HomeMy WebLinkAboutHDP 96-10; Cade Tentative Parcel Map; Hillside Development Permit (HDP) (6)ic
STATE, OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SAN DIEGO COAST AREA
31 11 CAMINO DEL RIO NORTH, SUITE 200 SAN DIEGO, CA 92108-1725 (61 9) 521 -8036
January 13, 1997
Steven Cade 3460 James Drive
Carl sbad, CA 92008
SUBJECT: Coastal Development Permit Application #6-96-159
Dear Mr. Cade:
The application proposes a parcel into two single fam 5,400 SCI. ft. residence an
mi nor parcel map to subdivide a 3.71 acre hillside ily lots. Lot 1 is proposed with a single story, d Lot 2 is proposed with a single story, 5,300 sq. ft. residence. Proposed accessory structures include a swimming pool for both lots and a tennis court on Lot 2. Also proposed is perimeter fencing around both properties and landscaping covering both lots.
This application is incomplete and cannot be processed until the following
i tems have been received. First, the City indicates that a1 1 local approvals
(minor subdivision map, hi1 lside development permi t> will not be received
unti 1 the week of January 13, 1997 at the earliest. In addition, there is a
10 day appeal period on the permit actions. This office can not process the appl i cati on unti 1 a1 1 local approval s are received. Once the City takes final action on the application, those resolutions and staff reports must be forwarded to this office. In addition, the following issues and items must be addressed prior to filing the application as complete with this office.
The items relate mostly to public access and biological resource concerns
resulting from the proposed parcel map and associated development. As you know, the project is subject to the provisions of the Agua Hedionda Land Use
Plan which identifies the proposed area as Hedionda Point. Regarding publ i c
access concerns, for projects located within the Hedionda Point area, the LCP
requires lateral access along the shore1 ine within a 25 wide access easement,
located landward of the mean high tide line. The submitted tentative parcel map indicates such an easement will be recorded and would be located below the four foot elevation. However, the City of Carlsbad indicates that lands below the six foot contour are subject to flooding and as such the easement area would not provide passable publ ic access at a1 1 times. The map a1 so indicates the "water 1 ine" boundary was identified below the 0 elevation based on a
1/19/96 field survey. Because the LCP identifies that the access easement
must be landward of the mean high tide line, we need information documenting
where the mean high tide line is so that we can confirm the appropriate
location for the access easement.
CDP 6-96-159 Page 2
In addition to the access easement, the Agua Hedionda LUP requires the following design criteria for structures proposed to be located within 100 feet of any access easement.
a> A1 1 portions of the such structures shall be set back from the point
nearest the access easement a di stance equivalent to twice the height
of the structure above finished grade; and
b) New development shall provide landscaping adequate to minimize vi sua1 intrusion upon public use areas.
P1 ease identify how existing and proposed development would conform with this
policy. In that regard, the application must be amended to include a site
plan showing a1 1 existing and proposed development, including accessory structures. The plan should shqw all existing improvements on the site that were built without benefit of a coastal development permit (i.e., fence, sand vol leyball court, others?) and indicate whether they are proposed to remain or be removed. Also, confirm in writing whether or not construction of the
residences are proposed with this application.. No floor plans and elevations
of houses were submitted with the application; however, the application
identifies the height and sizes of the houses. If the residences are proposed at this time, please identify on the parcel map or a site plan their proposed
building sites. Also, provide the floor plans and elevations so consistency with the above LUP provision can be con'firmed. The accessory structures (swimmimg pools , tennis court) , as proposed, without plans for the houses, would likely not be supportable by Commission staff.
The wetlands boundary must also be determined and shown on the submitted site plan. A wetlands boundary determi nation is done through a biological survey
of the property. The survey should identify the location of any wetlands
present on the site, both vegetated and non-vegetated. Staff wi 11 likely
recommend a 100 foot buffer be provided between the wetlands boundary and any
proposed development, including grading, private recreation and introduced or
non-native landscaping. The pub1 i c access easement is typical ly a permitted
use within the buffer.
The site plan including all existing and proposed development and the wetlands
boundary should be submitted to the California Department of Fish and Game for
review and comment on the boundary determination and on the uses within the
100 foot buffer. It may be found that existing improvements on the site that were bui 1 t without benefit of a coastal development permit (i .e., fence, sand
vol leyball court, others?) cannot be approved as a permitted use within the
buffer.
The above requirements for public access and a development buffer have been
used in two previous Commission actions (CDP 6-88-477, L&R Partnership and
6-90-93, Remington Industries) on the north shore of Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Copies of these Commission actions are available upon request.
Please also submit a fence plan. The fence location is unclear on the
submitted parcel map. As you know the fence that was installed near the
CDP 6-96-159
Page 3
water's edge impedes public access that has been historically available to the
public. This fence was installed without benefit of a coastal development
permit and was the subject of a previous violation letter. You have indicated you are reluctant to remove the fence until you have been relieved of all mai ntenance and 1 i abi 1 i ty responsi bi 1 i ti es associated wi th the publ i c using the site for publ i c access along the shorel ine. You have indicated that the fence is only temporary until that happens. However, because the fence blocks
public access that has existed unimpeded along the shoreline, staff may be
recommend that the fence be removed at this time. Due to the length of time
necessary to process the application for s.ubdivi sion and residences, we
request that you submit a separate application addressing the fence to resolve
the pending violation.
Adam Street is designated as a scenic roadway in the LCP. The LCP requires that development located adjacent to scenic roadways or located between the road and the shorel i ne shall be regulated as fol lows:
a) No portion of structures shall be permitted to exceed the elevation of the roadway:
b> Development shall be designed to step down in height to avoid casting shadows on shoreline areas and to produce a transition between open space and developed areas; and
c) Adam Street frontage landscaping shall be in conformance with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines.
As noted, while no floor plans and elevations of houses are proposed with the application, the application identifies the houses will be one-story. Please identify how the houses and other development, including landscaping, wi 11
comply with the above requirements.
The City's mitigated negative declaration indicates that the project site
contains sensitive biological resources, including .39 acres of disturbed coastal sage scrub and California adolphia sparsely scattered throughout the coastal sage scrub. The mitigated negative declaration indicates the sage scrub wi 11 be taken and mitigated offsite at a mitigation bank. The LUP requires that such habitat be preserved and allows only a 10% encroachment. Please submit a 25% Slope Analysis and Vegetation Survey and the following information all shown on the proposed site and grading plan (and a reduced 8
1/2" X 11" copy) which includes the following information. All fiaures must be aiven in sauare feet and in Dercentaues.
1. Slope Analvsis which analyzes existing contours from a recent topographic
survey and clearly indicates the following areas:
A. 0 - 25% grade
B. 25% grade and over C. Areas of 25% grade and over where encroachment
occurs; encroachment includes a1 1 areas proposed
to be altered by grading, landscaping, and
,
CDP '6-96-1 59
Page 4
structures and also includes brush management zone #1 (20 feet from any proposed structures).
2. Veaetation Survey which indicates the nature of the current vegetation for
the entire site, including the following categories:
A. Native; give vegetation type(s)
B. Non-nati ve; gi ve vegetation type( s)
3. On the proposed si te/gradi ng plan, indicate and quantify the following areas :
A. Total area of native vegetation B. ' Total area of 25% or greater (steep) slopes with native vegetation C. Total area of encroachment on native vegetation D. Total area of encroachment on 25% or greater slopes with native vegetation
Storm runoff from the proposed subdivision could add to the deterioration of water quality in the lagoon. P1 ease identify in a drainage and runoff control plan how the project will be designed to minimize potential water quality impacts. Also submit the supporting hydrology report or calculations for the drainage and runoff control plan.
Upon review of the above information, staff may request additional information
based on requirements of applicable local ordinances or as needed to analyze
the project. If you have any questions, please contact me at the above telephone number.
bi 11 Pondey
Coastal Planner
1527A #