COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: HEARING DATE: RE: Santa Barbara County Planning Commission Florence Trotter-Cadena, Planner III North County Development Review October 11, 2006 (Consent Agenda) Stonegate Ranch Modification of Conditions (06RVP-00000-00010 for 98-DP-019) APNs: 105-330-004 1.0 REQUEST Hearing on the request of Stonegate Ranch, to consider the following [application filed on July 26, 2006]: a) 06RVP-00000-00010 to modify Condition #45 of 98-DP-019 (Stonegate Ranch Single Family Dwellings) to permit rough grading prior to recordation of TM 14,481; and to accept 95-EIR-001 and its addendum dated August 11, 2003 as adequate environmental review for the project pursuant to Section 15162 of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. The application involves Assessor s Parcel No. 105-330- 004, located approximately 200 feet southeast of the intersection of Pinal Avenue and Broadway, in the Orcutt area, Fourth Supervisorial District. Application Filed: July 26, 2006 Application Complete: August 21, 2006 Processing Deadline: 90 days from 15162 Determination 2.0 RECOMMENDATION AND PROCEDURES Follow the procedures outlined below and conditionally approve Case Nos. 06RVP-00000-00010 marked "Officially Accepted, County of Santa Barbara October 11, 2006 Planning Commission Exhibit 1", based upon the project's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and Article III, Inland Zoning Ordinance, and based on the ability to make the required findings. Your Commission's motion should include the following: 1. Adopt the required findings for the project specified in Attachment A of this staff report, including CEQA findings.
06RVP-00000-00010, Stonegate Modification of Conditions to 98-DP-019 PC Consent Agenda: October 11, 2006 Page 2 2. Accept the CEQA Determination Letter based on 95-EIR-001 and its addendum, pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, as described in Section 6.1 of this staff report, as adequate environmental review for the project. 3. Approve the project subject to the revised Condition #45 included as Exhibit 1. Refer to staff if the Planning Commission takes other than the recommended action for appropriate findings and conditions. 3.0 JURISDICTION This project is being considered by the Planning Commission based upon Article III, Chapter 35-317.10.3.b, which specifies that revised development plans shall be processed in the same manner as a new development plan. Also, Chapter 35-317.6 specifies that all Development Plans outside the jurisdiction of the Director or the Zoning Administrator shall be within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. Therefore, this project is subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. 4.0 ISSUE SUMMARY Grading prior to recordation is a procedure requested by developers for a number of reasons. In this case, the final map is not ready for recordation, yet conditions which must be complied with prior to grading can be met. Several county departments have worked with the owners to ensure that all pre-construction conditions will be met before a grading permit is issued. 5.0 Background TM 14,481, Stonegate Ranch is currently in the map clearance process. Due to issues regarding the affordable housing documents, Planning and Development will not be able to sign off on the project prior to the September 20, 2006 deadline at which time the map will expire. The owner has applied for a time extension on July 26, 2006. The time extension request is expected to be considered by the Planning Commission on October 11, 2006. 6.0 Project Description The Stonegate Ranch project received final approval by the Planning Commission on September 10, 2003. The project would eventually allow the construction of 46 lots (44 single family lots, one 19,569 square foot open space lot, and one 22,883 retention basin lot). Since the original approval, the applicant has submitted for map clearance on TM 14,481. Due to issues regarding the affordable housing documents and conditions of approval with those documents the map has not been able to record. In order to close the timeline gap and avoid loss of existing construction loans, the owners have requested permission to rough grade the property prior to recordation of the map (TM 14,481). Condition #45 in the development plan (98-DP-019) linked development to recordation of the map. County Code Sec.21-8-C4 allows an exception, but this condition first needs to be revised.
06RVP-00000-00010, Stonegate Modification of Conditions to 98-DP-019 PC Consent Agenda: October 11, 2006 Page 3 6.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS 6.1 Environmental Review CEQA Section 15162 allows the use of a previously adopted environmental impact report (EIR) unless substantial evidence would require major revisions of the previous EIR due to substantial changes in the proposed project because of: 1) new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2) substantial changes to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3) new information of substantial importance. Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines is found to be applicable to the proposed Modification of Conditions, as new significant environmental effects will not occur, previously identified environmental effects will not increase in severity, and no new information of substantial importance will require revisions to the previously certified EIR. 6.2 Comprehensive Plan Consistency The project description has not changed; the environmental setting has not changed; and the applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan have not changed. Therefore, the policy consistency analysis approved with TM 14,481/98-DPF-019 is still applicable. 6.3 Article III and Chapter 21 Ordinance Compliance The proposed modification would be consistent with all requirements of the Small Lot Planned Development (SLP) Zone District of the Article III Zoning Ordinance and Chapter 21, Subdivision Regulations. 7.0 APPEALS PROCEDURE The action of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the Board of Supervisors by the applicant or any interested person adversely affected by such decision. The appeal, which shall be in writing and the accompanying fee must be filed within ten (10) calendar days of the Planning Commission s decision. ATTACHMENTS A. Findings B. CEQA 15162 C. Site Plan EXHIBITS 1. Revised Condition #45 for 98-DP-19 G:\GROUP\Permitting\Case Files\RVP\06 cases\06rvp-00000-00010 - Stongate 98-DP-019\StonegateRanchPCMemo.doc
ATTACHMENT A: FINDINGS 1.0 CEQA FINDINGS CEQA Section 15162 allows the use of a previously certified environmental impact report (EIR) unless substantial evidence would require major revisions of the previous EIR due to substantial changes in the proposed project because of: 1) new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2) substantial changes to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3) new information of substantial importance. Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines is found to be applicable to the proposed Revised Development Plan, as new significant environmental effects will not occur, previously identified environmental effects will not increase in severity, and no new information of substantial importance will require revisions to the previously certified EIR. Additional review may be found in Section 6.1 of this staff report. 2.0 ADMINISTRATIVE FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 35-317.7, a Preliminary or Final Development Plan shall be approved only if all of the following findings can be made: 1. That the site for the project is adequate in size, shape, location, and physical characteristics to accommodate the density and intensity of development proposed. The 7.91 gross acre project site is adequate in size, shape, location and physical characteristics to accommodate the proposed 44 unit residential project. The site was determined to be an appropriate location for SLP zoning, with a maximum density of 63 units on site. Further, the location of development is within the identified development areas in accordance with the requirements of the Orcutt Community Plan. The site does not contain areas with steep slopes or areas with significant habitat or open space values. The site does not contain any landforms or geological features that would preclude development in any location. The site contains adequate access location and adequate public services. The proposed residential development would be compatible with the neighboring residential development. The site is physically suitable for development as shown on the project plans. Therefore, the site is adequate in size, shape, location, and physical characteristics for the type and density of development as shown on the project plans. 2. That adverse impacts are mitigated to the maximum extent feasible. As noted in the August 11, 2003 Addendum to 95-EIR-01, the impacts of the proposed project are the same or less than those of the project analyzed in 95-EIR-01 prepared for the Orcutt Community Plan. The proposed project has conditions to mitigate all identified impacts to the maximum extent feasible. The Board of Supervisors adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for 95-EIR-01 for the significant impacts that could not be fully mitigated.
Stonegate Ranch Revised Development Plan 06RVP-00000-00010 for 98-DP-019 PC Consent Agenda: October 11, 2006 Page A-2 3. That streets and highways are adequate and properly designed. The Public Works Roads Department has accepted the location and design of the proposed roads per the project plans subject to certain conditions, including providing a funding source for long term operation and maintenance of the roads. 4. That there are adequate public services, including but not limited to, fire protection, water supply, sewage disposal, and police protection to serve the project. Adequate public services exist, or will be available prior to recordation of the map. The Fire Department approves the design of the project subject to their conditions of approval. The project will be served by State Water through an agreement with the City of Santa Maria. A Can and Will Serve Letter from the water company is required prior to recordation of the map and a finalized agreement between the applicant and the City subject to County Counsel review is also required. Sewage disposal facilities (LCSD trunk line and capacity in LCSD treatment plant) are required to be in place prior to recordation of the map pursuant to the policies of the Orcutt Community Plan. The Can and Will Serve Letter must state that the effluent from the LCSD plant will meet RWQCB standards and that the project is located within the District s service boundaries. Police protection has not been identified as a significant issue associated with the project. 5. That the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare of the neighborhood and will not be incompatible with the surrounding areas. The proposed project is located and designed in accordance with the requirements of the Orcutt Community Plan and is not incompatible with the surrounding area. The proposed project would not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood. The project site was determined to be an appropriate location for residential development, during the Orcutt Community Plan. All of the existing surrounding land uses were planned or present at the time this determination was made. The proposed project would allow a total of 44 residential units on the project site. Residential uses on the site would be sized and architecturally designed so that they would be compatible with surrounding residential land uses. Traffic generated by the proposed project would not significantly affect roadways used by residents of the surrounding area.
Stonegate Ranch Revised Development Plan 06RVP-00000-00010 for 98-DP-019 PC Consent Agenda: October 11, 2006 Page A-3 6. That the project is in conformance with the applicable provisions of Article III and the Comprehensive Plan. The project would be consistent with the applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan including the Orcutt Community Plan and Article III as noted in Sections 6.2 and 6.3 of the attached memo. 7. That in designated rural areas the use is compatible with and subordinate to the scenic and rural character of the area. The project is located within the urban boundary line of Orcutt. 8. That the project will not conflict with any easements required for public access through, or public use of a portion of the property. The proposed project would not impact, alter or affect any public access easements.
ATTACHMENT B: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW TO: FROM: Decision-Makers Florence Trotter-Cadena, Planner Development Review Division North County DATE: August 21, 2006 RE: CEQA Determination: Finding that Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines applies to the Stonegate Ranch Time Extension (Case# 06RVP-00000-00010). CEQA Section 15162 allows the use of a previously prepared EIR, Addendum, or ND unless subsequent changes are proposed in the project which will require important revisions of the previous EIR, Addendum, or ND due to the involvement of new significant environmental impacts, or there are substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, or new information becomes available. Location: This site is identified as Assessor s Parcel Number 105-330-004, located approximately 200 feet southeast of the intersection of Pinal Avenue Background: The Planning Commission approved the Addendum (dated August 11, 2003) to 95-EIR-01 for TM 14,481 and 98-DP-019. Pursuant to Section 15164 of CEQA, an addendum is allowed to be prepared when only minor changes or changes that do not create new significant impacts would result from the project. The Addendum identified the specific environmental impacts of TM 14,481 and 98-DP-019 and, where appropriate, refined the program level mitigation measures from 95-EIR-01 to reduce the project s environmental impacts. Because the current project meets the conditions for the application of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, preparation of a new EIR, Addendum, or ND is not necessary. Changes in Project Impacts: The project description and the environmental setting of the project site have not substantially changed since the original project was approved. The short-term, long-term and cumulative impacts associated with the proposed project have not increased or changed since the time of original project approval. The mitigation measures identified in the original Addendum would remain applicable and adequate to reduce the potential impacts to less than significant levels. Findings: It is the finding of this Division that the previous environmental documents (the August 11, 2003 Addendum and 95-EIR-01) may be used to fulfill the environmental review requirements of the Stonegate Ranch Development Plan Revision. No impacts previously found to be insignificant are now significant. Taken together, the original environmental documents and this letter fulfill the environmental review requirements of the current project. Because the current project meets the conditions for the application of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, preparation of a new EIR, Addendum, or ND is not necessary. Discretionary processing of Stonegate Ranch Development Plan Revision (Case # 06RVP-00000-00010) may now proceed with the understanding that any substantial changes in the proposal may be subject to further environmental review.
Exhibit 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Stonegate Ranch Development Plan Revised Development Plan (06RVP-00000-00010) of 98-DP-019 These revised development plans are based upon and limited to compliance with the Planning Commission Hearing Exhibit 1 dated October 11, 2006, which revises condition of approval #45 as set forth below. Any deviations from the project description, exhibits or conditions must be reviewed and approved by the County for conformity with this approval. Deviations may require approved changes to the permit and/or further environmental review. Deviations without the above-described approval will constitute a violation of permit approval. Condition #45 shall be revised as follows: No permits for development, including grading, shall be issued prior to recordation of Tentative Tract Map 14,481, except when grading prior to recordation has been approved by the Board of Supervisors per County Code Sec. 21-8-C4. G:\GROUP\Permitting\Case Files\TM_TPM\14400s\14481\ModificationtoDP\StonegateRanchPCMemo.doc