Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-01-22; Planning Commission; ; LCPA 02-10|EIR 97-01 ADDENDUM|DI 02-01 (HMP ADDENDUM #2) - HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLANw The City of Carlsbad Planning Department P.C. AGENDA OF: January 22,2003 A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application complete date: NIA Project Planner: Don Rideout Project Engineer: NIA Michael Holzmiller SUBJECT: LCPA 02-1O/EIR 97-01 ADDENDUM /DI 02-01 (HMP ADDENDUM #2) - HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN - Request for an amendment to the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) by amending three LCP segments (Mello 11, Mello I and Agua Hedionda) to add habitat conservation standards to remaining undeveloped properties in the Coastal Zone, adding an addendum (#2) to the City’s Draft Habitat Management Plan (HMP) to incorporate the additional standards, adopting a Negative Declaration for the additional standards and approving an Addendum to the previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR 97-01) for the City’s Municipal Golf Course . I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 5360 RECOMMENDING ADOPTION of a Negative Declaration, and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5361 and 5362 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of Local Coastal Plan Amendments (LCPA 02-10) and DI 02-01 for HMP Addendum No. 2, and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 5363 APPROVING an Addendum to EIR 97-01; and that the Planning Commission forward a minute motion to the City Council to direct staff to submit design revisions to the Municipal Golf Course plan to the California Coastal Commission in order to resolve the pending appeal of Golf Course Coastal Development Permit (CDP 97-25). 11. INTRODUCTION This item involves several actions related to applying additional habitat protection and conservation measures to the remaining undeveloped properties in the City’s coastal zone. The LCPA includes revisions and additions to incorporate the measures into three LCP segments (Mello 11, Mello I and Agua Hedionda). The City’s draft Habitat Management Plan is also proposed to be amended by adding an Addendum (Addendum #2) to incorporate the coastal habitat protection standards into the HMP document. Finally, several design revisions to plans for the City’s Municipal Golf Course are being proposed in order to comply with the new coastal habitat standards. A detailed description of the actions is provided in this report, as well as an analysis of how the actions are consistent with applicable City plans and programs including the General Plan, the City’s Coastal Program and the draft HMP. Staffs analysis concludes that the actions are consistent with these plans and programs and, therefore, staff is recommending support of the requested actions. * LCPA 02-10/EIR 97-01 AddenddI 02-01HMP Addendum #2 - HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN January 22,2003 111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND A. BACKGROUND Since 1991 the City of Carlsbad has been working on a HMP. The purpose of the plan is to conserve sensitive species and their habitat while also providing for compatible public and private development. The HMP was approved by the Carlsbad City Council on September 21, 1999. Subsequently, the first addendum was prepared based on comments by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game. The completed document dated December 1999 with Addendum was submitted to the wildlife agencies for approval of an Incidental Take Permit. In August 2000 the federal Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management granted the California Coastal Commission’s request for a Consistency Review of the HMP. This action precluded approval of the Incidental Take Permit until the Coastal Commission has approved the Consistency Review. The purpose of the Consistency Review in this case is to determine whether issuance of the Incidental Take Permit to Carlsbad would be consistent with the California Coastal Act. As a result of discussions between the City of Carlsbad and the Coastal Commission, it was determined that the Consistency Review should be accompanied by revisions to the HMP and to the Carlsbad LCP. The revisions are the subject of this staff report. In addition to the revisions to the HMP and LCP, this staff report addresses modifications to the proposed Municipal Golf Course. On June 7,2000, the Carlsbad Planning Commission certified Environmental Impact Report EIR 97-01 and approved Coastal Development Permit CDP 97-25, approving the Golf Course project. Subsequently, the California Coastal Commission appealed CDP 97-25 based on concerns regarding impacts to biological resources in the coastal zone portion of the project. Modifications have been made to the Golf Course design addressing the Coastal Commission’s concerns. An addendum to EIR 97-01 has been prepared and is attached. The Golf Course project modification is closely linked to both the HMP and LCP, and the various actions are therefore being processed concurrently, as further described below. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION LCP AMENDMENTS - The Carlsbad LCP consists of six segments. Three of these segments are proposed for revision at this time. They are Mello I, Mello 11, and Agua Hedionda. The remaining three segments (Village Redevelopment Area, West Batiquitos and East Batiquitos) have been reviewed and do not require amendment. Mello 11 contains the majority of undeveloped land and habitat in the coastal zone. The table below is a summary of the key provisions added to the Mello I1 segment. For further detail, please refer to the revised text of Mello 11 which is provided as Exhibit “A” to Resolution No. 5361. , LCPA 02-10EIR 97-01 AddenddI 02-01HMP Addendum #2 - HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN January 22,2003 TABLE 1. MAJOR CONSERVATION Impacts to Habitat Mitigation Wetlands Conservation Standards Golf Course Preserve Management Plan IEASURES IN THE COASTAL ZONE Impacts to Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHA) are prohibited unless specifically identified in the HMP. Mitigation must include creation of new habitat of the type being impacted at a ratio of 1 : 1 to achieve a “no net lossyy standard. Additional mitigation must be as previously identified in the HMP. Offsite mitigation inside the coastal zone is preferred but may be outside the coastal zone if it would result in greater biological benefit. No impacts to wetlands except for uses allowed by Coastal Act. When allowed, impacts must be mitigated at 4: 1 ratio. Detailed conservation standards are provided for 15 specified properties. If 80% or more of a property is ESHA, 75% of the property must be conserved. At least 67% of coastal sage scrub and 75% of gnatcatchers must be preserved. Hardline boundaries can be negotiated in lieu of standards. Boundaries differing fkom standards require LCP amendment. 100 ft. for wetlands. 50 ft. for riparian and coast live oak woodland. 20 ft. for all other native habitat. Trails and fuel modification zone 3 are permitted in buffers. Coastal Commission can support if it complies with new Mello I1 standards. Plan must be prepared within 1 year from approval of HMP. Must be adopted by LCP amendment. For Mello I and Agua Hedionda, the same measures as stated above apply, with the exception of the list of 16 specified properties and the golf course. The revised text of Mello I and Agua Hedionda are provided as Exhibits “B” and “C” to Resolution No. 5361. P- h LCPA 02-10/EIR 97-01 Addend41 02-01HMP Addendum #2 - HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN January 22,2003 Papre 4 HMP SECOND ADDENDUM - In order to reflect the new standards that will apply inside the coastal zone and to maintain consistency with the LCP, a second addendum to the HMP has been prepared. The addendum, which is provided as Exhibit “X” to Resolution No. 5362, incorporates all of the new LCP provisions outlined above, in most instances using identical wording. In addition, the addendum includes new Hardline boundaries for two properties that are outside the coastal zone (the Summit and Mandana). These Hardline boundaries have been prepared during the time that the approval of the HMP has been on hold. GOLF COURSE - Due to the revisions needed to the Municipal Golf Course design for compliance with new coastal habitat protection policies, it is necessary to process an addendum to the certified Environmental Impact Report for the Golf Course (EIR 97-01). The addendum, which is provided as Exhibit “Y” to Resolution No. 5363, describes the changes that have been made in the design, provides schematic exhibits showing the original and revised layouts, and includes a revised table of impacts and mitigation. With respect to mitigation, a greater amount of on-site habitat creation will be provided in order to comply with the new standards being included in the Local Coastal Program. In addition all impacts to wetlands and southern maritime chaparral inside the Coastal Zone have been eliminated. Because the changes to the Golf Course were for the purpose of greater habitat protection, all impacts have been reduced compared with EIR 97-01 as originally certified. In conjunction with the EIR addendum, staff is also recommending that the Planning Commission, by motion, recommend to the City Council that the revision to the Golf Course design be submitted to the Coastal Commission to resolve the pending appeal of CDP 97-25. IV. ANALYSIS The recommendation of approval for these actions was developed by analyzing consistency with city plans and programs, more specifically, the General Plan, the LCP and the draft HMP. The following analysis section discusses consistency with each of these. A. General Plan The proposed actions are consistent with the applicable policies of the General Plan. Particularly relevant are policies contained in the Land Use and Open Space and Conservation Elements. The actions are consistent with the following stated policies of the Land Use and Open SpaceKonservation Elements: Develop and retain open space in all categories of land use; Participate in programs that restore and enhance the City’s degraded natural resources; Implement, to the greatest extent feasible, the natural resource protection policies of the LCP; Preserve open space areas in as natural a state as possible; 0 Participate in the statewide and regional plans (the state of California’s Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP), efforts with SANDAG and other north county cities in the preparation of a North County Wildlife Forum Multi- I‘ n LCPA 02-1OLEIR 97-01 AddenddI 02-01HMP Addendum #2 - HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN January 22,2003 Pane 5 species Habitat Conservation Plan), to conserve sensitive environmental resources; Coordinate planning and development of a citywide open space system with habitat planning efforts; Minimize the encroachment of development into wetland and riparian areas; Coordinate the protection of wetlands, woodlands, riparian areas, and other sensitive habitat areas with appropriate state and federal protection agencies; Encourage and participate in regional planning efforts to protect environmentally sensitive species from extinction; Require adequate buffers between new development and environmentally sensitive habitats; Require private development which impacts sensitive resources to provide appropriate mitigation measures, so that the existing biodiversity within the City is maintained; Require that at the time of any discretionary approval, any land dedicated to the City for its habitat or scenic value, have an appropriate easement and/or zoning placed on it for resource protection; and Recognize and implement the policies of the California Coastal Act and the Carlsbad LCP when reviewing potential development in the coastal zone. B. Local Coastal Program Compliance with the City’s certified LCP is determined by analyzing whether the proposed LCP amendment and HMP addendum are consistent with all other applicable policies or provisions of the LCP and the Coastal Act. Listed below are the policy areas addressed by the three LCP segments and an explanation of how the proposed project complies with the policy. Note: Although the three segments use slightly different terminology to describe these policy areas, all three address the same issues. Tal Policy Areas Agriculture Geologic Hazards e 2 - COMPLIANCE PurDose 1 To prevent the premature conversion of agricultural lands to urban uses To address slope instability, soil erosion, floodplains, and seismic hazards UTH LCP POLICIES Compliance The proposed project may have a minor effect on agriculture by encouraging conversion from agriculture to wildlife habitat. However, this conversion is allowed by Policy 2-1 of Mello 11 which states: “Any acreage under the control of a public entity for a public recreation or open space use shall be exempt from Policy 2-1 and be permitted to convert from an agricultural use Nothing in the proposed project affects the existing LCP provisions regarding these hazard areas. All existing provisions remain in full effect. 3, ... *‘ e LCPA 02-1OEIR 97-01 AddenddI 02-01HMP Addendum #2 - HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN January 22,2003 Page 6 Table 2 - COMPLIANCE WIT1 Public Works Recreation and Visitor-serving Facilities Visual Resources Public Access Environmentally Sensitive Habitat To assure that necessary infrastructure elements are provided in a manner that minimizes impacts to coastal zone resources To assure that adequate opportunities are provided for public recreation and facilities to serve visitors to the coast To assure that development in the coastal zone minimizes visual obstruction of public coastal views To provide the public with maximum opportunities for free access to the coastline ~~~ To achieve optimum protection of wildlife habitat resources in the coastal zone LCP POLICIES, Continued The proposed project furthers this policy by establishing habitat protection standards that apply to public works projects as well as private development. ~ The proposed project does not preclude development of any areas designated for recreation or visitor-serving facilities. In fact, by resolving issues of species and habitat protection, the project facilitates recreational development of Veterans Memorial Park and Hub Park, as well as privately owned properties designated for such uses. Among the action recommendations in the LCP is “preservation of natural vegetation on steep slopes” which is supported by the project. The project does not affect or modify any other provision of visual resources protection. Nothing in the proposed project effects the existing LCP provisions regarding public access. All existing provisions remain in full effect. The proposed project addresses Environmentally Sensitive Habitat by recommending new conservation and development standards for properties in the coastal zone. These new standards have been developed in coordination with Coastal Commission staff for the express purpose of implementing LCP and Coastal Act policies for the protection of habitat and species. As demonstrated in the above discussion, the proposed project is fully consistent with the certified LCP. C. Habitat Management Plan The purpose of the HMP is to promote conservation of rare habitats and species as required by state and federal law, while also facilitating compatible economic development of public and private land. The HMP as originally approved in 1999 did not make any distinctions between land inside and outside the coastal zone. In response to the LCPA 02-10EIR 97-01 Addendum431 02-01HMP Addendum #2 - HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN January 22,2003 Coastal Commission’s concerns, that distinction is now being made, resulting in modified standards for conservation in the coastal zone. The coastal zone standards, while different from the original HMP, remain consistent with the intent of the HMP. The differences are primarily in the areas of mitigation, Hardline Properties, treatment of highly constrained properties, and buffers. The following discussion explains the differences between the 1999 HMP and the proposed coastal zone standards. Compared with the 1999 HMP, the coastal zone standards generally increase the required mitigation ratios. The coastal standards also require that 1 : 1 creation of new habitat be a component of the mitigation. The coastal standards do not give credit for onsite preservation of existing habitat, but credit is given for substantial restoration. Two coastal zone properties shown as Hardlines in the 1999 HMP will be subject to new standards which may affect their Hardline boundaries. These properties are the City Golf Course and Kevane. The process for agreement on Hardlines is modified to include the Coastal Commission and to require a LCP amendment when Hardlines differ from the standards. The 1999 HMP recognized that some properties are highly constrained, and a 75% conservation standard was applied to these. The coastal zone standards increase the number of parcels that are subject to the 75% standard. Requirements for conservation of coastal sage scrub and gnatcatchers remain unchanged. The coastal zone standards generally increased the required buffer for all habitat types. Although the proposed coastal zone standards will create differences in the handling of properties inside and outside the coastal zone, the proposed standards remain consistent with the original intent of the HMP. 0 0 V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An environmental analysis of the proposed actions was conducted and no significant impacts were identified. The proposed actions deal primarily with biological resources in that it involves incorporating additional conservation and protection measures for habitat located in the Coastal Zone into the HMP and the City’s LCP. This action does not authorize or permit any development project or any impacts to biological resources. The proposed action modifies certain provisions of the Local Coastal Program and makes additions to the HMP to provide higher levels of protection for biological resources. The present LCP provides some protection for wetlands and habitats located on steep slopes. The proposal provides greater protection for wetlands and for habitats located on areas other than steep slopes. In addition, the proposal includes enhanced buffer requirements and the requirement for long-term management and monitoring program for species and habitats. Any development project which would have the potential to impact biological resources are currently required to undergo an extensive review and permitting process which includes biological surveys of the project site, compliance with the HMP, compliance with the LCP (for properties located inside the Coastal Zone). CEQA compliance, public hearings, issuance of local permits, and issuance of state or federal permits if required. These existing plans and . - -* I LCPA 02-10EIR 97-01 AddenddI 02-01HMP Addendum #2 - HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN January 22,2003 regulatory mechanisms ensure that potentially significant biological impacts are disclosed and fully mitigated. Because the actions were determined not to have any adverse impacts on the environment, a Negative Declaration was issued by the Planning Director on December 20,2002. Notice of the Negative Declaration was provided to the State Clearinghouse and to the County Clerk and published in the newspaper. No written comments were received in response to the notice. The actions would result in several design revisions to the previously approved plans for the City’s proposed Municipal Golf Course for which an EIR (EIR 97-01) was certified. These revisions are a result of complying with the additional habitat protection standards of the actions. The revisions would result in greater protection of coastal habitat resources and, would reduce the severity of previously identified impacts. Therefore, pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act, an Addendum to the previously certified EIR has been prepared. ATTACWENTS : 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5360 (Neg. Dec.) Planning Commission Resolution No. 5361 (LCPA) Planning Commission Resolution No. 5362 (DI - HMP Addendum) Planning Commission Resolution No. 5363 (EIR Addendum) Revised Golf Course Routing Plan (previously distributed)