The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLCPA 02-10; Habitat Management Plan; Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (35). r‘ r\ WAYNE CALLAGHAN 38 REDHAWK, IRVINE, CA 92604 Tel: (949) 559-6200 Fax: (949) 559-6215 E-mail: calgroup@regroup.NET June 1 1,2003 Honorable Commissioners California Coastal Commission 31 1 1 Camino del Rio North, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92 108- 1725 (Copy sent to Staff) Dear Commissioners and Stag I appreciate Staffs efforts to complete its report over the last week and especially to clarify the City and my questions impacting Planning Area L (“PAL”). Especially Ms. Keri Akers meeting with me on short notice and under such a tight schedule, and although new to this project, her willingness to attempt to research past requirements as well as commitments. I am especially thankful with Coastal / Ms. Ken Akers offering to provide input in the near future, so we might be able to maximize the City’s, Coastal’s and my team’s ability to assure everyone’s experience and concerns can be incorporated, rather than at the last minute trylng to patch conflicting ideas together. This will better serve existing residentdwildlife and future residents. I only received the revisions, and am attempting to respond first thing this morning. As of late today, my understanding is that the present or revised recommendations do not impact our ability to continue as previously agreed. Since the time schedule has not permitted me to properly address several of my questions I feel it is appropriate to assure I have expressed my understanding(s) so these concerns can be properly understood, or addressed. To facilitate a shorter letter, I will first provide brief overview or basis for my understanding 0 Project overview 0 Historical perspective 0 Biological Setting & Constraints Vegetation / Open Space --- Fire Suppression Program If at time of the hearing I am able to more clearly explain my concerns I will remove my concerns from this letter and leave my understanding as a basis for future discussions. Project overview Villaggio’s design introduces unique concepts. Individual occurrences of some concepts might be found; however, we are not aware of the extensive integration being utilized. Traditional design solutions were put aside to create an Old World “Village” in harmony with California coast’s natural environment. A narrow cobblestone street winds through a common community garden with parking on grass create and natural surface drainage rather than curb and gutters. The garden functions as a gathering area that is unique in its concerns for protecting access to sensitive open space as well as retention, cleansing, and control of urban runoff. Highly detailed structures and provide access to private courtyards. Garages are grouped around textured auto courts that blend into the landscaping. Rear of units offer a variety of single story choices from open living area to garden room. The variety is intended to enhance the visual appearance from off-site, before entering into the community / village. Unique detailed architecture and fencing with community maintained grass land buffer to the west, and units below and behind a landscaped screen on the east also contribute to esthetics from off-site. f- Historical History 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Initial planning was based on extensive compromises with Coastal Commission and Fish and Game staffs, before I even acquired the Property in 1980. After a six-year collaborative process, the Coastal Commission unanimously approved the project with positive support from all agencies and its staff. Coastal Commission permit / findings memorialize (see following) the fact that this environmental balance was achieved. “This balance / development ameement for enhancement and preservation of the sensitive resources, above and beyond what the LCP requires, combined with the ofSer to dedicate in fee title, Coastal Commission agreed to modifications to maximum residential development, and prohibitions of grading on steep slopes to allow a reasonable use of the property to generate suflcient revenues. ’’ 1985 - 99: In reliance on the approval which specified the Planning Areas to be developed numerous millions of dollars were spent in good faith and reliance on that commitment. Next: Coastal Commission and Dept. of Fish and Game in recognition of property owner provisions of the deal having been fully accomplished; recognized the vesting in writing. And as a result; Coastal achieved benefit fiom the bargain. Next: Ownership of Kelly Ranch (not including PAL) changed and the plan was revised. In its 1999 hearing, the Coastal Commission specifically required Planning Area L’s future development to be fully addressed prior to approval of an “Amended” Coastal Permit. The Amended Coastal Development Permit (CDP# 6-84-61 7-A), and Irrevocable OfSer to Dedicate Open Space Easement (Recorded Doc. # 2002-0058285) Specipcally permit alteration of the Open Space without Coastal Approval, including for: Fire Suppression Zone 3 Fuel Modification section; Restoration/revegetation of manufactured and natural slopes within the open space. NOTE: Salient items from California Coastal Commission Special Condition #6 are included in the appropriate sections of PAL ’s revegetation program; Cut and fill slopes to support development, roadways and geotechnical remediation; Such uses as are permitted by the existing easements described in the title report. This was further acknowledged and subordinated to in the “Perpetual Conservation Easement Grant” in favor of the Center for Natural Lands Management and this wording was specifically approved by the United States Fish and Wildlife Services in same. 0 0 0 0 2000 - 2001: After PAL’S development envelope and environmental issues were defined and the proposed Open Space placed in an irrevocable offer to dedicate. Before, during and after the hearing, Coastal staff provided statements, assuring me that my dedicating open space prior to the City processing my project, and the hardline oficially processed; that the Coastal Commission would continue to respect its prior commitments regarding my ability to develop the remaining portion of PAL, and the opportunity for me to recover my family’s extensive investment in environmental enhancements and share of previously paid infrastructure. Recent efforts to have the City enforce it grading ordinance on the Kelly Ranch, PAL although accepted for approval has not yet been set for final public hearing. Bioloaical Seftina & Constraints Past and recent Environmental Impact Reports (“EIR”) show Planning Area L (“PAL”) to consist mainly of non-native grasses. PAL’s dominant plants are Eurasian grasses that have substantially displaced the native flora. The recent EIR and entitlements identified an area East and North of PAL that should be preserved, and which PAL’s planning conforms. The plants that were noted were recognized as not individually or cumulatively significant and in most cases the species were still locally common in the area. EIR also stated: ... ” The Kelly Ranch project granted an irrevocable ofer of dedication over 181 acres of land encompassing the Agua Hedionda Lagoon as a condition of the original approval. This protects substantial and critical raptor foraging habitat, albeit with different habitat values. Given that the current development project replaces the un-built development, this dedication could be factored into the requirement for additional mitigation lands for raptor foraging habitat The previous dedication of 181 acres provides adequate compensating raptor foraging habitat, and no future mitigation is considered necessary ”. Like most of the Kelly Ranch, Planning Area “L” has undergone weed abatement, farming, erosion control, and rough grading as a borrow site. It was also an integral part of the Irrevocable Offer to dedicate over 180 acres of Open Space and slope easements. The aerial photo shown below was taken shortly after rough grading and erosion control on the Kelly Ranch. This process included strong measures to avoid any intrusion into natural habitat areas. After this operation, Planning Area L underwent extensive farming with irrigation for an extended period. Kelly Ranch has been the subject of proposed development since the early 1980’s. In 1998 Kelly Ranch, including Planning Area “L”, was the subject of an EIR with biology prepared by Merkel & Associates [“Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR 98-05) for the Kelly Ranch General Plan Amendment and “Core Area” Subdivision (CT 97-16) (SCH #98041067), A. D. Hinshaw Associates, January 15, 19991. Wetland delineation and vegetation characterization was provided by Glenn Lukos and Associates. Quina Checkerspot butterfly surveys were conducted by Lincer and Associates during the 1988 adult flight season. Little Pacific pocket mouse trapping surveys were conducted by SJM Biological Services 1997. Site specific focused coastal California gnatcatcher surveys were conducted by Varanus Biological Services in 1997. In April, 1999, Re- initiation of Formal Consultation on Implementation of the Specific Rule for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (1 -6-93-FW-37R1) occurred. In February, 2000, R. Mitchel Beauchamp of Pacific Southwest Biological Service (PSBS) provided a “Vegetation Mapping” of Planning Area L; denoting the mapped California Sage Scrub (“CSS”) / Habitat Area. The following exhibit was also used in Coastal and City’s 2000 2001 approvals Thli map Is a mducad reproducrion of the 40 Scale Vegstatlon Mappln generated by Pacific SouthwesI BIo~oQIc~I Sewic8t8SBS) on February 14 2000. Hand written plan text and wg&ation boundary ines are PSBS. Abbrevlated plani community symbols and Area Calculations. by diilal planimeter, are by Plannlnp The mapping occurred on a 40 scale base. A letter report describes PSBS’s assessment of vegetation occurring on Planning Area L. and reflects the vegetation mapping used to calculate project impacts and is an exact copy of the base map and plant community characterizations generated by PSBS, with lines enhanced by Planning Systems to improve graphic legibility. For the purposes of impact assessment, plant community area calculations were digitized by Planning Systems. Plant associations occurring in Planning Area L (per PSBS), and were quantified by Planning Systems. r‘ T Vegetation The following exhibit denotes the California Sage Scrub (“CSS”) / Habitat Area mapped by R.M. Beauchamp (February 14, 2000) and refined with 40 scale aerial photo (July 1, 2000). Further refinement to the boundary was included after the area was surveyed and staked in 2002 project’s Civil Engineer. by the Open Space by PAL to facilitate City and In addition several new areas will be added to the Coastal Sage Scrub community; and approximately 0.41 acres of grass land plus 0.16 acres Habitathuffer, if approved (as expected) by City of Carlsbad Fire and Planning Departments. Fire Suppression Prowam The City of Carlsbad policies are intended to protect development from fires associated with wildland fires. In an effort to comply with the various needs on the part of public agencies and still implement the intent of the City regarding fire suppression, the City of Carlsbad processed a modification for the Kelly Ranch project related to its Fire Suppression Sections shown in “Landscape Manual, City of Carlsbad Policies and Requirements”. The revision is reflected in Coastal Commissions approvals, Coastal Development Permit, Open Space Offer to Dedicate Open Space, and the dedication of Open Space Easement. r' ? Distribution List cc: City of Carlsbad Mayor Claude Lewis Ray Patchett, City Manager Ron Ball, City Attorney City Clerk's office Michael Holzmiller, Planning Don Rideout, Planning Gary Wayne, Planning Christer Westman, Planning Coastal Commission Staff Chuck Damm, Regional Director Deborah Lee, Regional Manager Sherilyn Sarb, San Diego LCP Manager Ken Akers, Coastal Program Analyst, San Diego