SANTA BARBARA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Surface Mining and Reclamation Ordinance Text Amendments

Transcription

1 SANTA BARBARA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Surface Mining and Reclamation Ordinance Text Amendments Hearing Date: September 13, 2006 Assistant Director: Dianne Black Staff Report Date: September 1, 2006 Case No. 06ORD Staff Contact : Larry Appel Environmental Document: CEQA Section 15061(b)(3) Phone No.: REQUEST Hearing on the request of the Planning and Development Department that the Planning Commission consider and adopt a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors that they adopt an ordinance (Case No. 06ORD ) amending the County Land Use and Development Code of Chapter 35 of the Santa Barbara County Code to amend Chapter 35.21, Agricultural Zones, of Article 35.2, Zones and Allowable Land Uses, Section (Surface Mining and Reclamation) of Article 35.8, Planning Permit Procedures, and Section 35-11, Glossary to create new permitting procedures and development standards that apply to agricultural soil export mining for property zoned Agriculture II for the inland area of the county (excluding coastal and Montecito). The purpose of the ordinance amendment is to address situations where farming or ranching operations desire to export soil as a result of improving agricultural conditions on the property. This amendment would provide a streamlined process by which the owner could export soil while complying with county and state Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) regulations. 2.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROCEDURES Case No. 06ORD : Follow the procedures outlined below and recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve case No. 06ORD , as shown in Attachment C, based upon the ability to make appropriate findings. Your Commission s motion should include the following: A. Recommend that the Board of Supervisors adopt the findings for approval of the proposed amendments (Attachment A), and B. Recommend that the Board of Supervisors find that these amendments for inland areas are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15061(b)(3) of the Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (Attachment B) and, C. Recommend that the Board of Supervisors adopt 06ORD , an amendment to Section 35-1, the Santa Barbara County Land Use and Development Code (Attachment C). 3.0 JURISDICTION

2 SMARA Revision Ordinance Amendment Page 2 This ordinance amendment is being considered by the County Planning Commission based upon provisions of Section of the Government Code. The Government Code and the County Code require that the County Planning Commission, as the designated planning agency, review and consider this ordinance amendment and render its decision in the form of a written recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. 4.0 ISSUE SUMMARY/BACKGROUND Earlier this year, Planning and Development placed a Stop Work Order (SWO) on an agricultural property in North County that was exporting large volumes of soil to serve as fill material for a housing project in the City of Santa Maria. The SWO was placed on the property due to violations with State and County SMARA regulations. It was determined that over 1,000 yards of material was moved from an area greater than one acre, which are two specific triggers to require a permit under SMARA. The landowner believed that since the removal of the material was enhancing onsite farming operations that the soil removal should have been allowed under the agricultural grading provisions of the County s Grading Ordinance. If the agricultural improvements did not require the export of soil from the site, then no discretionary permit would be required. The Grading Ordinance allows agriculturalists great latitude in being able to work their land. A ministerial land use permit is only required for agriculturally associated earth work when the grading is for a structure (i.e. a building or reservoir), within 50 feet of the top-of-bank of a creek or watercourse, or within 200 feet or 500 feet of property lines or urban boundary lines respectively. An appeal was filed and the Board conducted a public hearing on May 16, After considering the staff report and testimony, the Board voted 5-0 to uphold the SWO. At the same time they recognized the need for farmers and ranchers at times to export soil in order to improve their agricultural operations. As a result, staff was directed to expedite the processing of an ordinance amendment that would provide a streamlined surface mining and reclamation process to obtain the necessary permits for agricultural soil export. Staff organized a group of people interested in the revisions. The group consisted of farmers and ranchers from the Santa Maria and Lompoc valleys, surface mining operators, trucking firms, County Counsel, the agricultural planner from the Agricultural Commissioner s Office, a Deputy CEO, and P&D staff and management. The ordinance was reviewed by the County s Agricultural Preserve Advisory Committee as well as the Agricultural Advisory Committee. The group met several times to discuss various options to process the export requests. A revised and simplified application form was developed (12 vs. 26 pages), and a new permit process was developed utilizing the Zoning Administrator for review through a minor conditional use permit. The current process requires approval of a major conditional use permit through the Planning Commission. If a project were exempt from CEQA, there could be a savings of over four months from the normal processing times under this revised process. Exhibit D provides a simple table showing a hypothetical permit submittal under the new permit process. It shows that the application could take days, depending on the level of CEQA review. This is significantly less time than a standard application that can take 290 days or more.

3 SMARA Revision Ordinance Amendment Page 3 The revisions are relatively minor in nature to accomplish the streamlining. First, the Agriculture II zone district would be amended to include agricultural soil export mining as a use permitted with a minor conditional use permit. A definition would be included in the definitions section to distinguish between traditional mining operations and agricultural soil export mining. Finally, the processing section of SMARA would be revised to show that only a minor conditional use permit, reclamation plan, and financial assurances would be required for agricultural soil export mining. 5.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION /ANALYSIS This section outlines the proposed revisions to the LUDC text regarding SMARA. The complete text of the ordinance amendments is contained in Attachment C. Proposed revisions are shown in gray shades. Other changes (strikeout and underline) have been identified as those that were part of the zoning ordinance reformatting project that your Commission discussed at the September 6, 2006 hearing. 5.1 Permitted use in AG-II with Minor Conditional Use Permit (Section ) Comments: In order to facilitate a more streamlined process, the agricultural soil export mining would be permitted with a minor CUP rather than a major CUP. Therefore, the AG-II section would include agricultural soil export mining as a use allowed with approval of a minor conditional use permit. These new types of projects would still be subject to the provisions of SMARA, and would be required to obtain approval of a reclamation plan along with the minor CUP. The applicants would only be required to submit information necessary to address impacts from site grading/mining, transportation off site and the site restoration. Since the mining would actually appear to be an agricultural grading operation, much of the technical requirements of a mining and reclamation plan would not be required. Staff expects the mining permit to appear very much like a grading plan with existing and proposed contours identified along with any erosion control necessary to facilitate the final graded areas. 5.2 New Definition of Agricultural Soil Export Mining (Section 35.11) Agricultural Soil Export Mining: Grading done for agricultural activities, as defined in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 3501, that requires the export of soil and such export does not exceed 75,000 cubic yards from any one parcel or group of contiguous parcels since January 1, For the purposes of this definition, any permitted or unpermitted export of soil since January 1, 2005, whether or not qualified as agricultural grading, shall be included in the calculation of 75,000 cubic yards. Comments: The initial concept of providing a streamlined process for agricultural lands was to assist in the removal of excess soil while complying with state and local SMARA regulations. The ordinance revisions were not intended to put agriculturalists in long-term competition with established mining operations. Staff has suggested a maximum of 75,000 yards for the new process. That would represent 4,167 round-trip truckloads of 18 cubic yards of soil each. If no

4 SMARA Revision Ordinance Amendment Page 4 maximum volume were identified, then the agricultural operation could theoretically continue mining and exporting soil for years (provided they could prove that they were continuing to improve the agricultural viability of the land. Staff has envisioned this new permit process to be of a relatively short duration and therefore not become a long-term competition to operations that have gone through an extensive permitting process. Your Commission and ultimately the Board can decide if a maximum yardage should be part of the ordinance amendments. 5.3 Revised Permit Process (Section ) (1) Agricultural Soil Export Mining. (a) Planning and Development shall submit the Reclamation Plan, financial assurances, or amendments to the Director of the Department of Conservation for review, together with an analysis of the proposed Reclamation Plan, financial assurances, or amendments and its certification that the documents and their content comply with all applicable State Regulations. [SMARA, Section 2774(c)] (b) The Director of the Department of Conservation shall have 30 days from the date of receipt of the Reclamation Plan or plan amendments, and 45 days from the date of receipt of financial assurances, to prepare written comments, if the Director of the California Department of Conservation so chooses. [SMARA Section 2774(d)] (c) The Zoning Administrator shall then consider the Reclamation Plan, financial assurances, or amendments and all comments received from the Director of the Department of Conservation that are submitted within the statutory comment period at a noticed public hearing and shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the Reclamation Plan and financial assurances. (d) (f) The Zoning Administrator shall incorporate the comments and recommendations of the Director of the Department of Conservation into the Reclamation Plan as part of plan approval or shall adopt detailed written responses that explain why specific comments or recommendations were not accepted. [SMARA, Section 2774(d)] Copies of any written comments received and responses prepared by the Zoning Administrator shall be promptly forwarded to the surface mining operator. (g) Notice of the time and place of the hearing(s) shall be given and the hearing shall be conducted in compliance with Section (Noticing and Public Hearings).

5 SMARA Revision Ordinance Amendment Page 5 (h) The action of the Zoning Administrator is final subject to appeal in compliance with Section (Appeals). (i) A decision of the Board on a Reclamation Plan may be appealed to the State Mining and Geology Board in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 2770, and California Code of Regulations Section Comments: The planning process identified in Section 5.3 (above) for agricultural soil export mining has been simplified from the standard SMARA process. This permit would evaluate mining operations that are limited to the export of soil from agricultural lands where the soil removal could be shown to improve the land s agricultural viability. The downshift in the level of permitting (minor CUP through the Zoning Administrator) and simplified application packet are both indicative of the straight-forward nature of the physical activity resulting from the agricultural grading. A properly drawn mining and reclamation plan would look like a typical grading plan with existing and proposed contour lines. Staff will also review the financial assurance worksheet that will identify the costs to reclaim the grading operation once the soil has been removed from the site. The financial assurances worksheet, which can sometimes be close to 20 pages, would only be 1-2 pages since the grading and soil removal would have the same physical characteristics of a grading plan. The County would apply the standard $3.00 per cubic yard fee that is utilized in all grading plan bonds for completion. The application packet would then be mailed to the Office of Mine Reclamation (OMR) - Department of Conservation for their 30-day review of the reclamation plan and 45-day review of the financial assurances. Even though the grading/mining operations are relatively small and considerably simpler than standard mining operations, the State regulations provide no shortened review period. Staff has been working with the OMR to see if they would consider some sort of reduced timeframe for review. If it is possible, then the overall P&D processing time could be reduced further. Once the State s review timeframe expired and any comments were forwarded to P&D, a staff report (incorporating their comments) and either a CEQA exemption or other environmental document would be prepared for consideration by the Zoning Administrator. Standard administrative procedures would be followed for noticing, hearing and appeals. The grading/mining would only commence after issuance of zoning clearance. 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed amendment is recommended to be determined to be exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for projects within the inland areas. Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule exemption, states that where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment that the

6 SMARA Revision Ordinance Amendment Page 6 activity is not subject to CEQA. The proposed changes in the ordinance still require each project to be subject to environmental review. No significant environmental impacts would occur as a result of these ordinance amendments, as explained in Attachment B, Notice of Exemption. 7.0 POLICY CONSISTENCY Adoption of the proposed ordinance amendment will not result in any inconsistencies with the adopted policies and development standards of the County s Comprehensive Plan and Community Plans or Local Coastal Plan. Since the proposed ordinance amendments neither alters the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan, or the Community Plans development standards, nor would they allow any development that is inconsistent with their intent, the proposed amendments are considered to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Each project would be evaluated for consistency with the County s Comprehensive Plan during project review. 8.0 ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE The proposed ordinance amendments are consistent with the remaining portions of the Land Use and Development Code that would not be revised by this amendment. In order to approve a mining permit (minor conditional use permit) and reclamation plan, they still must be determined to be consistent with the whole of the Land Use and Development Code. 9.0 PROCEDURES The County Planning Commission may recommend approval, approval with revisions to the text, or denial of staff recommendations for the proposed amendment to Section 35-1 of the LUDC to the County Board of Supervisors APPEALS PROCEDURE Ordinance amendments are automatically forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for final action, therefore no appeal is required ATTACHMENTS A. Findings of Approval B. CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) Notice of Exemption C. 06ORD Draft Ordinance Amendment

7 SMARA Revision Ordinance Amendment Page 7 D. Hypothetical Permit Submittal Review Process G:\GROUP\Permitting\Case Files\Oa\2000s\06 cases\06ord SMARA\StaffReport2.doc

8 SMARA Revision Ordinance Amendment Page 8 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF SMARA REVISIONS (Attachment A) 1. The proposed amendments to the Land Use and Development Code, Section 35-1, are needed to achieve consistency with the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (P.R.C. Sec et seq.), P.R.C. Sec, 2207; and the California Code of Regulations adopted pursuant thereto (Cal Code Regs, TIT 14, Sec et seq). 2. The proposed amendments are in the interest of the general community welfare, since the amendments will provide a streamlined process to allow the export of soil while enhancing agriculture on properties throughout Santa Barbara County. 3. The proposed amendments are consistent with the Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan and Coastal Plan, the requirement of State Planning and Zoning laws, and the Land Use and Development Code. 4. The proposed amendments are consistent with sound zoning and planning practices to regulate land uses for the overall protection of the environment and community values.

9 SMARA Revision Ordinance Amendment Page 9 ATTACHMENT B NOTICE OF EXEMPTION TO: FROM: Santa Barbara County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Larry Appel, Supervising Planner Planning and Development Department The project or activity identified below is determined to be exempt from further environmental review requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as defined in the State and County Guidelines for the implementation of CEQA. APN(s): Case No.: Location: Project Title: Not applicable. 06ORD The proposed ordinance amendments would apply to all inland and coastal areas of the county, excluding the Montecito Planning Area. SMARA revisions to the Land Use and Development Code. Project Description: An ordinance (Case No. 06ORD ) amending the County Land Use and Development Code of Chapter 35 of the Santa Barbara County Code to amend Chapter 35.21, Agricultural Zones, of Article 35.2, Zones and Allowable Land Uses, Section (Surface Mining and Reclamation) of Article 35.8, Planning Permit Procedures, and Section 35-11, Glossary to create new permitting procedures and development standards that apply to agricultural soil export mining for property zoned Agriculture II. Exempt Status: (Check one) Ministerial Statutory Categorical Exemption Emergency Project X No Possibility of Significant Effect [ 15061(b)(3)] Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule exemption, states that where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment that the activity is not subject to CEQA. Reasons to support exemption findings: The ordinance amendment simply downshifts the planning process for mining and reclamation of agricultural soil export to the Zoning Administrator. Each project would be assessed for impacts and either an exemption or environmental document would be prepared. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts are expected to result as a consequence of these ordinance revisions.

10 SMARA Revision Ordinance Amendment Page 10 Department/Division Representative Date Acceptance Date: Date Filed by County Clerk: Note: A copy of this form must be posted at P&D six days prior to a decision on the project. Upon project approval, this form must be filed with the County Clerk of the Board and posted by the Clerk of the Board for a period of 30 days to begin a 35 day statute of limitations on legal challenges. Distribution: Hearing Support Staff Project file