SANTA BARBARA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report for

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report for Hayes Holden Tentative Parcel Map

Hearing Date: October 11, 2006 Deputy Director: Zoraida Abresch Staff Report Date: September 22, 2006 Division: Dev Rev North Case No.: 01TPM-00000-00027 /TPM 14,590 Staff Contact: Lorie Baker Supervising Planner: John Karamitsos Environmental Document: 06NGD-00000-00023 Phone #: 934-6255

OWNERS / APPLICANTS: Jerry and Lisa Hayes Monty and Debra Holden 8320 Highway 166 Santa Maria CA 93454 805-934-0949 AGENT: David Swenk Urban Planning Concepts 2950 Professional Parkway Santa Maria CA 93455 805-934-5760 SURVEYOR: Jon McKellar Jon McKellar, PLS 910 East Stowell, Suite107 Santa Maria CA 93454

1.0 REQUEST

Hearing on the request of David Swenk, agent for owners, Jerry and Lisa Hayes and Monty and Debra Holden, to consider Case No. 01TPM-00000-00027 for approval under County Code Chapter 21 to divide a 117.28 acre parcel (gross) into two parcels, of 54.52 gross acres (Proposed Parcel 1) and 61.97 gross acres (proposed Parcel 2) in the U Zone District under Ordinance 661; and to approve the Negative Declaration 06NGD-00000-00023 pursuant to the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. Application Filed: December 31, 2001 Application Complete: August 10, 2006 (current project description) Processing Deadline: 60 days from approval of ND

8320 Highway 166 (approximately ¾ mile east of Tepusquet Road and 20 miles east of the City of Santa Maria, APN 131-030-042, Fifth Supervisorial District.

Hayes Holden Tentative Parcel Map 01TPM-00000-00027 / TPM 14,590 Hearing date: October 11, 2006 Page 2

2.0 RECOMMENDATION AND PROCEDURES

Follow the procedures outlined below and conditionally approve Case No. 01TPM-00000-00027 / TPM 14,590 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 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. 2. Approve the Negative Declaration (06NGD-00000-00023) and adopt the mitigation monitoring

program contained in the conditions of approval (Attachment B). 3. Approve the project subject to the conditions included as Attachment C. Refer back to staff if the Planning Commission takes other than the recommended action for appropriate findings and conditions.

3.0 JURISDICTION

Tentative Parcel Maps that are not exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act are subject to consideration by the Planning Commission pursuant Section 21-6(a) of Chapter 21.

4.0 ISSUE SUMMARY

4.1 Geologic Resources 4.1.1 Geologic Setting: The State Geologic Map shows that a branch of the East Huasna Fault crosses the subject property. This map also indicates that the property is underlain by Franciscan Formation rocks including ultrabasic intrusive rocks (e.g. serpentinite). The geologic map by Vedder and others (Geologic Hazards Report by Earth Systems Pacific, January 30, 2006, indicates that portions of the subject parcel (particularly portions on proposed Parcel 2) are underlain by landslide debris. Pre-SMARA (Surface Mining and Reclamation Act) mining activities occurred (prior to 1975) on approximately 18.92 acres in the north-eastern portion of the proposed Parcel 2. No reclamation was attempted after mining completion and slopes remain steep and exposed, though in various stages of natural restoration. Tailing from the mining operations still are scattered around the old mine site.


4.1.2 Geologic Hazards There is potential instability, particularly affecting considerable portions of proposed Parcel 2, due to the above-mentioned landslides and pre-SMARA mining activities. Based on the analysis provided in the attached geologic reports (Attachment B, Geologic Reports), Proposed Parcel 2 contains a demonstrated developable area of approximately 5.75 acres, contained in part within Development Envelope A. The remaining unstudied portions of Development Envelope A and the entirety of Development Envelope B (approximately 14.25 acres), as well as the remaining locations outside of the proposed Development Envelopes would be required to be evaluated by a certified engineering geologist upon proposal for structural development (including access drives) which require a Land Use Permit. Impacts associated with development and/or grading within the proposed development envelopes would be potentially significant. Mitigation (refer to Attachment B, Geologic Processes section, and Conditions of Approval) requiring submittal of fully developed plans with supporting geotechnical analysis (prepared by a certified engineering geologist) for all Land Use Permit applications within development envelopes would ensure that impacts to geological processes are reduced to less than significant levels. Future development within these unstudied areas would be required to demonstrate that structures requiring a Land Use Permit and associated access would have no possibility of resulting in potentially significant adverse impacts associated with biological resources, or geologic processes including exposure to or production of unstable earth conditions, erosion, or excessive grading. 4.2 Biological Resources 4.2.1 Special Status Species: Flora and Fauna A search of the California Natural Diversity Database indicates that the following special status plant species could occur in the area: umbrella larkspur (Delphinium umbraculorum), Miles milkvetch (Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesiana), and the Mt. Pinos onion (Allium howellii var. clokeyi). All are California Native Plant Society (CNPS) “List 1B” species, which are considered to meet the CEQA definition of rare. Umbrella larkspur occurs on mesic sites in cismontane woodland. The closest location is along Highway 166 about 2 miles north of the Pine Canyon Ranger Station (CNDDB 2006). This plant could potentially be found on the subject parcel. The Miles milkvetch has not been seen recently in Santa Barbara County, and there are only a few general locations in the coastal hills from the Cuyama River mouth area through Foxen Canyon and the Buellton area (CNDDDB, 2006). In San Luis Obispo County it has been seen recently on heavy clay soils in serpentine grasslands. Due to the lack of suitable habitat, it is not expected on the site. The Mt. Pinos onion occurs in Great Basin scrub and pinyon-juniper woodland. This habitat is not abundant on the project site, and thus this species is not expected. A search of the CNDDB indicates that the following special status animal species could occur in the area: prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus, CSC), American badger (Taxidea taxus, CSC), and two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii, CSC). All are California Department of Fish and Game Species of Special Concern (CSC). The two-striped garter snake is known from Pine Canyon Creek in the immediate vicinity of the project site (CNDDB 2006). It is found in rocky streams that have protected pools near shore (Stebbins 1966). 4.2.2 Wildlife Dispersal/Mobility


Continuous wildlife corridors extend along the subject parcel in an east and west trend along Aliso and Pine Canyon Creeks where incised ephemeral channels and ridgelines punctuate the topography. The subject parcel and the land that surrounds it is part of an important wildlife mobility corridor between the Cuyama River and the upland reaches into the Los Padres National Forest. The on-site woodland provides excellent habitat for native plant and animal species. In addition, this woodland serves as a substantial mobility corridor for herbivoric/omnivoric populations (such as deer, badger, bear) and the associated predator base (owl, turkey vulture, mountain lion, bobcat) migrating between coastal and inland foraging ecosystems. The major impacts associated with this project would be the cumulative inclusion of human habitation to an active biological regime. Such impacts are potentially significant because of the high biological value of the biodiversity indicators found in the Cuyama River corridor providing aquatic habitat, as well as shelter and migration corridors for terrestrial wildlife. These activities could also impact the riparian areas which provide food, shade, shelter, perching, roosting, nesting and foraging for other species. The biological resource impacts of one single family dwelling in the vicinity of Aliso Creek would be relatively minor. However, access to proposed Envelope B on proposed Parcel 2 would require access across Aliso Creek. Impacts to the wildlife corridor would occur as a result of structural development associated with the required crossing. Intensification of residential use on the project site, with associated outdoor patio lighting, landscaping, fire clearing, etc., could result in potentially significant environmental impacts to wildlife migrating through or foraging on the project site. Proposed mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration would reduce potential impacts to wildlife migratory activity and survival of native flora and fauna to less than significant levels: a) additional studies to determine the presence or absence of special status species (flora and fauna), and may be subject to appropriate protective measures, including avoidance, to minimize potential impacts; b) prior to Land Use Permit approval, the County Biologist shall review and approve all plans for proposed construction and development within the proposed Development Envelopes (including access provisions to access Development Envelope B on Proposed Parcel 2) to ensure impacts to migratory activities and survival of native flora and fauna would be minimized.


5.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

5.1 Site Information

Site Information

Comprehensive Plan Designation

A-II, 40 Acre minimal parcel size

Zoning District, Ordinance U, Ordinance 661

Site Size 117.28 acres gross/116.85 acres net

Present Use & Development Single family dwelling and ancillary structures, open space/horse raising

Surrounding Uses/Zoning North: Rural Ranchettes, Cattle grazing; U, A-II South: Rural Ranchettes, Cattle grazing; U, A-II East: Rural Ranchettes, Cattle grazing; U, A-II West: Rural Ranchettes, Cattle grazing: AG-I-20, AG-I

Access Highway 166 (proposed Parcel 1) and Pine Canyon Road (proposed Parcel 2)

Public Services Water Supply Private Wells (Two, Parcels 1&2) Sewage: Private septic systems (One existing, one

Proposed Parcel 2) Fire: County of Santa Barbara Stations 22 (Orcutt)

and 44 (Cuyama), US Forest Service Pine Canyon Station and the California Department of Forestry

Schools: Blochman Union Elementary School District Santa Maria Union Joint High School District

5.2 Setting The project lies in proximity to the Cuyama River, a 2nd order tributary to the Santa Maria River, and is bordered by Pine Canyon to the south and a ridgeline dominating Aliso Creek to the north. The site topography is characterized by north-south facing slopes of excessive topography, frequently in excess of 40%. The site is located in an area of dense oak woodlands and riparian habitat containing the drainage paths of Aliso and Pine Canyon Creeks, both of which are 3rd order tributaries draining into the Cuyama River. The general soil classification consists predominantly of the Los Osos-Gaviota Association. Specifically, soils onsite are part of the Contra Costa series consisting of moderately sloping to very steep, well drained and somewhat excessively drained clay loams to sandy loams on uplands. Soils in the Contra Costa series are non-prime and suitable for range with a Capability Unit of VII.


The property is located along Highway 166 approximately ¾ mile east of Tepusquet Canyon Road. Historical use has been limited to horse ranching with a single family residence. Pre-SMARA mining activities occurred on approximately 18.92 acres of the north-east portion of the parcel along Aliso Creek. The site was never reclaimed as it pre-dated SMARA required reclamation activities and is currently under various stages of natural rejuvenation though cut slopes are clearly visible. Existing development on the site is located on proposed parcel 1 and consists of a 1,658 square foot single family residence, 1,243 square foot shop, and numerous corrals totaling 12,129 square feet. A 5,000 gallon water tank is located on proposed parcel 1. Proposed Parcel 2 is undeveloped. An existing 20 foot wide access drive services the existing structures located on proposed Parcel 1 and provides access from Highway 166 and Pine Canyon Road. The surrounding area is rural in nature and the primary use is limited grazing. Surrounding Land Uses: The surrounding properties consist primarily of large parcels that are either vacant or have a residence, and are conducting agricultural operations such as grazing. Existing Structures: The existing parcel contains approximately 12,130 square feet of structural development including: one single family dwelling, a shop, a barn and corral. 5.3 Project Description The Hayes/Holden Tentative Parcel Map is a request of Jerry and Lisa Hayes and Monte and Deborah Holden, to consider Case No. 01TPM-00000-00027 (application filed on December 20, 2001 and resubmitted October 02, 2002) for approval under County Code Chapter 21 to divide a 117.28 acre gross (116.85 acre net) parcel into two (2) parcels, Proposed Parcel 1 is 54.52 acres gross (54.09 acres net), and Proposed Parcel 2 is 61.97 (gross and net) acres. The existing parcel is in the U Zone District under the Santa Barbara Zoning Ordinance No. 661. The application involves Assessor Parcel No. 131-030-042, located at 8320 Highway 166 approximately ¾ mile east of Tepusquet Road and 20 miles east of the Town of Santa Maria, Fifth Supervisorial District.

Proposed Parcel 1: Proposed Parcel 1 is currently developed with a single family residence, shop, barn and corral totaling approximately 12,129 square feet of structural development. The applicant proposes a development envelope of approximately 11.4 acres to encompass the existing development and horse raising operation and protect the existing natural resources in the area.

Proposed Parcel 1 has an existing serviceable well and 5000 gallon water tank that is currently serving the single family residence. Proposed Parcel 1 has an existing permitted septic system that would continue serving the site. Access would be from an existing 20-foot wide access drive servicing the existing single family residence off of State Route 166, and also connecting to Pine Canyon Road, a limited access service road terminating in the Los Padres National Forest.

Proposed Parcel 2: Proposed Parcel 2 is currently undeveloped. An existing jeep trail bisects the proposed parcel, and an existing water well is located in the northwestern corner of the property (approximately 500


feet south of the northern property line). The applicant proposes two development envelopes totaling approximately 20 acres in order to accommodate all future development.

Development Envelope A is located along the western property boundary and is approximately 12.6 acres in size. Within Envelope A, an approximately 5.75 acre area located approximately 300 feet east of State Route 166, has been identified as not subject geologic hazards and suitable for structural development (Geologic Hazards Report, Earth Systems Pacific, January 30 and May 31, 2006). Development Envelope B is located along the northeastern property boundary and is approximately 7.5 acres in size.

Proposed Parcel 2 would be served by private water well. The well application and exploration of groundwater indicates sufficient water to serve the parcel. Wastewater would be disposed of by private septic systems. There are suitable areas and soils for septic installation. Access would be provided off of State Route 166. 5.4 Background Information An existing single family dwelling as well as horse raising are the primary uses on the subject parcel. On September 6, 1990 a Land Use Permit for a single family dwelling and tack room was approved on September 6, 1990. A Land Use Permit was issued on May 31, 2005 for the construction of a 1,296 square foot barn.

6.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS

6.1 Environmental Review A Mitigated Negative Declaration, 06NGD-00000-00023, was prepared for the project and is included in the staff report as Attachment B. The Negative Declaration was circulated for a 30-day public review and comment period from August 18, 2006 to September 18, 2006. A separate environmental review hearing was not held due to the non-complex nature of the proposed project. Four comment letters were received from: 1) Environmental Health Services; 2) Urban Planning Concepts, Agent; 3) Jerry Hayes, Applicant; 4) the Department of Transportation. Minor changes have been made to the Draft ND to produce the Final ND attached to this staff report. They are indicated by underline for additions and strikethrough for deletions. For a more detailed analysis, please see the Negative Declaration (Attachment B of this staff report). 6.1.1 Impacts

The Negative Declaration identified potentially significant but mitigable impacts to Aesthetics/Visual Resources (from impacts to public views and visually incompatible structures), Biological Resources (potential disturbance/destruction of native vegetation, endangered and/or threatened species of flora and fauna), Cultural Resources (potential disturbance/destruction of cultural resources), Air Quality (short-term dust impacts due to potential future construction activities), Fire Protection (potential high fire hazard danger), and Geologic Processes (potentially significant impacts from increased erosion and stream sedimentation caused by grading and construction and road maintenance). Please refer to 06NGD-00000-00023 (Attachment B) for a full review of these impacts.


6.1.2 Mitigation

The potentially significant impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels through adherence to the following mitigation measures:

• Visual Resources: low intensity, low glare, hooded outdoor lighting would be required on all future structures to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. All future Hillside/Ridgeline development and any development within Development Envelope B would be reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review to ensure architectural compatibility in order to maintain the existing, rural character of the area.

• Biological Resources: specific flora and fauna studies prior to development approval, use of development envelopes to limit impacts, a tree protection plan, construction management protocol, and observance of existing County Comprehensive Plan policies designed to minimize earth disturbance and removal of vegetation, would be required to reduce impacts to less than significant levels.

• Cultural Resources: standard archeological protection mitigation measures would be required to reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels.

• Air Quality: standard dust minimization measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

• Geologic Resources: limit development to 5.75 acre area delineated within Development Envelope A, unless remaining portions of Development Envelope A and B are studied and certified by a certified engineering geologist; limit development to the dry season unless an erosion control plan in place; grading erosion and sediment control plans would be required to reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels.

• Fire Protection: standard fire prevention methods including use of fire resistant building materials; adequate access; stored water fire protection system; and a fuel management plan would be required to reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels.

6.2 Comprehensive Plan Consistency

REQUIREMENT DISCUSSION Land Use Development Policies

Land Use Development Policy 4 Prior to issuance of a use 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 as a result of the proposed project. Lack of public or private services or resources shall be

Consistent. Adequate public and private services are available to serve the proposed project. Water: Both proposed parcels would be served by private wells. Adequate water has been demonstrated to be onsite. Wastewater Disposal: One permitted septic system currently serves Proposed Parcel 1. Adequate area for a disposal system has been demonstrated on Proposed Parcel 2. Environmental Health Services


REQUIREMENT DISCUSSION grounds for denial of the project or reduction in the density otherwise indicated in the land use plan.

would approve the septic system within the envelope prior to issuance of a building permit. Police: Adequate police protection services are available to serve the proposed lots. Fire Protection: The project site is served by the County of Santa Barbara Fire Department, U.S. Forest Service, and California Department of Forestry. Because fire protection in the area is constrained by emergency access and evacuation problems, mitigation measures have been identified to reduce the likelihood of a wildland fire reaching to and/or spreading from adjacent structures. Specifically, these measures include a vegetation clearance zone around the proposed building envelopes, brush clearance around all structures, and conformance with all applicable fire department standards. The Santa Barbara County Fire Department has reviewed these measures and has determined that the project as conditioned is consistent with Fire Department requirements. Adherence to these measures would ensure fire protection would be adequate to serve the project. Utilities: The project site is located within a developed area where public utility infrastructure is present and available. Roads: Proposed Parcel 1 is currently developed and maintains access to Pine Canyon Road (a private road) via Highway 166. Access to proposed Parcel 2 would be taken directly from Highway 166. Proposed Parcel 1 also maintains access to Pine Canyon Road. Preliminary Caltrans review indicates that the applicant should consult with a licensed professional engineer regarding adequate line of sight distances and space in accordance with Highway Design Manual standards (Joseph Londono, District 5 Development Review Coordinator, Caltrans, letter dated 9-6-06). Prior to Land Use Permit approval for structural development requiring access directly from State Route 166, the applicant shall provide evidence of satisfaction of Caltrans encroachment permit


REQUIREMENT DISCUSSION review. In the event that Caltrans declines review and/or jurisdiction of proposed access, such evidence shall also be provided (Condition 20). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with this policy.

Geologic Hazards Seismic Safety Element Applications for grading and building permits, and applications for subdivision shall be reviewed for adjacency to, threats from, and impacts on geologic hazards arising from seismic events, landslides or other geologic hazards such as expansive soils and subsidence areas. In areas of known geologic hazards, a geologic report shall be required. Mitigation measures shall be required where necessary.

Consistent. There is potential instability, particularly affecting considerable portions of proposed Parcel 2, due to landslide potential and pre-SMARA mining activities. Proposed Parcel 2 contains a demonstrated developable area of approximately 5.75 acres, contained in part within Development Envelope A. The remaining unstudied portions of Development Envelope A and the entirety of Development Envelope B (approximately 14.25 acres), as well as the remaining locations outside of the proposed Development Envelopes would be required to be evaluated by a certified engineering geologist upon proposal for structural development (including access drives) which require a Land Use Permit (Condition No. 17). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with this policy.

Hillside and Watershed Protection


REQUIREMENT DISCUSSION Hillside and Watershed Policy 1: Plans for development shall minimize cut and fill operations. Plans requiring excessive cutting and filling may be denied if it is determined that the development could be carried out with less alteration of the natural terrain. Hillside and Watershed Policy 2: All developments shall be designed to fit the site topography, soils, geology, hydrology, and any other existing conditions and be oriented so that grading and other site preparation is kept to an absolute minimum. Natural features, landforms, native vegetation, such as trees, shall be preserved to the maximum extent feasible. Areas of the site which are not suited to development because of known soil, geologic, flood, erosion or other hazards shall remain in open space. Hillside and Watershed Policy 3: For necessary grading operations on hillsides, the smallest practical area of land shall be exposed at any one time during development, and the length of exposure shall be kept to the shortest practicable amount of time. The clearing of land should be avoided during the winter rainy season and all methods for removing sediment from runoff waters. All sediment shall be retained on site unless removed to an appropriate dumping location. Hillside and Watershed Policy 5: Temporary vegetation, seeding, mulching, or other suitable stabilization method shall be used to protect soils subject to erosion that have been disturbed during grading or development. All cut and fill slopes shall be stabilized as rapidly as possible with planting of native grasses and shrubs, appropriate non-native plants, or with accepted landscaping practices. Hillside and Watershed Policy 7: Degradation of the water quality of groundwater basins, nearby streams, or wetlands shall not result from development of the site. Pollutants, such as chemicals, fuels, lubricants, raw sewage, and other

Consistent. The proposed project would result in the construction of a new single family dwelling, farm employee dwellings, appurtenant structures, and associated improvements. Mitigation measures were designed to allow future development to be oriented so that it would not significantly alter the existing site conditions and would maximize preservation of the natural features. This includes minimization of vegetation removal as conditioned (Condition No. 8). Key areas of the site unsuitable for development have been excluded from the developable areas via use of development envelopes. A 5.75 acre area within Development Envelope A, delineated on proposed Parcel 2, could be developed following obtaining Land Use Permits. The remaining portions of Development Envelope A and the entirety of Development Envelope B, including access to Development Envelope B, would be subject to certification by a certified engineering geologist prior to approval of Land Use Permits (Condition No. 17). Adherence to standard Building & Safety Division requirements, including observance of Construction Site Pollution Control Best Management Practices, placed on grading and drainage and erosion control plans (as implemented through County Code, Chapter 14, Grading Ordinance) would ensure water runoff and impacts associated with site preparation/grading are minimized (Condition Nos. 10, 18, 19). The project conditions require fuel management in order to minimize fire danger (Condition No. 16). The plan would call for minimal grading in order to remove any vegetation within the building envelopes, would not entail excessive grading and shall be in conformance with these polices. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with these policies.


REQUIREMENT DISCUSSION harmful waste, shall not be discharged into or alongside coastal streams or wetlands either during or after construction.

Streams and Creeks Policies Streams and Creeks Policy 1: All permitted construction and grading within stream corridors shall be carried out in such a manner as to minimize impacts from increased runoff, sedimentation, biochemical degradation, or thermal pollution.

Consistent: The project is conditioned to require a minimum development/construction setback of 50 feet from the top of bank of Aliso and Pine Canyon Creeks. All necessary permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Fish and Game, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (as applicable) would be required prior to approval of Land Use Permits (Conditions 7, 9, 11, 19). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with this policy.

Flood Hazard Area Policies Flood Hazard Area Policy 2: Permitted development shall not cause or contribute to flood hazards or lead to expenditure of public funds for flood control works, i.e., dams, stream channelizations, etc.

Consistent: Any new development would be located a minimum of 50 feet away from any creek. Development that is possible from this lot split would not be of a density large enough to significantly contribute to flood hazards or lead to necessary public improvements. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with this policy.

Visual Resources Visual Resources Policy: #2In areas designated as rural on the land use plan maps, the height, scale,and design of structures shall be compatible with thecharacter of the surrounding natural environment, except where technical requirements dictate otherwise. Structures shall be subordinate in appearance to natural landforms; shall be designed to follow the natural contours of the landscape; and shall be sited so as not to intrude into the skyline as seen from public viewing places. #5: Utilities, including television, shall be placed underground in new developments in accordance with the rules and regulations of the California Public Utilities Commission, except where cost of undergrounding would be so high as to deny service

Consistent. All existing development is compatible with the rural character of the area. Any ancillary structures that may be built in the future would maintain the rural character in conformance with this policy. The project site does not contain any features that would prevent future development from being compatible with and subordinate to the surrounding environment. Future Land Use Permit applications for within Development Envelope B (proposed Parcel 2) and/or involving Hillside/Ridgeline development would be subject to Board of Architectural Review (BAR) approval (Refer to Condition Nos. 2, 3, 4). The project has access to all necessary utilities and the project site does not contain any features that would require above-ground utility extensions to future development. A condition has been placed


REQUIREMENT DISCUSSION on the project requiring the undergrounding of all future utilities (Condition No. 21). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with these policies.

Housing Element Housing Element Policy 5.1: The County shall encourage compatibility of new construction...with surrounding structures and their setting in an effort to maintain or enhance harmony and balance in the community.

Policy 5.2: The County shall encourage well-designed, energy efficient units in new residential development that will minimize maintenance costs over time. All projects shall comply with Development Standard 5.3.1: All fixtures, mechanical components, roofing, and siding utilized in all newly constructed units shall meet the standards of the Uniform Building Code as adopted by the County and shall meet the standards of Title 24 for energy conservation.

Policy 5.5: The County shall continue to encourage development within existing urban boundaries of the County and the preservation and/or protection of rural land uses outside the urban boundaries.

Consistent: The Building and Safety Division reviews development proposals to ensure compliance with Title 24 requirements and the Uniform Building Code. Planning and Development would ensure, where feasible/practicable, that the proposed project maintains conformity with surrounding structures and the surrounding environment. Future Land Use Permit applications within Development Envelope B (proposed Parcel 2) and/or involving Hillside/Ridgeline development would be subject to Board of Architectural Review (BAR) approval (Refer to Condition No. 2). The project would not require the development or extension of new energy sources. Existing energy sources would have sufficient capacity to serve the project. The additional demand represented by this project could be considered incremental but not significant. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with these policies.

Agricultural Element Agricultural Element Policy IA: The integrity of agricultural operations shall not be violated by recreational or other non-compatible uses.

Policy IID: Conversion of highly productive agricultural lands whether urban or rural, shall be discouraged. The County shall support programs which encourage the retention of highly productive agricultural lands.

Consistent: The proposed subdivision would not violate the integrity of any agricultural operation at the project site or on neighboring properties. The proposed parcels are not considered significant agricultural resources as their size and potential foraging capacity are not considered suitable to support an independent grazing operation prior to this project. The limiting physical constraints such as dense oak woodlands and steep rocky terrain create a situation that inhibits adequate forage production. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with these policies.

Circulation Element


REQUIREMENT DISCUSSION Circulation Element A project that would contribute ADTs to a roadway where the Estimated Future Volume does not exceed the policy capacity and/or PHTs to intersections operating at a LOS C or better is considered consistent.

Consistent: The proposed subdivision would create an additional parcel with the potential to develop an additional residential development, thereby increasing vehicular traffic on the surrounding public and private roadways. As discussed in the Transportation/Circulation issue area of Attachment B, the addition of a potential new residence would not add substantial additional vehicular movement to local roads in the area. The cumulative impact of one additional single family residence would not be cumulatively considerable. The proposed project would not result in an increase in traffic generation or congestion and therefore is considered less than significant. This small addition to traffic represents an incremental contribution to cumulative traffic in the area, and pursuant to County ordinance, traffic mitigation fees would be required to offset the project’s contribution to cumulative traffic. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with this policy.

6.3 Ordinance Compliance 6.3.1 Ordinance 661 Consistency Rezone The subject parcel is within the Unlimited Agriculture (U) zone district under Ordinance 661. Ordinance 661 is an outdated Zoning Ordinance that is still in effect for some of the rural areas of the County. Although the majority of the Ordinance was repealed in 1984, the agricultural zone districts (e.g., AG, AL, and U) remain in effect and govern the permitted and conditionally permitted uses of property that remains zoned under Ordinance 661. The permit process itself, however, is governed by Article III. While typically, all Ordinance 661-zoned parcels seeking approval of a discretionary permit application must be rezoned to an agricultural designation under the current Article III zoning ordinance pursuant to current County administrative practices, the Planning and Development Department has determined that a rezone would not be required at this time for the following reason: The Comprehensive Planning Division’s Three-Year Work Program recently approved by the Board of Supervisors includes the complete rezoning of all 661 zoned parcels. The project site is within the study area of the 661 Ordinance Consistency Rezone project and has been identified to be rezoned to AG-II-40.

6.3.2 Compliance with Article III, Inland Zoning Ordinance


The proposed Tentative Parcel Map is subject to the requirements of the Article III, AG-II-40 Agriculture II Zone District. The purpose of the AG-II zone is to “to establish agricultural land use for prime and non-prime agricultural lands located outside of Urban, Inner Rural and Rural Neighborhood areas, as shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Maps.” The intent of this district is to “to preserve these lands for long-term agricultural use.” The proposed lot split would allow for continued agricultural production and associated development at densities established by the zoning ordinance, which is consistent with the purpose and intent of the AG-II-40 zone district. The proposed project complies with the minimum lot size requirement of the AG-II-40 zone district (100-acre minimum parcel size), and although no development is proposed with the current project, all future development could meet required development standards and zone district requirements of the AG-II-100 zone district including use, setbacks, parking, and height requirements. 6.3.2 Compliance with Chapter 21, Subdivision Regulations The proposed project would be consistent with the County’s subdivision regulations as described in the findings (Attachment A). The proposed lots would conform to the subdivision standards as indicated in Chapter 21. 6.4 Subdivision/Development Review Committee The project was considered by the SDRC on January 17, 2001. The Fire Department, Parks Department Air Pollution Control District, Surveyor, Environmental Health Services and Roads Division have conditions of approval. Subsequent letters from these Departments have been received and have been incorporated into this staff report as conditions of approval. 6.5 Board of Architectural Review (BAR) The proposed map does not require BAR review. Future Land Use Permit applications for Hillside/Ridgeline development on Proposed Parcel 2 would be subject to BAR review and approval. 6.6 Development Impact Mitigation Fees A series of ordinances and resolutions adopted by the County Board of Supervisors require the payment various development impact mitigation fees. This project is subject to the fees as shown in the following table. The amounts shown are estimates only. The actual amounts will be calculated in accordance with the fee resolutions in effect when the fees are paid. The developer of a project that is required to pay development impact mitigation fees may appeal to the Board of Supervisors for a reduction, adjustment or waiver of any of those fees based on the absence of a reasonable relationship between the impacts of the proposed project and the fee category for which fees have been assessed. The appeal must be in writing and must state the factual basis on which the particular fee or fees should be reduced, adjusted or waived. The appeal must be submitted to the director(s) of the


relevant departments within 15 calendar days following the determination of the fee amount(s). For a discretionary project, the date of determination of fee amounts is the date on which the decision-maker adopts the conditions of approval and approves the project.

Estimated Countywide Development Impact Mitigation Fees Fee Program Base Fee (per unit or 1,000 sf) Estimated Fee Fee due at

Recreation (Parks) n/a $1,034 Land Use Clearance Transportation n/a $465 Map Recordation Fire ($0.20/sf.) $0.20/s.f. unknown Final Inspection

7.0 APPEALS PROCEDURE

The action of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the Board of Supervisors within ten (10) calendar days of said action.

ATTACHMENTS A. Findings B. 06NGD-00000-00023 with Transmittal Letter C. Conditions of Approval with attached Departmental letters D. Proposed Tentative Parcel Map 14,590 (full-size for Planning Commissioners only) G:\GROUP\Permitting\Case Files\Tpm\01 cases\01TPM-00000-00027 TPM 14,590\PC Docs/Hayes Holden PC.DOC

Hayes Holden Tentative Parcel Map 01TPM-00000-00027 / TPM 14,590 Hearing date: October 11, 2006 Page A-1

ATTACHMENT A: FINDINGS 1.0 CEQA FINDINGS 1.1 The Planning Commission has considered Negative Declaration 06NGD-00000-00023

together with the comments received and considered during the public review process. The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission, has been prepared in compliance with CEQA, and is adequate for this proposal.

1.2 The Planning Commission finds that through feasible conditions placed upon the project,

the significant impacts on the environment have been eliminated or substantially mitigated.

1.3 The documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon

which this decision is based are in the custody of the Secretary of the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission, Ms. Dianne Meester Black, Planning and Development, located at 123 E. Anapamu Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101.

1.4 Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires the County to adopt a reporting or

monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The approved project description and conditions of approval, with their corresponding permit monitoring requirements, are hereby adopted as the monitoring program for this project. The monitoring program is designed to ensure compliance during project implementation.

2.0 ADMINISTRATIVE FINDINGS 2.1 Subdivision Map Act Findings Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors shall deny TPM 14,590 if any of the following Subdivision Map Act Findings cannot be made: 2.1.1 State Government Code §66473.1. The design of the subdivision for which a tentative

map is required pursuant to §66426 shall provide, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision. Future residential development on the site will be located away from development on surrounding lots and would be able to take advantage of solar exposure for natural heat and light and prevailing winds for natural cooling effects. There is sufficient northern, southern, eastern, and western exposure to allow for passive heating or cooling systems to be provided on the site.

2.1.2 State Government Code §66473.5. No local agency shall approve a tentative map, or a

parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, unless the legislative body finds


that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement is consistent with the general plan required by Article 5 (commencing with §65300) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 or any specific plan adopted pursuant to Article 8 (commencing with §65450) of Chapter 3 of Division 1.

The configuration of the tentative parcel map and site of the parcels are consistent with the property’s Comprehensive Plan Designation of A-II-40, Agriculture II (40-acre minimum lot size). As discussed in Section 6.0 of the staff report and incorporated herein by reference, the parcel map is consistent with all applicable County Comprehensive Plan policies relating to adequate services including water, sewer, traffic and circulation, visual resources, noise, public services, and preservation of agricultural resources.

2.1.3 State Government Code §66474. The following findings shall be cause for disapproval of

a Tentative Parcel Map/Tract Map: a. The proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as

specified in §66451. As discussed in Section 6.0 of the staff report, upon incorporation of conditions identified in Attachment C, the parcel map is consistent with all County Comprehensive Plan policies including adequate services, traffic and circulation, hillside and watershed development, noise, and agriculture.

b. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. The design and improvements set forth in 01TPM-00000-00027/TPM 14,590, through compliance with the conditions of approval identified in Attachment C, are consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan and the underlying AG-II-40 zone district per Article III in respect to lot dimensions, adequate access, and availability of services.

c. The site is not physically suitable for the type of development proposed.

As discussed in Section 6.3 of the staff report and incorporated herein by reference, the site is physically suitable for the lot split. The parcels would meet the minimum lot size required by the AG-II-40 zone district of the Article III Zoning Ordinance, and each parcel is adequate in size and shape to accommodate future development while minimizing environmental impacts. With implementation of the conditions of approval outlined in Attachment C, impacts will be minimized. Adequate public and private services will be available to serve the project. As such, the site is found to be physically suitable for the lot split under this tentative parcel map.

d. The site is not physically suited for the proposed density of development.

As discussed in Section 6.0 of the staff report and incorporated herein by reference, adequate land area and suitable topography support the site's ability to accommodate an additional single family dwelling and accessory structures. The areas of the site that are not suitable for development or that should be preserved have been excluded from the developable areas via use of development envelopes. As such, the site is found to be physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

e. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.


Negative Declaration 06NGD-00000-00023 analyzed the environmental effects of the proposed project and accurately concluded that, with application of identified conditions and mitigation measures, the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Mitigation measures from the Negative Declaration have now been incorporated into the project as conditions of approval. As indicated in the Negative Declaration, potentially significant environmental impacts will be mitigated to less than significant levels. The project will not result in substantial environmental damage nor will the project be harmful to fish, wildlife or the habitat on which they rely.

f. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious

public health problems. There are no known likely public health problems or hazards associated with the lot split from future development of the two lots. No serious public health problems will occur as a result of the subdivision. As indicated in Section 6.2 of the staff report, adequate water, utilities, and access are available to serve the proposed parcels. The project is not located within an area of historic flood hazards and has been reviewed and approved by the County Fire Department and the County’s Flood Control District, Environmental Health Services, and Air Pollution Control District. Therefore, the lot split will not cause serious public health problems.

g. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with

easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. The lot split will not conflict with any easements located on the property. No easements will need to be altered or relocated as a result of the proposed project.

2.1.4 State Government Code §66474.6. The governing body of any local agency shall

determine whether discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community sewer system would result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with §13000) of the Water Code Waste discharge will be accommodated by two private septic systems with leach lines. The County’s Environmental Health Services Division (EHS) has reviewed the proposed project and has determined that the lots created by this lot split will not be in violation of existing requirements prescribed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board for the discharge of waste water. EHS has determined that the existing private septic disposal system on Parcel 1, and feasibility shown for a sewage disposal system on Parcel 2, have demonstrated feasibility and are adequate to serve domestic wastewater based on soil conditions and the size of the proposed parcels.

2.2 Chapter 21, County Subdivision Regulations


2.2.1 Easements or rights-of-way along or across proposed county streets which are not expressly subordinated to street widening, however the road commissioner may approve such easements or rights-of-way without such subordinations.

The proposed project will not affect any easements across proposed county streets.

2.2.2 Lack of adequate width or improvement of access roads to the property; creation of a landlocked lot or parcel without frontage on a street or other approved ingress and egress from the street.

Adequate access to the parcels will be provided from an existing driveway to the Development Envelope identified in Parcel 1, and a proposed driveway to Development Envelope A. Access is gained directly off of State Highway166. All access roads will be subject to Fire Department standards for emergency vehicle access. Public Works, Roads Division and Caltrans have reviewed the access and has determined that it is adequate to serve the project.

2.2.3 Cuts or fills having such steep slopes or great heights as to be unsafe under the

circumstances or unattractive to view.

All future grading and development on the parcels will be restricted to development envelopes (including access to Development Envelope B), hence limiting development to slopes of less than 20% and minimizing impacts to onsite resources such as native vegetation. In addition to the 5.75 acre “demonstrated developable area,” a certified engineering geologist must review and approve plans for development requiring Land Use Permits.

2.2.4 Grading or construction may not be performed prior to the approval of the final map.

No grading has occurred nor is proposed for any street or buildable area prior to recordation of the map, except for any allowed earthwork or structures under existing zoning regulations.

2.2.5 Potential creation of hazard to life or property from floods, fire, or other catastrophe.

The project will not create any hazard associated with flooding and fires as discussed in the Negative Declaration prepared for the project.

2.2.6 Nonconformance with any adopted general plan of the County or with any alignment of a state highway officially approved or adopted by the state highway commission. Compliance with the conditions of approval identified in Attachment C ensures that the design and improvements of the lot split and future development are consistent with the County’s Comprehensive Plan, as discussed in the previous findings and in Section 6.2 of this report. The project does not conflict or impact the alignment of any state highway. Preliminary Caltrans review indicates that the applicant shall consult with a licensed professional engineer regarding adequate line of sight distances and space in accordance with Highway Design Manual standards (Joseph Londono, District 5 Development Review Coordinator, Caltrans, letter dated 9-6-06). Prior to Land Use Permit approval


for structural development requiring access directly from State Route 166, the applicant shall provide evidence of satisfaction of Caltrans encroachment permit review.

2.2.7 Creation of a lot or lots which have a ratio depth to width in excess of 3 to 1.

The project will not result in lots that have a depth to width ratio in excess of 3:1. 2.2.8 Subdivision designs with lots backing up to watercourses.

Pine Canyon Creek runs through Parcel 1 and Aliso Creek runs through Parcel 2. Grading and drainage plans that include erosion control measures (temporary and permanent) are required prior to future development of the two lots. Review and approval of these plans by P&D and Flood Control is required. The subdivision design does not back up to any watercourse.

Hayes Holden Tentative Parcel Map 01TPM-00000-00027 / TPM 14,590 Hearing date: October 11, 2006 ATTACHMENT B: NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page B-1

ATTACHMENT B: NEGATIVE DECLARATION

Hayes Holden Tentative Parcel Map 01TPM-00000-00027 / TPM 14,590 Hearing date: October 11, 2006 ATTACHMENT C: CONDITIONS Page C-1

ATTACHMENT C: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 01TPM-00000-00027/ TPM 14,590

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. This Tentative Parcel Map is based upon and limited to compliance with the project description, the hearing exhibit marked Exhibit 1, dated June 28, 2006, and conditions of approval 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.

The project description is as follows:

The Hayes/Holden Tentative Parcel Map is a request of Jerry and Lisa Hayes and Monte and Deborah Holden, to consider Case No. 01TPM-00000-00027 (application filed on December 20, 2001 and resubmitted October 02, 2002) for approval under County Code Chapter 21 to divide a 117.28 acre gross (116.85 acre net) parcel into two (2) parcels, Proposed Parcel 1 is 54.52 acres gross (54.09 acres net), and Proposed Parcel 2 is 61.97 (gross and net) acres. The existing parcel is in the U Zone District under the Santa Barbara Zoning Ordinance No. 661. The application involves Assessor Parcel No. 131-030-042, located at 8320 Highway 166 approximately ¾ mile east of Tepusquet Road and 20 miles east of the Town of Santa Maria, Fifth Supervisorial District.

Proposed Parcel 1: Proposed Parcel 1 is currently developed with a single family residence, shop, barn and corral totaling approximately 12,129 square feet of structural development. The applicant proposes a development envelope of approximately 11.4 acres to encompass the existing development and horse raising operation and protect the existing natural resources in the area.

Proposed Parcel 1 has an existing serviceable well and 5000 gallon water tank that is currently serving the single family residence. Proposed Parcel 1 has an existing permitted septic system that would continue serving the site. Access would be from an existing 20-foot wide access drive servicing the existing single family residence off of State Route 166, and also connecting to Pine Canyon Road, a limited access service road terminating in the Los Padres National Forest.

Proposed Parcel 2: Proposed Parcel 2 is currently undeveloped. An existing jeep trail bisects the proposed parcel, and an existing water well is located in the northwestern corner of the property (approximately 500 feet south of the northern property line). The applicant proposes two development envelopes totaling approximately 20 acres in order to accommodate all future development.


Development Envelope A is located along the western property boundary and is approximately 12.6 acres in size. Within Envelope A, an approximately 5.75 acre area located approximately 300 feet east of State Route 166, has been identified as not subject geologic hazards and suitable for structural development (Geologic Hazards Report, Earth Systems Pacific, January 30 and May 31, 2006). Development Envelope B is located along the northeastern property boundary and is approximately 7.5 acres in size.

Proposed Parcel 2 would be served by private water well. The well application and exploration of groundwater indicates sufficient water to serve the parcel. Wastewater would be disposed of by private septic systems. There are suitable areas and soils for septic installation. Access would be provided off of State Route 166.

The grading, development, use, and maintenance of the property, the size, shape, arrangement, and location of structures, parking areas and landscape areas, and the protection and preservation of resources shall conform to the project description above and the hearing exhibits and conditions of approval below. The property and any portions thereof shall be sold, leased or financed in compliance with this project description and the approved hearing exhibits and conditions of approval hereto. All plans (such as Landscape and Tree Protection Plans) must be submitted for review and approval and shall be implemented as approved by the County.

II. MITIGATION MEASURES (06NGD-00000-00023) Aesthetics 2. Natural building materials and colors compatible with surrounding terrain (earthtones and

non-reflective paints) shall be used on exterior surfaces of all structures, including fences. The scale and design of structures shall be compatible with the character of the surrounding natural environment. Structures shall be subordinate in appearance to natural landforms and shall be designed to follow the natural contours of the landscape. Structures shall not intrude into the skyline as seen from public viewing places.

Future development on Proposed Parcel 2, Development Envelope B requiring a Land Use Permit, the above requirements shall be reviewed and approved by the Board of Architectural Review. This BAR review requirement shall not apply to Proposed Parcel 2, Development Envelope A unless County Hillside and Ridgeline Ordinance requirements apply. Plan Requirement: Materials and colors shall be denoted on building plans. Timing: Structures shall be painted prior to occupancy clearance.

MONITORING: P&D shall inspect during construction and prior to occupancy clearance.


3. Any exterior night lighting installed on the project site shall be of low intensity, low glare

design, minimum height, and shall be hooded to direct light downward onto the subject parcel and prevent spill-over onto adjacent parcels. Lights for walkways may remain on all night and operate at a sufficient illumination to provide for a safe environment. Plan Requirements: The locations of all exterior lighting fixtures and an arrow showing the direction of light being cast by each fixture and the height of the fixtures shall be depicted on a project plans to be reviewed and approved by P&D, and the BAR (if applicable).

MONITORING: P&D and BAR (if applicable) shall review the project plans for compliance with this measure prior to approval of a Land Use Permit for structures. Permit Compliance shall inspect structures upon completion to ensure that exterior lighting fixtures have been installed consistent with this measure.

4. The project landscaping shall consist of drought-tolerant native vegetation which adequately softens the building profiles within Envelope B of Proposed Parcel 2 in order to minimize visual impacts to public viewsheds. The intent of this requirement is to integrate visible structures into the existing rural setting and not to entirely screen them from view. Landscaping shall be compatible with the character of the surroundings and the architectural style of the structure. Particular attention shall be given to the screening of proposed structures as viewed from the west of the proposed Parcel 2 development envelope, along Highway 166.

Future development on Proposed Parcel 2, Development Envelope B requiring a Land Use Permit, the above requirements shall be reviewed and approved by the Board of Architectural Review. This BAR review requirement shall not apply to Proposed Parcel 2, Development Envelope A unless County Hillside and Ridgeline Ordinance requirements apply.

Plan Requirements/Timing: Prior to approval of Land Use Permits for new construction, the applicant/owner shall enter into an agreement with the County to install required landscaping and water-conserving irrigation systems and maintain required landscaping for the life of the project. The applicant shall also submit four copies of a final landscape and water-conserving irrigation plan to P&D for review and approval. Prior to occupancy clearance, landscape and irrigation shall be installed.

MONITORING: Prior to occupancy clearance, Permit Compliance staff shall photo document installation. Permit Compliance staff shall check maintenance as needed.

Air Quality 5. If the construction site is graded and left undeveloped for over four weeks, the applicants

shall employ the following methods immediately to inhibit dust generation:


a. seeding and watering to revegetate graded areas; and/or b. spreading of soil binders; and/or c. any other methods deemed appropriate by Planning and Development.

Plan Requirements: These requirements shall be noted on all plans. Timing: Plans are required prior to approval of Land Use Permits.

MONITORING: Grading Inspector shall perform periodic site inspections.

6. Dust generated by development activities shall be kept to a minimum with a goal of

retaining dust on the site, by following the dust control measures listed below: a. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill

materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease.

b. During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour.

c. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation.

Plan Requirements: All requirements shall be shown on grading and building plans. Timing: Condition shall be adhered to throughout all grading and construction periods.

MONITORING: P&D shall ensure measures are on plans. P&D Grading and Building inspectors shall spot check; Grading and Building shall ensure compliance on-site. APCD inspectors shall respond to nuisance complaints.

Biological Resources 7. No construction (including but not limited to infrastructure improvements such as road,

water, sanitary waste lines, and utility improvements), earth disturbance or construction equipment shall occur or operate outside of any proposed building envelope. This restriction shall not apply to access provisions necessary for Development Envelope B on Proposed Parcel 2. Envelope boundaries shall be staked in the field. Installation of infrastructure improvements shall be cited to minimize removal of native vegetation. Plan requirements: All plans for proposed construction and development within the Development Envelopes, including access provisions to access Development Envelope B shall be reviewed and approved by the County Biologist, and may be subject to appropriate protective measures, including avoidance, to minimize potential impacts to flora and fauna. The development envelopes shall be placed on the parcel map, grading and building plans. The condition shall be noted on all final plans to describe the activities prohibited outside the approved envelopes. Timing: Prior to Land Use Permit approval, the County Biologist shall review and approve all plans for proposed construction and development within the


Development Envelopes, including access provisions to access Development Envelope B. Envelopes shall be delineated on the map prior to approval of final map clearance and shall be staked in the field prior to start of grading or structural development.

MONITORING: During plan check, the planner shall ensure that all construction and storage of construction equipment and materials is located within the approved envelope. Staking shall be checked during the preconstruction meeting. P&D grading inspectors and permit compliance planners shall inspect the site during all construction phases to ensure development is confined within development envelopes and that staking remains in place during site grading and construction.

8. For both Proposed Parcel 1 and Proposed Parcel 2, a grading, trenching, ground disturbance, construction activities and structural development shall occur outside of the critical root zone of all onsite native trees. Prior to the approval of a land use permit for grading or construction, all onsite oaks where the critical root zone lies within 50 feet of any proposed development shall be identified on the site plan. Applicable trees shall be fenced at or outside of the critical root zone. Fencing shall be at least three feet in height of chain link or other material acceptable to P&D and shall be staked every six feet. The applicant shall place signs stating “tree protection area” at 15 foot intervals on the fence. Fencing and signs shall remain in place throughout all grading and construction activities.

a. No tree removal or damage is authorized by this permit. However, any unanticipated damage to trees or sensitive habitats from construction activities shall be mitigated in a manner approved by P&D. This mitigation shall include but is not limited to posting of a performance security, tree replacement on a 10:1 ratio. The required mitigation shall be done under the direction of P&D prior to any further work occurring on site. Any performance securities required for installation and maintenance of replacement trees will be released by P&D after its inspection and approval of such installation and maintenance.

b. To help ensure the long term survival of onsite oaks, no permanent irrigation systems are permitted within the critical root zone of oak trees. Any landscaping must be of compatible species requiring minimal irrigation. Drainage plans shall be designed so that tree trunk areas are properly drained to avoid ponding.

Plan Requirements and Timing: Oak tree critical root zones within 50 feet of any proposed development shall be annotated on all plans prior to approval of land use permits. This condition shall be printed on all project plans. Fencing shall be graphically depicted on all project plans. MONITORING: P&D shall review plans and confirm fence installation prior to Land Use Permit issuance. Grading Inspectors shall conduct site inspections to ensure compliance during grading and construction.


9. All ground disturbances and vegetation removal shall be prohibited in a fifty (50) foot

setback from either side of the top-of-bank of Aliso and Pine Canyon creeks, which are sensitive riparian habitat areas, with exception to access provisions necessary for access to Development Envelope B. The areas shall be fenced with a fencing type and in a location acceptable to P&D. Plan Requirements: The riparian habitat area shall be shown on all grading plans. MONITORING: P&D shall perform site inspections throughout the construction phase.

10. During construction, washing of concrete, paint, or equipment shall occur only in areas

where polluted water and materials can be contained for subsequent removal from the site. Washing shall not be allowed near sensitive biological resources. An area designated for washing functions shall be identified. Plan Requirements: The applicant shall designate a wash off area, acceptable to P&D, on the construction plans. Timing: The wash off area shall be designated on all plans prior to approval of Land Use Permits. The washoff area shall be in place throughout construction.

MONITORING: P&D staff shall check plans prior to approval of Land Use Permits and compliance staff shall site inspect throughout the construction period to ensure proper use.

11. No alteration to stream channels or banks shall be permitted until the Department of Fish

and Game (DFG), Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) have been contacted to determine if the drainage falls under their jurisdiction. Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to approval of Land Use Permits, the applicant must receive all necessary permits and agreements from the DFG, ACOE, and RWQCB. A copy of the agreement (or a letter stating none is required) shall be delivered to P&D prior to approval of Land Use Permits.

MONITORING: P&D shall confirm DFG, ACOE, and RWQCB approvals.

Cultural Resources 12. In the event archaeological remains are encountered during grading, work shall be

stopped immediately or redirected until a P&D qualified archaeologist and Native American representative are retained by the applicant to evaluate the significance of the find pursuant to Phase 2 investigations of the County Archaeological Guidelines. If remains are found to be significant, they shall be subject to a Phase 3 mitigation program consistent with County Archaeological Guidelines and funded by the applicant. Plan Requirements/Timing: This condition shall be printed on all building and grading plans. MONITORING: P&D shall check plans prior to approval of Land Use Permits and shall spot check in the field.


Fire Protection 13. The following fire prevention methods shall be used for all future structures:

a. Building materials for all structures including residences, fences and accessory structures shall be constructed of fire resistant materials.

b. P&D Building & Safety Class A or B roofing (i.e., non-combustible tile or asphalt composite shakes) shall be required for all future on-site structures.

c. Spark arresters shall be required for wood burning fireplaces.

d. Private decks and structural overhangs proposed for all new structures shall be constructed with fire retardant materials or heavy timber.

Plan Requirements: Where appropriate, the fire prevention measures shall be graphically depicted on grading and building plans. Timing: Measures shall be installed prior to occupancy clearance. MONITORING: P&D building inspectors shall site inspect during construction.

14. Adequate access shall be provided. Plan Requirements: Individual lot access shall be by

all-weather surface roads and shall be submitted by the applicant for review and approval by the County Fire Department prior to Land Use Permit approval. Timing: Primary access shall be installed during initial grading.

MONITORING: Access shall be reviewed and approved by P&D and County Fire Department prior to approval of Land Use Permits. The Fire Department and Building and Safety shall ensure compliance through site inspections.

15. The applicant shall submit plans for a stored water fire protection system subject to

approval by the Fire. Plan Requirements: Prior to erection of combustible building materials, the applicant shall meet with the County Fire Department and obtain approval of a stored water fire protection system. Timing: A stored water fire protection system shall be installed prior to the erection of combustible materials.

MONITORING: Fire Department shall ensure compliance prior to occupancy clearance.

16. To minimize fire hazards, a Fuel Management Plan shall be implemented in order to reduce impacts to native vegetation relating to fire hazard reduction. All brushing shall be limited to a 30' radius from all proposed and existing structures and within the proposed building envelopes. Live natural vegetation having trunks of four inches or greater may remain within the 50' perimeter provided that specimens are maintained free of dead, decadent limbs and branches. Natural vegetation which is dead and/or decadent shall be


removed or chipped within 100 feet from structures. Limbs larger than four inches in diameter, leaves, mulch and duff do not require abatement. No mature trees shall be removed. Plan Requirements/Timing: A Fuel Management Plan shall be submitted to Planning and Development and the Santa Barbara County Fire Department for review and approval prior to Land Use Permit approval for structures containing combustible materials.

MONITORING: A site inspection shall be conducted by Fire and P&D personnel prior to occupancy clearance.

Geologic Processes 17. Development on proposed Parcel 2 requiring a Land Use Permit, including access drives,

shall be limited to the 5.75 acre area proven to be geologically stable pursuant to the Addendum to Geologic Hazards Report; Holden Property Lower Building Site (Earth Systems Pacific, 05-31-06). In order to approve access and development within the remainder of the Development Envelopes, the applicant shall demonstrate, through a certified geologic report, that the area proposed for development is geologically stable. Plan Requirements: The applicant shall submit required certified geologic report with Land Use Permit application. Certified developable areas shall be depicted on the Site Plan. Timing: P&D will review and approve certified geologic report prior to LUP approval.

18. The applicant shall limit excavation and grading to the dry season of the year (i.e. April

15 to November 1) unless a Building & Safety approved erosion control plan is in place and all measures therein are in effect. All exposed graded surfaces shall be reseeded with native ground cover vegetation to minimize erosion. Plan Requirements: This requirement shall be noted on all grading and building plans. Timing: Graded surfaces shall be reseeded within four weeks of grading completion, with the exception of surfaces graded for the placement of structures. These surfaces shall be reseeded if construction of structures does not commence within four weeks of grading completion.

MONITORING: P&D shall site inspect during grading to monitor dust generation and

four weeks after grading to verify reseeding and to verify the construction has commenced in areas graded for placement of structures.

19. Grading and erosion and sediment control plans shall be designed for construction of

access roads and utilities to minimize erosion and shall include the following:

a. Grading shall be prohibited within 50 feet of the top of bank of Pine Canyon and Aliso Creeks with the exception of an approved access point to Highway 166. The protected area shall be designated with orange construction fencing or other barrier to prevent entry by equipment or personnel.


b. Methods such as geotextile fabrics, erosion control blankets, drainage diversion structures, siltation basins and spot grading shall be used to reduce erosion and siltation into adjacent water bodies or storm drains during grading and construction activities.

c. All entrances/exits to the construction site shall be stabilized (e.g. using rumble plates, gravel beds or other best available technology) to reduce transport of sediment off site. Any sediment or other materials tracked off site shall be removed the same day as they are tracked using dry cleaning methods.

d. Graded areas shall be revegetated within 4 weeks of grading activities with deep rooted, native, drought-tolerant species to minimize slope failure and erosion potential. Geotextile binding fabrics shall be used if necessary to hold slope soils until vegetation is established.

e. Grading on slopes steeper than 5:1 shall be designed to minimize surface water runoff.

f. A detailed geological and/or soils engineering study addressing structure sites and the access road shall be prepared to determine structural design criteria, as recommended by the Planning and Development Building & Safety Division. The study shall be submitted for review and approval by Public Works.

g. Temporary storage of construction equipment shall be limited to within the designated building envelopes and located outside of oak tree critical root zones and at least 100 feet from any water bodies.

Plan Requirements: The grading and erosion and sediment control plan(s) shall be submitted for review and approved by P&D prior to approval of Land Use Permits. The plan shall be designed to address erosion and sediment control during all phases of development of access roads on the site. The applicant shall notify Building and Safety prior to commencement of grading. Timing: Components of the grading plan shall be implemented prior to occupancy clearance. Erosion and sediment control measures shall be in place throughout grading and development of the site until all disturbed areas are permanently stabilized.

MONITORING: Grading inspectors shall monitor technical aspects of the grading activities.

III. PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS 20. Prior to Land Use Permit approval for structural development requiring access directly

from State Route 166, the applicant shall provide evidence of satisfaction of Caltrans encroachment permit review. In the event that Caltrans declines review and/or jurisdiction of proposed access, such evidence shall also be provided.


21. Compliance with Departmental letters: a. Air Pollution Control District letter dated January 3, 2002. b. Fire Department letter dated August 27, 2005. c. Transportation Division (Public Works) dated September 21, 2006. d. Surveyor’s letters (2) dated September 20, 2006. e. Environmental Health Services letter dated March 22, 2005. f. Park Department letter dated September 21, 2006.

WRITTEN CLEARANCE FROM ALL COUNTY DEPARTMENTS LISTED ABOVE shall be obtained prior to approval of Land Use Permits (on a form provided by Planning & Development). Such clearance shall indicate that the applicant has satisfied all applicable conditions.

IV. CONDITIONS SPECIFIC TO TENTATIVE PARCEL MAPS 22. Informational Sheet: Prior to recordation of the tentative map and subject to P&D

approval as to form and content, the applicant shall include all of the mitigation measures, conditions, agreements and specific plans associated with or required by this project approval on a separate informational sheet to be recorded with the Parcel Map. All applicable conditions and mitigation measures of the project shall be printed on grading and/or building plans and shall be graphically illustrated where feasible. If Land Use Permits are obtained prior to recordation, tentative map conditions will not apply retroactively to the previously issued Land Use Permit. For any subsequent development on any parcels created by the project, each set of plans accompanying a Land Use Permit shall contain these conditions.

23. Electrical utilities shall be installed underground. 24. If the proposed map is revised from the approved tentative map, or if changes to

conditions are sought, approval shall be in the same manner as for the originally approved tentative map.

25. Threes (3) copies of the map to finalize the tentative map and required review fees in

effect at the time shall be submitted to Planning and Development (P&D) for compliance review of P&D conditions before P&D will issue Parcel map clearance to the County Surveyor. The map shall show statistics for net lot area (gross area less any public road right of way) and any open space.

26. Prior to recordation, public utility easements shall be provided at the locations and of

widths required by the serving utilities. The subdivider shall submit to the County Surveyor a set of prints of the Parcel map accompanied by a letter from each utility and water and sewer district serving the property stating that the easements shown thereon are acceptable (Chapter 21, Sec. 21- 30; Ord. No. 2199, Sec. 13).


27. The Tentative Map shall expire three years after approval or conditional approval by the final decisionmaker unless otherwise provided in the Subdivision Map Act, Government Code §66452.6.

V. COUNTY RULES AND REGULATIONS 28. Additional Permits Required: Before using any land or structure, or commencing any

work pertaining to the erection, moving, alteration, enlarging, or rebuilding of any building, structure, or improvement, the applicant shall obtain a Land Use Permit (zoning clearance) from the Planning and Development Department. A Land Use Permit expires one year from issuance and a time extension must be sought by the applicant prior to expiration of the LUP. The Land Use Permit (zoning clearance) is required by ordinance and is necessary to ensure implementation of the conditions required by the Planning Commission. Before a Land Use Permit (zoning clearance) will be issued by the Planning and Development Department, the applicant must obtain written clearance from all departments having conditions; such clearance shall indicate that the applicant has satisfied all pre-construction conditions. A form for such clearance is available in the P&D Department.

29. Signed Agreement to Comply Required: Prior to recordation, the owner shall sign and

record an agreement to comply with the project description and all conditions of approval. The forms are available at the P&D office.

30. Print and Illustrate Conditions on Plans: All final conditions of approval by the Planning

Commission shall be printed in their entirety on appropriate construction or building plans submitted to P&D.

31. Indemnity and Separation Clauses: Developer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless

the County or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the County or its agents, officers or employees, to attach, set aside, void, or annul, in whole or in part, the County's approval of the final development plan. In the event that the County fails promptly to notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, or that the County fails to cooperate fully in the defense of said claim, this condition shall thereafter be of no further force or effect.

32. Legal Challenge: In the event that any condition imposing a fee, exaction, dedication or

other mitigation measure is challenged by the project sponsors in an action filed in a court of law or threatened to be filed therein which action is brought in the time period provided for in section 66499.37, this approval shall be suspended pending dismissal of such action, the expiration of the limitation period applicable to such action, or final resolution of such action. If any condition is invalidated by a court of law, the entire project shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission and no approval shall be issued unless substitute feasible mitigation conditions/measures are imposed.


33. Mitigation Monitoring Required: The applicant shall ensure that the project complies with all approved plans and all project conditions including those which must be monitored after the project is built and occupied. To accomplish this, the applicant agrees to: a. Contact P&D compliance staff as soon as possible after project approval to provide

the name and phone number of the future contact person for the project and give estimated dates for future project activities.

b. Contact P&D compliance staff at least two weeks prior to commencement of construction activities to schedule an on-site pre-construction meeting with the owner, compliance staff, other agency personnel and with key construction personnel.

c. Pay fees prior to approval of Land Use Permits as authorized under ordinance and fee schedules to cover full costs of monitoring as described above, including costs for P&D to hire and manage outside consultants when deemed necessary by P&D staff (e.g. non-compliance situations, special monitoring needed for sensitive areas including but not limited to biologists, archaeologists) to assess damage and/or ensure compliance. In such cases, the applicant shall comply with P&D recommendations to bring the project into compliance. The decision of the Director of P&D shall be final in the event of a dispute.

G:\GROUP\PERMITTING\CASE FILES\TPM\01 CASES\01TPM-00000-00027TPM 14,590\PC DOCS\HAYESHOLDEN TPM SR_PC.DOC

Documents

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report for