HomeMy WebLinkAboutLCPA 02-10; Habitat Management Plan; Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (34)T-032 P. 002/012 F-058 - Jun-09-08 02:58pm From-619 767 2W 619 761 2384
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
n75 MTRO~OLITAN DRIYE, SUITE Im SAN DIM0 AR$A
SAN DIEGO. CA 921OW-
(619) 767.U70
Th 8D
Addendum
June 9,2003
To: Commissioners and Interested Persons
From: California Coastal Commission
San Diego Staff
Subject: Addendum to CITY OF CARLSBAD MAJOR LCP AMFXDMENT NO. 143B (Habitat Management Plan), for the Commission Meeting of
JUW 11-13,2003
Staffncommends~the following changes be made to the above-referenced staff report. The non-bold &kit+eW underline reflects the original sraffrecomrnendation. The bold
,"1L,lu.alunderUne reflm the changes to the staff recommendation ia this
addendum.
1, On Page 9, add the following language after the first paragraph in Part IV
(Suggested Modifications):
1. The following changes should be made to policy 7-9 of the Second Addendum
to the HMP on page 5:
h. All mitigation areas, onsite and offsite, shall be stcd with a conservation easement in favor of the wildlife agoncics. In addition, a
preserve nlanagement plan shall be prepared for the migitation areas, to the
satisfaction of the City, the wildlife agencies, and the Coastal Commission. Phase 1 of the preserve rn- be hc- e
bplemmtation Propram of the LCP throunh an ICP amendment within
LCP. Phase 2 of the D~CSCTVC rn-all be cerc&&gx~ oEthe HMP as urn of the
into
Erogsam in the same manner within three years of Commission ccrtification of the HMP as uart of the certified LCP. The
preserve management plan shall ensure adequare hding to protect rhe
preserve as open space and to maintain the biological values of the
mitigation areas in pcrpcmity. Management provisions and fhding
--to address
mimpacts for which shall be in place prior to esy
tion is required b-hktat . At a minimum,
.. .. *
. .
Jun-00-03 02:58pm From-618 767 234 T-032 P. 003/01 2 F-058
_4
618 767 2384
Addendum to CAR LLPA 1-03B
Page 2
monitoring reports ahall be required as a condition of development
approval after the i3rst and third year of habitat mitigation efforts. Zhe
2. On Page 12, rcvist the last paragraph as follows:
L.% Assessor’s Parcel No. 215-050-73 (Levatino) -Maximum 25% development
clusterezon the southern portion of the property. Buffer widths may be reduced and/or
additional imbacts mav be allowed to the extent iFnecessm to obtain site access. andlor
$0 accowodate Circul an ‘on Road im~rovcments identified in the certified LCP.
3, On Page 13, revise Suggested Modification 65 as follows:
5. Revised Hardline Preserve maps for the Hub ParldSDG&E Propem
Zem+MW& and Kelly Ranch (Exhibits 13-rylhl S) shall replace the
existing Figures 179 and 12 in the HMP, consistent with the conditions of
the Coastal Commission’s action for Coastal Development Permit 6-01-167
(Hub PuWSDG8&& & and the Kelly Ranch Open Space
Map approved in the Commission’s action on LCP Amendment No, 2-99D (Kelly Ranch). ,me standard
-for Planning Area L (Callaghan) included on Paat D-65 of the
‘E.TMpshall b
1.be revised to include the followine;
statement: Oum SII ace ~rescrve. as shown-ellv Rw&
-e Map for F!lannin~ Area L. shall be reqtlired (ref. Exhibit 21
attached to the staf€rcuort~.
*a
In the above revision, the language regarding the Zone ,19 Park hardline revision was
deleted because the reference was made in mor.
4, On Page 17, Suggested Modification #ll;swtion 3-8.12 (Levatino) should be revised
as follows:
U3-8A-6 Assessor’s Parcel No. 215-050-73 (Lcvaho) -Maximum 25% devolopment olustcred on the southern portion of the property. Buf€kr widths
mav bc tbduccd and/or additional bat% may be allowed to the extent iE necessary to obtain site access, and/or to sccomo date Cir calation RoaQ
rovements identified in the certified LCP.
5, On Page 26, the fourth paragraph should bc revised as follows:
&-- - A rezone for the Manzanita Partners site was appmvcd by the Commission in July 2002 (Carlsbad LCP
Amendment No. 1-WE with conditions for impact limitations to protect onsite
Jun-09-03 02:58pm from-619 767 2384 619 767 2304 - T-032 P, 004/012 F-058
Addendm to CAR LCPA 1-03B
Page 3
.. southern maritime chaparral. d
In the above revision, the refcrence 10 the need for an amended hardline for Manzanita
was made in error. The rezone approved by thc Commission for this propaty did not
amend the Manzanita hardline as included in the 1999 draft W.
6. On Page 27, the final sentence of the firsr paragraph should be revised as follows:
The additional open space on Planning Area L is part of the Callaahan D~OIXI~Y, whicAwas not identified as a hardline at Kelly Ranch LCP amendment. As recommended in Sunnested Modification
the HMP ~laaning sta&gd for tkG&gh~allanhan pmptrty shall in-
additional rwuircmenr that any development ontbc C- shall be
on the Kelly Ranch Open %ace IkQg for P&&g Area L @ hibit21). The
intent of this additional standards lanpuagc is to clarifv thc status of the
Callarrhan site With respect to the Kellv
consistencv between the HMP and the Kcllv Ranch &en Space Map for
ElannrngArea L. The swested m odification does not revise or s-
Kelly Ranch Open Space..Map for Pl-a L mwiouslv certified bv &
time of Commission review of rbe
evlouslv- pproved oucn suacc uwc rca- as shorn
and t 0-
7. On Page 27, revise the second sentence of the second paragraph as follows:
AlthouQh & the Zone 19 Park site thwgh - was the subiect of the City's acdon for Coastal Development Pdt 6-CII-02-
029/Local ID 1-3 1 in Aumst 2002, this was a de dmis action which allowed
for build- mwded faoil stab-
sloucs within the prcs~rve area that wen adiacmt to a drainage facilitv. The
hardline was not amended. and rhe area affected bv the
-oved ftom th,eserve area as id-
.. e. .
-. . -
8. 0x1 Page 32, add the following language before the last sentence of the first paragraph:
F !4 a
tc w-
modificationstotheHMP modificabons would do w cvons to posl
maor =umAd de ea, to the extent necessary to obtain sire access
Camino Real. identified difficulties with site access rtquirements and imDacts
re to El C-ve be- second addendum and the Me110 II LIP. The . .. ..
pd/or ac- (1 irculation Road imurovments to El Cho Real as
included in thc ccrtificd J CP,
Jun-00-03 02:58pm From-61s 767x384 T-032 P.005/012 F-058 - 619 767 2384
Addendm to CAR LCPA 1-03B
Page 4
9. On page 35, after the end of the first incomplete paragraph, and before the Findings
for Approval, if Modified, insert the following language as follows:
C. Preserve Funding - Eotabmen t and M aintenance
.. !them will have sever4
components. hcludinn existing own mace. parkland and Dresmes. exisbqg and future mitiaation areas. and future OD~ mace with habitat that will bc
d to be breserved on mdivldwl Drooerties under the HMP. As
provided in the 1999 draft HMP. the Citv docs not anticbate - that public
order to establish thc proposed HMP preserve area. The Citv-rnay, however,
ire land or mitiation credits in order to provide ad- decide to acau
mitinarionsppo-s €or
. a.
9cauwJon ofw itat within- the Citv will be necessary in 8 .. 'vatelv-owned hab
.. ..
To w its obllmons 8 _LlfirDClD~ t in the MHCP. the Cily has amreed to .. .a
effectuate the con3ervation and conveyance of 307.6 acres h the MHCP
core area which is located 0utsid.e the Citv of C-ad. Some oft&
reauired land acauisition will take dace tbroureh funding requirements associated with already-amroved lame develoumcnt umiects Within the City
JFieldstone HCP. Rancho Cadlo Master PIan). The City will acquire 51.6
acres within the MHCP core area as art of the required mitiaation for
I. Pdf coursc. whlm
PrODCX".
. I. 0. necessm to f&j.U the Cirv sition *v
will likely be obtained throush amlication of a habitat in-lieu mitigation fee
develo~ment that is subiect to rnw throueh the HMP for
prouoscd habitat imuacts. An mact amount of thc fee. as ncccssw to
wovide the remaininjz fundinp for the MHCP core area land acauitision and
for .. .
fee is Drovidedin SecGon E of rhe 1999 draftHMp,
In the 1999 draft HMP, the City prom sed that habitat man aaemant adld
mpnitorinp: for private-preserve area should be provided primarily by the fee
owner of the habitat. Howevcr, section 7-9 of the HMP secondadddurn
the coastal zone. adequate fundinp shall be movided to
protect the HMP prcsme as open space and to maintain the bioloical
values of the mitigation anss in perpetuity. Tbis section also rcauircs th at
manamnent mowsions and fund- be
w' * ' s. Inaddition, with a conservation cas-
&-satisfaction of the Citv. the wrldlife $2-ommission. As modified. section 7-9 of the Second Addendum to the
.. - -
.. 'or to any impacts to All mitistation mas. onsitc and offsite. shall be sccurcd
.. . me rnanaplement - plan shall be ~>regwed fo-
coastal the ..
Jun-00-03 02:58pm From-GlQ 767-2384 1-032 P. 006/012 F-058 - 619 767 2384
Addendum to CAR LCPA 1-03B
Page 5
r-D HMP wi rve m Ian be
'fication of the HMP as part
ted into the hulcmentation Pro~am of the LC
pmendment wime Y ear of mion C ccrh
incorposted into the hDl 'on Promam in the same manner witbh
three years of Commission cera 'fication of the HMP as nart of th e certified
LCP. Additionally. the oreserve rnanaRement dan shall ensure adequa& fundine: to protect the mserve as open mace and to rn 'ntain the biological
abitat impacts shall be in dace fUndinatirnitigation rcauircd to address h
prior to the impacts for w-~e abon is raauired. Fb&v. at Q
e rcauired as a condition of minimum, momto~morts shall b me lo^^ t amro _. Val after the first and third war of hab itat mitigation
efforts.
YCOrnOra Pthrowhe
Pfae certified LCP. Phase 2 ofthe Preserve management plan sh all be
..
VS
.. .
*.
D. Other LCP and Implementation Requiremen
lema tation Pmmm P'IP") of the Carlsbad LCP is la&
adcauatc to ensure that coastal development ~crmits authorize only
icics of the certified LUP. as
' nsistent with the development that is consistent with the uol the IP. however. are inw
03,040 of the
amended. Some pr.o
submitted LUP amendmcnts. In aartic ular. Scmon 21.2
Carlsbad Municipal Code D~O tects onlv chatwral an d coastal sage scrub
plant c 3% grade and o ver. Ifamend ed as DIQDOS~~. the LCP
protect an expanded ranpe of native vegetation tyms regardless of
UDO~anhv.
..
.. only W hcn these vegetation types occur on slopes of
use D-
follow in^ auurovd of the HMP. the City will prepare a ~reservc
emeat ~lan in two phases over a three-vcar pE69d. Bs Drovidcd in
Section E.S. of the 1999 drdHMp. Phase 1 of the ~lan develoument will be
completed Within one veaval of the W. and sh all rnclude at a
1.
2,
3. The timing of ongoinn status mons for rcvicw bv the wildlife anenci w ;
4. mm t'c - e ies control,
detailed fire mag5mment p lan for DES me areas including
pcrmissablc brush clearance and fuel reduction zones;
for rccrm use of the Drtsme svm
m--,
6 I.
Ian Will bc co- thrcc -0 .. Val of& HMP. and shalt include:
1. Identify and Prioritize ~rescxve weas ncediag erosion control:
Jun-00-03 02:58pm From-618 767 g84 619 767 2384 1-032 P. 007/012 F-058
. Addendum to CAR LCPA 1-03B
Page 6
2. Ad etailed ' glemcnt zonemcc ific prescrvc management - recommendations. This plushall als o review the fe asibiliw for
undercros- ana0 T bridges in certain zones whaq
rnaior roads cross uge are as.
3. The proposed dW tha t will provide permanent, long-ta manapement of the -o reserve and a wcrv e manager. -
..
on to th e aboverea section 7-9 ofthe HMP second 1- be included as a review
e manamnent ~lm. Phase 1 of the nreserve -v for the Dreserv
e war of C ammissim
and Phase 2 shall be
the LCP hu& an LCP amendment- on c-n ome HMP as part of the certified LCP.
incornorated within three yew
'on Plan PI of Eemeut plan,Q&ll be borpor ated into the h&gW.an
.. The IP amendment wll &e all n ecassary updates to the IP for
jmplementation of thc HMP in t h c coastal zone. The suggested
m6-q reaure that in the case of anv c;lonflict between the IP and the
certified Ln. the certified LUP shall take Drcccdence. The commission findsndurine the intb one-vcar ncriod betw em Commission
cauon of the "P and incornoration ofrhe areserve and other n dates intn the P, the HMP, as part of the certified
ted in the coastal zonc & will urovids LCP. can bo awelv men
sufficient motection for coastal resourea
tcessw UP
20. On Pages 47-48, Part VI of the stafhport should be deleted and replaced with the
following:
WT VI: FINDINGS FOR CERTIETCATION OF FEDERAL CONSISTENCY
DETERMINATION
In addition to amending its LCP, the City of Carlsbad has submitted a consistency
certification, pursuant to the reqIkInentS of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA), for the HMP. The Cicy developed the E€MP to meet the rquirunents of a
habitat comervation plan pursuant to section 10(a)(2)(A) ofthe Endangered Species Act
@SA) (16 USC #1539(a)(2)(A)). The plan is ncccssary for thc U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Sdce to issue an incidental take pennit to the City pursuant to section lo(+( l)(B) of the ESA, in order to allow urban dcvclopmcnt within the City of Carlsbad consistent with the HMP. Since this permit is not listed in the California Coastal Management Program (CCMP) as one of the permits that is automatically subject to the consistency rquirtmenrs
of the CZMG, the Commission requested, and received, permission from the Office of
Ocean and Coastal Resource Managenlent (OCRM) to review this activity.
The purpose of the COnSiStCnCy review in this case is to determine whether issuance of the
ITP would be consistent with the California Coastal Act. Under thc CZMA, the Fish and Wildlife Service cannot grant approval of the ITP until the Commission concurs with the
City's consistency certification. As part of the overall submittal that is currently under
Jun-09-03 02:5Spm From-61s 767p84 1-032 P. 008/012 F-058
6
618 767 2384
Addendum to CAR LCPA 1 -03B
Page 7
CQnunission review, the City included a certification that thc HMP and LCP amendment
comply with the enforccablc policies of the CCMP, and Will be conducred h a manner
consistent with such policies. The City has requestcd the Commission’s concurrence in
this certification of consistency.
Based upon review ofthe 1999 draft HMP and supporting documants, Commission staff
determined that the federal consistency review should be ammpanied and supported by
revisions to the HMP and a corresponding amendment to the Carlsbad LCP. The City has
delayed submittal of its consistency certification mu1 the LCP amendment was also
submitted LO the Commission so that the Commission could review the certification
concurrent with the LCP amendment and rely upon the proposed changes to issue a
conditional co~urrcnce. The City’s application for an ITP pursuant to Section 10 of the
ESA requires that the City submit a federal consistency certification to the Commission.
Additionally, the Cornmission will rely on the HMP as a meohanism to ensure that
mitigation outside of the coasral zone compensates for the loss of sensitive coastal
r~~ources in thc coastal zone. Thus the Commission bas determined that it is important to
conduct a federal consistency review of thc HMP, because the CZMA strengthens the
ability of the Codssion to evaluate activities outside of the coastal zone.
The Commission’s review of thc ITP application, federal consistency certification, and
other supporting information is necessary to ensure that the HMP is consistent with the
federally approved CCMP. The enforceable policies of the CCMP are Chapter 3 of the
California Coastal Act, In the findings above, the Codssion evaluates the LCP
amcndmmts incorporating the HMP into LCP for consistency with the Chapter 3 policies. Shco these policies provide the substantive basis for bath the LCP amendment and the consistency certification, the Commission can use the above LCP findings as a basis for its federal consistency analysis.
In Part V of this report, the Commission provides the basis for a finding that the LCP
amendment, as submitted, is inconsistent with Chapter 3 policies. Specifically, in rhat
section, the Commission found that the project is inconsistent with Section 30240 of the
Coastal Act, The Commission also found that, if it modifies the LCP amendment, the City could minimize the Commission’s concerns with respect: to the LCP amendment’s
consistency With the Section 30240 of the Coastal Act. The Commission finds that these
suggested modifications must also function as conditions to its concurrence in the City’s
consistency certification and incorporates them by reference.
Despite these changes, the Commission concluded that the LO amendment still raises issues with respect to consistency with Section 30240. Howcvcr, the Commissjon also
found that it could approve the LCP amendment with the suggested modifications, because it creates a conflict with consistency with Section 30250 of the Coastal Act and
approval of the Lcp amendment is on balance most protective of coastal resources. The
Commission incorporates these conclusions, by reference, into its analysis of the City’s
consistency certification and finds the following: 1) the HMP is inconsistent with the
ESHA policy of CCMP; 2) the pattern of development that would occur in the absance of the HMP is inconsistent with Section 30250 of the Coastal Act; 3) the HMP therefore crcatus a conflict between these two policies; and 4) the Commission concludes that
Jun-09-03 02:59pm Frorn-Glg 7671384 1-09 P.008/012 F-058 - 619 767 2384
Addendum to CAR LCPA 1 -03B
Page 8
resolving the conflict in favor of Section 30250 is most protective of coastal rasources.
The Commission also incorporates, by reference, its findings that the LCP amendment, as
modified, is consistent with the wetland and water quality policies of the Coastal Act, and
thus finds that the HMP is consistent with the wetland and water quality policies of the
CCMP. In conclusion, the Commission finds that, subject to conditions in the form of the
suggested modifications hereinabove sct forth, the HMF is consistent with the enforceable
policies of the CCMP.
1 1. Following Exhibit 20 of the staff report, the Kelly Ranch Open Spacc Map for
Planning &ea L (attached) shall be added as Exhibit 21.
Jun-DO-03 02:5Qpm From-61s 767,2384 1-032 P. 01 Oh1 2 F-058 - 61s 717 2384
Open Space Recommendation
Area L
i
(I