HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/19/1992, 6 - CONSIDERATION OF CITY'S POSSIBLE ROLE AS LEAD AGENCY FOR PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR A 705 ACRE RECREATIONAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS ""LOS NOMADAS."""pp^^yy Original agenda report from the 5/5/92 meeting.
����IIII�pIIIINIIIIIIIII II f I ._..l - MEETING DATE:
II1IIh
city Or Sa1 iS oB�Spo 5'
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT EM NUMBER:
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director; By: Jeff
Hook, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Consideration of City's possible role as lead agency for
preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for a 705 acre
recreational planned development known as "Los Nomadas."
CAO RECOMMENDATION: Review the project concept plans and
supporting information and provide direction to staff and the
applicant regarding the City's role in project processing and
preparation of an Environmental Impact Report.
BACKGROUND
The applicants have submitted an application and plans for Los
Nomadas, a resort /golf course /conference center planned development
planned for the 705 -acre La Lomita Ranch. The project site is
located in unincorporated County land, just south of the Edna -
Islay area, between Orcutt Road and Broad Street. This is a large
and complex project, ultimately involving public and private
recreational features, including: two 18 -hole golf courses; 40
bungalow suites; 36 low -rise "haciendas" -- each with eight suites;
10 tennis courts; health facilities (exercise equipment, Par
Course); swimming lagoon; horse stables and arena; entertainment
amphitheater; and a resort plaza with restaurant, bar /grill, shops,
and related facilities. As explained in the enclosed "Developer's
Statement ", the project application includes:
• environmental review;
• General Plan text and map amendment;
• planned development pre- rezoning;
• architectural review
Although annexation of the 705 acres to the City is their ultimate
objective, the applicants have postponed applying for annexation
pending City action on environmental review, General Plan
amendments and pre- zoning. within nine months of- their initial
application submittal, the applicants also intend to submit a
tentative subdivision map and precise PD plan which can incorporate
findings and mitigations resulting from the environmental review.
The applicants have also submitted planning applications to the
County of San Luis Obispo to process an identical project under
County jurisdiction. They would prefer that the City serve as the
"lead agency" in completing the EIR, and have requested that the
City agree to do so.
In those cases where a project is to be carried out or approved by
more than one agency, the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and the City's Environmental Procedures require that one
agency (designated the Lead Agency) be responsible for preparing
�0_
111111i1INNII01$1111 I'll I l city of San t..,s OBISp0
MIME
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff Report
Page 2
the environmental documents for the project. CEQA specifies that
the Lead Agency shall be- the jurisdiction with the greatest
responsibility for supervising or approving the project as a whole.
Thus, our city could be the Lead Agency for the Los Nomadas project
unless for any reason the Council determines that it is not
appropriate to proceed ahead with processing of the applications.
In that case the issue of Lead Agency would be moot as the City
would lack jurisdiction to prepare the environmental documents. The
County would then automatically become the jurisdiction with
processing authority for Los Nomadas, and indications are that they
would be willing to proceed with that activity.
PERTINENT DATA
Applicant:
Representative:
County Zoning:
Co. Land Use Designation:
Environmental status:
EVALUATION
Northwinds, N. V.
RRM Design Group
AG
Agriculture; Airport
Environmental Impact
will be required.
Review Area
Report (EIR)
The decision on which public agency is the Lead Agency under CEQA
is important because:
1) The Lead Agency collects environmental fees, initiates and
directs the environmental review process;
2) The Lead Agency selects and contracts with environmental
consultants to prepare the EIR which is paid for by the
applicant;
3) The Lead Agency consults with other public agencies to include
their concerns and issues in the EIR scope of work; and
4) The Lead Agency exerts the most influence over the scope and
format of the Final EIR.
In deciding what public agency shall as lead agency, CEQA and -the
City's policies use several criteria. The pertinent criteria are
listed below:
■ If the project is to be carried out by a private entity,
the Lead Agency shall be the public agency (eg. in this
case, either City Council or Board of Supervisors) with
b O —C?s
����� ►��►II�►IIIIIII �� ►j����ll MY Of SAW- Is OBISp0
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff Report
Page 3
the greatest responsibility for supervising or acting on
the project as a whole.
■ Where a City prezones an area, the City will be the
appropriate Lead Agency for any subsequent annexation of
the area and should prepare the appropriate environmental
document at the time of prezoning. The Local Agency
Formation Commission shall act as a Responsible Agency.
■ Where more than one public agency meet the criteria
listed above, the agency which will act first on the
project in question shall be the Lead Agency.
■ Where two or more agencies have a substantial claim to
be Lead Agency, the public agencies may by agreement
designate one agency as Lead Agency. An agreement may
also provide for cooperative efforts by two or more
agencies by contract, joint exercise of powers, or
similar devices.
The decision on Lead Agency status does not affect the agency's
authority to later approve or deny a project. The City could, for
example, become Lead Agency and then decide not to amend its
General Plan or pre -zone the property due to environmental impacts
which became apparent during environmental review. If the County
served as Lead Agency, it would then normally address City
issues as part of EIR scoping due to the concurrent application
pending with the City.
The above criteria suggest that the City would be a logical choice
as Lead Agency since the City is likely to act first on the
project, and since pre- zoning is requested. The lead agency
decision depends to some degree, however, on the City Council's
judgement as to the timeliness of this project. If the
Councilmembers feel this project merits further City consideration,
then the City's Lead Agency role is probably desirable. If based
on current and anticipated City policies and plans Councilmembers
do not believe this project merits the staff time and effort which
would be necessary if the City were Lead Agency, it should so
direct staff. It should be emphasized, however, that the project
would then likely be processed by the County without the City's
direct involvement in the environmental review for a project which,
if approved, could significantly affect the City.
6 2T_3
�������►�►�►�ulllllifliP glpj city of San k_s OBISpo _
llif& COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff Report
Page 4
ALTERNATIVES
1. Determine that the City shall serve as Lead Agency for
purposes of environmental review for Los Nomadas, and direct
staff to work with the applicant to begin processing the EIR
and other development application requests.
From the City's standpoint, this approach would require the most
City staff time and effort; however it would probably produce an
EIR which most closely met the City's development review needs in
the shortest timeframe. If the City Council believes that the City
would consider amending its General Plan and pre - zoning the site
to accommodate the project, than this is the appropriate action.
2. Determine that the City should not serve as Lead Agency for
purposes of environmental review of Los Nomadas, and direct
City staff to work with the County Environmental Coordinator's
Office to include possible City issues and concerns in the EIR
scoping.
Under this approach, County staff would have primary responsibility
for conducting the environmental review. The City review
development review process would be held up pending County
completion of the EIR. This approach could lengthen the City's
development review process due to different County procedures
regarding environmental review. If the City Council believes there
is little or no chance that the City would amend its General Plan
and pre -zone the area to accommodate the project, this is the most
appropriate action.
3. Continue consideration of the issue, giving specific direction
as to the additional information needed.
ACTION
Review the project concept plans and supporting information and
provide direction to staff and the applicant regarding the City's
role in project processing and preparation of an Environmental
Impact Report.
Enclosure: Los Nomadas "Developer's Statement"
(Council and CAD only - available in Council Office for review)
May 18, 1992
Mr '7TING AGENDA
Dw : —IS 2-9L ITEM #
Department of Planning and Building
San Luis Obispo County
Arnold Jonas, Director
Community Development Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
HAND DELIVERED
Alex Hinds, Director
Bryce Tingle, Assistant Director
Barney McCay, Chief Building Official
Norma Salisbury, Administrative Services Officer
COPIESTO:
❑ • Davam Ammon ❑ FYI
5eC=X9 R(CDDDnL
®' CAO D FIN. DIR
ATInRNEY VCAO ❑ FIRECFETEF
❑ FW DIR.
C.ERK/ORIC. ❑ roucEat
❑ mcmT. TEAM ❑ REC DIR
❑ C READ Faz ❑ LrnLDIP,
2e FILE
MAY 1 9 1992
CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS OBISPO. CA
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR LAS NOMADAS PROPOSAL
This letter is written to provide comments from county environmental and planning staffs
regarding how environmental review for the Las Nomadas proposal might best be structured,
since the proposal has been submitted to both the city and the county. We understand that the
City Council will consider whether to accept "lead agency" status for environmental review
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the project at their meeting of May
19, 1992.
We are in agreement with the information presented in the city staff report on this item
regarding lead agency status under CEQA. More specifically, if the applicant has shown intent
to pursue annexation to the city and has submitted the appropriate applications, then the city
should be the lead agency.
This project is unusual in that it proposes development of property which is not yet within the
city's incorporated boundary, urban reserve or sphere of influence. The county has received a
request to amend the County General Plan and a specific plan application. Normally, such a
project would result in the county being lead agency for environmental review. However, the
site is located directly adjacent to the existing city limits and the applicant has requested
initiation of the process leading to annexation, so the city is the logical choice as lead agency.
Also, the applicant has submitted similar proposals to both the city and the county, apparently
preferring development within the city, but also interested in developing under county
jurisdiction if the city declines to process and /or approve the project. Theoretically, separate
environmental reviews could be required by the city and county, but that would unnecessarily
complicate coordination between the city and county regarding the two concurrent studies, result
in extra cost for the applicant, and might not produce better environmental information.
County Government Center • San Luis Obispo • California 93408 • (805) 549 -5600
Arnold Jonas, RE: Las Nomadas Page 2
May 18, 1992
Therefore, a single environmental impact report is appropriate. The question is: which
jurisdiction should be responsible for preparing the scope of work, selecting a consultant, and
determining whether the consultant has prepared adequate analyses of potential impacts and
mitigations, and responses to comments.
If the city wishes to accept lead agency status, county staff request that the city and county
formalize the process to ensure effective coordination. We wish to cooperate with your staff to
facilitate preparation of the environmental review in a manner that will provide information
needed in conjunction with approval or denial of the project in the city or the county.
For your information, county planning staff have tentatively scheduled July 28, 1992, to request
that the Board of Supervisors authorize processing of the specific plan application submitted by
the applicant. Any interested members of your Council or staff are invited to attend this
meeting.
In, summary, we concur with your staff that the city appears to be the best choice for lead
agency ff the city is processing the appropriate applications leading to possible annexation, and
that the county should be lead agency if the applicant does not pursue annexation or if the city
does not authorize processing of the necessary applications. Either way, the city and county
should formalize how the environmental review will be coordinated between the two
jurisdictions.
A member of our planning staff will attend your May 19, 1992, meeting to observe the
discussion of this item and answer questions.
Sincerely, ^ /
v�
�OY Carroll, County Environmental Coordinator
Alex Hinds, Director, County Planning and Building Department
cc: Members of the County Board of Supervisors
Paul Hood, Local Agency Formation Commission
Kieth Gurnee, RRM Design Group