SANTA BARBARA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report for County Sale of Cary Place Government Code 65402 Consistency Determination Deputy Director: Steve Chase Staff Report Date: June 22, 2006 Division: Development Review South Case No.: 06GOV-00000-00020 Staff Contact: Julie Harris (805) 568-3518 Environmental Document: N/A Supervising Planner: June Pujo (805 568-2056 OWNER/APPLICANT: County of Santa Barbara General Services Department 1105 Santa Barbara Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Contact: Ronn Carlentine (805) 568-3078 This site is identified as Assessor Parcel Number 005-240-ROW, located between Wallace Avenue/Union Pacific Railroad and the Pacific Ocean, Summerland, First Supervisorial District. 1.0 REQUEST Hearing on the request of the County of Santa Barbara General Services Department to consider for a determination that the sale of an unused and unimproved right-of-way, known as Cary Place, is consistent with the County General Plan, including the Coastal Land Use Plan and the Summerland Community Plan, pursuant to Government Code Section 65402. Application Filed: May 24, 2006 Processing Deadline: 40 days from application submittal July 3, 2006
Page 2 2.0 RECOMMENDATION AND PROCEDURES Based on the discussion in Section 6.0 of this report, pursuant to Government Code Section 65402, staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following action: 1. Determine that the sale of the Cary Place Right-of-Way is potentially consistent with the County General Plan, including the Coastal Land Use Plan and the Summerland Community Plan. 2. Transmit the consistency report required by Government Code Section 65402 to the General Services Department and the Board of Supervisors. This staff report and the letter reflecting the Planning Commission's action shall constitute the required report. 3.0 JURISDICTION This request is being considered by the Planning Commission based upon California Government Code Section 65402(c), which states that a local agency shall not acquire or dispose of real property or authorize construction of a public building or structure until the location, purpose and extent of such action have been analyzed as to conformity with the County's General Plan and have been reported to the planning agency having jurisdiction over the adopted General Plan. See Attachment B for the full text of Government Code Section 65402. 4.0 ISSUE SUMMARY The proposed sale of Cary Place to the owner of 2375 Finney Street (C. Anthony Thomas) is the result of a settlement agreement, effective date January 27, 2006, between the County of Santa Barbara and Mr. Thomas. Upon completion of the sale, Mr. Thomas will own unencumbered fee title to Cary Place, excepting only recorded utility easements that pre-exist the transfer (e.g., the Summerland Sanitary District s lift station) and a recorded covenant that states that no residential structures may be constructed on Cary Place other than landscaping features such as outdoor stairways. While Cary Place has been proposed for trail use/beach access in the Summerland Community Plan, it has not been used as a road or trail or for access to the beach. There are also no rights to public access on the adjacent properties to the north and south that would allow for access across Cary Place. The proposed sale of Cary Place can be found potentially consistent with County Comprehensive Plan policies, including Summerland Community Plan policies, as discussed in detail in Section 6.2 of this staff report. 5.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
Page 3 5.1 Site Information Comprehensive Plan Designation Ordinance, Zone District Site Size Present Use & Development Surrounding Uses/Zoning Access Public Services Site Information Urban area, Residential, maximum 4.6 dwelling units per acre Article II, Single Family Residential 7-R-1, 7,000 square feet minimum lot size 0.32 acres (13,975 square feet) Summerland Sanitary District Lift Station North: Union Pacific Railroad, Wallace Avenue and U.S. Highway 101/Transportation Corridor South: Sandy Beach and Pacific Ocean/Recreation East: Residential/7-R-1 West: Residential/7-R-1 No access across railroad tracks from Wallace Avenue, access to sanitary lift station via private road easement, Finney Street. Water Supply: Montecito Water District Sewage: Summerland Sanitary District Fire: Carpinteria/Summerland Fire Protection District 5.2 Setting The subject property (Cary Place) is located in Summerland, south of Wallace Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad and north of the sandy beach of the Pacific Ocean. To the east and west are bluff-top properties developed with single family residences overlooking the Pacific Ocean. Cary Place slopes steeply from the railroad and adjacent residential properties, towards the south, leveling out near the southern end of the property near the beach. The site is covered primarily with nonnative vegetation, including nasturtium and ice plant. A sanitary lift station, operated by the Summerland Sanitary District, is located in the northeast corner of the property. A 24-inch underground storm drain traverses the property from north to south, with an outfall near the southern property boundary near the beach. The source of the storm drain is not known as of the date of this staff report, but is likely collecting drainage from Highway 101 as well as drainage from portions of the Summerland community north of the highway. 5.3 Description The County of Santa Barbara, General Services Department proposes to sell an unused and unimproved road right-of-way to the owner of an adjacent lot identified as APN 005-240-019, 2375 Finney Street. The 0.32-acre property is known as Cary Place. 5.4 Background Information
Page 4 The proposed sale of Cary Place to the owner of 2375 Finney Street (C. Anthony Thomas) is the result of a settlement agreement, effective date January 27, 2006, between the County of Santa Barbara and Mr. Thomas. Upon completion of the sale, Mr. Thomas will own unencumbered fee title to Cary Place, excepting only recorded utility easements that pre-exist the transfer (e.g., the Summerland Sanitary District s lift station, drainage) and a recorded covenant that states that no residential structures may be constructed on Cary Place other than landscaping features such as outdoor stairways. The settlement agreement resulted from a dispute between the County and Mr. Thomas over a number of issues relating to the Thomas parcel and Cary Place, including fee ownership of the property. Cary Place is a right-of-way parcel, shown on a late 19 th -century survey for a proposed City of Summerland and to be used for public rights of passage, that was never actually developed and used as a road. Over the decades, additional connecting road rights-of-way in the area that were never developed as roads and that were shown on the same survey have been abandoned, such that the streets that Cary Place would have accessed no longer exist, either on paper or on the ground. A review of the County s historic Assessors Parcel books show the rights-of-way, named Finney Street, to both the east and west of the Cary Place parcel. West of Cary Place, the Finney Street right-of-way was abandoned more than 40 years ago; east of Cary Place, the Finney Street right-of-way was abandoned prior to 1975. (The Finney Street that exists today is a private road easement that has no relation to the Finney Street rights-of-way.) Thus, these rights-of-way have never been used by the public and abandonment of Cary Place would not result in a loss of public benefit. In 2003, as part of a nearby project (Mecay-Hotchkiss: Case Nos. 00-GP-009, 00RZ-007, 00- LA-018, 02CDH-00000-00041), a mitigation measure was proposed that would have developed vertical public beach access across Cary Place, which would have furthered the goals and policies of the Summerland Community Plan. During public hearings on the project information was presented that indicated that no easements existed or were available across adjacent private property, which would be necessary to successfully develop Cary Place for public beach access. The Union Pacific Railroad submitted a letter to the Board of Supervisors (Attachment D) indicating the County s desire to convert a private railroad crossing near Cary Place to a public crossing. The UPRR expressed safety concerns and referred the County to the California Public Utilities Commission and UPRR s real estate department. To convert a private railroad crossing to public would also require acquisition of easements across private property to connect the railroad crossing to Cary Place. In addition, another easement to the south would be required (and was not available) to connect Cary Place to the beach. Given the issues that arose around this mitigation measure, an alternative was proposed and accepted by the Board of Supervisors to provide funds for developing public access in another (unspecified) location in the Summerland area. As this project included a General Plan Amendment and Rezone, it was required to go to the Coastal Commission for certification. The Coastal Commission concurred with the Board of Supervisors findings and did not require access to be developed on the Cary Place parcel. 6.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
Page 5 6.1 Environmental Review A Government Code Section 65402 determination is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, no environmental review is required. 6.2 Comprehensive Plan Consistency REQUIREMENT Summerland Community Plan Action PRT-S- 1.3: To increase public recreational opportunities, when funding is available, the County shall pursue any option to obtain parcels of land, or portions thereof, with open space, visual, or recreational resource potential as shown in Figure 14 (Scenic Vistas/Priority Lands) that become available. If purchased, the parcels should be used for public open space or for public recreation. Summerland Community Plan Policy PRT-S- 2: In compliance with applicable legal requirements, all opportunities for public recreational trails within those general corridors adopted by the Board of Supervisors as part of the Parks, Recreation and Trails (PRT) maps of the County Comprehensive Plan (and this Community Plan) shall be protected, preserved and provided for during and upon the approval of any development, subdivision and/or permit requiring any discretionary review or approval. Summerland Community Plan Action PRT-S- 2.1 The County shall actively pursue acquisition of interconnecting useable public DISCUSSION Potentially Consistent: Figure 14 identifies all of the land seaward of the Union Pacific Railroad as priority land for acquisition for public use, including Cary Place. A number of the parcels seaward of the railroad are developed with single family dwellings and it is highly unlikely that these properties will ever become available for public acquisition. It should be noted that while the Cary Place parcel is currently in public ownership, it is currently not used by the public for recreation. The sale of Cary Place, which would result in the abandonment of a publicly owned property rather than acquisition, will not result in any new development on this parcel apart from landscape features such as stairways, as agreed to by the parties to the settlement agreement. In effect, the parcel will continue to provide some visual relief to the public, albeit not publicly owned. Potentially Consistent: As a part of the settlement agreement to resolve a legal dispute between the County and Mr. Thomas, owner of adjacent APN 005-240-019, the Board of Supervisors agreed to sell the Cary Place parcel to Mr. Thomas. The Summerland Community Plan (Figure 15) identifies Cary Place as a location for a trail with access to the beach. Cary Place is currently a landlocked parcel with no access easements across the Union Pacific Railroad tracks or across the privately owned parcel to the south, and no currently willing landowners to provide such easements. The abandonment of this County-owned land will greatly reduce
Page 6 REQUIREMENT trails within such designated corridors through negotiation with property owners for purchase, through exchange for surplus County property as available, from time to time; or through acceptance of gifts and other voluntary dedications of easements. Summerland Community Plan Action PRT-S- 2.2: When funding becomes available, the County shall design a program which provides for phasing and the setting of priorities for the acquisition and/or development of each trail identified in Figure 15 (PRT Map). The County shall pursue protection of such recreational trails network and expansion to meet goals of this plan to achieve desirable additional recreational and open space through: a. Expansion of the County Capital Improvement Plan for acquisition of additional recreational and trail properties; b. Pursuit and protection of title to properties that are in the public domain through past use of development; and c. Acquisition of desirable property and/or property necessary to expand such trails networks; to provide key interconnections; and to meet the most pressing public demands, through negotiated acquisition and/or acquisition through eminent domain proceedings, as approved, from time to time, by the County Board of Supervisors. Summerland Community Plan Development Standard PRT-S-2.4: Recreational and trails resources shall be protected for future use, by conditions upon all development which may directly affect the designated trail corridors, to require a permanent dedication of useable public trails through such trail corridors. Summerland Community Plan Policy CIRC- S-18: Existing public rights-of-way shall not DISCUSSION any opportunity to develop a trail and access across this land in the future and make it more unlikely that UPRR would ever grant access rights across the railroad tracks. The lack of current public access combined with the very low possibility that future easements could ever be secured results in a very limited likelihood that this proposed trail of the Summerland Community Plan would ever be developed. In 2003, the County attempted to develop a beach access trail across Cary Place as a mitigation measure on a nearby project. At hearings before the Board of Supervisors, public testimony was presented that demonstrated the difficulties associated with developing public access in this location. The Board of Supervisors ultimately decided to revise the mitigation measure to develop access at an alternative location in the Summerland area. Currently, developed public access exists approximately 1,000 feet to the west at Lookout Park. Access also exists approximately 1,360 feet to the east of the Summerland Sanitary District property on Wallace Avenue. These vertical accesses to the beach would continue to be available to the public. While desirable, access at Cary Place is not necessary. Potentially Consistent: Cary Place was never actually developed and used as a road or for
Page 7 REQUIREMENT be abandoned. Coastal Plan Policy 2-6: Prior to issuance of a development permit, the County shall make the finding, based on information provided by environmental documents, staff analysis, and the applicant, that adequate public or private services and resources (i.e., water, sewer, roads, etc.) are available to serve the proposed development. The applicant shall assume full responsibility for costs incurred in service extensions or improvements that are required as a result of the proposed project. DISCUSSION other public access uses. Over the decades, additional road rights-of-way in the area that also were never developed as roads have been abandoned over the years, such that Cary Place does not serve the intended purpose of a rightof-way. Thus, as these rights-of-way have never been developed or used by the public, the sale of Cary Place would not be inconsistent with this policy that serves to protect existing public rights-of-way and use. Consistent: The sale of Cary Place to the owner (Mr. Thomas) of the adjacent property (APN 005-240-019) would not result in any new development apart from landscaping features such as outdoor stairways. The settlement agreement between the County and Mr. Thomas stipulates that a covenant will be recorded clarifying that no residential structure may be constructed on Cary Place apart from such landscaping features Existing utility easements will remain in place (e.g. the Summerland Sanitary District s lift station, drainage). 6.3 Ordinance Compliance A Government Code Section 65402 determination only requires review of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and is not subject to the regulations of the County of Santa Barbara Inland Zoning Ordinance. 6.4 Subdivision/Development Review Committee The request is not subject to review by the Subdivision/Development Review Committee. 6.5 Board of Architectural Review The request is not subject to review by the South County Board of Architectural Review. 7.0 APPEALS PROCEDURE The report of the Planning Commission pursuant to California Government Code Section 65402(c) is not appealable to the Board of Supervisors. The Planning Commission s
Page 8 determination will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors, which would take final action on the sale of County property. ATTACHMENTS A. Findings B. Text of Government Code Section 65402 C. Letter from Ronn Carlentine, General Services Department, dated May 24, 2006 D. Union Pacific Railroad Letter to Board of Supervisors, dated March 17, 2003 E. Select Summerland Community Plan Figures F. APN page and Aerial Photo G:\GROUP\Permitting\Case Files\GOV\06cases\06GOV-00000-00020\SR_PC 7-05-2006.DOC
Page A-1 1.0 CEQA FINDINGS ATTACHMENT A: FINDINGS CEQA findings are not applicable to the requested Government Code Section 65402 Consistency Determination. 2.0 ADMINISTRATIVE FINDINGS Based on the policy discussion in Section 6.0 of the staff report, dated June 22, 2006, the proposed sale of Cary Place could potentially be in conformity with the policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan, including the Summerland Community Plan.
Page B-1 ATTACHMENT B: GOVERNMENT COSE SECTION 65402 Government Code 65402 65402. (a) If a general plan or part thereof has been adopted, no real property shall be acquired by dedication or otherwise for street, square, park or other public purposes, and no real property shall be disposed of, no street shall be vacated or abandoned, and no public building or structure shall be constructed or authorized, if the adopted general plan or part thereof applies thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition or disposition, such street vacation or abandonment, or such public building or structure have been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof. The planning agency shall render its report as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof within forty (40) days after the matter was submitted to it, or such longer period of time as may be designated by the legislative body. If the legislative body so provides, by ordinance or resolution, the provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to: (1) the disposition of the remainder of a larger parcel which was acquired and used in part for street purposes; (2) acquisitions, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening; or (3) alignment projects, provided such dispositions for street purposes, acquisitions, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening, or alignment projects are of a minor nature. (b) A county shall not acquire real property for any of the purposes specified in paragraph (a), nor dispose of any real property, nor construct or authorize a public building or structure, in another county or within the corporate limits of a city, if such city or other county has adopted a general plan or part thereof and such general plan or part thereof is applicable thereto, and a city shall not acquire real property for any of the purposes specified in paragraph (a), nor dispose of any real property, nor construct or authorize a public building or structure, in another city or in unincorporated territory, if such other city or the county in which such unincorporated territory is situated has adopted a general plan or part thereof and such general plan or part thereof is applicable thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition, disposition, or such public building or structure have been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency having jurisdiction, as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof. Failure of the planning agency to report within forty (40) days after the matter has been submitted to it shall be conclusively deemed a finding that the proposed acquisition, disposition, or public building or structure is in conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof. The provisions of this paragraph (b) shall not apply to acquisition or abandonment for street widening or alignment projects of a minor nature if the legislative body having the real property within its boundaries so provides by ordinance or resolution. (c) A local agency shall not acquire real property for any of the purposes specified in paragraph (a) nor dispose of any real property, nor construct or authorize a public building or structure, in any county or city, if such county or city has adopted a general plan or part thereof and such general plan or part thereof is applicable thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition, disposition, or such public building or structure have been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency having jurisdiction, as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof. Failure of the planning agency to report within forty (40) days after the matter has been submitted to it shall be conclusively deemed a finding that the proposed acquisition, disposition, or public building or structure is in conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof. If the planning agency
Page B-2 disapproves the location, purpose or extent of such acquisition, disposition, or the public building or structure, the disapproval may be overruled by the local agency. Local agency as used in this paragraph (c) means an agency of the state for the local performance of governmental or proprietary functions within limited boundaries. Local agency does not include the state, or county, or a city.