20100511_m

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

Planning and Building Department

DATE:

April 30, 2010

BOARD MEETING DATE:

May 11, 2010

SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:

10-Day Notice

VOTE REQUIRED:

Majority

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

Jim Eggemeyer, Interim Director of Community Development

SUBJECT:

County Response to the California Coastal Commission’s Action on the Midcoast Update Local Coastal Program Amendments

RECOMMENDATION

1.

Conduct a public hearing regarding the County’s options for responding to the California Coastal Commission’s action on the Midcoast Update Local Coastal Program amendments.

2.

Adopt a resolution acknowledging receipt of the California Coastal Commission’s suggested modifications to the Midcoast LCP Update and directing staff to develop a resubmittal and request an extension to the timeframe to file the resubmittal.

BACKGROUND

On December 10, 2009, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) denied certification of the Midcoast Update Local Coastal Program (LCP) amendments submitted by the County in January 2007. The CCC then voted to approve the amendments subject to the County agreeing to accept 72 changes, as recommended by its staff (a copy of the CCC staff recommendation is available at http://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/2009 /12/Th18a-12-2009.pdf). The CCC’s action did not reflect any of the revisions to the CCC staff’s changes requested by the County, which were formulated after three Board of Supervisors hearings regarding the CCC staff recommendation, conducted in June, July, and December of 2009.

The County must now decide whether to accept the changes adopted by the CCC, and has six months from the date of the Commission’s action (until June 10, 2010) to do so, unless an extension is requested by the County and granted by the CCC. Therefore, the options available to the County are the following:

•

Adopt a resolution to accept the CCC’s changes in their entirety. The amendments, as revised by the CCC, would take effect on the date that the CCC determines that the resolution is legally adequate;

•

Vote to reject the changes, which would have the effect of leaving the existing LCP in place as the standard of review for coastal development permit applications; or,

•

Direct staff to develop an alternative version of the update that would be resubmitted for CCC certification.

At the April 13, 2010 meeting, members of the Board of Supervisors identified their concerns about accepting the CCC’s modifications, and expressed an interest in resubmitting the County’s original version of the amendments. A meeting with CCC staff to discuss this approach occurred on April 30, 2010. At the meeting, CCC staff expressed its interest in working with the County through the resubmittal process to develop alternatives to the suggested modifications of concern to the County. Some of the options discussed included:

•

Exempting Conditional Certificates of Compliance that legalize conforming lots from the lot retirement requirement;

•

Clarifying how the proposed temporary well moratorium and the requirement to connect to a public water system applies to lots with existing wells;

•

Adjusting restrictions on non-residential, non-Coastal Act priority uses to accommodate smart growth development with appropriate mitigation;

•

Revising Public Works policies to accommodate needed infrastructure projects; and

•

Restoring grandfathering provisions for applications that have been deemed complete as of the effective date of the resubmitted amendments.

In recognition that more time and discussion is needed to identify the full scope and content of the resubmittal, the recommended resolution directs staff to request that the CCC grant a one-year extension to the six-month timeframe the County has to respond to the CCC’s action. If the CCC grants this extension, Planning and Building staff will continue to work with the CCC staff and other interested parties on the specific content of the resubmittal, which will be considered by the Board of Supervisors at a subsequent hearing.

DISCUSSION

The following sections of this report summarize the concerns about accepting the CCC’s changes that form the basis for resubmitting an alternative version of the amendments rather than accepting the CCC’s changes, and describe the issues and procedures associated with a resubmittal of the County’s amendments.

1.

Concerns Regarding the CCC’s Suggested Modifications

An unfortunate consequence of the requirement to accept all of the CCC’s changes in order for any of the amendments to take effect is that a few disagreements can lead to failure of the entire amendment effort. In this case, accepting the CCC’s changes would not be in the best interest of the County, and would undermine the balanced approach your Board developed through the local process. As expressed by the Board on April 13, 2010, negative consequences include:

•

Concerns regarding the lot retirement requirement, including the application of this requirement to Conditional Certificates of Compliance and the potential problems associated with long-term maintenance of retired lots;

•

Concerns about instituting a temporary prohibition on wells, particularly in light of the progress being made in advancing understanding and management of groundwater resources;

•

Concerns about applying the modified amendments to permit applications currently in process; and

•

Concerns regarding exposure to litigation if the County accepts and applies the modified amendments proposed by the CCC.

Additional concerns regarding the CCC’s modifications that were presented at the April 13, 2010 Board of Supervisors meeting and form a basis for resubmitting the amendments rather than accepting the CCC’s modifications include:

•

Restrictions on non-residential and non-Coastal Act priority land uses that impede the creation of local jobs and the provision of enhanced local services;

•

Public Works policies that present unnecessary and potentially unsolvable obstacles for needed infrastructure improvements;

•

The requirement to reserve service capacities for Coastal Act uses before reserving capacities for local priorities such as affordable housing; and

•

Rezoning the Devil’s Slide Bypass lands to Open Space prior to the development of a public access plan for the area.

2.

Resubmittal of the County’s Amendments

In the interest of avoiding the loss of the beneficial changes included in the County’s amendments, the resolution directs the Planning and Building Department to develop an updated version of the amendments for resubmittal to the CCC. This resubmittal provides a final opportunity to work with CCC staff on alternative policy language that meets their objectives in a manner acceptable to the County.

The differences between a resubmittal and a regular amendment are that resubmittals must be made prior to the expiration of the CCC’s conditional certification (i.e., by June 10, 2010 unless extended by the CCC), and that resubmittals are not subject to the same local processing and CCC filing requirements as new amendments (including, for example, local public hearing requirements). In order to provide adequate time for Planning staff to develop the content of the resubmittal, the resolution directs staff to request a one-year extension to the six-month timeframe in which the CCC’s conditional certification remains in effect. During the extension timeframe, Planning staff will continue to work with CCC staff and other interested parties to develop alternatives to the problematic policy language proposed by the CCC that will be considered by the Board of Supervisors at a subsequent public hearing.

Shared Vision 2025: The resolution to resubmit an updated version of the amendments is consistent with Shared Vision 2025 because the modifications proposed by the CCC will reduce opportunities for infill development that promotes livable, healthy, and prosperous communities the vision supports. Resubmittal of the amendments also provides an opportunity to promote solutions to the issues identified by the CCC, consistent with Shared Vision 2025 objectives for a livable community.

This report was reviewed by County Counsel and determined to be acceptable in form and content.

FISCAL IMPACT

Resubmittal of the amendments will require the use of limited staff resources that will delay progress on other priority projects.


					COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Planning and Building Department


DATE:						April 30, 2010
BOARD MEETING DATE:						May 11, 2010
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:						10-Day Notice
VOTE REQUIRED:						Majority

TO:				Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:				Jim Eggemeyer, Interim Director of Community Development

SUBJECT:				County Response to the California Coastal Commission’s Action on the Midcoast Update Local Coastal Program Amendments


RECOMMENDATION

1.		Conduct a public hearing regarding the County’s options for responding to the California Coastal Commission’s action on the Midcoast Update Local Coastal Program amendments.

2.		Adopt a resolution acknowledging receipt of the California Coastal Commission’s suggested modifications to the Midcoast LCP Update and directing staff to develop a resubmittal and request an extension to the timeframe to file the resubmittal.

BACKGROUND

On December 10, 2009, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) denied certification of the Midcoast Update Local Coastal Program (LCP) amendments submitted by the County in January 2007. The CCC then voted to approve the amendments subject to the County agreeing to accept 72 changes, as recommended by its staff (a copy of the CCC staff recommendation is available at http://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/2009 /12/Th18a-12-2009.pdf). The CCC’s action did not reflect any of the revisions to the CCC staff’s changes requested by the County, which were formulated after three Board of Supervisors hearings regarding the CCC staff recommendation, conducted in June, July, and December of 2009.

The County must now decide whether to accept the changes adopted by the CCC, and has six months from the date of the Commission’s action (until June 10, 2010) to do so, unless an extension is requested by the County and granted by the CCC. Therefore, the options available to the County are the following:

•		Adopt a resolution to accept the CCC’s changes in their entirety. The amendments, as revised by the CCC, would take effect on the date that the CCC determines that the resolution is legally adequate;

•		Vote to reject the changes, which would have the effect of leaving the existing LCP in place as the standard of review for coastal development permit applications; or,

•		Direct staff to develop an alternative version of the update that would be resubmitted for CCC certification.

At the April 13, 2010 meeting, members of the Board of Supervisors identified their concerns about accepting the CCC’s modifications, and expressed an interest in resubmitting the County’s original version of the amendments. A meeting with CCC staff to discuss this approach occurred on April 30, 2010. At the meeting, CCC staff expressed its interest in working with the County through the resubmittal process to develop alternatives to the suggested modifications of concern to the County. Some of the options discussed included:

•	Exempting Conditional Certificates of Compliance that legalize conforming lots from the lot retirement requirement;

•	Clarifying how the proposed temporary well moratorium and the requirement to connect to a public water system applies to lots with existing wells;

•	Adjusting restrictions on non-residential, non-Coastal Act priority uses to accommodate smart growth development with appropriate mitigation;

•	Revising Public Works policies to accommodate needed infrastructure projects; and

•	Restoring grandfathering provisions for applications that have been deemed complete as of the effective date of the resubmitted amendments.

In recognition that more time and discussion is needed to identify the full scope and content of the resubmittal, the recommended resolution directs staff to request that the CCC grant a one-year extension to the six-month timeframe the County has to respond to the CCC’s action. If the CCC grants this extension, Planning and Building staff will continue to work with the CCC staff and other interested parties on the specific content of the resubmittal, which will be considered by the Board of Supervisors at a subsequent hearing.

DISCUSSION

The following sections of this report summarize the concerns about accepting the CCC’s changes that form the basis for resubmitting an alternative version of the amendments rather than accepting the CCC’s changes, and describe the issues and procedures associated with a resubmittal of the County’s amendments.

1.		Concerns Regarding the CCC’s Suggested Modifications

		An unfortunate consequence of the requirement to accept all of the CCC’s changes in order for any of the amendments to take effect is that a few disagreements can lead to failure of the entire amendment effort. In this case, accepting the CCC’s changes would not be in the best interest of the County, and would undermine the balanced approach your Board developed through the local process. As expressed by the Board on April 13, 2010, negative consequences include:

		•	Concerns regarding the lot retirement requirement, including the application of this requirement to Conditional Certificates of Compliance and the potential problems associated with long-term maintenance of retired lots;

		•	Concerns about instituting a temporary prohibition on wells, particularly in light of the progress being made in advancing understanding and management of groundwater resources;

		•	Concerns about applying the modified amendments to permit applications currently in process; and

		•	Concerns regarding exposure to litigation if the County accepts and applies the modified amendments proposed by the CCC.

		Additional concerns regarding the CCC’s modifications that were presented at the April 13, 2010 Board of Supervisors meeting and form a basis for resubmitting the amendments rather than accepting the CCC’s modifications include:

		•	Restrictions on non-residential and non-Coastal Act priority land uses that impede the creation of local jobs and the provision of enhanced local services;

		•	Public Works policies that present unnecessary and potentially unsolvable obstacles for needed infrastructure improvements;

		•	The requirement to reserve service capacities for Coastal Act uses before reserving capacities for local priorities such as affordable housing; and

		•	Rezoning the Devil’s Slide Bypass lands to Open Space prior to the development of a public access plan for the area.

2.		Resubmittal of the County’s Amendments

		In the interest of avoiding the loss of the beneficial changes included in the County’s amendments, the resolution directs the Planning and Building Department to develop an updated version of the amendments for resubmittal to the CCC. This resubmittal provides a final opportunity to work with CCC staff on alternative policy language that meets their objectives in a manner acceptable to the County.

		The differences between a resubmittal and a regular amendment are that resubmittals must be made prior to the expiration of the CCC’s conditional certification (i.e., by June 10, 2010 unless extended by the CCC), and that resubmittals are not subject to the same local processing and CCC filing requirements as new amendments (including, for example, local public hearing requirements). In order to provide adequate time for Planning staff to develop the content of the resubmittal, the resolution directs staff to request a one-year extension to the six-month timeframe in which the CCC’s conditional certification remains in effect. During the extension timeframe, Planning staff will continue to work with CCC staff and other interested parties to develop alternatives to the problematic policy language proposed by the CCC that will be considered by the Board of Supervisors at a subsequent public hearing.

Shared Vision 2025: The resolution to resubmit an updated version of the amendments is consistent with Shared Vision 2025 because the modifications proposed by the CCC will reduce opportunities for infill development that promotes livable, healthy, and prosperous communities the vision supports. Resubmittal of the amendments also provides an opportunity to promote solutions to the issues identified by the CCC, consistent with Shared Vision 2025 objectives for a livable community.

This report was reviewed by County Counsel and determined to be acceptable in form and content.

FISCAL IMPACT

Resubmittal of the amendments will require the use of limited staff resources that will delay progress on other priority projects.