sewer or water infrastructure improvements and drainage
improvements, as provided for in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan.
(ii) The biological habitat preserve shall be consistent with the
City’s habitat management planning efforts or agency approved Habitat Management Plan
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
- -
and will not negatively impact the City’s ability to obtain or implement a Habitat
Management Plan.
(iii) The biological habitat preserve shall be consistent with the
City’s Local Coastal Program.
(B) A conditional use permit shall not be required when a Biological
Habitat Preserve is associated with a development proposal otherwise requiring
environmental review and discretionary approval by the City of Carlsbad.”
EFFECTIVE DATE: The ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its
adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to
be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation within fifteen days after its
adoption, except that within the Coastal Zone the effective date of this ordinance shall be
the date of final California Coastal Commission approval of this ordinance.
Illi
/I//
/Ill
/I//
/Ill
/Ill
l/II
/Ill
/Ill
/Ill
l/II
/Ill
.
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
-
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad
City Council on the day of , 1995, and thereafter
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Carlsbad on the day of , 1995 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
RON BALL, City Attorney
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATI’EST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
EXBIT 4
1
I/
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3782
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT,
AMENDING TITLE 21, CHAPTER 21.04 OF THE
CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, BY THE ADDITION OF
SUBSECTION 21.04.048 TO DEFINE BIOLOGICAL
HABITAT PRESERVE AND AMENDING TITLE 21,
CHAPTER 21.42 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE
BY THE ADDITION OF SUBSECTION 21.42.010(15) TO
REQUIRE THE PROCESSING OF A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES TO
ENSURE THAT BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES
ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY’S GENERAL PLAN,
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM AND HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLANNING
EFFORTS.
CASE NAME: BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES
CASE NO: ZCA 95-02/LCPA 95-08
14 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 2nd day of August, 1995,
15 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and
16 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
17 and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
18
19
20
21
22
23
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered aII factors
relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
24
25
26
27
20
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration
according to Exhibit “ND”, dated July 18, 1995 and “PIP’, dated March 27,
1995, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following
findings:
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
Findhs:
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have
a significant impact on the environment.
2. That because no development is proposed as part of this zone code amendment, and
because future projects will be individually reviewed to evaluate environmental
impacts, no impacts are anticipated to geologic resources, water resources, air quality,
transportation/circulation, biological resources, energy and mineral resources, hazards,
noise, public services, utilities and services, aesthetics, cultural resources, or
recreation.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of August,
1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Welshons; Commissioners Compas, Erwin,
Monroy, Nielsen, and Savary.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Noble.
ABSTAIN: None.
KIM I@ELSHONS, Chairperson
CARLSBADP LANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 3782 -2-
AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Citywide - City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego,
State of California
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: An ordinance amending Title 21, Chapter 21.04 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code by the addition of Section
2 1.04.048 to define Biological Habitat Preserve and
amending Title 21, Chapter 42 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code by the addition of Section 2 1.42.010(15) to require
the processing of a Conditional Use Permit for biological
habitat preserves to ensure that biological habitat preserves
are consistent with the City’s General Plan, Growth
Management Plan Local Coastal Program and Habitat
Management Planning efforts, and to amend the City’s
Local Coastal Program (LCP) to ensure consistency
between the City’s Zoning Ordinance (ivhich
&nctions as the implementing ordinance for the
LCP) and the City’s LCP.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and
the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a
Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the
environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the
Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning
Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public
are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Pianning Department within 30 days of
date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Teresa Woods in the Planning
Department at (619) 438-l 161, extension 4447.
DATED:
CASE NO:
JULY 18, 1995
MICHAEL J. H?kZMIkLER
ZCA 9502ILCPA 95-08 Planning Director
CASE NAME: BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVE
PUBLISH DATE: JULY 18, 1995 Twxd
2075 Las PalmaS Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 l (619) 436-l 161 @
ENVIRONMENTAL l&PACT AS$ESSMENT FORM - PART B
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. ZCA 9542
DATE: MARCH 27. 1995
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
CASE NAME: BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVE
APPLICANT: City of Carl&ad
ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carl&ad, CA, 92009,
(619) 438-l 161, extension 4212
DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMl’ITED: N/A
PROJECI’ DESCRIIYIION: An ordinance amending Title 21, Chapter 04 of the Carl&ad Municipal Code
by the addition of Section 2 1.04.048 to define Biological Habitat Preserve and amending Title 2 1, Chapter
42 of the Carl&ad Municipal Code by the addition of Section 21.42.010(15) to require the processing of
a Conditional Use Permit for biological habitat preserves to ensure that biological habitat preserves are
consistent with the City’s General Plan, Growth wgement Plan and Habitat Management Planning
efforts.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially afkted by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact”, or ‘Potentially Sign&ant Impact Unless Mitigation
Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following @ges.
- Land Use and Planning - Transportation/Circ&tion - Public Services
- Population and Housing
- Geological Problems
- Water
- Air Quality
- Biological Resources - Utilities and Service Systems
- Energy and Mineral Resources ’ - Aesthetics
-- - cultuTal Resources
- Noise - Recreation
- Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION.
& be completed by the Lead Agency).
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I fmd that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION wilI be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signiflcant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been
added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the propowd project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I fmd that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect
1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuan t to applicable legal standards, and 2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the
effect is a “potentially significant impact’ or “potentially significant unless mitigated.” An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/MITIGATE NEGATIVE DECLARATION is required, but it must
analyse only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signiflcant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT
be a significant effect in’this case because all potentially signiticant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in earlier EIR’s pursuan t to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to the earlier
ElR’s, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a
Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
L* W-L 4-s-95
Planner Signature Date
Planning Directo?%ignat& Date
.
ENV[R~NMENTALIMPA~
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Clupter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental
Impact Assessment to dctermk if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental
Impact Assessm ent appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical,
biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information
to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration,
or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
.
A brief explanation is required for all answers except ‘No Impact’ answers that are adequately
supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact”
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply
does not apply to projects like the one involv&L A “No Impact” answer should be explained when
there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general
Stan*
“Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact
is not adversely sign&ant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies.
‘Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact’ to a “Less Than Significant
Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation
measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant.
Based on an “E&Part II”, if a pmposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the
environment, but a potentially significant effects (a) have been analyxed adequately in an earlier EIR
or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standa& and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, then no additional environmental
document is required (Prior Compliance).
A Negative Declaration may be pmpared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project
or any of its aspects may cause a signiftcant effect on the environmetit.
If there are one or more potenWly significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there
are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation
measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate
“Potentially Signifkant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated” may be checked and a Mitigated
Negative Declaration may be prepared.
b When ‘potentially Significant Imp49 is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare
an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzcd adquately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable
standa& and the &fed will be mitigated, or a “Statement of Overriding considerations” has been madepunlanttotbatearlierExR.
. An EIR ma be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including but not limited
to the following ckumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or
mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to
mitigation mesures that redfxe the impact to less than significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding
Considerations” for the significant impact has not been made p ursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed
mitigation measures do not reduce the impact to less than signifkant, or, (4) through the EL&Part
II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or
determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially sign&ant effect to
below a level of sign&ance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAl, EVAILJATION . Particular attention should be given to discussing
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined signi!icant.
4 Rev. lpq9!!
\b
.
Issua(adsuppduglnf-~):
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a
W
4
d)
e)
II.
a)
W
cl
III.
a)
W
cl
4
d
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project?
Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible
land uses)?
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)?
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the pqosal:
Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections?
Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indkctly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major Mastructure)?
Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing?
GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people to potential impacts involving:
Fault rupture?
Seismic ground shaking?
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
Landslides or mudflows?
pbcpcirllf sii RJtewy Ullh Lcsrbm signifii .’ * Signifiaut No impact Ii+zgtd rzapct w=t
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
-26
x
x
x
x
5 Rev. 1/3q9s J
.
ha ml sqpatiq IafutMtlat tiYoum%):
0
g)
h)
0
Iv.
a)
W
cl
4
4
g)
h)
9
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or IIll?
Subsidence of the land?
Expansive soils?
Unique geologic or physical features?
WATER Would the proposal result in:
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding?
Discharge into surf&e waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)?
Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements?
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through intercepian
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through
substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability?
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
Impacts to groundwater quality?
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
-lur sii
Uh . .
llz$Ed
leuTh Significant
hpct
No hwt
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
A-
x
x
x
x
x
m..
ls!aler &Id suppat& lnfamtial !jinucu):
V.
a)
AIR QUALTI’Y. Would the proposal:
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
W
d
Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate?
4
VI.
Create objectionable odors?
TRANSPORTATION/C&ULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a)
b)
Increased vehicle tripe or traffic congestion?
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm quipment)?
d Inadquate emergency access or access to nearby
UXS?
4
d
0
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
8)
VII.
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)?
Rail, waterborne ac air mfflc impacts?
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Would the propo& result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare specie-s or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animds, and birds?
W Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
No
hl=t
x
- x
-4 x
- x
4 x
I - x
x
- x
7 Rev . l/W= \4
.
.
cswes (al suppatii hfamaa -1:
a
4
e)
VIII.
a)
b)
a
Ix.
a)
b)
cl
4
4
X.
a)
b)
Lmaiiy designa!ul natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, ripaxian and vernal pool)?
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the Proposal:
Conflict with adopted energy consen&on plans?
Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner?
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region
And the residents of the State?
HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation?
Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazatd?
Exposureofpeopletoexistingsources of potential
health hazards?
Increase fie hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees?
NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
8
-d7 slim
FUddly UIlh
siinifwm Mitiguial
lmpct mati
LcmTbm Significant
Impct
No w=t
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Rev. 1/30/95
x0
-
I
ksle md stqqmipl Infe saucu):
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or altend
government services in any of the following areas:
a)
W
d
4
d
XII.
Fii protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
.
4
W
d
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
Other governmental services?
UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal reksult in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
Powerornaturaigas?
Communications systems?
Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities?
4
d
0
I)
XIII.
a)
b)
c) Create light or glare?
Sewer fx septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste disposal?
Local or rqiond water suppli~?
AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
Have a demons&able negative aesthetic effect?
FoteptLur siii lmact
I#Zltidly siikm UW LcsllnD . . * Significant
,,“““, xmpct lI$t
A-
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
A-
x
x
x
9 Rev. 1/3cy95
2’
.
Iiva.la (Md suppating lnfam8tial saxcu):
XIV.
a)
b)
c)
4
e)
xv.
a)
W
XVI.
a)
W
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
Disturb paleontological resources?
Disturb archaeological resources?
Affect historical resources?
Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
RECREATION. Would the proposal:
Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recmational facilities?
Affect existing recreational opportunities?
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantMy reduce the
habitatofafishorwildlifespecies,causea~or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to ehminate a plant or animal community,
reducethenumberorrestricttherangeofarareor
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (‘Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
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
p~j~)
-rlly Sifplifll ibtddly Unla b-l%80 No
lw=t
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
10 Rev. 1/3ops rr*
-
. siinificra
FOtddly Unlar LaThan
l-=(~suppatip(Mam8tlat-): signifii -* - Siifiant No lnqmct ,.“““, lmp8ct fw=t
c) Does the project have environmental effects which wilI
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? A-
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one
or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)@). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets:
a)
b)
4
Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope
of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state
whether such effects were addressed by mitigation m-es based on the earlier analysis.
Mitigation measures. kor effects that are “Less than Signikant with Mitigation Incorporated,
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and
the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
11 Rev. 1/30/9s
33
DISCUSSION OF ENVlRONIWENTAL EVALUATION
.
I. PROJECT BACBGROIJND INFORMATION
ThisZoneCodeAmendmen t (ZCA) will add new sections of code to: (1) define Biological Habitat Preserve
and, (2) require the processing of a Conditional Use Permit for biological habitat preserves, to ensure that
biological habitat preserves are consistent with the City’s General Plan, Growth Management Plan and Habitat
Management Planning efforts: The ZCA will confirm that property purchased for the purpose of long-term
habitat protection is located in such a manner as to be consistent with the City’s habitat management planning
efforts, as well as consistent with the regional efforts of the Multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP)
and the State of California’s Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP). The 2CA will also ensure that
the designation of land for habitat preservation does not significantly impact the City’s ability to achieve the
public facilities as outlined in the City’s Growth Management Plan
This zone code amendment does not condone any physical development. Because no development is proposed
as part of this zone code amendment, and because future projects will be individually reviewed to evaluate
environmental impacts, no impacts are anticipated to geologic reso- water resources, air quality,
transportation/circulation, biological resources, energy and mineral resources, hazards, noise, public services,
utilities and setices systems, aesthetics, cultural resources, or recreation.
Non4ZeIevant Exmironmental Issues
Due to the nature of this project, the following RIA Part II checklist categories are not relevant or applicable,
therefore, the “No Impact” column has been checked.
I. Land Use Planning - a), b), c), d), e)
IL Population and Housing - a), b), c)
IIL Geologic Problems - a), b), c), d), e), f), g), h), i)
IV. Wat- - a). b), ~1, 4, d, 0, g), h), 0
V. Air Quality - a), b), c), d)
VI. TransportationlCirc*a - a), b), ~1, d). e), 0, g)
VII. Biological Resources - a), b), c), d), e)
VJIL, Energy and Mineral Resources - a), b), c)
IX. M - a), bh d. 4, e)
X. Noise - a), b)
12 Rev. lpops
L3(
XL Public Serviu~ - a), b), c), d), e)
. XII. Utilities and services Systems - a), b), c), d), e), 0, g)
XiII. Aesthetics - a), b), c)
XIV. CulturalResouces- a), b), cl, 4, d
JCV. Recreation - a), b) l
13
LIST MITIGATING MEASURJ3 IIP APPLICABLE)
-N/A
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM IIF APPLICABLE]
N/A
.
14
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEAS~
THIS IS ‘I’0 CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WlTH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJ-ECl’.
bate
15 Rev. 1/3o/!a
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3783
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONE CODE
AMENDMENT, AMENDING TITLE 21, CHAPTER 21.04 OF
THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, BY THE ADDITION
OF SUBSECTION 21.04.048 TO DEFINE BIOLOGICAL
HABITAT PRESERVE AND AMENDING TITLE 21,
CHAPTER 21.42 OF THE CARLSBAD JMUNICIPAL CODE
BY THE ADDITION OF SUBSECTION 21.42.010(15) TO
REQUIRE THE PROCESSING OF A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES TO
ENSURE THAT BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES ARE
CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY’S GENERAL PLAN, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM AND HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLANNING
EFFORTS. CASE NAME: BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES
CASE NO: ZCA 95-02
13 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has initiated this zone code amendment to
14 ensure that designated biological habitat preserves are reviewed for consistency with the
15 City’s General Plan, Growth Management Plan and Habitat Management planning efforts;
16
II and
17
18
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 2nd day of August, 1995,
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to the Zone Code Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
26
27
28
4
W
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
recommends APPROVAL of ZCA 95-02, according to Exhibit “x”, dated
August 2, 1995, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the
following findings: 3 II . . . .
. 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
J?indlngg
1.
2.
3.
The proposed amendment is consistent with the various elements of the General
Plan by ensuring that biologIcal habitat preserves are designated in conformance
with the various elements of the General Plan.
The proposed amendment will not cause adverse impacts on ’ surrounding
development because biological habitat preserves do not involve physical
development and because individual habitat preserves will be reviewed individually
for environmental impacts under Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the
California Environmental Quality Act.
The proposed amendment will ensure that biological habitat preserves are designated
in conformance with the Carisbad Growth Management Plan and the City’s habitat
management planning efforts.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of August,
1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Welshons; Commissioners Compas, Erwin,
Monroy, Nielsen and Savary.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Noble.
ABSTAIN None.
KIM TkSHONS, Chairperson
CARLSBADPLANNIN G-COMMISSION
AlTEST:
MI~HAELJ.I-MLZ~LLER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 3783
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
~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3788 I
I
A RESOLUTION OF THE P LANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
I RECOMMENDINGAPPROVALOFANAMENDMENTTO
ALL SIX SEGMENTS OF THE CARLSBAD LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM TO MARE THE ZONING CODE
(WHICH FUNCTIONS AS THE IMPLEMENTING
ORDINANCE FOR THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM)
AND THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM CONSISTENT
IN REQUIRING THE PROCESSING OF A CONDITIONAL
I USE PERMIT FOR BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES.
CASE NAME: BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES
CASE NO: LCPA 95-08
I WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Plan,
General Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in
conformance;
WHEREAS, a verified application for an amendment to the Local Coastal
Program, has been filed with the Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for amendment as
provided in Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 2nd day of August, 1995,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the proposed Local
Coastal Program Amendment shown on Exhibit “x*, dated August 2, 1995, attached to
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3783;
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all 1
factors relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment.
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines require a six week public review period
for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program.
l
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
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
4
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
At the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on July 20,
1995, and ending on August 31, 1995, staff shall present to the City Council
a summary of the comments received.
Cl That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
recommends APPROVAL of LCPA 95-08, as shown on Exhibit “LCPA 9508”,
dated August 2, 1995, attached hereto and made a part hereof based on the
followillg findings:
Findinas:
1.
2.
3.
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
The proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment is consistent with all applicable
policies of the City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program in that Biological Habitat
Preserves located within the Coastal Zone, processed pursuant to these amended
regulations, shall be required to be consistent with alJ applicable LCP development
standards, policies and provisions.
The proposed amendment is required to maintain consistency between the zoning
code and the Local Coastal Program.
The Planning Director has found that., the environmental effects of this project will
be less than significant and therefore has issued an Amended Negative Declaration
on July 18, 1995.
PC RESO NO.3788 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of.the City of Carlsbad, held on the 2nd day of August, 1995, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Welshons; Commissioners Compas, Erwin,
Monroy, Nielsen and Savary.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Noble.
ABSTAIN: None.
KIM wELsHONS, Chairperson
CARLSBADP LANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 3788 -3-
- EXHBIT 5
lie city d tarball lldg lkprlml A REPORT TO TIIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 3 0.
P.C. AGENDA OF: AUGUST 2, 1995 Application complete date: N/A
Project Planner: Teresa Woods
Project Engineer: N/A
SUBJECT: ZCA 9502/LCPA 95-08 - BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES - Request
for an amendment to Title 21, Chapter 21.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
by the addition of Section 21.04.048 to define Biological Habitat Preserve and
amending Title 21, Chapter 21.42 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code by the
addition of Section 21.42.010(15) to require the processing of a Conditional
Use Permit for biological habitat preserves to ensure that biological habitat
preserves are consistent with the City’s General Plan, Growth Management
Plan, Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Habitat Management Planning
efforts, and to amend the City’s LCP to ensure consistency between the City’s
zoning ordinance (which functions as the implementing ordinance for the
LCP) and the City’s LCP.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3782,
recommending APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning
Director and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3783, recommending
APPROVAL of ZCA 95-02, and Planning Commission Resolution No. 3788
recommending APPROVAL of LCPA 95-08, based on the findings contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
This Zone Code Amendment proposes to define biological habitat preserve and to
add a new section to Chapter 21.42 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code requiring the
processing of a conditional use permit for biological habitat preserves to ensure that
designated biological habitat preserves are consistent with the City’s General Plan,
Growth Management Plan, Local Coastal Program and Habitat Management
Planning efforts. The Local Coastal Program (LCP) Amendment is necessary to
ensure consistency between the City’s Zoning Ordinance and its Local Coastal
Program.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
In early 1995, the City was notified that the property formerly known as Carlsbad
Highlands, located in Zone 15 on the eastern boundary of the City was being.
considered as a “conservation bank”. A conservation bank sets aside lands for the
ZCA 95-03LCPA 95-08 - mOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVb
AUGUST 2,199s
protection of sensitive habitat and species while allowing the property owner to
realize market value for their property by pre-approving the land as a mitigation
parcel for developments off-site. The establishment of a conservation bank in the
City raised several issues including: (1) whether the preserve would preclude
providing necessary facilities under growth management; (2) whether the proposal
was consistent with the General Plan; and, (3) whether allowing projects out of the
City to mitigate environmental impacts in Carlsbad was desirable. These issues will
be discussed iu the analysis section below.
Bank of America took possession of Carlsbad Highlands, a 263-acre parcel of
unimproved property, through foreclosure proceedings in September, 1993. An
appraisal at acquisition indicated a low value, predominately due to the
environmental constraints on the property. Since that time, the Bank has sold 83
acres to Caltrans as mitigation land for Highway 76 in Oceanside, which impacted
gnatcatcher habitat. The 83 acres are permanently designated as open space through
a conservation easement. Realizing the potential of the property as a conservation
bank, Bank of America received approval from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
the California Department of Fish and Game, and the California Resources Agency
to designate the balance of the parcel as a “pre-approved” conservation bank.
The timing of start-up of the conservation bank and the mechanism for authorizing
it were initially unclear to staff. Ultimately, staff was informed that the Bank and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, and
California Resources Agency had negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) to establish the conservation bank. Because no formal mechanism existed
in the City requiring a permit for Biological Habitat Preserves, there was no way for
staff to require the property owner to address issues of concern to the City. In this
case, the City was ultimately able to resolve these issues, but a formal process would
have made the resolution quicker and easier. This zone code amendment has been
initiated to ensure that in the future, lands proposed for biological habitat preserves
are reviewed through a formal process which would allow the City the opportunity
to address issues related to the General Plan, Growth Management Plan and Habitat
Management Planning efforts.
The proposed zone code amendment would require the processing of a conditional
use permit (CUP) for biological habitat preserves to ensure that designated biological
habitat preserves comply with the following policies and regulations:
Carlsbad General Plan
Carlsbad Local Coastal Program
Growth Management
Habitat Management Planning efforts
Chapter 21.42 (Conditional Uses) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
ZCA 95-02JLCPA 95-08 - biOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES
AUGUST 2,199s
lv. ANALYSIS
Staff is recommending approval of this project. Therefore this analysis section will
present the project’s compliance with the above policies and regulations.
a. General Plan
The proposed zone code amendment is consistent with the vision, goals, and
programs of the General Plan. One of the vision statements of the General Plan is
“A City which recoguizes the value of its unique ecological position as a coastal city
of beaches, fragile lagoons, and unspoiled canyons; which has taken steps to conserve
the quality and quantity of its air, water, land and biological resources.” Supporting
this vision are goals in the Open Space and Conservatian Element that include: “(1)
A City which protects wildlife habitat through the preservation and enhancement of
significant feeding, nesting and breeding areas; (2) A City which preserves to the
maximum extent possible, the existing level of biodiversity; (3) A City which preserves
a variety of unique conservation areas to accommodate the needs of humans, plants
and animals; and, (4) A City that protects environmentally sensitive land and buffer
areas. Implementing programs and policies supporting these goals include: “(1)
Identity existing open space for protection, management, and potential enhancement
to maintain and, if possible, increase its value as wildlife habitat; and, (2) Coordinate
planning and development of a citywide open space system with habitat planning
efforts. All of these statements support the concept of a well planned and coordinated system of open space and habitat preserves. Consistent with the vision,
goals and policies, the proposed zone code amendment will ensure that habitat
preservation is done in a coordinated manner consistent with the Carlsbad General
Plan.
b. Caelsbad Local Coastal Prom-am
The City’s zoning Ordinance, as approved by the California Coastal Commission,
functions as the implementing ordinance for Carlsbad’s Local Coastal Program. To
ensure consistency between the City’s amended Zoning Ordinance and it’s LCP, this
LCP amendment is being processed. The proposed LCP amendment, which will add
new requirements and procedures for designated biological habitat preserves, is not
anticipated to result in significant impacts to coastal resources. Any designated
biological habitat preserve will be required to be consistent with applicable LCP
standards, policies and provisions.
At the end of the State mandated six week public comment period, starting on July
20, 1995, and ending August 31, 1995, staff shall present to the City Council a
summary of comments received.
ZCA 95024LCPA 95-08 - brOLOG1CA.L HABITAT PRESERVES
AUGUST 2.1995
C. Growth Manwement
The proposed zone code amendment is being processed to ensure that biological
habitat preserves will not preclude the City’s ability to provide necessary facilities
identified in the City’s Growth Management Plan. Staff is concerned that if too
much of the City were designated as open space it would be difficult to fund
necessary public facilities, as well as result in the reduction of long term income
sources which were anticipated when growth management was established. By
requiring habitat preserves to be reviewed under a CUP, fiscal and infrastructure
impacts can be identified and adequately analyzed.
d. Habitat Manaeement Planning Efforts
In 1991, the City began preparing a Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The goal of
the HMP is to preserve habitats within the City in a mix and configuration that will
ensure the persistence, diversity, and species richness of natural communities within
the City. A draft I-IMP has been out for public review since July 1994. The
continued processing of the I-IMP has been delayed to allow time for the
development of regional habitat management plans. It is anticipated that the City’s
HMP will be ready for Council action in approximately 6 months. The proposed zone code amendment will ensure that future proposed biological habitat preserves
are located consistent with the recommendations of the Carlsbad HMP.
e. Zonine Ordinance ChaDter 21.42 of the Carfsbad MuniciDal Code
The proposed zone code amendment will require (per Section 21.42.010(15)) that a
CUP be obtained for any proposed biological habitat preserve. A CUP will not be
required for preserves that are proposed as part of a development proposal requiring
environmental review nor for land zoned as Open Space (OS). Although a CUP is
required for biological habitat preserves under this new code section, there will be
no way to guarantee the processing of a CUP on lands being purchased with the idea
of using them for mitigation. Unless the City is notified (by either the resource
agencies or property owner), that property is being considered for a formal biological
habitat preserve, there is no way of knowing that laud is being used as mitigation for
projects outside of the City of Carlsbad. Staff will be working with the resource
agencies to ensure that in the future, the City is notified early in the process of
identifying biological habitat preserves and that property owners are notified in a
timely manner that a CUP is required before a biological habitat preserve is formally
designated.
SUMMARY
The proposed zone code amendment is consistent with the visions, goals, and programs of
the General Plan, will not cause adverse impacts to the City’s Growth Management Plan,
ZCA 95024LCPA 95-08 - blOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES AUGUST 2,1995
will ensure consistency with LCP standards, policies and provisions, and will comply with the
City’s habitat management planning efforts. Therefore, staff recommends approval of ZCA 95 -02.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Because the proposed zone code amendment does not condone any site specific development and because future projects will be individually reviewed to evaluate
environmental impacts, the Planning Director determined that no significant adverse
environmental impacts will result from this proposal and has, therefore, issued a Negative
Declaration on April 12, 1995.
A’ITACHMJWTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3782
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3783
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3788.
37
PLANNING COMMISSION August 2,1995
EXHBIT 6
PAGE 9
3. ZCA 95-02/LCPA 95-08 - BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES - Request for recommendation of approval of a Negative Declaration and an amendment to Title 21, Chapter 21.04 of the Carl&ad Municipal Code by the addition of Section 21.04.046 to define Biological Habitat Preserve and amending Title 21, Chapter 21.42 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code by the addition of Section 21.42.010(15) to require the processing of a Conditional Use Permit for biological habitat preserves
to ensure that biological habitat preserves are consistent with the City’s General Plan, Growth
Management Plan, Local Coastal Program, and Habitat Management Planning efforts.
Terri Woods, Associate Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that ZCA
95-02/LCPA 95-08 is a request for an amendment to Title 21 to define biological habitat preserve and to
establish a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process for the establishment of a biological habitat preserve. It
will also amend the Local Coastal Program (LCP) consistent with these changes. The zone code
amendment is being initiated primarily to ensure that future biological preserves are formally reviewed
through a City process. Earlier this year, land known as the Highlands Property was being considered as a
conservation bank by state and federal agencies. The property owner, Bank of America, did not come to
the City to make its wishes known. It was only very late in the process that the City was notified of the fact
that this was going to be established as a habitat mitigation bank. When staff reviewed it, there were some
issues dealing with Carlsbad’s growth management plan. There is a road which runs through the middle of the property (Cannon Road) which has regional significance. Staff wanted to ensure that the City would have the ability to put that road through, should the land be designated as a preserve. Bank of America did work with staff to negotiate all the issues in this particular case. The proposed zone code amendment
will ensure that, in the future, the City will have a better mechanism to identify those issues and to ensure
that they are addressed prior to the agencies taking action on a designated preserve. The City is also
requesting an amendment to the LCP. The City’s zoning ordinance is the City’s implementation ordinance for its LCP. By amending the LCP, the City is keeping the implementing ordinance up to date. Staff
recommends approval of this zone code and LCP amendment.
Commissioner Monroy inquired about the 63 acres which were sold for mitigation of Highway 76. What happened to the density allocated for those 63 acres. Ms. Woods replied that the density goes into the City’s housing bank of excess units.
Commissioner Monroy inquired if he is correct in assuming that the density of that property was
non-transferable to another developer. Ms. Woods replied yes.
Chairperson Welshons opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
There being no persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairperson Welshons declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Compas, and duly seconded, to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 3782, recommending approval of the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 3763, recommending approval of ZCA 95-02, and Planning Commission Resolution No. 3788 recommending approval of LCPA 95-08, based on the findings contained therein.
VOTE: 6-O
AYES: Compas, Erwin, Monroy, Nielsen, Savary, Welshons
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
. .
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years
and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled
matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of
Blade-Citizen
a newspaper of general circulation, printed and
published daily in the City of Oceanside and qualified for the Cii of Oceanside and the North County Judicial district with substantial circulation in Bonsall, Fallbrook, Leucadia, Encinitas, Cardiff, Vista and Carisbad, County
of San Diego, and which newspaper has been adjudged
a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior
Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, under the date of June 30, 1989, case number 171349; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy
(set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:
Sept. 29, 1995
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated &sXe~n.sid~gCga:imia, this 29 day
of
- - - - - - - -/!G!Lc;g~ - -- - - --- -
BLADE-CITIZEN
Legal Advertising
1722 South Coast Highway Oceanside, CA 92054 PO. Box 90
Oceanside, CA 92049 619 I 433-7333
I This space is for the County Clerk’s Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
Notice of Public Hearing
______-______--------------------------------------
I
--- -. - -.y Y* L,aaa- .._ _ --
mcRhCbats21.~~~t)arr.l-u.,;.~~~~~~ & on I-y, CMobH 10,1995, 0 co&&#
-~-- -- 1 V-B ..- -cd- *,1U aAn .
~~ -- 4td~MilbD.&qsmba29,1965 .’ .._ . /belaY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ZCA 95-2/LCPA 95-8
BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday, October 10, 1995, to consider approval of a Negative Declaration; an amendment to Chapter 21.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, by the addition of Section 21.04.048, to define Biological Habitat Preserve; and an amendment to Chapter 21.42 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, by the addition of Section 21.42.010(15), to require the processing of a Conditional Use Permit for biological habitat preserves to ensure that biological habitat preserves are consistent with the City's General Plan, Growth Management Plan, Local Coastal Program and Habitat Management Planning efforts and to amend the City's Local Coastal Program (LCP) to ensure consistency between the City's zoning ordinance (which functions as the implementing ordinance for the LCP) and the City's LCP.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Terri Woods in the Planning Department, at (619) 438-1161, extension 4447.
If you challenge the Negative Declaration, Zone Code Amendment, and/or Local Coastal Program Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at, or prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: September 29, 1995 APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
. I ; .
TERRI WOODS
PLhNNlNG UEPT. r,ru, ZCA 95-02/LCPA 95-08 Ihlogical
I iabilat Prcscrvcs
/ LABELS
DR GEORGE W MANNON
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DIST ENCINITAS SCHOOL DIST
801 PINE AVENUE 1 CIVIC CENTER DR 101 S RANCH0 SANTA FE RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008 SAN MARCOS Cl’. 92069 ENCINITAS CA 92024
LEUCADIA COUNTY WTR DIST VALLECITOS WTR DISTRICT SAN DIEGO COUNTY, Dcpts
1960 LA COSTA AV 788 SAN MARCOS BLVD 5201 RUFFIN RD STE “B”
CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAN MARCOS CA 92069 SAN DIEGO CA 92123
err Eiir--i LA1 ENGINEERING DEPT
CITY OF SAN MARCOS CITY OF VISTA
1 CIVIC CENTER DR PO BOX 1988
SAN MARCOS CA 92069 VISTA CA 92085
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
300 NO. HILL ST
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAhlE
330 GOLDENSHORE #50
LONG BEACH CA 90802
ART0 J. NUUTINEN
4920 CAMPUS DR
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will
hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad,
California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 2, 1995, to consider recommending approval
of a Negative Declaration and an amendment to Title 21, Chapter 21.04 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code by the addition of Section 21.04.048 to define Biological Habitat Preserve
and amending Title 21, Chapter 21.42 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code by the addition of
Section 21.42.010(15) to require the processing of a Conditional Use Permit for biological
habitat preserves to ensure that biological habitat preserves are consistent with the City’s
General Plan, Growth Managem’ent Plan, Local Coastal Program and Habitat Management
Planning efforts and to amend the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) to ensure consistency
between the City’s zoning ordinance (which functions as the implementing ordinance for the
LCP) and the City’s LCP.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and aftei Jullr 27, 1995. If you have
anv questions, please call Terri Woods in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, ext. i -!447.
If you chailenge the Negative Declaration, Zone Code Amendment and/or Local Coastal
Program Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written
correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: ZCA 95-02fLCPA 95-08
CASE NAME: BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES
PUBLISH: JULY 21, 1995
!
CITY OF CARLSBAD c
PLANNING COMMISSION 1
k
-
(Form A)
10% CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notide
ZCA 95-02lLCPA 95-08 - BIOLOGICAL HABITAT PRESERVES
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the ftem for the council meeting of
Thank you.
Public Hearing
Assistant Clty Man--
September 5, 1995 Oate
.-