~-~-...--------------·-----·-· ----------------• ,,,. ... ,;19"• -·

CCC-284378

California Superior Local Rules

• • ' ~-~-...--------------·-----·-· ----------------• ,,,. ... ,;19"• -· DRAFT • • I May 13, 2004 PC Meeting - dra1t minutes for Commissioner review of . i I Estero Plan Update I . . .. I- .... -- ·----- ..... -- - . : 9: 12:04 I ESTERO PLAN I AM !UPDATE f ····- ····••*•1··--·-···- --·--··-······•·-· -- ------·--··-·· -·-···· ·-·····.--··--·~·--··:·-----··--··--.·-·-----·:----·---··-·---·-------·· - i 9.12. 19 i J h Eu hrat Reports on the amount of time available for review of this Area Plan Update. • AM i s~a; P • Fifteen hours are presently scheduled. No additional time nor money are i budgeted for this item. Gives the

schedule for today. Gives future schedule. . .. . .. . . - .. - . - .. . . . . . . . . - . .. . .. . . .. . . .. .. . .. ... • r • 9:16:06 1 1 commissioner Requests clarification of whether replacement pages will be provided, with AM Roos staff _responding that a draft will be prepared following conclusion of the I heanngs. i 9: 16 :·sa -!

Mik~-w ~lk;,;,· ----• stat~; repl~re~~~t -p~g~~-~iii~-~~ailable b~f or~ the fi~;I -~dio; 1;;1<~;.--- -•• I AM I staff These are in process at this time. 1 • • - •• •• • ;· -----• .. --- ·-- --· lntroctuce--;-Nan~y Orton, st~ff.--~~ Ni~i~-C~rt~~~con~ltant for the E-1-R-. - ··- ' 9.19.10 1 Mike Wulkan, Refers to appendices, stating a new appendix G is in process which should • AM I staff be ready by the next meeting, concerning habitat conservat,on plan general information. Acknowledges correspondence received since last meeting, 1 which is included in the staff report passed out this morning.

I s:21 : 19 Commissioner Asks about the letter that suggests seeking legislation to include Chevron AM I Liberto-Blanck property. Asks how it affects the Estero Area Plan, with staff responding. This will come up today, and the Commission can consider it. '----·-------~ -·--- .. --·· - -·· ···--~--- --·- -· ------ ------ -------------- ·--·-· Displays suggested agenda overhead. 1. Recap 4/22/04 meeting; revise 9:22:28 Mike Wulkan, AM staff 9:23:30 Mike Wulkan, AM staff Dune Sands ESHA standards; Review

chapter 8, cover rural area land use and Cayucos land use. Recaps previous meeting. New maps are attached to staff report, pages 3 and 4. Changes to Dune Sands ESHA are shown in Exhibit A. Details changes. First, if a dwelling is destroyed 75°10 or more, it should be able to be rebuilt. Language is proposed to accomplish that. Exemptions from Dune Sands ESHA sk ndards for minor developments. Gives details. Refers to site disturbance standards, giving details. States the findings that would be required to employ said standards. Refers to language in Exhibit A.

Speaks to Habitat Conservation Plan, and relationship with Federal Endangered Species Act. ESHA standards can be waived if they are inconsistent with the FESA. Gives details. Refers to Landscape requirements, noting changes.

Speaks to adjustment of limitation on site disturbance, which has been changed so one I will not be penalized for restoring habitat. r----~-------;------------------------------ 9:31:27 AM 9:32:02 AM 9:33:00 AM t Chairman Mehlschau Mike Wulkan, staff I Commissioner I Nielsen Requests information about "destroyed structures", giving a hypothetical situation and asks how it would be handled, with staff responding. If destruction were more than 75°10, then the new structure would have to comply with new standards, which is different from the rest of the county.

The structure could be replaced without having to comply with these standards, as long as it goes back to the same footprint as it was. That is different from re::t of county. Requests clarification of 500 square feet of site disturbance, giving a hypothetical example. Asks if habitat could be restored, with staff responding J • •

• • -~ ~-~..,.,----------------,-,....---- ----------·-•-' -----------·---·--,,, .. \4' I I I 9:34:56 I AM ' • ! 9:35:52 .. . .. . . . I • • , • , • . Mike Wulkan, ! staff . . . . . I : Commissioner , Nielsen ·1·--···----·---····- ............ ·--·-··--·-----·... -·-- ----- ------ ---·. that site disturbance of 500 square feet or less would likely be small projects.

States if one Is within Los Osos USL there is a 500 foot exemption, but outside the Los Osos USL, there is none. ·--- ---····-·---·-·---- ··----·------- ------ - ·-··· - --·-·····--··~----··-·-·--·-··------·· States that anywhere within URL one must have an approved HCP, participate in an HCP, or comply with FESA.

I AM I • I , • • , ·• • , I 9:36:32 : Commissioner Requests information about areas outside the URL, with staff responding, outside the URL is almost exactly the same boundary as the Los Osos Dune Sands ESHA. ,-·-- .. _.,_ --·- ------·--- -- .. -· -···-- ..... ·--· -· -·--··· --·----·•-· -----·----- ·- 1 Asks about

definitions of a TH, with staff responding, a TH is a terrestrial I A~I , 9:38:1(1 1 AM I j ! 9:39:59 i AM • .. . , 9:41:58 • I AM I 9:43:20 I AM ' i Nielsen \ I I i Commissioner 1 Nielsen : Commissioner Nielsen ' -•H•-• •• •• ••• ••• •• • • I • ' I Mike Wulkan, i staff Mike Wulkan, i staff habitat, which is a kind of ESHA. Requests further information about how the 10,000 and 20,000 square foot determinations were made, with staff responding habitat Is to be protected to the maximum extent feasible. That is the basis of the standards.

The goal is to protect as much habitat as possible while allowing reasonable areas for development. --,·- - ---- - ------ --··-·---- ' Asks about restrictions on the number of dwellings, with staff responding most of the areas are zoned residential sublJrban. Gives examples and outcomes. . . - _______ .__,_ -- -- - ....... - -- ----- *------·--··-- ----- - - • States the maximum would be 13 dwelling units clustered, with 20,000 square feet maximum site disturbance, and open space. 1f the site Is all ESHA and cannot be developed according to the biological report, then the property could not be divided.

That is a restatement of an existing ordinance uf the Coastal Land Use Ordinance. Further clarifies changes in the staff report distributed this morning. -- -r-9:44:41-·1Chai~~;;--·--- __ .. Requests public comment be limited to those issues addressed by staff. AM Mehlschau -- -- -·---- -- --·-~. ·--··- ··r··-·-····-· -···-·•--*- -*·--· Expresses concern about fire clearance conundrum. Exempting it means you can impose the impact, and also means you do not have to quantify or mitigate. That is unacceptable. Non-conforming development being treated as 9:45:06 ' if it does is not acceptable.

With plants, endomism is on a small scale, which Eric Greening AM sounds like very little, but it could be occupied by the last remaining area of ' endangered plant species. More care must be taken in such an area. Making I more and more exceptions will lead to collision with California Coastal Commission, holding up the entire area plan. Requests clarification of "endomism," with Mr. Greening responding an area that is not duplicated elsewhere is an endomism. Root is endemic, which means it is here and not elsewhere. - • -- ------- --- - -- -- ..

Distributes a site plan of the 66 acres previously referred to by Commissioner Nielsen. States his grave concerns about this property and designation as 9:49:13 Dune Sands ESHA. Requel\ts exclusiol'I of the developable portion of the Jeff Edwards property and make the Dune Sands overlay coterminus with the open space. AM Speaks to a Lot Line Adjustment approved for Michael Tutt on March 11, 2004. Requests Commission act to include the open spa~e component of that project in the greenbelt overlay and exclude the .-emaining eight acres. , • • • • ...

• ' , • I I 9:52:49 ; AM I t •• ·- I 9:53:58 • AM I I - .. - - , 9:54A l~ I I I 9:54:50 AM I I I ' ' ' ' 1 Commissioner :Roos I ' r . • • . : Commissioner \Nielsen i ~~missioner , Liberto-Blanck ' ' ' ' ' I , David Chipping I i I I I ' i ' I I ' I • I ' .. - - • • Reqcests clarification of mapped areas, and whether they meet existing rules, with Mr. Edwards responding. The Colmar matter has not yet been filed, but I the Tutt matter was previously reviewed. Requests information as to when the project will come forward, with Mr. Edwards responding the vesting map will be submitted soon.

States she spoke ex parte with Eric Greening about the plan. . ·- . . . .. . . . - . . . ... -~ . . . . . . .... . . . - . . . . . . ' . ' Los Osos. Comments on response to letter from Connor, about unmapped ESHA. Gives an example from Oxnard where a plant that was thought to be I extinct was found. Under the Coastal Act, it received automatic protection. Unmapped ESHA automatically protects something that comes up unexpectttdly. One should not remove that aspect of the protection from the Coastal Plan.

As far as confusion about mapping overlays defining ESHAs and ones that define mitigation areas, where habibt exists is different from what can be done with a piece of land where such habitat exists. Gives examples of when federal policies apply. States the Coastal Act has higher mitigation standards than CEQA. Speaks to small square footage disturbance, giving example of a 50 foot x 50 foot home, and how disturbance for fire suppression would affect this. Reiterates his request to not rename this greenbelt ESHA. Gives reasons.

AM , Rich Nyznyk request regarding two APN's where both properties were requested to be I I removed. Refers to a,, approved lot line adjustment. Requests clarification i I that both APN's are removed from the greenbelt. ·- ----···-··r------ -··-- - -~----·--· ... ,-- --- ------- -- ------------·- 10:02:51 I break AM I ~- -·r------ - ·,--------- -------------------------------10:1a:5o RECONVENE AM 10: 19:49 Commissioner AM Roos Requests information about habitat, with staff responding. Refers to map submitted by Mr.

Edwards, with staff clarifying details regarding ESHA and adverse impacts from development as well as compliance issues. ------r--·----- -- 10:21 :46 AM Commissioner Liberto-Blanck Requests staff speak to issues raised by Mr. Greening, with staff responding not including fuel modification areas for fire suppression was a decision made by this Commission, but this can been looked at again.

States brush clearance for fire suppression could be included in the disturbance limitations if certain findings could be made, which would allow adjustment. -----~---- --- - -·-· 10:23:50 AM Nancy Orton, staff States reasons why fire suppression can be allowed while still being subject to limitations due to sensitive habitat area. States Fire Department has distributed guidelines about how to deal with fire suppression clearing within sensitive habitat.

I i-----r---------i------------------------------1 1Q·2A:55 Commissioner ~-_.:A::M=--~=Li_be_rt_o-__ B_l_an_ck __ ;-R_e_it_e_ra_te_s_s_t_at_e_m_e_nt_s_b __ Y_s_ta_ff_, _w __ it_h_M_s_. _o_rt __ o_n_a_ffi __ ,rm_in __ g_. _______ , 10:27:48 AM Discussion L-:::::::::::::..--1. _____ _j__ ________________________ _ , .. ,,,. . ·,- •

• • • • I . . . :·· . - . . . . .. I 10:29: 13 : Nicole Carter, ·1··--··-·-·---· -- --···-~------ ·-----·--·--·· --------·--·-·-·-----···--- --- ... --- I States many factors enter fire management. States the statement from South I AM . EIR Consultant Bay Fire Department is dear. Significant impacts can result even without clear-cutting. Gives examples. States the fire department is sophisticated and works with property owners. I ' I • • • •• --·· ·-- ♦-----·--·-------- ---- ----------·-----------·-------------· -·-· j 10:30:22 1 Commissioner I AM IRoos States he likes what staff came up with.

States he is satisfied with today's presentations. 1 1 10:30:40 ; Commissioner AM i Liberto-Blanck . . . . . .. Agrees with Commissioner Roos. - . . . I I 1o:30:S4 : MOTION I AM ' I ; r . . . . . .

AM •Roos I I • • • • • • • • • • * •• Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Roos, seconded by Commissioner Liberto-Blanck, and unanimously carried, to tentatively approve Exhibit A to Los Osos Dune Sands Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area standards as set forth in staff report, with all changes proposttd included. [ -•••- -•- ••••• ••• •••••-•-• ••••-•-•••-••••-•••-•-•••••----♦•-•-•••---- ------•--h---•-• • • Requests clarification regarding "The Farm.", with staff responding. Reiterates Mr. Nyznyk's testimony, stating the Shielbelhut property has had snails or ' snail shells found on it.

The lot line adjustment has not yet been recorded. States staff does not have a strong position either way, but prefers leaving it in . I 10:34:24 • 6~r11missi,,,,er si~t~s'~he-;i·s;;~~-to-,~;v;11i~.-beca~~~~ot en~~hi~ormatio;has been ---- AM Liberto-Blanck received to take it out, with Commissioner Roos stating his agreement. [ 1-~~~~5; ·rc~~~;;~:o~er •• States m~;~inf~~~tio~-i;~~qu·i;;i,o take propertie; out-~f the g~~, ,~-It-. -••• 1 AM I Nielsen I There is still an opportunity to be exempted from the ESHA. Supports leaving j .........

I the farm in, with Commissioner Roos stating his agreement. ••• ·- -- -••• [ Recommends reviewing

chapter 8. This is a co;stal A~_s_s_co_m_p_o._ne_n_t_, a-•·· 10:36:07 AM Mike Wulkan, staff compilation of the goals, policies and programs that relate to Coastal Access. New items will be highlighted. Page 8-3 discusses a major goal of maximizing access along the coast and protecting private property as well. Page 8-9 includes coastal access policies; references pedestrian circulation, regional bikepaths. Protection of resources and agricultural operations is included, and consistent with Coastal Act language, using the same language. Page 8-11 starts discussion about standards. Highlights some.

Page 8-12 refers to new r----.'-------·rd_e_v_el_o_pm_e_nt_. ________________________ ~ 10:42: 16 1 Commissioner AM jRoos .. ---- 10:43:21 AM t I I Mike Wulkan, staff Requests dariiication of Minor Use Permits being required, which are usually for smaller projects, with staff stating it is projects of two or more dwelling units. Adding a garage would not kick in these standards . ----,Page 8-13 refers to programs and future actions by the Board of Supervis~rs, • as well as funding. Programs are taken from chapters 4 and 5.

Hiking and equestrian trails has been previously covered, and will be shown in the Parks and Recreation Element, being developed now. Tables appear on pages 8-23 and 8-24. On 8-14 there is a new program with County General Services for a plan regarding future offers to dedicate, a program for General Services and Planning to document presc1 'ptive rights, and a program that public land holdings appropriate for public access be retained in public ownership. A program in the rural area to develop parkland, equestrian oriented with an off highway bike path, connecting Cayucos and Morro Bay is included.

Protection of senstive habitat, including Snowy Plover protection is a new program. That • I •

' r ' • • ------ -- ----------~·--~------------------· --,,,,. 40 I • I . ' . . . . . . . .. . I 10:4o:14 1Commissioner ! AM 1Roos I .• ·r···-·· · : 10:47:16 :Commissioner ! AM I Liberto-Blanck ' ' ' ' • • concludes

summary of

Chapter 8-Coastal Access. ,·---- ------ _________ ¥____ -·· •·· 1 Requests information about parking criteria, with staff responding the criteria ! are in a through e of third bullet. Page 8-5 refers to south of Los Osos, a sand spit owned by State, and a map on 7-18.

The portion of the sand spit within Morro Bay is privately owned, with staff stating he is not aware of a program to acquire that. ' ... '. '' .. ' ,.-· ..... - ' ... '' ' ' .... ' ... ' ... ,,. ·--- ···- .. -· ·------··-·---·-·--···---------~---··· 1 10:48:24 ;John Euphrat, I States the majority is owned by Morro Bay, and he is not aware of plans to ! AM i staff l purchase. I • -··- ••• ,··- •• ,•--·-·· ---····•·- • ••-- ••···-·---•--·--··- .. -•.--- ·••- •··--- ______ ,._ -----···· - ! 10:48:58 !

Mike Wulkan, States the sand spit is protected, and refers to location of the discussion i AM : staff within the proposed plan. : • I • • siai;s-~si~tth1;i~ksea;y, b~tth~re is.diffi~uii;ri~cii~batance-between-· • ! public access and resource protection. These two goals often come into • I ! i : 1o:5o:o5 1 Eric Greening AM conflict. Page 8-9 under B-1, second paragraph, it would be better to reference the California Coastal Trail which would extend from one end of the area to the other, with the trail from Los Osos to Cayucos being a segment of that, to be consistent with changes in the circulation chapter.

And next page says "pursue improved coastal access and amenities ... in connection with I I ! I 1 • new development." Suggests striking "in connection with new development " I I Language within the plan could be misconstrued as calling for development I j on that property. Cayucos residents are very concerned about this, especially J I if it turns out to be a desalination plant. '· --- --- 1··--------- - - --- Refers to page 8-9, #2 Coastal Trail. "Class-I" should be inc~ded, so that the • I trail is clearly divided from the roadway. That is as opposed to "Class 2" which 10.53.19 Joy Fitzhugh is a road shoulder.

On page 8-14, prescriptive rights, second line, which says AM Farm Burea~ !"should document potential public prescriptive rights.", states the county 1 should not be in the business of trying to log who trespasses. People in agriculture do have a problem with trespass. Suggests striking from the paragraph. -----------,------ ----------·-· ·---:.-------------·--- --- ·-------- --·-· Speaks for Cuesta Inlet Property.

The majority ownership does not have a 10:55:56 AM Teresa McClish problem, but some do not like the prescriptive rights paragraph, because it says "anything existing shall be maintained." and in a separate

section says •consistent with protection of special habitat.• The habitat Is tread constantly by dogs and bicycles, and many others. This is too broad. Staff responds to Commissioner Nielsen's request for page number, stating page 8-12 last bullet speaks to Cuesta Inlet. ----,---------.------------------------------! 10:58:18 Commissioner AM Liberto-Blanck Requests clarification of prescriptive rights, with staff responding.

I ----·- --· Mike Wulkan, staff j 11:00:16 iTim McNulty, -' I The intent of this policy (2 programs) is to give an idea where we have possible prescriptive rights, so public access can be maximized, and interaction can be had between different access trails within the coastal communities This comes from general policy of coastal act goals to prevent interference with public access to the coast. States documentation of potential prescriptive rights has been started.

Chapter 8 has a list of existing sites. That is the intent. States prescriptive rights is a very old right of the public. State law has a ___________ __, •

' ' • - ----- - - • • ~--------... . ....------- ------,......., . ...--, ------------·----- ..... .... - ,- 1 • ' I • ; ' • • ' I • • I At.-1 ' . . • : County Counsel l t ; 11 :02:33 'Commissioner ' I : AM ;Roos ·--- ' l ' ' • • I I I 11:04:19 1 0. . I AM ; 1scuss1on ' ' I 11 :05: 17 Commissioner AM !Nielsen I • ! . •*-------. -·-. ·- •• - .~ • • • ~ 11 £~ 51 I Discussion -- . - .. 11 :07:24 Chairman AM Mehlschau • • ---·-- --- -- statute that allows a property owner to file a document that he knows of access but does not approve, and thereby, the continued use would not constitute a future right.

Historical use of private property for access car1 be taken to court. Use must be documented, or it can be lost. If someone tries to prevent the use, and those who use somehow "go away'' the access could be lost. That is the idea of documentation, to record the access . [ Gives a hyp~th;tical -sit~ati~~-·t;ciarify-the-p7iscrlptive rights IS_S_l;_e_, w-i-th ____ __ 1 County Counsel responding. If an agreement were made between two 1 properties owners who subsequently have a falling out, no prescriptive right , could be established, if you had authority to use the property.

That is only 1 when using property contrary to desires of owner. The only way to get I prescriptive access is to trespass, with County Counsel affirming and stating ; the trespass must be done in the open and with knowledge of owner. • i Requests information about whether potential public prescriptive rights were identified by the county, would the property owner have access to a legal propertv to remove his property from that list, with county counsel responding. There must be documentation that use occurred for a period of time.

A I historical recor<.! of use is of value in such a case . [ ---·---- ·--- - ---------- I •. "*•·- ••••• •*-•-·-· ··- ............... -·····-· -~·~--·-··-·-·---···---- -----·-····-·- ·--···· ---··-··-- •• Requests some language further defining what the county plans to do regarding prescriptive rights and documenting use, with staff responding. --------- ·----- ---------------------- -----····-----· • 11:OS:10 Commissioner States this should be taken out. Staff has stated there is adequate access in AM Roos rural areas, so there is no problem, no big areas that are fenced off.

In this 1 time of declining budgets we should do this. - ~· ··---- - - r- •• --··-··- -----·- • - ••• --- ----- ---··· -·· --- •• 11 :09:02 Commissioner AM Liberto-Blanck 11 :09:22 AM MOTION States her agreement with Commissioner Roos Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Roos, seconded by Commissioner Liberto-Blanck, and unanimously carried, to remove the second bullet, NPrescriptive Rights: on page 8-14 and revise the first bullet so it does not refer to potential public prescriptive rights. r•* ----··.---- ------·--·· -· ••• - - - -·--- --- Requests clarification of page 8-9, regarding the first bullet, creating a Class 1 11: 10:32 Commissioner AM Liberto-Blanck bike lane, with staff responding that a Class 1 bike path was recommended, but no part of the circulation map was revised.

Part of the bike path may have to be Class 2. I ·--------r-------i----------------------------- --States the use of "where feasible" would be appropriate here, because the South Bay Boulevard corridor between Los Osos and Morro Bay has been analyzed, and some places are fairly constrained. States Class 1 standards 11: 11 :48 AM Richard Marshall, Public Works I talk about pedestrian~. and multi-use situations . .... ---- .. -------~------------------·----------1 11: 12:45 Commissioner States it should ba referred to as the California Coastal Trail, with staff responding that can be included.

I This is the second sentence under the first b~let. Proposes language . - . -- - AM Liberto-Blanck !--:=---! I I Mike Wulkan, ,__ __ __,__ • '

• • - .. -- - - ------.....----------------• • • • $ ,,,,. i• • ·- - .. -·. -- -------·-·. l staff I I ! 11 • 13: 28 : Commissioner Developing a coastal trail from Los Osos to Cayucos, where feasible, that Is part of the California Coastal Trail.

I ....... -·--·-··-·---·---···-·--·-··-···- ·--·-. ... . .. ··-·---····-··------·- ---··- ' Suggests adding •consistent with the Califomia Coastal Trail and county trails 1 AM : Nielsen ' ! plan." I ..... - -·· - . - .. - .. . . . ·- - . • • - ...... - • • • • • • - - ·--- ~- ••••• - -· ·--- -·-------- --- • , I Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Liberto-Blanck, seconded by · Commissioner Cooper, and unanimously carried, to revise the second ! 11 :13:38 !

MOTION sentence under the first bullet, page 8-9 to read: ·oeveloping a coastal trail I AM i i from Los Osos to Cayucos that is part of the Califomia Coastal Trail, and is ! I i consistent with the Califomia Coastal Trail and County Trails Plan. I ., . f -- . ··- -·· .. -·-·· ·-. . • . . •.. . • ••• •••• • • • •••• ·-···· ••• ; 111~42 ! Discussion ! · -····- r ·· r . -- .. - • • • -·· • • ·-· ___ ••• ____ ·--·- _ I i • Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Nielsen, seconded by Commissioner i 11 1~57 '.

MOTION Cooper, and unanimously carried, to strike on page 8-10 bullet 3 "in I ~ i i connection with new development." 1 r : -,··-·······--··· ··· ··-···- ······ ....... - ·· ·· ··-· -·----------··-·-·-·----------·---·-·- ' I States that in regard to one speaker's request for more specificity regarding j I Commissioner the Cuesta Inlet, the discussions today are policy level and the Commission is • Nielsen ! tryi"lg to balance use against environmental concems, and the language on ; I page 8-12 does that. ·-·--·· r··-----·-···· ••••••• Refers to meth~~-di~W;~i~-~-that h;s been used so far.

States Coastal --·· 11 :17:16 i Nicole Carter, access is discussed in the EIR in

Section 5.1 Circulation. Impacts of AM 'EIR Consultant development were considered less than significant. Also, information about coastal access is in 5.8 Biology. Impacts are considered significant. ------------- -·-------11: 19: 17 j Commissioner Requests input from Ms. Carter regarding impacts, with Ms. Carter AM I Liberto-Blanck responding. ;.---· - ··-·------- .. ----·--------·-···· ····-·· -·,---------------·--·-·--------- -· 11:19:38 MOTION Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Roos, seconded by Commissioner AM Cooper, and unanimously carried, to approve

chapter 8 as modified. ···------ r···-~•-··•···-·-------·--·----- --- - ------------ ---------·-·----------- -----·· Addresses

chapter 4. Refers to page 4-6, stating this applies throughout the 11-21 ·27 Mike Wulkan planning area. Policies in rural area are aimed at protecting resources, AM staff ' maintaining the existing extent of the urban areas, and creating a hard edge I bet-.veen urban and rural development, among others. On page 4-8 land use policies begin for . ural areas. Gives details, listing. ---··-·---------·-- -States purposes of Open Space Policy 1 and 2.

On page 4-9 agricultural 11:24:28 AM Mike Wulkan, staff areas - provide incentives for agricultural use, not converting, and preventing development. :-----.-------------:----------------------·- -------Asks meaning of preventing development, with staff responding it means not changing the general plan.

The intent is not to prevent development on existing lots, but to prevent the spread of urban and suburban size lots in Commissioner Roos agricultural areas. ---------:---------:--------------------------------- 11 :25:35 Discussion AM ,-----,-------:-------------------------------; Suggests eliminating #3 because the material is covered adequately in point #2, with staff responding. AM Nielsen IJ' 1 :29:29 I Mike Wulkan, I Suggests if #3 Is deleted, #2 should be revised to include "or a~end the I •

• • -- -------------------------- . . . . ,,,.. ~- i I ' AM 1 staff I i ' I ' ' . - ' i l I I • -- ------------------· •• ---·-· .. ·---~ .. ----planning area standards such that more Intensive development would not be allowed." or something similar, with Commissioners agreeing that staff shall develop language. Discusses a hard area around Los Osos to contain urban development within.

States Cayucos wants a similar greenbelt surrounding their community. #6 ' ' i 11 :31: 11 ; Mike Wulkan, had language added previously, "without interfering with agricultural development." Regarding the Morros area, to protect scenic aspects of the Morros. States a Morro Bay Specific Plan is being developed at this time. On I AM istaff ! I ' page 4-13, Agriculture Policies, #11 needs to be changed to read: "Require decommissioning of marine terminal facilities, ...

" . . . . . . ··- ... ···-·. - - _ .. -·. ·-··.. - ---·--··--- -- --- ·----- - --· States there is a proposal to use that, and if the principles were present, they ' 11 :33:38 I Commissioner would probably object to that language. That is the desalination plant. States AM ; Roos we should not state it is decommissioned and make that a county policy. ' . --·- - . ' -- - - ··--·· .. -··.. f' ---- - ·- - • ·--------- -·- -· •• States there is no permit for the use, it has been discontinued.

Any proposal I 11 :34:37 John Euphrat, AM staff I I that comes in after today will have to be consistent with the agriculture 1 element. A pipeline system in place below the sand exists now, and are seen as conduits that could potentially be used. There is no application for a desalination plant. The proposed language would not affect it one way or the other. That property would be required to be cleaned up. A pending application exists to clean up the property by Chevron. Explains the clean-up proposed. Explains decommissioning in detail.

Suggests adding language to clarify, such as "other than existing facilities that can be reused as part of a new project." ·--·-- - --···· r··--·- -- ----··-- .. ·- ---·- --·-- - ---States

chapter 7 contains more specific language, but this statement can be 11 :40:16 Mike Wulkan, modified to cover re-use of facilities. States language will be developed for I AM I staff consideration later today. - 11 :41 :04 AM ·r -------·----- -----------------------~ Refers to

Chapter 12, bike path between Cayucos and Morro Bay - we can Mike Wulkan, staff strike "except for new development." Refers to page 4-15, Policies regarding rural lands category, which is the Cayucos hillsides. The Cayucos hillsides are the areas commonly referred to as paper lots. Both areas are subject to geological hazards. ------------ j Reques~-c-l-an-.fi-,ca-tio_n_o_f_w_h_o_m--ai,;i;ins-i~;-;~-~i;-d_th.rough tax default, with • 11 :44:35 Commissioner staff responding the county maintains those it acquires. That is one possible AM Liberto-Blanck solution, to have a regional open space committee.

There are legal lots that could be developed in the future, though it is unlikely. 11 :46:47 Mike Wulkan, AM staff , If the county acquires tax defaulted lots, the maintenance is done by the county. Discussion has taken place between the county and conservation organizations, where the lots have been given over the conservation organizations. County General Services does the maintenance. One possible solution is a regional open space district or some WdY to fund these acquisitions. Gives example of Cayucos Land Conservancy, which has received a grant to study ways to acquire properties.

They may have acquired some b}' '11., ,ation, or by transfer from the county. They are looking at ways to preserve t,1ca, area. Theoretically, development would be possible in the • •

• I ' ' I ' I ' I I I ' ' i ' ' ' • • -- f f~t~~e: if ailimpacts ~~-deaii -~ith. On pig;;·,i~ 1 are policies -f; ' Recreation category. The existing are Montana de Oro State Park, and a small property owned by Chevron. Policy 2 says •immediately adjacent to urban areas on sites that do not have prime land or significant habitat. This is in the Coastal Act. If we look to rezone land to recreation, It should not impact agriculture, sensitive habitat and should be adjacent to an urban area. ' ' ---· -- --·-·--·---·-----·----·--· --------. ' Page 4-18 Residential Suburban categories.

Points out the 2 areas, and describes same. The policies for those areas are to not move the urban reserve lines to encompass existing residential suburban categories outside the URL. That's consistent with keeping a hard boundary. Page 4-19 there is a policy for the fringe area of Morro Bay. There are some programs on page 4-55, for the Adelaida Planning Area, requested by the Cayucos Citizens Advisory Council. One is to establish a new sensitive resource area. This is now in process.

There is a program to delete the EX combining designation for the tank farm above Cayucos, to establish a referral area within which certain projects within the Whale Rock Reservoir area would be referred to I I I 1 11 :56:08 ! Mike Wulkan, ! AM lstaff I : I I I I ' I I I I ! I I I ' I I I . ······-·1··--··· i I I I I ' 11 : 21 j Commissioners ' 11 :57:46 Commissioner AM Nielsen 1 1 Environmental Health if those projects could include contaminants being released into the watershed. There is also a proposal to change the 1 boundaries of the Coastal Zone, which is the email from Dick Moom.

If the Commission wishes to do something along the lines the Advisory Council suggests, wording can be developed. Please expand on the email from Mr. Moon, with staff responding, pointing out on map existing Coastal Zone boundaries, and defining Coastal Zone. Explains recommendation of the Advisory Council. They advise expansion of the Coastal Zone. The State Legislature would have to be requested to change the Coastal Zone boundaries. Regarding page 4-55 c.

Requests information about commercial or industrial zones in the area, with staff responding in recreation category there is possibility of some projects other than agricultural use. The Idea is to get anything that might have contaminants to be reviewed if it is in the watershed of Whale Rock Reservoir. Requests canfirmation that moving the Coastal Zone line, it would be moved only to the extent it is in the Estero Plan, with staff responding the existing coastal zone boundary is the one between Estero and Adelaida.

This proposal of moving the Coastal Zone inland would make part of Adelaida coastal and subject to those regulations. ··- - -------i-------------------------------1 Page 4-9 Is the proposal to delete policy 3 and revise policy 2. "Do not I 11 :59: 17 Mike Wulkan, AM staff convert agricultural land to other land use categories or revise planning area standards so as to enable more intensive development." With that language the would be no problem deleting #3.

Chapter 4 is concluded. ·-------..---- --;----------------------- ------1 Refers to letter from Dick Moon. States it appears the Cayucos Advisory 12:00:55 PM I Eric Greening Committee has gone a step further. Refers to discussion about the tanks, states none of those is In the Estero Planning Area, nor in the coastal zone. All are in the Adelaida Planning Area. States the Commission should entertain Mr. Moon's concerns. They are trying to get control of their viewshed and watershed, and have that local.

Refers to 4-18 Whale Rock watershed, states "now in Adelaida" which makes him wonder if In the past the coastal zone was wider there. With the Estero Marine terminal there will be projects that • •• •

I ' I ' -- ~~- - --..----..;.----~-----------.. . ...----- -------· ---------------------• P 5 a e ~ ..... - ,- • • r - .. - . --·r ------ • I I I under coastal policies. I . ·- ···- ·--- ··r- --·-- - - - -·· •• ·~ - • -· I Regarding the marine termina!, see page 4-55 2d, which is a program to add I planning area standards to the marine terminal ownership so they are • 12:04:27 1 : Mike Wulkan, consistent with the standards in this plan. States that the planning area PM staff boundary of Adelaida was changed inn 1990 to follow the coastal zone. In the I past there was an Inland Estero and a Coastal Estero.

The Inland Estero was ' ' never subject to coastal regulation• I ! I ··-···-•--··. -- -·-·- ------···· -- - !Page 4-8, Open Sp;ce, states s~pporting agriculture is important to water I ' • I quality. States slowing sedimentation impact agrieu'.ture. States all open ' space land is not publicly owned. Would like "agriculture" there. On page 4-. 10, thanks Commission for their revision. Page 4-37, encouraging acquisition I of sensitive resources is still opposed by Farm Bureau. They are not in favor 12:06:13 Joy Fitzhugh, of the county a:quiring such land.

Page 4-55, states they are concerned PM Farm Bureau about amendments and establishing SRA's and impacts on agriculture. States I the Coastal Commission wanted to put restrictions on agriculture to protect the public viewshed. States they do not support that at all. ~tates the Farm Bureau is not in favor of expanding the Coastal Zone at all.

Also page 4-55, I the establishment of a referral area, states this extra ac...; ,1ity may not be I needed, due to other regulations above the Whale Rock Reservoir. . ------ .. ---·--- ---· 1 :31 :17 Chairman Requests rereading of item b2 on page 4-9, second phrase, with staff --PM Mehlscha.: responding .. r ·---·- --·, --- I I Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Roos, seconded by Commissioner I I Liberto-Blanck, ano unanimously carried, to delete policy 3 and revise policy 2 1:32:18 ' MOTION on page 4-9, to read as follows: "Do not convert agricultural land to other land PM use categories or revise planning area standards so as to enable more • I intensive dev'91opmer.t." • -·-----·--·r -------··• ----- ----- 1:32:3Q Chairman Requests '114-13 wording, with staff responding.

PM 1\-lehlschau ---- r-- -·· • -·- States the policy language should be narrowed. Reads proposed new #11. Mike Wulkan, States that in

Chapter 7, specifics regarding the plan will be given.

The policy Staff language ti .1re should be broad. • • - - Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Nielsen, seconded by Commissioner j:J3:46 Cooper , and unanimously carried, to revise #11 on page 4-13 to read: MOTION "Require a plan for the decommissioning of the marine terminal facilities, PM correction of any hazardous conditions, and restoration of the site to enable future use that is consistent with the Agriculture Lar· J Us,., Category." . --- --- 1:;M:Q6 Thereafter, on motion by Commissi.>ner Nielsen, seconded by Commissioner MOTION Cooper, ana unanimously carried, to delete the phrase -in connection with PM new development" to #12 on page 4-13. .. -------·- -- 1:34:37 Commissioner Stci1tes page 4-8 •,,yas discussed, with staff responding tl1at L:,e policy is only for open space, and so would not cover agricultural land.

Suggests including PM Roos the word -agriculture" following the word -recreation." ------·--- - ---- • I 1 :35:41 Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Roos, seconded by Commissioner I MOTION PM Liberto-alanck, and unanimously carried, to revise Policy A.2. on page 4-8 to I -- • I • a ' ' I I 1

- ----- - - •• • . ' ' f • • • • • -· -------------------·-·-----------··- ---· I read as follows: "Slow the process of bay sedimentation and support efforts to ensure that water quality supports recreation, agriculture, viable I I commercial fishing and shellfish maricutture industries, and a healthy I ecosystem that harbors a diversity of wildlife." I . ---- ..... r--- ·-· . - . .. . . -r Discussion takes place reg;~ng changing the coasta,-;o,1e boundary, with 1 1 1 : 37 : 58 '. Commis ,,oner Roos stating this is not the proper time to discuss it. - !

Discussion PM requests affirmation of whether advisory groups shou,d have an opportunity to l I discuss this first . .... -. -•. • [--- • • -· ••• -·. - • - •• I Thereafter, on m~on by C~mmissioner Libe~-Btanck, seconde_d_b_y_ -----· 1 :38:46 i Commissioner Roos, and unanimously carried, to tentatively approve I PM ' MOTION MChapter 4 Land Use Policies And Programs" for the rural area, as covered so I 1 _ ___ 1 far. page 7-10, these standards apply everywhere, including urban areas. These I 1 :40:00 Mike Wulkan, are general standards for environmentally sensitive standards. Clustering is I PM staff discussed.

On page 7-11, there is a discussion of cluster options, which would provide options for cluster subdivisions that are less strict than for other . . . . . . . . 1 :41 :52 Commissioner Refers to "g" -- that paragr&ph should refer to a through f, not a through g, ?M I Roos with staff confirmi J . . ...... ·----,·--- ·- -·· --· •••••• u~~apped •• ESHA_i_s-re-f~--rredt~l~-th~·pl~~~ ~;fe~ed-to._o_n_p_a-ge-7--11-. A-1,-a-r~·-· 1 :42:21 PM I Mike Wulkan, staff considered environmentally sensitive habitat, and development within those c1reas would have to be clustered or concentrated.

On page 7-13 some requirements for land divisions and development design appear. In 1a, development has to result in no adverse impact in environmentally sensitive areas. If it does, you cannot divide. 1 b is new development prohibited unless not silhouetted against the sky.

On page 7-14 standards for site disturbance in environment&lly r.ensitive .,abitat limits site disturbance to the maximum extent feasible. tten1 2 ac the bottom of the page discusses site disturbance, and needs to be revised to be consistent with earlier changes: "Site disturbance includes disturbance of the following areas ..• add "utility trer.ching, and in 4th line delete fuel modification areas, then continue "site disturbance d~s not include, and then delete ... all the way to "othe, features. " Site disturbance does not include and then add "activities" -- Page 7-15.

This standard protects water quality, requiring within 1 mite of a municipal water well requires ... review. The requirement is for a referral to Environmental Health for their review. P· -, 7-15 has planning areawide standards that require maximization of ... On page 7-17 standards require referral areas or planning impact areas for Morro Bay, Cayucos and Los Osos. These are areas within which projects get referred to the cities or advisory groups for their review. Maps appear on pages 7-21, Figure 7-3, page 7-18 has Morro Bay impact area.

The Cayucos Impact area is shown on 7-20. ~----·r------- .. -.---------------------------- ---1 Questions page 7-15 E-1, "existing prescriptive rights" - requests legal definition, with staff responding it is a prescriptive right that has already been 1:49:05 PM Commissioner Roos I determined by the courts . -- ··----'----- -----··- 0 a rsss • ' • • ' • I I I ' ! 1

• I I " ' ► I • • ' • I I • • • • * 1 :50:00 PM I I I Commissioner 1 Liberto-Blanck I I I • ' 0 # a Requests Information on standards regarding light pollution of the night sky, with staff stating he recalls nothing from the advisory councils on this, but the ordinance requires certain methods. States she wishes a standard about the night sky, with staff responding language from the El Pon1ar plan could be applied here. Commission directs staff to bring back language to the next meeting . I . . . . . . : . .. . . .. - . .. . . ----- ·- ·------ -------- Rural area standards begin on page 7-22.

On 7-23 a standard appears for new land divisions in Los Osos groundwater basin, which requires before I PM 1staff 1 approval a finding must be made that at buildout the project is sustainable. This standard is proposed for Los Osos, and new lots ec.nnot be created I r . ·-----··------ ;··------·--· -··--· 1 :53:46 : D' .

I PM i 1scuss1on r·. -- --·--·-·· -,-----···· ·- •• ·-· - I ! ' ' ! ' ' I I 1 :57:04 i Mike Wulkan, • PM staff I I • • I I I I I ·-· ------··-- -··------------ 1 :59:48 Commissioner PM Nielsen --- r --- --------· -- I 2:00:42 Comrr.issioner I PM Roos .----·-· ·--- ,------ -~------·-· ··- I I I 2:02:25 1 Mike Wulkan, PM staff ·- .. -·- -- - . -. ·--·-·· - 2:04:26 Commissit'11er PM 1 Liberto-Blanck --·- 2:04:54 Mike Wul"an, PM staff unless water is ovailable. ··-···-·--·-·--· ------ ------ • - --------·-·· -------- -----h Hills Scenic Item C page 7-23, displays on overhead screen.

This is the Iris Backdrop critical viewshed. It is a sensitive resource area. The i protect views as seen from LOVR and a narrow corridor of 100 deaisto feet on either side of LOVR where visual standards would apply. Those are i oundinthe a.,other displayed back of the document in the package of amendmenl.s. Item

I) is critical viewshed, the Hwy 1/Cayucos area, shown c,n 7-25 and overhead. It extends from Morro Bay along Via Creak to Hwy 1. a sensitive resource area designation, unlike Irish .-iills which is viewshed. -- -States the designation should be identified, with staff respondin identified in

Chapter 6. - ·-- This would be simply critical git is Request& clarification of stand~rds expressed in two different v staff responding the intent is the same, and the wording for item used for botli. Item C should say all applicable standards ... ap erbiages, with D could be ply, for example, those in

Chapter 4." ----- Page 7-27 the primary purpose is to protect scenic backdrops, i animal and plant habitats. This is already in existence, and is b mportant eing refined. tal Terrace, consolidating Clustering is required, as discussed earlier. On page 7-28 Coas west of Cayucos extending up the coastlin~. staff recommends items a and b regarding biological report.

Delete language ... -------··· - Asks for definition of Land Use Permit, with staff responding it is a broad category, and could be ministerial. - sos area, and Refers to bottom of page 7-28, Dunes Sands outside the Los 0 intent is to recognize those areas can support endangered spec require following the standard&. Recommends change to item # ies, and I 3, last sentence on the page. Gives propcsed language. States a ma displayed showing those areas outside Los Osos that have Los p will be Osos Dune Sands. -·-----,-- •• -- 2:07:05 Mike Wulkan, PM staff I Certain types of soils are referred to Oi I page 7-30.

This is reco mmended by the Agriculture and Open Space Element. A 1 lists the allowable uses. Bottom Marine of page 7-30 In Agriculture category are standards for Los Oscs Terminal. Pages 7-31, 32 and 33 have actual standards. What i s being - • • a • • • I ' ' ' ' 1 ◄ ' ◄ I

i I • • .... - -- ' ' i I I r I I I I - C p e . . . . ·--·-- --·------ ---------·-·--·----·-- --- -- - --required is storage tarks, unnecessary storage tanks shall be dismantled, In accordance with requirod development plan and any ... corrected. Standard 2 requires develop1nent plan be filed. On page 7-33, the requirements of the development plan are listed. Recommends ,evising wording in b3 to add the . . - ' i ' ' ' ' ' I I ' . .. - . j Mike Wulkan, i staff I ' I I • ' ' I ' 2: ~ 3:04 : Commissioner PM :Nielsen I ' application include any reusff of existing facilities. Explains. #3. .. ,' -·-----· ··-· -·-· -----------·-----·------·•. Details some permitting requirements. A

section of the California Code has special requirements for construction near landfills. On page 7-36 a map appears. States uses are limited, and lists uses. Estero Bluffs is now public page 7-37 there are no significant changes. -------------· • -----1 Requests clarification on page 7-28. Point 3. States the SRA is outside the URL.

Section 6b refers to sensitive resource area. The language proposed to be inserted requires participation in the Los Osos HCP, but does not address indi\ idual HCP, with staff responding because it is in rural area, they are not -- . -- required to comply ' 2:15;12 ·rJ-oh~ Euph~at, • ·1 states;;~;~~~~ of Los.Os~~ ~o ha~~-t~e.~ption of doi~~ ~h~.r~~;-···-··-··· I staff 1 ' 2:· 5:52 i'M 2:17:33 PM - I.··-.... . . . .. -·-·-··· -··•· ·················----··-···-··-····-··-·····-· ··---· ·--- -·-- ·-·---··-·· •• Refers to pages 7-15 and 7-23.

Asks if changes to 4-10 #6 will suffice or should Coastal Access and Recreation being consistent with protection of ongoing future agriculture be included. Same thing on 7-23, both c and d where Irish Hills L3ckdrop is discussed. Please insert "As long as it does not interfere with agricultural production." Compliments on fine work done by Mike i I Joy Fitzhugh, Farm Bureau I Wulkan and Nancy Orton. I I ' I I I -----· · --·1 States his agreement a~lrt-the good work that has been done ~Y staff.

Points out tt,at before it is dete111lined that this area plan is not the place to look at changing the Coastal Zone Boundary, you should interface with others, and it should be mentioned in the plan. On Los Osos Dunes Sands, is the language an obs~acle to the likely possibility that impacts on Dunes Sands habitat inside the community of Los Osos will require off site mitigation outside that Eric Greening community. We have not seen the habitat conservation plan, but it may become a program, and the habitat outside the community may become impacted.

Any language that exempts this area from habitat conservation plan is going to have to be mitigated somewhere. On page 7-33 a small change where any proposal not yet accepted by the county would not be accommodated in this plan. It should say "and any re-use proposed for" so as nat to give privileged status to some applicants.

States night sky should be protected and language should be included, such as in El Pomar-Estrella 1 Plan. -·-----· ·----·---· ..... :.---------------- ··-·------·---··-. -· ••• Page 7-15, comments by Joy Fitzhugh, it would be appropriate to add "opportunities to provide access along the coast shall be maximized" 2:21 :51 Mike Wulkan, PM staff i---·-- 2:22:36 John Euphret, PM staff --- -·--------- 2:23:16 States language could be changed in #3 to read, "Public access shall be consistent with protection of sensitive habitat and agricultural uses." PM Discussion I LI -=2=:2==6=:5:::1:..J..:I M::O:::T_::l:::O::_N:__ __ L.:I T'..:..:hereafter, on motion by Co;missioner Roos, seconded by Commissioner i • ,,,,. qe •

• • , ' I . . -· ... PM I 2:27:14 PM I I . - . . 2:28:41 PM 2:29:21 PM . I ! ' ' I i Mike Wulkan, ' i staff ' I I •. • .

I ;MOTION I ' I • !MOTION ' I 2:29:38 i Commissioner PM /Nielsen r -- - ---=- ---- ..... 1 2:30:08 o• , I PM 1scuss1on , ----···r-······ . 2:31 :08 EM 2:31 :45 PM 2:32:48 PM MOTION I MOTION I -----· Commissioner Nielsen -·- -- - - • Liberto-Blanck, and unanimously c,qmed, to modify Areawide Standard E-3 on 1 page 7-15 by adding the word •agriculture" to the end of t~.cs :entence. ••• - --··----- -·-·-----····. ···-----------·------·· •• ~ ·- - - States the actual standards that implement the critical viewsheds are in the Coastal Zone Land Use Ordinance package of amendments at the back of this book, so that would be the place to deal with that.

Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Roos, seconded by Commissioner Liberto-Blanck, and unar1imously carried, to revise the last sentence of item C on page 7-23 to read: ·All applicable standards In the Coastal Zone Land Use Ordinance apply within this area (e.g., those in

Chapter 23.04)." Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Liberto-Blanck, seconded by Commissioner Roos, and unanimously carried, to make the definition of •site jdisturbance" in Item 2.b.(2) on page 7-14 the same as the definition in Los 1 Osos ESHA standards. Changes to 7-28 2a Application Content, which is a biological report. Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Nielsen, seconded by Commissioner Roos, and unanimously carried, to delete on page 7-28, #2.a. as revised, the words • that is subject to the scenic protection standards in

Chapter 23.04 of the Coastal Zone Land Use Ordinance.", and to add the phrase ·except for the standard that requires participation in the Los Osos HCP." to the end of #3. Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Nielsen, seconded by Commissioner Roos, and unanimously carried, to add the words ·in accordance with the required development plan" to #1 Storage Tanks and Related Equipment" on page 7-32.

Refers to revision required on page 7-33, and proposes language. - --2:33: 11 Commissioner . . . . . ,. ·-- ·- Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Liberto-Blanck, seconded by 2:34:05 MOTION Commissioner Roos, and unanimously carried, to add the phrase ·re-use of EM existing facilities," to b.(3) on page 7-33, following the words ·Plans for ' proposed decommissioning," in the first line. I - -· ---- ·- 2:34:20 Commissioner Refers to concern by Eric Greening that Commission not make decision too quickly regarding expansion of the Coastal Zone.

States the PM Liberto-Blanck recommendations are tentative. ·- - - -2:35:11 Mike Wulkan, States a

summary of the EIR as it applies to these standards should be given, PM staff and maps reviewed. 2;~§:34 Nicole Carter, Some properties are changing from Agriculture to Rural Lands. There is not a whole scale change, and the potential for environmental impact is less than PM EIR Consultant that. Water supply, traffic related issues such as noise, wastewater, are not , • t

, ------- -- ---...- ~ ---- - ,. V -- • • ' I I i I I ' I ' ' ' ' I ' • • I ' I ' I ' ' ! ' I I ! ' I I I I ' I I I I ' I I I ' 1 . . • • ' ' 2:38:46 PM ' I ' • ' . . . • Mike Wulkan, staff 1 I I I I .. issues, drainage is a less than significant impact, and there are no significant impacts to agriculture. Aesthetic Impacts are less than significant. Geology, and cultural resources were looked at. Significant and una,otdable Impacts, 1 circulation had a class 1 impact. Air quality was considered. - -- ---··-------·-- • r • -- \ States changes to land use categories will be covered.

Following page 7-179 : starts a series of maps. They are numbered In lower right corner. States he I will start with map #M-2. Displays overhead, it will change from Agriculture to I Rural Lands. This 22-acre piece is Class 7 soils, which is unsuitable for range ; land. Staff recommends to go from Agriculture to Rural Lands on 22 acres. • The next map, M-3 is a boundary adjustment between the Estero and San I I Luis Obispo Planning Area. This is in the Coastal Zone. Right now it is in the San Luis Obispo Planning Area, but part of it is in the Coastal Zone.

The Estero Planning line is proposed to be mo•,ed to put all the property within Estero. Map #M-4, shows a proposed change from public facilities to agriculture on two 10-acre properties. Describes. Public Facilities zoning is i not appropriate because it is privately owned. It should be zoned Agriculture, I which is consistent with surrounding lands. Displays map #M-5. Staff I recommends change from Agriculture to Rural Lands. Next map, #M-6, shows combining designation changes. Gives key changes, pointing out on I Cayucos, and points out same on map.

That is to protect coastal views, marine mammals and sensitive plants. The next several maps, M-6, M-8a, M- 8b, M-8c and M-8d show the areas of Los Osos Dunes Sands which are I being designated environmentally sensitive habitat. Most of these sites were zoned Agriculture though most were publicly owned. Displays maps. ----·--··- ,-·----------- .... ·-· - - ------I 2:50:33 i Commissioner Map M-6, requests clarification of "unused", with staff stating it means the ~--=P=M=-_! Ni!~~e~--- __ 1 number "1" was not used in this map. ____________ _ States most of the changes appear routine.

Suggests the Commissioner may want to be tentative about Public Facilities for the Los Osos Sewer.

The Coastal Commission sent that back to the CSD who may end up relocking at 2:51 :3o Eric Greening eM I PM some of the originally proposed sites. _______________ , Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Nielsen, seconded by Commissioner Roos, and unanimously carried, to accept the changes suggested by staff to I ·-------- --·- -·--------·- Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Liberto-Blanck, seconded by maps M-2, M-3, M-4, M-5, M-6 and M-8 versions A, B, C, and D. 2:54:o9 MOTION PM Commissioner Nielsen, and unanimously carried, to tentatively adopt the standards, as amended. 2 : 54 : 33 Thereafter, on motion by Commissioner Liberto-Blanck, seconded by PM MOTION Commissioner Nielsen, and unanimously carried, to continue this item to May ······---••.--·- ---;-------·---------------------···- 1 1 27, 2004 at 8:45 a.m. -- ~-·- -·- -- ··--······-··----·-------·- ........ ------ -·-------. ---··--------··-·-·------·------- --------·· - - - • • - I 0 ,,,. ....... -· • 1

Document details

Collection	California Superior Local Rules
Citation	CCC-284378
Type	court_rule
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	CA_LOCAL
Identifier	f9a75feb630b49d6df5c8f41dcc31f84f6d45593

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).