HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 97-25; Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course; Coastal Development Permit (CDP) (12)- -
GRAY DAVIS, Governor STATE OF CALIFORNIA - THE RESOURCES AGENCY
CALI FORNlA COASTAL COMMISSION
SAN DIEGO AREA
7575 METROPOLITAN DRIVE, SUITE 103
SAN DIEGO, CA 92108-4402
(619) 767-2370
Filed: 6/27/00
Fri 13a 49th Day: waived
Staff Report: 7/18/03
Hearing Date: 8/6-8/03
Staff KA-SD
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON APPEAL
Application No.: A-6-CII-00-087
Applicant: City of Carlsbad Agent: Michael: Holzmiller
Description: Development of an 18 hole championship golf course, clubhouse,
parking lot, maintenance facilities, driving range, conference center and
pads for future industriaVgolf related uses on 397 acre site.
Site: North of Palomar Airport Road and east and west of College Boulevard,
Mello 11, Carlsbad, San Diego County. APN 155-104-04
Substantive File Documents: Certified City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program; City of
Carlsbad File No. CDP 97-25; Appeal File A-6-CII-087; Staff Report on
Recommendation on Appeal Substantial Issue dated 5/7/03; City of
Carlsbad LCP Amendment No. 1-03B (Habitat Management Plan) File.
STAFF NOTES:
At its June 12,2003 hearing, the Commission found Substantial Issue exists with respect
to the grounds on which the appeal was filed. This report represents the de novo
recommendation.
Summarv of Staffs Preliminary Recommendation:
The staff recommends that the Commission, after public hearing, approve the permit with
conditions. The proposed development will be constructed on an undeveloped 397-acre
site located north of Palomar Airport Road, south of Faraday Avenue, east of Hidden
Valley Road, and extending on either side of College Boulevard. The project site is
located both inside and outside the coastal zone. No significant impacts to public access
or public views are anticipated. The primary issues raised by the proposed development
relate to habitat protection and water quality. No permanent impacts to wetlands will
occur and as conditioned, there will be no net loss of native habitat, appropriate
mitigation measures will be applied for all upland and temporary riparian impacts, and
native habitat in preservation areas will be permanently protected with buffer areas and
h
A-6-CII-00-0c.
Page 2
conservation easements. To address water quality, special conditions have been applied
to require that Best Management Practices be incorporated to control stormwater leaving
the developed site, to require installation of permanent runoff and erosion control
devices, and to require that detailed plans for erosion control, water quality monitoring,
fertilizer and pesticide use and turf management be submitted by the applicant.
I. PRELIMINARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends the Commission adopt the following resolution:
MOTION: I move that the Commission approve Coastal
Development Perm it No. A-6- CII-00-08 7 pursuant to the
staff recommendation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL:
Staff recommends a YES vote. Passage of this motion will result in approval of the
permit as conditioned and adoption of the following resolution and findings. The motion
passes only by affirmative vote of a majority of the Commissioners present.
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE PERMIT:
The Commission hereby approves a coastal development permit for the proposed
development and adopts the findings set forth below on grounds that the development as
conditioned will be in conformity with the certified Local Coastal Program. Approval of
the permit complies with the California Environmental Quality Act because either 1)
feasible mitigation measures and/or alternatives have been incorporated to substantially
lessen any significant adverse effects of the development on the environment, or 2) there
are no further feasible mitigation measures or alternatives that would substantially lessen
any significant adverse impacts.
11. Standard Conditions.
See attached page.
III. Special Conditions.
The permit is subject to the following conditions:
1. Final Development Plans. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director for
review and written approval, detailed final plans for the proposed development that
include site, building, grading and drainage plans. Said plans shall be in substantial
conformance with the plan entitled “City of Carlsbad Golf Course Revisions” submitted
-
A-6-CII-00-0,
Page 3
with LCPA 1 -03B (Habitat Management Plan) on February 7,2003 and shall comply
with the following:
a. There shall be no impacts to southern maritime chaparral habitat within the
Coastal Zone portion of the project. Impacts to coastal sage scrub shall be
consistent with the approved development plan and shall be mitigated as
addressed in Condition #2 below. Any temporary impacts to wetland andor
riparian areas for the purpose of constructing golf cart path crossings shall be
restored as addressed in Condition #3 below.
b. The conservation and development areas for the golf course property shall be
consistent with the golf course hardline map (Figure 8 Revised) in the City of
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP). Areas shown for conservation shall
not be impacted or disturbed except for revegetation, restoration and other
similar activities related to mitigation. Areas shown for impact may be fully
developed with appropriate mitigation.
The permittee shall undertake the development in accordance with the approved plans.
Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be reported to the Executive Director.
No changes to the plans shall occur without a Coastal Commission approved amendment
to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines that no
amendment is legally required.
2. Mitigation for Upland Habitat Impacts. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit to the Executive
Director for review and written approval, a final detailed coastal sage scrub mitigation
plan. Said plan shall be developed in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and the California Department of Fish and Game, and shall include the
following:
a. Preparation of a detailed site plan delineating all areas and types of impact to
upland habitat species (both permanent and temporary) and the exact acreage of
each impact. In addition, a detailed site plan of the mitigation sites shall also be
included.
b. Impacts to coastal sage scrub shall be mitigated at not less than a ratio of 2: 1.
c. Mitigation methods shall be consistent with those approved in Section 7-9 of the
second addendum to the Carlsbad HMP and Policy 7- 1.10 of the Mello I1 Land
Use Plan of the Carlsbad LCP, as provided in Exhibit 10.
d. A minimum buffer of 20 feet shall be provided between development as defined
in Section 30106 of the Coastal Act, and native upland habitat, except as
otherwise provided in Section 7-1 1 of the second addendum to the Carlsbad
HMP and Policy 3-1.12 of the Mello I1 Land Use Plan of the Carlsbad LCP, as
provided in Exhibit 10.
A-6-CII-00-0c.
Page 4
e.
f.
g-
h.
1.
j.
Location where the seeds will be collected and identification of plant species to
be used for the restoration area;
Application rate (e.g. pounds per acre of seeding effort);
Methods of weed eradication. No weed whips shall be permitted after
installation of the seed mixes;
Designation of a qualified botanist to supervise the restoration effort;
Criteria for defined goals, objectives and performance standards. These shall
include the following: three years after the initial planting, the restored areas
should support at least 10 native species appropriate to the vegetation type and
have evidence of natural recruitment of at least one-half of these species. Weeds
should be controlled as specified in (i) above and never constitute more than 10
percent of the total cover. Cover by native vegetation should increase over time
and ultimately approach 60 percent;
At completion of the mitigationhestoration effort, the restoration specialist shall
prepare a letter report indicating that the installation is finished and that the
three-year monitoring period has begun. Monitoring reports shall be submitted
to the City annually for three years. If at the end of three years, any of the
restored areas fail to meet the year-three standards as contained in the final
mitigation plan, the monitoring and maintenance period will be extended one full
year for that area. This process shall continue until all year-three standards are
met.
The permittee shall undertake development in accordance with the approved
mitigationhestoration plan. Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be
reported to the Executive Director. No changes to the plans shall occur without a Coastal
Commission approved amendment to this coastal development permit unless the
Executive Director determines that no amendment is legally required.
3. Restoration for Construction Impacts. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, if any temporary wetland andor riparian
impacts are proposed, the applicant shall submit a detailed revegetation plan indicating
the type, size, extent and location of all plant materials, any proposed irrigation system
and any other landscape features necessary to revegetate any proposed temporary wetland
and/or riparian impacts. The restoration program shall be developed in consultation with
the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife and the California Department of Fish and
Game, and at a minimum shall include:
Before/After Survev. The condition of the wetland andor riparian revegetation and
substrate under the two approved golf cart crossing locations shall be documented
prior to construction, and the extent of proposed temporary impacts shall be
identified. The extent of impacts to the vegetation and substrate shall be assessed
-
Ad-CII-00-OL
Page 5
and documented after completion of the repairs. Temporary wetland and/or riparian
impacts shall be revegetated at a ratio of 1 : 1. There shall be no wetland impacts
except for those temporary impacts associated with construction of the two
approved golf cart crossings. No permanent wetland or riparian impacts shall be
allowed.
a. The following goals, objectives and performance standards for the restoration
sites:
1. Full restoration of all wetland and/or riparian impacts that are
identified as temporary. Restoration of temporarily impacted areas
shall include, at a minimum, restoration of before-impact elevations,
restoration of before-impact hydrology, removal of all non-native plant
species, and replanting with locally collected native wetland and/or
riparian plant species.
2. After construction and restoration, a permanent minimum buffer of
100 feet shall be provided between development and wetlands, and a
minimum buffer of 50 feet shall be provided between development
and riparian area, except as shown on the “City of Carlsbad Golf
Course Revisions” plan dated February 7,2003. For the two approved
golf cart path crossings and the golf course playing areas adjacent to
the riparian area as shown on the plan, an average minimum post-
construction buffer of 50 feet shall be provided between new
development and wetlands, and an average minimum post-
construction buffer of 25 feet shall be provided between new
development and riparian areas, consistent with Policy 3-1.12 of the
Mello I1 Land Use Plan and Section 7-1 1 of the Carlsbad HMP, as
provided in Exhibit 10, unless otherwise approved by the Executive
Director in a manner consistent with the final, approved development
plans and mitigationhestoration plans. The buffer between
development and ripariadwetland habitat for these referenced areas
shall not be less than 10 feet in width at any one point.
3. As shown on the plan entitled “City of Carlsbad Golf Course
Revisions” submitted with LCPA 1 -03B (Carlsbad HMP) on February
7,2003, and consistent with the golf course hardline map (Figure 8
Revised) in the Carlsbad HMP, golf cart path crossing #1 shall utilize
the existing farm road, and crossing #2 shall utilize a bridge span
structure. No permanent riparian impacts shall occur for either
crossing.
4. Success criteria and final performance monitoring shall provide at
least a 90% coverage of areas disturbed by construction activities
within 1 year of completion of construction activities.
-
A-6-CII-OO-,
Page 6
5. The final design and construction methods that will be used to ensure
the restoration sites achieve the defined goals, objectives and
performance standards.
6. Submittal, within 30 days of completion of initial restoration work, of
post-restoration plans demonstrating that the restoration sites have
been established in accordance with the approved design and
construction methods.
Construction impacts to sensitive habitat areas (e.g., coastal sage and other native upland
habitat, wetlands, and riparian areas) shall be avoided by identifying and staking all
sensitive habitats outside the project footprint, and educating the construction crews
about the importance of these habitats and need for protection.
The permittee shall undertake development in accordance with the approved restoration
plan. Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be reported to the Executive
Director. No changes to the plans shall occur without a Coastal Commission approved
amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines
that no amendment is legally required.
4. Final Landscaoe Plans. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director for
review and written approval, a detailed final landscape plan for the proposed
development. Said plan shall show the type, size, extent and location of all proposed
vegetation and any necessary irrigation, and shall provide the following information
and/or commit to the following requirements:
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
The installation of plant materials on the site shall consist only of drought-tolerant
native or non-invasive plant materials.
Required habitat buffers, as provided in Special Condition #2, shall be identified.
The applicant shall provide a list of proposed plants to be used in the buffer areas,
and shall indicate the type and location of any proposed barriers, signage or other
methods that will be utilized to separate golf course activities from protected
native habitat, wetlands andor riparian area.
A planting schedule that indicates the planting plan will be implemented within
60 days of completion of construction.
A written commitment by the applicant that all required plantings will be
maintained in good growing condition, and whenever necessary, will be replaced
with new plant materials to ensure continued compliance.
A written commitment by the applicant that five years from the date of opening of
the golf course, the applicant will submit for the review and written approval of
the Executive Director, a landscape monitoring report, prepared by a licensed
A-~-CII-OO-L /
Page 7
f.
Landscape Architect or qualified Resource Specialist, that certifies the on-site
landscaping is in conformance with the landscape plan approved pursuant to this
Special Condition. The monitoring report shall include photographic
documentation of plant species and plant coverage.
If the landscape monitoring report indicates the landscaping is not in conformance
with or has failed to meet the performance standards specified in the landscaping
plan approved pursuant to this permit, the applicant, or successors in interest,
shall submit a revised or supplemental landscape plan for the review and approval
of the Executive Director. The revised landscaping plan must be prepared by a
licensed Landscape Architect or a qualified Resource Specialist and shall specify
measures to remediate those portions of the original plan that have failed or are
not in conformance with the original approved plan.
The permittee shall undertake development in accordance with the approved landscaping
plans. Any proposed changes to the approved landscaping plans shall be reported to the
Executive Director. No changes to the plans shall occur without a Coastal Commission
approved amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director
determines that no amendment is legally required.
5. Erosion Control Plans. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director for
review and written approval, an erosion and sediment control plan for the proposed
development, prepared by a qualified resource specialist. The plan shall be in substantial
conformance with the following requirements:
a. The plan shall delineate the areas to be disturbed by grading or construction
activities and shall include any temporary access roads, staging areas and
stockpile areas. The natural areas on the site shall be clearly delineated on the
project site with fencing or survey flags. No grading or staging of equipment or
supplies shall occur in the protected areas.
b. The plan shall specify that if grading occurs during the rainy season (October 1 -
March 3 l), the applicant undertake the following protective measures to assure
offsite sedimentation is minimized to the maximum extent feasible: install or
construct temporary sediment basins (including debris basins, desilting basins or
silt traps), temporary drains and swales, sand bag barriers and/or silt fencing;
stabilize any stockpiled fill with geofabric covers or other appropriate cover;
install geotextiles or mats on all cut or fill slopes; and close and stabilize open
trenches as soon as possible.
These erosion and sediment control measures shall be required on the project site
prior to or concurrent with the initial grading operations and maintained
throughout the development process. All sediment should be retained on-site
unless removed to an approved dumping location either outside the coastal zone
or to a site within the coastal zone permitted to receive fill.
A-~-CII-OO-L ., I
Page 8
c. The plan shall also include temporary erosion control measures should grading or
site preparation cease for a period of more than 30 days, including but not limited
to: stabilization of all stockpiled fill, access roads, disturbed soils and cut and fill
slopes with geotextiles and/or mats, sand bag barriers, and/or silt fencing; and
installation of temporary drains and swales and sediment basins. These
temporary erosion control measures shall be monitored and maintained until
grading or construction operations resume.
The permittee shall undertake development in accordance with the approved erosion
control plans. Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be reported to the
Executive Director. No changes to the plans shall occur without a Coastal Commission
approved amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director
determines that no amendment is legally required.
6. Drainage and Polluted Runoff Control Plan. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit for the review and
approval of the Executive Director, final drainage and runoff control plans including
supporting calculations. The plan shall be prepared by a licensed engineer and shall
incorporate structural and non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to
reduce the pollutant load of runoff to the maximum extent feasible, and reduce or
eliminate any potential increases in the volume or velocity of runoff leaving the site. In
addition to the specifications above, the plan shall be in substantial conformance with the
following requirements:
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
Selected BMPs (or suites of BMPs) shall be designed to treat, infiltrate or filter
stormwater from each runoff event, up to and including the 85th percentile, 24-
hour runoff event for volume-based BMPs, and/or the 85th percentile, 1 -hour
runoff event, with an appropriate safety factor, for flow-based BMPs.
BMPs shall be selected to address the pollutants of concern for this development,
including sediments, nutrients, pesticides, fertilizers, metals, petroleum
hydrocarbons, trash and debris, and organic matter.
Runoff shall be conveyed off site in a non-erosive manner. Energy dissipating
measures shall be installed at the terminus of all outflow drains.
Drainage from all roofs, parking areas, driveway area, and other impervious
surfaces on the building pad shall be directed through vegetative or other media
filter devices effective at removing and/or treating contaminants such as
petroleum hydrocarbons, heavy metals, and other particulates.
Opportunities for directing runoff into pervious areas located on-site for
infiltration andor percolation of rainfall through grassy swales or vegetative
filter strips, shall be maximized.
A-~-CII-OO-L. i
Page 9
f. The plan shall include provisions for maintaining the drainage system, including
structural BMPs, in a functional condition throughout the life of the approved
development. The plan shall include an identification of the party or entity(ies1
responsible for maintaining the various drainage systems over its lifetime and
shall include written acceptance by the responsible entity(ies). Such
maintenance shall include the following: (1) BMPs shall be inspected, cleaned
and repaired when necessary prior to and during each rainy season, including
conducting an annual inspection no later than September 30fh each year and (2)
should any of the project’s surface or subsurface drainagehiltration structures or
other BMPs fail or result in increased erosion, the applicantkindowner or
successor-in-interest shall be responsible for any necessary repairs to the
drainage/filtration system or BMPs and restoration of the eroded area. Should
repairs or restoration become necessary, prior to the commencement of such
repair or restoration work, the applicant shall submit a repair and restoration plan
to the Executive Director to determine if an amendment to this coastal
development permit or a new coastal development permit is legally required to
authorize such work.
g. Parking lots susceptible to stormwater should be swept with a vacuum regenerative sweeper on a regular basis.
h. The golf course shall be equipped with flow reducers or shutoff valves triggered
by a pressure drop so that broken pipes do not increase flow to the storm drains;
i. The applicant shall provide, for the review and approval of the Executive
Director, plans for a self-contained cart washing facility that is equipped with a
pre-treatment facility, and, if significant discharge is proposed, is connected to
the sanitary sewer;
j. All storm drain inlet structures must be equipped with trash racks, which shall be
maintained by the applicant and/or authorized agent.
k. Storm drains shall be stenciled with water quality warnings indicating
that the drain flows to the lagoon.
The permittee shall undertake development in accordance with the approved drainage and
runoff control plans. Any proposed changes to the approved drainage and runoff control
plans shall be reported to the Executive Director. No changes to the approved plans shall
occur without an amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive
Director determines that no amendment is legally required.
7. Water Quality Monitoring Plan. PFUOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit for the review and approval of the
Executive Director, a water quality monitoring plan to address the quality of runoff prior ~~ to leaving the site or entering the onsite riparian area. The plan shall describe the
methodology for monitoring, including specific threshold levels and sampling protocols,
A-~-CII-OO-L. ,
Page 10
location of monitoring sites, schedule for monitoring, and reporting of results. The
monitoring plan shall also include a contingency plan describing the actions to be taken if
water quality impacts are discovered. In addition to specifications above, the plan shall
be in substantial conformance with the following requirements:
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
g.
The plan shall require monitoring of the following pollutants: nitrates, nitrites,
phosphates, dissolved oxygen, pH, total suspended solids (TSS), acute and
chronic toxicity, and shall indicate the proposed sampling frequencies. Total
suspended solids (TSS) shall be sampled for at the same frequency as the
nutrients.
The plan shall specify maximum threshold levels for each water quality
parameter.
The plan shall specify sampling protocols to be used for each water quality
parameter. Measurements must be precise enough to evaluate compliance with
applicable water quality threshold levels.
Sampling for baseline data shall be conducted a minimum of three (3) times and
during different level storms to acquire a representative sample of water quality
conditions at the site.
Results of monitoring shall be submitted to the Executive Director annually.
If any water quality threshold levels referred to above in b) are exceeded, the
applicant (or successor interest) shall notify the Executive Director of the
exceedances and potential impacts and within 48 hours of receipt of the
monitoring data. At the same time the applicant shall consult with the Executive
Director regarding the need for additional sampling to evaluate the exceedance or
corrective action to minimize water quality impacts. The applicant shall report to
the Executive Director on the possible causes of the exceedance and proposed
corrective actions within 30 days of the initial receipt of the data.
If any water quality impacts persist after three years of detection, not withstanding
any corrective actions taken by the applicant, all use of the chemicals that exceed
water quality threshold levels shall cease.
8. Turf and Pest Management Plan. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director for
review and approval, a detailed turf and pest management plan for the golf course portion
of the development. The plan shall comply with the following requirements:
a. Turf management practices shall minimize fertilizer use, water use and chemical
pest control to the maximum extent feasible, to avoid impacts to native upland
habitat, wetlands, riparian areas, and water quality.
A-~-CII-OO-L ,
Page 11
b. The plan shall favor non-chemical strategies over chemical strategies for
managing onsite pests. Chemical strategies shall only be employed after all other
strategies have been used and proven ineffective. This shall be demonstrated by
providing written notice to the Executive Director of the non-chemical strategies
that will be used, the reasons for their ineffectiveness, and the chemical strategies
that are being considered.
The permittee shall undertake development in accordance with the approved turf and pest
management plan plans. Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be reported
to the Executive Director. No changes to the approved plans shall occur without an
amendment to this coastal development permit unless the Executive Director determines
that no amendment is legally required.
9. Public Golf Course Facility. The golf course, clubhouse, parking areas, driving
range, conference center and pads for future industrial/golf related uses shall be operated
as facilities open to the general public. Any proposed change in the level of public access
and/or public use shall require an amendment to this permit. Signage shall be provided
indicating that the onsite facilities as provided above are open to the public.
10. Open Space and Conservation Easement.
A. No development, as defined in Section 30106 of the Coastal Act, shall occur
in those areas indicated as Preservation Areas in Exhibit 7 (City Golf Course,
Revised Figure 8 of the Carlsbad HMP, CAR LCPA 1-03B), except for
temporary impacts associated with construction of the two approved golf cart
path crossings, consistent with Special Condition #3, and onsite habitat
restoratiodrevegetation activities as part of an approved coastal sage scrub
mitigation plan, consistent with Special Condition #2.
B. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT,
the applicant shall execute and record a document in a form and content
acceptable to the Executive Director, irrevocably offering to dedicate to a the
California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Services, or their successor agencies, an open space and conservation
easement over all onsite habitat preservation areas, and all mitigation areas
(onsite and/or offsite) that will be utilized to address onsite impacts to
habitat. The recorded document shall include legal descriptions of both the
applicant’s entire parcel and the easement area(s). The recorded document
shall also reflect that development in the easement area(s) is restricted as set
forth in this permit condition.
C. The offer to dedicate shall be recorded free of prior liens and encumbrances
which the Executive Director determines may affect the interest being
conveyed. The offer shall run with the land in favor of the People of the
State of California, binding all successors and assignees, and shall be
A-~-CII-OO-L .
Page 12
irrevocable for a period of 21 years, such period running from the date of
recording.
1 1. Protection of the Coastal California Gnatcatcher. To prevent breedinghesting
season impacts to the coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica),
the permittee shall not undertake any clearing or grading activities in occupied
gnatcatcher habitat between March 1 and August 15, unless approved in writing by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game.
12. Open Space Restriction.
A. No development, as defined in Section 30106 of the Coastal Act, shall occur
in habitat buffer areas as required in Special Conditions #2 and 4, and as
identified in the final landscape plans, and as described and depicted in an
Exhibit attached to the Notice of Intent to Issue Permit (NOI) that the
Executive Director issues for this permit, except for
1. approved landscaping activities and plantings and/or restoration and
revegetation of native habitat according to the final coastal sage scrub
mitigation plan; and
B. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE NO1 FOR
THIS PERMIT, the applicant shall submit for the review and approval of the
Executive Director, and upon such approval, for attachment as an Exhibit to the
NOI, a formal legal description and graphic depiction of the portion of the subject
property affected by this condition, as generally described above and shown on
Exhibit 7 attached to this staff report.
C. PRIOR TO ANY CONVEYANCE OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE
SUBJECT OF THIS COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, the applicant shall
execute and record a deed restriction, in a form and content acceptable to the
Executive Director: (1) indicating that, pursuant to this permit, the California Coastal
Commission has authorized development on the subject property, subject to terms
and conditions that restrict the use and enjoyment of that property (hereinafter
referred to as the “Standard and Special Conditions); and (2) imposing all Standard
and Special Conditions of this permit as covenants, conditions and restrictions on the
use and enjoyment of the Property. The restriction shall include a legal description of
the applicant’s entire parcel or parcels. It shall also indicate that, in the event of an
extinguishment or termination of the deed restriction for any reason, the Standard and
Special Conditions of this permit shall continue to restrict the use and enjoyment of
the subject property so long as either this permit or the development it authorizes - or
any part, modification or amendment thereof - remains in existence on or with
respect to the subject property.
A-6-C11-00-~ ,
Page 13
IV. Findings and Declarations.
The Commission finds and declares as follows:
1. Detailed Project Description.
A. Site Characteristics:
The proposed development is a championship municipal golf course and associated
development on a 397 acre site consisting of 18 golf holes (354 acres), a 22,000 square
foot clubhouse, a 222 stall, 2.5 acre parking lot, 1 1.5 acre driving range with bunker
lighting, creation of three pads totaling 22.2 acres for fbture development of planned
industriaVgolf related commercial development, a 9,040 sq.ft. maintenance building,
restroom facilities and a 21,000 sq.ft. conference center and related uses. The site is
vacant with the exception of College Boulevard, a major north/south roadway which
generally runs through the middle of the site, utility powerlines that bisect the site and an
existing police shooting range, located in the northeast portion of the site, which is
proposed to be relocated as part of the proposed development. The single point of public
access to the golf course parking lot and clubhouse is at the northern terminus of Hidden
Valley Road.
The site is located north of Palomar Airport Road, south of Faraday Avenue, east of
Hidden Valley Road and extends on either side of College Boulevard. The project site is
located both in and out of the coastal zone, with approximately two-thirds of the site
located within the coastal zone. The project is immediately east of Carlsbad
RancWLegoland and west of the Carlsbad Research Center and Palomar Airport.
Portions of the site are within Phase I11 of the Carlsbad Airport Center, College Business
Park, and the southern section of Veteran’s Memorial Park. To the north is the Veteran’s
Memorial Park which will ultimately be developed as an outdoor recreation facility. To
the west is Legoland Carlsbad which is also primarily an outdoor recreation facility.
The project site is traversed by three electric transmission lines (which are carried on
poles and towers) and a 20-inch gas pipeline. The utility lines cross the middle of the site
from the southeast to the northwest sections. The gas pipeline traverses the northern
portion of the site generally paralleling and then crossing a riparian area.
The project encompasses approximately 397 acres and has a varied topography which
consists primarily of 25 acres of riparian habitat (following a creek which cuts eastlwest
through the northern portion of the site) and rolling hills to moderately steep slopes.
Portions of the site have been disturbed through previously approved grading, active
agriculture, easement and line maintenance, and illegal encampments. Those areas which
have not been disturbed have varying degrees native and non-native vegetation. Along
with the riparian habitat, the golf course site contains approximately 80.2 acres of coastal
sage scrub, 6.7 acres of southern maritime chaparral, 199 acres of non-native grassland,
and 2.0 acres of native grassland. Within the upland habitat areas, 7 pairs of coastal
California gnatcatchers were previously identified, as well as possibly one burrowing owl
6
A-6-CII-O0-\ .
Page 14
and an undetermined number of orange-throated whiptails. Approximately 150 acres of
native vegetation are located on both steep and non-steep slopes.
The first of three proposed industrial pads is five acres in size and is located at the comer
of Palomar Airport Road and Hidden Valley Road. The two other industrial pads are
proposed at the eastern edge of the site on either side of College Boulevard. The 8.4-acre
pad proposed on the north side of College Boulevard will be located partially in the
coastal zone. The 5.9-acre proposed pad on the south side of the road is not located in
the coastal zone. Both pads will be accessed from College Boulevard.
In CDP #6-86-102 (City of Carlsbad), the Commission approved the construction of
College Blvd., a major northhouth roadway which generally runs through the middle of
the site. Some of the residual cut grading associated with construction of the road was
placed on the property adjacent to the road right-of-way pursuant to CDP #6-86-269.
As noted above, the proposed development is located both inside and outside the Coastal
Zone. The subject of this review relates only to those portions of the development
located in the Coastal Zone.
B. Previous Proiect Design:
As originally approved by the City of Carlsbad on June 7,2000, impacts were proposed
to approximately 0.15 acres of wetland area associated with the three golf cart paths that
were planned to cross the riparian corridor and streambed to provide access to holes 13
and 15 on the north side of the stream. Additional impacts to wetland resources totalling
approximately 2.85 acres would have resulted throughout the site fi-om the proposed
locations of various components of the development (golf holes, driving range, club
house, industrial pads and drainage facilities), with approximately 2.5 total acres of
wetlandriparian impacts inside the coastal zone. The on-site wetlands consist of riparian
woodland along the creek bed and numerous drainage courses at higher elevations. To
address proposed impacts to wetlands, approximately 5.3 acres of riparian habitat was
proposed to be enhanced offsite at the Carltas site south of Palomar Airport Road in
Encinas Creek, which is within the coastal zone. In addition, approximately 5 acres of
on-site creation of riparian habitat was proposed adjacent to an existing wetland
mitigation site located on the project site along the north bank of the creek within the
coastal zone (mitigation for wetland impacts associated with the construction of Cannon
Road to the west).
In total, the project as originally approved by the City included impacts to 3 acres of
wetlandriparian area (2.5 acres in the coastal zone), 4 acres of impact to southern
maritime chaparral (.4 acres in the coastal zone), 49.2 acres of coastal sage scrub (21.3 in
the coastal zone) and up to 8.5 acres of steep slopes with coastal sage scrub (“dual-
criteria slopes”) in the coastal zone that are occupied by the California gnatcatcher. No
mitigation was proposed for upland habitat impacts. The original golf course project
layout is attached as Exhibit 4.
A-~-CII-OO-L .
Page 15
Based on continuing inconsistencies with the wetland and riparian resource protection
policies, buffer requirements and policies protecting steep slopes and environmentally
sensitive habitat areas (ESHA), the Commission found that the project was inconsistent
with the City of Carlsbad’s certified LCP and therefore raised a substantial issue with
regards to the grounds raised by the appellants.
Pursuant to Policy 3-7 of the certified Mello I1 LUP (updated in 2003; relevant
requirements are now in Policy 3-1.7), wetland and riparian resources were required to be
protected and preserved, and no direct impacts could be allowed except for expansion of
existing circulation element roads and those direct impacts associated with the
installation of utilities (water, sewer, electrical). The impacts that were proposed to be
associated with the golf course development are not a permitted use within a wetland.
Instead, the City found that on balance, because the proposed impacts had been accepted
by the resource agencies as being consistent with the City’s draft HMP, they could be
accepted if appropriately mitigated. However, at that time, the HMP was not part of the
certified LCP and could not serve as the standard of review for the proposed impacts.
Therefore, the project could not be found consistent with Policy 3-7 of the Mello I1 LUP.
Additionally, Policy 3-8 of the certified Mello I1 LUP (updated in 2003; relevant
requirements are now in Policy 3-1 .12), new development must be set back by a
minimum of 50 feet from riparian resources and 100 feet from wetland resources, unless
the applicant demonstrates that a buffer of lesser width will protect the identified
resource, based on site-specific information. Although the original project design
included an extensive wetland and riparian mitigation component that was developed in
consultation with the resource agencies, no findings were made by the City regarding the
sufficiency of the proposed golf course design to provide adequate buffers from sensitive
resources and active and passive recreational uses. Therefore, the project could not be
found consistent with Policy 3-8 of the Mello I1 LUP.
Policy 4-3 of the certified Mello I1 LUP and the Coastal Resource Overlay Protection
Zone (Section 21 203 of the certified Carlsbad Municipal Code) requires that for those
slopes mapped as possessing endangered plantlanimal species and/or coastal sage scrub
and chaparral plant communities, “(s)lopes of 25% grade and over shall be preserved in
their natural state, unless the application of this policy would preclude any reasonable use
of the property, in which case an encroachment not to exceed 10% of the steep slope area
over 25% grade may be permitted. Uses of slopes over 25% may be made to provide
access to flatter areas if there is no less environmentally damaging alternative available.”
Up to 10% of “dual criteria” slopes may be disturbed in addition to steep slopes that are
required to access flatter areas. The golf course site contains approximately 25 acres of
dual criteria slopes; the original golf course design would have resulted in impacts to 8.5
acres of dual-criteria slope impact (35%). The City found that since there would be no
net loss of dual criteria slopes through a mitigation program of onsite and offsite (outside
the Coastal Zone) preservation and restoration of dual criteria slopes, the proposed
impacts could be found consistent with the certified LCP. However, at that time the LCP
had no provisions whereby a greater than 10% impact to dual criteria slopes could be
accepted and/or mitigated by preservation or revegetation. Therefore, the project could
A-~-CII-OO-L ,
Page 16
not be found consistent with Policy 4-3 of the Mello I1 LUP and the Coastal Resource
Protection Overlay Zone.
Based upon the above-described inconsistencies with the certified City of Carlsbad LCP,
an appeal of the City’s CDP for the golf course project was filed by Commissioner Sara
Wan and Commissioner Pedro Nava on June 27,2000. On June 12,2003, the
Commission found that the development, as approved by the city of Carlsbad, raised a
substantial issue with regards to the grounds raised by the appellants.
C. Current Project Design:
A revised project design was submitted by the City as part of an LCP amendment on
February 7,2003 (Exhibit 5). The purpose of the LCP amendment was to incorporate the
final Carlsbad HMP and second addendum into the LCP, and include revisions and
additions to the LCP that paralleled the HMP for consistency between the two
documents. The LCP revisions, and the golf course project redesign, were made by the
City in response to input from Commission staff and the resource agencies. The revised
golf course design eliminates impacts to southern maritime chaparral and wetlands in the
coastal zone. Total impacts to coastal sage scrub have been reduced from 49.2 acres to
42.5 acres (from 21.3 acres to 14.2 acres in the coastal zone). Mitigation will be provided
for all coastal sage scrub impacts at a 2:l ratio, with at least 1:l new creation, to ensure
no net loss of habitat. This mitigation will be accommodated onsite to restore and
improve wildlife corridor connections.
The revised design reduces overall impacts both inside and outside the coastal zone, as
shown in Exhibit 6. Within the coastal zone, impacts to coastal sage scrub have been
reduced from 21.3 acres to 14.2 acres, and impacts to wetlands and southern maritime
chaparral have been eliminated. Dual-criteria slope impacts in the coastal zone have been
reduced from 8.5 acres (16.6%) to 3.7 acres (7.2%), and non-native grassland impacts
have been reduced from 94.1 acres to 73.3 acres. Outside the coastal zone, impacts to
southem maritime chaparral, non-native grassland and wetlands have also been reduced.
Although small increases in proposed impacts to dual-criteria slopes and coastal sage
scrub are proposed outside the coastal zone area of the project, the proposed onsite 2: 1
mitigation for coastal sage scrub will apply to impacts both inside and outside of the
coastal zone portions of the project. Mitigation for impacts to southern maritime
chaparral and riparian area outside of the coastal zone will be also mitigated onsite, at a
ratio of 3: 1. Therefore, there will be no net loss of habitat on the site, either inside or
outside of the coastal zone.
To achieve these reduced habitat impacts, the redesign of the proposed development
included the following changes:
The commercialhndustrial pad located at the northeast comer of Hidden Valley Road
and Palomar Airport Road (approximately 5 acres) was deleted to avoid wetland
impacts.
A-~-CII-OO-L ,
Page 17
The golf practice range was narrowed slightly and reoriented to avoid wetland
impacts.
Hole 1 was relocated to avoid wetland impacts.
The most northwesterly cart path in the original development proposal, located
between Holes 12 and 13, was deleted to eliminate one of the riparian crossings and
avoid wetlandriparian impacts.
The original Hole 12 was deleted to provide greater protection for an identified
gnatcatcher territory in coastal sage scrub habitat. It was replaced by a new Hole 12
in non-native grassland located between Holes 13 and 15 of the original plan. Holes
12, 13 and 14 were renumbered to reflect these revisions.
The industrial parcel located on the north side of College Boulevard (approximately
6.7 acres) was reconfigured to reduced coastal sage scrub impacts, enlarge the
proposed wildlife corridor on the east side of the site, and provide greater protection
for an identified gnatcatcher territory.
The alignment of the cart path between Holes 15 and 16 was modified to reduce
wetland impacts (outside the coastal zone).
1. Environmentallv Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA)
Policy 3-1.2 of the Mello I1 LUP and Section 7-1 of the second addendum to the
Carlsbad HMP state:
Pursuant to Section 30240 of the California Coastal Act, environmentally
sensitive habitat areas, as defined in Section 30107.5 of the Coastal Act, shall be
protected against any significant disruption of habitat values, and only uses
dependent on those resources shall be allowed within those areas.
Policy 3-1.9 of the Mello I1 LUP and Section 7-8 of the second addendum to the
Carlsbad HMP state, in part:
There shall be no net loss of Coastal Sage Scrub, Maritime Succulent Scrub,
Southern Maritime Chaparral, Southern Mixed Chaparral, Native Grassland and Oak
Woodland within the Coastal Zone of Carlsbad . . .
Policy 3-1.12 of the Mello I1 LUP and Section 7-1 1 of the second addendum to the
Carlsbad HMP state, in part:
Buffers shall be provided between all preserved habitat and development.
Minimum buffer widths shall be provided as follows:
a. 100 ft. for wetlands
b. 50 Et. for riparian areas
c. 20 ft. for all other native habitats (coastal sage scrub, southern maritime
chaparral, maritime succulent scrub, southern mixed chaparral, native
grassland, oak woodland)
A
A-6-CII-00 J
Page 18
Any proposed reductions in buffer widths for a specific site shall require sufficient
information to determine that a buffer of lesser width will protect the identified
resources. Such information shall include, but is not limited to, the size and type of
the development and/or proposed mitigation (such as planting of vegetation or the
construction of fencing) that will also achieve the purposes of the buffer.. .
Policy 3-7 of the Mello I1 LUP and Section 7.13 of the second addendum to the Carlsbad
HMP state, in part:
a. The impact and conservation areas for the municipal golf course are shown as
a Hardline design in the HMP (Figure 8 Revised), and which shall serve as the
standard of review for determining areas in which development may occur in future.
Areas shown for conservation shall not be impacted or disturbed except for
revegetation, restoration, and other similar activities related to mitigation. Areas
shown for impact may be fully developed with appropriate mitigation.
b. Any impacts to Coastal Sage Scrub shall be mitigated by on-site creation at a
ratio of 2:l in compliance with the no net loss standard stated in Policy 3-1.2 (7-1).
Onsite revegetation or restoration may be done on agricultural, disturbed or non-
native grassland areas. For impacts to the Coastal California gnatcatcher, additional
mitigation shall be provided by acquisition and preservation at a 1 : 1 ratio of land
supporting gnatcatchers. Impacts to dual criteria slopes shall not exceed 10%.
g. In the riparian area of Macario Canyon Creek, two crossings shall be allowed,
as shown in the HMP Hardline exhibit. Crossing #1 shall utilize the existing farm
road. Crossing #2 shall utilize a bridge span structure. No riparian impacts shall
occur for either crossing.
h. The design of riparian buffers shall be as shown in the HMP. Buffers shall be
landscaped with appropriate native, non-invasive plants to provide a natural
transition between recreational areas and riparian habitat, as well as to discourage
human intrusion into the riparian area. Appropriate signing and fencing will also be
utilized.
As defined in Section 30107.5 of the Coastal Act, ESHA is defined as “any area in which
plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their
special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by
human activities and developments.” In 1993, the coastal California gnatcatcher was
listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) ), 16 U.S.C. 9 1531
et seq. The coastal California gnatcatcher is found primarily in coastal sage scrub habitat
in southern California. The Carlsbad HMP, which includes the golf course site hardline,
is a segment of the state’s larger NCCP program that is being developed in response to
the listing of the California gnatcatcher.
h
A-6-CII-00- I
Page 19
The Carlsbad HMP and the Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP) are
intended to meet criteria for the California Department of Fish and Game’s (CDFG)
Natural Communities Conservation Planning process (NCCP), which was initiated in
southern California in 1991 and of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). The
objectives of the southern California NCCP program include identification and protection
of habitat in sufficient amounts and distributions to enable long-term conservation of the
coastal sage community and the California gnatcatcher, as well as other sensitive habitat
types. Generally, the purpose of the HCP and NCCP processes is to preserve natural
habitat by identifying and implementing an interlinked natural communities preserve
system. Through these processes, the resource agencies are pursuing a long-range
approach to habitat management and preserve creation that expands upon more
traditional mitigation approach to habitat impacts. Although HCPs have been prepared
for areas as small as a single lot, the MHCP and its subarea plans are intended to hction
at the citywide or regional level, instead of focusing on impacts to individual properties.
Implementation of this large-scale approach to habitat conservation will allow some
development involving incidental take of listed species andor environmentally sensitive
habitat in those areas where it is most appropriate, in order to preserve the largest and
most valuable areas of contiguous habitat and their associated populations of listed
species.
In 1992, the City signed an NCCP agreement with the California Resources Agency to
develop the Habitat Management Plan (HMP) as part of the City’s General Plan. The
1992 agreement enrolled the City in the NCCP program as an “Ongoing Multi-Species
Plan” as defined in the NCCP process guidelines. The agreement was supplemented in
1993 to clarify that the HMP is a subarea plan of the San Diego County MHCP.
The MHCP study area involves approximately 186 square miles in northwestern San
Diego County. This area includes the coastal cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach
and Oceanside, as well as the inland cities of Vista and San Marcos and several
independent special districts. The participating local governments and other entities will
implement their portions of the MHCP through individual subarea plans such as the
Carlsbad HMP. Once approved, the MHCP and its subarea plans will replace interim
restrictions placed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) and the California
Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) on impacts to coastal sage scrub and gnatcatchers
within that geographical area, and will allow the incidental take of the gnatcatcher and
other covered species as specified in the plan. Although the HMP is a subarea plan of the
MHCP, it will receive its own federal take permit and is not subject to finalization of the
MHCP in order to be approved.
The City developed the HMP to meet the requirements of a habitat conservation plan
pursuant to section 1 O(a)(2)(A) of the Endangered Species Act [ 16 USC 0 1539(a)(2)(A)].
The draft Carlsbad HMP was initially approved by the Carlsbad City Council on
September 21,1999. An addendum was then prepared based on comments provided by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and
Game (CDFG), and the revised document, dated December 1999, was submitted to the
wildlife agencies for approval of an incidental take permit (ITP) under section 9(a)( 1)(B)
[ 16 USC 0 1538(a)(l)(B)] of the Endangered Species Act. Issuance of the permit would
A-6-CII-00. I
Page 20
have predated approval of the final HMP itself, and was requested in order to begin
development of a City golf course which had been included as a “hardline” property in
the HMP with pre-agreed limitations on development area and mitigation requirements,
as agreed between the City and the wildlife agencies. These “hardline” properties were
designated in the HMP with specific development/ conservation footprints approved by
the wildlife agencies. If development is proposed on these sites in a manner that is
substantially in conformance with the hardline, the development will be authorized
consistent with all other regulatory standards and procedures. The purpose of this
process is to ensure that certain areas of onsite habitat will be set aside for permanent
preservation, and that the property owners have committed to abide by the established
development limitation upon approval of the HMP.
Because construction of the golf course would inevitably result in impacts to
environmentally sensitive habitat, such as coastal sage scrub occupied by gnatcatchers,
the 1999 draft HMP allowed mitigation for these impacts through a combination of onsite
preservation of habitat that was to remain undeveloped, onsite restoration and creation of
riparian area that would be impacted by the golf cart paths, and offsite acquisition of
coastal sage scrub habitat for preservation. However, the Coastal Act does not allow
onsite preservation to count as mitigation in the Coastal Zone, and the second HMP
addendum (February 2003) was revised to exclude onsite preservation from acceptable
mitigation methods for habitat impacts.
On June 7,2000, the Carlsbad Planning Commission certified an environmental impact
report (EIR) for the proposed Carlsbad city golf course, and approved a coastal
development permit for the golf course development. The Coastal Commission appealed
the City’s CDP based on concerns regarding the project’s inconsistency with the habitat
protection policies in the certified LCP. The City submitted a revised golf course plan to
the Commission on February 7,2003, as part of LCPA No. 1-03B (Habitat Management
Plan). The LCP amendment was approved with modifications on June 12,2003, and the
City accepted the modifications on June 17,2003. The certification of the LCP
amendment is scheduled for the Commission meeting of August 8,2003.
The revised design is consistent with the Mello IT Land Use Plan of the LCP and the
Carlsbad HMP.
As previously described, within the coastal zone the revised golf course will impact 14.2
acres of coastal sage scrub (3.7 acres on steep slopes) and 73.3 acres of non-native
grassland. The areas of coastal sage scrub have been determined to be ESHA because
they provide nesting and foraging habitat for documented California gnatcatchers, and
because of the important linkage provided between native habitat on this property and
other sections of the wildlife corridor that join Core Area 4 and Linkage Area F in the
HMP planning area. However, if mitigated as proposed, the replaced coastal sage scrub
will be located in areas that provide larger contiguous contributions to the onsite
conservation area, and will ensure that the wildlife corridor and gnatcatcher population
will have sufficient areas of high-quality habitat for species survival. In addition to
providing a minimum ratio of 1 : 1 new creation to mitigate for habitat impacts, an
additional 1 : 1 mitigation requirement is also required (restoration, revegetation, etc.) to
A-6-CII-00- , I
Page 21
ensure that the lower habitat values of a less mature vegetation community and/or any
difficulties in establishing the new habitat will be compensated. Although nine
gnatcatcher use areas will be impacted by the proposed development, the revised design
will result in a substantial reduction in impacts to the overall coastal sage scrub
community that supports the gnatcatcher population. The proposed take of seven
gnatcatchers on the golf course site, as allowed by the Incidental Take Permit issued by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, will be partially mitigated by the offsite acquisition
and preservation of 5 1.6 acres containing 5 pairs of gnatcatchers within the MHCP core
area in unincorporated San Diego County.
Mitigation will be provided for all coastal sage scrub impacts at a 2: 1 ratio, with at least
1 : 1 new creation, to ensure no net loss of habitat. This mitigation will be accommodated
onsite to restore and improve wildlife corridor connections. Temporary impacts to the
onsite riparian area for construction of golf cart path crossings will be mitigated at a 1 : 1
ratio. For the proposed impacts to coastal sage scrub (14.1 acres total; 3.7 in the coastal
zone), 28.2 total acres of mitigation will be required. Mitigation in the form of new
creation and/or substantial restoration will be required for 14.1 acres of this total amount;
the remaining 14.1 acres of mitigation may include new creation, restoration or
revegetation, or a combination of these methods. As identified on the “City of Carlsbad
Golf Course Revisions” plan (February 2003), and in Exhibit 9, mitigation opportunities
for onsite creation exist in the areas identified as non-native grassland, agricultural land,
and existing landscaping. Mitigation opportunities for onsite restoration and revegetation
exist in the areas identified as disturbed coastal sage scrub, coastal sage scrubhative
grassland mix, and disturbed areas. Sufficient area is available onsite within all these
identified existing vegetation types to accommodate the required 2: 1 mitigation for the
14.1 acres of total impact to coastal sage scrub. The proposed mitigation measures are
consistent with the Mello I1 LUP and the Carlsbad HMP.
Based upon the requirements for upland habitat mitigation in Policy 3-1.10 of the Mello
I1 LUP and Section 7-9 of the Carlsbad HMP (Exhibit lo), Special Condition #2 and
Special Condition #3 will ensure that no net loss of either upland or wetlandriparian
habitat will result, and there will be no permanent riparian or wetland impacts from
construction. Although temporary wetlandriparian impacts resulting from the golf cart
path crossings over the onsite creek will be unavoidable, the applicant shall be required
to submit a detailed revegetation plan and restoration program, with a mitigation ratio of
1 : 1. No permanent impacts to riparian or wetland areas shall be allowed.
Consistent with Policy 3-1.12 of the Mello I1 LUP and Section 7-1 1 of the second
addendum to the Carlsbad HMF, buffers are required between all preserved habitat areas
and development. The purpose of buffers is to provide a clear delineation between
habitat and development area and protect habitat .from encroachment and adjacent
activities. The minimum baseline buffer widths for wetlands and riparian areas have
been established respectively at 100 feet and 50 feet. However, the Mello I1 LUP and
the HMP allow buffer width reductions if the applicant can demonstrate that a reduced
buffer can still protect the identified resources. The application must provide
information regarding the size and type of the development and/or proposed mitigation
-
A-6-CII-00. I
Page 22
(such as planting of vegetation or the construction of fencing) that will fulfill the purpose
of the buffer. The concurrence of the wildlife agencies is also required. The golf course
design includes reduced permanent buffers between the golf cart path crossings, the golf
course playing areas, and the riparidwetlands areas of the creek, to keep the golf course
development as compact as possible, and reduce additional encroachment into native
upland vegetation. For these identified areas, there will be a minimum average post-
construction buffer of 25 feet between new development and riparian areas, and 50 feet
between new development and wetlands. At no point shall the buffer width be less than
10 feet. The reduced buffers will be required to provide adequate protection for onsite
riparian and wetland resources, as supported by protective water quality requirements
included in Special Conditions #5 (Erosion Control Plans), #6 (Drainage and Polluted
Runoff Control Plan), #7 (Water Quality Monitoring Plan) and #8 (Turf and Pest
Management Plan) that have been established to protect water quality, prevent discharge
of untreated onsite runoff into the creek and minimize overall pollutant loads. The
wildlife agencies have concurred with the reduced buffers for these areas. For all other
areas of the golf course site, the baseline minimum buffer of 100 feet shall be provided
between development and wetlands, and a minimum buffer of 50 feet shall be provided
between development and riparian areas.
The permittee shall be required to comply with an approved monitoring plan and submit
post-restoration plans, to demonstrate that the restoration sites have been established in
accordance with the approved design and construction methods. Implementation of this
condition will ensure that there is no net loss or permanent impact to wetland and/or
riparian areas, that revegetation and restoration activities are carried out according to the
approved plans, and that adequate buffers are provided for all onsite riparian and wetland
areas.
The revised golf course design will impact 3.7 acres of dual criteria slopes in the coastal
zone, or 7.2% of the total amount of dual-criteria slopes. Dual-criteria slopes are
protected in Policy 4-3(b)( 1) of the Mello I1 LUP, which states that slopes of 25% grade
and over that are covered by coastal sage scrub and/or chaparral plant communities,
andor which possess endangered plantlanimal species, shall be preserved in their natural
state, with a potential exception for encroachment not to exceed 10%. This percentage of
steep slope encroachment may be modified only for development consistent with the
approved HMP and the City’s Incidental Take Permit. The revised golf course design
has shifted development areas to avoid dual-criteria slopes to the greatest extent feasible.
The revision will impact 4.8 fewer acres than the original design, which would have
allowed encroachment into 16.6% of the dual criteria slopes in the coastal zone, and the
revised percentage of 7.2% encroachment into steep slopes is consistent with the Mello I1
LUP and the Carlsbad HMP. The golf course development will not impact any existing
designated view corridors or views of the coast, and will be appropriately landscaped and
oriented to ensure that there will be no significant visual impacts.
Since the project has been revised, only conceptual plans have been submitted. As such,
Special Condition #1 requires the applicant to submit detailed final development plans,
including site, building, grading and drainage plans, to ensure that development is
4
A-6-CII-00. ,7
Page 23
consistent with the “City of Carlsbad Golf Course Revisions” plan that was approved as
part of LCPA 1-03B, and with the Carlsbad HMP. The plans shall detail that no impacts
to southern maritime chaparral habitat are allowed within the Coastal Zone, and that the
proposed golf course and associated development shall be located only within the
development areas detailed in the hardline map of the HMP.
As provided in Special Condition #2, impacts to coastal sage scrub must be consistent
with the approved final development plans, and must be mitigated at not less than a 2: 1
ratio. Sections 7-8 and 7-9 of the second addendum to the Carlsbad HMP, and Policies
7-1.9 and 7-1.10 of the Mello I1 Land Use Plan (LUP) of the LCP, provide that there
shall be no net loss of coastal sage scrub. Mitigation for impacts shall include a creation
component of at least 1 : 1 in order to meet the no net loss standard. Substantial
restoration of highly degraded areas (where effective functions of the habitat type have
been lost) may be substituted for creation, if the wildlife agencies agree. Onsite
preservation of habitat is not eligible for mitigation credit. A minimum buffer of 20 feet
shall be provided between development and native upland habitat, unless reduced buffers
are found to be acceptable consistent with Section 7-1 1 of the second addendum to the
Carlsbad HMP and Policy 3-1.12 of the Mello I1 LUP. Implementation of this condition
will ensure that there is no actual loss of habitat acreage and that all impacts will be fully
mitigated. This condition also requires that goals, objectives and performance standards
be developed. Monitoring of the upland mitigation sites is also required with reports
developed annually on the success of the mitigation efforts to meet the goals, objectives
and standards.
Special Condition #3 addresses temporary impacts to riparidwetland area adjacent to
the onsite creek, which may result from the two proposed crossings for golf cart paths.
If temporary impacts to these areas are unavoidable, the applicant shall be required to
submit a detailed revegetation plan and restoration program, with a mitigation ratio of
1 : 1. No permanent impacts to riparian or wetland areas shall be allowed. Consistent
with Policy 3-1.12 of the Mello I1 LUP and Section 7-1 1 of the second addendum to the
Carlsbad HMP, buffers are required between all preserved habitat areas and
development. The minimum baseline buffer widths for wetlands and riparian areas have
been established respectively at 100 feet and 50 feet. However, the Mello I1 LUP and
the HMP allow buffer width reductions if the applicant can demonstrate that a reduced
buffer can still protect the identified resources.
The golf course design includes reduced permanent buffers between the golf cart path
crossings, the golf course playing areas, and the riparidwetlands areas of the creek, to
keep the golf course development as compact as possible, and reduce additional
encroachment into native upland vegetation. For these identified areas, there will be a
minimum average post-construction buffer of 25 feet between new development and
riparian areas, and 50 feet between new development and wetlands. At no point shall the
buffer width be less than 10 feet. The reduced buffers will be required to provide
adequate protection for onsite riparian and wetland resources, as supported by protective
water quality requirements included in Special Conditions #5 (Erosion Control Plans),
#6 (Drainage and Polluted Runoff Control Plan), #7 (Water Quality Monitoring Plan)
-
A-6-CII-OO-. /
Page 24
and #8 (Turf and Pest Management Plan) that have been established to protect water
quality, prevent discharge of untreated onsite runoff into the creek and minimize overall
pollutant loads. The wildlife agencies have concurred with the reduced buffers for these
areas.
The permittee shall be required to comply with an approved monitoring plan and submit
post-restoration plans, to demonstrate that the restoration sites have been established in
accordance with the approved design and construction methods. Implementation of this
condition will ensure that there is no net loss or permanent impact to wetland and/or
riparian areas, that revegetation and restoration activities are carried out according to the
approved plans, and that adequate buffers are provided for all onsite riparian and wetland
Consistent with Policy 3- 1.12 of the Mello I1 LUP and Section 7-1 1 of the second
addendum to the Carlsbad HMP, reduced permanent buffers between the golf cart path
crossings and the riparidwetlands areas of the creek shall be allowed, with a minimum
post-construction buffer of 25 feet between new development and riparian areas, and 50
feet between new development and wetlands. For all other areas of the golf course site,
permanent minimum buffers of 100 feet shall be provided between development and
wetlands, and a minimum buffer of 50 feet shall be provided between development and
riparian areas.
The permittee shall be required to comply with an approved monitoring plan and submit
post-restoration plans, to demonstrate that the restoration sites have been established in
accordance with the approved design and construction methods. Implementation of this
condition will ensure that there is no net loss or permanent impact to wetland and/or
riparian areas, that revegetation and restoration activities are carried out according to the
approved plans, and that the required buffers are provided for all onsite riparian and
wetland areas.
Special Condition #4 requires that a detailed final landscape plan shall be submitted for
the proposed development, and shall include information on the type, size, extent and
location of all proposed vegetation and any necessary irrigation. Only drought-tolerant
or non-invasive plants may be installed on the site, including habitat buffer areas. The
necessary onsite habitat buffers, as required in Special Condition #2, shall be identified,
and the applicant shall indicate the type and location of any proposed barriers, signage or
other methods that will be utilized to separate golf course activities from protected native
habitat, wetlands and/or riparian area. These requirements are intended to prevent the
spread of non-native, invasive plants into onsite habitat areas and other offsite coastal
resources, promote water conservation, and identify measures that will be taken to
separate habitat areas from development.
Special Condition #10 provides that, consistent with Policy 7-1.lO.i of the Mello II LUP
and Section 7-9.h. of the second addendum to the Carlsbad HMP, all onsite habitat
preservation areas and all mitigation areas (onsite and offsite) that will be utilized to
address onsite impacts to habitat, shall be secured with conservation easements in favor
of the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Special Condition #11 prohibits clearing and grading activities during the gnatcatcher
A-6-CII-00-b o 7
Page 25
breedinghesting season (March 1-August 19, to provide additional protection for the
onsite gnatcatchers and$avoid take of their young. Special Condition #12 provides that
the required wetland, riparian and upland buffer areas be protected as open space. The
applicant is required to record a deed restriction imposing the conditions of this permit as
convenants, conditions and restrictions on use of the property prior to any conveyance.
Additionally, this condition identifies acceptable activities and uses within habitat buffer
areas, which will not become part of the golf course preserve area, but which will be
required as transitional areas between development and established habitat, and which
must be appropriately vegetated and maintained to ensure their continuing protective
value.
The San Diego Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP), of which the Carlsbad
HMP is a part, is under the jurisdiction of the wildlife agencies, which are also parties to
the Implementing Agreement for the HMP. Although it is anticipated that eventually the
management of the preserve areas identified in the HMP will be delegated to a single
conservation entity, the final HMP preserve management plan has not yet been prepared.
The proposed conservation easements will ensure that any proposed changes to the
preserve area boundaries or activities within the preserve will be continue to be within
the oversight of the wildlife agencies. In total, 254.6 acres of the 397-acre site will be
conserved, including approximately 37 acres of coastal sage scrub, 5 acres of southern
maritime chaparral, and 23 acres of riparidwetland area. (Exhibit 5 shows the golf
course development areas; Exhibit 9 shows approximate locations of onsite resources.)
The open areas that will become part of the golf course preserve will be part of a major
wildlife preserve corridor that runs north-south across Macario Canyon and the Veterans
Memorial Park site, and connects the Core 4 and Linkage F habitat planning areas in the
Carlsbad HMP. Based upon the above revisions to the golf course site design, the
proposed development, as conditioned, is consistent with the Mello I1 LUP policies for
protection of environmentally sensitive habitat.
2. Public AccessPublic Recreation.
The proposed golf course development is a municipal recreational facility, which will be
open to the public and will increase recreational opportunities in the coastal zone. To
ensure public access and public awareness, Condition #9 requires that all of the visitor-
serving golf course facilities, including the golf course and driving range, clubhouse, and
conference center, will be operated as commercial visitor-serving facilities open to the
general public, and that any proposed change in the level of public use will require an
amendment to the permit. The applicant is also required to provide signage for the golf
course facilities indicating that they are open to the public.
The golf course site is inland from the coast, and the proposed development will not
affect public access to the coast or impact existing coastal recreational opportunities or
uses. The applicant has provided information indicating that the existing and proposed
roadway system is adequate to handle the vehicle trips that will be generated by the
proposed development, and sufficient onsite parking will be available to the public. As
A-6-CII-OO-uo7
Page 26
conditioned, the proposed project will provide adequate public access and public
recreational opportunities.
3. Visual Resources and Natural Landforms.
Policy 8-1 of the Mello I1 LUP states:
The Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone should be applied where necessary
throughout the Carlsbad coastal zone to assure the maintenance of existing views
and panoramas. Sites considered for development should undergo individual
review to determine if the proposed development will obstruct views or otherwise
damage the visual beauty of the area. The Planning Commission should enforce
appropriate height limitations and see-through construction, as well as minimize
any alterations to topography.
The City’s most recent LCP amendment (June 2003) revised the previous Mello I1 land
use policy regarding preserving of steep slopes with native habitat, or “dual criteria”
slopes. Previously, these steep slopes possessing endangered plandanimal species and /or
coastal sage scrub and chaparral plant communities, were required to be preserved in
their natural state, with limited encroachment allowed to no more than 10% of these
areas. As revised, the Mello I1 LUP habitat protection policies continue to protect these
steep slopes, but with the provision that the percentage of steep slope encroachment may
be modified only for development consistent with the approved HMP and the resource
habitat protection policies of the Mello I1 LUP, and which is approved as part of the
City’s Incidental Take Permit pursuant to the adopted HMP. The proposed golf course
site development meets all of these requirements. As revised, 3.7 acres of dual criteria
slopes in the coastal zone, or 7.2%, will be impacted. This revision will impact 4.8 fewer
acres than the original design, which would have allowed encroachment into 16.6% of
the dual criteria slopes in the coastal zone. In most cases, the onsite natural landforms of
the canyons, wetlands and riparian areas in the coastal zone contain environmentally
sensitive habitat, and as conditioned will be protected to the maximum extent feasible
while allowing development of the golf course and associated uses.
The golf course clubhouse has been proposed as a split-level two-story structure. Based
on draft plans and elevations provided by the City, the clubhouse will be seen as a single-
story structure from the main entrance, and as seen from the south, it will be two stories.
The project proposes habitable building height up to 35 feet and architectural elements up
to 45 feet, which is consistent with the requirements of the Mello I1 LUP. Setbacks and
parking have been provided over the minimum requirement. Two industrial pads are
proposed at the eastern edge of the site on either side of College Boulevard. The 8.4-acre
pad proposed on the north side of College Boulevard will be located partially in the
coastal zone. The 5.9-acre proposed pad on the south side of the road is not located in
the coastal zone. Both pads will be accessed from College Boulevard and are designated
for golf-course related uses, consistent with the development requirements of the Mello I1
LUP.
A-6-CII-OO-v67
Page 27
As conditioned, the golf course site design does not impact any existing designated view
corridors or views of the coast, and provides the maximum feasible protection for onsite
natural landforms. Special Condition #4 addresses landscaping that may be used to
screen maintenance facilities and other structures from offsite areas. Therefore, the
project will not result in significant impacts to visual quality, view corridors, or natural
landforms, consistent with LCP provisions.
4. RunofWater Oualitv.
Policy 4.3(b) of the Mello I1 LUP provides, in part, that:
No development shall be permitted except pursuant to submittal of a runoff
control plan prepared by a licensed engineer qualified in hydrology and hydraulics;
such approved plans shall assure that there would be no increase in peak runoff rate
from the developed site over the greatest discharge expected from the existing
developed site as a result of a 10-year frequency storm. Runoff control shall be
accomplished by a variety of measures, including, but not limited to, onsite
catchment basins, detention basins, siltation traps, and energy dissipators, and shall
not be concentrated in one area . . .
Development approvals shall include detailed maintenance arrangements for
providing the ongoing repair and maintenance for all approved drainage or erosion-
control facilities . . .
All permanent runoff-control and erosion-control devices shall be developed and
installed prior to or concurrent with any onsite grading activities.
The project conditions include several requirements for plans that address water quality
protection and runoff control during construction and operation of the golf course site
facilities, including Special Conditions #4 (Final Landscape Plans), #5 (Erosion Control
Plans), #6 (Drainage and Polluted Runoff Control Plan), #7 (Water Quality Monitoring
Plan) and #8 (Turf and Pest Management Plan). +
Generally, golf course operations are reliant on fertilizers and pesticides, and have
substantial watering requirements. As a result, runoff associated with the golf course
could result in pollution in the form of nutrients and organic phosphates which could
affect Agua Hedionda lagoon and its tributaries. Additionally, the use of non-native,
invasive plant species in landscaping could adversely affect the environmentally
sensitive habitat of the lagoon and other coastal waters if seeds from these plants species
were introduced via runoff or bird feces. The necessary grading and removal of
vegetation will increase potential for erosion and sedimentation in storm water runoff.
Additionally, the proposed development will include parking lots, a clubhouse and
conference center, commercialhndustrial uses, maintenance facilities, and other
impervious structures, all of which will potentially increase the amount of runoff and
pollutant load entering nearby waterways. The proposed increases in impervious surface
will decrease the infiltrative function and capacity of existing permeable land onsite,
A-6-CII-00-u07
Page 28
which will promote a corresponding increase in the volume and velocity of storm water
runoff that can be expected to leave the site.
Further, pollutants commonly found in runoff associated with golf courses include
sediments, nutrients, pesticides, fertilizers, metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, trash and
debris, and organic matter. The discharge of these pollutants to coastal waters can cause
cumulative impacts such as: eutrophication and anoxic conditions resulting in fish kills
and diseases and the alteration of aquatic habitat, including adverse changes to species
composition and size; excess nutrients causing algae blooms and sedimentation
increasing turbidity which both reduce the penetration of sunlight needed by aquatic
vegetation which provide food and cover for aquatic species; disruptions to the
reproductive cycle of aquatic species; and acute and chronic toxicity in marine
organisms leading to adverse changes in reproduction and feeding behavior. These
impacts reduce the biological productivity and the quality of coastal waters, streams,
wetlands, estuaries, and lakes and reduce optimum populations of marine organisms and
have adverse impacts on human health.
Due to the sensitivity of the nearby riparian area and the downstream drainages to Agua
Hedionda lagoon, and the potential water quality impacts as described above, it is
essential for the applicant to establish best management practices and take precautionary
measures to ensure that water quality is protected. In order to find the proposed
developed consistent with the water and marine resource policies of the certified LCP,
the Commission finds it necessary to require the incorporation of BMPs designed to
control the volume, velocity and pollutant load of storm water leaving the developed site.
These BMPs must address erosion control, pollutant load, runoff pre-treatment, water
quality monitoring, and storm water facilities maintenance. With the inclusion of water
quality monitoring as a permit condition, any impacts to water quality that may occur
despite precautions can be identified, and the source of the impacts evaluated and treated
with appropriate measures. For the above-described reasons, the applicant will be
required to submit and receive approval for plans addressing storm water runoff, erosion
control, and water quality monitoring. Additionally, since a golf course development is
likely to be dependent to some degree on the use of fertilizers andor pesticides to
maintain turf health, additional conditions for a turf and pest management plan have also
been included to reduce chemical runoff impact from the golf course itself to the
maximum extent feasible.
Special Condition #4 requires vegetation selected for landscaping to be native drought-
tolerant species or adapted non-invasive material. The use of drought-tolerant
vegetation greatly reduces the need for intensive irrigation, which in turn reduces the
potential for excessive irrigation to result in nuisance runoff from the site. Additionally,
any irrigation system utilized is required to be efficient technologically, which will serve
to prevent excess irrigation and resulting nuisance runoff from occurring. Furthermore,
native or adapted plants are well suited to regional conditions, and therefore do not have
to be sustained with heavy fertilizer or pesticide applications. Minimizing the need for
topical agents such as fertilizer and pesticides should reduce or eliminate their
A-6-CII-00-b07
Page 29
application, thereby minimizing pollutants susceptible to stormwater and nuisance runoff
from the site.
Special Condition #5 addresses erosion and sedimentation control requirements for both
construction activities during the site development period. The applicant shall submit an
erosion and sediment control plan that delineates the areas to be disturbed by
development activities, identifies natural areas and areas to be protected, and establishes
protective measures to minimize offsite sedimentation and prevent onsite erosion,
particularly during the rainy season (October 1 -March 3 1). These requirements are
intended to prevent offsite downstream impacts to water quality due to large amounts of
sediment leaving the site.
Special Condition #8 provides specific requirements for fertilizer and pesticide
management. Special Condition #7 provides for water quality monitoring to ensure that
the runoff control measures as contained in the other relevant special conditions are
adequately protecting coastal water resources.
The project will be consistent with Best Management Practices (BMPs) as provided in
Special Condition #6, and all local, state, and federal regulations regarding water quality
and waste discharge. The City obtained a 401 water quality certification from the San
Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board in 1999, which will require amending for
consistency with the current golf course design. The Commission's water quality staff
has reviewed the proposed project and determined that, as conditioned, the proposed
project is consistent with the water quality protection policies of the Coastal Act.
5. Local Coastal Planning. Section 30604(a) also requires that a coastal development
permit shall be issued only if the Commission finds that the permitted development will
not prejudice the ability of the local government to prepare a Local Coastal Program
(LCP) in conformity with the provisions of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. In this case,
such a finding can be made.
As noted above, the project site is located north of Palomar Airport Road, south of
Faraday Avenue, east of Hidden Valley Road, and extends on either side of College
Boulevard, and is within the jurisdictional area of the Mello I1 Land Use Plan segment of
the Carlsbad LCP. The Commission has certified the Mello I1 Land Use Plan and
Implementation Program for this LCP segment. The Carlsbad HMP is also a part of the
certified LCP. As discussed above, the proposed development, as conditioned, can be
found consistent with the Mello I1 LUP, the Carlsbad HMP, and all applicable Chapter 3
policies of the Coastal Act. Therefore, the project will not have any impacts on coastal
resources and will not prejudice the ability of the City of Carlsbad to administer its
certified Local Coastal Program for the area.
6. Consistency with the California Environmental Ouality Act (CEQA).
Section 13096 of the Commission's Code of Regulations requires Commission approval
of Coastal Development Permits to be supported by a finding showing the permit, as
conditioned, to be consistent with any applicable requirements of the California
A-6-C11-00-"07
Page 30
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Section 2108OS(d)(2)(A) of CEQA prohibits a
proposed development from being approved if there are feasible alternatives or feasible
mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen any significant adverse
effect which the activity may have on the environment.
The proposed project has been conditioned in order to be found consistent with the
applicable provisions of the certified LCP as well as with the public access and recreation
policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. Mitigation measures, including conditions
addressing habitat impacts and mitigation, landscaping, and storm water management to
minimize adverse environmental impacts. As conditioned, there are no feasible
alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen
any significant adverse impact which the activity may have on the environment.
Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed project is the least environmentally-
damaging feasible alternative and is consistent with the requirements of the Coastal Act
to conform to CEQA.
STANDARD CONDITIONS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Notice of Receipt and Acknowledgment. The permit is not valid and development
shall not commence until a copy of the permit, signed by the permittee or authorized
agent, acknowledging receipt of the permit and acceptance of the terms and
conditions, is returned to the Commission office.
Expiration. If development has not commenced, the permit will expire two years
from the date on which the Commission voted on the application. Development
shall be pursued in a diligent manner and completed in a reasonable period of time.
Application for extension of the permit must be made prior to the expiration date.
Interpretation. Any questions of intent or interpretation of any condition will be
resolved by the Executive Director or the Commission.
Assiment. The permit may be assigned to any qualified person, provided assignee
files with the Commission an affidavit accepting all terms and conditions of the
permit.
Terms and Conditions Run with the Land. These terms and conditions shall be
perpetual, and it is the intention of the Commission and the permittee to bind all
future owners and possessors of the subject property to the terms and conditions.