HomeMy WebLinkAboutLCPA 95-09; Ocean Bluff; Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (5)h
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Gowmor
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SAN DIEGO COAST AREA
31 11 CAMINO DEL RIO NORTH, SUITE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 9210E-1725
(619) 521-8036 June 16, 1995
Anne Hysong Ass1 stant Planner Ci ty of Carl s bad
P1 ann1 ng Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carl s bad, CA 92009-1 576
VIA FACSIMILE
Re:
Dear Ms. Hysong,
"Oceanbluff" PropertyIZone 20 Specific Plan Area
In response to your letter, dated June 5, 1995, directed to me and referencing the above property, I have asked Bill Ponder to review the certified Mello I1
Local Coastal Program (LCP) and we have reached the following conclusions.
First, we confirmed that the Mello I1 LCP does indeed delineate the subject
property with an RLM land use designation and the site is presently zoned
L-C. Second, we would also concur that a zone change for the site from the L-C holding zone to R-1 would be an acceptable implementing zone for the certified RLM land use designation.
However, your correspondence is silent on the need for a local coastal program amendment to authorize the rezoning of the site from L-C to R-1 to allow the residential development. Although I was not directly involved with the Mello
I1 LCP at the time of its original certification, it is my understanding that
the L-C zone was designed as an interim holding zone and applied to sites
either committed to agriculture or awaiting further specific planning. Since
the zone only allowed agriculture, it was therefore accepted as an appropriate implementing zone for the certified Mello I1 land use plan on certain
properties . However, as more speci fi c planning occurred, any subsequent zone
change would necessitate a local coastal program amendment. All rezoninas re1 ated to land use reaulation or administration within the coasta 1 zoneL which occu r after the certification of a local aovernment's local coasta 1 groaram. reauire an LCP amendment in order to be e f fec ti ve .
In summation then, we would disagree with your June 5, 1995 scenario for this property since it did not specify the need for an LCP amendment to authorize the R-1 rezoning. Bill Ponder has mentioned that this situation may have
Anne Hysong June 16, 1995 Page 2
arisen once before on another property (Eagle Canyon) and we did not require
an LCP amendment. While I cannot recall the particulars of that situation, it
was his recollection that the application had received all of its local approvals and been submitted here before the question of whether or not an LCP amendment was required became apparent. In this instance, however, where we are apprised of the situation earlier, our direction must conform with the Commission's regulations and an LCP amendment is necessary to implement the rezoning. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact Bill Ponder or me at the above office.
Sincerely, n
Assistant District Director
DNL:d1(0344A) cc: Gary Wayne Chris DeCerbo