HomeMy WebLinkAboutLCPA 90-08; Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan; Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (6)I PETE WILSON, Governor STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
--
May 21, 1993 SAN DIEGO COAST AREA
3111 CAMINO DEL RIO NORTH, SUITE 200
(619) 521-8036
SAN DIEGO, CA 92108-1725
TO: COMMISSIONERS AND INTERESTED PERSONS
'\ FROM: CHARLES DAMM, SOUTH COAST DISTRICT DIRECTOR \I
DEBORAH N. LEE, ASSISTANT DISTRICT DIRECTOR, SAN DIEGO ARCA OF,F{CE. L+-'* BILL PONDER, COASTAL PLANNER, SAN DIEGO AREA OFFICE --I_ _- - . .a
SUBJECT: STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON MAJOR AMENDMENT 1-93 TO THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM-MELLO I1 LCP: (For Public
Hearing and Possible Action at the Meeting of June 9-11, 1993)
SYNOPSIS
BACKGROUND
The Carlsbad Local Coastal Program consists of six geographic segments.
Pursuant to Sections 30170(f) and 30171 of the Public Resources Code, the
Coastal Commission prepared and approved two portions of the LCP, the Mello I
and I1 segments in 1980 and 1981, respectively. However, the City of Carlsbad
found several provisions of the Mello I and I1 segments unacceptable and
declined to adopt the LCP implementing ordinances for the LCP.
1985, the Commission approved major amendments, related to steep slope protection and agricultural preservation, to the Mello I and I1 segments,
which resolved the major differences between the City and the Coastal
Commission. The City then adopted the Mello I and I1 segments and began
working toward certification of all segments of its local coastal program.
Since the 1985 action, the Commission has approved several major amendments to
the City of Carlsbad LCP. The subject amendment request involves property
which lies within the Mello I1 segment of the City's LCP.
In October,
SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT REQUEST/BACKGROUND
The proposed amendment modifies the certified land use and implementation
plans for the Mello I1 segment regarding 423.5 acres on the north side of
Palomar Airport Road, south of the future extension of Cannon Road, and east
of Paseo Del Norte known as the "Carlsbad Ranch". Specifically, the City of
Carlsbad proposes to amend the certified Mello I1 LCP to: (1) Change
references from Master Plan to Specific Plan, (2) Expand the uses permitted in
the agricultural preserve to allow for public recreation facilities, (3)
Update acreage figures referenced in various policies, (4) Designate 24.5 acres as open space to accommodate a public driving range, putting green, and
ancillary uses, and (5) Add new language to condition the specific plan to preserve agriculture and/or public recreation uses on the areas of the site
not currently proposed to be developed for as long as feasible.
Proposed are amendments to the Mello I1 Land Use Plan Map to redesignate approximately 113 acres located north of Palomar Airport Road, south of future
Cannon Road and east of Paseo Del Norte from Non-Residential Reserve (NRR) to
I
Carl. Ad LCPA 1-93 Page 2
Open Space (OS), Professional Office/Planned Industrial (O/PI), Community Commercial/Professional Office/Planned Industrial (C/O/PI), Travel Services
Commercial/Community Commercial (TS/C), and Community Commercial (C). Also
proposed are amendments to the Mello I1 Implementing Ordinances for a zone change from L-C-Q (Limited Control, Qualified Development Overlay Zone) to O-Q/P-M-Q (Office, Planned Industrial, Qualified Development Overlay Zone),
C-2-Q/O-Q/P-M-Q (General Commercial/Office/Planned Industrial, each with the
Qualified Development Overlay Zone), C-T-Q/C-2-Q (Comnercial-Tourist/General Commercial, both with the Qualified Development Overlay Zone), C-2-0 (General
Commercial, Qualified Development Overlay Zone), C-T-Q (Commercial-Tourist, Qualified Development Overlay Zone). A zone change from E-A (Exclusive
Agriculture) to 0-S (Open Space) is also proposed. Finally, a zone change is proposed from L-C-Q (Limited Control, Qualified Development Overlay Zone) to C-T-Q (Commercial-Tourist, Qualified Development Overlay Zone) on 2.3 net acres on the west side of Paseo Del Norte located north of Pea Soup Andersen I s .
SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends rejection of the proposed Mello I1 land use plan amendment as submitted, and approval, if modified. Staff recommends rejection of the proposed Mello I1 implementation plan amendment as submitted, and approval if modi f i ed .
The appropriate resolutions and motions may be found on Pages 4 - 7. The suggested modifications may be found on Paqe 7. Findings for denial, as
submitted, of amendment to the Mello I1 Land Use Plan segment begin on Page 11. The findings for approval of the amendment to the Mello I1 Land Use Plan
segment, if modified, besin on Page 21. Findings for rejection of the
amendment to the Mello I1 Implementation Plan, as submitted, begin on page 29;
and, findings for approval of the Implementation Plan amendment begin on paqe - 31.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Further information on the City of Carlsbad LCP amendment may be obtained from Bill Ponder, at (619) 521-8036.
.
i
PART I. OVERVIEW
1
Carlsbat. ,CPA 1-93 Page 3
A. Local Coastal Program History-All Segments.
The City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program (LCP) consists of six geographic segments: the Agua Hedionda Lagoon LCP segment comprised of approximately
1,100 acres; the Carlsbad Mello I LCP segment with 2,000 acres; the Carlsbad
Mello I1 LCP segment which includes approximately 5,300 acres; the West
Batiquitos Lagoon/Sammis Properties LCP segment with 200 acres; the East
Batiquitos Lagoon/Hunt Properties LCP segment with 1,000 acres and the Village Area Redevelopment segment with approximately 100 acres.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 30170(f) and 30171, the Coastal Commission was required to prepare and approve an LCP for identified portions
of the City. This resulted in the two Carlsbad LCP segments commonly referred
to as the Mello I and Mello I1 segments. The Mello I and Mello I1 LCP
segments were approved by the Coastal Commission in September 1980 and June
1981, respectively.
the City and approved by the Coastal Commission on July 1, 1982.
The Agua Hedionda segment Land Use Plan was prepared by
The Mello I, Mello I1 and Agua Hedionda segments of the Carlsbad LCP cover the majority of the City's coastal zone. They are also the segments of the LCP which involve the greatest number of coastal resource issues and have been the subject of the most controversy over the past years. Among those issues involved in the review of the land use plans of these segments were
preservation of agricultural lands, protection of steep-sloping hillsides and
wetland habitats and the provision of adequate visitor-serving facilities. Preservation of the scenic resources of the area was another issue raised in
the review of these land use plans. As mentioned, the City had found the
policies of the certified Mello I and I1 segments regarding preservation of
agriculture and steep-sloping hillsides to be unacceptable. The City
therefore did not apply these provisions in the review of local projects.
In the summer of 1985, the City submitted two amendment requests to the
Commission and, in October of 1985, the Commission certified amendments 1-85
and 2-85 to the Mello I and Mello I1 segments, respectively. These (major)
amendments to the LCP involved changes to the agricultural preservation, steep
slope protection and housing policies of the Mello I and I1 segments of the
LCP. After certification of these amendments, the City adopted the Mello I
and I1 LCP segments.
The West Batiquitos Lagoon/Sammis Properties segment and the East Batiquitos/Hunt Properties segment were certified in 1985. These LCP
amendments paved the way for two large projects comprising the majority of each segment: the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park-Sammis project within the West Batiquitos segment and the Pacific Rim Master Plan (now known as the
Aviara Master Plan) within the East Batiquitos Segment.
The plan area of the Village Area Redevelopment segment was formerly part of the Mello I1 segment of the LCP. In August of 1984, the Commission approved
the segmentation of this 100-acre area from the remainder of the Mello I1 LCP
-
Carl,,ad LCPA 1-93 Page 4
segment and, at the same time, approved the submitted land use plan for the
area. In March of 1988, the Commission approved the Implementation Program for the Village Area Redevelopment segment of the LCP.
post-certification maps occurred in December and the City assumed permit authority for this LCP segment on December 14, 1988.
A review of the
In addition to the review process for the six LCP segments mentioned, the City has also submitted at various times, packages of land use plan amendments to the certified LUP segments, including these segments, in an effort to resolve existing inconsistencies between the City's General Plan, Zoning Maps and the Local Coastal Program. After all such inconsistencies are resolved, the City plans to submit, for the Commission's review, the various ordinances and post-certification maps for implementation of the LCP. At that time, or
perhaps earlier, the City should also prepare and submit a single LCP document that incorporates all of the LCP segments as certified by the Commission and
any subsequent LCP amendments. After review and approval of these documents by the Commission, the City would gain "effective certification".
8. STANDARD OF REVIEW
The standard of review for land use plans, or their amendments, is found in
Section 30512 of the Coastal Act. This section requires the Commission to
certify an LUP or LUP amendment if it finds that it meets the requirements of
Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. Specifically, it states:
Section 3051 2
(c) The Commission shall certify a land use plan, or any amendments
thereto, if it finds that a land use plan meets the requirements of, and
is in conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section
30200). Except as provided in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), a
decision to certify shall require a majority vote of the appointed
membership of the Commission.
Pursuant to Section 30513 of the Coastal Act, the Commission may only reject zoning ordinances or other implementing actions, as well as their amendments,
on the grounds that they do not conform with, or are inadequate to carry out,
the provisions of the certified land use plan.
action by a majority vote of the Commissioners present.
The Commission shall take
C. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The City has held Planning Commission and City Council meetings with regard to
the subject amendment request.
to the public.
known interested parties.
All of those local hearings were duly noticed Notice of the subject amendment has been distributed to all
PART 11. LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM SUBMITTAL - RESOLUTIONS
Following a public hearing, staff recommends the Commission adopt the following resolutions and findings. The appropriate motion to introduce the
.
Carlsbad L-QA 1-93 Page 5
resolution and a staff recommendation are provided just prior to each resolution.
A. RESOLUTION I (Resolution to deny certification of the City of Carlsbad Mello I1 Land Use Plan Amendment 1-93, as submitted)
MOTION I
I move that the Commission certify the Mello I1 Land Use Plan Amendment
1-93, as submitted.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends a NO vote and the adoption of the following resolution and findings.
Commissioners is needed to pass the motion.
An affirmative vote by the majority of the appointed
Resolution I
The Commission hereby denies certification of the amendment request to the City of Carlsbad Mello I1 LCP Land Use Plan and adopts the findinqs stated
below on the grounds that the amendment will not meet the requirements of
and conform with the policies of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 30200)
of the California Coastal Act to the extent necessary to achieve the basic
state goals specified in Section 30001.5 of the Coastal Act; the land use
plan, as amended, will not be consistent with applicable decisions of the
Commission that shall guide local government actions pursuant to Section 30625(c); and certification of the land use plan amendment does not meet
the requirements of Section 21080.5(d)(2)(i) of the California Environmental Quality Act, as there would be feasible measures or feasible
alternatives which would substantially lessen significant adverse impacts
on the environment.
8. RESOLUTION I1 (Resolution to approve certification of the City of Carlsbad Mello I1 Land Use Plan Amendment 1-93, if modified)
HOTION I1
I move that the Commission certify the Mello I1 Land Use Plan Amendment 1-93, if modified.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends a YES vote and the adoption of the following resolution and findings.
Commissioners is needed to pass the motion.
An affirmative vote by the majority of the appointed
Resolution I1
The Commission hereby certifies the amendment request to the City of Carlsbad Mello I1 LCP Land Use Plan and adopts the findinqs stated below
Car ,ad LCPA 1-93
Page 6
on the grounds that the amendment, with suggested modifications, will meet the requirements of and conform with the policies of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 30200) of the California Coastal Act to the extent necessary to achieve the basic state goals specified in Section 30001.5 of the Coastal Act; the land use plan, as amended, will contain a specific access component as required by Section 30500 of the Coastal Act; the land use
plan, as amended, will be consistent with applicable decisions of the
Commission that shall guide local government actions pursuant to Section 30625(c); and certification of the land use plan amendment does meet the requirements of Section 21080.5(d)(2)(5) of the California Environmental
Quality Act, as there would be no feasible measures or feasible
alternatives which would substantially lessen significant adverse impacts on the environment.
C. RESOLUTION I11 (Resolution to deny certification of Mello I1 LCP Implementation Plan Amendment 1-93, as submitted)
MOTION I11
I move that the Commission reject the Mello I1 Implementation Plan Amendment 1-93, as submitted.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends a YES vote and the adoption of the following resolution and findings. present is needed to pass the motion. An affirmative vote by the majority of the Commissioners
Resolution I11
The Commission hereby denies certification of the amendment to the City of Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program on the grounds that the amendment does not conform with, and is inadequate to carry out, the provisions of the
certified land use plan. There are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen any significant adverse impacts which the approval would have on the
envi ronment.
0. RESOLUTION IV (Resolution to approve certification of Mello I1 LCP Implementation Plan Amendment 1-93, if modified)
MOTION IV
I move that the Commission approve the Mello I1 Implementation Plan Amendment 1-93, if modified.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends a YES vote and the adoption of the following resolution and findings.
present is needed to pass the motion.
An affirmative vote by the majority of the Commissioners
f
t
Resolution IV
Carlsbad APA 1-93 Page 7
The Commission hereby certifies the amendment to the City of Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program on the grounds that the amendment, as modified, conforms with, and is adequate to carry out, the provisions of the certified land use plan. There are no feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen any significant adverse impacts which the approval would have on the envi ronment.
PART 111. SUGGESTEO MOOIFICATIONS (underlining indicates where added policy language is recommended for City proposed policies; entirely new policies recommended by staff are so noted)
A. Mello I1 Segment Land Use Plan
1. On page 2, Policy 2-1 "Conservation of Agricultural Lands", new policy language shall be added to read:
1. Consistent with the provisions of Sections 30241 and 30242 of the Coastal Act, it is the policy of the City to contribute to the
preservation of the maximum amount of prime agricultural land throughout the coastal zone by providing for the balanced, orderly conversion of designated non-prime coastal agricultural lands. Non-prime agricultural lands identified on Map X including the 423 acre Carltas Property are designated Coastal Agriculture and shall be permitted to convert to urban uses subject to the agricultural mitigation or feasibility provisions set forth in the LCP.
2. Conversion of designated coastal agricultural lands shall be permitted provided that: a) conversion would preserve prime agricultural lands within the statewide coastal zone consistent with sections 30241 and 30242 or concentrate new development consistent with section 30250 of the Coastal Act; or b) continued or renewed agricultural use is not feasible.
3. Conversion of non-prime coastal agricultural lands shall be permitted pursuant to wither Option 1 (Mitigation), Option 2 (Feasibility Analysis), or Option 3 (Conversion Fee) as set forth below in this
policy. Consistent with Section 30242 of the Act, no feasibility analysis shall be required if a landowner selects Option 1 or Option - 3.
Option 1 -- Mitigation
Non-prime coastal agricultural lands shall be converted to urban use consistent with the Carlsbad General Plan if, prior to approval of a subdivision map, a mitigation program is in effect that permanently preserves one acre of prime agricultural land within the statewide
Coastal Zone for each acre of net impacted agricultural land in the LCP that is converted. For purposes of calculating required
Carl. Ad LCPA 1-93 Page 8
mitigation acreage, net impacted agricultural lands are the parcels and acreages designated on Map X and the 423 acre Carltas Property, minus the acreages in steep slopes (25% or greater) and areas containing sensitive coastal resources that would preclude development.
The standards and prqcedures for such a mitigation program shall be set forth in LCP implementing ordinances. Recipients of prime agricultural land interests pursuant to this policy shall be limited to: 1) local or state agencies; or 2) tax exempt organizations whose principal charitable purposes are consistent with the agricultural mitigation program and qualify under Section 501 (c)(3) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Further, mitigation priority shall be given to preserving prime agricultural lands in the coastal zones of counties selected by the State Coastal Conservancy for pilot program funding, and other counties with similarly qualified programs.
Option 2 -- Determination of Agricultural Feasibility
If the feasibility of continued agriculture is questionable, either the city or involved landowners may complete an agricultural feasibility study for: a) all coastal agricultural land lands in the LCP; b) 3 or 4 subareas which constitute logical subunits; or, c) contiguous landholdings in single ownership of at least 100 acres.
If Option 2 is selected, that portion of the study area determined to be feasible for continued agriculture, if any, shall be converted
upon request of the landowner to urban use subject to compliance with
the provisions of Option 1 above. That portion of the study area determined not to be feasible for continued agriculture could be
converted only after: a) the City approves the feasibility study; b)
an LCP amendment is prepared and submitted to the Coastal Commission
that provides for the conversion; and c) the Coastal Commission
certifies the LCP amendment as to its conformance with the Coastal
Act.
Option 3 -- Determination of Agricultural Feasibility
In lieu of the procedures established by the above options, property may be converted to urban uses upon payment of an Agricultural
Conversion Mitigation Fee. The amount of the fee shall be determined
by the City Council at the time it considers a coastal development
permit for urban development of the property.
less than five thousand dollars nor more than ten thousand dollars
per net converted acre of agricultural land and shall reflect the
approximate cost of preserving prime agricultural land pursuant to
the off-site mitigation program (Option 1).
prior to the issuance of buildinq permits for the project.
mitigation fees collected under this section shall be deposited in the State Coastal Conservancy Fund and shall be expended by the State Coastal Conservancy in the following order of priority:
The fee shall not be
The fees shall be paid All
Carlsbad -,PA 1-93 Page 9
a. -
b. -
C. -
d. -
e. -
Restoration of natural resources and wildlife habitat in Batiquitos Lagoon, includinq but not limited to payment for
operation and maintenance of a lasoon enhancement program.
Development of an interpretive center at Buena Vista Laqoon.
Restoration of beaches managed for public use in the coastal zone in the City of Carlsbad.
Purchase of agricultural lands for continued agricultural production within the Carlsbad Coastal Zone as determined by the
Carlsbad City Council.
Agricultural Improvements which will aid in continuation of agricultural production within the Carlsbad Coastal Zone as
determined by the Carlsbad City Council.
For purposes of implementation, neither Option 1 nor Option 2 nor Option 3
shall have priority over the other.
4. To maximize and expedite the preservation of prime agricultural lands throughout the state coastal zone, all parcels designated coastal agriculture in the LCP including the 423 acre Carltas Property shall have an underlying urban land use designation as identified on Map Y and the Carlsbad Ranch SDecific Plan. Conversions of coastal agriculture land permitted by the City in conformance with either Option 1 or Option 2 or Option 3 as set forth in Policy 2 shall be consistent with the land use designations on Map Y and the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan.
5. Conversions or parcels designated coastal agriculture that are
requested for uses other than the underlying land use designation on
Map Y and the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan shall be subject to an LCP amendment to allow the City and the Coastal Commission to determine
the consistency of proposed urban uses with other applicable
provisions of the LCP and the Coastal Act.
2. In Section I1 of the Specific Plan, the following statement shall be added:
The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan is supplemental to the existing certified Mello I1 Land Use Plan. All the resource protection and
land use provisions of the existing certified land use plan are
applicable to the Carltas property.
3. On page 18, under "Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas", a new Policy
#3-7 shall be added:
Wetlands and riparian resources outside the lagoon ecosystems shall be protected and preserved. No direct impacts may be allowed except for the expansion of existing circluation element roads identified in the certified LCP and those direct impacts associated with
I
Car. ad LCPA 1-93 Page 10
installation of utilities (i.e., water, sewer, an electrical lines). There must be no feasible less environmentally-damaging alternative to the proposed disturbance; any allowable disturbance must be performed in the least environmentally-damaging manner. Open space
dedication of sensitive resource areas is required.
Mitigation ratios for any temporary disturbance or permanent displacement of identified resources shall be determined in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Appropriate mitigation ratios shall be determined based on site specific information. Such information shall include, but is not limited to, the type and size of the development and/or proposed mitigations (such as planting of vegetation or the construction of fencing) which will also achieve the purposes of the buffer. The buffer shall be measured landward from the delineated resource. The California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service shall be consulted in such buffer determinations. Buffer zones shall be
protected through the execution of open space easements and passive recreational uses are restricted to the upper half of the buffer zone
4. In Section IV of the Specific Plan, the following provision shall be
added:
Height Limitations/Architectural Embellishments
The basic height limit for the Carlsbad Ranch development shall range from 35 - 45 feet. One architectural embellishment or accent feature, not to exceed 65 feet in height, may be permitted for the
proposed hotel as long as the accent feature is unuseable space and restricted in bulk to no more than one percent (1%) of the hotel's
overall roof surface.
B. Mello I1 Segment Implementing Ordinances
5. Section 21.020 of the Coastal Agricultural Zone shall be amended as
f 01 lows :
A. "Coastal Agricultural Lands" means those agricultural lands identified on Map X attached to the Land Use Plan certified on . The following are the lands identified on Map X:
Site I1 377 approximate acres
Site I11 27 5
Site IV 109 Lusk 93
Bankers 27
Hunt (Portion Thereof) 200 It
423 Carl tas -
E. "Net impacted Agricultural Land" means for purposes of calculating required mitigation acreage, the parcels and acreages
II n
II n
II II
I1 II
II
I1 II
'.
Carlsbad . ,PA 1-93 Page 11
designated on Map X and the 423 acre Carltas property suitable for agricultural use minus the acreage in steep slopes (25% of greater)
and areas containing sensitive coastal resources that would preclude development. "
6. Section 21.060, subsection C. of the Coastal Agricultural Zone shall be
amended as follows:
1. An applicant or group of applicants may complete an agricultural feasibility analysis for one or any combination of the following study areas : (1) all coastal agricultural lands in the LCP area;
(2) individual feasibility analyses for each of the four subunits in the LCP (refer to Map X)
Site I1 377 approximate acres Site I11 275 'I II Site IV 109 I' II Lusk/Bankers Site 120 I' If Carltas Site 423 'I II
or, (3) an individual study for the Hunt property may be submitted as part of a submitted master plan for each of its subunits.
7. In Section VI1 of the Specific Plan, the following statement shall be
added :
The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan is supplemental to the existing certified Mello I1 Implementing Ordinances. All of the municipal
code provisions and implementing ordinances of the existing Mello I1 Implementation Plan are applicable to the Carltas property.
8. Architectural Embellishment/Hotel Site
In Section IV of the Specific Plan, under Design Guidelines, the following provision shall be added:
A single architectural accent feature, not to exceed 65 feet, may be allowed for the hotel development as long as it is restricted in bulk
to no more than one percent (1%) of the hotel's overall roof surface. All other developments within the village center shall not exceed 45 feet in height, inclusive of architectural embellishments.
PART IV. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF AMENDMENT 1-93 TO THE MELLO I1 SEGMENT LAND USE PLAN
The following is a more detailed description of the proposed land use designations and text changes to the Mello I1 Land Use Plan proposed for that
portion of the LCP relating to the Carlsbad Ranch property under the Carltas ownership. this property. It is preceded by a brief history of the LCP policies regarding
Carl ad LCPA 1-93 Page 12
A. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND
This LCP amendment proposal involves changes to both the Land Use Plan and Implementing Ordinances of the Mello I1 segment of the LCP regarding the Carlsbad Ranch. The 423 acre property is located to the north of Palomar
Airport Road, east of Interstate 5. It is generally characterized by gently
to moderately sloping lands overlooking the Pacific to the west, Aqua Hedionda
Lagoon to the north and Canyon de las Encinas to the south. The majority of
the property has been used for agricultural production which predates the
Coastal Act. Flowers, tomatoes, and strawberries are grown on the property.
Other on-site uses include a palm tree nursery, produce sales stand, and a
packing shed located near existing roads, Paseo del Norte and Palomar Airport
Road. Surrounding land uses include agricultural land to the north, Car
Country Carlsbad adjacent to the site at the northwest corner, Pea Soup Andersen's to the southwest across Paseo Del Norte, a 7-11 convenience store, Nurseryland, and the Price Club to the south across Palomar Airport Road, and undeveloped property to the east.
The primary land use and environmental issues on this property can be limited to preservation of agricultural lands and the area's scenic resources. There
do remain, however, scattered areas of steep sloping hillsides covered with
native vegetation along the northeastern and southeastern portions of the
property along with a riparian area in the south central portion of the site.
Section 30242 of the Coastal Act calls for the preservation of non-prime agricultural lands. In an effort to preserve the agricultural lands of the
site consistent with Section 30242 of the Coastal Act, the LCP as originally
certified by the Commission in 1981, included special provisions for use of
the contiguous 423 acre Ecke (Carltas) holdings. Previous LCP amendments
reference the Carlsbad Ranch as being 500+ acres; however, a recent survey
indicates the site is approximately 423 acres. Similarly, previous LCP
amendments reference that the site contains 137 developable acres which have
been corrected to 92.6 acres by the survey. As with all of the agricultural
lands of the Carlsbad LCP, the subject lands were treated as non-prime lands
even though some of the property could have met the "prime" criteria because
of the economic return the land was providing from agricultural production.
The Commission's rationale for treating all lands in the LCP as non-prime was
that the majority could not meet the prime status and to treat those that
could meet the criteria solely based on economic return would penalize owners
of such lands and would provide incentives for taking the most productive
lands out of production.
Major amendments to the LCP certified by the Commission in 1985 significantly
changed the policies of the LCP regarding agricultural preservation. Those amendments essentially allowed for conversion of all of the agriculturally
designated lands within the City's Mello I and Mello I1 segments. Such conversion was to be allowed pursuant to either (1) a determination of infeasibility of continued agricultural use based on area wide studies or, (2)
participation in a mitigation program designed to offset the loss of agricultural lands or (3) payment of an agricultural mitigation fee. The
funds accrued from the fees required under the third option are used in the
Carlsbad ,PA 1-93 Page 13
restoration and enhancement of natural resources, public access opportunities,
and agricultural preservation in Carlsbad.
However, at the request of the subject owner, the Carltas property was not included in the the LCP amendments approved by the Commission for the
remainder of the Mello I and Mello I1 segment agricultural lands. Thus, the
policies regarding preservation of the agricultural resources of the site remain those which were originally approved with certification of the Mello I1
segment LCP in 1981 and subsequently amended twice in 1988 (Local Coastal Program Amendments 2-87 and 1-88). The LCP as it now exists for the subject Carltas property allows for two different options for use of the overall
acres. Each addresses retention of agricultural uses over the majority of the
site.
The first option allows activities that are consistent with continued agricultural production on the various (existing) parcels within the
contiguous ownership. These uses are defined and include such activities as
crop production, truck farms etc. The permitted uses also allow development
of some structures, those normally associated with agricultural operations or
family farms, such as silos, barns, roadside stands and a single family
residence. With the certification of LCP Amendment 2-87, farmer's markets and
floral auction houses were added as allowable agricultural uses, subject to
size and location limitations.
The second option is a 'Imixed use" approach to development of the overall site. Under this option, a portion of the lands are allowed to convert to
urban uses while the remainder of the property must be retained in long-term
agricultural production. The rationale for the mixed use approach is that by
allowing conversion and development of a portion of the property, a
supplemental income can be provided which may relieve development pressures
and allow for continued agricultural uses on the remainder of the site. With
the certification of LCP Amendment 1-88, the Commission approved the
realignment of agricultural and urban boundaries associated with preparing the
site to be developed under the mixed use option. However, while the
boundaries were changed, the overall acreage devoted to agricultural uses and
urban uses were not modified. The Specific Plan proposes the development of the site under the mixed use option.
Under the mixed use option, the LUP allows conversion of a total of 92.6 acres of the overall 423 acres with a requirement that such conversion be done
subject to a master plan, in this case, the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The LCP specifically requires that conversion of any of the acreage is subject to
the approval of a master plan which addresses the entire property, including
development within the potentially developable area and continued agricultural use of the remaining lands. With the subject amendment request, the City is
requesting the approval of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (CRSP) which defines permitted land uses, provides detailed development and design standards, and describes the method by which the Specific Plan will be
implemented.
Currently, the 92.6 acres of developable area includes area that is adjacent to existing urban services and roads (Lot #lo, 10.7 acres) and 81.9 acres of
Car, ,ad LCPA 1-93 Page 14
developable area located in the middle of Carlsbad Ranch, in an area that has
been used for agricultural production. It is in this area, on top of the
ridgeline, where the Specific Plan proposes the bulk of new development.
In addition to the LCP provisions regarding agricultural preservation, the
site is also subject to Williamson Act Agricultural Preserve contracts which
provide for tax assessment at a rate lower than fair market value for those
acres retained in agricultural use. The contract has been amended twice. The
first amendment adjusted the contract boundary in addition to adding botanical
gardens, farmer’s markets, and a floral auction to the list of permitted
uses.
present configuration of the preserve.
under contract is the same as that designated for continued agricultural use
in the “mixed use” option of the LCP.
The second amendment adjusted the contract boundary resulting in the Currently, the Carltas acreage now
B. THE PROPOSED LCP AMENDMENT
The City proposes to change the underlying land use designations for approximately 113 acres from Non-Residential Reserve (NRR) to a number of other designations: Professional Office/Planned Industrial (O/PI), Community
Commercial (C), Travel Service/Community Commercial (TS/C) and Open Space
(OS). The site is presently designated as NRR on 384.4 acres with the
remaining designation as Open Space (OS) on 39.1 acres. The NRR designation is a holding zone that requires new development to be accompanied by a master
plan prior to its redesignation to another land use and permits only continued
agricultural use in the interim. The current Open Space area on 39.1 acres
corresponds to a portion of the property designated for continued agricultural
use and includes the flower fields.
The City also proposes to change the underlying NRR land use designation on
24.5 acres to OS. Identified as Parcel 11 of the Specific Plan, this acreage
is currently designated in the LCP as agricultural lands retained for
continued agricultural use under the mixed use option of the LCP. It is also
part of the agricultural preserve under Williamson Act contract. The proposed
land use designations are accompanied by corresponding modifications to the
zoning designations of the implementing ordinances of the LCP.
The Specific Plan proposes non-residential designations to allow for a mix of
uses (office, research and development/light industrial, retail, hotel, and
accessory uses) to create a “village center” along the ridgeline. The
remaining developable portion of the Specific Plan, Parcel 10 located off the
ridgeline adjacent to the existing auto retail center, is planned to support a
variety of uses. The Specific Plan proposes to develop 92.6 acres in office, research and development, retail, and hotel uses; 24.5 acres for a driving
range and putting green; and retain 306.4 acres for agriculture. Development
would result in approximately 1,450,000 sq.ft. of office, research and
development uses; 220,000 sq.ft. of retail uses, and a 280 room hotel. With
the exception of the 24.5 acres now proposed as open space, the Specific Plan
is consistent with the “mixed use” option of the Mello I1 LCP with respect to conforming with the urban/agricultural boundary established in previous
Commission actions on this property. As noted, LCP Amendment 1-88 determined
-
Carlsbad - ,PA 1-93 Page 15
the location and total acreage of the site which could be proposed for development.
Additionally, the amendment proposes text changes to the site-specific policy regarding the Carltas property in the Mello I1 LCP, Policy 2-2. The changes
include a change in LCP references from Master Plan to Specific Plan,
amendment of the Mello I1 LCP to include the city's latest building height
regulations, an update of acreage figures referenced in various policies, and
adding language to condition the specific plan to preserve in agriculture
and/or public recreation uses the areas of the site not currently proposed to
be developed for as long as feasible.
All of the proposed LCP modifications are found on Exhibits 1 - 5. The
exhibits include maps of the existing and proposed LCP land use designations
for the Carltas property. The exhibits also include a copy of the text
changes which are proposed as modifications.
C. CONFORMANCE WITH SECTION 30001.5 OF THE COASTAL ACT
The Commission finds, pursuant to Section 30512.2b of the Coastal Act, that
the land use plan amendment, as set forth in the resolution for denial as
submitted, is not consistent with the policies and requirements of Chapter 3
to the extent necessary to achieve the basic state goals specified in Section
30001.5 of the Coastal Act. It reads:
The Legislature further finds and declares that the basic goals of
the state for the coastal zone are to:
a) Protect, maintain and, where feasible, enhance and restore the
overall quality of the coastal zone environment and its natural and
manmade resources.
b) Assure orderly, balanced utilization and conservation of coastal zone resources taking into account the social and economical needs of the
people of the state.
recreational opportunities in the coastal zone consistent with sound
resource conservation principles and constitutionally protected rights of
private property owners.
c) Maximize public access to and along the coast and maximize public
d) Assure priority for coastal-dependent and coastal-related development over other developments on the coast.
e) Encourage state and local initiatives and cooperation in preparing procedures to implement coordinated planning and development for
mutually beneficial uses, including educational uses, in the coastal zone.
0. CHAPTER 3 CONSISTENCY
1. Land Resources/Agriculture. Section 30242 of the Coastal Act states:
Carl. dd LCPA 1-93 Page 16
All other lands suitable for agricultural use shall not be converted to nonagricultural uses unless (1) continued or renewed agricultural use
is not feasible, or (2) such conversion would preserve prime agricultural
land or concentrate development consistent with Section 30250. Any such permitted conversion shall be compatible with continued agricultural use
on surrounding lands.
The proposed LUP amendment would allow the land use designation of 113 acres of the site to be changed from an agricultural designation to multiple
non-residential designations. As noted, in its previous reviews on this site, the Commission established those areas that could be developed for urban uses
and those areas that would remain in agriculture. Thus, the Commission has
clearly anticipated the development of this site under the mixed use concept
identified in the Mello I1 LCP and subject to various mitigation and land use control measures designed to enhance agricultural preservation and to minimize
conflicts between agricultural and urban uses. With the exception of 24.5
acres identified as Parcel 11 in the Specific Plan, the acreage proposed for
redesignation corresponds to those areas identified as suitable for urban
development under the certified LCP.
The City proposes the redesignation of 24.5 acres associated with Parcel 11
from NRR to OS. the driving range proposed for this site in the Specific Plan. However, this area is currently identified in the LCP and the Williamson Act as lands to remain in the agriculture preserve. The proposed driving range appears to be an acceptable use under the provisions of the contract. The City found that removal of this parcel from agricultural production would not significantly
reduce the acreage remaining in agriculture (306 acres), and that the use of the parcel for recreational activity would be consistent with LCP policies regarding public access and recreational uses. Currently, both the Mello I1
LCP and the land conservation contract limit land uses within the preserve to
agricultural uses as well as accessory uses for agriculture. As noted, those lands identified in the Mello I1 LCP as agricultural lands are identical to
those lands covered under the Williamson Act contract for the property.
The existing OS designation certified in the LCP would permit
The City also proposes amending language to the text of Policy 2-2 6.1 of the Mello I1 LCP to add public recreational uses as a permitted use within the
agricultural preserve. This policy provides that residential, commercial, and other non-residential uses may be developed on up to 92.6 acres of the site
subject to a Master Plan for the site.
"development of land within the Agricultural Preserve will be subject to the
provisions of the Williamson Act and specifically the Land Conservation Contract in effect at the time of development." amending the Williamson Act contract to allow for the recreational use on
Parcel 11. It should be noted that a notice of non-renewal of the applicant's contract was recorded on the property on October 4, 1991 beginning the start of a 10 and 15 year period at the end of which the contract will have
expired. under Williamson Act contract. However, any proposed future conversion of agricultural lands within the Carlsbad Ranch would be the subject of a local coastal program amendment.
The text change specifies that
The property owner is
Therefore, by the years 2002 and 2007, none of the site will remain
_-
Carlsbad --PA 1-93 Page 17
In effect, the City's proposal to redesignate Parcel 11 from its agricultural designation under the certified LCP to an urban use is a request to adjust the
agricultural/urban boundary between the two uses. While, in past actions, the
Commission has approved boundary changes between the two, the overall acreage devoted to agricultural uses and urban uses was not modified. Thus, the
amendment request indirectly amends the boundary by seeking approval to add recreational uses as a permitted use within the agricultural preserve. While,
in 1988, the Commission approved the redesignation of 39 acres of agricultural lands to open space to preserve the flower fields located on the western portion of the site, that action preserved an agricultural use within the open space designation. The current proposal would not preserve an agricultural use within the open space designation.
The Commission cannot find that the conversion of agricultural lands to an urban use without mitigation is consistent with the certified Mello I1 LCP. The site specific policy in the LCP regarding the Carltas property does not include a provision to mitigate the conversion of agricultural lands to other uses. However, the Mello I1 LCP provides three mitigation options for such
conversions for projects in areas outside of the Carltas property: (1) "Prime
Land Exchange"; (2) "Determination of Agricultural Feasibilityll; and (3)
"Agricultural Conversion Mitigation Fee". Briefly, the options are:
#l. Conversion of non-prime agricultural lands subject to a mitigation
program wherein prime agricultural lands elsewhere in the California
coastal zone would be preserved for agricultural uses on a 1:l basis.
#2. Conversion to urban uses on lands on which, after appropriate analysis, continued agricultural production proves infeasible from a
financial standpoint.
#3 Conversion to urban uses through payment of a mitigation fee of between $5,000 and $10,000 per net acre of agricultural lands
converted. The fees collected through such conversion would be
deposited with the State Coastal Conservancy for use on projects
within the City of Carlsbad which, serve to enhance coastal lagoons and beach areas or, preserve agricultural lands within Carlsbad's
coastal zone.
Under the first option, a property owner could elect to participate in a
mitigation program which would preserve prime agricultural lands in the
California coastal zone on a 1:l ratio. For each (net) acre of non-prime agricultural land affected within the Mello I1 plan area, an acre of prime
agricultural land would be preserved elsewhere in California's coastal zone. The lands would be preserved through acquisition of interests over such
property which would in turn be conveyed to local or state agencies or
non-profit organizations whose principal purposes are consistent with the
agricultural mitigation program. Under the program mitigation priority would
be given to preserving "prime agricultural lands in the coastal zones of
counties selected by the State Coastal Conservancy for pilot program funding,
and other counties with similarly qualified programs."
Car ,ad LCPA 1-93 Page 18
Under the second option the City or involved property owners could contest the feasibility of agricultural lands, and, consistent with Section 30242, conduct a analysis to determine the feasibility of agriculture in the affected area. The language calls for such study to be conducted for "a) all coastal agricultural lands in the LCP; b) 3 or 4 subareas which constitute logical subunits; or, c) contiguous land holdings in single ownership of at least 100 acres." Should the analysis show agriculture to be infeasible, the land designated as such could be converted to urban uses consistent with proposed underlying land use designations. The policy provides, however, that such conversion cou1.d occur only after: "a) the City approves the feasibility study; b) an LCP amendment is prepared and submitted to the Coastal Commission which provides for the conversion; and c) the Coastal Commission certifies the amendment request as to it's conformance with the Coastal Act."
Under the third option, the owner of designated agricultural lands could mitigate the conversion of such lands through payment of a fee of "not less than $5,000 nor more than $10,000 per acre". The amount of the fee would be determined by the City of Carlsbad at the time of a development proposal and would be based on the cost of preserving prime agricultural lands in the state coastal zone pursuant to the off-site mitigation program (option #1) of the Basic Agricultural Policies. The fees collected would be deposited with the State Coastal Conservancy. The proposed conversion fee funds would then be expended by the Conservancy in the following order of priority :
1. Restoration of natural resources and wildlife habitat in Batiquitos Lagoon, including, but not limited to, payment for operation and maintenance of a lagoon enhancement program.
2. Development of an interpretive center at Buena Vista Lagoon.
3. Restoration of beaches managed for public use in the coastal zone in the City of Carlsbad.
4. Purchase of agricultural lands for continued agricultural production within the Carlsbad coastal zone as determined by the Carlsbad City Counci 1.
5 Agricultural improvements which will aid in continuation of agricultural production within the Carlsbad coastal zone as determined by the Carlsbad
City Council.
As noted, the above options do not currently apply to the Carltas property but are applied within the Mello I1 plan area on lands subject to the Coastal Agriculture Overlay Zone. As noted, the Carltas property was subject to a site-specific LUP policy that allowed the 423 acre site to be developed under a mixed use option incorporating both urban and agricultural uses but with the majority of the site to remain in agriculture. The driving range, although a public recreation and visitor-serving use, is nonetheless an urban use and goes beyond the urban/agriculture boundary set in previous Commission actions. While not subject to the overlay zone, the Commission can only
support the redesignation of the land and changes to the text of the site
'.
Carlsbad &++A 1-93
Page 19
specific policy regarding the Carltas property subject to one of the above agricultural conversion options. The alternative would be to deny the
redesignation of Parcel 11. Because preservation of agricultural lands is not
achieved with the proposed redesignation, there is a conflict with Section
30242 of the Coastal Act and the agricultural preservation policies of the certified LCP. Therefore, the Commission finds that the amendment is
inconsistent with the Coastal Act and must be rejected.
2. Visual Resources. Section 30251 of the Act states, in part:
The scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas shall be considered and protected as a resource of public importance. Permitted development
shall be sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas, to minimize the alteration of natural land forms, to
be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and, where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded
areas.
The site is composed of gently rolling topography and contains three north-south trending ridges. Elevations range from a high of 280 mean sea
level (msl) in the northeastern portion of the site to a low of 60 feet MS1 in
the southwestern portion of the site.
agri cu 1 t ura 1 product i on. Much of the site is currently in
Because the proposed development is planned for the top of the ridge, the buildings would be visible along the top of the ridge from many points along
1-5, Palomar Airport Road, and Cannon Road, all listed as Scenic Highways in
the LCP. The site is a Carlsbad landmark in the spring when the ranunculuses
are in bloom; therefore, any development on the site would draw viewer
attention, particularly in the spring. Other factors that affect visual
resources include grading, which is proposed at 1,145,000 cubic yards and
building height. All the buildings in the village center are planned at two
levels at 35 feet or three levels at 45 feet with the exception of one 65-foot
non-habitable architectural accent feature associated with the proposed
hotel.
The proposed 280-room hotel is sited on the ridgeline at a maximum height of
65 feet, the highest 20 feet as an architectural embellishment (tower). The
City has recently passed an amendment to the municipal code to allow for
building height to fifty-five feet for large developments (over 40 acres)
subject to a number of conditions, one of which is that the site must develop
with a regional commercial use that would accommodate large anchor tenants.
Also, certain architectural projections are allowed in a number of zones,
including the C-2 and C-T zones that govern development on the hotel site.
The ordinance provides that architectural features may be permitted up to
fifty-five feet through a site development plan provided they (1) do not
function to provide useable floor area; (2) do not accommodate and/or screen
building equipment; (3) do not adversely impact adjacent properties; and (4)
are necessary to ensure a building's design excellence. be setback approximately 150 feet from the edge of agricultural uses, and
1,000 feet from Palomar Airport Road.
As proposed, it would
The EIR states that the hotel's
Car oad LCPA 1-93 Page 20
architectural feature would add visual diversity to the profile of the project by breaking up the line of development along the ridge and further enhance the
visual identity of the area. The Commission approved a hotel of similar
height and scale (4 levels and 45 feet and 254 rooms, however without
architectural embellishments extending beyond the roofline) within the Aviara development on a ridge above Batiquitos Lagoon. The visual impact of both
hotels are partially mitigated by their distance from scenic features and by virtue of their location within urbanizing areas.
Grading and building simulations have been performed from key viewpoints. These simulations indicate the proposed development is compatible with views
of similar urban uses in the adjacent area which include Pea Soup Anderson,
Car Country Carlsbad, and other development along Paseo del Norte, Palomar
Airport Road, and Cannon Road. In addition, the proposed building setbacks,
agricultural buffers, and landscape features provide screening from many
viewpoints. The Specific Plan contains development standards and design
guidelines (i.e., building coverage standards, agricultural setbacks, building
and landscape setbacks, tree planting standards, varied height and rooflines
to reduce appearance of bulk, varied compositional elements of street level
storefronts to create pedestrian interest, color buildings to surrounding
areas, etc.), that will protect the visual quality of the area.
However, the Commission remains concerned over the visual impact of the hotel
as it is sited on the ridgeline in a visually prominent area. The City has
recently amended its municipal code to allow certain architectural projections
in a number of zones, including the C-2 and C-T zones that are proposed on the
hotel site. Regarding those zones, the amended ordinance states that
buildings shall not exceed 45 feet and three levels; it also provides that
architectural features may be permitted to 55 feet upon specific findings that
the features: (1) do not function to provide useable floor area; (2) do not accommodate and/or screen building equipment; (3) do not adversely impact
adjacent properties; and (4) are necessary to ensure a building's design
excellence.
high, apparently inconsistent with the zoning requirements as amended.
Additionally, the Specific Plan is silent with respect to spatial requirements
regarding the hotel's design. Thus, the Commission is concerned with the
visual impact of the proposed tower. A large, bulky architectural feature at
this location has the potential to cause adverse visual impacts because of its ridgeline siting. For this reason the Commission rejects the Specific Plan.
The proposed hotel includes a tower that would extend to 65 feet
3. Sensitive Resources
Sections 30231 and 30240 of the Coastal Act protect and preserve sensitive coastal resources such as wetlands and riparian habitat. The site is
comprised of three gently sloping parallel ridges that traverse the site in a
north-south direction, providing for an overall vertical change of 200 feet.
The 423 acre site is gently sloping with only a small portion of land, about
30 acres, achieving slopes of 25% of greater.
slopes would be impacted by the Specific Plan; dual criteria steep slopes are concentrated at the northeast corner of the site adjacent to Macario Canyon.
The ridges that run through the site provide panoramic views of the ocean,
No naturally-vegetated steep
Carlsbab dPA 1-93 Page 21
Agua Hedionda Lagoon and the City of Carlsbad, and are prominent landforms that are highly visible from the west. Cultivation of flowers on the west
facing slopes create a colorful landscape that are unique visual resources of
Carlsbad. Natural plant communities that occur on the site are limited, due
to the history of agricultural uses on the site. Coastal sage scrub and mixed
chaparral occur within two areas along the eastern perimeter of the site not proposed for development with the Specific Plan. There is also 2.65 acres of
riparian scrub within the site including a stand of riparian habitat (willows)
located within an existing desilatation basin on the southern portion of the
property.
With respect to addressing indirect impacts to the nearby Agua Hedionda Lagoon and the Canyon de las Encinas watersheds, the Specific Plan proposes a
comprehensive system of water detention basins and conveyance systems which are intended to improve the quality of water runoff prior to being discharged off-site and ensures that urban runoff does not flow over agricultural land and vice versa.
integrated system of detention basins, grassed swales and catchment basins
which filter storm water runoff before discharging it into the City's storm drainage system which eventually enter the above watersheds. The Commission notes this system would minimize impacts of sedimentation and erosion to sensitive areas.
The drainage system calls for the development of an
However, while no adverse Impacts to resources are anticipated in the Specific Plan, the Commission notes the Specific Plan does not contain policies regarding habitat protection and defers subsequent environmental review of
on-site resources to a later local coastal program amendment. The Commission finds that based on this lack of specificity regarding resource protection, the Specific Plan must be rejected as it cannot be found consistent with
Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. A Suggested Modification is attached
to indicate that the resource protection policies of the Mello I1 LCP are a supplement to the Specific Plan to assure adequate resource protection absent
such policies in the Specific Plan. This Suggested Modification was previously adopted by the Commission in Local Coastal Progam Amendment 1-92 to protect sensitive wetland and riparian resources that exist outside lagoon ecosystems within the City of Carlsbad. However, this requirement was not adopted by the City within six months as required under the Commission's
regulations and has expired. Therefore, the Commission finds it appropriate in this case. Only with the modification can the Commission find that the
Specific Plan can be found consistent with Sections 30240 and 30231 of the
Coastal Act.
PART V. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD MELLO I1 LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT 1-93, IF MODIFIED
A. SUMMARY FINDING/CONFORMANCE WITH SECTION 30001.5 OF THE COASTAL ACT
As previously stated, the proposed Mello I1 land use plan amendment is not acceptable in its current form.
following section of this report, suggested modification language has been
For this reason, and as stated in the
-
CarlsL A LCPA 1-93 Page 22
provided to specifically identify what agricultural preservation and resource protection provisions are necessary to find the request approvable under Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. The Commission finds, pursuant to Section 30512.2b of the Coastal Act, that the land use plan amendment, as set forth in the resolution for certification with suggested modifications, is consistent with the policies and requirements of Chapter 3 to the extent necessary to achieve the basic state goals specified in Section 30001.5 of the Coastal Act, as previously cited.
B. CHAPTER 3 CONSISTENCY
1. Agricultural Preservation. Sections 30241 and 30242 of the Coastal Act concern the protection of agricultural lands. In 1981, when the Carlsbad Mello I1 LCP segment was certified by the Commission, the two major concerns
were preservation of agricultural uses and protection of environmentally
sensitive habitats. Regarding agricultural preservation, a major issue was
minimizing agricultural versus urban impacts by developing stable
urban/agricultural boundaries. For the most part, the certified LCP
accomplished this objective by concentrating development along 1-5, Palomar
Airport Road, and the El Camino Real transportation corridors and preserving
the interior areas, where public infrastructure is lacking, for continued
agricultural use.
Major amendments to the LCP certified by the Commission in 1985 significantly changed the policies of the LCP regarding agricultural preservation. Those amendments essentially allowed for conversion of all of the agriculturally designated lands within the City's Mello I and Mello I1 segments. Such conversion was to be allowed pursuant to either (1) a determination of
infeasibility of continued agricultural use based on area wide studies or, (2) participation in a mitigation program designed to offset the loss of agricultural lands or (3) payment of an agricultural mitigation fee. The
funds accrued from the fees required under the third option are used in the
restoration and enhancement of natural resources, public access opportunities,
and agricultural preservation in Carlsbad.
However, as noted, the Carltas property was not included in the the LCP amendments approved by the Commission for the remainder of the Mello I and Mello I1 segment agricultural lands. Thus, the policies regarding preservation of the agricultural resources on the Carltas site remain those which were originally approved with certification of the Mello I1 segment LCP in 1981 and subsequently amended twice in 1988 (Local Coastal Program Amendments 2-87 and 1-88). The LCP as it now exists for the subject Carltas
property allows for two different options for use of the overall 423 acres. Each addresses retention of agriculture uses over the majority of the site.
As noted, the property is being developed under the mixed use option provided in the LCP. The Specific Plan incorporates a number of features recommended by the City of Carlsbad and the Commission in their previous reviews to reduce land use compatiblity impacts between urban and agricultural uses as follows:
Regrade the road cut adjacent to Palomar Airport Road in the area designated as "Open Space" to allow agricultural use of the land. Soils
I
Carlsbab ,CPA 1-93
Page 23
in the regraded area should be amended to be equivalent to the existing
Class I11 Marina Soils.
A grade separated crossing for farm vehicles and pedestrians at the
northerly end of Road A.
Farm vehicle crossings incorporated into the design of the pedestrian connection between the Paseo Center and the Village Center.
A 50-foot setback between buildings and adjoining agricultural uses.
A 6-foot solid wall or landscaped berm installed around the perimeter of the area designated for development, to provide a physical barrier between urban and agricultural uses, and to restrict access into agricultural areas.
Disposal of irrigation and storm water runoff from buildings, streets, parking lots, and landscaped areas through a system of detention basins
and storm drains.
A storm drain system to segregate urban and agricultural runoff.
Landscaping which includes windbreaks to aid in reducing the effects of farm spraying and dust generation.
Landscape plant material selected for resistance to pests, particularly
aphids, thrips, whitefly, and spider mites which could affect agricultural
crops.
Project sponsor shall notify all future tenants, users, or landowners of
the developable area that the area is subject to dust, pesticides, and
odor with adjacent farm operations. The notice shall be included on all
deeds to parcels created, as well as in the rental and lease agreements.
Farm operators shall regularly water roads to minimize the drift of dust
to adjoining uses. All agricultural leases for the property shall contain
this requi rement.
Should water rates increase as a result of urban development on the Carlsbad Ranch, the project sponsor will subsidize water rates for
agricultural operations so that they equal agricultural water rates. All leases for the property shall contain this requirement.
The cost of all mitigation measures shall be borne by the project sponsor and not passed on to the agricultural operators. Should the property
owners choose not to farm on a yearly basis, a reasonable effort shall be
made to offer the agricultural land for lease or rent for agricultural
uses at a value equal to or less than the average market rents for
similarly situated agricultural land within a 30 mile radius of the
Carl sbad Ranch.
-
Carl: d LCPA 1-93 Page 24
With respect to the first measure listed, the regrading of the road cut adjacent to Palomar Airport Road to allow agricultural use of the land, the Commission notes that although this grading would occur in the open space area
associated with flower growing and outside the developable area for urban uses, the policy can be found consistent with the certified LUP. This was a previous policy adopted by the Commission in local coastal program amendment
1-88 and would enhance flower growing by lowering the existing steep slope to a 6:l grade. As noted, the policy calls for the amending of the soils after grading to further enhance farming opportunities. Similarly, the Commission notes that a number of other agricultural areas would be graded under the Specific Plan. This grading is proposed to meet engineering standards
required by the City of Carlsbad for road construction and to smooth out
contours within agricultural areas to better sustain farming and flower growing operations. Commission's previous actions on the site and with the agricultural preservation policies in the certified Mello I1 LCP.
Grading of this sort can be found consistent with the
As noted in the previous section of this report, the currently proposed amendment would not provide suitable protection for agricultural preservation and cannot be found consistent with the Mello I1 LCP or with the above Coastal
Act sections. That is, the amendment request seeks to convert agricultural lands to urban uses without mitigating the adverse effect of this conversion. The Commission recognizes that development pressure to convert agricultural land to urban uses is great within Carlsbad and that sustaining agriculture within the City will be difficult at best. In this case, the Commission notes
that some conversion of agricultural lands on the Carltas property is beneficial to the long-term viability of agricultural operations, as the Mello
11 LCP provides that urban uses subsidize the remaining agricultural use of the site.
However, while the Commission can accept that conversion of certain agricultural lands is an economic reality, the Commission cannot allow the these lands to be converted without adequate mitigation. Therefore, the suggested modifications require that the existing agricultural conversion policies within the certified Mello I1 LCP be applied to the subject site. The Suggested Modification to the Land Use Plan identifies that the Carlsbad Ranch property is subject to the requirements of the Coastal Agriculture Zone, including provisions for the conversion of agriculturally designated lands within the plan area to urban uses. This conversion, as approved in both the LUP and ordinances, would be subject to a mitigation program, a determination of infeasibility of agriculture or payment of an agricultural conversion mitigation fee. Only as suggested can the proposed amendment be found consistent with Sections 30241 adnd 30242 of the Coastal Act.
2. Visual Resources. Section 30251 of the Act provides that new development be sited and designed to preserve and protect visual resources.
As noted in the preceding section of this report, the proposed 280-room hotel
is sited on the ridgeline at a maximum height of 65 feet, the highest 20 feet
as an architectural embellishment (tower). Although the Specific Plan contains a number of provisions to mitigate the visual impacts of new
development on this ridgeline site, the Commission remains concerned over the
Carlsbalr JPA 1-93 Page 25
visual impact of the hotel. The Specific Plan is silent with respect to spatial requirements regarding the hotel's design. A large, bulky architectural feature at this location has the potential to cause adverse
visual impacts because of its ridgeline siting. For this reason the
Commission rejected the Specific Plan.
that the basic height limit for the Carlsbad Ranch development shall range from 35 - 45 feet. One architectural embellishment or accent feature, not to
exceed 65 feet in height, may be permitted for the proposed hotel as long as
the accent feature is unuseable space and restricted in bulk to no more than
one percent (1%) of the hotel's overall roof surface. Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with Section 30251
of the Coastal Act.
The Suggested Modification requires
3. Land Use Changes/Development Intensity. Section 30250(a) of the
Coastal Act states, in part:
(a) New residential, commercial, or industrial development, except as otherwise provided in this division, shall be located within, contiguous
with, or in close proximity to, existing developed areas able to accommodate it or, where such areas are not able to accommodate it, in
other areas with adequate public services and where it will not have a
significant adverse effects, either individually or cumulatively, on
coastal resources.
In addition, Section 30252 of the Act states, in part:
The location and amount of new development should maintain and enhance public access to the coast by (1) facilitating the provision or extension of transit service, [and] (2) providing commercial facilities within or adjoining residential development or in other areas that will
minimize the use of coastal access roads ....
Finally, Section 30253(d) requires that new development "minimize energy
consumption and vehicle miles traveled.4i
The proposed LUP amendment would allow the land use designation of 113 acres
of the site to be changed from a holding zone for agricultural uses (NRR) to
multiple non-residential land use designations. The site is located at the northeast quadrant of the Palomar Airport Road/Paseo Del Norte intersection,
approximately 200 yards east of the Palomar Airport Road/Interstate 5
interchange. The site is primarily in agricultural production, and is surrounded by commercial development to the west and south, and by lands that
are either vacant or in agricultural production to the north and east.
Palomar McClellen Airport is located about three miles easterly of the site.
The proposed Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan will significantly increase the intensity of development in this area.
acres in office, research and development, retail, and hotel uses; 24.5 acres
for a driving range and putting green, and accommodates approximately
1,450,000 sq.ft. of office, research and development uses; 220,000 sq.ft. of retail uses, and a 280 room hotel.
As proposed, development includes 92.6
-
Car. ad LCPA 1-93
Page 26
In order to determine if the proposed land use change is consistent with relevant Coastal Act policies, however, the increase in traffic resulting from
the proposed land use change must be evaluated as to whether or not it will have significant adverse impacts on coastal access, by, among other things,
impeding coastal visitors through increased traffic congestion on coastal
access routes or precipitating development of other public facilities that
could adversely impact sensitive resources.
Palomar Airport Road is a major east-west street in the City of Carlsbad. Generally speaking, coastal access in north San Diego County is impeded by the
relative absence of east-west traffic arteries capable of accommodating large
numbers of coastal visitors from inland communities. At present, the only
major highway serving as an east-west connector in North County is Highway 78. All other east-west traffic occurs on surface streets such as Palomar
Airport Road.
to the south of Highway 78.
access routes in the North County area, the additional increment of traffic on
Palomar Airport Road resulting from the land use designation change could
result in significant impacts on coastal access, particularly given the
current status of the 1-5 overcrossing of Palomar Airport Road.
The next nearest freeway is Hi'ghway 52, located over 20 miles
Given this relative paucity of east-west coastal
In this area, Palomar Airport Road has been widened to six lanes (three lanes
in either direction).
Norte and continues to the east, well past the project site. Westerly of
Paseo Del Norte, however, the road narrows to two lanes (one lane in either
direction) at the 1-5 overcrossing. The Commission has recently approved the
widening of the 1-5 overcrossing (CDP #6-90-270), and construction is
currently underway.
The six lane configuration extends from about Paseo Del
Currently, the City adopted performance standard for intersections (LOS "D1')
is not met at the intersections of Palomar Airport Road/Paseo del Norte and
Palomar Airport Road/I-5 northbound ramps. However, at present, the peak
period for traffic occurs on weekdays between 4:OO PM and 6:OO PM. At other
periods, the identified critical intersections meet the adopted performance
standard for intersections in Carlsbad, including morning peaks. In other
words, at those times when beach visitor traffic is of concern, both traffic along Palomar Airport Road and traffic resulting from the proposed land use
change appear not to be of concern.
Because the retail commercial uses associated with this development would be more likely to result in traffic on weekends, however, there still remains a
potential for beach visitor traffic impacts resulting from the proposed land use change. In response to concerns raised by Commission staff regarding the nearby Price Club site, a supplementary traffic study specifically addressing weekend traffic impacts for commercial retail uses was prepared in 1991. Trip generation data taken from this study indicates that trip generation is higher on the weekends than weekdays with Saturday trip generation being higher than
Sundays.
While the increase in weekend retail trips is of concern, the majority of traffic on Palomar Airport Road at this time appears to be traffic generated
Carlsbacr -CPA 1-93
Page 27
by the extensive industrial/business park areas along Palomar Airport Road and
along El Camino Real. Generally, this traffic would be expected to be limited
to weekdays, and total weekend approach volumes at the I-5/ Palomar Airport Road interchange, even with the proposed land use changes, are anticipated to be considerably lower than on weekdays. Given that the proposed increases in traffic resulting from the land use change would be off-day and off-peak from typical beach visitor travel days and times, it is not anticipated that the
proposed land use changes would result in any impacts upon the ability of the
public to gain access to coastal areas.
Cannon Road currently passes under 1-5 to the west and extends approximately
1,600 feet east of 1-5 along the northern boundary of the site. It would provide access to the site at its intersection with Road A. It is planned to
extend easterly to the City's eastern limit and carry 10,000 vehicle trips per day along its east segment, while the segment west of 1-5 carries about 8,000 vehicle trips per day. While the Commission is not concerned with immediate traffic circulation impacts on Cannon Road resulting from buildout of the
Specific Plan, it is concerned with potential adverse impacts to coastal
resources that exist near the planned alignment of Cannon Road and the
potential effect the Specific Plan may have on its ultimate design and
alignment.
As originally submitted by the City in 1978 in its Agua Hedionda LUP
submittal, Cannon Road would have resulted in about 11 acres of wetland fill.
Subsequent to the Commission's action to deny the submittal, a negotiating
committee was formed to address the remaining issues of the Agua Hedionda LUP,
including Cannon Road. The committee developed a conceptual alignment involving the least amount of adverse impacts upon lagoon resources. The agreed upon alignment resulted in wetland fill in two locations.
As stated in Policy 5.8 of the certified LUP, the policies regarding the
protection of resources in conjunction with the extension of Cannon Road are
as follows:
a. No portion of the road construction shall involve the filling or
dredging of fresh or saltwater marsh wetlands, except as noted in the
letter from the Coastal Commission to the State Department of Fish
and Game.
b. To the extent that there any portion of the road construction would occur in or adjacent to an environmentally sensitive habitat area
other than a wetland, the road shall be sited and designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade such areas, shall avoid
significant disruption of habitat values, and shall be sited and
designed to be compatible with the continuance of such habitat values
c. To the extent that are no feasible less environmentally-damaging alternatives and the road as designed would nonetheless result in
adverse impacts to environmentally sensitive habitat area, such impacts shall be fully mitigated in accordance with the
recommendations of the State Department of Fish and Game.
-
CarlsL . LCPA 1-93 Page 28
In Coastal Development Permit #6-89-195, the Commission approved the construction of Reach I of Cannon Road, identified as a circulation element
major road in the LCP. Reach I was approved at 1.25 miles long, running from
Paseo Del Norte to the eastern side of Macario Canyon.
approved as a four-lane major arterial, with a 102-foot right of way. Macario Canyon would be crossed by a bridge of about 500 feet in length resulting in
wetland and riparian fill. The permit was approved with conditions regarding
mitigation for resource impacts. In Coastal Development Permit #6-90-217, the Commission approved the Reach I1 Cannon Road sewerline from an existing
sewerline in El Camino Real to the sewerline that was approved as part of
Reach I on the west side of Macario Canyon subject to mitigation of resource
impacts.
The roadway was
The site is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 13 within the City
of Carlsbad. To ensure adequate public facilities and services are available,
Zone 13 requires certain performance standards must be met prior to
development of the Specific Plan. Regarding traffic generation, a total of
70,000 ADT is assumed for the proposed buildout of Zone 13 in 2005. Traffic
associated with the buildout of the Carlsbad Ranch is 51,456 vehicle trips per
day which reflects development proposed with the Specific Plan and future
unspecified development of the agricultural lands. The submitted traffic
analysis also considered other projects located within Zone 13 including the
SDG&E property located to the north of Cannon Road and immediately east of
1-5. This property is designated Travel Service (TS) in the LCP and is expected to generate 18,544 vehicle trips per day.
With the assurance that new development has been planned for and would not result in additional vehicle trips that would trigger Cannon Road's widening or realignment from that currently approved or planned for and with the
existing resource protection policies in place in the Aqua Hedionda LUP, the
Commission notes the Specific Plan can be found consistent with Chapter 3
policies of the Coastal Act. Therefore, the Commission finds that the subject
LUP amendment, as submitted, is consistent with Sections 30250(a), 30252 and
30253 of the Coastal Act.
4. Sensitive Resources
Sections 30231 and 30240 of the Coastal Act protect and preserve sensitive coastal resources such as wetlands and riparian habitat. In its denial of the
Specific Plan, the Commission found that while no adverse impacts to resources
are anticipated in the Specific Plan, it does not contain policies regarding
habitat protection and defers subsequent environmental review of on-site
resources to a later local coastal program amendment.
The Commission finds that based on this lack of specificity regarding resource protection, the Specific Plan must be rejected as it cannot be found
consistent with Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act.
Modification is attached to indicate that the resource protection policies of
the Mello I1 LCP are a supplement to the Specific Plan to assure adequate
resource protection absent such policies in the Specific Plan.
Modification provides that all wetlands and riparian resources outside the
A Suggested
This Suggested
-
Carlsbac ,CPA 1-93 Page 29
lagoon ecosystems shall be protected and preserved and that no direct impacts may be allowed except for the expansion of existing circluation element roads
identified in the certified LCP and those direct impacts associated with
installation of utilities (i.e., water, sewer, an electrical lines).
Additionally, open space dedication of sensitive resource areas is required as well as mitigation ratios for any temporary disturbance or permanent displacement of identified resources to be determined in consultation with the
California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Only with the modification can the Commission find that the Specific Plan can be found consistent with Sections 30240 and 30231 of the Coastal Act.
PART VI. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD MELLO 11
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT 1-93, AS SUBMITTED
A. AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION
The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (CRSP) is proposed as the implementing measure for the Carltas property. The Specific Plan consists of both a text and diagrams which specify the following in detail: (1) distribution and
location of land uses; (2) infrastructure; (3) development standards; (4)
implementation measures; and (5) a statement of the relationship of the
specific plan to the General Plan.
The proposed zone change will change the zoning from Limited Control, Qualified Development Overlay Zone (L-C-Q) and Exclusive Agriculture (E-A) (on
24.5 acres) to the zones listed in the following table:
PARCELS TOTAL ACRES PROPOSED OESIGNATION
1-5 & 9
6&7
8
10
11
18
47.6 acres O-Q/P-M-Q
18.0 acres C-2-Q-Q/P-M-Q
12.2 acres C -T -Q / C - 2 -Q
10.7 acres C -2 -Q
24.5 acres 0-s 2.3 acres C -T-Q
0 (OFFICE)
P-M (PLANNED INDUSTRIAL)
C-2 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) C-T (COMMERCIAL-TOURIST)
0-S (OPEN SPACE)
Q (QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE)
B. FINDINGS FOR CERTIFICATION
1. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan
Specific Plan is to define the distribution and location of land use,
infrastructure, development standards, and implementation measures for 113 acres of Carlsbad Ranch, with the remaining acreage to remain in agriculture
and open space.
a) Purpose and Intent of the Ordinance. The purpose and intent of the
Car; ad LCPA 1-93 Page 30
b) Major Provisions of the Ordinance. The Specific Plan provides development and design standards with respect to the development of the site. The Specific Plan is divided into 17 lots with development standards and design guidelines separated into the following areas: (1) Office, Corporate Headquarters and Research and Development Parcels, (2) Village Center, (3) Paseo Center, (4) Open Space Areas, and (5) Non-Residential Reserve. The focal point of the development is a pedestrian-oriented village center linked to the other development sites along a main ridge road. The village center is proposed to serve a mix of community and business uses and mixed use buildings are encouraged. The 280-room hotel is proposed at the most prominent location at the southern end of the site and is proposed as a major landmark for Carlsbad. center. Regarding open space areas, a public putting course and driving range is proposed on Parcel 11 (24.5 acres); approximately 39 acres of land near the southwestern corner of the site is presently designated as open space and would remain in floriculture as long as feasible.
Office buildings are planned around the periphery of the village
The remainder of the property is designated Non-Residential Reserve and is proposed to be held in agricultural use through the buildout of the Specific
Plan. The standards address development of the lots as well as compatibility
with the adjacent agricultural and/or recreational uses. The amendment also
proposes to adopt recent hesight regulations adopted by the City of Carlsbad
for the CRSP plan area. The Specific Plan also contains goals, objectives, and policies that will assist in guiding and directing development within the Carlsbad Ranch.
c) Adequacy of Ordinance to Implement the Certified LUP. The standard of
review for LCP implementation submittals or amendments is their consistency
with and ability to carry out the provisions of the certified LUP. In the-
case of the subject LCP amendment, the concept underlying the Specific Plan is
to concentrate urban uses within a limited area so that the majority of the
site can continue to be used for agricultural use, which is the theme endorsed
by the certified Mello I1 LCP. However, a number of zoning measures associated with the Specific Plan cannot be found consistent with the policies of the Mello I1 LUP and must be rejected.
As noted in the previous section regarding agricultural preservation, the land use and zoning changes proposed on Parcel 11 to accommodate a driving range on agriculturally designated lands would not implement the mixed use provisions of the certified Mello I1 LCP. Therefore, since the Specific Plan fails to provide for suitable mitigation for the driving range, which exceeds the acreage previously committed to urban uses, the Specific Plan must be
rejected. The Suggested Modification provides that the Carltas property be subject to the agricultural conversion policies of the Mello I1 LUP within the
Coastal Overlay Zone.
As noted in the previous findings regarding the Land Use Plan amendment, the height of the proposed hotel could have adverse visual impacts. To address these impacts the following Suggested Modification to the Specific Plan is
required within its Design Guidelines. It requires that a single
Carlsbad ,,PA 1-93 Page 31
architectural accent feature, not to exceed 65 feet, may be allowed for the
hotel development as long as it is restricted in bulk to no more than one
percent (1%) of the hotel's overall roof surface and that all other
developments within the village center shall not exceed 45 feet in height,
inclusive of architectural embellishments.
Regarding the resource protection measures of the Specific Plan, a Suggested Modification is attached to indicate that the resource protection policies of
the Mello I1 LCP are a supplement to the Specific Plan to assure adequate resource protection absent such policies in the Specific Plan. The modification notes that The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan is supplemental to the existing certified Mello I1 Implementing Ordinances. All of the municipal code provisions and implementing ordinances of the existing Mello I1 Implementation Plan are applicable to the Carltas property.
Therefore, since the Specific Plan fails to provide for suitable with the suggested modifications, the Commission finds that the amendment must be rejected .
PART VII. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD MELLO I1 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT 1-93, IF MODIFIED
The Commission finds that Amendment 1-93 to the Implementation Program of the Mello I1 segment of the Carlsbad LCP may be found adequate to carry out the
provisions of the certified land use plan, as amended, if modified in accordance with the previously stated suggested modifications. with the suggested modifications, the Commission finds that the amendment may
be certified.
Therefore,
PART VIII. CONSISTENCY WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
Section 21080.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exempts local government from the requirement of preparing an environmental impact
report (EIR) in connection with its local coastal program. Instead, the CEQA
responsibilities are assigned to the Coastal Commission and the Commission's
LCP review and approval program has been found by the Resources Agency to be
functionally equivalent to the EIR process. Thus, under CEQA Section 21080.5,
the Commission is relieved of the responsibility to prepare an EIR for each
LCP.
Nevertheless, the Commission is required in an LCP submittal or, as in this
case, an LCP amendment submittal, to find that the LCP, or LCP, as amended,
does conform with CEQA provisions. The land use plan and zoning amendments to
the Mello I1 segment of the City's LCP deal with changes to the land use designation and zoning of two areas within the City's coastal zone. The Mello
I1 amendment raises the potential for adverse impacts to coastal agriculture.
As submitted, 24.5 acres of designated agricultural lands would be converted
to urban uses without adequate mitigation.
modification would add a new policy to the land use plan that would assure
that the conversion of these lands was justified and adequately mitigated.
Suggested Modifications regarding visual resources and resource protection
The proposed suggested
-
Carl id LCPA 1-93 Page 32
have also been added to mitigate any adverse impacts associated with the
Specific Plan. Given these suggested modifications, the Commission finds
that the approval of Mello I1 LCP amendment will not result in any significant
adverse impacts to coastal resources and can be found consistent with Chapter
3 Coastal Act policies. Additionally, existing land use plan policies in the Mello I1 LUP would mitigate the impact of new development on this property below a level of significance.
Finally, the individual project to which the new LCP policies would apply will require a coastal development permit. The specific impacts associated with
this project would be assessed through the environmental review process; and,
its compliance with CEQA would be assured. Therefore, the Commission finds that no significant, unmitigable environmental impacts under the meaning of
CEQA will result from the approval of the proposed amendment and that the proposed changes can be made.
8420A
i
3
4
EXISTWG GPERAL PLAN/LCF#
i
I
CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN
4
EXHIElif NO. 3 1