HomeMy WebLinkAboutLCPA 93-02; Residential Density Increases; Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (2)I -- RCU BY: XEROX TELElZOF'IER 7010 ; 7-12-93 2: 08PM ; Ck DEPT OF HCD - 3 6194380894: # I
TEL .m: 9i6-z~- 715 #74Q PQ1 . -. -. JUL-12-'3-r-i3': 17 ID: C" -PT OF HCD
, %STATE a'F CAClFQAHlA - BUSINESS, %HSPDRTATtOH Afrb HbUSlND AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
hsblt'" brand fax transmittEd memo 7671 I #of panee 3 I
I_-
--
April 23, 1991
Jonathan Wittwer Chief Deputy County Counsel Governmental Center
701 Ocean Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060-4068
Dear Mr. Wittwer:
Re: State Density Bonus Law
This letter is in response to your correspondence of March 21, 1991, to bur farmer Director, Maureen Higgins, wherei,;.
you forwarded a copy of an inquiry regarding State density bcn-2~ law made to us in a letter of June 13, 1990. A member of 01-11
legal staff (Mark Lovington) responded to this inquiry via
telephone conversations with members of your staff and the
Coastal. Commission last July. We did not forward a written response at that time as it was bur understanding that a member
of your staff would call us back if further clarification was
desired. We regret the misunderstanding.
You requested bur response C.0 the two questions addressed below relating to the relationship between State density bonus law and the County's General Plan and Local Coastal Plan. These questions are:
(1) Does the new State density bonus law preempt a county
density bonus program adopted as part of the County's general plan, ECP and zoning ordinance such that the county may adopt an implementing ordinance for the new Stale density bonus law without first: amending its general plan and Local 'Coastal Plan?
(2) If the California Coastal Commission does not approve an amendment of the county's LCP to conform to the new State
density bonus law, what is the proper action for the County of Santa Cruz to take with respect to a land use application far a project Pn the Coastal Zone seeking a density bonus and other incentives?
RC'J BYtXEROX TELECOPIER 7010 ; 7-12-93 2:B9PM ;CQ DEPT UF HCD j
TEL NO: 916-3;"'-^ '15 JUL-12-'93 13: 18 1D:r- -'PT OF HC'D +.- *.iL*r..* I. I 1 '$4
Jonathan Wittwer
Page 2
6 194330894 ; # 2
#740 P02 .-
In our opinion, State density bonus law, pursuant to Government Code Sections 65915, et,. seq., preempts any lacally-
adopted plans, ordinances, and programs, including its general
plan and provisions of a certified Local Coastal Plan (LCP). most recent amendments to State density bonus law were effective
January 1, 1990; localities have been responsible for
implementing the new standards since this date, regardless of whether or when tho mandatory implementing ordinance is adopted.
The
Section 30514 of the Public Resources Code addresses
provisions regaI-ding amendment of a certified LCP. Subsection (c) provides for a procedure whereby local governments may submit proposed amendments to the Cornissfon's Executive Director for
determination as llminm or as requiring rapid and expeditious action.Il
In our opinion, this expedited amendment process could be warranted in the case of actions by local governments to conform
with Government Code Section 65915 et. seq. Government Code
Section 65915, ,et. ..s.e.cr. is generally more restrictive now than prior to its amendment effective in 1990, and is more restrictive
than the existing policies of Santa Cmz county's general plan and LCP- Consequently, we don't anticipate that its use or implementation would have impacts relative to the California Coastal Zone Conservation Plan beyond those already considered in adoption of prior general plans or LCPs.
the case of amendments to a LCP, the provisions of Government
Code Section 65915 et. seq. do not appear to pose any conflict with the requirements of Chapter 3 of Division 20 of the Public Resuurces Code against which the LCP was initially reviewed.
There does not appear to be a basis to anticipate the California Coastal Commission would fail to approve an amendment to conform with Government Code Section 65915 et. seq. on its merits.
While the Commission does not make such a determination in
RCU EY:XEROX TELECOPIER 7010 ; 7-12-93 2:10PM ;CQ DEPT OF HCD 3
TEL NO: 316-77- -715 ,: . , m .. .. , JUL-12-’93 13:19 ID:r” 7PT OF HCD
a. * . 1-
’ Jonathan Wittwer
* Page 3
We hope this information addresses 1
6194380894; # 3
#740 P03
r concern on this
issue, Wheaton (327-2642) or Mark Lovingtan (323-7288) of our staff. If-we can be of further assistance, please contact Linda
Sincerely,
. Linda A. Powell -,. .. Deputy Director
cc: Judith Allen Esq., California Coastal Commissbn Diane Guzman, Santa Cruz county Planning Director
Kitt Berman, CSAC Bill Murphy, HPD
Linda Wheaton, KPDM Mark Lovington, LAD Don Crow, HPR Santa Cruz County H. E. file
lmwa4 : BM: LAP santacruz,bd