HomeMy WebLinkAboutLCPA 97-09; Kelly Ranch; Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (14)STATE OF CWFORMA-THE RLsouRcES AQW GRAY DAVIS. Corms
CALI FORNl A COASTAL COMMISSION
SAN DIEGO AREA
3111 CAMINO DEL RK) HORTH, WIlE 200
SAN DIEGO, CA 921ob1725
(6 1-8036
Wed 17a September 23,1999
TO:
OFFICE
SUBJECT:STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON CITY OF CARLSBAD AGUA
HEDIONDA AND MELLO II LCP SEGMENT MAJOR AMENDMENT NO.
2-99D (For Public Hearing and Possible Commission Action at the Meeting of
October 12915,1999)
SYNOPSIS
SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending denial of the proposed amendment as submitted and approval if
modified as suggested in this report. The proposed changes to rescind the Kellw h
Master Plan could result in adverse impacts to coastal resources
attached suggested modifications would bring the amendment into conformance with
Coastal Act and LCP policies.
submitted. The
The LCP amendment as submitted by the City was driven, in part, by the City’s effort in
completing its Habitat Management Plan, and, in part, by the property owners desire to
obtain a coastal development permit for residential build-out of the Mello II Core Area.
However, the LCP submittal only recognizes the role of the HMP for those areas where a
“hardline preserve” has been negotiated. Yet, the entire Kelly Ranch property is affected
by the City’s LCP amendment and the Master Plan is being replaced bv s-
desi llll nation * theroleof e ’ future build-
out of the Kelly Ranch. The City’s LCP amendment fails to establish the appropriate
bolicies within the LCP as the standard of review for entire Kelly Ranch property or
recognize the role of the HMP in habitat protection for the area consistent with the
Coastal Act.
Because the overriding goal of the HMP is habitat protection, the relationship between its
requirements and those of the Coastal Act should be acknowledged and reconciled with
this LCP amendment. This is especially true because the resource protection policies of
the Coastal Act address not only protection of environmentally sensitive habitat areas, but
also landform alteration, scenic preservation and public access, all issues raised by build-
z _._---
cc------.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 2
out of the 433 acre Kelly Ranch. The Commission must approve the LCPA with
suggested modifications designed to establish the appropriate standard of review for
future buildout of the Kelly Ranch property, not simply accommodate the proposed Core
Area development plan which the City approved as a companion permit and has been
appealed by the Commission.
a L remains an area of disagreement between the City and the
area” in the HMP, the City believes it is premature to designate the entire
se the area has not yet been negotiated as “hardline preserve” and is
e (previous staff recommendation September 1999 staff report).
lieves a residential designation omthe e ntkhen ifA&
ensitivehahitat a~ef+ of the plhy s
“-we ’2 As a means to resolve this conflict, staff is
suggesting that an updated biological survey and slope analysis be completed by the City as part
of the revised land use plan mapping required to effectively certify this LCP amendment, and that
any ESHA be designated as Open Space. A low density residential designation would amlv to
,thth-&xLp&ion ofth e Dlanning - area. m-r -lc( ?
--
Another area of conflict relates to the suggested modifications including reference to the
Habitat Management Plan (HMP). Because the document is still dr& and has not been
accepted by the Resource agencies or the City Council, the City staff has indicated they
will not accept suggested modifications that include reference to the HMP. Due to the
nature of this LCP amendment, which is being proposed in large part due to the HMP
effort, <ommission staff does not believe it is possible to review this LCP amendment -7 an-arddrevie wmthe LCP without acknoww an d-
future role -LIS€IA and future buildout of the Kelly Ranch.
..
The City’s action approving the LCP amendment was done in connection with approval
of CDP 97-43 for residential development within the Mello II segment. The City had
hoped the residential project could proceed prior to the on-coming rainy season, so that
Cannon Road could also be completed. The project proponent has indicated the grading
for the Core Area and completion of Cannon Road are inextricably integrated and that a
delay to the issuance of the Core Area permit means an unacceptable delay to completion
of Cannon Road.
The amroDriate resolutions and motions begin on Dage 8. The Suggested Modifications
begin on Dave 1 1. The findings for denial of the Land Use Plan amendments begin on
page 18. The findings - for denial of the Imdementation Plan amendment begin on Dage - 42.
SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT REOUEST
The City of Carlsbad proposes to amend its local coastal program for the Mello II
segment of the City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program (LCP) and the land use plan for
the Agua Hedionda Lagoon segment of the LCP. The area of land affected by this LCP
amendment is the 433 acre Kelly Ranch, the development of which is governed by the
Kelly Ranch Master Plan (which is included with the Agua Hedionda LUP and the Mello
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 3
II LCP). The amendment proposes to rescind the Kelly Ranch Master Plan and replace it
with standard land use designations and zoning. The certified Kelly Ranch Master Plan
is attached as Exhibit 4 and the proposed LCP land use plan is attached as Exhibit 5.
The western portion of Kelly Ranch is addressed by the certified Agua Hedionda LUP
which divides this portion of Kelly Ranch into three Planning Areas, A, B and C. This
portion of Kelly Ranch is characterized by a large contiguous wetland area within the
wetlands boundaries of eastern Agua Hedionda Lagoon as mapped by the State
Department of Fish and Game. It includes the wetlands of Agua Hedionda Lagoon and
the Wetland Preserve, which is 180+ acres to be dedicated to the Department of Fish and
Game. The Wetland Preserve is Planning Area B in both the proposed LCP amendment
and the Kelly Ranch Master Plan. The LCP amendment proposes to change the
boundaries of Planning areas A, B and C to address the changes in the wetland
boundaries that have occurred on the property. Also, the density on Planning Area C
would be decreased from RMH (8-12 dua) to RLM (0-4 dua).
Regarding text changes, Land Use Policy 1.2 of the certified Agua Hedionda Land Use
Plan is proposed to be deleted. The policy describes allowed uses in the lagoon wetlands
and is proposed for deletion because the allowed uses are inconsistent with Policy 3.1
which is far more restrictive and will be retained.
Of the 433 total acres of the Kelly Ranch, approximately 216 acres lie within the Mello 11
LUP. The Mello Kl Kelly Ranch property is bounded by Cannon Road on the north and
west and El Camino Real to the east. Agua Hedionda Lagoon is located to the west and
Macario Canyon to the south. Cannon Road divides the two segments for most of the
boundary (see Exhibit 1). The Mello IT portion of the Kelly Ranch property contains low
lying areas associated with the Wetland Preserve immediately adjacent to the eastern
shore of Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and upland areas comprised of steep hillsides and
canyons that give way to mesa tops where residential development is proposed. The area
can-be characterized as highly scenic based on its topography and the presence of several-
The existing CCP (i:e., Kelly Ranch Master Plan) divides the portion of Kelly Ranch
within the Mello II segment into planning areas that are designated for open space,
commercial, and residential development (these are Planning Areas E-R). The proposed
LCPA modifies most of the planning area names, boundaries and designations from that
identified in the Kelly Ranch Master Plan. Areas that were previously designated for
residential development are proposed for residential development; however, proposed
open space boundaries have changed as a result of implementation of the City of
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP). In addition, the commercial use designation
would be eliminated. The letters assigned to planning areas have been changed in the
amendment and the following discussion refers to planning areas as they are identified in
the LCP amendment.
Regarding open space, the configuration of previously approved open space boundaries
are proposed for modification to accommodate “hardline preserve” areas identified in the
City of Carlsbad Draft Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The proposed upland open
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 4
space system contains steep and non-steep areas containing primarily coastal sage scrub
and southern maritime chaparral that are contiguous and form two corridors on the Kelly
Ranch property that provide enough area and habitat for wildlife movement.
JXODO- SD - ace preserve configuration has been approved by the USF&WS an dthe-
$DF&G,
Planning Areas D, G, and H are shown for multi-family residential development. The
amendmen
4-8 dua t 8-1
Planning Areas from that shown in the master plan. However, the LCP amendment
proposes a change to the boundaries of Planning Areas I and J and a decrease in the
allowable residential units for the Planning Areas from a density of 4-8 dua to 0-4 dua.
ses a redefmition of the Planning Area boundaries and a change from
ua which would be an increase in the allowable residential units for the D
Planning Area F has an existing designation of Travel Recreation (T-R) which’allows for
visitor-serving uses. The developable portion of the site is proposed to be changed to
Open Space which is a reduction in the intensity of use from Travel Related Commercial
and will accommodate the future use of the site for the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Nature
Visitor Center.
Planning Area K contains the Kelly Ranch homestead and is approximately 6.3 acres.
of the “hardline preserve” identified in the HMP; however, the proposed KP land use
portion of the area to be residential RM (4-8 dua). The zoning map shows the entire
planning area (not yet created) to be zoned RD-M-Q.
e City’s submittal indicates approximately 4.3 acres is designated Open Space as part * plan map and zoning map do not reflect these designations. The land use map indicates a
Planning Area L is shown on the proposed LCP land use plan map and zoning with a
residential designation RM (4-8 dua) and it is zoned RD-M-Q. This area is adjacent to
the area which has been designated “hardline preserve” in the HMP and contains steep
hillsides and coastal sage scrub vegetation.
No changes are proposed in Planning Area E. The land use designation is RM and the
zoning R-1. This area is currently under construction with a 144 unit residential
subdivision approved under a separate coastal development permit by the City.
The City is proposing text changes to the Policy 3-5 in the certified Mello 11 LUP
applicable to the Kelly RancMacario Canyon area which delete reference to the Kelly
Ranch Master Plan and the permit approved by the Commission for the master plan CDP
#6-84-617. Finally, the City is proposing to delete Section 21.38.160 from the certified
Mello 11 LCP Implementation Plan. This section applies to the Kelly RancMacario
Canyon area. The entire policy is an attachment to this report.
It appears the proposed amendment results in an overall lower density than the existing
approved Kelly Ranch Master Plan. The result of the change is a reduction in allowable
residential units within the entire 433 acre Kelly Ranch from a maximum of 1400 to 909
dwelling units; however, the Master Plan also stipulates that the maximum density is not
guaranteed by the plan, and that each planning area will be evaluated in relation to
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 5
topography and site sensitivity to justify the proposed density.
The LCP amendment is proposed to facilitate subdivision and buildout of a large
residential development on the Kelly Ranch property, although the Commission is only
reviewing the proposed land use and implementation changes at this time. However, the
Commission must consider impacts of residential buildout as a means to analyze the
effect of the proposed LCP amendment and make revisions, as necessary, to establish the
standard of review consistent with the Coastal Act.
KELLY RANCH MASTER PLAN/SITE HISTORY
The proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) request involves the 433-acre Kelly
Ranch property located in central Carlsbad, which is bisected approximately in half by the
boundary between the Agua Hedionda LCP segment, and the Mello II LCP segment. The Mello
II segment overlays the southeastern half, and in 1997 received effective certification, which
transferred pennit authority to the City of Carlsbad. The Agua Hedionda LCP segment overlaying
the remainder of Kelly Ranch has not yet been certified, and permit authority over this segment
has not yet been transferred. The boundary between the certified Mello II segment and the
uncertified Agua Hedionda segment is largely the alignment of Cannon Road (Area F is within the
Mello 11 segment).
On April 15,1985 the Coastal Commission approved LCPAs for both Agua Hedionda
and Mello II (Major Amendments 1-85), which stipulated that the Kelly Ranch property
be governed by the Kelly Ranch Master Plan land use document. At the same hearing the
Commission granted a coastal development permit (CDP #6-84-617) for Kelly Ranch. .
The developer of CDP #6-84-617 began construction of the project in 1985, but ran into
City delays and an economic recession, and eventually filed for bankruptcy and the
project was never completed. Development activities conducted by the developer
included the rough grading of Cannon Road and portions of the subdivision, and
installation of sediment basins and drainage facilities. The property was sold in 1997 to
Kelly Land Company, which began a new program of planning on the site.
Cannon Road was permitted for construction by the original CDP #6-84-617, and has
recently received an updated (amended) permit (CDP No. 6-97-1 1). This major arterial
roadway is currently under construction. In addition, Kelly Ranch Village “E’ has
recently received a coastal permit from the City of Carlsbad (CDP No. 96-13), on January
21, 1998 for 144 single-family homes. The Village E development is also presently
under construction. In October, 1998, the City issued CDP No. 98-01 for Planning Area
“F’ to accommodate the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Information Center. This area was
designated for visitor serving or neighborhood commercial uses in the oripinal coasu
development pest. The information center has been placed on the site and is awaiting
completion.
;&&A
Most recently, the City of Carlsbad approved the Kelly Ranch Core Area coastal permit
(CDP 97-43). The Core Area is a 150 acre upland property within Kelly Ranch, situated
entirely within the Mello II segment of the Carlsbad LCP. Although Carlsbad’s coastal
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 6
permit was issued conditional upon Coastal Commission approval of an LCP
Amendment, it was appealed by two Coastal Commissioners. The grounds for aDDeal are
the approved develoDment is inconsistent with the existing applicable LCP documents
and Carlsbad did not follow pro procedures & conditionally approvm
@fore Cm ‘ssion action approvinp the necessary LCP~mendmenL
CDP #6-84-617 approved the master subdivision of the 433-acre site to create 20 parcels,
rough grading of 120 acres (1.2 million cubic yards), construction of access roads and
implementation of wetland restoration programs. The site contains a wide variety of
topography and habitat including wetlands, pastureland, field crops, farmlan and steep
addition to the subdivision, a 5,400 foot-long portion of Cannon Road, a major arterial, was
approved, and three access roads in the southeast portion of the site. The Commission
acknowledged the wetlands of Agua Hedionda Lagoon by requiring the dedication of
approximately 180 acres as a preserve. The master plan created Planning Areas to be
developed under policies 1.2,3.1 and 3.2 of the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan and the
resource protection policies of the Mello 11 LCP, including policies 3-5 and Section
21.203 of the Carlsbad LCP (Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone) as the standard
of review for buildup of development (ref. Exhibits of policy language attached to the
staff report). The master plan also provided approximately 77 acres of open space wlthrn
wturallv vegetated steep slope areas (i.e., “dual criteria” mxi) . While the master plan
provided for buildout of a maximum of 1,400 residential units, this figure was an upper
limit of permitted density subject to constraints analysis and the application of resource
protection policies. In its approval, the Commission waived the agricultural preservation
policies in the Mello II LCP due to significant wetland preservation.
slopes. The parcels ranged in size from approximately 2 L=T=in acres to acres.
..
Regarding residential densities, although the master plan permitted up to a maximum of
1,400 residential units and the proposed amendment only proposes 909 units based on net
developable acres as defined by the City of Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance and the
underlying General Plan Land Use designations, it must be noted that the larger number
was based totally on gross acreage and not net developable acres, meaning thxe
number of units would significantly decrease after applying the resource protection
provisions of the LUP to the individual planning areas. Previously, the policy identified
&at densities should be determined based on the Kelly Ranch Master Plan, which is the
LCP standard of review approved by the Commission.
LCP BACKGROUND
The City’s certified LCP contains six geographic segments as follows: Agua Hedionda,
Mello I, Mello II, West Batiquitos LagoodSammis Properties and East Batiquitos
Lagoon/Hunt Properties and Village Redevelopment Area. 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 II segments in 1980 and 1981, respectively.
The Village Redevelopment Area LCP was certified in 1988; the City has been issuing
coastal development permits there since that time. The Commission certified the Agua
Hedionda Land Use Plan in 1982. The West Batiquitos Lagood Sds Properties
segment was certified in 1985. The East Batiquitos LagoodHunt Properties segment was
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 7
certified in 1988. On October 21,1997, the City assumed permit jurisdiction and has
been issuing coastal development permits for all of its segments except Agua Hedionda.
The Agua Hedionda Lagoon LCP segment remains as a deferred certification area until
an implementation plan is certified. The subject amendment request affects both the
Agua Hedionda and Mello II segments of the LCP.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Further information on the submittal may be obtained from Bill Ponder at the San Diego
Area Office of the Coastal Commission at 3 11 1 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200,
San Diego, CA 92108, (619) 521-8036.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 8
PART I. OVERVIEW
A. STANDARD OF REVIEW
The standard of review for land use plans, or their amendments, is found in Section
305 12 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 30512
(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.
The standard of review for implementation plans, or their amendments, is found in
Section 30513 of the Coastal Act. Pursuant to Section 30513, 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. The Commission shall take action by a majority vote of the
Commissioners present.
B. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The City has held both Planning Commission and City Council hearings with regard to
the subject amendment request. Each of these local hearings were duly noticed to the
public. Notice of the subject amendment has been distributed to all known interested
parties.
PART II. LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM SUBMITTAL - RESOLUTIONS
Following a public hearing, staff recommends the Commission adopt the following
resolution and findings. The appropriate motion to introduce the resolution and a staff
recommendation are provided just prior to the resolution.
,
A. RESOLUTION I (Resolution to approve certification of the City of
Carlsbad Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan and Mello I1
LCP Land Use Plan Amendment #2-99D, as submitted)
Q MoTIoN1 . I move that the Commission certify the Agua Hedionda and Mello II Land Use
Plan Amendment ##2-99D, as submitted.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-990
Page 9
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends a
findings. An affirmative vote by a majority of the appointed Commissioners is
needed to pass the motion.
vote and adoption of the following resolution and
Resolution I
The Commission hereby denies the amendment request to the Agua Hedionda and
Mello II Land Use Plans, as submitted, and adoDts the findinm stated below on
sofandconform
'on 30200) of the Californi,
the grounds t will not meet the re-t
with the policies of Chapter 3 (co-th Secb
Coastal Act to -ary to achieve the basic state goals specified
Section 30001.5 of the Coastal Act; the land use plan, as amended, will be
inconsistent with applicable decisions of the Commission that shall guide local
government actions pursuant to Section 30625(c); and certification of the land use
ma Envm ental Quality Asas there would be feasible measures or
feasible alternatives which would substantially lessen significant adverse impacts
on the environment.
plan amendment will not meet the requirements of S&o- (i2aftke
B. RESOLUTION II (Resolution to approve certification of the City of Carlsbad Agua
Hedionda and MelloII Land Use Plan Amendment 2-99D, if
Modified)
I move that the Commission certify the Agua Hedionda and Mello II Land Use
Plan Amendment ##2-990, if modified.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends a yEs vote and adoption of the following resolution and
findings. An affirmative vote by a majority of the appointed Commissioners is
needed to pass the motion.
Resolution 11
The Commission hereby amroves the amendment request to the Agua Hedionda
and Mello II Land Use Plan, as modified, and adopts the findings stated below on
the grounds that the amendment 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 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 will meet the requirements of Section 21080S(d)(2)(i) of the
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-9933
Page 10
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. RESOLUTIONHI
MOTION III
(Resolution to reject certification of Mello II
Implementation Plan Amendment #2-99D, as
submitted)
I move that the Commission- - the City of Carlsbad Mello II Implementation Plan
Amendment #2-99D as submitted.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends a yEs vote and the adoption of the following resolution and findings. An
affirmative vote by a majority of the Commissioners present is needed to pass the motion.
Resolution Ill
The Commission hereby denies certification of the Mello 11 Implementation Plan
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 environment.
D. RESOLUTION IV. (Resolution to approve certification of the City of Carlsbad Mello
11 Implementation Plan Amendment #2-99D, if modified)
I move that the Commission prove the City of Carlsbad Mello 11
Implementation Plan Amendment 2-99D if it is modified in conformance with the
suggestions set forth in this staff report.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends a yEs vote and the adoption of the following resolution and findings. An
affirmative vote by a majority of the Commissioners present is needed to pass the motion.
Resolution IV
The Commission hereby approves certification of the implementation amendment, as
approved with suggested modifications, to the City of Carlsbad’s Local Coastal Program on
the grounds that the amendment does conform with, and is adequate to carry out, the
provisions of the certified land use plan. There are no feasible alternatives or feasible
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 11
mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen any significant adverse
impacts which the approval would have on the environment.
PART JJI. SUGGESTED MODIFICATIONS
A. Aqua Hedionda Land Use Plan Revisions
1. Revised Land Use Plan MaD - The City shall prep& a revised LCP Land Use Plan
map, to replace existing Exhibit C contained in the ce;tified Aqua Hedionda LCP Land
Use Plan, which shall incorporate the following changes:
a. Revisions to the boundaries of Planning Areas A, B, and C as proposed in LCPA m-991) Kelly
Ranch;
e land use designation on Planning Area A shall be revised from the proposed
(8-15 dua) to RM (4-8 dua);
c. The land use designation on Planning Area B shall be Open Space and the map shall
delineate the boundary as that shown on attached Exhibit 11 corresponding to the area to
be dedicated as Wetland Preserve to the Department of Fish and Game.
d. The land use designation on Planning Area C shall be revised from RMH to RLM as
proposed by the City;
2. Revised Exhibit D - Wetlands - The City shall prepare a revised Exhibit D which
shall indicate the boundary of the Wetland Preserve described in (c) above and any
wetlands located on proposed Planning Areas A and C.
3. Permitted Uses in WetlandsBuffers - Section 30233 shall be added to the text of the
certified Aqua Hedionda Land Use Plan after Section 30240 on page 22. Additionally,
Policy 3.1 shall be revised to read as follows:
3.1 Kelly ProDertv. No tfsef develoDment shall occur within the boundaries of the
wWetland Preserve - 9- or -as approved by the State Department of Fish and Game if also
consistent with Section 30233 of the Coastal Act. No develoDment shall occur within
wetlands that are outside of the Wetlands Preserve exceDt to the extent such develoDment
is consistent with Section 30233 of the Coastal Act.
.. xcept to the extent
necessary for resource maintenance andresource management- . ..
a) A buffer strip of at least 100 feet in width shall be maintained in a natural condition
around the perimeter of all wetlands or environmentally sensitive habitat areas to protect
the functions and values of wetlands. The width of the buffer mav be either increased or
decreased as determined on a case by case basis, wkss in consultation with the State
Department of Fish and Game, taking into consideration the type and size of
development. the sensitivity of the wetland resources to detrimental edge effects, natural
features such as topomaDhv. and the functions and values of the wetland. including the
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 12
.. need for udand transitional habitat. J
deqwte. In no case shall a buffer of less than 50 feet in width be Demitted.
b) Fencing shall be required to prevent uncontrolled access of persons or domestic animals into
the wetland or environmentally sensitive areas; and
c) No vehicle, pedestri
environmentally sensi
hall be permitted within either the wetland,
for resource management and educational
d only within the uDDer half of the reauired
4. Landform Alteration - Policy 4.4 shall be revised to read as follows:
4.4 Recognizing the unique environmental features of the lagoon and its environs and the
sensitivity of the area to soil erodibility and sedimentation, development shall be regulated as
follows:
a. Development on existing scbdivided lots having all of their area in slopes of 25% or greater
shall be permitted, but grading shall be limited to minimal site preparation for pole type footings.
Driveway, parking areas shall be limited in size and shall be restricted to an area adjacent to the
local streets. On site vegetation shall not be disturbed beyond the minimal area needed to be
cleared for the construction process, which shall be clearly delineated on approved site plans.
b. Development, grading and landform alteration &of natural steep slope areas (25%) shall be
m&iete& avoided, when feasible. Anv unavoidable disturbance shall be minimized to the extent
possible. Exceptions may include encroachments by roadway and utilities necessary to reach
flatter developable areas, when there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative.
The maximum allowable density shall be calculated on the total lot area, although this may be
modified through setbacks, plan review, or other requirements of this plan and applicable city
regulations.
c. Use of the Planned Development (PD) Ordinance and cluster development shall be required in
areas containing environmentally sensitive resources, extensive steep slope areas and significant
natural landform features. = W3 cric- be e p"p& 5kd3
5. .Public WorkdGated Communities - Policy 5.9 (c) shall be revised to read as follows:
c) Dedication of easements and provisions for funding all public improvements required by this
plan and other city plans and ordinances, shall be a requirement for new development.
Improvements shall include utility extensions, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian access to
designated viewpoints, and any other public improvements necessary to accommodate the
proposed development. Public access trails to and along the lagoon shall be urovided where
feasible in consultation with the CDFG. Public access and parking on interior streets shall be
reauired as a condition of subdivision amroval either through a public street system or Dublic
access easements. No Drivate gated communities shall be permitted between Park Drive or
Cannon Road and Aaua Hedionda Lapoon.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 13
6. Water Ouality - Add Section 5.10 to read:
Water OualityA3est Management Practices (BMPs). Best Management Practices IBMPs)
that are amropriate for residential develoDment, including but not limited to the
following shall be implemented: . Silt tram. catch basins. oil demeasers. and mease tram shall be incomorated into the
design of develoDment that increases imxmneable surfaces. including ~arkine lots
A Dublic education Dromam designed to raise the level of awareness of water auality
issues around the lagoon including such elements as catch basin stenciling and Dubk
awareness signs 5 6 . A street sweeDing and cleaning Dromam ’ A landscape management ~lan that includes herbicidehesticide management . Solid waste management (trash removal)
Such measures shall be incomorated into Droiect design through a water aualitvhrban
runoff control D~UI and monitoring D~OPJ~~ to ensure the discharge from all Drowsed
outlets is consistent with local and regional standards. Such measures shall be reauired
as a condition of develoDment amroval at the subdivision stage.
7. Public Views - Add the following to Policy 8.3 which addresses regulation of development
located between the road and the shoreline:
e) Any residential subdivision on Planning Area A shall be designed to Dreserve anv natural
landform and shall provide a Dublic view corridor at the western DroDertv line of sufficient width
corridor shall be Drovided across the central portion of the site, such that the total width of at least
two view corridors is’ not less than 200 feet. The Dubk view corridor(s) shall be keDt free of all
structures and free of landscaping which at maturity would rise above a reasonable viewline from
vehicles Dassing on the public road. The view corridor shall be secured through deed restriction
or easement as a condition of development amroval.
a to Dreserve the existiny view towards the lagoon in that location. At lea& one additional view
B. Mello II Land Use Plan Revisions
8. Revised Land Use Plan MaD - The City shall prepare a revised LCP Land Use Plan
map, to replace the approved Kelly Ranch Master Plan for the Mello II LCP segment
which shall incorporate the following changes:
a. The map shall include a revised Open Space boundary that shall include the cross-
hatched area delineating “hardline preserve” on Figure 12 dated 8/24/99 in the draft
Habitat Management Plan and attached to this report.
b. The map shall include a revised Open Space boundary for Planning Area L based on
an updated biological survey and slope analysis prepared at the direction of the City and
approved by the Executive Director. The survey and analysis shall identify and map all
contiguous area on Planning Area L comprised of slopes 25% grade or greater or
containing native vegetation, including, but not limited to, coastal sage scrub and
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-91)
Page 14
southern maritime chaparral habitat. All such mapped areas shall be designated Open
Space. Any remaining flatter, disturbed portion of the planning area adjacent to the road
shall be designated 4 c. The Open Space area that forms the north/south open space corridor shall be revised to $3 include the “breaks” in the corridor that correspond to access roads negotiated with the
Resource agenciesiso there is one contiguous north/south open space corridor.
d. Planning Area F shall be shown as Open Space.
t w
9. Revised Zoning Map - The City shall prepare a revised zoning map as a component of
the LCP Implementation Plan which shall incorporate the following changes:
a. The map shall include Open Space zoning over the area designated as Open Space in
the revised LCP Land
b. The residential
L which is
c. The residential zoning of RD-M-Q shall only apply to the area of proposed Planning
Area K that is outside the “hardline preserve” area shown on the Figure 12 dated 8/24/99
in the HMP and attached to this report.
the area of proposed Planning Area
d. Planning Area F shall be zoned Open Space.
10. City Revisions to Policy 3-5 Kelly PointMacario Canyon Area - The following
sections of Policy 3-5 (a) of the certified Mello 11 LUP shall be revised to read as follows
(bold indicates Coastal Commission changes to City proposed changes):
(a)(6) 9 Residential densities in the 433 acre Kellv Ranch
-?the underlvinrr GeRepsl
-shall be permitted and based on fi
Plan LCP Land Use designation. The actual densitv Permitted on the site will be determined
through apdication of the resource protection provisions of the certified LCP and my be
less than the densitv allowed bv the land use dan.
.. .
(a)(7) Approximately 4 =acres located adjacent to and west of Cannon
€l3MW# are designated Road, a
Open Space with ~ an intemretive center for
Aaua Hedionda designated as a allowable use.
..
11. Reference to Master Plan and CDP - The following additional changes shall be made
to Policy 3-5 (b) to strike reference to the Kelly Ranch Master Plan and CDP 6-84-617 as
an LCP standard:
Amiculture @@ ..
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 15
Agricultural preservation policies for the 433-acre Kelly Ranch ..
-have been deleted by Lcp amendment of 2-85.
12. Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas - Rename Policy 3-5 (c) to
Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas and add subsections (1) d, e and f, as follows:
d) The NCCP Drocess is desimed to sustain and enhance a viable udand habitat
connection between sensitive lands within Carlsbad and to recomize habitat suumrting
the California ynatcatcher as environmentallv sensitive habitat area (ESHA). In the Kelly
Ranch/Macario Canyon area. such a connection is between the Macario Canyon
watershed and Ama Hedionda Creek. Lands designated as “hardline Dreserve” in the
Habitat Management Plan (HMP) within the coastal zone constitute ESHA and shall be
designated and zoned as ODen SDace in the LCP.
e) Projects that are located in “standards areas” identified in the Habitat Management
Plan (HMP) shall conform to both the certified LCP and those standards developed by the
Resource agencies through the HMP Drocess. -w *&
13. Water Ouality - Add the following as new subsection Policy 3-5 (c) (6):
Water OualityBest Management Practices EMF%). Best Management Practices (BMPs)
that are aqxouriate for residential develoument. including but not limited to the
followinP shall be imdemented:
Silt tram. catch basins. oil degreasers, and grease traps shall be incoruorated into the
design of development that increases imuermeable surfaces. including: mrking lots
A public education program designed to rake the level of awareness of water auality
issues around the lagoon including such elements as catch basin stenciling andpublic
awareness signs
A street sweeping and cleaning program
A landscaue management ~lan that includes herbicidehesticide management
Solid waste management (trash removal)
Such measures shall be incorporated into Droiect design through a water qualitvhrban
runoff control ~lan and monitoring urogram to ensure the discharge from all Drouosed
outlets is consistent with local and regional standards. Such measures shall be reauired
as a condition of develoument aDproval at the subdivision stage.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 16
14. Brush Management - Add the following as new subsection Policy 3-5 (e):
All develor>men&hall be setback a minimum of 30-feet from desimated oDen mace areasc
to accommodate Zone 1 brush management and 1andscaDing. including trees for
screening purposes. All develoDment shall be designed to assure there will be no clearcut
of environmentally sensitive habitat areas to establish brush management Zone 1.
rrcc\h*
15. Vista Points - Provide for the following as new subsection Policy 3-5 (g) and
develop a Scenic Resource map indicating the designated vista points:
The Citv shall reauire public vista points on Planning Area L and at another location on
the ridgeline within Planning Areas I or J and accessible from the communitv trails
svstem. SUDDOI~ parking shall be provided. Dedication of easements shall be a condition
of subdivision amroval.
16. Public Trails - Provide for the following as part of the Mello II land use plan and develop a
aDproved trail svstem:
all reauire a Dublic trails svstem that links a series of community trails between Aaua
goon. the intemretive center. the street svstem. oDen SDW areas (as Dermitted by
USFWS and DFG) and the amroved public vista mints. Trails easements shall be dedicated as a
condition of subdivision apmoval. Trail imDrovements shall be installed concurrent with
residential develoDment.
17. Public StreetdGated Communities - Add the following as new subsection Policy 3-5 (h):
A Dublic street system shall provide access to residential develoDment located in Plannine Areas I,
J. K and L of Kelly Ranch with on-street parking. as feasible, to ~u~p01-t the Dublic trail svstem
and vista Dbints. Private gated communities shall not be ~ermitted within those Dlanning areas.
C. Mello I1 Implementation Plan Revisions
18. Coastal Resource Protection - Section 21.203 (Coastal Resource Protection Overlay
Zone) shall apply to the Kelly Ranch property and shall be amended to provide the
following as new provisions.
19. Preservation of SteeD Slows and Vegetation - Add the following as new subsections
21.203.040 A. 1.d-g:
d. Lands designated “hardline Dreserve” in the Habitat Management Plan (HMP) within
the coastal zone shall be designated and zoned as @en Space. Pro-iects that are located
in the “standards areas” identified in the HMP shall conform to the certified LCP and the
standards develoDed by the Resource agencies through the NCCP process.
e. Access roads shall be a permitted use within designated and zoned Open Space areas
subiect to an amroved coastal development Dennit, only when necessary to access flatter
areas and when designed to be the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 17
s- f. All development shall be setback a minimum of 30-feet from designated ODen mace
areasto accommodate Zone 1 brush management and 1andscaDing. including trees for
oses. All develoDment shall be designed to assure there will be no clearcut
ally sensitive habitat areas to establish brush management Zone 1.
g. Due to severe site constraints, innovative siting and design criteria
develoDment to dWe paved surface area. Dwelling units shall be-clustered in the 4
relatively flat Dortions of the site.
47 ' shall be incorwrated into aDDroved residential
s?
20. Grading Season - Revise Section 21.203.040 (B) 4) e) as follows:
All construction activities shall be planned so that gdmg will occw in units that can be
easily completed with the summer construction season. All grading operations shall be
limited from April 1 to October 1 of each year. All areas disturbed by grading shall be
planted within 60 days of initial disturbance and prior to October 1 with temporary or
permanent (in the case of finished slopes) erosion control methods. The October 1
gradin? season deadline mav be extended to November 15" with the agroval of the City
Engineer subiect to implementation bv October lst of erosion control measures designed
to Drohibit discharge of sediments off-site during and after the madine operation is
completed. Extensions bevond November 15* mav be allowed in are& of very low risk
of imDact to sensitive coastal resources and may be aDDroVed either as uart of the original
coastal develoDment Dermit or as a formal amendment to an existing coastal develoDment . permit.
Exception. If any of the resDonsible Resource Agencies Drohibit mading ODerations
during the summer grading period in order to Drotect sensitive environmental resources,
then mading activities mav be allowed during a Dortion of the winter grading by a coastal
development Dennit or Dermit amendment.
21. Water Oualitv - Add the following as new Sections 21.203.040 (B) 4) j):
Water OualitvBest Management Practices (BMPs). Best Management Practices (BMPs)
that are aDDroDriate for residential develoDment. including but not limited to the
following shall be imdemented: . . Silt tram, catch basins. oil degreasers, and mease traps shall be incomorated into the
design of develoDment that increases immrmeable surfaces, including Darking lots
A public education Drogram designed to raise the level of awareness of water auality
issues around the lagoon including such elements as catch basin stenciling and Dublic
awareness signs
A 1andscaDe management plan that includes herbicide/Desticide management
Solid waste management (trash removal)
logram . .
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 18
Such measures shall be incorporated into Droiect desim through a water aualitv/urban
runoff control ~lan and monitoring Dram to ensure the discharge from all DroDosed
outlets is consistent with local and reprional standards. Such measures shall be reauired
as a condition of develoument apDroval at the subdivision stage.
22. Park Purposes - Add the following as new Section 21.203.040 (F):
Park purposes shall be a permitted use compatible with within Macario Canyon provided
that any park construction is subject to the erosion and urban runoff control provisions of
Section 2 1.203.
23. Scenic Preservation - Remove Section 21.40.135 Coastal Zone Restrictions from the
Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone and move to new Section 21.203.040 (F) (Scenic
Preservation) and 21.205.080 (Scenic Preservation) to the municipal code to read as
follows:
Within the coastal zone. existirq Dubk Views and Danorama shall be maintained. Through the
individualized review Drocess, sites considered for development shall be conditioned so as to not
obstruct or otherwise damage the visual beautv of the coastal zone. In addition to the above,
height limitations and see-through construction techniques should be emdoved. Shoreline
development shall be built in clusters to leave omn areas around them to Dermit d uent
views of the shoreline. Vista points shall be incomrated as a i art of&&iects. The uniaue
characteristics of older communities such as the Carlsbad Village Dribm6kdor shall be
preserved through design reauirements which are in accordance with the flavor of the
neighborhood. DeveloDment along ridgelines and/or visible from- access routes
and/or designated Scenic Highways or Dublic recreational omweur Xeas shall be screened from
public views through the use of trees as a landscam scretdand/or!detbacks from the ridgkline and
*
open space areas.
PART JY. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD
AS SUBMITTED
AGUA HEDIONDA AND MELLO 11 LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT 2-99D,
A. AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION
1. Aqua Hedionda Land Use Plan
The City of Carlsbad proposes to amend its local coastal program for the Mello II
segment of the City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program (LCP) and the land use plan for
the Agua Hedionda Lagoon segment of the LCP. The area of land affected by this LCP
amendment is the 433 acre Kelly Ranch, the development of which is governed by the
Kelly Ranch Master Plan (which is included with the Agua Hedionda LUP and the Mello
II LCP). The amendment proposes to rescind the Kelly Ranch Master Plan and replace it
with standard land use designations and zoning. The western portion of Kelly Ranch is
within the Agua Hedionda plan area. The LUP divides the portion of Kelly Ranch in the
plan area into three Planning Areas, A, B and C. This portion of Kelly Ranch is
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 19
characterized by a large contiguous wetland area within the wetlands boundaries of
eastern Agua Hedionda Lagoon as mapped by the State Department of Fish and Game. It
includes the wetlands of Agua Hedionda Lagoon and the Wetland Preserve, which is
180+ acres to be dedicated to the Department of Fish and Game and shown as Planning
Area B in the proposed local coastal program amendment and the Kelly Ranch Master
Plan. Existing Park Drive runs generally east to west adjacent to upland and marsh areas
of the lagoon just north of the three planning areas of the master plan (Planning Areas A,
B and C) within the Agua Hedionda Lagoon segment. Along the western boundary of the
site, in Planning Area A is several previously fded wetland areas. These areas, known as
the “fingers” extend outward from Planning Area A. The LCP amendment proposes to
change planning area boundaries and include its land area within Planning Area B, and
revise density on Planning Area C as follows:
Planning Area A & B
The existing designation for Planning Area A is RMH and Planning Area B is Open
Space. Both will remain the same. The amendment proposes a boundary adjustment,
between development Planning Area A and the Agua Hedionda Lagoon ( Planning Area
B), which separates the developable portion of the Planning Area A from the lagoon and
ultimately reduces the size of Planning Area A. The net effect is a reduction in the
allowable residential units.
Planning Area C
The existing designation for Planning Area C is RMH and will be changed to RLM. In
addition, the amendment proposes an adjustment between Planning Area C and Planning
Area B which will reduce the size of Planning Area C. The adjustment is intended to
include constrained lands into Planning Area B which is Open Space. The City indicates
an RLM designation on this property is appropriate since it is surrounded by single
family residential development and there is only one point of access. Residential
Medium High has a density range of 8-15 dwelling units per acre (ddac) and Residential
Low-Medium has a density range of 04 ddac. The net effect is a reduction in the
allowable residential units which is compatible with the neighborhood and also equates to
less Average Daily Traffic (ADT) to the street which accesses the site.
Land Use Policy 1.2 of the certified Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan is proposed to be
deleted. The policy describes allowed uses in the lagoon wetlands and is proposed for
deletion because the allowed uses are inconsistent with Policy 3.1 which is far more
restrictive. The policies are as follows:
Policv 1.2
That portion of the “Kelly Property” containing wetland areas shall be designated
as open space consistent with the maintenance of the natural resources of the
wetlands and floodplain area. Permitted uses shall include maintenance and
extension of utility transmission and distribution systems, agriculture, outdoor
plant nurseries, fish hatcheries, driving ranges, archery ranges, hiking and
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 20
equestrian trails, apiaries, or other non-intensive recreational, scientific or
educational uses compatible with resource values. No permanent structures or
impermeable surfacing or filling shall be permitted within the 100-year
floodplain. Any development of the property shall be subject to regulation by
conditional use permit and shall be subject to the approval of the State
Department of Fish and Game.
Policv 3.1-Kelly Property
No uses shall occur within the boundaries of the wetland area except those
activities necessary for maintenance, resource management, farming and grazing,
or as approved by the State Department of Fish and Game
A buffer zone of at least 100-feet in width shall be maintained in a natural
condition around the perimeter of all wetlands or environmentally sensitive
habitat areas, unless the State Department of Fish and Game determines that a
lesser setback or physical barrier is adequate.
Fencing shall be required to prevent uncontrolled access of persons or
domestic animals into the wetland or environmentally sensitive areas; and
No vehicle, pedestrian, or equestrian access shall be permitted within either
the wetland, environmentally sensitive, or buffer areas, except for resource
management and educational purposes.
states that no uses shall occur within the boundaries of the wetland area except
those- activities necessary for maintenance, resource management, farming and grazing,
or as approved by the State Department of Fish and Game. By comparison, Land Use
Policy 1.2 allows for outdoor plant nurseries, fish hatcheries, driving ranges, archery
ranges, and agricultural production. The City found the proposed permitted uses within
wetlands are more in line with those accepted in the Mello II LCP and Chapter 3 policies
of the Coastal Act.
2. Mello 11 Land Use Plan
Although the Kelly Ranch Master Plan serves as both the Land Use Plan and
Implementation Plan, it is part of the certified Land Use Plan of the Mello II LCP. Thus,
amendments to the Master Plan are amendments to the LUP and are reviewed for
consistency with Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act.
The Mello II LCP land use map is proposed for modification to eliminate the existing
Kelly Ranch Master Plan land use regulatory document, and replace it with the General
Plan Map and zoning standards applicable to a new land use scheme (see exhibits 4 and
5). In addition, LCP text changes are proposed to eliminate references to the Kelly
Ranch Master Plan, and to instead refer to the new proposed zoning requirements, as
follows:
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 21
Existhg Land US- -
Kelly Ranch Master
Plan
Residential Medium (RM)
Travel-Recreation
Commercial (T-R)
Open Space (OS)
Proposed Land USW -
Residential Low-Medium
Residential Medium 0
Open Space (OS)
Proposed zoning -
coastal zoning Map
R-1-Q
R-1-Q and R-3-Q I os
Of the 433 total acres of the Kelly Ranch, approximately 216 acres lie within the Mello 11
LUP area with the remaining in the Agua Hedionda Lagoon segment. The Mello 11
property is bounded by Cannon Road and El Camino Real to the north and east, Agua
Hedionda Lagoon to the west and Macho Canyon to the south. Cannon Road divides
the two segments for most of the boundary (see exhibit 1). The road joins El Camino
Real south of the Agua Hedianda Creek bridge. Portions of the roadway lie within the
100-year floodplain of Agua Hedionda Creek.
The existing LCP (Le., Kelly Ranch Master Plan) divides the portion of Kelly Ranch
within the Mello IIsegment intc planning areas that are designated for open space,
commercial, and residential development (these are Planning Areas E-R). The proposed
LCPA modifies most of the planning area names, boundaries and designations from that
identified in the Kelly Ranch Master Plan. Areas that were previously designated for
residential development are proposed for residential development; however, proposed
open space boundaries have changed as a result of implementation of the Habitat
Management Plan (HMP). In addition, the commercial use designation would be
eliminated. The letters assigned to planning areas have been changed in the amendment
and the following discussion refers to planning areas as they are identified in the LCP
amendment.
Planning Areas D. G. and H
The existing designation for these Planning Areas is RM. The amendment proposes a re-
definition of the Planning Area boundaries'and a change to RMH. The net effect of the
change would be an increase in the allowable residential units for the Planning Areas.
Residential Medium High has a density range of 8-15 ddac as compared to a density
range of 4-8 du/ac for Residential Medium.
The City indicates the increase in density is appropriate in that, the site is near major
sources of employment at the Carlsbad Research Center, Carlsbad mrt Center,
Carlsbad Ranch and Legoland California. The site is situated on a Circulation Element
Roadway with direct access to Interstate 5. The site has hillside conditions with a great
difference in site elevations. The Planning Areas are located at the base of the hillside
adjacent to the major roadways which accommodates access and reduces grading
requirements. The lagoon and hillsides also geographically separate the site from
established residential neighborhoods. The increase in density for these Planning Areas
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-990
Page 22
is also balanced against the reduction in densities of Planning Areas I and J located at the
upper reaches of the site.
Plannine Areas I and J
The existing designation for these Planning Areas is RM. The amendment proposes a re-
definition of the Planning Area boundaries and a change to RLM. The net effect of the,
change would be a decrease in the allowable residential units for the Planning Areas.
Residential Low Medium has a density range of 04 ddac as compared to a density range
of 4-8 ddac for Residential Medium. The City concluded that the reduction in density is
appropriate in that these Planning Areas are more difficult to access because of the
hillside conditions.
Plannine Area F
The existing designation for this Planning Area is Travel Recreation (T-R) which allows
for visitor-serving uses. The developable portion of the site is proposed to be changed to
Open Space which is a reduction in the intensity of use from Travel Related Commercial
and will accommodate the future use of the site for the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Nature
Visitor Center. The City found this proposed change to be appropriate in that the reduced
use intensity will reduce ADT, the potential future use will provide community facilities
which will benefit the new residential development and the community at large, and will
potentially have lesser offsite impacts to the adjacent Agua Hedionda Lagoon wetlands in
the form of less night lighting and less potential of unsupervised entrance and disturbance
to the wetlands.
Planning Area K
This planning area contains the Kelly Ranch homestead and ‘is approximately 6.3 acres.
The City’s submittal indicates approximately 4.3 acres is designated Open Space as part
of the “hardline preserve”; however, the proposed LCP land use plan map and zoning
map do not reflect these designations. The land use map indicates a portion of the area to -& be residential RM (4-8 dua). The zoning map shows the entire Planning Area to be zoned 4
RD-M-Q.
Planning Area L
The proposed LCP land use plan map and zoning show the entire Planning Area L
designated RM (4-8 dua) and zoned RD-M-Q. It is approximately 5.5 acres and adjacent
to “hardline preserve” open space.
PlanninP Area E
No changes are proposed in Planning Area E. The land use designation is RM and the
zoning R- 1. This area is currently under construction with a 144 unit residential
subdivision approved under a separate coastal development permit by the City.
CARLSBAD LmA 2-99D
Page 23
ODen SDace
The configuration of previously approved open space boundaries are proposed for
modification to accommodate “hardline preserve” areas identified in the City of Carlsbad
Draft Habitat Management Plan (HMP). Briefly, the upland open space system that was
approved in the Kelly Ranch Master Plan conformed to the “dual criteria” slopes that
exist on the site, These dual criteria areas are naturally vegetated slopes (i.e., containing
coastal sage scrub or chaparral) that are at least 25% ,grade. The Carlsbad LCP protects
such slopes from development encroachment as dual. criteria slopes provide habitat value,
stabilize the soils, and have value as a scenic resource.
.
Since the certification of the Master Plan, the federal government has listed the
gnatcatcher as a “threatened” species under the federal Endangered Species Act and the
gnatcatcher’s habitat, coastal sage scrub, has in many instances been designated by the
Commission as environmentally sensitive habitat area subject to Section 30240 of the
Coastal Act. In addition, the State has enacted the Natural Community Conservation
Planning Act. The City of Carlsbad, the CDF&G and the USF&WS have worked
together to implement the NCCP planning process by establishing habitat corridors used
by multiple species including the gnatcatcher that will be preserved. The process has
resulted in a draft Habitat Management Plan (”) that identifies habitat corridors in the
Kelly Ranch area. These corridors are identified in the HMP as “hardline preserve” areas
and, under the HMP, these areas cannot be developed.
The LCP amendment revises the plans for development of Kelly Ranch to reflect the
results of the HMP process. This includes revising the boundaries of the designated open
space to include all areas identified as “hardline preserve” in the HMP. The proposed
upland open space system contains steep and non-steep areas containing primarily coastal
sage scrub and southern maritime chaparral that are more contiguous than the dual
criteria areas and which form two corridors on the Kelly Ranch property that provide
enough area and habitat for wildlife movement. The proposed open space preserve
configuration has been approved by the USF&WS and the CDF&G.
Text Changes
The City is proposing text changes to the policy in the certified Mello II LUP applicable
to the Kelly Ranch/Macario Canyon area as follows. The entirety of Policy 3-5 is an
attachment to this report. Policy 3-5(a)(6) is proposed to be revised as follows:
;Residential densities in the 433-acre Kellv
Ranch- ’ * shall be permitted based on-
84- the underlying General Plan Land Use designation.
Policy 3-5(a)(7) is proposed to be revised as follows:
Approximately €ew 2.8 acres located adjacent to Cannon Road,
‘ 6-8447 CDP 98-47 are
tfse an intemretive
and as described in
designated for 4
center for Agua Hedionda.
..
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 24
Finally, the City is proposing to delete Section 21.38.160 from the certified Mello II LCP
Implementation Plan. This section applies to the Kelly Ranch/Macario Canyon area.
The entire policy is an attachment to this report.
The LCP amendment is proposed to facilitate subdivision and buildout of a large
residential development on the Kelly Ranch property, although the Commission is only
reviewing the proposed land use and implementation changes at this time. The
Commission must consider impacts of residential buildout as a means to analyze the
effect of the proposed LCP amendment and make revisions, as necessary, to establish the
standard of review consistent with the Coastal Act.
B. CONFORMANCE WITH SECTION 30001.5 OF THE COASTAL ACT
The Commission finds, pursuan't to Section 30512.2b of the Coastal Act, that portions of
the Land Use Plan as set forth in the DE& ' e resolu&ns. is in conformance with& e
policies and requirements of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act to the extent necessary to
achieve the basic state goals specified in Section 30001.5 of the Coastal Act which states:
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 economic needs of the people of the state.
d) Maximize public access to and along the coast and maximize public
recreational opportunities in the coastal zone consistent with sound resource
conservation. principles and constitutionally protected rights of 3 private property owners.
(d) Assure priority for coastal-dependent and coastal-related development over
other development 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.
The Commission therefore finds, for the specific reasons detailed below, that the land use
plan does not conform to Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act or the goals of the state for the
coastal zone.
C. CHAPTER 3 CONSISTENCY
1. Environmentallv Sensitive Habitat Areas
CARLSBAD LCF’A 2-99D
Page 25
a. Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan.
Section 30233 states in part:
(a) The diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal waters, wetlands, estuaries,
and lakes shall be permitted in accordance with other applicable provisions of this
division, where there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative,
and where feasible mitigation measures have been provided to minimize adverse
environmental effects . . .
Section 30240 states:
(a) Environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be protected against any significant ’
disruption of habitat values, and only uses dependent on those resources shall be
allowed within those areas.
(b) Development in areas adjacent to environmentally sensitive habitat areas and parks
and recreation areas shall.be sited and designed to prevent impacts which would
significantly degrade those areas and shall be compatible with the continuance of those
habitat and recreation areas.
Agua Hedionda Lagoon LUP-Policy 1.2 is proposed to be deleted and be replaced
by existing Policy 3.1.
Planning Area B contains 18Oe acres of open space and is known as the Agua Hedionda
Lagoon wetlands preserve system. In CDP #6-84-617 the Commission required an
irrevocable offer to dedicate in fee title these low lying wetland areas which was recorded
in 1985. However, the offer has not yet been accepted. It is expected that the preserve
system will be dedicated to the Wildlife Conservation Board as a Wetland Preserve
sometime this year. A copy of the draft offer has been given to Commission staff. The
Wetland Preserve is also part of the City’s Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The HMP
is a segment of the state’s larger NCCP program that is being developed in response to
the listing of the California Gnatcatcher as an endangered species. The focus of the
NCCP and HMP is to preserve coastal sage scrub and related upland habitats. The draft HMP identifies the wetland preserve as a “hardline preserve” area that cannot be
developed.
While it appears that policy 3.1 is the environmentally preferred policy, when compared to Policy
1.2, with respect to wetlands protection, it still would allow farming and grazing as permitted uses
within wetlands. These are not identified as permitted uses within Section 30233 ofthe Coastal
Act. To be consistent with Section 30233, these uses must be deleted from the LUP policy.
Regarding permitted uses within the Wetland Preserve, Policy 3.1 must be revised to indicate no
uses shall occur within the boundaries of the wetland preserve, Planning Area B, except those
activities necessary for maintenance and resource management. Additionally, the certified LUP
lacks specific policy language addressing wetland areas outside the Wetland Preserve. Thus,
Section 30233 must be added to the text of the certified Aqua Hedionda Land Use Plan to make
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 26
clear that uses permitted in all remaining wetlands shall be limited to those identified in Section
30233 of the Coastal Act.
Additionally, with regards to water quality, the LUP contains no provisions that require new
development to use Best Management Practices (BMPs) during construction and operation of
residential projects to ensure water quality will be preserved through a water quality/urban runoff
control plan. Section 3023 1 of the Coastal Act requires that the biological productivity and
quality of coastal waters, wetlands, and estuaries be maintained and restored through, aniong other
means, controlling run-off. Because Kelly Ranch is adjacent to Agua Hedionda Lagoon and its
surrounding wetlands, residential development in Kelly Ranch has the potential to adversely affect
the water quality of the lagoon and surrounding wetlands. Since the certification of the Kelly
Ranch Master Plan, additional BMPs that are helpful in reducing the amount of pollutants in run-
off have been identified. Implementation of such BMPs in residential development in Kelly
Ranch would reduce the adverse impacts of such development on the lagoon and surrounding
wetlands. Since the LCP amendment fails to incorporate certain BMPs, it is inconsistent with
Section 3023 land must be denied.
.
Agua Hedionda Lagoon LUP policy 3.1 also provides for a 100-foot buffer between
wetland resources and new development unless reduced by the Department of Fish and
Game. A 50-foot buffer zone was approved by the Commission in.CDP #6-84-617 in
Planning Area A based on a large topographical difference in elevation between the
developable portion of the planning area and wetland resources. Since that time the
wetlands have expanded and the Commission must consider whether the proposed
density is appropriate based on the environmental resources present on the site at this
time. The Commission finds that the proposed LUP amendment is inconsistent with
Chapter 3 policies because it fails to update the policies relating to the wetland resources
and permitted density on Planning Area A to reflect current wetland and ESHA
conditions. The previous wetland delineation for Planning Area A was done many years
ago and the wetlands in this area have expanded. It may no longer be appropriate to
accept a reduced 50-foot buffer within this planning area as Policy 3.1 calls for a 100-foot
buffer unless reduced by CDFG.
To be found consistent with Chapter 3 policies, the Commission finds a buffer strip of at
least 100 feet in width shall be maintained in a natural condition around the perimeter of
all wetlands or environmentally sensitive habitat areas, unless the State Department of
Fish and Game determines that a lesser setback or physical barrier is adequate. However,
in no case shall a buffer of less than 50 feet in width be permitted. Fencing shall be
required to prevent uncontrolled access of persons or domestic animals into the wetland
or environmentally sensitive areas. In addition, in order to protect ESHA and wetlands,
the LUP should prohibit vehicles, pedestrians, and horses from entering the wetlands,
environmentally sensitive, and buffer areas, except for resource management and
educational purposes. Further, to the extent access improvements are needed to facilitate
access for resource management and education purposes, such improvements should be
permitted only within the upper half of the required buffer. No development shall occur
within the boundaries of the Wetland Preserve except to the extent necessary for resource
maintenance and resource management or as approved by the State Department of Fish
and Game if also consistent with Section 30233 of the Coastal Act. No development
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 27
shall occur within wetlands that are outside of the Wetlands Preserve except to the extent
such development is consistent with Section 30233 of the Coastal Act.
Further, the Commission has found on many occasions that high densities associated with
residential develoDment DroDosals near wetland areas has resulted in adverse imp acts to
such resources. These resources are directly adversely impacted by intrusion from
humans and pets and indirectly adversely impacted by the introduction of erosion and _--
Fouutlon (sedimentation, insecticides, pesticides etc.) into wetlands.
The wetlands surrounding Agua Hedionda Lagoon are an environmentally sensitive habitat area
under Section 30240 of the Coastal Act. Therefore, residential development on Planning Area A,
which is immediately adjacent to these wetlands must be consistent with both Section 30231 of
the Coastal Act, and Section 30240(b), which requires that development in areas adjacent to
ESHA must be sited and designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade the
ESHA. For the above reasons, the Commission finds the land use designation of RMH (8-15
dua) is too high a density for this area. Residential development at this density couldresult in
adverse impacts to the nearby wetlands and lagoon through human and pet intrusion, erosion, and
polluted run-off. Because the Land Use Plan amendment fails to reduce the density of Planning
Area A to reflect the need to protect the expanded ESHA wetlands, the LUP amendment is
inconsistent with Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. The density on proposed Planning Area A
should be revised from the
shall prepare a revised
the Wetland Preserve
Also, the revised
A and C.
Additionally, the Commission is concerned about the protection of upland resources (Le.,
naturally vegetated steep slopes). Existing LUP policy 4.4 restricts development, grading and
landform alteration on steep slope areas (25%) grade and greater. However, the policy does not
state that development of steep hillsides should be avoided, if feasible. Any unavoidable
disturbance shall be minimized to the extent possible. Since the LUP amendment fails to reflect
this need, it is inconsistent with Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. Thus, for all of the above
reasons, the Commission finds the proposed LUP amendment inconsistent with Chapter 3 policies
of the Coastal Act.
RM (4-8 dua).. Additionally, the City
which shall indicate the boundary of
dedication purposes (ref. Ex. 11).
on proposed Planning Areas
a15Ti)J4
b. Mello II Land Use Plan
Section 30240 of the Coastal Act requires that new development be sited and designed to
not have an adverse impact on coastal resources. The Commission finds that the proposed
amendment is inconsistent with Chapter 3 policies regarding preservation of
environmentally sensitive habitat areas for the following reasons.
The Kelly Ranch Master Plan was approved with an extensive upland open space system,
which contains two environmentally sensitive habitats--coastal sage scrub (CSS) and
southern maritime chaparral (SMC) on most of the steeply sloping hillsides. The
proposed LCP amendment would accommodate a pattern and density of residential
development on the Kelly Ranch with a revised open space system from that approved in
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 28
the Kelly Ranch Master Plan. The revised open space plan would pennit 13.7 acres of
“dual criteria” slopes to be impacted by grading. “Dual criteria” slopes are designated in
the certified Mello II LCP as naturally-vegetated steep slopes at least 25% grade. There
is a total 61.6 acres of dual criteria slopes onsite within the 150 acres encompassing the
Core Area where the majority of residential development is proposed. While much of the
proposed impact is limited to slopes isolated fiom the main landforms of the site or
slopes which have been disturbed by previous grading or agricultural activities, several
canyons are proposed to be filled which were found worthy of preservation in the
Commission’s previous approval of the Kelly Ranch Master Plan.
Although the previously approved Kelly Ranch Master Plan was approved with an
extensive open space system, it is not in conformance with the NCCP requirements which
have been developed since certification of the master plan. The proposed amendment
will allow development in conformance with the City’s Habitat Management Plan (HMP), and has been approved by the USF&WS and CDF&G. However, while the City
approved the open space system based on its consistency with the HMP, as noted above,
it is not consistent with all the resource protection provisions of the certified LCP. Policy
3-5 requires that for those slopes mapped as possessing endangered plant/auimal species
and/or coastal sage scrub and chaparral plant communities, slopes of 25% grade and over
shall be preserved in their natural state, unless the application of this policy would
preclude any reasonable use of the property, in which case an encroachment not to
exceed 10% of the steep slope area over 25% grade may be permitted. Uses of slopes
over 25% may be made to provide access to flatter areas if there is no less
environmentally damaging alternative available. The Commission notes that the City
only protected the environmentally sensitive habitat areas that were negotiated with the
resource agencies to find consistency with the HMP. The CiWs aD- ’ t address
protection of dual criteria sloges. notablv a -be r of small canyons on the hillside areas,
recognizes the ha bitat v&e of
roval fails to
that are proposed to be fdled. The existhgmsta ~lan
these areas and calls for their pr-ithP.rlty s app
address landform alteration or v bal imDact associated with mading ofsteen lu ‘hides.
. *, ..
As noted, Policy 3-5 allows use of slopes over 25% grade to provide access to flatter
areas if there is no less environmentally damaging alternative available. The existing
master plan allows approximately 4 acres of impact to dual criteria slopes for the road
system. The proposed amendment proposes approximately 6 acres of impact for the road
system as engineered. The road, known ~L”,-LL~ e
of special concern as it proposes significantly more impact into dual criteria areas than
design approved in the xwdaqh, The City states it is the least
environmentally damaging alignment based on the fact that it provides the sole access to
the Kirgis parcel to the south which is also part of the HMP as a “Standards” area. (A Stan‘dards area is an area that is proposed for inclusion into the open space preserve of the
HMP but it still being negotiated). Presently road HH stubs out beyond the southern
property line of the core area onto the Kirgis parcel. The alignment has been accepted by
the resource agencies as consistent with the HMP. They found that although it bisects the
large open space area that runs northlsouth on the property, each portion of open space is
capable of sustaining a viable wildlife corridor for plants and animals. The sponsor of the
LCP amendment also provides the following:
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 29
Considering that Village I and more directly Village “J” constitute islands of
developable lands surrounded largely by dual criteria lands, and City of Carlsbad
safety policies require two separate accesses for each, the locations chosen were’
picked specifically for their low level of environmental impact.
The Village I accesses are located in virtually the same location as in CDP 6-84-
617, within areas only marginally considered dual criteria Note that the Village
“J” access however has been removed from its previous location within a valley
of mature SMC vegetation (including Del Mar manzinita), to its proposed location
up a more gradual slope, characterized by disturbed CSS and CSS. Further, its fdl
slopes are proposed for CSS revegetation, minimizing its impact. The northern
Village “J” crossing is situated at the same location in the master plan project, and
this location avoids dual criteria lands almost entirely. In addition, the USF&WS,
CDFBtG and the City of Carlsbad have all approved these crossings specifically
because they are located within the environmentally preferred location for such
accesses.
However, while recognizing the approval of the above agencies, the Commission finds’
that their main charge is habitat protection, a value which can apply to hillside areas
regardless of slope. The Commission, however, has considered steep, naturally
vegetated hillsides worth of protection for their scenic value and to protect natural
landforms and thereby minimize erosion and downstream sedimentation, in addition to
habitat value.
7 1-
Regarding open space preservation, the existing Kelly Ranch Master Plan designates
approximately 53.8 acres of dual criteria slopes out of a total 71 acres in open space. The
proposed amendment designates approximately 72 acres, including steep and non-steep
area and vegetated and unvegetated areas in open space as part of the HMP preserve, with
47.9 acres of that being dual criteria slopes. Two areas of previously approved open
space are proposed for development. One is a long, narrow canyon area in Planning
Areas J and 0 of the Kelly Ranch Master Plan. Although it is separated from the main
north/south trending open space corridor that occurs to the east, it remains a significant
open space corridor. The other area is a large amount of open space in Planning Areas H
and K of the master plan which again is isolated from the open space system running
north/south and easdwest on the subject site. However, this area also has habitat value
and would be protected under the dual criteria habitat provisions of Policy 3-5 and the
Coastal Resource Protection Overlay zone.
It is difficult to determine what density would be permitted within each individual
planning area of the master plan if all dual criteria areas were not developed. Section
21.53.230 of the municipal code requires that area comprising “undevelopable lands (Le.,
beaches, wetlands, slopes over 40% grade, etc.)” not be used when calculating allowable
density on property proposed for development; however, 50% of dual criteria areas can
be used when calculating density. Section 21.53.120(e) provides that no more than 50%
of the portion of a site containing 25% to 40% slopes may be used for calculating
allowable residential density. The LUP policies also require that any permitted density
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 30
should be clustered on the non-sensitive, flatter, portions of the site and natural landforms
should not be significantly altered. Therefore, if the maximum permitted density cannot
be accommodated on a parcel consistent with the resource protection policies of the LUP,
‘ the resodce protection policies shall prevail.
Regarding one of the individual planning areas
planning areas east of Cannon Road),
Medium on the proposed LUP map
This planning area is shown as a
Area (all the
Plan which means that the Resource agencies have indicated that a portion of the area
should be considered for incorporation into the “hardline preserve”. The Commission
finds that this area contains a significant amount of naturally-vegetated steep slopes or
coastal sage scrub or southern maritime chaparral vegetation. These slopes and
vegetation provide valuable habitat for the gnatcatcher as well as other sensitive species.
In addition, these slopes are contiguous with the already existing “hardline preserve”
area. Therefore, the Commission finds that the naturally-vegetated steep slopes in this
area are environmentally sensiuve habitat area (ESHA) as is any coastal sage scrub or
southern maritime chaparral vegetation.
It appears there is a portion of this planning area that is flat and disturbed and includes an
existing unimproved road. It is not possible to determine at this time the exact acreage of
environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA) located within the proposed planning area
limits without an updated biological survey and slope analysis of current conditions. The
City indicates that because the planning area has not yet been designated “hardline
preserve”, it is premature to designate the entire planning area as Open Space. The
planning area will be designated a “standards area” in the HMP and draft “standards”
read as follows:
There are two properties within this zone that are designated as standards areas: the
Kirgis property and the Callahan property. Both properties are required to avoid
impacts to any identified Narrow Endemic plant populations. Impacts to coastal
sage scrub and southern maritime chaparral habitats shall also be avoided, with
impacts limited to smaller fragments, edges, lower quality areas, and areas devoid
of sensitive species. The Kirgis property shall be allowed a maximum of 25% of
the parcel for development purposes. The Callaghan property shall be allowed a
maximum of 50% of the parcel for development purposes. Both properties shall
place their development on the least environmentally sensitive portion of the
property.
The Commission finds, as proposed in the LCPA, a residential land use designation and
zoning for this entire planning area is inconsistent with Section 30240 of the Coastal Act
and the certified LCP policies addressing encroachment on steep slopes with native
vegetation. If the site were a legal parcel, the current LCP provisions would prohibit
development of slopes 25% grade and over which contain coastal sage scrub or southern
maritime chaparral. If all or nearly all of the parcel is such slopes, a maximum 20% of
the site could be graded. Therefore, it appears the draft “standards” may permit a
development footprint that would exceed that permitted by the current LCP policies.
CARLSBAD LdpA 2-99D
Page 31
Additionally, the Mello II land use plan, as proposed by the City, would allow from 4-8
dua on approximately 3.8 net acres where a parcel has not yet been created. This would
allow potentially 22 to 30 residential units on that residentially designated site.
Therefore, as submitted, the proposed Mello 11 land use plan is inconsistent with Chapter
3 policies of the Coastal Act. The Commission finds this is the appropriate time to
determine the resource constraints in the planning area, designate existing ESHA as Open
Space, and apply the residential land use designation and zoning only to that portion of
the planning area able to accommodate development consistent with the Coastal Act and
current LCP policies.
Regarding brush management, the existing master plan text contains fm suppression guidelines
that require a fuel modification zone be established around new development so that vegetation
clearance will be kept to the minimum necessary for fire safety. Aside from the Master Plan, the -4 Mello II LUP does not contain brush management provisions. Thus, the proposed amendment
would eliminate the only brush m- licies applicable to Kelly Ranch. Furthermore,
since the certification of the Master Plan, the Commission has updated the fire suppression
provisions within the City of Carlsbad LCP segment for the Aviara development on the north
shore of Batiquitos Lagoon. The Commission needed to update these policies because they were
developed before coastal sage scrub was found to be ESHA and before the fire departments began
requiring larger areas of vegetacon clearance to protect structures. Because Kelly Ranch contains
significant areas of coastal sage scrub, the policies applicable to development of Kelly Ranch
must include updated brush management policies that reflect the ESHA status of coastal sage
scrub as well as the need to reduce vegetation clearance for visual and erosion control purposes.
Therefore, because this current fire suppression language is not provided within the existing text
of the Mello II LCP, the Commission cannot find that the amendment is consistent with Section
30240 and other Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act and must be denied. Inclusion of the
updated fire suppression language in the form of a suggested modification will be necessary to
find the amendment consistent with Section 30240 of the Act.
CAW
Additionally, with regards to water quality, the LUP contains no provisions that require new
h development to use Best Management Practices during construction and operation of residential *s @projects to ensure water quality will be preserved through a water qualityhrban runoff control
plan. As described in the findings for denial of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon LUP amendment,
such policies are necessary for the LUP to be consistent with Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal
Act. Without such provisions, the amendment must be denied. Based on the above, the
Commission finds that the proposed amendment cannot be found consistent with Chapter 3
policies of the Coastal Act and must be denied.
2. VISUAL RESOURCES
a. Aqua Hedionda Land Use Plan
Section 3025 1 of the Coastal Act provides in part:
Section 30251
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 32
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.
In recognition of the unique scenic and natural resource values of Agua Hedionda
Lagoon, the City adopted detailed provisions in the Agua Hedionda LUP aimed at
preserving and protecting the visual quality of the lagoon. The project site is highly
visible from traffic on 1-5 and El Camino Real. The Carlsbad LCP recognizes that the
lagoon and surroundings present a scenic open space break from the intense urban
development characteristic of the southern California coastal zone. Excellent views and
vistas are afforded the public from such vantage points along Carlsbad Blvd., 1-5, Adams
Street, the subject property and Park Drive. Cannon Road is designated as a Scenic
Highway. As a result, the City included the following policies in the LUP which are
relevant to the subject property:
Policv 8.3 Development lmated adjacent to scenic roadways, or located between
the road and the shoreline, shall be regulated as follows:
b) Where no significant elevation difference exists between the shoreline and the
first parallel public road, permitted development in the intervening area shall
provide a view corridor, of a width equivalent to at least one-third of the road
frontage of the parcel, which shall be kept free of all structures and free of
landscaping which at maturity would rise above a reasonable viewline from
vehicles passing on the public road.
c) On all property adjoining the shoreline, permitted development shall be
designed to “step down” in height, to avoid casting shadows on shoreline areas
and to produce a perceived transition from open space areas to developed areas . . .
d) Any development proposed to be located on or near a significant landform
(e.g., Agua Hedionda Point) shall be designed so as to minimize disturbance of
natural landforms, and shall be developed in a manner that assures its
compatibility and harmony with the natural landform through use of such
architectural techniques as terraced or pole foundations and variations of roof
lines to complement the topography
The proposed amendment proposes large areas of open space including the wetlands and
associated upland habitat areas of the site. In response to Section 3025 1 of the Coastal
Act, one of the issues addressed in the Land Use Plan was the preservation of public
views from Park Drive. This street is a designated scenic corridor, which runs along the
north shore of the lagoon. The policies of the LUP require that development of the lots,
which lie between Park Drive and Agua Hedionda Lagoon, be designed so as to preserve
the views from Park Drive.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 33
The policies call for the view preservation to occur through either: (a) the siting of structures at
elevations below that of Adams Street adjacent to the property or (b) the preservation of one-third
of the width of the parcel as a "view corridor". The preferred method for preserving such views
lies in the siting of all (portions of) structures on a site at an elevation, which is below that of the
elevation of the adjacent scenic roadway. This would allow passersby to see over the structure(s)
to the lagoon and surrounding areas. The Commission is concerned about the views from and to
Planning Area "A". This parcel currently has a
grading of a nearby residential subdivision
was deposited during the
the site to the lagoon and
wetlands from Park Drive. .=& mhd
The Commission finds that to be consistent with the Coastal Ac
development on Planning Area A should be designed to preserv
the existing view corridor at the western property line, and provide an additional view corridor in
the central portion of the site. However, due to the fact that the public's view is currently blocked
across the majority of the site, and that an unobstructed view of the lagoon exists immediately east
of the planning area, the requirement for a view corridor encompassing a distance of 113 of the
road frontage (400 +/- ft.) is qot required. The Commission finds sufficient view preservation will
occur with a requirement that at least a 200-feet width of corridor be provided at least two
locations across the site, one being at the western property line. The public view corridor should
be kept free of all structures and free of landscaping which at maturity would rise above a
reasonable viewline from vehicls passing on the public road. The view corridor should be
secured through deed restriction or easement as a condition of development approval.
licy, any preserve
The Commission is also concerned about landform alteration in this visually significant area.
Existing policy 4.4 of the Agua Hedionda LUP recognizes the unique environmental features of
the lagoon and its environs and the sensitivity of the area to soil erodibility and sedimentation, and
requires that new development limit grading and vegetation removal to minimal site preparation to
preserve natural landforms. The policy requires development, grading and landform alteration of
steep slope areas (25% grade) shall be restricted although exceptions may include encroachments
by roadway and utilities necessary to reach developable area. Finally, it provides that use of the
Planned Development (PD) Ordinance and cluster development shall be required in areas
containing environmentally sensitive resources, extensive steep slope areas and significant natural
landform features. The Commission notes this policy was one of the first policies regarding
landform alteration to be certified in San Diego County almost 18 years ago. This language has
evolved over the years to include other ways of preventing excessive landform alteration while
providing reasonable development expectations to permittees. Thus, the Commission finds it is
necessary to update the Agua Hedionda LUP with the current language and, as such, must deny
the current amendment request, as submitted.
b. Mello I1 Land Use Plan
As noted, the Mello 11 portion of the L€P amendment request contains low lying areas
associated with the Wetland Preserve immediately adjacent to the eastern shore of Agua
Hedionda Lagoon, and upland areas comprised of steep hillsides and canyons that give
way to mesa tops where the single family planning areas, Planning areas I and J, are
proposed. This area is yet to be developed and is probably the most rural and open space
lands that are remaining within the City's coastal zone. Distant views from 1-5 and the
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 34
ocean exist from many parts of the property. Also to the north is the floodplain of Agua
Hedionda Creek and its associated riparian corridor and floodplain. Much of the
property has been farmed, although it generally is too steep for cultivated crops. As
noted, Cannon Road runs generally parallel to the creek between El Camino Real and the
westerly limits of the Kelly property. The area can be characterized as highly scenic
based on its topography and the presence of several habitat types.
Although the LCP amendment allows for substantial residential development in an
uncommonly scenic area, it fails to provide for any public vista points. This is a major
shortcoming considering the size and topography of the Kelly Ranch and the viewshed
across Agua Hedionda lagoon to the ocean. Few, if any, other areas in Carlsbad afford
such expansive views in all directions. The residential development allowed under the
LCP amendment will result in grading of natural landforms, development of a highly
scenic area, and the addition of residential development that will increase the use of
coastal resources in the area. Allowing this development without mitigating the adverse
impacts on visual and recreational resources is inconsistent with Sections 30250,3025 1,
and 30252 of the Coastal Act. The Commission finds that the impacts of residential
development that will be allowed under the LCP can be mitigated if the LCP provides
for public vista points in the area.
One particularly appropriate place for such a viewpoint is the aforementioned Planning
Area L. Planning Area L is a steep hillside that climbs to a flat area along the spine of a
ridge at approximate elevation 250 feet. The views from this spine across Agua
Hedionda Lagoon are spectacular and unique from this vantage point. The Commission
finds the environmentally sensitive portions of this planning area should be designated in
the LCP as open space for its habitat value as part of an important wildlife corridor, and it
will likely be designated “hardline preserve” in the HMP. However, a public vista point
on the non-sensitive portion of this planning area could be achieved without adversely
affecting its role as part of the wildlife preserve. Another prime location for spectacular
panoramic views would be within Planning Areas I or J and accessible from the
community trails system. Because the proposed LCP amendment fails to provide such
an important public amenity, it must be denied.
Additionally, the Commission finds that landscape screening of development located
along ridgelines is necessary to preserve scenic views from Scenic Highways and public
open space and resource areas. This language should be added to the policy addressing
scenic preservation within the coastal zone and revisions should be made to the location
of that policy to assure it is applicable to all coastal zone development and future buildout
of Kelly Ranch.
3. Public Access
a. Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan
Section 30212 of the Coastal Act provides that adequate public access must be provided by new
development. Planning Areas A through C are located between Agua Hedionda Lagoon and the
first coastal roadway.. The lagoon is somewhat unique in its status as a multiple-use wetland area.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 35
The lagoon provides an extensive range of water-related passive and active recreational uses, as
well as providing sensitive habitat for plants and animals. In preparing the LUP, the Commission
and the City were aware of the need to balance competing uses. Because of this, while public
access is desired, the LUP provides for controlled access, limiting the access to pedestrian use
only. In this case, the LUP identifies (Policy 7.1) that a bike route is proposed along Park Drive
between the western property line and the intersection of Park Drive and Kelly Drive to the
northeast. The LUP also identifies that pedestrian access should be provided along the north shore
of the lagoon; however, this public trail is not proposed within the lands which are affected by this
amendment request. It should be noted that the master plan originally approved an interpretive
center to be sited within Planning Area A; however, this facility has been relocated to Planning
Area “F’ which is located within the Mello 11 segment.
Policy 5.9 (c) of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon LUP provides that dedication of easements and
provisions for funding all public improvements required by this plan and other city plans and
ordinances, shall be a requirement for new development. Improvements shall include utility
extensions, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian access to designated viewpoints, and any other
public improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed development. A public access
concern relates to residential development being proposed in Planning Areas “A” and “C”. If
proposed as gated communities, both vehicular and pedestrian access would be prohibited through
the interior of the sites, and the interior street system would not meet public street standards with
respect to width, design or setbacks.
In prior Commission actions, the Commission has found that gated communities are inconsistent
with the public access policies of the Coastal Act. The Commission has found that the
construction of gated communities in the coastal zone, particularly adjacent to recreational or
scenic resources, either directly impacts public access, or has a “chilling” effect on the public’s
perceived ability to access coastal resources. The subject sites are immedi
180+ acre Wetland Preserve on the north shore. Moreover, there is curren
access to the lagoon across the property. Fencing and gating the entire deve area would alter
existing access. The Commission finds it appropriate to require that the site not be gated. Also,
public streets or public access easements on private streets must be proposed to be consistent with
the public access provisions of the Coastal Act.
w
The Commission further finds it is not necessary that the interior streets be upgraded to meet
public street standards in all cases. In some instances, a private street system could provide on-
street parking spaces and access easements could assure access is available to the public through
the street system. If design constraints prohibit such a scenario, then public streets would be
required. With regional population growth continuing, the need for adequate support facilities
becomes ever more critical. Thus, the Commission finds the maximum possible number of public
parking spaces must be provided to find the amendment consistent with the access provisions of
the Coastal Act because of its proximity to coastal waters and a significant coastal public
recreational area. Public streets with on-street parking, as feasible, and no-private gates shall be
permitted for any residential development located between Park Drive or Cannon Road and Aqua
Hedionda Lagoon. Additionally, public access to the lagoon should be provided through a public
trail system along the planning area, if acceptable to the Department of Fish and Game. Without
such provisions, the Commission finds the amendment must be rejected as not being consistent
with Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 36
b. Mello II Land Use Plan
Section 30212 of the Coastal Act provides that adequate public access must be provided
by new development. The existing Kelly Ranch Master Plan in the Mello 11 segment
contains no specific requirement for public pedestrian access into or through the subject
area other than a trail shall be provided along Cannon Road (sidewalk). The City of
Carlsbad Open Space Element requires public dedication of a trail system both along the
southern frontage of Cannon Road, and along an interior road through Village J, located
at the top of the ridgeline. The City found the accommodation of these two trails would
be a public benefit, and will be in greater compliance with Coastal Act policies regarding
public access. Additionally, the proposed Village F site will accommodate an
interpretive center, intended to provide information to the public regarding the adjacent
lagoon wetlands, and incorporate a trail system within the planning area. However, the
Commission finds that while the above access provisions are laudable, they do a
enough to assure adequate p-e and mrtant section of the coaatsl
zone._
Section 30212 of the Coastal Act provides that adequate public access must be provided
by new development. In its approval of the Aviara Master Plan, on nearby Batiquitos
Lagoon, the Commission found a trail system was necessary to find maspx plan
development consistent with the public access and recreation requirements of the Coastal
Act. In that case, the trail system links a series of upland community trails to the North
Shore Trail which follows the northern shore of Batiquitos Lagoon. The North Shore
Trail is an important local and regional visitor destination point for hikers, bicyclists and
bird-watchers. The trail system provides the upland linkages to the lagoon and addresses
the recreational demand of future residents and impacts on existing public recreational
facilities. The Commission has found both the upland community trails and the North
Shore Trail are necessary public access and recreation components of the Aviara Master
Plan.
There are parallels between the Aviara Master Plan arid the subject Kelly Ranch property.
Both are large planned developments that are situated near lagoons and enjoy significant
amounts of open space because of the resources that inhabit the areas. While the Kelly
Ranch is not immediately accessible to the shoreline of Agua Hedionda Lagoon, it is
immediately upland of the 180+ acre Wetland Preserve and the floodplain of Agua
Hedionda Creek, thereby affording destination points where the coastal visitor can learn
about and enjoy the resources of the lagoon and its environs. As noted, Planning Area F
is the home of an interpretive center whose objective is to provide a meeting place for the
public to learn about and enjoy the resources of the lagoon and its environs. The currea
msea.nexknsis.i~As a res&& e
' 30212of
amendment does not pro
Commission findstheJ.UP - cann ot be found consist-
the Coastal Act and must be denied.
4. Intensity of Develor>ment/Densitv Modifications
a. Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 37
Section 30250 of the Coastal Act requires that new development be concentrated in areas
able to support it without adversely affecting coastal resources and states, in part:
Section 30250.
(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 significant adverse effects, either individually or
cumulatively, on coastal resources.. . .
The proposed amendment involves modification of land uses and applicable zoning for
Kelly Ranch. The City of Carlsbad found this redistribution of land uses necessary to
comply with land use regulations adopted since the most recent 1985 LCP modifications
for the affected property ( Le., the City's Growth Management Program, which requires
stricter limits on densities and developable properties, and the Draft Habitat Management
Program, which is an outgrowth of the "threatened" listing of the California gnatcatcher).
The proposed amendment results in a net reduction in allowable dwelling units from the
existing LCP allowable Kelly Ranch Master Plan capacity of 1400 units to 909 units.
Regarding the Agua Hedionda Lagoon planning areas, the LCP amendment proposes to
retain the existing land use designations that were approved in the Kelly Ranch Master
Plan, with the exception of Planning Area C. In Planning Area C, a downzoning is
pyosed in recognition of wetland resources that have expanded onto the planning area
since the time of approval of the- . The Commission finds this downzoning to
be appropriate given the present environmental conditions of the site. Planning Area A is-
proposed at the same density as approved in the master plan. In this case, similar to
Planning Area C, the Commission finds that a downzoninp is a-. gi ven ,
the expansion of wetlands that has occurred within the ~1- a. However, since the
downzoning is not proposed, the amendment must be denied.
*
p-~r
b. Mello 11 Land Use Plan
The proposed increase in residential intensity within Planning Areas D, G and H is
acceptable, subject to application of the resource protection policies which address
preservation of dual criteria slope areas. The site is near major sources of employment at
the Carlsbad Research Center, Carlsbad Airport Center, Carlsbad Ranch industrial and
commercial centers, and the LegoLand California amusement park. The site is also
situated on an arterial roadway, with direct access to 1-5. Planning Areas D, G and H are
characterized by some of the more flat terrain on Kelly Ranch, at the base of the upland
hillsides. Areas D, G and H are also physically separated from established residential
neighborhoods by the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. However, the area encompassed by these
planning ares contains -of dual criteri
it is separated from the main northhouth trending open space corridor that occurs to the
east, it remains a significant open space corridor. The other area is a large amount of
s. As noted, one is a long,
narrow canyon area in Planning Areas F and 0 of the Kelly Ranch Master Plan. Although
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 38
open space in Planning Areas H and K of the master plan which again is isolated from
the open space system running north/south and east/west on the subject site. However,
this area also has habitat value and would be protected under the dual criteria habitat
provisions of Policy 3-5 and the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay zone.
The proposed decrease in residential intensity in Planning Areas I and J is appropriate in
that these areas are more difficult to access because of rougher terrain and hillside
conditions, and their high visibility from surrounding areas. Finally, the proposed
Planning Area F land use change is appropriate in that the reduced use intensity (from T-
R uses) will allow greater preservation of natural open space, will substantially reduce
ADT, and have less offsite impacts to the adjacent Agua Hedionda Lagoon wetlands in
the form of less night lighting and less potential of unsupervised entrance and disturbance
to the wetlands.
on Planning Area L is inappropriate given its prominent
integral role in the HMP. As noted, because the hardline
for the property, its inclusion in the hardline
trending habitat corridor will exist. The
ommission is concerned that failure to address the environmentally sensitive nature of
Planning Area L at this time is inconsistent with Section 30240 of the Coastal Act and
could affect the implementation of the HMP with corresponding adverse impacts to
adjacent resource areas. Thus, the Commission finds that the proposed amendment is
inconsistent with Chapter 3 policies regarding land use densities and must be denied.
V. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGUA
HEDIONDA LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT #2-99D - IF' MODIFIED
The standard of review for LUP submittals or amendments is their consistency with and ability to
carry out the provisions of Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. As noted, the City found the
proposed LUP redesignations are required to bring the Kelly Ranch regulations in line with
modem requirements for habitat preservation, growth management, and other land use regulatory
programs adopted since 1985. However, as noted above, the Commission found that the
amendment must be denied for several reasons. These reasons are tied to changes that have
occurred since the Commission approved the master plan and reflect current standards of
environmental review.
'
As noted, the emergence of the City's Habitat Management Plan as an important program in
resource protection has resulted in a greater emphasis being placed on protection of environmental
resources, both wetland and upland. The Agua Hedionda LUP was approved in 1982 with no
provisions specifying what permitted uses are within wetlands. This is a major oversight which
the Commission is addressing in this action by requiring through a suggested modification that
any projects that are proposed in sensitive areas be consistent with Section 30233.
In this case, there has been significant expansion of wetlands over the years on Planning Areas A - C since the extent of such areas was initially surveyed. A 50-foot buffer was previously required
on Planning Area A that may no longer be appropriate based on current environmental conditions
on the site. The Commission is requiring in this action that an updated wetland delineation and
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 39
wetland buffer determination be done to determine the appropriate locations for development and
resource preservation. The suggested language will assure consultation with the California
Department of Fish and Game to determine the impacts of a proposed density on the wetland
habitat as it exists today. Also, considering there will be a need for a buffer to provide important
functions, including absorption of polluted runoff and upland transitional value.
Additionally, because the proposed density of Planning Area A would create
relatively intense development in a wetland area, a revised LUP map mus
identifies that reduced density will occur on Planning Area (from the d ro o d RMH [8-15 dual to
RM [4-8 dual). As noted, the Commission has found on many occasions that high densities
associated with residential development proposals near wetland areas has resulted in adverse
impacts to such resources. These resources are directly impacted by intrusion from humans and
pets and indirectly impacted by the introduction of erosion and pollution (sedimentation,
insecticides, pesticides etc.) into these environmentally sensitive areas. As revised, the
Commission can find the proposed LCP amendment consistent with Section 30250 of the Coastal
Act.
g&\*fl- expectation of
submitted which
In addition, with respect to identifying an appropriate boundary between new development and
coastal resources, the Commission finds a revised LCP Land Use Plan map, to replace existing
Exhibit C contained in the certified Aqua Hedionda LCP Land Use Plan, must be developed to
include revisions to the boundaries of proposed Planning Areas A, B, and C as proposed in LCPA
#2-99D Kelly Ranch. Additionally, the land use designation on proposed Planning Area B shall
be Open Space. The City must prepare a revised Exhibit D as part of the LUP which delineates
the boundary of the Wetland Preserve consistent with the offer of dedication to the Department of
Fish and Game. Also, the exhibit must show the wetlands existing on Planning Areas A and C.
As noted, the Agua Hedionda LUP recognizes the scenic nature of the area and provides that
public views be maintained between the first coastal road and the lagoon. In this case, the three
planning areas within the Agua Hedionda segment that were part of the Kelly Ranch Master Plan
are all located between the first coastal road (Park Drive) and the lagoon and as such the LUP
requires that view corridors be maintained. Of special concern is Planning Area A as it is
proposed with the highest residential density and already has an artificial landfomthat currently
blocks views over a significant portion of the planning area. To ensure that existing views will be
preserved and any natural landforms are maintained, the Commission is approving a suggested
modification that calls for reservation of a view corridor at the western property line (from Park
Drive) and an additional view corridor in the central portion of the site. Because currently the
public view is blocked across the majority of the site and unobstructed views of
immediately east of the planning area, the Commission finds a total width of at
least two view corridors is sufficient to meet the requirements of the Coastal Act.
Regarding landform alteration and impacts to steep slopes, Policy 4.4 of the LUP shall be revised
to provide that development, grading and landform alteration of natural-steep slope areas (25%)
grade shall be avoided, when feasible. Currently, the policy restricts development of such slopes.
The revised language is more in line with accepted standards of steep slope preservation. It
requires that any unavoidable disturbance shall be minimized to the extent possible and that
exceptions may include encroachments by roadways and utilities necessary to reach flatter
developable areas, when there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 40
Regarding public access concerns, based on the location of the planning areas in the Agua
Hedionda segment between the first coastal road and the sea, Policy 5.9 (c) shall be revised to
read that no private gates shall be permitted for any residential development located between Park
Drive or Cannon Road and Aqua Hedionda Lagoon. Additionally, public streets with on-street
parking shall be provided within the developable portions of the planning areas, as feasible, so
that a parking reservoir will be available for coastal visitors for future use as recreational and
access demands increase in the area. If adequate public access can be provided through public
access easements across private streets, that is also a viable alternative. Finally, although access
improvements are encouraged, Policy 3.1 shall be amended to identify that access improvements
shall be permitted only within the upper half of any required buffer between development and
wetland resources. In this way access will be provided without adversely affecting the resource
values of the identified wetland, and in consultation with the California Department of Fish and
Game.
Regarding water quality concerns, the Commission finds that all applicable BMPs,
including but not limited to curb inlet stenciling, solid waste management (trash removal)
silt and grease traps and street sweeping, shall be incorporated into the project design
through a water quality/urban runoff control plan and monitoring program as a condition
of development approval to ensure the discharge from any proposed outlet is consistent
with local and regional standards. The Commission finds that as modified, the proposed
amendment can be found consistent with Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act.
VI. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD MELLO 11
LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT #2-99 - IF MODIFIED
The standard of review for LUP submittals or amendments is their consistency with and
ability to carry out the provisions of Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. As noted, the
City found the proposed LUP redesignations are required to bring the Kelly Ranch
regulations in line with modem requirements for habitat preservation, growth
management, and other land use regulatory programs adopted since 1985.
However, the Commission found above that the amendment must be denied for several
reasons. Regarding areas where the proposed revisions do not adequately protect
environmentally’ sensitive habitat, the Commission finds that Policy 3-5 of the Mello II
LUP must be updated to recognize the importance of such habitat within the Mello II
plan area. The policy shall be amended to state that the City’s Habitat Management Plan
(HMP) is designed to sustain and enhance a viable upland habitat connection between
sensitive lands within Carlsbad and to recognize the habitat supporting the California
gnatcatcher as environmentally sensitive habitat (ESHA). In the Kelly Ranch/Macario
Canyon area, such a connection is between the Macario Canyon watershed and Agua
Hedionda Creek. Those portions of the “hardline preserve” that exist on lands within the
coastal zone should be designated and zoned as open space in the LCP. Projects that are
located in the “standards areas” should conform to both the certified LCP and those
standards developed by the Resource agencies as part of the HMP process. The
Commission finds such language must to added to the LCP to serve as the standard of
review for future buildout of Kelly Ranch.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-991)
Page 4 1
Such issues are raised by the proposed designation of the entirety of Planning Area L for
residential development. This is one of the individual planning areas that make up the
Core Area (all the planning areas east of Cannon Road), P1
Residential Medium on the proposed LUP map and is desi
zoning map. This planning area is shown as a “standards area” in the City’s draft Habitat
Management Plan which means that the Resource agencies have indicated that a portion
eGrziZ-CS)
of the area should be considered for incorporation into the “hardline preserve”. The
Commission finds that this area contains a significant amount of naturally-vegetated
steep slopes or coastal sage scrub or southern maritime chaparral vegetation. These 6~“ - rp
slopes and vegetation provide valuable habitat for the gnatcatcher as well as other
sensitive species. In addition, these slopes are contiguous with the already existing
“hardline preserve” area. Therefore, the Commission finds that the naturally-vegetated
steep slopes in this area are environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA) as is any
coastal sage scrub or southern maritime chaparral vegetation.
The Commission finds it is appropriate to determine the extent of this planning area that
constitutes ESHA at this time, prior to designating the entire planning area for residential
use in the LCP. Therefore, the attached suggested modification requires an updated
biological survey and slope analysis to be prepared at the direction of the City and
approved by the Executive Director. The survey and analysis shall identify all
contiguous area on Planning Area L comprised of slopes of 25% grade or greater or
containing native vegetation, including but not limited to, coastal sage scrub and southern
maritime chaparral habitat. In this way the ESHA will be identified and that area
designated as Open Space. The remaining flat and disturbed portion of the site will be
designated low density residential. Any future development on that portion of the
planning area must adhere to the resource protection, brush management and landscaping
requirement s of the certified LCP. Additionally, the suggested modifications require the
location of a vista point on the non-sensitive portion of Planning Area L due to tlg
expansive views ofkdfkom this high point of the Kelly Ranch property,
While the LCP must be changed to acknowledge the important planning goals of the HMP, it must
also be revised to ensure that buildout of the planning areas will be consistent with existing
resource protection policies contained in the Mello II LUP. In that regard existing Policy 3-
5(a)(6) should be revised to indicate the residential land use designations represent a maximum
density that may be permitted subject to application of the steep hillside and other applicable
resource protection provisions of the certified LCP. The actual density permitted on a site will be
determined through application of the resource protection provisions of the LCP and may be less
than the density allowed by the land use plan.
Additionally, the proposed land use map indicates a break in the designated Open Space area to
accommodate a secondary access road across the negotiated “hardline preserve” to access
Planning Area J. However, that access road has not yet been determined to be in conformance (&‘ 7r
with the steephh ’ ‘de and resourc e protection policies of the LCP under an approved coastal w -“ eve17 ’ . Therefore, the Commission believes it is more appropriate for the land use
plan to show the area as open space to provide a contiguous habitat corridor. The Commission is
suggesting an additional policy that would acknowledge an access road may be a permitted use in
f a open space area if amrove4 bv the Resource agencies and by an approved coastal development
permit @ding and subject to Coastal Commission approval on appeg This approach keeps the
option open of a secondary access road, if there is no less environmentally damaging alternative
and the road is necessary, but protects the area as open space in any event. If an area is designatgd
as "hardline preserve" it is considered E SHA and such road or other develoDmen-d
permitted,
Updated brush management standards should also be incorporated to ensure that vegetation
removal associated with fire safety be kept to the minimum necessary to ensure that sensitive
habitats are not adversely impacted. Brush management standards should be implemented in
Zone 1 which require a minimum 30-feet wide development setback from required open space
areas to incorporate landscaping for screening purposes. No clearcut of sensitive vegetation shall
occur to establish fire protection for Zone 1.
Regarding water quality concerns, the Commission finds that all applicable BMPs,
including but not limited to clirb inlet stenciling, solid waste management (trash
removal), silt and grease traps and street sweeping, shall be incorporated into the project
design through a water qualityhrban runoff control plan and monitoring program as a
condition of development approval to ensure the discharge from the proposed outlet is
consistent with local and regional standards. The Commission finds that as modified, the
proposed amendment can be found consistent with Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act.
PART VII. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD MELLO II LCP
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT #2-991). AS SUBMITTED
A. AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION
The amendment proposes to change the zoning within the master plan from Planned
Community (PC) to R1 (Planning Area E), R-1-Q (Planning Areas C, I and J), R-3-Q
(Planning Areas D, G, and H), RD-M-Q (Planning Areas A, K and L), OS (Planning Area
B) and OS (Planning Area F>. The "Q" overlay, which requires Planning Commission,
review and approval of a Site Development Plan (SDP), is being applied to each zoning
designation with the intent of insuring that future development of the Planning Areas will
be visually and physically compatible with each other similar to the intent of a Master
Plan. Each zoning designation corresponds to a General Plan designation. The R-I(-Q)
implements the RLM land use designation which is characterized by single family
residential development, the R-3-Q and RD-M-Q implement the RMH General Plan
designation which is characterized by attached multi-family residential development and
OS implements the OS General Plan designation which is characterized by improved and
natural open space. Approval of the zone change eliminates the requirement for a master
plan on this property.
.
The Coastal Commission in 1984 consistent with its zoning, Planned Community (PC),
originally approved the Kelly Ranch Master Plan. The PC zone is intended to provide a
method to encourage the orderly implementation of the General Plan, allow for the
comprehensive planning of all necessary public facilities, and provide a framework for
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 43
phased development by the comprehensive planning and development of large tracts of
land under unified ownership in accord with an adopted master plan.
The project also proposes to repeal section 21.38.160 of the certified municipal code.
The City found the elimination of this section was a “housekeeping” item in that with
adoption of the proposed land use and implementation plan amendments, a master plan
would no longer be required for the Kelly Point and Macario Canyon. A discussion of
this ordinance known as “Additional Standards - Upper Agua Hedionda Watershed”
follows.
B. SUMMARY FINDINGS FOR REJECTION
1) Pumose and Intent of the Ordinance. The purpose and intent of the Section
21.38.160 (proposed to be deleted from the LCP) is to provide additional development
standards for the upper Agua Hedionda watershed which includes Kelly Point and
Macario Canyon, implement the goals and objectives of the resource protection
provisions of the Carlsbad LCP; assure resources and constraints are properly identified
and incorporated into the planning process; preserve and/or enhance the aesthetic
qualities of natural landforms and manufactured slopes by designing projects which relate
to the slope of the land; minimize the amount of project grading, assure that grading will
be done in an environmentally sensitive manner whereby lagoons and riparian
ecosystems will be protected from increased erosion and assure no substantial impacts to
natural resource areas, wildlife habitats or native vegetation areas will occur.
2) Maior Provisions of the Ordinance. The major provisions of the ordinance
include supplementing the underlying zoning by providing additional resource protective
regulations within designated areas to preserve, protect and enhance the habitat resource
values of Kelly Point and Macario Canyon, and steep sloping hillsides; to provide
regulations in areas which provide the best wildlife habitat characteristics; to encourage
proper lagoon management; and to deter soil erosion by maintaining the vegetative cover
on steep slopes. Section 21.38.160 is a part of the PC Zone. It states that a master plan is
required, it designates maximum density of development, it references Coastal
Development Permit 6-84-617, it identifies information which shall be included in a
master plan, and it reiterates many of the requirements of the Coastal Resource Protection
Overlay Zone Chapter 21.203 of the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance. (See attachments for
the full text of ordinance sections 21.38.160 and 21.203).
3) Adeauacy of the Ordinance to Implement the Certified LUP Segments. 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 City’s Municipal Code serves as the Implementation
Program for the Carlsbad LCP. The Mello 11 LUP has a number of provisions that
protect coastal resources, including naturally vegetated steep slopes. Policy 3-5 of the
Mello II LUP is a site specific policy for the Kelly Ranch property. It has provisions
which state that grading and erosion control on sensitive “dual criteria” (naturally
vegetated and over 25% grade) slopes is prohibited unless the application of the policy
would preclude any reasonable use of the property. The policy does not apply to the
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 44
construction of roads on the City's Circulation Element or the development of utility
systems.
As previously noted, the portion of the Kelly Ranch property known as the Core Area
contains 61.6 acres of slopes greater than 25% with sensitive species. The existing
certified Master Plan, which serves as the LUP and IP, allowed encroachment into some
dual criteria slope areas through the anticipated residential buildout (ref. Ex. 12).
However, there are areas of open space retained within the residential planning areas that
are not shown as open space on the proposed land use plan.
However, each Planning Area within the Kelly Ranch property must comply with the
slope and resource preservation policies of the certified Mello II LCP and Section 21.203
of the municipal code. Any application for development within a planning area shall
require a slope analysis, biological resource map during Site Development Plan review.
The overlay zone identifies five areas of protection. They are 1) steep slopes and
vegetation; 2) drainage, erosion, sedimentation, habitat; 3) landslides and slope
instability; 4) seismic hazards; and 5) floodplain development. The policy states that
slopes of 25% grade and over shall be preserved in their natural state unless application
of the policy would preclude reasonable use of the property. Also, since disturbance of
25% slopes may be required to access flatter portions of the site and, thus, allow a
reasonable use of the property, the policy further states that such encroachment may be
allowed, if there is no less environmentally damaging alternative available. These
policies will apply to the Kelly Ranch property as a result of deletion of Section
2 1.38.160.
While 21.203 contains the above provisions, there are several provisions in 21.38.160
which are not in 21.203. These are important provisions that were included in Policy 3-5
to find it consistent with Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. These include a provision
that due to severe site constraints, innovative siting and design criteria (including shared
use of driveways, clustering, tandem parking, and pole construction) shall be
incorporated into the master plan to minimize paved surface area. Dwelling units shall be
clustered in the relatively flat portions of the site and paik purposes shall be a permitted
use ( i.e., on the Macario Canyon site) subject to the erosion control provisions of Section
21.203. Thus, while the Commission can support the repeal of 21.38.160 because the
bulk of its provisions exist in 21.203, it finds that the preceding provisions must be made
part of 21.203.
Regarding water quality concerns, the Mello IT LCP does not contain recent language
requiring new development to employ best management practices when developing
upland of sensitive areas like Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Therefore, because the proposed
amendment is not consistent with the resource protection provisions of the certified land
use plan, the amendment must be denied. '
Regarding view preservation, the current LCP ordinance does not specifically address the
need for landscape screening of residential development located along prominent
ridgelines. Additionally, as currently drafted there is a technical problem of applying the
scenic preservation policy to all development within the coastal zone unless the
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 45
development is within a Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone. me City has not develoDed
such an overlay za for the wy of th e c0asral.z -f es them
is not applicable.
adequate to carry out the certX-
.. .. essed in order to find the ordinances
t
PART VIII. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF TEE CITY OF CARLSBAD LCP
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT #2-99D. IF MODIFIED
The standard of review for implementation plans is Section 305 13 of the Coastal Act.
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. As noted, the City found the proposed LUP redesignations are
required to bring the Kelly Ranch regulations in line with modem requirements for
habitat preservation, growth management, and other land use regulatory programs
adopted since 1985. However, the Commission found above that the amendment must be
denied for several reasons because it could not be found to be consistent with the
resource protection provisions of the Mello II LUP.
However, the attached Suggested Modifications address incorporation of the hardline
preserve areas as open space, establish brush management standards, require use of
BMPs to improve the quality of discharged runoff, and require landscape screening and
implementation of the Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone for the Kelly Ranch property.
Specifically, Section 21.203 (Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone) shall be revised
to apply to the Kelly Ranch property and shall be amended to provide the following as
new provisions: lands designated “hardline preserve” in the draft Habitat Management
Plan (HMP) within the coastal zone shall be designated and zoned as Open Space;
projects that are located in the “standards areas” identified in the draft HMP shall
conform to the certified LCP and the standards developed by the Resource agencies
through the NCCP process; access roads shall be a permitted use within designated and
zoned Open Space areas subject to an approved coastal development permit, and only
when necessary to access flatter areas and when designed to be the least environmentally
damaging feasible alternative; all development shall be setback a minimum of 30-feet
from designated open space areas to accommodate Zone 1 brush management and
landscaping, including trees for screening purposes; all development shall be designed to
assure there will be no clearcut of environmentally sensitive habitat areas to establish
brush management Zone 1; due to severe site constraints, innovative siting and design
criteria (such as shared use of driveways, clustering, tandem parking) shall be
incorporated into approved residential development to minimize paved surface area;
dwelling units shall be clustered in the relatively flat portions of the site; all construction
activities shall be planned so that grading will occur in units that can be easily completed
within the summer construction season; all grading operations shall be limited from April
1 to October 1 of each year; all areas disturbed by grading shall be planted within 60 days
of initial disturbance and prior to October 1 with temporary or permanent (in the case of
finished slopes) erosion control methods. The October 1 grading season deadline may be
extended by an approved amendment to the coastal development permit and subject to an
interim erosion control plan addressing temporary and emergency erosion control
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 46
measures designed to prohibit discharge of sediment off-site during and after the grading
operation is completed.
Regarding the preservation of water quality, Best Management Practices (BMPs) that are
appropriate for residential development, including but not limited to the following shall
be implemented: silt traps, catch basins, oil degreasers, and grease traps shall be
incorporated into the design of development that increases impermeable surfaces,
including parking lots; a public education program shall be implemented which is
designed to raise the level of awareness of water quality issues around the lagoon
including such elements as catch basin stenciling and public awareness signs; a street
sweeping and cleaning program, a landscape management plan that includes
herbicide/pesticide management and solid waste management (trash removal). Such
measures shall be incorporated into project design through a water quality/urban runoff
control plan and monitoring program to ensure the discharge from all proposed outlets is
consistent with local and regional standards. Such measures shall be required as a
condition of development approval at the subdivision stage.
Regarding the preservation of public access and recreation, park purposes shall be a
permitted use compatible with within Macario Canyon provided that any park
construction is subject to the erosion and urban runoff control provisions of Section
21.203.
Regarding scenic preservation, the suggested modification relocates the regulation that addresses
scenic values so that a Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone is not required for the regulation to be
applicable to all development within the coastal zone. The suggested modification adds the
regulation to Section 21.203.040 (F) (Scenic Preservation) and 21.205.080 (Scenic Preservation)
to provide that within the Mello I and Mello ?segments, existing public views and panorama
shall be maintained. As rewdevelopment along ridgelines and/or visible from major coastal
access routes and/or designated Scenic Highways or public recreational or resource areas shall be
screened from public views through the use of trees as a landscape screen and/or setbacks from
the ridgeline and open space areas.
In summary, with the above revisions, the Commission finds the proposed amendment is in
conformance with the visual, access and recreation and resource protection policies of the certified
Mello II LCP
IX. 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.
CARLSBAD LCPA 2-99D
Page 47
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 to CEQA
provisions. The City of Carlsbad has prepared and certified an EIR @IR 98-05) for the
Kelly Ranch Core Area; however, the Commission has found that several significant
impacts associated with the proposed LCP Amendment remain and has proposed
suggested modifications to make the amendment request consistent with Chapter 3
policies of the Coastal Act and the Carlsbad LCP. As a result of these modifications, the
Commission finds that the proposed amendment does conform to CEQA provisions. The
LCP amendment to the Agua Hedionda Lagoon and Mello II segments of the City’s LCP
proposes changes to the land use designations and zoning of properties within the City’s
coastal zone, and eliminates the existing Master Plan requirement. The changes will not
result in an intensity of land use incompatible with the surrounding area or have adverse
impacts on coastal resources as modified. Therefore, the Commission finds that approval
of the LCP amendment will not result in any significant unmitigated adverse
environmental impacts.
(Carlsbad LCPA2-99DkellyranchfnlstfrptlO.99)
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
LCP,A Map Designation Change
Property From: To:
A. 208-020-38 RM/OSR-R RLM/RM/RMH/OS/O
B. 208-020-17,41 RM/OS RM/OS
C. 207-01 0-23 RMH/OS RLMIRMHIOS
D. 208-020-40 RM/OS I RLMIOS
E. 208-020-36 RLM 1 RM
LCPA: 97-09
draft @ final 0
Approvals
Council Approval Date:
Resolution No:
Effective Date:
Signature:
I
EXISTING
PROPOSED .
LCPA 97-09 TEXT
April 7,1999
ArJua Hedionda
The Agua Hedionda LCP map Exhibit C shdl be changed to reflect the modified Coastal
Program Land Use Map.
Land Use policy 1.2 shall be deleted.
Mello I1
Policy
Policy
;-5(a)(6) shall be revised as follows:
Residential densities in the 433 acre Kelly Ranch shall be permitted and based on
the underlying General Plan Land Use designation.
3-5(a)(7) shall be revised as follows:
Approximately 2.8 acres located adjacent to Cannon Road, and as described in
CDP 98-47 are designated for an interpretive center for Agua Hedionda and for
child care facilities under either Residential-Professional (RP) zoning or a future
Community Facilities (CF) zone if one is created.
The Kelly PointMacario Canyon area shall be designated for Planned
ResidentiaUAgriculture development. The area affected by this policy, and
development regulations applicable to this master plan area, are described below:
All slopes greater than 25 percent shall result in an allowable
development intensity of 1 dwelling unit per ten acres;
All slopes greater than 20 percent, but less than 25 percent, shall
result in a development intensity of 1 dwelling unit per five acres;
All slopes greater than 15 percent, but less than 20 percent, shall
result in a development intensity of 1 dwelling unit per acre;
All slopes greater than 10 percent, but less than 15 percent, shall
result in a development intensity of 2 dwelling units per acre;
All areas with a slope of less than 10 percent shall result in a
development intensity of 6 units per acre.
Residential densities in the
433 acre Kelly Ranch ' ' shall be pennitted and
KQW the
based on
underlying General Plan Land Use designation;
Approximately 4 2.8 acres located adjacent to
Cannon Road, and as described in .. 844% CDP 98-47 are designated for -- 3s
an interpretive center fur Agua
Hedionda .
.. -it 6-84-61 7
Due to ovemding and extensive wetland preservation and protection
provisions of the Kelly Ranch Master Plan as approved by the City and
Coastal Commission in permit 6-84-6 17, agricultural preservation policies
are waived.
Agricultural preservation policies for the remaining areas covered by this
policy have been deleted by LCP amendment of 2-85.
and Erosion Contrcd
Any development proposal that affects steep slopes (25% inclination or
greater) shall be required to prepare a slope map and analysis for the
affected slopes. Steep slopes are identified in the PRC Toups maps . The
slope mapping and analysis shall be prepared during the CEQA
(3)
(4)
(5)
Soils investigation conducted by a licensed soils engineer
has determined the subject slope are to be stable and
gmimg and development impacts mitigatable for at least 75
years, or life of structure.
Grading of the slope is essential to the development intent
and design.
Slope disturbance will not result in substantial damage or
alteration to major wildlife habitat or native vegetation
areas.
If the area proposed to be disturbed is predominated by
steep slopes and is less than 10 acres, complete grading
may be allowed only if not interruption of significant
wildlife corridors occurs.
Because north-facing slopes are generally more prone to
stability problems and in many cases contain more
extensive natural vegetation, no grading or removal of
vegetation from these areas will be permitted unless all
have been mitigated. Overriding
circumstances are not considered adequate mitigation.
Drainage and Runoff Rates: Drainage and runoff shall be
controlled so as not to exceed at any time the rate associated with
property in its present state, and appropriate measures shall be
taken on and/or offsite to prevent siltation of lagoons and other
environmentally sensitive areas.
Installation Timing of Drainage and Runoff Control Measures:
The appropriate measures shall be installed prior to onsite grading.
Required Open Space Easements on Undeveloped Slopes: All
undevelopable slopes shall be placed in open space easements as a
condition of development approval.
(d) Park Purposes (Marcario Canyon):
Park purposes shall be a permitted use compatible with this land use designation provided
that any park construction is subject to 3-5 C above.
L
1
c
1
E
s
1c
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
33 --
23
24
25
26
27
2s
repealed.
ORDINANCE NO.
A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT AND LOuAL COASTAL
PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO REPEAL SECTION 21.38.160 OF
THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS IN KELLY POINT AND
MACARlO CANYON.
CASE NAME: KELLY RANCH CASE NO.: ZCA 99-03/LCPA 97-09
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Section 21.38.160 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is hereby
\
SECTION 2: When effective, this ordinance will also constitute an amendment
to the Mello II and Agua Hedionda segments of the City’s Local Coastal Program according to
exhibits LCPA 97-09 and LCPA 97-09 Text attached hereto.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its
adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be
published at least once in a publication of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within fifteen
days after its adoption. (Not withstanding the preceding, this ordinance shall not be effective
within the City’s Coastal Zone until approved by the California Coastal Commission.)
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City
Council on the day of 1999, and thereafter.
Ill
Ill
ill
Ill
Ill
ill
ill
ill
ill
7
1
3 -
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
23
25
26
27
25
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the day of 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL) .
II 8.160 .. - 1 Jp- Watershed.
The Contents of a Master Plan for Kelly Point and Macario Canyon area as
identified by the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program shall include the following additional
information required below and be approved in accordance with the following additional
development standards:
(a) Pexmits - Required. Developments as defined'in Chapter 21.04.107,
(including but not limited to land divisions) require a coastal development permit subject
to the requirement of this zone. All uses in this zone are subject to the procedural
requirements of Chapter 21.201. Prior to or simultaneously with the approval of any
division of land or any other development, a master plan of development for the property
containing the requirements specified below shall be submitted and approved.
Maximum Density of Development. The Master Plan shall be approved
subject to a maximum density of development as follows:
(1) All slopes greater than 25 percent shall result in an allowable
development intensity of 1 dwelling unit per ten acres;
(2) All slopes greater than 20 percent but less than 25 percent shall
result in a development intensity of 1 dwelling unit per five acres;
(3) All slopes greater than 15 percent but less than 20 percent shall
result in a development intensity of 1 dwelling unit per acre;
(4) All slopes greater than 10 percent but less than 15 percent shall
result in a development intensity of 2 dwelling units per acre;
(5) All areas with a slope of less than 10 percent shall result in a
development intensity of 6 units per acre;
(6) For the Kelly Ranch Master Plan area, residential densities and
slope criteria shall be permitted and based on those contained in the City approved master
plan and as approved by the Coastal Commission in Permit 6-84-61 7.
Approximately 4 acres located adjacent to the extension of Cannon
Road, and as described in Coastal Development Pennit 6-84-617 are designated for
visitor-serving or Neighborhood Commercial use.
The plan required as a part of the Master Plan shall be certified as
accurate by a registered engineer or other qualified professional to be true and accurate
containing reasonably accurate estimates of the amount of cut and fill. The plan shall .
show the existing' and the finished topography of the ground to be graded and filled,
including a site plan of the proposed residential or commercial development in the same
scale so that it can be superimposed upon the topographic map.
The Master Plan shall include a topographic map at a scale
sufficient to determine the above but no less than 1" = 100 feet having a contour interval
of 5 feet with overlays delineating areas of greater than 10, 15, 20, and 25 percent slopes.
A map showing the type of soil erodibility, and class based on the Land Use Capability
Classification System of the Soil Conservation Service shall be submitted in the same
scale as the slopes. The Master Plan shall show the computation of the densities and
acreage of soils.
(c) Erosion, Drainage, Sedimentation. Subject to the modifications, additions,
or exceptions expressed below, as a part of the permit application, the applicant shall
submit an erosion, sedimentation and drainage plan, prepared by a qualified professional,
(b)
(7)
(i) A soils investigation conducted by a licensed soils
engineer has determined the subject slope area to be stable and @ng and development
impacts mitigatable for at least 75 years, or life of structure.
Grading of the slope is essential to the development
intent and design.
Slope disturbance will not result in substantial
damage or alteration to major wildlife habitat or native vegetation areas.
If the area proposed to be disturbed is predominated
by steep slopes and is in excess of 10 acres, no more than one third of the total steep slope
area shall be subject to major grade changes.
If the area proposed to be disturbed is predominated
by steep slopes and is less than 10 acres, complete grading may be allowed only if no
interruption of significant wildlife corridors occurs.
Because north-facing slopes are generally more
prone to stability problems and in many cases contain more extensive natural vegetation,
no grading or removal of vegetation hm these areas will be permitted unless all
environmental impacts have been mitigated. Overriding circumstances are not
considered adequate mitigation.
(3) Drainage and runoff shall be controlled so as not to exceed at any
time the rate associated with property in its present state, and appropriate measures shall
be taken on andor offsite to prevent siltation of Agua Hedionda Lagoon and other
environmentally sensitive areas.
(4)
(5)
(6)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
The appropriate measures shall be installed prior to onsite ,%ding.
All undevelopable slopes shall be placed in open space easements
as a condition of development approval.
A site specific technical report shall be required addressing the
cumulative effects of developing each subwatershed and recommending measures to
mitigate both increased runoff and sedimentation. It shall be reviewed and prepared
according to the Model Erosion Control Ordinance contained in the Master Drainage
Plan, with the additions and changes adopted herein, such that a natural drainage system
is generally preserved for the eastern undeveloped'watersheds, but that stomdrains are
allowed for those western portions of the watershed which have already been
incrementally developed.
Mitigation measures tailored to project impacts and consistent with
the control of cumulative development shall be implemented prior to development in
accordance with the following additional criteria:
(A) Submittal of a runoff control plan designed by a licensed
engineer qualified in hydrology and hydraulics, which would assure no increase in peak
runoff rate from the developed site over the greatest discharge expected from the existing
undeveloped site as a result of a 10-year frequency storm. Runoff control shall be
accomplished by a variety of measures, including, but not limited to, onsite catchment
basins, detention basins, siltation traps and energy dissipators and shall not be
concentrated in one area or a few locations.
(B) Detailed maintenance arrangements and various
alternatives for providing the ongoing repair and maintenance of any approved drainage
(7)
PLANNING SYSTEMS LCP SEGMENT BOUNDARIES-
\, -:- *.
,I-
- ..
I ! I i
1,
,.
I
'/
EXHIBIT R
WETLAtdPS
I ..
i
I
I
STATISTICAL SUMMARY ....-..__
__ m
0
120
........... ...,
.... .- .
14.0 !4? ..............
240
REC. CENrER
......... ................
.......
, HASiEM F4LANl KEllY RANCH A PLANNED COMMUNITY
Note: See Back of Report for Fu
~ULUMWNmES & KMJFMAN AH) WWMDOF SOUTHERN
I I I
/
CAUFoRNlA
11 Scale Map.
-14-
I--
LEGEND
RL Residential Low Density
RLM Residential Low-Medium Density
RM Residential Medium Density
os
-mm-mCIIc- v
I i
RMH Residential Medium-High Density
N Neighborhood Commercial
OS . Openspace
0 Office
AUG 2 3 1999
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSIOh I
SYSTEMS KELLY RANCH - GENERAL PLAN (PROPOSED)
P-C
~~~ PLANNING SYSTEMS
Y
LEGEND
OS Openspace
P-C Planned Community
LEGEND
R-1 -Q
R-3-Q
RD-M-Q
os
Single Family Residential (Qualified Overlay) R-P-Q Residential-Professional (Qualified Overlay)
Multiple Family Residential (Qualified Overlay) PC Planned Community
Residential Density-Multiple (Qualified Overlay) OS Openspace
B
NOTE: PLANNING AREA "L" NOT A PART
SOURCE: Project Design Consultants
DATE: 1997
A.D.Hinshaw Associates Kelly Ranch Figure 1.1.4.
Non-Core' Arm. I I I I I I II I I I I I I
OS = Open Space
RM P Residential Medium Density 4-f
RLM = Residential Low-Medium Donsky 64
Non-Cora' Arme i 1 I1 C- 1 = Noighbofhood Commercial
Areas A.C 20.91 3.21 0.01 17.7 RMH 111.5 115.0 203 266 PC = Planned Community
0 0 R - 1 E One-lamily Residential 192.51 0.01 132.51 0.0 - Ares 0 OS I - 1
RD-M = Redentl.1 Densrry-multiple
Kelly Ranch General Plan
NnIm
la1 Per existing Kelly RanchlCity of C.r(sbad Agrwmsnt
Ib) Ares E ~UK been spprovd lor dswbpmant (144 du) and is not included in the propomd Kdly Ranch 'Core Area' projoct.
GMCP = Growth Management Control hint
TOR = Top 01 General Ran Density Range
NAP = IncMed in KeUy Ranch propct ma. but is 'Not A Pln' of Tsmiw Map I 97-1 6.
ource: Tentetiw Map, Sheet 2 and Ksllv Ranch Master Plan (1 984). ueers\philip\word\eir\kelly\tablel 1 1 -39
311 8/99 1.
Figure 12 Kelly Hillman Property 3/4/79 1
400200 0 400 800
FFFT
L @I 1898 City ol Carlsbad GIs -, /cargir2/product./hmp/hmpprajac~ll~~n.aml 03/04/90
OFFER TO DEDICATE AREA
KELLY RANCH
CARLSBAD, CALIFOWIA
4lTE VEGETATIm WAS WVENTOUIED BY RZED T. SPROUL. 4.D. UXHTY CERTIFIED BIUCGIST. M GIEG EVANS, LAND- ASUITECT. LA.?-, IN WE BPRWC. ff I331 A VEGETATION HAP WAS DM M TM FIELD WMi A .,-
=E AERIAL PUCITC€=R4PU. AND A TOPOGRPPWlC OvERLAY CF EXISTING WE CONDITI~S.
CU4MRSION ff CERTAIN URAND UABITATS TO WETLAND UABlTAl MA4 CCC-D DURI*IC. WE TlWE SEWEN INITIAL WAPPM AND GENEFATIU4 ff TU14 EXUIBIT TIIObE CUANSES AE NOT DESCRIBED BY TU16 EXUlBlT
Flm 1/25/99
Non-llb*t(nud r.J*on*: 3/23/99 PS B7W15
LEGEND
I-
2.2.1 1
I
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Chapter 21203
COASTAL RESOURCE PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONE
Sections:
21.203.010 Intent and hrrpose
21.203.020 Applicant
21 .2Q3.030 Pennit Required .
21.203.040 Development Standards
- .. .
"21.203.010 Intent And Pumose.
The intent and purpose of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone is to:
A. Supplement the underiying zoning by providing additional resource protective - regulations within designated areas to preserve, protect and enfiance the habitat resource valun /
of Buena Vista Lagoon, Agua Hedionda Lagoon, Batiquitos Lagoon, and steep sloping hillsides;
I EXHIBITNO. 13 i pemK-1
Carlsbad LCPA 2-99D
CRP Overlay Zone Existing IMellDI1LCPl I Implementation Plan
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B.
C.
D.
E.
Provide regulations in areas which provide the best wildlife habitat characteristics '
Deter soil erosion by maintaining the vegetative cover on steep slopes;
Implement the goals and objectives of Sections 30231,30233,30240@) and 30253
. Encourage proper lagoon management;
of the Public Resources Code and the approved Carlsbad Local Coastal Program."
"21.203.020 Applicability.
This chapter implements the California Coastal Act and is applicable to all properties
located in the coastal zone as defined in Public Resources Code Section 30171. In case of any
conflict between this zone and the underlying zone, provisions of this zone shall apply."
"21.203.030 Permit Required. -
Developments, including but not limited to, land divisions, as defined in Chapter
21.04.108 require a coastal development permit. This permit is subject to the requirements of
this zone and the procedural requirements for coastal development permits of Chapter 21.201
of this code."
"21.203.040 DeveloIjment Standards.
The following specific development standards shall be applied to areas within the Coastal
Resource Protection Overlay Zone as part of the coastal development permit. Such standards
shall control, notwithstanding the provisions of the underlying zone and shall include:
A. Preservation of Steep Slopes and Vegetation .
Any development proposal that affects steep slopes (25% inclination or greater'
shall be required to prepare a slope map and analysis for the affected slopes. Steep slopes ar
identified on the PRC Toups maps. The slope mapping and analysis shall be prepared during
the CEQA environmental review on a project-by-project basis and shall be required as a
condition of a coastal development permit.
For those slopes mapped as possessing endangered 'plant/animal species
and/or coastal sage scrub and chaparral plant communities, the following policy language would
Slopes of 25% grade and over shall be preserved in their natural
state, unless the application of this policy would preclude any reasonable use of the property,
in which case an encroachment not to exceed 10% of the steep slope area over 25% grade may
be permitted. For existing legal parcels, with all or nearly all of their area in slope area over
25% grade, encroachment may be permitted; however, any such encroachment shall be limited
so that at no time is more than 20% of the entire parcel (including areas under 25% slope)
permitted to be disturbed from its natural state. This policy shall not apply to the construction
of roads of the City's Circulation Element or the development of utility systems. Uses of slopes
over 25% may be made in order to provide access to flatter areas if there is no less
environmentally damaging alternative available. No further subdivisions of land or utilization of Planned Unit
Developments shall occur on lots that have their total area in excess of 25% slope unless a
Planned Unit Development is proposed which limits grading and development to not more than
10% of the total site area.
c. Slopes and areas remaining undisturbed as a result of the hillsidr
review process, shall be placed in a permanent open space easement as a condition c
development approval. The purpose of the open space easement shall be to reduce the
1.
apply: a.
b.
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
-1 0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
potential for localized erosion and slide hazards to prohibit the removal of native vegetation -1
except for creating firebreaks and/or planting fire retardant vegetation and to protect vis<
resources of importance to the entire community.
For all other steep slope areas, the City Council may allow exceptions to the above grading provisions provided the following mandatory findings to allow exceptions are
made:
A soils investigation conducted by a licensed soils engineer has determined the subject slope area to be stable and grading and development impacts mitigatable
for at least 75 years, or life of structure.
Grading of the slope is essential to the development intent and
design.
Slope disturbance will not result in substantial damage or alteration to major wildlife habitat or native vegetation areas.
If the area proposed to be disturbed is predominated by steep slopes
and is in excess of 10 acres, no more than one third of the total steep slope area shall be subject
to major grade changes. ,
If the area proposed to be disturbed is predominated by steep slopes
and is less than 10 acres, complete grading may be allowed only if no interruption of significant
wildlife corridors occurs.
Because north-facing slopes are generally more prone to stability
problems and in many cases contain more extensive natural vegetation, no grading or removal
of vegetation from these areas will be permitted unless all environmental impacts have been
mitigated. Overriding circumstances are not considered adequate mitigation.
2.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
B. Drainage, Erosion, Sedimentation, Habitat i 1. Buena Vista Lagoon: Developments located along the first row of lots
bordering Buena Vista Lagoon, including the parcel at the mouth of the Lagoon, shall be
designated for residential development at a density of up to four dwelling units per acre.
Proposed development in this area shall be required to submit topographic and vegetation
mapping and analysis, as well as soils reports, as part of the development permit application.
Such information shall be provided in addition to any required Environmental Impact Report,
and shall be prepared by qualified professionals and in sufficient detail to locate the boundary
of wetland and upland areas and areas of slopes in excess of 25%. Topographic maps shall be
submitted at a scale sufficient to determine the appropriate developable areas, generally not less
than a scale of 1" - 100' with a topographic contour interval of five feet, and shall include an
overlay delineating the location of the proposed project. The lagoon and wetland area shall be
delineated and criteria used to identify any wetlands existing on the site shall be those of
Section 30121 of the Coastal Act and based upon the standards of the Local Coastal Program
Mapping Regulations. Mapping of wetlands and siting of development shall be done in
consultation and subject to the approval of the Department of Fish and Game. Development
shall be clustered to preserve open space for habitat protection. Minimum setbacks of at least
100 feet from wetlandsflagoon shall be required in all development, in order to buffer such
sensitive habitat area from intrusion. Such buffer areas, as well as other open space areas
required in permitted development to preserve habitat areas, shall be permanently preserved
for habitat uses through provision of an open space easement as a condition of project approval.
In the event that a wetland area is bordered by steep slopes (in excess of 25%) which will act
as a natural buffer to the habitat area, a buffer area of less than 100 feet in width may & I permitted. The density of any permitted development shall be based upon the net developable--
34
I !
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
area of the parcel, excluding any portion of a parcel which is in wetlands or lagoon. A
specified in (a), a density credit may be provided for that portion of the parcel which is in steel;
slopes. Stom drain alignments as proposed in the Carlsbad Master Drainage Plan which would
be carried through or empty into Buena Vista Lagoon shall not be permitted, unless such
improvements comply with the requirements of Sections 30230,30231,30233, and 30235 of the
Coastal Act by maintaining or enhancing the functional capacity of the Lagoon in a manner
acceptable to the State Department of Fish and Game. Land divisions shall only be permitted
on parcels bordering the Lagoon pursuant to a single planned development permit for the entire
original parcel.
2. Batiquitos Lagoon Watershed: Development located east of 1-5 (generally
referred to as the Savage property) shall be designated for a maximum density of development
of 8 units per gross acre, excluding wetlands and constrained slopes. Development shall take
place according to the requirements of the P-C Planned Community zone Chapter 21.38,
supplemented by these additional requirements. Land divisions shall only be permitted
pursuant to a Master Plan for the entire original parcel subject to the requirements herein:
a. Drainage, Erosion and Sedimentation requirements shall be as
specified in subsection B.4. of this section.
b. Detailed topographic maps shall be prepared by qualified
professionals. including biologists, hydrologists and engineers in sufficient detail to locate the
boundary of lagoon or wetland and upland areas. The scale shall not be less than 1" = 100'
with a contour interval of five feet, and shall include an overlay delineating the location of the
development. The lagoon and wetland areas shall be delineated according to the requirements
of Section 30121 of the Coastal Act and the Local Coastal Program mapping regulations,
subject to the review and approval of the State Department of Fish and Game.
Development shall be clustered to preserve open space and habitat.
A minimum setback of 100 feet from the lagoodwetland shall be
required.
At least 2/3 of any development shall be clustered on the half of the
property furthest away from the lagoon at the base of the bluff in order to preserve the
outstanding visual and natural resources.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Existing mature trees shall be preserved.
Public recreation facilities shall be provided as a condition of
development including picnic tables, parking, and a public access trail along the lagoon shore.
The trail shall be secured by an irrevocable offer to dedicate public access but shall be
developed and landscaped as a condition of development and shall be at least 15 feet wide with
unobstructed views of the lagoon. To facilitate provision of public uSe areas and preservation of
environmentally sensitive lands, and to maintain the outstanding visual resources in the area
surrounding the lagoon, an additional density credit of one dwelling unit per acre of developed
land shall be provided for each two and one half percent (2 1/2%) of total lot area, excluding
wetlands, which is maintained in open space and public recreation in excess of fifty percent
(50%) of the total lot area, excluding wetlands.
Areas - West of 1-5: For areas west of the existing Paseo del Norte, west
of Interstate 5 and along El Camino Real immediately upstream of the existing storm drains,
the following policy shall apply: A site-specific report prepared by a qualified professional shall
be required for all proposed development, identifying mitigation measures needed to avoic
increased runoff and soil erosion. The report shall be subject to the requirements of the model
h.
3.
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
r- erosion control ordinance contained in the Appendix to the Carlsbad Master Drainage pi
(June, 1980), and to the additional requirements contained herein. Such mitigation sh,
become an element of the project, and shall be installed prior to the initial grading. At a
minimum, such mitigation shall require construction of all improvements shown in the Master
Drainage Plan for the area between the project site and the lagoon (including the debris basin),
as well as: restriction of grading activities to the months of April through September of each
year; revegetation of graded areas immediately after grading; and a mechanism for permanent
maintenance if the city declines to accept the responsibility. Construction of drainage
improvements may be through formation of an assessment district, or through any similar
arrangement that allots costs among the various landowners in an equitable manner.
AI1 Other Areas in the Coastal Zone: The following requirements shall
apply unless superseded by the more specific requirements herein and subject to the
modifications, additions, or exceptions detailed below, as a part of the permit application, the
applicant shall submit an erosion, sedimentation and drainage report prepared by a qualified
professional which includes the requirements of the Model Erosion Control Ordinance
reprinted in the Appendix to the June 1980 Carlsbad Master Drainage Plan, all requirements
of the Master Drainage Plan, and the additional requirements specifically enumerated herein.
The June 1980 Master Drainage Plan and its appendices are herein incorporated by this
reference. No subsequent amendments are a part of this zone unless certified by the Coastal
Commission. The general provisions, procedures, standards, content of plans and
implementation contained therein are required conditions of development in addition to the
provisions below. Approved development shall include the following conditions, in addition to
the requirements specified above:
All offsite, downstream improvements (including debris basin ai(
any other improvements recommended in the Drainage Plan) shall be constructed prior to the
issuance of a grading permit onsite. Improvements shall be inspected by city or county staff and
certified as adequate and in compliance with the requirements of the Drainage Plan and the
additional requirements of this zone. If the city or county declines to accept maintenance
responsibility for the improvements, the developer shall maintain the improvements during
construction of the onsite improvements.
If the offsite or onsite improvements are not to be accepted and
maintained by a public agency, detailed maintenance agreements including provisions for
financing the maintenance through bonding ‘or other acceptable means shall be secured prior
to issuance of the permit. Maintenance shall be addressed in the report required to be
submitted with the permit application. The report shall discuss maintenance costs and such
costs shall be certified as a best effort at obtaining accurate figures.
c. Construction of offsite drainage- improvements may use an
assessment district or any other acceptable manner. Such mechanisms shall be secured by
bonding or other acceptable means prior to issuance of a coastal development permit.
If a public agency agrees to accept maintenance responsibilities, it
shall inspect the facilities prior to onsite construction or grading and indicate if such facilities
assure continued maintenance. No onsite development may take place prior to acceptance of
the drainage improvements.
All construction activities shall be planned so that grading will occur
in units that can be easily completed within the summer construction season. All gradire
operations shall be limited from April 1 to October 1 of each year. All areas disturbed h.
grading shall be planted within 60 days of the initial disturbance and prior to October 1 with
4.
a.
b.
s
d.
e.
I
36
i
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
-10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
temporary or permanent (in the case of finished slopes) erosion control methods. I f. Storm drainage facilities in developed areas shall be improved an(
enlarged according to the Carlsbad Master Drainage Plan, incorporating the changes specified
herein. Improvement districts shall be formed for presently undeveloped areas which are
expected to urbanize in the future. The improvement districts shall implement the Master
Drainage Plan. Upstream areas in the coastal zone shall not be permitted to develop
incrementally prior to installation of the storm drain facilities downstream, in order to assure
protection of coastal resources. New drainage facilities, required within the improvement
districts shall be financed either by some form of bond or from fees collected from developers
on a cost-per-acre basis.
When earth changes are required and natural vegetation is removed,
the area and duration of exposure shall be kept at a minimum.
Soil erosion control practices shall be used against "onsite" soil
erosion. These include keeping soil covered with temporary or permanent vegetation or with
mulch materials, special grading procedures, diversion structures to divert surface runoff from
exposed soils, and gade stabilization structures to control surface water.
Apply "sediment control" practices as a perimeter protection to
prevent offsite drainage. Preventing sediment from leaving the site should be accomplished by
such methods as diversion ditches, sediment traps, vegetative filters, and sediment basins.
Preventing erosion is, of course, the most efficient way to control sediment runoff.
Landslides and Slope Instability: Developments within 500 feet of areas identified
generally in the PRC Toups Report, figure 8, as containing soils of the La Jolla group
(susceptible to accelerated erosion) or landslide prone areas shall be required to submit
additional geologic reports containing the additional information required in the Coast2
Shoreline Development Overlay Zone.
D. Seismic Hazards: Development in liquefaction-prone areas shall include site-
specific investigations done addressing the liquefaction problem and suggesting mitigation
measures. New residential development in excess of four units, commercial, industrial, and
public facilities shall have site-specific geologic investigations completed in known potential
liquefaction areas.
Floodplain Development: Within the coastal zone, in the 100-year floodplain, no
new or expanded pennanent structures or fill shall be permitted. Only uses compatible with
periodic flooding shall be allowed."
g.
h.
1.
C.
E.
, _.
37
LAND USE / COASTAL PLANNING
POLICY AND PROCESSING
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE WWI
August 19,1999
Bill Ponder
RE; CITY OF CARLSBAD LCP 2-99 KELLY RANCH
Dear Bill:
I received your telephone message of yesterday evening indicating that the
additional informational materials submitted last Friday did not satisfy
Coastal Staff requirements for detailed analysis of the City-issued coastal
permit for the Kelly Ranch Core Area. It is now more clear to me that Coastal
Staff is undertaking a full re-analysis of the conclusions drawn by all previous
[Federal, State and Local] agencies involved in the project. We had provided
Coastal Staff with copies of the results of the final analyses conducted during
the earlier multi-level reviews, but I understand now however that these
results are not acceptable for the level of review desired by Coastal Staff, and
that much of this information must be re-created for detailed examination by
Coastal Staff.
To this end, enclosed please find the following information:
1. Slope analysis and vegetation information 'as identified in the format
stipulated in model letter provided by Coastal Staff. Specifically;
a. . Slope analysis graphic 'exhibit [to be delivered 8/20]
demonstrating recently-flown topographic contours, identifying
areas of 0-25% grade, and 25% and greater grade. Analysis also
demonstrates areas where grading will occur, and also fire
protection brush management.
b. Vegetation survey graphic analysis which indicates the nature of
the current vegetation [from Figure 2.2.1 of the Core Area EIR].
Carlsbad LCPA 2-99D
Slope Analysis and Vegetation
1530 FARADAY AVENUE SUITE 100 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 (760) 931-0780 FAX (760) 931-5744
c. Steep slope analysis figures as follows; I
2.
Total area of 25% and greater [steep] slopes:'
Native vegetated steep slopes:
Non-native vegetated steep slopes:
73.3 ac.
61.6 ac.
11.7 ac.
Total area of steep slope grading
Grading on steep slopes with native vegetation2
Grading steep slopes with non-native vegetation
24.3 ac.
13.7 ac?
10.6 ac4
d.
Brush Management Areas.
Landscape Plans for the Core Area, including fire protection
You requested clarification regarding the open space table shown on
page 2.2.2 of the Core Area Final EIR. I am informed that this analysis,
which was condqcted by A. D. Hinshaw Associates, reflects information
as follows:
"Constrained Open Space is defined as area meeting the "constrained"
definition pursuant to the City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan,
including steep slopes, easements, arterial roadways, and six other
minor "constraint" categories.
"Biological" Open Space identifies the total of preserve areas of coastal
sage scrub [CSS], southern maritime chaparral [SMC] and native
grassland [NG] vegetation [46.0 total acres]. The Kelly Ranch Master
Plan analysis for "Biological" Open Space reflects only the fact that
these habitats were not considered sensitive, or worthy of preservation
in and of themselves, during the 1985 period when the Master Plan
project was analyzed and approved.
One of the problems inherent in the present requirement for project
review by a growing multitude of agencies and departments is that they
each have their own method and formula for analysis of open space.
And although this subject EIR table [fig. 2.2.21 does result in a positive
open space tabulation for the Core Are project, it does not appear to
reflect a preferred Coastal Commission method of analysis. The "dual
criteria" analysis would seem to be more applicable to the Coastal
Commission.
From PDC Engineering. Does not include Cannon Road or Callaghan parcel. From "dual criteria" analysis previously provided.
6.1 acres for access roads; 7.6 acres for development grading. ' Balance of 24.3 acres and 13.7 acres. Note that development grading predominately placed on __ non-native slopes (exempting roads for access to otherwise d&elop&ie parcels).
Of course the problem with this is that this level of analysis has been
replaced over the last few years with criteria established by state and
federal environmental agencies reflective of protection of endangered
species. The dual criteria method is somewhat arbitrary compared to
the complex criteria currently employed by Cal Fish and Game, Federal
Fish and Wildlife and the Corps of Engineers. Extensive analysis and
discussion has taken place with these agencies to reach the proposed
open space configuration.
3. You requested an analysis of how the proposed steep slope [I presume
dual criteria] grading for access to otherwise developable areas has been
situated in the least environmentally damaging locations. Considering that
Village ‘I‘ and more directly Village ’J’ constitute islands of developable land
surrounded largely by dual criteria lands, and City of Carlsbad safety policies
require two separate accesses for each, the locations chosen were picked
specifically for their low level of environmental impact.
The Village ‘I’ accesses are located in virtually the same location as in CDP 6-
84-617, within areas only marginally considered dual criteria. Note that the
Village ’J’ access however has been removed from its previous location
within a valley of mature SMC vegetation [including Del Mar Manzanita], to
its proposed location up a more gradual slope, characterized by disturbed CSS
and CSS. Further, its fill slopes are proposed for CSS revegetation,
minimizing its impact. The northern Village ’J’ crossing is situated at the
same location as in the Master Plan project, and this location avoids dual
criteria lands almost entirely.
In addition, the USF&WS, CDF&G and the City of Carlsbad have all approved
these crossings specifically because they are located within the
environmentally preferable location for such accesses. Please see Figure 2.1.2
of the Core Area EIR. Far more environmental analysis of these crossings has
occurred on the Core Area project than occurred on the 6-84617 project.
4. You also requested an analysis of why development is currently
proposed in those areas where it was not previously approved in the Master
Plan. A good amount of give-and-take has occurred during the modification
from the Master Plan to the Core Area project. These changes reflect design of
a project fully in compliance with the new, updated rules and regulations
regarding coastal development in Carlsbad, including HMP, Growth
Management, Hillside Protection, and other requirements. All of these
regulations more strictly regulate development that those adopted in
conjunction with 6-84-617. The Core Area project was designed upon
identification of habitat preserve corridors defined by USF&WS and CDF&G.
For example, the narrowest point in habitat linkage per 6-84-617 was 140 feet
wide. The Core Area project is designed at a minimum 400 feet.
In addition, it has been acknowledged by the other agencies involved, that
some increase in developable area, in areas that are not considered important
to the habitat corridor program, must be allowed in order to provide trade-off
of development rights, in order to'achieve the HMP goals. All areas of
expansion of development envelope beyond the Master Plan limits are in
areas considered acceptable to the City of Carlsbad, and the Resource Agencies.
These are the reasons why development is currently proposed in areas not
previously approved in the Master Plan.
We continue to be hopeful that'the reduction in dwelling units, the increase
in quality of vegetation preserve and open space, the significant revegetation
effort, the elimination of the commercial land use and replacement with a
community nature center and the public trails program will allow the Coastal Staff to make the necessary findings that the City-proposed LCP Amendment
results in a far superior project than 6-84-617.
Please call if you wish to discuss any of these matters further.
Simrel y,
Director of Planning
cc D. L. Clemens
Christer Westman
I I
Ryan Green
1714 Camassia Lane
Carlsbad, CA 92009
July 19, 1999
Ms. Sherilyn Sarb
District Manager
California Coastal Commission
3111 Camino del Rio North
Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
Dear Ms. Sarb,
I am currently a resident of Carlsbad and with'the opening of
Legoland, traffic on the existing streets has become very
congested. The opening of Cannon Road would be very helpful to
relieve this congestion.
I would appreciate anything you could do to ensure that the
Kelly Ranch project gets put on the August agenda for the
Coastal Commission.
Sincerely,
Ryan Green
Cynthia Roush JUL 2 0 1999
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SAN DIEGO COAST' DISTRICT
2231 Corte Cicuta
Carlsbad, CA 92009
July 19, 1999
Ms. Sherilyn Sarb
District Manager
California Coastal Commission
31 11 Camino del Rio North
Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
Re: Kelly Ranch
Dear Ms. Sarb,
As being a resident of Carlsbad, traffic has become a real problem since the opening of
Legoland. I would greatly appreciate it if Cannon Road could be put on the August
agenda for the Coastal Commission to enable the opening of Cannon Road.
This would alleviate a lot of headaches for a tremendous amount of people, including
myself.
Thank you for your understanding,
Cuhia Roush
July 16, 1999
Chuck Gasperson
3007 Greenwich St.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Ms. Sherilyn Sarb
District Manager
California Coastal Commission
3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
Re: Kelly Ranch
Dear Ms. Sarb,
JUL 2 1 1999
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMl SSlON SAN DIEGO COAST DISTRICT
We need Cannon Road!!!
The Kelly Ranch project was recently unanimously approved by both
the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission and the City Council. It is
an excellent project with much careful thought given to balancing new
development and open space.
But most importantly, Kelly Ranch will construizt an important link in
Carlsbad ... Cannon Road. Cannon Road will finally give the Carlsbad
community another means of traveling west and avoiding the traffic on
Palomar Airport Road.
Please act quickly on this important matter and approve this much
needed project.
Thank you for your time.
July 20, 1999
Glakier
Water
Sherilyn Sarb, District Manager
California Coastal Commission
31 11 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
Dear Ms. Sarb:
As a business leader in the community of Carlsbad and representing a number
of employees using both the Palomar Airport and El Camino Real corridors in
their daily commute to work and as a resident of Carlsbad, I strongly request that
the Kelly Ranch project be part of the Coastal Commission's August agenda.
It is my understanding that the Commission has a heavy workl.oad with many
important issues to discuss, but the delay in reviewing the Kelly Ranch project will have far-reaching consequences.
Kelly Ranch is very important to the city of Carlsbad, its residents and
businesses. The completion of Cannon Road from El Camino Real to the
Macario Canyon Bridge is essential to the city's circulation system as a primary
relief to Palomar Airport Road and the provision of a much-needed east-west
thoroughfare. Additionally, Kelly Ranch has contributed the Nature Center at
Agua Hedionda Lagoon, dedicated 200 acres of wetland to the State of
California, provided nature trails, set'aside I00 acres of upland habitat as part of
the Habitat Management Plan and reduced the density from 1600 units to 950
units including affordable housing.
Delaying Coastal Commission review of this project will delay the opportunity to
complete Cannon Road in a timely fashion and we urge you to put Kelly Ranch
on the agenda in August.
Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to a favorable reply.
Sincerely, J
Vice President
Glacier Water Services. Inc.
2261 Cosmos Court. Carlsbad. CA 92009 760-930-2420
Fax: 760-930- 1206
www.placierwater.com
A,
LAGOON ?OUNDAtlON
P. 0. Box 4001
CCrrLrbad, CA 92018
REF: Carlsbad LCP Amendment #2-99
' (Including Kelly Ranch Master Plan approved under CDP 6-84-617)
DearMs. sarb;
The Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation (Foundation) notes that the re€erenced application may
be on the Coastal Commission August 1999 agenda. As this amendment affects land near Agua Hedionda
Lagoon and includes the Kelly Ranch, we feel it appropriate to comment, and thank you fix the
oppomrnity to do so.
With respect to the Kelly Ranch, we mguize that the application dif€ers somewhat from the
project approved by the Coastal Commission in 1985 (CDP 6-84-617), but we see these differences as
positive, with regard to the impact on the lagoon. Some highllghts important to the Foundation:
The developer is working closely with the California Department of Fish & Game to transfer to DFG
approximately 186 acres of key open space on the Kelly Ranch. The Foundation supports this transfer, and has participated in meetings and field trips toward that end
The developer is donating a 3800 square foot building and approximately 2 1/2 acres of open space to
the Foundation, to become the Foundation's Nature Center for education and promoting care of the
environment and habitat. The site, near the above-mentioned 186 acres, overlooks the wetlands and
the lagoon.
Elements of the Kelly Ranch, including the above-mentioned 186 acres, are an important inclusion in
the City of Carlsbads proposed Habitat Management Program.
The proposed development includes trails that provide public access consistent with the goals of the
Foundation.
The proposed development includes fewer residences than originally approveci, thereby lessening any
impact on the lagoon.
In general we believe the propsed development is consistent with goals and objectives of the
FoundatioK-is consistent with Coa-stal- Commission policies and represents
original Commission action. The Foundation previously supported the Kelly Ranch project when it was
reviewed by the Carlsbad Planning Commission and the Carlsbad City Council.
improvement over the
cc: Coastal Commissiodfax (6 19) 52 1 9672
AHLF Secretary - Gene Huber
City of Carlsbad - Michael Holzmiller
Kelly Land Company - Larry Clemendfax (760) 918-6663
A California Nonprofit Corporation Since March I990
Steve Wheeler
2930 Via Pepita
JUL 2 0 1999
CALIFORN!A
COASTAL COMMISSION SAN DIEGO COAST DISTklCT
Carlsbad, CA 92009
July 16,1999
Ms. Sherilyn Sarb
District Manager
California Coastal Commission
31 I1 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
RE: Kelly Ranch - Carlsbad
Dear Ms. Sarb:
It is my understanding that you are currently processing the
application for the Kelly Ranch in Carlsbad.
I am very supportive of this project. As a long-time resident of
Carlsbad, I have watched our community grow, and for the most part,
believe that the City of Carlsbad has done a very good job in their
planning efforts.
The Kelly Ranch project is a great example of development improving
our city's infrastructure and thereby improving our quality of life. The
Kelly project is responsible for construction Cannon Road to connect
to the existing portion west of the project. Cannon Road is badly
needed to relieve the traffic congestion on Palomar Airport Road and
to provide better access to the coast.
Your favorable recommendation on the Kelly Ranch project will
certainly help this new community become a reality.
Thank your for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Ms. Shesilyn sarb
California CoastaI Commission
3 1 1 1 Cwrino Del Rio No* Suite 200
Sm Diego, CA 92108
bear Ms. Sarb,
I understand you arc pmcesSiag the Kelly Ran& application at this he. Isuppri this
project- Your recommendation of Kclly Ranch will help make it a reality.
As T watched OW COXWUU~~~Y grow OVBT the years, I've found City of carlsbad planning
to be benelicial.
Kelly Ranch will improve our City's infiastru~t~~~ and thus our quality of We. Further
ccmstnlctim of Cannon Road BS part of this project WiIl east taffic on Palomar Airpoit Road and allow grew BCC~JS to the cow
Thank you for reading this letter.
sincerely,
David B. Ragla&
6415 Marlin Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009
I.
W 17a
LARUBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
July 15, 1999
Sherilyn Sarb, District Manager
California Coastal Commission
31 11 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
Dear Ms. Sarb:
The Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce, representing more than 1650 businesses,
requests that the Kelly Ranch project be part of the Coastal Commission's
August agenda.
The Chamber understands that the Commission has a heavy workload with
many important issues to discuss, but the delay in reviewing the Kelly Ranch
project will have far-reaching consequences.
Kelly Ranch is very important to the city of Carlsbad, its residents and
businesses. The completion of Cannon Road from El Camino Real to the
Macario Canyon Bridge is essential to the city's circulation system as a primary
relief to Palomar Airport Road and the provision of a much-needed east-west
thoroughfare. Additionally, Kelly Ranch has contributed the Nature Center at
Agua Hedionda Lagoon, dedicated 200 acres of wetland to the State of
California, provided nature trails, set aside 100 acres of upland habitat as part of
the Habitat Management Plan and reduced the density from 1600 units to 950
units including affordable housing.
Delaying Coastal Commission review of this project will delay the ability to
complete Cannon Road in a timely fashion. The delay could mean the difference
between geuing Cannon Road built and opened by June, 2000 or having to wait
until June, 2001. The city of Carlsbad desperately needs this thoroughfare as
soon as possible. We urge you to put Kelly Ranch on the agenda in August.
Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to a favorable reply.
cerely,
5620 Paseo del Norte, Suite 128 P.O. Box 1605 Carlsbad, California 92008
(760) 931-8400 Fax (760) 931-9153
Ibur Mr. Swh:
THE CL EMENSGROUP
July 26, 1999
Ms. Debra Lee
California Coastal Commission
31 11 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92109
Re: Kelly Ranch - Carlsbad
Dear Ms. Lee:
Thank you for our recent telephone conversation regarding the Kelly
Ranch project and thz special effort made by the Coastal Commission
staff to try to place the project on your August agenda. Although there are
still some remaining issues to be discussed and finalized, I am quite sure
that between your staff, the City of Carlsbad, and the Kelly team we can
finalize your review for the September agenda. Our first combined
meeting to work through the project is scheduled for July 28 at 1230 P.M.
As we discussed, I would like to formally request that the Kelly Ranch
project be scheduled for Tuesday, September 14, 1999 in Eureka. This
schedule will accommodate arrangements for those who need to be
involved with the presentation to the Commission, and if approved,
provide valuable time in the remaining days of the week in which to
arrange and commence grading.
Your consideration of our scheduling request will be greatly appreciated.
>$>:is
cc: Sherilyn Sarb
Land Development Public Affairs
1530 Faraday Avenue, Suite 120 Carlsbad, CA 92008 760.918.6662 760.918.6663 fax
J
3 3 7
\
COASTAL SAGE SCRUB HABITAT REMAINING 57.2 ACRES
r-1 SOUTHERN MARmME CHAPARRAL HABmAT REMAINING
1- 1f-J DEL MAR MANZANITA PLApcrS REMAINING
13.1 ACRES
29 PLANTS
0 53 190
Eucalyptus Woodland
Disturbed Wetland
Natural Floodchannel/ Streambed
t- Marine
I Agriculture
7 -
Maritime Succulent Scrub
Coastal Sage Scrub
1 --
-; Chaparral fi Southern Maritime Chaparral
Southern Mixed Chaparral
Southern Willow Scrub
Coastal Sage-Chaparral Scrub
Grassland
Southern Coastal Salt Marsh 9p.
Salt Water Marsh
Freshwater Marsh
Riparian Scrub
Riparian Forest
Riparian Woodland
Oak Woodland
Coast Live Oak Woodland
m Alkali Marsh
a openwater a Disturbed Land
i U r ban/Develo ped 7
u Proposed Preserve System
AUG 2 4 1999
CALIFORNIA
COASTAL COMMI sS!% sm DIEGO COAST DISTRICT
Figure 7
vegetation Legend for Proposed
Hardline Areas
@ 1997 City of Carlsbad (313 lcargisZ/produc~/hmplhmpproject/legsnd.~I 10130198
.AIArArr. 114 c m a-S
City
September 17, 1999
Honorable Christine Kehoe California Coastal Commissioner
of
SEP 2 1 1999
City of San Diego CALIFORNIA 202 ‘C“ Street COASTAL COMMISS~ON San Diego, CA 92101 sAN DIEGO COAST DISTRICT
KELLY RANCH - Lcp
Dear Commissioner
Thank you for meeting recently with Larry Clemens, representing Kelly Ranch.
As Mr. Clemens may have explained, the City of Carisbad recently approved the Kelly Ranch
tentative map and a variety of other legislative matters, and has been very supportive of the
Kelly Ranch. Importantly, the Kelly Ranch project will be instrumental in completing Cannon
Road (a much-needed east-west arterial connecting from El Camino Real to Interstate 5).
Additionally, the project has done an extraordinary job in preserving and dedicating vast
acreages of both uplands and wetlands (approximately 100 acres of ‘upland and 200 acres of
the Agua Hedionda Lagoon wetland), and is a participant in the City’s HMP. The Kelly Ranch
project is also proposing to construct approximately 490 rental apartments, of which 132 are
available under the provisions of the City’s Affordable Housing Program. It is not often that “for
renr housing is available in the coastal zone, and it is very unusual indeed to have an
&fordable housing project with no public subsidy involved.
The Issues
Coastal staff has recommended certain modifications to the City’s LCPA application that are not
acceptable to the City or the project propon‘ent. The following is a short synopsis of the issues:
+ Preservation of two ravines (as a canyover from the 1984 approved coastal permit CDP 6-
84-617). The two small ravines at issue within Area G (apartment site) were discussed with
both the City and the State and Federal Resource Agencies in the early planning stages of
the current project and it was agreed that the quality of habitat and locations of these areas
were not significant in light of other natural areas being offered for dedication. The quality
of habitat and “connectivity” of these natural areas are of paramount importance. In order
to balance reasonable development, including suitable access to the site, with preservation
and enhancement of the highest quality natural areas, these two ravine areas were allowed
for development. This was not a developer decision alone, it was a collaborative decision
made through the HMP planning process and the Environmental Impact Report process.
+ During the biological analysis and land planning efforts on Kelly Ranch, a variety of
development opportunities and environmental protection priorities were analyzed. Many
decisions were made and priorities identified in terms of balancing protection of the most
important natural areas and reasonable development. This is precisely the type of analysis
done by the Coastal staff in 1985 and supported by the Coastal Commission through permit
6-85-61 7. Coastal staff s/Commission’s permit findings memorialize the fact that a balance
Carkbmd RCQ4 d-qqb
&@&om Gfv 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad. CA 92008-1989 (7
Honorable Christine Kehoe
September 17, 1999
Paae 2
of priorities must be set in complex projects such as Kelly Ranch. Clearly, the current Kelly
Ranch Plan has achieved this environmental balance in the regulatory opinions of the City
of Carlsbad, California Department of Fish and Game, and the Federal Fish and Wildlife
Service. Evidence of this fact is the certified EIR and the integration of the Kelly Ranch
planned open spaces into the citywide HMP document that emphasizes "regionat" viability
of natural habitats. It would be ironic that a single land use regulatory agency, after two
years of environmental planning and agreement, woutd decide that those efforts are
unacceptable based upon land use policies set in 1985 prior to virtually all of the now in-
place environmental regulations.
+ Private roads/gated communities are being suggested by Coastal staff as not acceptable.
Private streets within apartment sites are in conformance with the City's Planned
Development Ordinance. The PUD ordinance permits cluster development that is generally
more environmentally sensitive (promotes more open space through cluster development
and less asphalt). Community gates should be allowed as long as the public access to
coastal resources is not prevented and there is adequate public access provided. The Kelly
Ranch has voluntarily contributed over $1 million of improvements to the Agua Hedionda
Lagoon Foundation in the provision of a 3800 sq. ft. Nature Center on over one acre of land
(Village "F"). Additionally, the Kelly Ranch Plan provides nature trails in both the upland
areas as well as the north and south shorelines of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon.
+ Planning Area "L" should not be determined to be 100% open space as recommended by
Coastal staff. Planning Area "L" should be approved as a separate parcel on the proposed
tentative map and the development potential should be decided at such time when the
property owner submits an application for a land use decision. However, it may be in both
City and Coastal Commission's best interests to establish it as a "standards" area so that
the development conditions are set at the time of the LCPA approval.
+ Coastal staff has questioned the legitimacy of the proposed access road that is planned to
serve Village "J" and an off-site parcel (known.as the Kirgis property). The secondary
access road must be provided to sewe both the Kelly Ranch Village "J" and the Kirgis
property. The City's cul-de-sac policy which was developed for emergency services and safety purposes, permits cul-de-sacs only if their length does not exceed 600 feet, the traffic
volume at the entrance does not exceed 500 ADT and the number of dwelling units does
Without the secondary access, neither Village "J" nor Kirgis can be
developed. The Federal and State Resource agencies have already reviewed and
approved the subject secondary access. Additionally, mitigation for the impacts caused by
the road have been included in the Kelly Ranch project and approved in the certified EIR.
' not exceed 50.
+ The Coastal staff has recommended to lower the zoning designation of Village "A" from
RMH (8-15 dua) to RLM (04 dua). The RMH designations are consistent with the approved
LUP designations for properties located lagoonward of Park Drive from Bristol Cove
eastward. CDP 6-84-617 issued by the California Coastal Commission approved the Village
"A" site for 200 dwelling units. Subsequently, the City's Growth Management Ordinance
reduced this site development to 111 dwelling units. An application is currently being
processed by the City to consider a proposal for 71 dwelling units (at a density of
approximately 7 dwelling units per acre).
Honorable Christine Kehoe
September 17, 1999
Page 3
The Kelly Ranch project was designed to be consistent with the City's HMP. It incorporates
certain environmental trade-offs in order to preserve the best quality habitat. Some of these
trade-offs are in conflict with the City's LCP protections for dual criteria steep .slopes.
Protection of the dual criteria slopes would not protect the best quality habitat on the site. In
order to justify these trade-offs the Commission's staff wants to incorporate the City's HMP
into the LCP. This poses a very large problem for us. The City Council has not taken
formal action on tbe HMP. Also, once the City acts on the HMP, it will require another 4 to 6
months of processing with the wildlife agencies. Therefore, the City cannot accept any
modifications that cause the HMP to be incorporated into the LCP. As an alternative, the
Commission could allow the trade-off by using $30007.5 (PRC) to resolve the policy conflict
and protect the most environmentally sensitive resources on the site. The Commission
established this precedent when it approved the Pacific Rim (Aviara) master plan and
allowed for the development of dual criteria slopes in exchange for the preservation of non-
protected slopes containing high quality coastal sage scrub.
As you can see, as is the case with most coastal projects, the Kelly Ranch is a complex project.
But this development proposal is high-quality and environmentally sound. It is a project that was planned with the good advice of the City of Carisbad, and the State and Federal Resource
agencies. And, importantly, it has survived the public hearing .process and received abundant
community support. The issues that I described above need to be resolved with Coatal staff
immediately so that this project can be heard at the October Coastal Commission hearing and
provide the Commission with the recognition that both the City and the Coastal staff are in
mutual agreement with the LCPA and the suggested modifications.
Thank you for your time and consideration in reading this lengthy letter.
' CLAUDE A. "BUD" LEWIS
Mayor
mhs
C: City Council
City Manager
Planning Director
Assistant Planning Director
Sherilyn Sarb
Bill Ponder
Larry Clemens
WAYNE CALLAGHAN
38 REDHAWK, IRVINE, CA 92604
Tel: (949) 559-6200 Fax: (949) 559-6215
E-mail: calgroup@regroup.NET
September 6,1999
Mr. Bill Ponder
California Coastal Commission
3 1 1 1 Camino del Rio North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108-1725
RE: LCP A 2-99; Kelly Ranch Draft Staff Suggested Modifications
Dear Bill:
We have reviewed your ‘draft’ Staff Suggested Modifications to the Kelly Ranch LCP Amendment,
and are highly opposed to several of your suggested modifications. I am in agreement with the City of
Carlsbad and Kelly Land Company’s additional items of concern they have communicated to me as
being in support of both their and my position and having been sent to you, some of which are attached
and all are incorporated herein. My most pressing concern is with, but not limited to your
recommendations regarding Planning Area “L” of the Kelly Ranch. Specifically issues 1, 2 & 3 below.
The previous two pages were an effort to try and obtain some reasonable understanding or basis for
your actions before delving Mer into the issues in this letter. However, said two pages should be
considered part of the official record and be forwarded to California Coastal Commission (“CCC”)
Commissioners with this letter.
Issue 1: The boundary line and residential zoning for proposed Parcel L shall be eliminated
MeZZo 11 I. Revised Land Use Plan Map - The City shall prepare a revised LCP Land Use Pla
map, to replace the approved Kelly Ranch Master for the Mello I1 LCP segment, which shal
incorporate the following changes:
- a. The map shall include a revised Open Space boundary that shall include the “hardlin
preserve” areas as shown on Figure 12 of the draft Habitat-Management Plan date
3/4/99 as Open Space. The boundary line for proposed Parcel L shall be eliminated.
component of the LCP Implementation Plan which shall incorporate the following changes:
- b. The parcel lines and residential zoning for proposed Parcel L shall be eliminated.
MeZZo 112. Revised Zoning Map - The City shall prepare a revised zoning map as
I NOTE: The City states it has informed you the site is in a “Standards Area” NOT
a “hardline Preserve Area” on the Habitat Management Plan.
Issue 2: Site to be used as a public access / public vista point
MeZZo 11 8) A public vista point shall be provided on the Callahan parcel and at anothcr location
or the ridgeline I\ ithiti Planning Areas I or J
Issue 3: No private Streets or gates
MeZZo 11 9)
gates shall be permitted for any residential development located in the Core Area.
Public streets with on-street parking, as feasible, shall be required and no private
ISSUE 1 The boundary line and residential zoning for proposed Parcel L shall be eliminated
‘Draft’ Carlsbad Habitat Draft Management Plan. PAL is not within a “hardline preserve”.
PAL is within a “Standards Area” since development information was not yet available. The City
states it has clearly communicated this to you. The Kelly Ranch project (including “Planning Area
L”) is within “PPA Core Area 4” and has contributed to establishment of a preserve within Core
Area 4 by contributing 240.3 acres of open space.
Subdividing PAL to create a legal parcel is independent of land uses. Covenants, Conditions
and Restriction (“CC&R”) recorded in the Official Public Records of San Diego County against all
of Kelly Ranch in addition to verbal communications as well as this and prior correspondences, has
provided CCC both direct and indirect notice regarding the constructive transfer of PAL having taken
place and of all Kelly Ranch owner’s requirement to create a legal lot for PAL per the map act.
Kelly Ranch owners and successors in interest (including owners of open space) are subject to
these documents. Those requirements obligate Kelly Land Company (as present owner) to create
legal lots, concurrent with recordation of Kelly Land Company’s final map.
Kelly Land Company has no right to make any decision regarding PAL,. It has merely designated
PAL as a legal lot. Its planning for the Kelly Ranch ignores all aspects of PAL’S future development.
History: Planning Area “L” (“PAL”) has gone through (see History Exhibit for more details):
Annexation into the City
Master Plan approval Zone change
Coastal approval Tentative Map approval
City Growth Management Plan
Inclusion in a City wide Mello Roos District
General Plan amendment
Revised City Hillside Grading Ordinance
Many other new regulations adopted by City
In addition to participating in entitlements, PAL has participated in wetland restoration, rough
grading, weed abatement, erosion control, farming, and was an integral part of the Irrevocable
Offer to dedicate approximately 200 acres of Open Space as well as additional slope easements. In
fact, I was responsible for and personally executed the initial Offers to Dedicate Open Space.
Site Characteristics: As part of development, Planning Area “L” (“PAL”) was gradcd under the
rough grading permit in mid 1980’s. The following aerial photo was taken shortly after rough
grading on the Kelly Ranch. After grading, PAL underwent extensive erosion control, planting and
irrigation for an extended period.
The majority of the site is comprised of Non-native grassland. Non-native grasslands are not
classified as a “sensitive” habitat by the draft HMP. However, the state and federal resource,
agencies are requesting that non-native grasslands be mitigated at a 0.5:l ratio to maintain ’
raptor foraging areas. Broad tracts of non-native grassland occupy most of the property. The
dominant plants here are Eurasian grasses that have substantially displaced the native flora.
California Coastal Commission LCPA 2-99 Planning Area “L,” (PAL) Page 2 of 5
5) Vesting
0 My wife and myself have placed almost all our assets into developing PAL; costs which could
easily exceed $2,000,000.
In 1980 my fm Cal Communities, Inc. was General Partner of the partnership which owned Kelly
Ranch, processed entitlements, graded, installed millions in infhstructure and millions more in
wetland and Habitat enhancements as well as dedication of wetland and slope areas of
approximately 200 acres.
o I incurred extensive costs to acquire, process and develop the Kelly Ranch and PAL.
o Since 1980 PAL has been assigned as a personal asset in all agreements to compensate me
for my initial costs and in addition the public has had public notice.
0 Federal taxes have already been paid for constructive receipt of the property.
The permits are now “vested” as acknowledged by the California Coastal Commission (“CCC”) on
January 6, 1987. Required property owner provisions of the deal have been fully accomplished.
Development activities undertaken pursuant to the Master Plan and CCC permit included
i) Fifty-three percent (181 acres) of the site encompassing Agua Hedionda Lagoon was offered for dedication as open space in 1985. Dedication through an Irrevocable Ofler to
Dedicate Fee Title and an Irrevocable Ofer to Dedicate Open Space Easement and
Declaration of Restriction (Instrument No. 85-301299 and 85-301298).
ii) An open space easement was recorded in 1985 and 1986, for slopes over 25 percent.
Dedicated by Irrevocable Ofer to Dedicate Open-Space Easement and Declaration of
Restricts (Instrument 85-301301) and Amendment No. I (Instrument 86-004362).
iii) Some of the grading and other construction activities done to vest approvals
(1) Rough grading, site preparation and erosion control within the Kelly Ranch including
(2) Installation of drainage and run-off control facilities and sedimentation basins.
(3) Restoration and enhancement of the lagoon, including major desiltation basin.
(4) Completed construction of Park Drive and El Camino Real.
(5) Construction of Cannon Road, and other internal roads.
(6) Installation of Utility construction within Cannon Road and El Camino Real.
(7) Subdivision (CT 96-07) was approved in April 1998, for a 45-acre portion (Area “E”)
of the Kelly Ranch pursuant to the adopted Master Plan and Coastal Permit.
Construction of this subdivision commenced in 1998.
Planning Area “L”.
PAL’S specific, land planning, civil engineering and architecture have been prepared on three
occasions for processing with the city. This also included initial City’s review several years ago.
PAL has undergone expense of grading, erosion control, planting, irrigation, and weed abatement
under Coastal and City permits. Your agency has acknowledged this as well as PAL’S vesting.
PAL has paid property taxes as a separate Assessor Parcel, which includes payment towards Mello
RoodAssessment Districts, Public Facility, and Community Facility District for the purposes of
providing public facilities prior to development to assure such facilities would be available for PAL
development.
0
California Coastal Commission LCPA 2-99 Planning Area “L” (PAL) Page 3 of 5
Planning Area L has already paid over $250,000 in cash directly for construction costs related to
Cannon Road and other off-site improvements to serve the development of PAL,.
ISSUE 2 Site to be used as a public vista point -and- ISSUE 3 No private Streets or gates
We strongly oppose requirement that: private drives within the project must be public streets,
privacyhecurity gates are prohibited, or that PAL is used for public vista point.
PAL is over one mile inland from the coastline, and on the inland side of the first public roadway.
It should be remembered this site is on the inland side of the first public street, and that public
access policies dictate the access provision “where no otherwise adequate coastal access exists ”.
There is no reason for redundant public access within the residential area of PAL.
Within a few hundred feet [on the lagoon side of public street] there is a 111 public nature center.
There is adequate public access to view the lagoon wetlands in various locations.
City has required in addition to original Coastal Permit public pedestrian trails and sidewalks in
two significant locations crossing the site and public views from these locations are plentiful.
Although there is more than adequate access and viewpoints proposed, the State has significant
Open Space areas within the Kelly Ranch to create such viewpoints if it wishes to exceed its
own policies. I am not sure why this entire site was selected over several others that are at a
higher elevation, or part of the proposed project, or preferably within the dedicate open space
that is non-native grasses?’ For example there is an Open Space area of non-native grasses at
the end of PAL’S access knwkle at Hemmingway Drive.
Access into PAL’S residential common area will defeat our extreme effort to open units into
shared common area to enhance feeling of a community or village instead of focus on private
exterior spaces.
We are not aware of any substantive rationale; whatsoever, that would necessitate full public
access into the residential common area or to use it as a public vista point.
Imposing public street requirements will render the project difficult to design. Especially this site
that already proposes a single loaded street, as well as homes designed to step with topography. ,
City public street requirements [street widths, turning radii, etc.], is inconsistent with proposed
Planned Development standards, which allow site to deviate for clustering within developable
areas versus more rigid detached project with long, wider streets.
Kelly RanchPAL has already contributed in excess of original CCC Permit. PAL is vested,
trade offs were completed in prior approvals and the revised application exceeds these early trade offs.
CCC staff recommended approval and the CCC Commission unanimously approved the Project in
1985 as memorialized in CDP 6-84-61 7. Commission findings associated with this permit indicate
their conclusion that;
“The Master Plan thus encompasses significant enhancement and preservation of the sensitive
resources of the site above and beyond what the applicable LCP documents currently require.
When combined with the offer to dedicate in fee title to a resource agency the majority of these
sensitive areas, and to restrict the uses allowed on others, these measures provide a mechanism
for long-range preservation of one of the state’s highest priority wetland resources.”
The section conclusion states, “The Commission finds that in order to accomplish this objective and
allow reasonable use of the property, modifications to the Planned Community Zone regarding
agriculture, maximum residential and commercial development, and prohibitions of grading on
steep slopes are appropriate. The Commission thus finds the proposed amendments, as part of the
overall development package, to be in conformance with Section 30007.5 of the Coastal Act.”
California Coastal Commission LCPA 2-99 Planning Area “L” (PAL) Page 4 of 5
I may not have understood your statement or intent, however, I have had a bad experience related to
third parties interfering with my business activities, and I need to sort through the following.
1) Regarding your suggested modification and Kelly Land Companies’ letter to you dated August 31,
1999. I assume your suggested modification did not intend to infer that Planning Area “L” could
not be subdivided, but rather that you wanted the property to be designated as open space, If this is
the case, I would appreciate before we step into my letter’s concerns, that this issue be clarified.
independent fiom land use (e.g. residential vs. commercial vs. open space). I need to understand
2) If the above is not correct then given that land is subdivided (Le. divided into parcels) which is
i) Why you made that jump? ii) Who on your staff as well as outside your organization was involved in such discussions
and, which of these persons were involved in the decision regarding parcel lines?
iii) Under your Mello I1 8) recommendation, “A public vista point shall be provided on the
Callahan parcel” appears to reflect knowledge of ownership. I then need to also know who
discussed ownership with you and did this person also discuss land use, or my parcel?
Since Planning Area “L” belongs to myself (not involved in the Coastal process) of which Coastal staff
has notice as well as it being on the public record regarding my interests, I am totally confused how
Coastal staff even jumped to land use let alone land division and now to a taking of the property for a
vista point that far exceeds Cod policy? It should be remembered this site is one mile inIand fiom
the coastline and on the inland side of the first public street, and that public access policies dictate the
access provision “where no otherwise adequate coastal access exists ”. There are more than adequate
access and viewpoints proposed,
0
0
0
Within a few hundred feet [on the lagoon side of a public street] is a full public nature center.
There is adequate public access to view the lagoon wetlands in various locations.
City has required (in addition to the original CCC Permit) public pedestrian trails and sidewalks in
two significant locations crossing the site and public views fiom these locations are plentiful.
State has significant Open Space areas within the Kelly Ranch to create such viewpoints if it
wishes to exceed its own policy. Not sure why this entire site was selected over several others that
are at a higher elevations, part of the proposed project or preferably within dedicate open space that
is non-native grasses? For example there is an Open Space area of non-native grass at the end of
PAL’S access knuckle.
0
Also the City states it has informed CCC the site is in a “Standards Area” not a “hardline Preserve
Area” on the Habitat Management Plan. PAL has been graded, is heavily vested, has been part of
numerous millions of dollars in habitat and infra-structure under my prior ownership of Kelly Ranch
when California Coastal Comission achieved their benefit from the bargain and acknowledged such
and vested rights, as well as millions more spent recently and that are proposed. See letter for details.
Again I assume some of this confusion is due to your not having been provided adequate information.
I did not know of this issue until last Friday afternoon, nor is it reasonable to have expected such issues
regarding the Coastal application and Area “L”. I assume since my notice was late last Friday (less
than two weeks from the hearing) we could discuss early Tuesday.
In any case, I am not agreeable to any actions on Planning Area “L” that will erode my rights.
Nor, am I willing to participate in any action that might jeopardize my existing vesting.
Bill Ponder 9/6/99 Fax (Page 2 of 2) 9 Pages in package
HISTORY EXHIBIT
1) Early Historv: With taxes and fhg costs rising, development began in 1960. The following
reflects this early planning.
2) 1980: Cal Communities, Inc. developed an initial / new concept reflected below with input fiom:
Initial Environmental Studies Mello I1 Local Coastal Plan (LCP) and Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan. California Coastal Commission and California Department of Fish and Game United States Corps of Engineers, and United States Department of Fish and Wildlife
County of San Diego, City of Carlsbad and numerous other Public and Quasi Publie Groups - I-
- ". . fM?mmudabrn =*=.:-
3) 1983: City approved an application to bring its plans into conformance with the Coastal Plan
related to the Ap Hedionda and Mello I1 Plans. The General Plan and zoning was revised.
4) 1984-85: Kelly Ranch was approved for 1600 units.
a) City of Carlsbad approved the Master Tentative Map (CT 83-30) and Master Plan (MP-174) on September 18, 1984
b) Coastal Commission unanimously approved the Coastal Permit (#6-84-617) on April 15,
1985. This Demit is now "vested" as acknowledged bv the Coastal Commission on 1/6/87.
c) Memo II Land Use Plan amended on October 24, 1985. Policy 3-5 of the LCP established
development provisions "due to overriding and extensive wetland preservation and protection.
5) 1999: In 1998 the property was sold to Kelly Land Company, which submitted applications to revise the plan. The new Plan included all the restrictions of the initial approval and Master Plan,
but also reduced density and included significant additional constraints on development.
Cos Anaelos Gmes
Local News Editorial Pam’
Carlsbad Development
m&n I1
CARLSBAD Development on Lagoon Wins Approval
Along Lagoon Wins OK
of Coastal Commission Lkawarblmraou*abu e- w ~b.t --I’ *H-
0 ’I)urrrlc+u u-
t==hu. WAlUWY. M - -.m L)U rmb. ernadmat ~b. hmm. md M kacem~~p-umdahaNms Ypracltmdbbuuk.PSO tn PUdc4l.d rrhur - Lbr awmrll1.( lk u-11 rnnd.d c.nla I(1yd nll d.lUDl.LnR 13Ulrdmlub. u* h* Iu pow -0”. 1Um.- = -Y .” Wld
M k-r. -YI, ID ‘YI-
Cutl.. dl”l?...f
rhrn uvs m lesl will
of Fish and Game, said ... “Getting that property into public
ownership and under lock and key was very critical,” Lauppe said “I think we
- ulrrd
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 ... commissioners, noting th& it is : ,, .., i. .j.i._ ...
.- . .j ., .h.,
rare that they unanimously endprse
Commissioner George Shipp III.. . called the
vote the beginning of “a new em’’ in relations
“I’m absolutely delighted to see that the
developer have worked together on this
1’
.PI; ., ’ I’ , ... ... after months of negotiations between
Cal Communities and commission staff
members in Sari Diego, who recommended Of and Our staff and the ‘
.,.? .$ i . /. and actually agreed on something.” Shipp ”.
said
SANTA BARBARA - With little comment
Commission unanimously approved . . . 0 0
Kelly Ranch
0
0 0
0 *L. and no hesitation, the State Coastal ... ..
0
0 0 0
0
0
*........***........o* o@oo**o***o*oooooo*o*oooooooo~ooo*o*oo~*o*oooo*o*ooo*oo*oo*o*oo
. . . to obtain the commission’s nod. Cal Communities had to agree to a rather hefty list of conditions. Among them are:
Turn over 200 acres
Construct a large siltation basin . . . to trap sedimentation that is currently swept downstream by Agua Hedionda Creek
r Yumerous lagoon restoration efforts must be undertaken and frnanced by Developer. Includes removal of.. . silt and landfill
Jom wetland, extension of tidal channel . . . and creation of nesting habitat for California Least tern and other endangered.. .
0
0 Create wildlife habitat.. . Construct an interpretive center, . . .
,/f%n.ning Area A has an existing designation of RMH. Area C was not down zoned
because of wetland encroachment as stated by CCC.
hatural steep slopes shall be avoided. (Staff report identifies slopes on A as
JPD ordinance is required for sensitive area development. PD is best served by reduced
manufactured)
widtldprivate streets in cluster development.
The CCC draws an incorrect conclusion that a residential designation on L will not
preserve sensitive resources or be consistent with Chapter 3 is false. There are
residential, industrial, and commercially zoned properties all throughout the coastal zone
that are still subject to environmental constraints, The property does not have to be
zoned OS in order to protect the steep slopes and/or other natural resources.
HOWEVER, deferring to a slope/vegetation analysis seems OK. Keeping the existing
RM should be acceptable for the “developable” portion of the site.
City shall require trail system? *
Public street requirement for K and L.
Remove “such as” or clarify that they are not specifically required.