    [From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

               Co6stal Zone
                information
                    Centel

                       SANTA BABBARA COUNTY
                                                                   COASTAL PLAN

                                                                                           COASTAL ZONE
                                                                                     INFORMATION CENTER

                         ,HT
                          9,
                         .C2
                         S3
                         1980

                                 -ANUARY 1980

                                                         OVL

                                 SANTA BARBARA COUNTY

                                          COASTAL            PLAN

                                     JANUARY                   19.810

                         This plan was prepared with financial assistance from the
                         Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and
                         Atmospheric Administration, under the provisions of the Fed-
                         eral.Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.

                                                                   Planning Department
                                                                   123 E  Anapamu Street
                                                                   Santa Barbara, CA 93101

                                             'COUNTY OF.SANTA BARBARA

                        Board of_Supervisors

                        David Yager, First District
                        Robert E. Kallman, Second District
                        William B. Wallace, Third District
                        Robert Hedlund, Fourth District
                        Harrell Fletcher, Fifth District

                        Planning Commission

                        Joan Wells, First District
                        Ted H. Gates, Second District
                        Jo Anne Yokota, Third District
                        Art Hibbits, Fourth District
                        Darwin E. Sainz, Fifth District

                        Planning Department

                        Britt A. Johnson, Planning Director

                        Project Staff

                        Kirvil Skinnarland, Project  Director
                        Ruth Ann Collins
                        Paul M. Rells
                        Susan Van Atta
                        Gene Bazan
                        Gregg Kantor
                        Kimberly Schizas.

                        Support Staff

                        Dorothy Capes
                        Don Krueger
                        Jose Manzo

                        Photography

                        All photographs   1978 Ron  Morgan

                        Front Cover Drawing

                        Lencho Auchstetter

                                                  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
                             We wish to extend our gratef'ul appreciation to the many individuals
                        and organizations who contributed their time and expertise to the develop-
                        ment of this plan.

                                       TABLE               OF        CONTENTS

                                                                                                      Page

                            Chapter    1: The   Coastal   Act
                                  1.1      History
                                  1.2      Goals, Priorities,and       Policies                         2.
                                  1.13     Implementation                                               41
                            Chapter 2:     The Local Coastal     Program (LCP)
                                  2.1      The Coastal Zone in Santa Barbara County                     6
                                  .2.2     The LCP Planning Process                                     7
                                  2.3      The Land Use Plan                                            9
                                  2.4      The Land Use Plan    Maps                                  11
                            Chapter 3:     The Resource Protection       and bevelopment      Policies
                                  3.1      Introduction                                               12
                                  3.2      Development                                                14
                                  3.3      Hazards
                                  3.4      Visual Resources                                           33
                                  3.5      Housing                                                    38
                                  3.6      Industrial and Energy Development                          46
                                  3.7      Coastal Access and Recreation                              76
                                  3.8      Agriculture                                               100
                                  3.9      Environmentally Sensitive Habitat        Areas            113
                                  3.10     Archaeological and Historica:l,Resources                  139
                                  3.11     Air Quality                                               143
                            Chapter 4:     The Planning Areas,
                                  4.1      -Introduction                                             145
                                  4.2      Carpinteria Valley                                        146
                                  4.13     Summerland                                                171
                                  4.4      Montecito                                                 179
                                  4.5      Goleta                                                    187
                                  4.6      Gaviota Coast                                             206
                                  4.7      North Coast                                               217
                                  4.8      The Channel Islands                                       226

                                                                                         Page
                         Appendix A   Definitions                                        @A-1
                         Appendix B m-lahd Use  Classification  Definitions              B-1
                         Appendix C - References                                         C-1
                         Appendix D   Service  System Data,
                                                                                         D-1
                         Appendix E   Buildout  Projections                              E-1

                                                         RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD    OF SUPERVISORS  OF THE

                                                          COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

                                   IN THE MATTER OF APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING)
                                   SUBMITTAL OF A PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN FOR )
                                   THE UNINCORPORATED COASTAL ZONE OF SANTA )           RESOLUTION NO. 80-12
                                   BARBARA COUNTY PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA.)
                                   COASTAL ACT OF 1976

                                   WITH REFERENCE TO THE FOLLOWING:

                                        A. The County of Santa Barbara has prepared a land use plan including,text and

                                   maps for its coastal zone in accordance with the California.Coastal Act of 1976
                                   (Pub. Res. C.� 30000 and following).

                                        B. After numerous public workshops and meetings and duly advertised public
                                   hearings before the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, the land use plan

                                   was considered and acted upon by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.

                                        C. The land use plan is intended to implement at the.local level the provisions

                                   of the Coastal Act of 1976.

                                        NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED as follows:

                                        1. The above recitations are true and correct.,

                                        2. This  Board hereby adopts pursuant to Government Code          65303(k) the  local
                                   coastal element, the land use plan of the Local Coastal Program (LCP),consisting of

                                   a text and land use (7) and resource (14) maps and certifies that it is the          intention

                                   of the,Board to carry out the provisions of this land use plan.

                                        3. The Board hereby directs the LCP staff to submit this land use plan to the

                                   Sout h Central Regional Coastal Commission and the California Coastal Commission for

                                   review and certification and authorizes Kirvil Skinnarland, LCP Project Director, to

                                   represent the County at all meetings.and hearings in reference to this land use plan.
                                        Passed and adopted this 7th day of January 1980 by the Board of Supe@visors,

                                   County of Santa  Barbara, State of California, by the following vote:

                                        AYES :
                                                    David M. Yager,,Robert E. Kallman, Williarn B. Wallace,
                                                    Robert L. Hedlund and Harrell. Fletcher
                                        NOES:       None

                                        ABS ENT:    None
                                        ATTEST:                                     AU fz X          Lll@
                                                                                    Chairman, B6ard 'of Superv-1sors-

                                   HOWARD C. MENZEL
                                   County Clerk-Recorder                         APPRO VED AS TO FORM:
                                   By,,@                                         GEORGE P. KADING
                                         puty CleR&!@                            B    C            "*r
                                                                                   y
                                                                                     Deputy County Counsel

                                CHAPTER -1:
                          THE COASTAL ACT

                  -1.1   HISTORY

                         Historicall y, land use in the California coastal zone has been regu-
                    lated by local.governments under the provisions of State Planning and
                    Zoning Law. This enabling legislationmandates local governments to
                    prepare.general plans and zoning to ensure orderly.physical growth and
                    development within their jurisdictions as Well as the protection of public
                    health, safety, and welfare.

                         Traditional local control over regulation of land use in       thecoastal
                    zone was substantially modified with the passage of The California Coastal
                    Zone Conservation Act (Proposition 20) by the voters of California on
                    November 7, 1972. The forces leading to the passage of this landmark
                    initiative were complex. The key factor, however, was the visible deteri-
                    oration of the coastal environment due to increasing development pressures
                    from a growing population. Under Proposition 20, the California Coastal
                    Zone Conservation Commission and six Regional Coastal Commissions were
                    created and given a dual mandate of preparing a statewide      "comprehensive
                   .enforceable plan for the orderly, long-range conservation      and management  of
                    the coast" and regulating development while this plan was      being prepared.
                    From 1973 to 1975, the Coastal Commissions, both regional      and state, held
                    literally hundreds of hearings on the evolving plan. The       California
                    Coastal Plan was submitted to the legislature on December      1, 1975. During
                    the 1976 legislative session, several coastal bills'were introduced, all.
                   ,modifying to some extent the Coastal Plan. By the summer of 1976, SB 1277,1
                    the California Coastal Actemerged fro    m both houses as the basis of
                    California's Coastal Zone Management Program. SB 1277 was amended by a
                    trailer bill, AB 2948, which was,itself amended by AB 400.       On January 1,
                    1977, the.Coastal Act and,other legislationcame into effect, establishing
                    a permanentcoastal management program for California.

                  1.2 G.OALS, PRIORITIES, AND. POLICIE8

                          In enacting'the Coastal   Act, the legislature   established the following
                     goals for futur'e activity in  the coastal zone:

                          (a). Protect, maintain and, where feasible, enhance and restore the
                               overall quality of the coastal zo   Ine environment and its natural
                               and man-made resources.

                          (b)  Assure orderly, balanced utilization and conservation of coastal
                               zone resources taking into account the social and economic needs
                               of the people of the state.

                          (c)  Maximize public access to and along the coast and maximize public
                               recreational opportunities in the coastal zone consistent with
                               sound resources conservation principles and constitutionally
                               protected rights of private property owners.
                         .(d)  Assure priority for coastal-dependent development over other
                               development on thecoast.

                          (e)  Encourage state and local initiatives and cooperation in prepar-
                               ing procedures to implement coordinated planning and development
                               for mutually beneficial uses, including educational uses, in the
                               coastal zone.

                          The heart of the Coastal Act is found in Chapter3, the Coastal
                    Resources Planning and Management Policies. These pol.icies.constitute the
                    standards that local plans must meet in order to be certified by the state
                    as well as-the yardstick for evaluating proposed developments within the
                    coastal zone. Topics covered by coastal policies include: beach access,
                    low and moderate income housing, recreation, marine environment, environ-
                    mentally sensitive habitat areas, agricul,ture, visual resources, and
                    coastal dependent energy andAndustrial development, In essence, these
                    policies are the rules for future growth a.nd development in the coastal
                    zone.

                          The Act also attempts to establish a framework for resolving conflicts
                    among competing uses for limited coastal lands. The policies which spell
                    out priority uses constitute this framework. The Coastal Act places as its
                    highest priority the preservation and protection of natural resources
                    including environmentally sensitive habitat areas (i.e., wetlands, dunes),
                    and prime agricultural lands. In the case of habitat.areas, only uses
                    dependent on these resources are allowed within such areas. For agricul-
                    tural land, the intent of the Act is to keep the maximum amount of prime
                    land in production. On lands not'suited for agricultural use, coastal
                    dependent development (i.e., development that requires a site on or
                    adjacent to the sea to be able to function at all) has the highest
                    priority. Public recreational uses have priority on coastal sites which,
                    are not habitat areas, and noti.needed for coastal dependent uses.-For sites

                                                          -2-

                    that are not reserved for habitat preservation, agriculture, coastal
                    dependent uses, or public recreation, private development is permitted.
                    However, visitor-serving commercial recreation has priority over private
                    residential, general, industrial and.general commercial development., These
                    priorities must be reflected in the,lahd use plans prepared by local,
                    goverments.

                 1.3 IMPLEMENTATION,

                            Each of the 15 counties and 53 cities   along the California coast is
                      requ.ired bythe Coastal Act to Prepare.a Local Coastal Program (LCP). The
                      LCP consists of "a local government's land    use'plans, zoning ordinances,
                      zoning district maps, and implementing actions which, when taken together,
                      meet the requirements of, and implement the provisions and policies of (the
                      Coastal Act) at the local level." (30108.6) The land use plan means the
                      11relevant.portions of a local government's general plan, or local coastal
                      element, which are sufficiently detailed to indicate the kinds, location,
                      and intensity,of land uses, the app.1-icable resource protection and
                      development policies and, where necessary, a listing of implementing
                      actions." (30108.5) The zoning ordinances and distict maps are the legal
                      tools for implementing the land use plan. The Coastal Act also requires
                      each LCP to "contain a specific.public access component to assure that
                      maximum access to the coast and public recreation Areas is provide'd."
                      (30500(a)) In addition, the local land use plans are required to consider
                      uses.of more than local importance. (30501(c)) As noted in the LCP
                      Regulations,* such uses generally include: (1) state and federal parks and
                      recreation areas and other recreational facilities of regional or statewide
                      significance; (2)-military and national defense installations; (3) major
                      energy facilities; (4) state and federal highways and other transportation
                      facilities (e.g., railroads and airports) or public works facilities (e.g.,
                      water supply or sewer systems) serving larger-than-local needs; ('5) general
                      cargo ports and commercial fishing facilities,@ (6) state colleges and
                      universities; and (7) uses of larger-than-local importance, such as coastal
                      agriculture, fisheries, wildlife habitats, or uses that maximize public
                      access to the.coast, such as accessways, visitor-serving developments, as
                      general.ly referenced in the findings, declarations, and policies of the
                      California Coastal Act of 1976..

                           The land use plans and zoning, after receiving local review and
                      approval, must be submitted to the.Regional and State Coastal Commissions.
                      The Commissions must make the finding that the land use plan is consistent.
                     .with the policies of Chapter 3 of the Act. The zoning and implementing
                      ordinances are then revie .wed to determine conformance with the approved
                      land use plan.

                           After certification of the.land use.plan and zoning components of      the
                      LCP,,the review authority for new development within the coastal zone,
                      which is now vested in the.Coastal Commission, will be returned to local
                      government. The local government, in issuing coastal development permits
                      after certification, must make the finding that the development is in     I
                      con.formity with the approved LCP. Any amendments to a certified LCP will
                      have to be approved by the State Coastal   Commission.

                      *LCP Regul.ations, adopted by the Coastal  Commission  on May 17,  1977.

                                                          -4-

                           After certification of the LCP's,    the Regional Coastal Commissions
                      will be phased out. The State Coastal     Commission will, however, continue
                      to exercise permit jurisdiction over certain kinds of development (i.e.,
                      development in the State Tidelands), and will continue to hear appeals and
                      review amendments to certified,L,CPs.: Only certain kinds of developments
                      can be appealed after a local government's LCP has been certi.fied; these
                      include-

                           (1)  Developments approved by the local government between the sea and
                                the first public road paralleling the sea or within 300 feet of
                                the inland extent of.any beach or of the mean high tide line of
                                the sea where there is no beach, whichever is the greater
                                distance.

                           (2)  Developments approved by the local government not included within
                                paragraph (1) of this subdivision located on tidelands, submerged
                                lands, public trust lands, within 100 feet of any wetland,
                                estuary, stream or within 300 feet of the top of the seaward face
                                of any coastal bluff.

                           (3)  Development approved   by the local government not included within
                                paragraph (1) or (2),of this subdivision located in a sensitive
                                coastal resource area if.the allegation on appeal is that the
                                development is not in conformity with the implementing actions of
                                the certified local coastal program.

                           (4)  Any development approved by a coastal county that is not
                                designated as the principal permitted use underthe zoning
                                ordinance or zoning district map approved    pursuant to Chapter 6
                                (commencing with �30500).

                           (5)@ Any development which constitutes a major    public works project or
                                a major energy facility.

                           The State Commission is also required to-review    periodically the
                     progress oflocal governments in carrying out the Coastal Act.. This review
                     is  to occur at least once every,five years.

                                                          -5-

                              CHAPTER 2:
         THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM (LCP)

               2.1 THE COASTAL ZONE IN SANTA BARBARA
                       COUNTY

                         On the mainland, the coastal zone in Santa Barbara County spans 110
                    miles of coastline and includes approximately 184 square miles.* In
                    addition, the offshore islands of Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa are entirely
                    within coastal jurisdiction. While the coastal zone boundary line
                    generally extends inland only 1,000 yards, the Santa Barbara coastal zone
                    extends further inland in several areas because of important habitat,
                    recreational, and agricultural resources. These areas include the lands
                    surrounding Guadalupe Dunes and Point Conception, and most of Carpinteria
                    Valley.

                         The coastal zone of Santa Barbara County is world-renowned for its
                    beauty and diversity. The South Coast is characterized.by sandy beaches,
                    bluffs, and coastal terraces. Urban development and agriculture have
                    nestled along the narrow coastal shelf against the spectacular backdrop of
                    the Santa Ynez Mountains. The coastline from Point Conception north to the
                    Santa Ma.ria River is rugged and rural, consisting of rolling hills,
                    mountains, rocky headlands, steep bluffs, and extensive sand dunes between
                    Mussel Point and the Santa Maria River.

                         The Santa Barbara County coastal zone, like so many other areas in
                    California, has a history of controversy over its use and development.
                    Many projects have been proposed for the coastal zone in recent years; some
                    have been implemented and others have failed to obtain necessary public
                    support. Some of the better-known proposals include Exxon's proposal for
                    an oil processing plant at Las Flores Canyon and the residential
                    development proposals for El Capitan and More Mesa.

                         While Santa Barbara County has managed to maintain extensive areas of
                    undeveloped coastline, it is clear that adopted plans and policies are not
                    adequate to ensure wise management, development, and conservation of its
                    coastline in the future. Stronger policies and appropriate land use
                    designations will be required to ensure protection of Santa Barbara
                    County's outstanding scenic values and diverse habitat resources,
                    preservation of pri me agricultural lands, and provision of, maximum
                    opportunities for recreational use of its beaches while allowing for
                    orderly growth and development.

                    *Vandenberg Air Force Base, which is located in the County@s coastal zone,
                    is not subject to local land use controls.

                                                      -6-

                 2..2 THE LCP PLANNING PROCESS,

                         The land use plan has evolved in several phases. The first phase,
                   January to June 1977, concentrated  .. on developing a'@framework for involving
                   the public and affected age'ncies in the planning process, preparing a sound
                   data base for land use decisions related to recreation access, and
                   environmentally sensitive habitats, and included a preiiminary study of
                   greenhouses and agriculture in the Carpinteria Valley.

                         The second phase, July 1977 to November 1978, involved actual prepara-
                   tion of the land use plan. Staff effort during these 16 months was concen-
                   trated on Santa Barbara County's critical coastal planning issues: agri-
                   culture, environmentally sensitive habitats, energy deyelopment, shoreline
                   access, and recreation. Draft reports, which are on file at the Planning
                   Department, were produced for all of the critical issues. Much of the
                   background information in these draft reports has not been repeated in the
                   land use plan.

                         During the second phase of the program, extensive opportunities for
                   public involvement in the development of the land use plan Were provided.
                   For example, special public workshops were held to discuss habitat areas,
                   recreation, access, and energy issues. A four-session Coastal Planning
                   Series was conducted in the spring of 1978, sponsored by the Continuing
                   Education Division of Santa-Barbara Community College. The series provided
                   an orientation session on requirements of land use planning under the
                   Coastal Act, established the critical coastal issues, and included presen-
                   tations on agriculture in the Carpinteria Valley, coastal recreation and
                   access, energy development and habitats. Early in the land use planning
                   process, an Agricultural Advisory Committee was formed to assist staff in
                   studying the complex nature of agriculture in the Carpinteria Valley. The
                   committee met numerous times to critique LCP draft reports. Finally, the
                   County's General Plan Advisory Committees have played an important role in
                   the development of the land use plan. The committees' land use recommenda-
                   tions contributed significantly to.LCP staff decisions on appropriate land
                   uses in the coastal zone.

                         The pre-hearing draft of the land use plan was released in November
                   1978; the third phase involved public review of that draft. Approxi-
                   mately 35 public meetings and workshops were held during a 4-month period
                   from November 1978 to February 1979. Many of the comments and suggestions
                   that were received during the informal public review period were incorpora-
                   ted into the hearing draft of the plan, which was released in May 1979.

                         Following the release of the hearing draft of the plan., joint public
                   hearings were held by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors to
                   receive public testimony on the plan. The Planning Commission completed
                   their action on the plan in September and forwarded their recommendations
                   to the Board. Additional public hearings were held by the Board of Super-
                   visors prior to their final action on the plan.

                                                   -7-

                        Public hearings on the land use plan will,be held by th e South Central
                   Regional Coastal Commission and State Coastal Commission.,-Following
                   approval of the land use plan, zoning and other implementing ordinances
                   will be prepared to carry out the land use plani Both ordinances and
                   zoning district maps will have to be approved by the County and Coastal
                   Commissions. Upon approval of both components of the LCP (land use plan
                   and zoning), the County will'regain permit control over new development
                   within the coastal zone.

                                                  .8-

                  2.3 THE LAND USE PLAN

                          The land use plan and implementation program, including zoning, Which
                    comprise the LCP are designed as a separate coastal element to the County's
                    General Plan under the California Government Code Section 65303(k). As a
                    separate element to the County's General Plan, the LCP exist's in addition
                    to the other elements of the General Plan, i.e., seismic safety, housing,
                    circulation, etc.. After.certification, the land use plan maps and zoning
                    district maps will replace and supersede the existing General Plan map and
                    zoning map for the County's coastal zone. Where there are conflicts
                    between policies set forth in the certified LCP and those set forth in any
                    element of the General Plan, the LCP shall take precedence for those areas
                    locate d within the coastal zone.

                         The purpose of the land use   plan is to protect coastal resources,
                    provide greater access and recreational opportunities for the-public@'s
                    enjoyment, while allowing for orderly and well-planned urban.development
                    and the siting of coastal dependent' industry. The plan incorporates, to
                    the maximum possible extent, local plans and policies which are consistent
                    with the Coastal Act. Where inconsistencies have been identified, modifi-
                    cations and revisions have been made. In general, the land use plan places
                    a stronger emphasis on expandi.ng public access opportunities to the
                    County's beaches, preserving prime agricultural land, and protecting
                    environmentally sensitive habitats than is found in prevailing local
                    policy.

                         The changes in existing land use regulati   ons that are proposed  in the
                    plan are moderate. Ample provision has been made for continued growth and
                    development; the land use designations within the plan can accommodate
                    projected new development through the year 2000, assuming that sufficient
                    water resources areavailable. The plan does not, however, put forth
                    provisions for phasing or controlling the rate of growth. There are too
                    many factors external to the jurisdiction.of the plan which would make such
                    an undertaking tenuous at best. These include: the Missile X program, the
                    Space Shuttle, the proposed LNG facility, Lease Sale 48, and U.C.S.B.
                    enrollment policies.

                         The plan proposes that firm urban-rural boundaries be established
                    which will have the effect of redirecting growth from an outward expansion
                    to infilling. In this sense, the plan will result in more compact urban
                    development, thereby assuring the long-term protection of surrounding
                    agricultural lands and recreational resources.

                         The land use plan has two components:' maps and text. The land use
                    plan maps show the kinds, location, and intensity of land uses proposed for
                    the coastal zone of Santa Barbara County. In addition, resource maps show
                    the location of environmentally sensitive habitat areas.

                                                    -9-

                        The text explains the rationale for the land uses and  establishes
                   policies to guide future development. These local policies, along with the
                   policies from Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act, will constitute the decision
                   rules for evaluating projects after certification of the land use plan.

                        The essence of the land use plan is contained in Chapter 3, the
                   Resource Protection and Development Policies. This chapter includes a
                   discussion of each of the major policy sections of the Coastal Act,
                   relevant issues and problems within the County's coastal zone, and the
                   proposed policies and actions which respond to these issues. Chapter 4 is
                   devoted to a more in-depth discussion of the planning issues and problems
                   in the seven planning areas within the coastal zone.
                       .,-,It is, of course, anticipated that the land use plan will need
                   revi0on from time to time in,accordance with changing conditions.    The
                   Coastal Act requires that certified plans be reviewed at least once  every
                   five years to determine whether the program is.being effectively implemen-
                   ted in co'nformity with the policies of the Act. Local recommendations for
                   revisions of the certified land use plan could be considered as part of the
                   five-year review process or they could-be initiated by the  County at any
                   time, subject to the approval of the State Commission.

                                                 _10-

               2.4 THE LAND USE PLAN MAPS

                         The land use plan'maps reveal two levels of information.   The land use
                    base maps show principal land use designations such as agriculture,
                    commercial, residential, and industrial. The second level of information
                    is contained'in overlay maps. The overlay maps illustrate specific
                    information such as flood.hazard areas, view corridors, environmentally
                    sensitive habitats, and areas which require special site design. They are
                    placed over the base maps as.a.means of showing where potential constraints
                    on development may exist. In addition, a set of resource maps for the
                    mainland and Channel Islands has been prepared. These maps include
                    detailed information regarding the location of environmentally sensitive
                    habitat areas and are intended to supplement the land use plan maps.

                         The land use plan maps have been developed at two scales, one for the
                    urbanized South Coast (Ellwood to Rincon) and.another for the rural areas.
                    The maps for the urbanized South Coast are at 500 scale lone inch = 500
                    feet). They provide enough detail for precise planning and zoning on a
                    parcel-by-parcel basis. Such detail is not necessary in the rural areas
                    where parcels are generally larger,and land use issues are not as complex.
                    Therefore, 2000 scale maps (one inch = 2000 feet) have been used for these
                    areas. For Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa Islands, the,land use plan maps are
                    at 8000 scale (one inch = 8000 feet).

                         The key to the maps is the land use classification syst em which has
                    been jointly developed by theLCP.and Comprehensive Plan staffs. The land
                    use classifications specify the principal permitted land uses within the
                    coastal zone. Included in the land use classification system are the four
                    11 overlay", designations. Each of the land use classifications is defined in
                   .Appendix B of the land use plan. Policies that are associated with the
                    overlay designations, View Corridor, Environmentally Sensitive Habitat
                    Area, Flood Hazard, and Site Design'are included in Chapter 3.

                               CHAPTEB 3:
                 'THE BESOURCE PBOTEC TION
                AND  DEVELOPMENT  POLICIES

                 3.1 INTROQUCTION

                          The policies established by the Coastal Act focus on the protection of
                     coastal resources and the regulation of development in the coastal zone.
                     These resource protection policies govern land resources, which include
                     environmentally sensitive habitat areas and prime agricultural lands,
                     recreational resources, the marine environment (i.e., streams, wetlands,
                     and coastal waters), scenic resources such as views to and along the ocean,
                     and air quality.. The stress of these policies is on resource conservation.
                     Coastal Act development policies govern all aspects of development
                     including land divisions, industrial development, and new and/or expanded
                     public works facilities. The emphasis of the    Coastal Act development
                     policies is on encouraging well-planned and orderly development which is
                     compatible with resource protection and conservation.

                          The text and the policies set forth in this chapter are, in many
                     aspects, the core of the land use plan. They establish the parameters for
                     evaluating future development projects within the County's coastal zone,
                     and set forth the measures that the County should take to achieve the
                     degree of resource protection required by the Coastal Act. Furthermore,
                     theselocal policies will serve as the foundation for developing the
                     ordi nances that will implement the land use plan.

                          This chapter is organized into major topics which reflect the
                     principal coastal resource protection and-development issues in Santa
                     Barbara County. Each section is prefaced with pertinent policies from the
                     Coastal Act and is followed by a discussion of local issues and problems
                     related to the topic. The issues section attempts to pinpoint where County
                     practices and regulations fall short of, or conflict with, the provisions
                     of the Coastal Act. Finally, each topic area is concluded with recommended
                     policies to bring the County into conformity with the Coastal Act  *   After
                     certification,, all new development in the County's coastal zone will have
                     to meet the standards set forth in these policies.

                         The following general policies shall provide the framework for the
                     land use plan:

                     Policy 1-1:  The County shall adopt the policies of the Coastal Act (PRC
                                  Sections 30210 through 30263) as the guiding policies of the
                                  land use plan.

                     Policy 1-2: Where policies  within the land use plan overlap, the policy
                                  which is the most protective of coastal resources shall take.
                                  precedence.

                                                       -12-

                    Policy 1-3:  Where there are conflicts between the policies set forth in
                                 the coastal land use plan and those set forth in any element
                                 of the County's General Plan or existing ordinances, the
                                 policies of the coastal land use plan shall take precedence.

                    Policy 1-4:  Prior.to the issuance of a coastal development permit, the
                                 County shall make the finding that the development reasonably
                                 meets the standards set forth in all applicable land use plan
                                 policies.

                    Policy 1-5:  Land use plan policies calling for   further studies, initiation
                                 of new programs, or acquisitiwof land or easements will be
                                 implemented as staff and funding become available.

                                                   -13-

                 3.2 DEVELOPMENT

                   3.2.1 COASTAL ACT POLICIES

                      I There are many sections of the Coastal Act that address,  either directly
                  or indirectly, the issue of development.* Only those policies that'are not
                  addressed in other sections of the plan are included here.
                           30250. (a) New development, except as otherwise provided in this
                        division, shall be located within, contiguous-with, or in close proxi-
                        mity to, existing developed areas able to accommodate it or, where such
                        areas are not able to accommodate it, in other areas with adequate pub-
                        lic services and where it will not have significant adverse effects,
                        either individually or cumulatively, on coastal resources. In addition,
                        land divisions, other than leases, for agri@ultural uses, outside exist-
                        ing developed areas shall be permitted only where 50 percent of the us-
                        able parcels in the area have been developed and the created parcels
                        would be no smaller than the.average size of surrounding parcels.
                           (b) Where feasible, new hazardous industrial development shall be
                        located away from existing developed areas.

                           30252. The location and amount of new development should maintain
                        and enhance public access to the coast by: (1) facilitating the pro-
                        vision or extension of transit service; (2) providing commercial facil-
                        ities within or adjoining residential development or in other areas
                        that will minimize the use of coastal access roads; (3) providing non-
                        automobile circulation within the development; (4) providing adequate
                        parking facilities or providing substitute means of serving the devel-
                        opment with public transportation; (5) assuring the potential for pub-
                        lic transit for high-intensity us'es such as high-rise office buildings,
                        and by (6) assuring that the recreational needs of new residents will
                        not overload nearby coastal recreation areas by correlating the amount
                        of development with local park acqui,sition and development plans with
                        the provision of on-site recreational facilities to serve the new de-
                        velopment.

                           30254. New or expanded public works facilities shall be designed
                        and limited to accommodate needs generated by development.or uses per-
                        mitted consistent with the provisions of this division; provided, how-
                        ever, that it is the intent of the Legislature that State Highway
                        Route I in rural areas of the coastal zone remain a scenic two-lane
                        road. Special districts shall not be formed or expanded except where
                        assessment for, and provision of, the service would not induce new
                        development inconsistent with this division. Where existing or planned
                        public works facilities can accommodate only a-limited amount of new
                        development, services to coastal-dependent land use, essential public
                        services and basic industries vital to the economic health of the
                        region, state, or nation, public recreation, commercial recreation, and
                        visitor-serving land uses shall.not be precluded by other development.

                  *Refer To Appendix A for definition of development.

                                                     -14-

                    3.2.2 PLANNING ISSUES

                         The policies of the Coastal Act require that new development be
                    concentrated within existing developed areas to avoid costly urban sprawl
                    and to protect coastal resources, i.e., prime agricultural lands, scenic
                    quality of rural lands, habitat areas, etc. The Act specifies that.
                    development adjacent or proximate to environmentally sensitive habitat
                    areas be designed to avoid adverse impacts; that development be sited so as
                    to avoid risks to life and property due to natural hazards; and that
                    coastal visual resources be protected by careful placement and design of
                    new development. Each of these development-related issues is treatedin
                    subsequent sections of this chapter. The Act also requires that public
                    works facilities (water, sewer, and roads) be adequate to serve new
                    development.

                         Concentrating New Development

                         According to Coastal Ac t policy, new development must  be"located
                    within, contiguous with, or in close proximity to existing  developed areas.
                    In the County's coastal zone, urban development is currently concentrated
                    on'the South Coast from Ellwood east to the Ventura County line, with rural
                    areas extending west of Ellwood and, to the east, encircling the urban
                    areas of the City of Carpinteria and the community of Summerland.
                    Concentrating new development in existing developed areas is, therefore, an
                    issue for Carpinteria, Summerland, and Goleta, given their proximity to
                    rural lands. According to the Coastal Act, development should take place
                    within these urban areas prior to expanding outward. As noted in the
                    agriculture section of the plan (Section 3.8), past urban expansion in
                    Goleta and the Carpinteria Valley has resulted in the conversion of much
                    prime agricultural land. To prevent further urban encroachment ont6
                    agricultural lands and encourage infilling within urban areas, urban/rural
                    boundaries are delineated on the land use plan maps for the Carpinteria
                    Valley, Summerland, and Goleta planning areas.

                         Within the rural lands of the Carpinteria  Valley and Summerland, there
                    exists a number of residential enclaves, known  as Shepard's Mesa, Los
                    Arcos., La Mirada, Ocean Oaks, Serena Park, Padaro Lane, Sandyland, and
                    Rincon. Boundaries for these rural neighborhoods   are also drawn on the
                    land use plan maps to allow for completion of the  neighborhood without
                    encroachment onto surrounding agriculturallands.

                         Land Divisions

                         Another stipulation of the Coastal Act is that land divisions outside
                    of existing developed areas be permitted only where 50 percent of the
                    usable parcels in the area have been developed and the created parcels
                    would be no smaller than the average size of surrounding parcels. The
                    rural lands of the North County coastline and from Gaviota to Ellwood are
                    currently zoned for large parcel sizes, in most cases 100-acre minimums.
                    The land use plan calls for an.increase in the minimum parcel size for the
                    Hollister and Bixby ranches and other non-prime agricultural lands in the
                    North Coast planning area from 100 to 320 acres. This minimum parcel.size
                    is adequate for determining appropriate land divisions in the North Coast;

                                                        _15-

                    thus, the 50 percent criterion is not needed. Similarly, 100 and 320-acre
                    minimums for agricultural lands along the Gaviota Coast are adequate to
                    protect the area's agricultural lands and prevent urban pressures for
                    premature conversions.

                          In other rural areas of the South Coast, an increase in the minimum
                    parcel size from five acres to ten acres is proposed onthe land use plan
                    (see Section 3.8). This change is required to address the policies of the
                    Coastal Act concerning land divisions and the preservation of agricultural
                    lands.

                          Service System Capacities and the Availability of Resources
                          The land use plan designates the kinds, intensities, and locations of
                    land  uses as required under the Coastal Act. A further intent of the
                    Coastal Act is that the "kinds, intensities, and locations" of land uses be
                    correlated with the availability of resources and services. Resources
                    refer to water supply; services refer to water distribution systems, waste-
                    water collection and treatment facilities, and transportation systems. In
                    cases where resources and/or services can only accommodate a limited amount
                    of new development, Section 30254 of the Coastal Act requires that provi-
                    sions be made for allocating resources and/or services so that coastal
                    dependent land uses, essential public services and basic industries, public
                    and commercial recreation., and visitor-serving land uses are not precluded
                    by other development.

                          Resource protection and pro-vision of public services are also treated
                    in other sections of the Coastal Act. Section 30231 of the Coastal Act
                    requires that depletion of groundwat-er supplies be prevented. Section
                    30241 requires that public service a  nd facility expansions and
                    non-agricultural development -do not impair agricultural viability either
                    through increased assessment costs or degraded air and water quality.

                          Throughout the County's coastal zone, the major resource limitation is
                    that of water. Wastewater treatment and collection facilities are near
                    capacity levels in Summerland and Montecito and, therefore, present an
                    additional constraint to development in these areas. Water supply' and
                    demand and sanitary treatment capacity data are found in Tables D-1 to D-8
                    (Appendix D) for the Carpinteria, Summerland, Montecito, and Goleta
                    planning areas. The implications of these data for the land use plan are
                    discussed in detail in the appropriate planning area sections.

                          Water moratoria are already in effect in the Montecito,, Summerland,
                    and Goleta County Water Districts; and the demand for water within the
                    Carpinteria County Water District is nearly,equal to the existing supply.
                    Therefore, all of the planning'areas of the urbanized South Coast @re
                    experiencing some constraints due to limited water resources. Because
                    buildout in these areas, i.e., the total number of housing units permitted
                    under the land use plan, exceeds available water supplies, priorities for
                    development are needed to assure that the priority land uses specified in
                    Section 30254 of the Coastal Act are not precluded and that the depletion
                    of groundwater supplies is prevented.

                                                          -16-

                    DEVELOPMENT POLICIES

                    Policy 2-1:  In order to obtain approval for a division of land, the
                                 applicant shall demonstrate that adequate water is available
                                 to serve the newly created parcels except for parcels
                                 designated as "Not A Building Site" on the recorded final or
                                 parcel map.

                    Policy 2-2:  The long term integrity of groundwater basins or sub-basins
                                 located wholly within the coastal zone shall be protected. To
                                 this end, the safe yield as determined by competent
                                 engineering evidence of such a groundwater basin or sub-basin
                                 should not be exceeded except 1) by overlying property owners
                                 for beneficial use on the overlying land or 2) on a temporary
                                 basis as part of a conjunctive use or other program managed by
                                 the appropriate water district. If the safe yield of a
                                 groundwater basin or sub-basin is found to be exceeded for
                                 reasons other than the two stipulated above, use of a private
                                 well for new development shall be grounds for denial of a
                                 project.

                    Policy 2-3:  In the furtherance of better water management, the County may
                                 require applicants to install meters on.private wells and to
                                 maintain records of well extractions for use by the
                                 appropriate water district.

                    Policy 2-4:  Within designated urban areas, new development other than that
                                 for agricultural purposes shall be serviced by the appropriate
                                 public sewer and water district or an existing mutual water
                                 company, if such service is available.

                    Policy 2-5:  Water-conserving devices shall be.used   in all hew develop-
                                 ment.

                    Policy 2-6:  Prior to issuance.of a development 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 in s 'ervice extensions or improvements that
                                 are required as a result of the proposed   project. Lack of
                                 available public or private services or resources shall be
                                 grounds for denial of the project or reduction in the density
                                 otherwise indicated in the land use plan.

                    Policy 2-7:  a.  The County shall give equal priority to the following land
                                     uses in the coastal zone of Montecito and Summerland:
                                     E@pansion of.public recreational opportunities
                                     Visitor-serving commercial uses, i.e., restaurants, retail
                                     commercial., motels, etc.
                                     Low and moderate income housing
                                     Agricultural expansion

                                                         -17-

                                  b.  'In Goleta, the County shall give highest priority to low
                                      and moderate income housing and agricultural expansion
                                      followed by public recreation and visitor-serving
                                      commercial uses.

                    Policy 2-8:   The existing uncommitted water surplus in the Carpinteria
                                  County Water District shall be divided between uses within the
                                  unincorporated area of the County and within the City of
                                  Carpinteria on the basis of historical water use; 30 percent
                                  shall be allocated to the City and 70 percent shall be
                                  allocated to the County (see Table 4-1, Carpinteria Valley
                                  planning area sect'ion). The'total uncommitted water surplus
                                  within the district shall be re-evaluated on an annual basis.

                                  Action:

                                  The County's portion of the uncommitted water surplus shall    be
                                  allocated for priority uses, incTuding but not limited to the
                                  following:

                                      1.  Agriculture:- Water shall be distributed between open
                                          field crops and greenhouses, nurseries, and cover
                                          crops on the basis of established water usage, i.e.,
                                          approximately 56 percent of the agricultural water
                                          supply shall be used for open field crops and 44
                                          percent for greenhouses, nurseries, and other cover
                                          crop production.

                                      2.  Residential development: New development shall be
                                          based on the 10 to 1 ratio (between urban development
                                          in the City of Carpinteria and residential development
                                          in the unincorporated area of the County) established
                                          by the State Coastal Commission. (For example, since
                                          30 percent of the water surplus is currently being
                                          allocated to the City of Carpinteria for urban uses, 3
                                          percent shall be allocated to the County for
                                          residential development within the rural neighborhoods
                                          delineated on the land use plan maps.)

                                      3.  Public recreation

                                      4.  Visitor-serving commercial: Two areas allow for this
                                          use on the land use plan map - the eastern end of the
                                          Carpinteria bluffs and the Carpinteria Camper Park on
                                          North Via Real west of the City.

                   Policy 2-9:    Annexation of a rural area(s) to a sanitary district or
                                  oxtensions of sewer lines into rural area(s) as defined on the
                                  land use plan maps shall not be permitted unless required to
                                  prevent adverse impacts on an environmentally sensitive
                                  habitat, to protect public health, or as a logical extension
                                  of services.,

                                                         -18-

                    Policy 2-10: Al'          %nt, including agriculture,- adjacent to areas
                                 designated on the-land use plan or resource maps as
                                 -environmentally sensitive.habitat areas, shall be regulated to
                                 avoid adverse impacts on, habitat resources. Regulatory
                                 measures include, but are not limited to, setbacks, buffer-
                                 zones, grading.controls, noise restrictions, maintenance of
                                 natural vegetation, and control of runoff.

                    Policy 2-11: The densities specified in the land use plan are maximums and
                                 shall be reduced if it is,determined that such reduction is
                                 warranted by conditions specifically applicable to a site,
                                 such as topography, geologic or flood hazards, habitat areas,
                                 or steep slopes.

                    Policy 2-12: The existing townsite of Naples i  s within a designated rural
                                 area and is remote from urban services. The County shall
                                 discourage residential development of existing lots. The
                                 County shall encourage and assist the property owner(s) in
                                 transferring development rights from the Naples townsite to    an
                                 appropriate site within a designated urban area which is
                                 suitable for residential development. If the County
                                 determines that transferring development rights is not
                                 feasible, the land use designation of AG-II-100 should be
                                 re-evaluated.

                    Policy 2-13:,,,In the Montetito planning area, should a request be made to
                                 @amend the Educational Facility land use designation for the
                                 Music Academy ofthe West on Fairway Road or Crane School on
                                 San Leandro Lane, the new land use designation shall be
                                 Residential with,a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet.

                    PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

                    The purpose of the Planned Development designation is to ensure well-
                    planned development of large lots that are planned for residential use
                    within the designated urban.areas. It is theintent of this designation to
                    allow for flexibility and innovative design of residential development so
                    that the important resource values of a particular site (i.e., habitat
                    areas, scenic quality, vegetation, archaeological resources, etc.) are
                    preserved. It is also the intent of the Planned Development designation to
                    require clustering of structures to the maximum extent possible to preserve
                    open space and provide recreational opportunities for use by both the
                    residents of the site and the public. In some cases, commercial
                    development such as convenience stores.or visitor-serving facilities (i.e.,
                    restaurants, motels, etc.) may be incorporated into the design of a Planned
                    Development.

                    All areas designated in the land use plan for Planned Development shall be
                    subject to the following policies:

                                                         _19-

                    Policy 2-14: The entire  site shall be planned as a unit. Preparation of a
                                  specific plan (Governmept Code Section 65450) may be required
                                  when parcels comprising a site designated as PD are in
                                  separate ownerships.

                    Policy 2-15:  Use of flexible design conceptsi including clustering of
                                  units, mixture of dweIling types, etc., shall be required to
                                  accomplish as much as possible all of the following goals:

                                  a.  protection of the scenic qualities of the site;
                                  b.  protection of coastal resources, i.e., habitat areas,
                                      archaeological sites, etc.;
                                  c.  avoidance of siting of structures on hazardous areas;
                                  d.  provision of public-open space, recreation, and/or beach
                                      access;
                                  e.  preservation of existing healthy trees; and
                                  f.  provision of low and moderate housing opportunities.

                    Policy 2-16:  Permitted use shall include:

                                  a.  residential units, either attached or detached.
                                      recreational facilities, including but not limited to
                                      tennis courts, swimming pools, playgrounds, and parks for
                                      the private use,.of the prospective residents.and/or the
                                      public; and
                                  c., open space;
                                  and in developments of 200 residential units or greater,
                                  conditionally permitted uses may include:

                                  d.  commercial recreational facilities (private or public)
                                      that are compatible with the proposed residential units;

                                  e.  in especially scenic coastal areas, visitor-serving
                                      'commercial facilities, i.e., a motel or restaurant.
                                      Residential density shall be reduced to accommodate
                                      facilities that provide overnight'lodging.

                                  f.  convenience establishments of a commercial  and service
                                      nature such as a neighborhood store, provided:

                                      (1) such convenience establishments are an integral part
                                          of the general plan of development for   the Planned
                                          Development'and provide services related to the needs
                                          of the prospective residents.
                                      (2) such convenience establishments and their parking
                                          areas will not collectively occupy more than one (1)
                                          acre per two hundred (200) dwelling units,

                                                         -20-

                                        (3) such convenience establishments will be located,
                                            designed, and operated primarily to serve trade and
                                            service needs of persons residing in the Planned
                                            Development and not persons residing elsewhere.
                                        (4) such convenience establishments will not by reason of
                                            their location, construction,,manner or timing of
                                            operations, signs, lighting, parking arrangements, or
                                            other characteristics have adverse effects on
                                            residential uses within or.adjoining the development,
                                            or create traffic congestion or hazards to vehicular
                                            or pedestrian traffic.

                    Policy 2-17:  The County shall specify the maximum density of development
                                  permitted under the Planned Development designation at the
                                  time this designation is adopted for a particular parcel(s)
                                  unless already specified in the land use plan. Determination
                                  of an appropriate density shall take into account all of the.
                                  factors listed in Policy 2-15 and shall be compatible with the
                                  density and character of surrounding land uses.

                    Policy 2-18:  The amount of public, private, and common open space in a
                                  Planned Development shalVbe specified in the development
                                  plan.   The County shall determine the amount of public and
                                  common open space required, but in no case shall the amount of
                                  public  and common open space be less than forty (40) percent
                                  of the  gross area. As part of the'open space requirement, the
                                  County  may include.dedication of environmentally -sensitive
                                  habitat areas to mitigate impacts of development in Urban
                                  areas.

                                  Open space shall be defilned as follows:

                                  a.  Public open space shall include but not be limited to
                                      public parks and parking lots, beaches, access corridors
                                      suc ih as bike paths, Mking or equestrian trails, usable
                                      natural areas, and vista points which are accessible to
                                      members of the general public. Public open space shall
                                      not include areas which are unusable for recreational
                                      purposes, i.e., private or public streets9 private parking
                                      lots, or hazardous areas such as steep slopes and bluff
                                      faces. Environmentally sensitive habitat areas and
                                      archaeological sites.may be included in public open
                                      space.

                                  b.  Common open space shall include but not be limited to
                                      recreational areas and facilities for the use of the
                                      prospective residents of the project such as tennis
                                      courts, swimming pools, playgrounds, community gardens,
                                      landscaped areas for-common use, or other open areas of
                                      the site needed.for the protection of the habitat,

                                                           _21-

                                       archaeological, scenic, or other resources. Common open
                                       space shall not include driveways, parking lots, private
                                       patios and yards, other developed areas, or hard surfaced
                                       walkways.

                                   c.  Private open space.shall include but not be limited to
                                       patios, decks, and yards for the private use of the
                                       residents of i,ndividual units.

                    SITE DESIGN OVERLAY DESIGNATION

                    Policy 2-19:   Prior to approval of any lot splits or subdivision of a parcel
                                   designated on the land use plan map with the Site Design
                                   Overlay, a site plan showing the ultimate parcelization of'the
                                   site shall be reviewed by Subdivision Committee and approved
                                   by the Planning Commission. The site plan shall show lot
                                   lines, circulation pattern, and a general indication of the
                                   location of residential structures. All parcels to be created
                                   shall have adequate building sites and road access. In
                                   approving the site plan, the Planning Commission shall make
                                   the finding that ultimate development of the site will be
                                   consistent with all land use plan policies, including those
                                   regarding protection of habitat areas, avoidance of flood and
                                   geologic hazards, and protection of hillsides and watersheds.
                                   Where necessary to achieve conformance with the standards set
                                   forth in the land use plan policies, the Subdivision Committee
                                   or Planning Commission may require increases in the minimum
                                   parcel sizes shown on the land use plan maps. All future lot
                                   splits or subdivision shall be in conformance with the
                                   approved site plan; and the property shall be so zoned as       to
                                   preclude further division.
                    NOTE:   Additional conditions for parcels designated as     PD-Planned Develop-
                            ment are found in the following sections:

                            Carpinteria Bluffs: Section 4.2.3
                            Hammond's Meadow: Section 4.4.3
                            More Mesa: Section 4.5.3
                            West Devereux: Section 4.5.4
                            Santa Barbara,Shores: Section 4.5.5

                                                           -22-

                 3.3 HAZARDS.

                   3.3.1 COASTAL ACT POLICIES

                        30253. New development shall:
                         (1) Minimize risks to life and property in areas of high geologic,
                        flood, and fire hazard.
                         (2) Assure stability and structural integrity, and..neither create
                        nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or
                        destruction of the site or surrounding area,,or in any way require the
                        construction of protective de'vices that would substantially alter
                        natural landforms-along bluffs and cliffs.

                        30235. Revetments, breakwaters, groins, harbor channels, seawalls,
                        cliff-retaining walls, and other such construction that alters natural
                        shoreline processes shall be permitted when required to serve coastal-
                        dependent uses or to protect existing structures or public beaches in
                        danger from erosion and when designed to eliminate or mitigate adverse
                        impacts on local shoreline sand supply. Existing marine structures
                        causing water stagnation contributing to pollution problems and fish-
                        kills should be phased out or upgraded where feasible.

                        30236. Channelizations, dams, or other substantial alterations of
                        rivers and streams shall incorporate the best mitigation measures
                        feasible, and be limited to. (1) necessary water supply projects; (2)
                        flood control projects where no other method for protecting existing
                       ..structures in the flood plain is feasible and where such protection is
                        necessary for public safety or to protect existing development, or;
                        (3) developments where the primary function is the improvement of fish
                        and wildlife habitat.

                  3.3.2: PLANNING ISSUES

                        Recent events have provided strong evidence of the vulnerability of.
                  certain coastal areas to natural hazards. Following saturating rains -in
                  the winter of 1978, large sections of the cliff face in Isla Vista fell
                  into the sea, threatening several apartments; soil slippage caused a road
                  washout in the community of Summerland; severe erosion occurred in graded
                  areas.above Summerland; several blufftop.homes sl.id into the sea in the
                  City of Santa Barbara; and flooding and heavy wave action damaged some
                  homes along Miramar Beach. Also in 1978, an earthquake disrupted a rail
                  line in the Ellwood area, produced numerous bluff slides and fissures along
                  the South Coast, and caused considerable structural damage in the
                  surrounding areas.

                        The Coastal Act requires that the risks to new development from such
                  occurrences be minimized. Moreover, it specifies that new development must
                  be located and built neither to "create nor contribute significantly to
                  erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of the site or surrounding
                  area or in any way require the construction of protective devices that
                  would substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs."

                                                     -23-

                         The County has an array of policies and  regulations within its zoning,-
                    grading, and fire ordinances, and building code which address many of the
                    concerns of the Coastal Act. In addition, Santa Barbara County has under-
                    taken public works projects in recent years which now protect large areas
                    that were previously vulnerable to flooding. Extensive creek channeliza-
                    tions in the.Carpinteria Valley and the construction of upstream debris
                    dams are two recent examples.

                         However,in  spite of measures currently  imposed by the County, recent
                    problems with blufftop development and severe erosion in certain hillside
                    agricultural areas suggest that more stringent controls are needed.

                         Bluff and Beach Erosion

                         Bluff erosion is a potential hazard for new  development and continues
                    to be a recurring hazard for existing development in portions of the South
                    Coast, The bluff areas along Del Playa Drive in Isla Vista,- sections of
                    More Mesa and Hope Ranch, and areas along Channel Drive and Padaro Lane are
                    all subject to hazards due to bluff erosion. Because of this recurring
                    threat, many retaining walls, groins, and sections of rip-rap have been
                    needed to protect life and property. In the aftermath of the 1978 winter,
                    property.owners have initiated additional protective measures, such as
                    major seawall projects proposed for Isla Vista and Padaro Lane.

                         The,County's policy on bluff development is handled on a case-by-case
                    basis except in Isla Vista and Hope Ranch. In Isla Vista, a 30-foot
                    setback requirement exists. It is based on an engineering study that was
                    undertaken in 1963 to determine cliff stability and related problems in the
                    Isla Vista area. The study identified an average "natural" rate of cliff
                    retreat at six inches per year and recommended that a value of twice the
                    apparent retreat rate (12 inches) per year be applied for safety purposes,
                    along with specific site drainage requirements. ;Assuming an average
                    1'economic life" of 30 years per structure, the County developed the 30-foot
                    setback for the area. In Hope Ranch, a 50-foot setback is required under
                    the provisions of the County's Zoning Ordinance #661.

                         The inadequacy of the present requirements with respect to the Coastal
                                                                         11
                    Act is especially apparent in Isla Vista, since new protective devices"
                    which may substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs.are
                    now necessary to.protect property.

                         Bluff areas adjacent to development at More,Mesa have been eroding at
                    an average rate of ten inches per,year, while along a section of Padaro
                    Lane bluff losses of up to two feet per year have been reported. These
                    examples provide additional evidence why County.setback standards should be
                    strengthened in order to eliminate.the possibility of needing new "protec-
                    tive devices" in areas where future development mayI occur.

                         While serious beach erosion occurred during the winter storms of 1978,
                    damage was localized and temporary in most cases. Heavy river and stream

                                                        -24-

                    flows replenished much of the losses. Existing and proposed flood control
                    projects are not considered to have a significant impact on sand supply to
                    ,the beaches that would require corrective measures.

                         Geologic Hazards

                         Geologic hazards include seismic hazards (surface ruptures, liquefac-
                    tion, severe ground shaking, tsunami runup), landslides, soil erosion,
                    expansive soils, and subsidence. Since these hazards can affect both life
                    and property,-additional siting criteria or special engineering measures
                    are needed to compensate for these hazards.

                         The entire South Coast lies in an area    of high seismic risk. Seismic,
                    landslide, and tsunami hazards have been mapped by the County and are used
                    by the Public.Works Department to review development oroposals. Where
                    faults are identifiable, the County Public Works Department has been
                    generally requiring a 50-foot setback from the fault, though precise
                    setback decisions are made on a case-by-case basis. In addition, geologic
                    and soil engineering reports may be required under Grading.Ordinance
                    No. 1795 for obtaining a grading permit. These reports are used to
                    identify geologic and soil problems and to establish   'conditions for siting
                    and constructing structures where hazards or problems exist.

                         With the exception of a slope hazard area in Summerland, pr    oblems due
                    to slope instability are generally confined to areas outside of the
                    proposed urban development limits set forth in the land use plan. Although
                    the coastal,zone between Ellwood and Point Arguello is either hilly or
                    mountainous with variable and complex geologic conditions, only low-inten-
                    sity, nonurbah land uses will be located in this area. Consequently,,
                    slope-related hazards will be minimized.

                         Soil erosion is  a slope-related hazard which has become more proble-
                    matic in recent years because of extensive agricultural development on
                    slopes of 30 percent or more. A recent study conducted by the Agricultural
                    Unit of the State Water Resources Control Board documents severe erosion in
                    some areas of the South Coast where new orchards are being established.
                    The County Grading Ordinance No. 1795 (as amended by Ordinance No. 2770)
                    exempts farming and agricultural grading operations on parcels zoned
                    exclusively for agricultural use which are larger than five acres from
                    obtaining a grading permit. However.- the County's Brush Removal Ordinance
                    (No. 2767), which applies to the South Coast, does regulate removal of
                    vegetation on parcels over five acres in size, and requires a permit and
                    approval of drainage and erosion control devices before agricultural
                    grading commences.

                         Flooding

                         Flooding has occurred along Santa Barbara's South Coast in      recent
                    years, particularly in the Carpinteria Valley, sections of Montecito,,.and

                                                          _25-

                     the Santa Barbara Airport area. Severe floods in    1969 undermined a section
                     of UO S. 101 in Carpinteria. These flood hazards    are progressively being
                     eliminated in the populated portions of Carpinteria Valley and other areas
                     of the South Coast as a result of stream channelizations and the construc-
                     tion of debris dams and silt basins by the Santa Barbara County.Flood
                     Control and Water Conservation District, the U.S. Corps of Engin   eers, and
                     by the U. S. Soil Conservation Service.

                          The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development through the
                     National Flood Insurance Program has investigated the existence and
                     severity of flood hazards in the unincorporated areas of.Santa Barbara
                     County. One of the.objectives of this study is to provide information      to
                     local planners in promoting sound land use and flood plain management. The
                     Federal Insurance Administration has adopted the 100-year flood (the flood
                     having a one percent chance of being equalled or exceeded in any given
                     year) as the national standard for purposes of flood plain management. The
                     100-year "flood plain" is comprised of a "floodway" and a "floodway
                               The floodway is the channel of a stream, plus
                     fringe .                                                  any adjacent flood
                     plain areas, which must be kept,free of encroachment in   order that the
                     100-year flood be carried without substantial increases   in flood heights.
                     As minimum standards,, increases in flood heights are limited to 1.0 foot,.
                     provided that hazardous velocities are not produced. The area between the
                     floodway and the boundary of the 100-year flood is termed the floodway
                     fringe. This area encompasses that portion of the flood plain that could
                     be completely.obstructed without increasing the.water surface elevation of
                     the 100-year flood more than 1.0 foot at any point.

                          County Flood Combin ing Regulations, administered by the Santa Barbara
                     County Flood Control and.,Water Conservation District, regulate construc-
                     tion, excavation, and grading in a "designated" floodway. The designated
                     floodway, as defined in Ordinance No. 661, only includes "land reasonably
                     required to provide for the construction of a flood control project for
                     passage of a flood against which protection is provided or eventually will
                     be provided by said project including land necessary for construction of
                     project levees." Thus, the restrictions are not as-comprehensive as those
                     recommended by HUD. In addition, the "FH" Flood Hazard Combining Regula-
                     tions currently apply only to areas in Carpinteria and Goleta, along
                     Atascadero Creek, and the Goleta Slough.

                          New regulations covering a 11 development within the 100-year flood
                     plain have been formulated. The Flood Plain Management Ordinance, Chapter
                     15A of the County Code, has been adopted in order to comply with the
                     requirements of the HUD-sponsored Federal Flood Insurance Program in which
                     this County,is participating.

                          Fire

                          Areas of moderate fire hazard within urban areas of the coastal zone
                     are restricted to hilly sections of the Carpinteria Valley and Summerland.
                     High fire conditions also exist west of Ellwood in rural areas of the

                                                         -26-

                      coastal zone. Developments within any of the@hazardous zones in rural
                      areas will be very low density and subject to stringent building, brush
                      C I earance,. access@, and. water storage capac,ity. restrictions Jfor fire
                      suppression purposes) by the County Fire Department and/or the U.. S,.        Forest
                      Service.

                      3.3.3 POLICIES

                           Seawalls and Shoreline Structures

                      Policy 3-1:   Seawalls shall not be    permitted unless@the County has deter-
                                    mined that there are no other less environmentally damaging
                                    alternatives reasonably available for protection of existing
                                    development. The County prefers and encourages non-structural
                                    solutions to shoreline erosion problems, including beach
                                    replenishment, removal of endangered structures and prevention
                                    of land divisions on shorefront property subject to erosion;
                                    and, will seek solutions to shoreline hazards or a larger
                                    geographic basis than a single lot circumstance. Where
                                    permitted, seawall design and construction shall respect to the
                                    degree possible natural landforms. Adequate provision for
                                    lateral beach access shall be made,and the project shall be.
                                    designed to minimize visual impacts by the use of appropriate
                                    colors and materials.

                      Policy 3-2:   Revetments, groins, cliff retaining walls, pipelines and
                                    outfalls, and other such construction that may alter natural
                                    shoreline processes.shall, be permitted when designed to elimi-
                                         or mitigate adverse impacts on local shoreline sand
                                    supply and so as not to block lateral beach access.

                      Policy 3-3:   To avoid the need for future protective devices that could
                                    impactsand movement and su   'pply, no permanent above-ground
                                    structures shall be permitted on the dry sandy beach except
                                    facilities necessary for publichealth and safety, such as.
                                    lifeguard towers, orwhere such.restriction would render.a
                                    parcel unusable.

                           Bluff Protection

                      Policy 3-4:   In areas  of new development, above-ground structures shall       be
                                    set back  a sufficient distance from the bluff edge to be safe
                                    from the  threat of bluff erosion for a minimum of 75 years,
                                    unless such. standard will make a lot unbuildable, in which
                                    case a standard of 50 years shall be used. The County shall
                                    determine the required setback. A geologic report may be
                                    required by the County in order to make this determination.
                                    (See also Policy 4-5 regarding protection of visual
                                    resources.)

                                                             -27-

                     Policy 3-5:  Within  the required blufftop.setback, drought-tolerant vegeta-
                                  tion shall@be maintained. Grading, as may be required to estab-
                                  lish proper drainage or to install landscaping, and minor
                                  improvements, i4e., patios and fences that do not impact bluff
                                  stability, may be permitted. Surface water shall be directed
                                  away from the top of the bluff or be handled in a manner satis-
                                  factory to prevent damage to the bluff.by surface and percolat-
                                  ing water.

                     Policy 3-6:  Development and activity of any kind beyond the required bluff-
                                  top setback shall be constructed to insure that all surface
                                  and subsurface drainage shall not contribute to the erosion of
                                  the bluff face or the stability of the bluff itself.

                     Policy 3-7:  No development shall be permitted on the bluff face, except for
                                  engineered, staircases or accessways to provide beach access, and
                                  pipelines for scientific research or coastal dependent industry.
                                  Drainpipes shall be allowed only where no other less environmen
                                  tally damaging drain system-is feasible and the drainpipes are
                                  designed and placed to minimize impacts to the bluff face, toe,
                                 .and beach. Drainage devices extending over the bluff face shall
                                  not be permitted if the property can be drained away from the
                                  bluff face.

                         Geologic Hazards

                     Policy 3-8:  Applications for gr ading and building permits, and applica-
                                  tions for subdivision shall be reviewed for adjacency to,
                                  threats from, and impacts on geologic hazards arising from
                                  seismic events, tsunami runup, landslides, beach erosion, or
                                  other geologic hazards'such as expansive soils and subsidence
                                  areas. In areas of known geologic hazards, a geologic report
                                  may be required. Mitigation measures shall be required where
                                  necessary.

                     Policy  3-9:. Water, gas, sewer, electrical, or crude oil transmission and
                                  distribution lines which cross fault lines, shall be subject
                                  to additional safety standards, including emergency shutoff
                                  where applicable.

                     Policy 3-10: Major structures, i.e.,.residential, commercial, and indus-
                                  trial, shall be sited a minimum of 50 feet from a potentially
                                  active, historically active, or active fault. Greater set-
                                  backs may be required if local geologic conditions warrant.

                         flood Hazard Area Overlay Designation

                         The intent of the Flood Hazard Area designation    is to avoid exposing
                     new developments to flood hazard and reduce the need for future flood
                     control protective works and resulting alteration of stream and wetland
                     environments by regulating development within-the 100-year flood plain.

                                                          -28-

                     The flood hazard areas designated on the overlay maps fall within the
                     100-year flood zone boundaries as mapped by the Federal Insurance        1
                     Administration (U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development).          An
                     up-to-date set of the HUD maps is available for inspection in the County
                     Flood Control District Office. All development in designated flood hazard
                     areas and within 50 feet of any stream or river in the area between Ellwood
                     and the Santa Maria River shall be reviewed by County Fl,    ood Control for
                     conformance with the following policies:

                     Policy 3-11: All development, including construction, excavation, and
                                   grading, except for flood control projects and non-structural
                                   agricultural uses, shall be prohibited in the floodway unless
                                   off-setting improvements in accordance with HUD regulations
                                   .are'provided. If the proposed development falls within the
                                   floodway fringe, development may be permitted, provided creek
                                   set'back requirements are met and finish floor elevations are
                                   above the projected 100-year flood elevation, as.specified in
                                   the Flood Plain Management Ordinance.
                     Policy 3-12:  Permitted devel'opment 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.

                     3.3.4 HILLSIDE'AND WATERSHED PROTECTION

                          Coastal Act Policies

                          In ad dition to Sectib n 30253 which requires that new development
                     neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, the Act requires
                     that biological productivity and quality of coastal waters, streams, and
                     wetlands be maintained and that development be sited to minimize alteration
                     of natural landforms.

                          30231. The biological productivity and the quality of coastal Waters,
                          streams, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes appropriate to maintain
                          optimum populations of marine organisms and for the protection of
                          human health shall be maintained and., where feasible, restored
                          through, among other means,,minimizing adverse effects of waste water
                          discharges and entrainment, controlling runoff, preventing depletion
                          of ground water supplies and substantial interference with surface
                          waterflow, encouraging wastewater reclamation, maintaining natural,
                          vegetation buffer areas that protect riparian habitats, and minimizing
                          alteration of natural streams.

                     1HUD flood hazard mapping has not been completed for all areas of the
                     County. Most of the streams on the urbanized South Coast area have been
                     studied in detail.   Information on,flood hazards in other areas of the
                     coastal zone is not as comprehensive.

                                                           -29-

                           30251.   The scenic and visual qu  alities  of coastal  areas shall be
                           considered and protected as a resource of publicimportance.
                           Permitted development shall be sited and des     igned to protect views to
                           and along the ocean and scenic,coastal areas, to minimize the
                           alteration of natural land forms, to be visually compatible with the
                           character of surrounding areas, and, where feasible, t-o:restore and
                           enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.

                           Implementation of these sections of the Act     requires regulation of
                     development on hillsides and watersheds.

                           Background,
                           Disturbance of hillsides2 and watershed lands3 can result       in the
                     loss  of soil and slope stability as well as increased erosion. The removal
                     of vegetation deprives the soil of the stabilizing function of        roots and
                     this loss,,of soil stability increases erosion and thus lowers downstream
                     water quaTity as a result of siltation. Wetlands and,,streams are particu-
                     larly impacted by increased siltation.' Heavy rains on'unstable slopes can
                     produce landslides, slumps, and flaws,especially in steeply sloping
                     areas.

                           Disturbance of hillsides and watershed lands by development may       also
                     alter the natural drainage pattern and thus produce increased-runoff        and
                     erosion. Removal of vegetative cover decreases percolation of precipita-
                     tion into-the soil, thereby reducing the amount of groundwater recharge and
                     adding water to runoff that would ordinarily be transpired by trees and
                     shrubs.. Construction of impervious surfaces, such as roads and buildings,
                     also decreases the amount,of groundwater percolation and increases the
                     amount of'runoff. Incre    .ased runoff, in addition to producing intensified
                     erosion, creates downstream flood hazards. Moreover, runoff from land
                     surfaces is often contaminated with a variety of industrial, agricultural,
                     commercial, or household   'residues. The most serious pollution problems
                     often result from persistent erosion of soil, from fertilizers and biocides
                     applied to the land, and from nutrients and toxic substances in watershed
                     discharges. Estuaries are the termini for coastal watershed drainage
                     systems and therefore such substances tend to concentrate in them.

                           Disturbance of hillside   and watershed  lands can result in high costs
                     to.a community. For example, degradation of hillsides as a result of
                     erosion, landslides, and loss of vegetation can reduce scenic values,
                     decrease real estate values, and impact the tourist industry. In addition,
                     poorly designed and constructed hillside developments can frequently result

                     2Hillsides  are defined as lands   with slopes exceeding 20 percent.
                     3Watersheds are defined as regions or areas drained by a network of
                     surface or subsurface watercourses and have potential for impacts on
                     coastal streams wetlands, estuaries, and groundwater basins throughrunoff
                     and percolation.'

                                                            -30-

                     in substantial costs to the public, either for repairs or for protective
                     measures to prevent further damage. Increased runoff and sedimentation
                     from denuded hillsides require increased public expenditures for flood
                     .control and storm water management. Decreased biological productivity of
                     coastal streams and wetlands has even farther-ranging public costs.

                          Protection of hillsides and watersheds is, therefore, necessary to 1)
                     minimize risks to life and property-from flooding, slope failure, and land-
                     slides; 2) insure continued biological productivity of coastal streams and
                     wetlands; 3) protect groundwater resources;   .and 4) preserve scenic values.

                           Policies

                          In order to ensure the long-term preservation of the.bi   ological
                     productivity of streams and wetlands, protection of visual resources, and
                     the prevention of hazards to life and property, the following policies
                     shall apply to all construction and development, including grading and
                     major vegetation removal, which involve the movement of earth in excess
                     of 50 cubic yards.

                     Policy 3-13: 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.

                     Policy 3-14: All development 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, and
                                  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.

                     Policy 3-15: For necessary grading operations on hillsides,    the smallest
                                  practical area of land shall be expo@ed 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
                                  measures for removing sediments and stabilizing slopes should
                                  be in place before the beginning of the rainy season.

                     Policy 3-16: Sediment basins (including debris basins, desilting basins, or
                                  silt traps) shall be installed on the project site in conjunc-
                                  tion with the initial grading operations and maintained
                                  through the development process to remove sediment from runoff
                                  waters. All sediment shall be retained on site,.unless'removed
                                  to an appropriate dumping location.

                                                          @-31 -

                    Policy 3-17:  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.fil.1 slopes shall be stabilized
                                  immediately With planting of native grasses andshrubs,
                                  appropriate nonnative plants, or with accepted landscaping
                                  practices.

                    Policy 3-18:  Provisions shall be made to conduct surface water to storm
                                  drains or suitable watercourses to prevent erosion. Drainage
                                  devices'shall be designed to accommodate increased runoff
                                  resulting from modified soil and surface conditions'as a
                                  result of development. Water runoff shall be retained on-site
                                  whenever possible to facilitate groundwater recharge.
                    Policy 3-19:  D@gradation of the water quali ty 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 harmful waste, shall not be discharged into
                                  or alongside coastal streams or wetlands either during or
                                  after construction.

                    Policy 3-20:  All development wit.hin the coastal zone shall be subject to
                                  the slope density curve (Plate A) of the County Zoning
                                  Ordinance No. 661 (Article VII, Section 20).    However, in no
                                  case,shall above-ground structures, except for necessary
                                  utility lines and fences for agricultural purposes, be sited
                                  on undisturbed slopes exceeding 40 percent.

                    Policy 3-21:  Where agricultural development will involve the construction
                                  of service roads a.nd the clearance ofnatural vegetation for
                                  orchard development on slopes of 30 percent or greater, a
                                  brush removal permit shall be required.

                    Policy 3-22:  Where agricultural development will involve the construction
                                  of service roads and.the clearance of natural vegetation for
                                  orchard,development on slopes of 30 percent or greater, cover
                                  cropping or any other comparable means of soil protection
                                  shall be utilized to-minimize erosion until orchards are
                                  mature enough to form a vegetative canopy over the exposed
                                  earth.

                                                       -32-

                3.4 VISUAL RESOURCES

                    3.4.1 COASTAL ACT POLICIES

                         30251. The  scenic and visual.qualities of coastal areas shall be
                         considered!and protected as a resource of public importance.
                         Permitted development shall be sited and designed to protect views to
                         and along the'@ocean and scenic coastal areas, and, where feasibl.e, to
                         restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas. New
                         development in highly scenic areas such as those designated in the
                         California,Coastline Preservation and Recreation Plan prepared by the
                         Department of Parks and Recreation and.by local government shall be
                         subordinate to the character of its setting.

                    3.4.2 PLANNING ISSUES

                         The scenic resources of Santa Barbara's coastal zone are of incalcu-
                    lable value to the economic and social well-being of Santa Barbara County.
                    The beauty of the Santa Barbara coastline is world-renowned; it is the
                    basis of the County's strong tourist and retirement economies and is a
                    source of continuing pleasure for the local populace.

                         The visual resources of the coastal zone include its beaches, sand
                    dunes, coastal bluffs, headlands, wetlands, estuaries, islands, hillsides
                    and canyons, upland terraces and plains, and its rivers and streams. These
                    resources are vulnerable to degradation through improper location and scale
                    of building development, blockage of coastal views, alteration of natural
                    landforms by poor cutting, grading, and filling practices, and by poor
                    design or placement of roadside signs and utility lines. The primary
                    concern of the Coastal Act is to protect views to these sceni,c resources
                    from public areas such as highways, roads, beaches*,, parks, coastal trails
                    and accessways, and vista points.

                         Local policies which have visual resource imp lications are developed
                    in the County's zoning, subdivision, and other ordinances. These include
                    the Beach Development (BD) and the Exclusive Agriculture (A-14) zone
                    restrictions, Ordinance #2188 governing the County's Board of Architectural
                    Review (BAR), Division 8 of the County's Subdivision Ordinance pertaining
                    to Special Treatment Areas, and County Sign Ordinance #2077.

                         The "BD" zone is in effect from Jalama to Ellwood and in Summerland.
                    It is intended to "preserve and protect a limited natural resource, ocean
                    beaches; ... to control construction of developments at sea level that may
                    be threatened by destruction from ocean storms; to control construction on
                    blutfs which may be threatened by collapse of beach bluffs caused by
                    erosion, slides, or slippage of such bluffs; and to control the construc-
                    tion of sea walls and groins which might disrupt the littoral drift of sand
                    along the coastline and cause erosion in the vicinity of such walls and
                    groins.", In general, the restrictions of the "BD" zone serve to limit
                    construction on beaches to recreational facilities and establish a 15-foot
                    or one story building height maximum for structures. Such restrictions
                    have indirect visual resource protection implications since they reduce

                                                      -33-

                   unnecessary development on beaches and control the scale of permitted
                   developments. However, the zone does not assure that permitted development
                   is sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic
                   coastal areas or that it is visually compatible with the character of the
                   surrounding areas as required by the Coastal Act. This is because the zone
                   extends inland only to the bluff line and therefore does not affect resi-
                   dential structures on top of the bluffs. In addition, the fact that the
                   "BD" zone allows development.on the beach for other than public safety and
                   welfare purposes appears to be incompatible with the intent of the Coastal
                   Act.

                        Views of scenic bluffs from beaches are not.protected by the "BD" zone
                   nor are they protected by blufftop setback requirements developed by the
                   Public Works, Department. The latter establishes a setback of 30 feet in
                   IsTa Vista (see Section 3.3 on Hazards) and on a case-by-case basis else-
                   where. These setback regulations were formulated for safety purposes with-
                   out @e gard to visual considerations.

                        The County's "A-14," Exclusive Agricultural Zone, does address some
                   of the visual problems associated with greenhouse development in the
                   Carpinteria Valley. The zoning standards require that hothouses, green-
                   houses, or other plant-protection structures be set back at least 50 feet
                   from the centerline of any street and require landscaping which, within
                   five years, will "reasonably block the view of any structures and on-site
                   parking areas from outside of the property." Landscaping along all streets
                   is also a requirement of the A-14 zone, but the degree of view blockage is
                   not specified. While increased setbacks for greenhouse development from
                   public streets and residential areas are needed (see Policy 8-6, Section
                   3 8), the existing landscaping requirements of the A-I-X zone are adequate
                   t; mitigate the visual impacts of greenhouses.

                        County building height standards, which in most zones permit two-story
                   structures of up to 35 feet inbeight, are not necessarily sensitive to
                   visual resource protection. For example, a building of 35 feet located on
                   a low coastal bluff set back 30 or 50 feet can be highly visible from many
                           points along a beach, and may consequently degrade the natural
                   scenic value of the bluff. Further setbacks and/or height restrictions are
                   needed to. ensure protection of views.

                        The County's Board of Architectural Review (BAR) process is sensitive
                   to visual resource concerns, including building mass, relationship of
                   buildings to topography, and compatibility of buildings with the immediate
                   area, but BAR's jurisdiction is limited, since not all zones are subject- to
                   review. Only areas which fall under "D", Design Supervision Combining
                   Regulations, are under review by the County's Board of Architectural
                   Review, although Summerland, Hope Ranch, Hollister Ranch, and the Embarca-
                   dero tract have their own review committees. All development in Montecito,
                   which is governed by its own zoning ordinance #453, is subject to review by
                   the County BAR. While the "D" designation is in effect for many critical
                   undeveloped parcels in the coastal zone, there are large vacant waterfront

                                                     -34-

                     parcels which a   re.not subject to design review. Furthermore, BAR policy
                     does not contain language which encourages the protection of views to and
                     along the oceaniand scenic coastal areas nor the "restoration and enhance-
                     ment of visual     uality in visually degraded areas." While these concerns
                     may be operative    in practices of the BAR, they are not spelled out in the
                     BAR's "Standards    of Architectural Review."

                           The "Special Treatment   111'section of the County  is Subdi  vision Ordinance
                     contains policies    which are directed to the protection of hillsides as a
                     visual resource'.    This section notes that extensive hillside areas in the
                     County dominate the view from the most heavilytravelled and highly
                     developed areas. Many of these same areas are subject to building
                     construction and.grading operations or the removal of the native cover
                     which can subst   antially affect the natural scenic background for such
                     travelled and developed areas. The "Special Treatment" section recommends
                     that subdivisions and other developments "shall be designed to preserve, to
                     the extent which is reasonable and feasible, the natural appearance of
                     extensive hillsides." It instructs the Subdivision Committee to require
                     grading which preserves the natural contours of land, retain trees and
                     other native vegetation, minimize road cut scarring, reduce grading, and
                    ,establish landscaping to conceal raw-cut slopes. Though the scope and
                     purpose of the "Special Treatment" designation would appear consistent            with
                     the policies of the Coastal Act, developments of fewer than five units            are
                     not subject to its provisions.

                           The Recreational District     is another existing,zoning policy       which
                     acknowledges the importance ofvisual resources, though it has not been
                     used to date. The purpose of the District is to protect and enhance areas
                     which have both active and passive recreation potential because of their
                     beauty and natural features. It would restrict building heights           to 2.5
                     stories, establish bluff setbacks of 50 feetwhen a,bluff is more than 50
                     feet in height, and require Board of Architectural review for development
                     proposed within the zone.

                           The County Sign Ordinance No. 2077 is sensitive to the visual impacts
                     of signs. The effect of the ordinance is to subordinate signs to man-made
                     and natural features. One of the significant features of the ordinance is
                     its restrictions on billboards. Billboards are categorized as an "off-
                     premisell sign and allowed only-in heavy industrial and heavy commercial
                     districts. Length and width limitations set forth in the ordinance are
                     smaller than the standard billboard sign. A number of billboards do exist
                     in the County coastal zone which, due to their size and location, impact on
                     coastal visual resources. These signs are located on the upland terrace
                     shelf north of Highway 101, between Ellwood and Gaviota; their 1          egal status
                     expired in May 1979.

                                                             35-

                      3.4.3 POLICIES

                      Policy 4-1:    Areas within the coastal      zone which are now required to obtain
                                     approval from the County      Board of Architectural Review,
                                     because of the requirements of the "V-Design Supervision
                                     Combining Regulations or because they are within the
                                     boundaries of Ordinance #453, shall continue to be subject to
                                     design review.. In addition, developments in all areas desig-
                                     nated on the land use plan maps as Commercial, Industrial, or
                                     Pla nn6d Devel,opmentand residential.stru,ctures on bluff:top
                                     lots shall be required to obtain plan approval from the County
                                     BAR.

                      Policy  4-2:   All  commercial, industrial, planned development, and green-
                                     house projects shall be required to submit a landscaping plan
                                     to the County for approval.

                      Policy  4-3:   In areas designated as rural on       the land use plan maps, the
                                     height, scale, and design of structures shall be compatible
                                     with the character of the surrounding natural environment,
                                     except where technical requirements dictate otherwise. Struc-
                                     tures shall be subordinate in appearance to natural landforms;'
                                     shall be designed to follow the natural contours of the land-
                                     scape; and shall be sited so as not to intrude into the sky-
                                     line as seen from public viewing places.
                      Policy  4-4:   In areas designated as urban.on the land use plan maps and in
                                     designated, rural neighborhoods, new structures shall be in
                                     conformance with the scale and,character of the existing
                                     community. Clustered development, varied circulation
                                     patterns, and diverse housing types shall be encouraged.

                      Pol'icy 4-5:   In addition to that required for safety (see         Policy 3-4),
                                     further bluff setbacks may be required for oceanfront struc-
                                     tures to minimize or avoid impacts on public         views from the
                                     beach. Blufftop structures shall be set back from the bluff
                                     edge sufficiently far to insure that the struct'U're does not
                                     infringe on views,,from the beach except in areas where exist-
                                     ing structures on,both sides of-the proposed structure already
                                     impact public views:frorn the beach. In such cases, the new
                                     structure shall be located no closer to the bluff's edge.than
                                     the adjacent structures.

                      Policy 4-6:    Signs shall be of size, location., and appearance so as not to
                                     detract from scenic areas or views. from public 'roads and other
                                     Viewing points.,

                      Policy 4-7:    Utilities, including television, shall be pla        ced underground
                                     in new developments in.accordance with the rules and regula-
                                     tions of the California Public.,Utilities Commission., except
                                     where cost of undergrounding would be so high as to deny
                                     service.

                                                             -36-

                    Policy 4-8: The County shall request the State of California to designate
                                  that portion of Highway 101 between Winchester Canyon and
                                  Gaviota State Park as a "Scenic Highway."

                    3.4.4 VIEW CORRIDOR   OVERLAY DESIGNATION

                         The Coastal Act  mandate for the protection of visual resources is
                    broad, requiring the  protection of the scenic and visual qualities of
                    coastal areas. Since the County's coastal area is world renowned for its
                    beauty, the entire coastal zone could be subject to a visual resource
                    protection overlay designation. Such a blanket designation is impractical;
                    the general visual resource protection policies in the preceding section
                    are intended to protect the County's scenic quality. The View Corridor
                    Overlay designation is a special tool which is intended to give additional
                    protection to areas where there are views from a major coastal road to the
                    ocean. Highway #101, which parallels the ocean throughout much of the
                    South Coast, affords many thousands of travellers scenic ocean vistas.
                    Protection of this visual resource, a view corridor to the ocean, requires
                    special treatment. Therefore, all areas in'the County where there are
                    views from Highway #101 to.the ocean are shown on the land use maps with a
                    View Corridor Overlay designation. All development in these areas shall be
                    reviewed by the County Board of Architectural Review for conformance to the
                   ,following policies:

                    Policy 4-9:    Structures shall besited and designed to preserve unob-
                                   structed broad views of the ocean from Highway #101, and
                                   shall be clustered to the maximum extent feasible.

                    Policy 4-10:   A landscaping plan shall be submitted to the County for
                                   approval. Landscaping when mature, shall not impede public
                                   views.

                    Policy 4-11:   Building height shall not exceed.9ne story or 15 feet above
                                   average finished grade, unless an increase in height would
                                   facilitate clustering of development and result in greater
                                   view protection, or a height in excess of 15 feet would not
                                   impact public views to the ocean.

                    NOTE: There are policies in'other sections of the plan whichi when imple-
                    mented, will result in protection of coastal visual resources. These
                    include policies for the preservation of habitat resources (Section 3.9)
                    and protection of bluffs, hillsides,, and watersheds (Section 3.3).

                                                       -37-

                3. 5 HOUSING

                   3.5.1 COASTAL ACT POLICIES

                        Section 30213. Lower cost  visitor and recreational facilities and
                        housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income shall be.
                        protected, encouraged, and,:where feasible, provided. ... New-housing
                        in the coastal zone shall be developed in conformity with the
                       ,standards,, policies, and goals of local housing elements adopted in
                        accordance with the requirements of subdivision (c) of*Section 65.302
                        of the Government Code.

                   3.5.2 PLANNING ISSUES

                        The coastal area of Santa Barbara County is an especially desirable.,
                   place to live@ People of all economic  sectors have chosen to locate in
                   this area, particularly in the urbanized areas of the South Coast, and this
                   has created a wide diversity of life styles and housing needs.-- As housing
                   cos.ts,have soared in recent years, accommodating the housing needs of all
                   economic levels has become.an important local-Assue, evidenced by concern
                   over rent control, interest in condominium conversions, and formation of
                   housing cooperatives.

                        The housing policies of the Coastal Act focus primarily on the needs
                   of persons of low and moderate income. Within the County's coastal zone,
                   substantial housing opportunities forlow and moderate income households
                   currently exist in areas such as Summerland and Isla Vista; these opportu-
                   nities need to be protected. In these and other segments of the coastal
                   zone, new low and moderate.income housing units need to be provided as
                   well..At present, the County is addressing the housing needs of persons of.
                   low and moderate income primarily through the Federal rent subsidy program
                   administered by the County Housing Authority and proposed housing rehabili-
                   tation programs through Community Development Block Grant funding. Addi-
                   tional, County housing policies for the coastal zone will be necessary to
                   satisfy the requirements of the Coastal Act, as will be borneout in the
                   following discussion of the housing issues and recommended policies for
                   addressing them.

                        Protecting Existing Low and Moderate Income Housing Opportunities

                        The Coastal Act requires that existing low and moder ate income housing
                   opportunities be protected. Many of these housing opportunities are found
                   in multiple-unit apartment complexes and in older residential neighborhoods
                   where the-housing stock, including both single family and multiple units,
                   is often in poor condition. Removal of these housing opportunities, either
                   through conversion of comparatively lower cost apartment r.entals to more
                   expensive owner-occupied units or demolition of existing units, can
                   displace low and moderate income people if adequate-housing alternatives
                   are not available within the local area.

                                                     -38-

                         In several areas of the coastal zone from Ellwood to Carpinteria,
                    e.g., Isla Vista, portions of Goleta, and Summerland, a large proportion of
                    the existing housing stock is in need of major repair. This finding is
                    based on a County-wide Housing Condition Survey'completed in June 1977,
                    which provided,the County with an inventory of exterior housing conditions.
                    According to this survey, forty-one percent (41%).of the single family
                    residences in Summerland are in need.of rehabilitation.("C" condition; see
                    Appendix A). These older, reparable dwelling.units which provide substan-
                    tial housing opportunities for low and moderate income households need to
                    be preserved.

                        The County has received Community Development Block Grant funding to
                    initiate a "Pilot" housing rehabilitation program in Summerland and Carpin-
                    -teria -in 1980. These and other rehabilitation efforts need to be encour-
                    aged to protect existing low and moderate income housing.opportunities.

                    Demolition and Replacement of Existing Low and Moderate Income Housing
                    Units

                        Demolition of dilapidated housing ("D" condition) is sometimes
                    required for health and safety reasons, resulting in the displacement of
                    low or moderate income households. This is particularly a problem in
                    rental situations. In some cases, replacement of the low and moderate
                  -income units that have been removed is necessary to protect housing oppor-
                    tunities. A determination.of the number of units to be replaced needs to
                    be made on a case-by-case basis, reflecting the housing needs of the commu-
                    nity. In other instances, a land use other than residential may be
                    preferred following removal. For example, pockets of low income housing
                    .off of South Fairview Avenue in Goleta are located under the flight line of
                    the@airport and intermingled with commercial and industrial uses; because
                    of health and safety considerations.ahd incompatibility with adjacent uses,
                    commercial or industrial land use may be better here. In such cases, it
                    will be necessary to replace the low and moderate income units that are
                    removed-in other areas with comparable proximity to public'services and
                    employment.

                    Conversion of Existing Apartment Units to Condominiums

                        Conversion of apartment units to condominiums can  have the effect of
                    decreasing rental opportunities for persons of low and moderate income.
                    According to a recent housing study conducted for the South Coast area, low
                    income households tend to reside in larger, multiple-unit apartment
                    complexes (General Research Corp.',-An Evaluation of the Housing Market for
                    UCSB Students, April 1977).-Conversion of tFese comparatively lower cost
                    rental units to condominiums need to be carefully monitored to prevent
                    displacement of low and moderate income persons, particularly on the South
                    Coast where the vacancy rate for rental units is-very low.

                                                     -39-

                     (According to the 1975 Special Census, the average vacancy rate for the
                     County was four percent. At'the present time, the vacancy rate on the
                     South Coast is estimated to be close to one percent, based on the results
                     of a survey conducted by the County Planning Department in the spring of
                     1978). In ApriI 1979, the County adopted an emergency condominium conver-
                     sion,ordinance.:  According to this ordinance, the County will deny a
                     conversion which  results in the involuntary displacement of any of the
                     existing tenants  within five years of approval.

                          Encouraging  and Providing for New Low And Moderate Income Housi   ng

                          According to the policies of the CoastalAct, new low and.moderate
                     income housing shall be provided where feasible, in conformity with the
                     goals and policies of the local housing element. The principal deterrent
                     to implementing this policy is that the high costs of land and construction
                     may preclude the building of units which are affordable to persons of low
                     and moderate incomes. However, the need for affordable housing is
                     presently a major issue County-wide and must be addressed in both the LCP
                     and County's Housing Element. Other factors which need to be considered in
                     determining the amount and,type of new housing in the coastal zone are the
                     employment characteristics of.the market area and resource constraints.

                     Affordability

                         Overpayment, defined,by the Department of Housing and Urban 'Develop-
                     ment as housing payments in excess of 25 percent of gross monthly income,
                     is currently the most severe housing problem in Santa Barbara County for
                     renters and owners. According to the 1975 Special Census, 47.4 percent of
                     all rental households in the County,and 53.4 percent of the rental house-
                     holds in the South Coast housing market area exceeded the 25 percent
                     standard. A consistent pattern has.emerged throughout the County that low
                     and moderate income households spend a larger proportion of their incomes
                     for rent than do higher income families. Among the poorest households,
                     those earning less than,$4,000 in 1974, the median proportion of.income
                     spent as rent varied,from 43 percent to 100 percent of gross income.
                     Also, households in multiple units pay a higher percentage of gross income
                     for rent compared to households renting single family, 2-to-4 units, or
                     mobile homes. In 19743, overpayment affected 21,000 households in the
                     County with the very low income households accounting for 46.6 percent of
                     these. Given the high incidence of overpayment among lower income house-
                     holds on the South Coast,and, thus,, the need for affordable housing, inclu-
                     sionary housing provisions and incentives for constructing new low and
                     moderate income housing are needed..

                     Relationship with Employment Opportunities

                         Employmentopportunitieslin      housing market area play a large role in
                     determining the type,of housing that is.needed. Thus,'the housing policies
                     of the LCP must be related to the land use plan and its implications for

                                                        -40-

                   the future growth of  the County. For example, Coastal Act priorities for
                   the preservation of agriculture are reflected in the land use plan which
                   establishes agriculture as a long-term land use. Such land use decisions
                   will certainly sustain, if not increase, the demand for farm laborers and
                   significantly impact the housing market for areas such as the City of
                   Carpinteria. Construction of the LNG facility at Point Conceptfon or the
                   space shuttle at Vandenberg Air Force Base would bring hundreds of
                   construction workers to these coastal areas and greatly affect the     demand
                   for temporary and permanent housing in the County. Also, visitor-serving
                   commercial uses, which are priority uses under the Coastal Act, provide
                   many service-oriented jobs for low and moderateincome people. All of
                   these potential employment effects need to be linked to their impacts on
                   the housing market at the time new development is proposed.

                   Resource Constraints

                        Water moratoria currently are in effect for the Goleta, Montecito, and
                   Summerland water districts. Thus, new housing in these areas is directly
                   dependen@@on the use of private wells. In the Carpinteria County Water
                   District,, a1imited water resource situation prevails and priorities for
                   t-he remaining water supply need to be established. New development
                   throughout the coastal zone must be tied to the availa@bility of resources
                   and phased according to local plans for expansion of public services, i.e.,
                   water, sewer, and roads.

                   3.5.3 RELATIONSHIP TO THE COUNTY'S PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT

                        The housing component of the Local Coastal Program builds upon the
                   work that is currently being,done toward development of a Housing Element
                   for the County's Proposed Comprehensive Plan. The LCP housing component
                   draws as much as possible on the housing needs analyses and program recom-
                   mendations that have been prepared to date in conjunction with the Housing
                   Element 'since LCP and County housing policies must be in conformity. In
                   addition, the housing component of the LCP focusses on housing opportuni-
                   ties for persons of low and moderate income. To this end, special LCP
                   needs analyses are reflected in the planning area discussions of the land
                   use plan (Chapter 4). It should be noted that separate housing components
                   are being prepared by the Cities of Santa Barbara and Carpinteria for their
                   respective jurisdictions in the coastal zone.

                        As outlined in preliminary drafts of the Housing Element, the County
                   is divided into five housing market areas (HMA): Lompoc, Santa Maria,
                   Santa Ynez, Cuyama, and the South Coast (Gaviota to the Ventura County
                   line). Of these, the South Coast is the only market area in which major
                   portions of the coastal zone are urbanized; and, within this market area,
                   housing is a coastal planning issue for the urban area from Ellwood east to
                   Carpinteria. The coastal zone west of Ellwood to Gaviota, through the
                   Hollister and Bixby Ranches, and north to Guadalupe, is rugged and rural.
                   Housing in this area is primarily incidental and necessary to agricultural
                   operations. Therefore, in the LCP, the..coastal zone from Ellwood to the

                                                       @41-

                    Ventura County line is viewed as one housing market area within which
                    existing low and moderate income housing opportunities are identified and
                    deficiencies addressed. Housing issues for each planning subarea (Goleta',
                    including Isla Vista and Hope Ranch; Montecito; Summerland; and the Carpin-
                    teria Valley) are then evaluated in the context of the total market area.
                    This approach has led to the formulation of general housing policies Which
                    apply to the County's entire coastal,zone, as well as additional local
                    policies and actions for individual planning areas.
                    3.5.4, POLICIES AND ACTIONS
                    Policy 5-1:   Affordable low and moderate income housing shall be defined as
                                  housing which is capable of being purchased or rented or is
                                  occupied by low and moderate income households    (see Appendix A
                                  for definition of low and moderate income). A dwelling unit
                                  is capable of being purchased by a low or moderate income
                                  household if the total purchase price of the unit does not
                                  exceed three and one half (3.5) times the annual income of the
                                  low or moderate income purchaser for whom the unit is intended
                                  to provide a housing opportunity. A dwelling unit is capable
                                  of being rented by a low or moderate income household if the.
                                  monthly rental cost does not exceed 35% of the gross monthly
                                  .household income of the renter. However, these ratios may be
                                  adjusted from time to time to reflect lending practices.,
                                  interest rates, association fees, and other changes which may
                                  affect the ability of low and moderate income persons to
                                  purchase or rent the units.

                   'Policy 5-2:   To protect existing low and  moderate income housing opportuni-
                                  ties, rehabilitation programs for areas in need shall be
                                  developed.

                                  Action

                                  The County shall identify areas which meet the requirements
                                  for government-funded rehabilitation programs, prepare the
                                  necessary applications for funding, and develop programs for
                                  implementation, including but not limited to a pilot rehabili-
                                  .tation program in Summerland.and Carpinteria effective 1979,
                                  through the use of Community Development Block.Grant funds
                                  which have been approved for this purpose.

                    Policy 5-3:   Demolition of existing low and moderate income housing of     four
                                  or more units shall not be permitted unless:

                                  a.  demolition is necessary for health and safety reasons,     or

                                  b., the costs of rehabilitation of the units would result     in
                                      housing costs which would not be affordable to low and
                                      moderate income households, or

                                                        -42-

                                 C. the units to be demolished are replaced on a one-for-one
                                     basis.

                                 Where demolition is permitted, the County shall request that
                                 displaced tenants be given priority for public housing
                                 assistance programs or require other reasonable assistance in
                                 seeking comparable housing.

                    Policy 5-4:  Conversion of apartment complexes of five units or more to
                                 condominiums or stock cooperatives shall not be permitted
                                 where.50 percent or more of the units are rented by personsof
                                 low or moderate income who would be displaced by such
                                 conversion unless:

                                 a)  comparable rental units   are available within the same
                                     housing market area for  displaced low or moderate income
                                     persons, as evidenced by a five percent rental vacancy
                                     factor for six months preceding conversion, and

                                 b)  tenants have been given notice of intent to convert at
                                     least 120 days prior to conversion and first option to
                                     purchase the proposed condominiums, and two-thirds of the
                                     low or moderate income tenants have chosen to exercise
                                     .their purchase option; or

                                 c)  the new monthly home ownership costs are affordable to low
                                     or moderate income households.

                                 Action

                                 1.  The applicant  shall provide the  County Planning Department
                                     with the following information:

                                     a)  percentage  of low or moderate income renters 18 months
                                         prior to the.proposed conversion, and

                                     b)  the number  of low or moderate income tenants who chose,
                                         to exercise the option to purchase one of the,
                                         condominium  units.

                                 2. The  County Plann,ing Department shall determine the vacancy
                                     factor in the housing market area six months preceding
                                     conversion and the availability of comparable rental
                                     housing. .                                                            I
                                 Following these and other determinations that may be required
                                 for consistency with other provisions of this plan, the
                                 Planning Department staff shall recommend approval or denial
                                 of the project to the Planning Commission.

                                                       -43-

                    Pol icy 5-5: The Housing Element shall be included as a policy for new.
                                 construction in the Local Coastal Plan when said Housing
                                 Element is approved by the County. In the-interim, to the
                                 maximum extent feasible'. all new residential development of
                                 ten or more units shall include provisions for low and
                                 moderate income housing. The County shall determine which of
                                 the following alternatives for accomplishing this objective is
                                 most appropriate.

                                 a.  The County may allow a density bonus not to exceed 25
                                     percent of the total number of units,permitted under the
                                     land use plan to facilitate the inclusion of low and
                                     moderate-income housing.
                                 b'. If the County determines that inclusion of low and
                                     moderate income units is infeasible in the proposed/`
                                     development project, the County may require an in lieu fee
                                     for provision of low and moderate income housing at
                                     another appropriate location.
                                 c.  In areas where the County finds that there is a critical
                                     need for low and moderate income-housing and that
                                     inclusion.of such housing in the development project could
                                     reasonably be accomplished given the density specified in
                                     the land use,plan, the location of the project, and other
                                     factors, the County may require the inclusion of low and
                                     moderate income housing as a condition of project
                                     approval.

                                 To ensure that the required low and moderate income housing
                                 remains affordable to persons of low and moderate income over.
                                @.time, measures such.as;resale control, rental agreements, or
                                 deed restrictions shall be required for a period of no less
                                 than 25 years.

                   Policy 5-6:   In.large residential developments of 20 units or more housing
                                 opportunities representative of all socioeconomic sectors of
                                 the community shall be preferred. Such developments would
                                 include a range of apartment sizes (studios, one, two, three,
                                 and four bedroom units) and a mix of 'housing types
                                 (apartments, condominiums, and single family detached)   to.
                                 provide for balanced housing opportunities, where feasible.

                   Policy 5-7:   Review and evaluation  of proposed residential  developments
                                 necessary to carry out the policies set forth   in this housing
                                 component shall be performed by the planning analyst who is
                                 responsible for implementation of the.County's Housing
                                 Element.

                                 the duties of this staff position shall include: (1) staff
                                 analysis of proposed residential projects in the coastal zone
                                 to determine appropriate.incentives forthe applicant to
                                 construct new low and moderate income housing; (2) require-

                                                       -44-

                                    ments  or conditions for approval to obtain the      necessary
                                    number oflow and moderate.income units; and,(3) mechanisms
                                    for ensuring that low and moderate inc     ome units.are retained
                                    as affordable units over the long term.

                     Policy  5-8:   Administration of housing programs shall be shared and
                                    coordinated as much as possible.with,agencie.s such as the Area
                                    Planning Council a,,n'd'-County Housing A Iuthority to.avoid addi-
                                    tional staffing requirements and increased costs to the
                                    County.

                     Policy 5-9:    To provide for a balanced housing mix that       will accommodate
                                    all economic segments of the.cbmmunity, review and approval of
                                    newdevelopment in the coastal zone, i.e., agriculture,
                                    coastal dependent industry, visitor-serving commercial, etc.,
                                    shall include an assessment of its growth-inducing impacts on
                                    housing needs. The provision of adequate housingshould.be a
                                    necessary corollary to new growth-inducing developments.

                     Policy  5-10:  In the areas designated for commercial uses on the land use
                                    plan ma ps, residenti  al'development shall be a permitted
                                    secondary.use subject to a conditional use,permit, and
                                    existing residential uses shall be considered permitted         uses.
                                    rather than legal non-conforming uses.

                     NOTE:   An implementation program adequate to carry out the        housing policies
                     of the  land use plan will be.prepared in conjunction with development of
                    .the Housing   Element of the County's Comprehensive,Plan. The implementation
                     program will include required programs,and actions, identification of the
                     responsible   agency or agencies, and a.time frame for accomplishment.

                     The housing   component of, the Coastal   Pla n will be brought into conformity
                     with the Housing El-emont of the County's Comprehensive Plan following adop-
                     tion of the Housing Element,.by the Board of Supervisors and        approval bythe
                     California   Department  of Housing and Community Development.

                                                            -45-

                  @3-6 INDUSTRIAL AND                        ENERGY          DEVELOPMENT

                                                            OUTLINE

                            .3.. 61COASTAL  ACT POLICIES

                                   The Coastal Dependency Criterion
                                   Oil and Gas Development
                                   'Thermal Power Generating Plants
                                   Liquefied Natural Gas
                                   Other Coastal Dependent Industrial      Uses

                            3.6.2  SUMMARY  OF PLANNING   ISSUES

                            3.6.3  OIL AND  GAS  DEVELOPMENT

                                   Background
                                   Planning,Issues and Scenarios
                                   Existing County Regulations for Oil and.Gas Development
                            3.6.4  LAND USE, PLAIN PROPOSALS
                                   Oil and  Gas Wells
                                   Oil  and Gas Processing Facilities
                                   Marine Terminals
                                   Pipelines
                                   Power Transmission Lines
                                   Piers and Staging Areas
                                   Other Coastal Dependent Industrial Facilities

                            3.6.5  THERMAL POWER PLANTS

                            3.6.6  LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS

                     3.6.1 COASTAL ACT POLICIES

                           The Coastal Act, while   emphasizinq Protection, enhancement,and restora-
                     tio'n of coastal  resources, recognizes that energy related development is
                     necessary for the *social and economic     well-being of the.State and the
                     Nation. The basis for allowing energy development in the coastal zone is
                     Section 30001.2, which states:.

                           30001.2. The Legislature further finds       and declares that   ' notwith-
                           standing the fact electr.ical generating.facilities, refineries, and
                           coastal-dependent developments, including ports and commercial fishing
                           facilities, offshore petroleum and gas development, and liquefied
                           natural gas facilities, may    have significant adverse effects on
                           coastal resources or coastal access, it may be necessary to locate
                           such development in the coastal zone in.order to ensure that inland as
                           well as coastal resources are preserved and that orderly economic
                           development proceed,s within the state.

                                                            -46-

                          The Act also contains provisions for several    types of  energy develop-'
                     ment, includi.ng oil and gas development, thermal power plants, liquefied
                     natural gas, and@other related facilities. These policies are listed for
                     .each of the major energy,facility categories in the following sections.

                          The Coastal Dependency Criterion

                          The Coastal Act policies addressing industrial development distinguish
                     between coastal dependent and other development. According toSection
                     30101 of the Act, coastal dependent development or use means that "which
                     requires a site on, or adjacent to, the sea to be able to function at all."
                     Examples of coastal dependentenergy facilities include: oil and gas
                     separation and treatment facilities supporting offshore petroleum develop-
                     ment, marinelterminals, and liquefied-natural gas terminals. Onshore oil
                     wells are not'considered to be coastal dependent since their functioning is
                     dependent on a location near the oil resource, not the sea. Electrical
                     generating plants and oil refineries may or may not be coastal dependent.
                     Electrical generating plants which use ocean water for-cooling purposes
                     must be at or near the coast, but plants can also use inland water supplies
                     when available. For refineries, transportation costs for crude oil and
                     refined,products dictate locations nearer end use markets rather than
                     sources of supply; hence, locations in and near metropolitan markets are
                     optimal. Since the principal metropolitan areas in California are coastal
                     areas and many refiner'ies.receive imported oil by tanker, this leads to the
                     coincident location of refineries in or near coastal areas.

                          Under Section 30255, coastal dependent developments,, whether or not
                     industrial, are given priority over other developments on or near the
                     shoreline. In addition, Section 30260 of the,Act establishes special
                   ..criteria for allowing coastal dependent industrial facil'ities. Section
                     30260 states that:

                          30260. Coastal-dependent industrial facilities shall be encouraged to
                          locate or expand within existing sites and shall be permitted reason-
                          able long-term growth whereconsistent with this division. However,
                          where new or expanded coastal-dependent industrial facilities cannot
                          feasibly be accommodated consistent with other policies of this divi-
                          sion, they may nonetheless be permitted in accordance with this
                          section and Secti.ons 30261 and 30262 if (1) alternative locations are
                          infeasible or more environmentally damaging; (2) to do otherwise would
                          adversely affect the publi,c. welfare; and (3).adverse environmental
                          effects are mitigated to the maximum extent feasible.

                          This section of the Act anticipates that industrial development may not
                     be consistent with other Coastal Act policies, yet may be necessary for the
                     public welfare. Additional policies for energy-related industrial develop-
                   ,ment are included in Sections 30261-30264 of the Act., They are discussed
                     below.

                                                         -47-w

                         Oil  and Gas Development

                         Oil  and gas development  is permitted in the coastal zone subject       to
                    the provisions of Section 30260   and the following conditions;,
                         30262. Oil and gas    development shall be permitted in accordance       with
                         Section 80260, if the following conditions.are met:
                            . (a) The development is performed safely and consistent with the
                         geol'ogic conditions of the well site.
                               (b) New or expanded facil.ities related to such development are
                         consolidated, to the maximum extent feasible and legally permis,sible,
                         unless consolidation will have adverse environmental consequences and
                         will not significantly reduce thenumber of producing wells, support
                         facilities, or sites required to produce the reservoir economically
                         and with minimal environmental impacts.
                               (c) Environmentally safe'and feasible subsea completions are
                         used when drilling platforms or islands would substantial.ly degrade
                         coastal visual qualities unless use of such structures will.     result in
                         substantially less environmental risks.
                              (d) Platforms or islands will not be sited where a substantial
                         hazard to vessel traffic might result from the facility or related
                         operations, determined in consultation with the United States Coast
                         Guard and the-Army Corps of Engineers.
                             Ae) Such development will not cause or contribute to subsidence
                         hazards,unless it is determined that adequate measures will      be under-
                         taken to prevent damage from such subsidence.
                              (f) With respect to.new facilities, all oilfield brines are
                         reinjected into oil-producing zones unless the Division-of Oil and Gas
                         of the Department of Conservation determines to do so would adversely
                         affect production of the reservoirs and unless injection into other
                         subsurface zones will reduce environmental risks. Exceptions to rein@
                         jections will be granted cons@istent with the Ocean Waters Discharge
                         Plan of the State Water Resources Control Board and where adequate
                         provision is made for the elimination of petroleum odors.and water-
                         quality problems.
                              Where appropriate, monitoring programs to record land surface and
                         hear-shore ocean floormovements shall be initiated in locations of
                         new large-s cale fluid extraction on land -or near shore before, opera-
                         tions begin and shall continue until surface conditions have
                         stabilized. Costs of monitoring and mitigation programs shall be
                         borne by liquid and gas extraction operators.

                   In addition, the Act encourages,consolidation and multi-company use of
                   facilities:

                         30261. (a) Multi-company use of existing and new tanker facilities
                         shall be encouraged to the-maximum extent feasible and legally
                         permissible, except where to do so would result in increased 'tanker
                         operations-and associated onshore development incompatible with the
                         land use and environmental goals.for the area. New tanker terminals
                         outside of existing.termin.al. areas shall be situated as to avoid risk
                         to.environmentally sensitive   areas and shall Use a monobuoy system,

                                                       -48-

                         unless an alternative type of system can be shown to be environ-
                         mentally preferable for a specific site.      Tanker facilities shall be
                         designed to (1) minimize the total volume of oil spilled, (2) minimize
                         the risk of collision from movement of other vessels, (3) have ready
                         access to the most effective feasible containment and recovery equip-
                         ment for oilspills, and, (4) have onshore deballasting facilities to
                         receive any fouled ballast water from tankers where operationally or
                         legally required.

                    The Act also requires that adequate.protection be provided against oil
                    spills. ;Section 30232 states that:

                         30232. Protection aga.inst the spillage of crude oil, gas, petroleum
                         products, or hazardous substances shall be providedlin relation to any
                         devel,opment or transportation of.such materials. Effective contain-
                         ment 6,nd cleanup facilities and procedures shall be provided for
                         accidental spills that do occur.-

                         Though refineries are not necessarily coastal dependent, their-loca-
                    tion in coastal metropolitan areas may put them in the coastal zone.
                    Section 30263 establishes criteria for locating refineries in the coastal
                    zone:

                         30263. (a) New or expanded refineries or petrochemical facilities
                         not otherwise consistent with the provisions of this division shall be
                         permitted if: (1) alternative locations are not feasible or are more
                         environmentally damaging; (2) adverse environmental effects are miti-
                         .gated to the maximum extent feasible; (3) it'is found that not permit-
                         ting such development would adversely affect the public welfare; (4)
                         the facility is not located in a highly scenic or seismically
                         hazardous area, on any of the Channel Islands, or within or contiguous
                         to environmentally sensitive areas; and, (5) the facility is sited so
                         as to provide a sufficient buffer area to minimize adverse impacts on
                         surrounding property.
                               (b) In addition to meeting all applicable air quality standards,
                         new or expanded refineries or petrochemical facilities shall be
                         permitted in areas designated as air quality maintenance areas by the
                         State Air Resources Board and in areas where coastal resources would
                         be adversely affected only if the negative impacts of the project upon
                         air quality are offset by reductions in gaseous emissions in the area
                         by the users of the fuels, or, in the case of an expansion of an
                         existing site, total site emission levels, and site levels for each
                         emission type for which national or state ambient air quality
                         standards have been established do not increase.
                               (c) New or expanded refineries or petrochemical facilities shall
                         minimize the need for once-through cooling by using air cooling to the
                         maximum extent feasible and by using treated waste waters.from inplant
                         processes where feasible.

                                                          -49-

                         Thermal Power Generating Plants

                         Siting of new or expanded thermal electri:c generating plants is
                   addressed in Section 30264 of the Coastal Act:

                         30264. Notwithstanding any other provision of this division, except
                         subdivisions.(b) and (c) of Section 30413, new or expanded thermal
                         electric generating plants may be constructed.in the coastal zone if
                         the proposed coastal site has been determined.by the State Energy
                         Resources Conservation and Development Commission to have greater
                         relative merit pursuant to theprovisions of Section 25516.1 than
                         available alternative sites and related facilities for an applicant's
                         service area which have been determined to be acceptable pursuant to
                         the provisions of Section 25516.

                         This section recognizes that the State Energy Resources Conservation
                   and Development Commission may decide to select sites in the coastal zone
                   upon a showing that these sites have greater relative merit than available
                   alternates,., This siting authority is limited within the coastal zone to
                   areas not.designated by the State Coastal Commission under Section
                   30413(b), which states that:

                         30413. (b) The (Coastal) commission shall, prior to January 1, 1978,
                         and after one or more public hearings, designate those specific loca-
                         tions within the coastal zone where the location of a facility as
                         defined in Section 25110 would prevent the achievement of the objec-
                         tives of this diviston; provided, however, the speci
                                                                              fic locations that
                         are presently used forsuch facilities and reasonable expansion there-
                         of shall not be so designated. Each such designation shall include a
                         description of the boundaries of such locations, the objectives. of
                         this division which would be so affected, and detai led findings
                         concerning the significant adverse impacts that would.-result from
                         development of a facility in the designated area. The commission
                         shall consider the conclusions, if any, reached by the State Energy
                         Resources Conservation and Development Commission in its most.'recently
                         promulgated comprehensive report issues pursuant to Section 25309.
                         The commission shall transmit a copy of its report prepared pursuant
                         to this subdivision to,the State Energy Resources Conservation and
                         Development Commission.

                         Liquefied Natural Gas

                         Section 30261.(b) of the Coastal Act authorizes the siting of one
                   liquefied natural gas facility in the California coastal  zone. Since the
                   passage of the Coastal Act, additional legislation (SB 1081) has deleted
                   this section of the Act. Senate Bill 1081 mandated a complex siting
                   procedure involving a number of agencies under the  lead of the California
                   Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Discussion of this.is deferred to
                   Section 3.6.6.

                                                     -50-

                        Other Coastal Dependent Industrial Uses

                        The Coastal Act recognizes that other industrial uses are also coastal
                   dependent. Those that the Act mentions specifically include ports and
                   commercial fishing facilities. In addition, related activities, such as
                   kelp harvesting and processing, aquaculture, and fish hatcheries, may also
                   be considered.coastal dependent. Such uses, because they are coastal
                   dependent, are given priority over other land use.s on oceanfront'lands
                   (Section.30255).

                        Other types of industrial uses (i.e., mineral extraction), which are
                   dependent on resources which, occur within the coastal zone as well as else-
                   where, are not considered to be coastal dependent.

                   3.6.2 SUMMARY OF COASTAL PLANNING ISSUES

                        Oil and gas related development is currently the principal industrial
                   activity in the Santa Barbara County coastal zone. Petroleum related acti-
                   vity is expected to increase in the future as development of leases in the
                   Channel proceeds. Although the Southern California Edison Company owns
                   land east of Point Conception which it had intended for a power plant, a
                   specific project is not likely to be proposed in the hear future. More
                   recently, the Public Utilities Commission selected an area near Cojo Creek,
                   immediately to the west of the Edison property, as the site for Califor-
                   nia's first liquefied natural gas terminal.

                        The issues involved in the siting of industrial and, particularly,
                   major energy facilities in the coastal zone are complex. The principal
                   concerns related to impacts on @coastal resources include:

                   1.   Shoreline Access and Recreation.0pportunities: Facilities may impose
                        barriers due to structures, fencing around the site, pier facilities
                        across the beach, pipeline rights-of-way, and safety zones. These
                        barriers. may impede lateral or,,vertical access to the shoreline, block
                        views, or consume limited oceanfront land.

                   2.   Oil Spills: The critical concerns are with safe operating procedures
                        in all aspects of the exploration, development, and production
                        process, plus cleanup capability which considers containment and
                        recovery at the source of the spill and at critical resource areas
                        such as beaches and coastal habitats.

                   3.   Land Resources: Coastal dependent development unless carefully sited
                        can result in destruction or adverse impacts on habitats, agricultural
                        lands, or archaeological sites.

                   4.   Air Pollution: The effect of emissions on local air quality from
                        marine terminals, oil and gas separation and treatment facilities and
                        LNG may be substantial. Emissions from these facilities are regulated
                        by State and Federal law.@

                                                      -51-

                    5.   Visual Resources:- Energy and industrial facilities, particularly when
                         .sited in rural areas or within view corridors, represent major impacts
                         on scenic and visual resources. 'Some impacts can be mitigated through
                         proper siting, screening, and landscaping.

                    6.   Marine Resources: Energy facilities that may Irequire ocean water for
                         cooling or heating purposes, i.*e., power plants and LNG terminals, can
                         have major adverse impacts on marine resources through entrainment of
                         organ,isms in water intake systems, through discharge of water at a
                         different temperature, and through use of biocides.

                         The following sections consider each of the energy and industrial
                    facility categories separately, and develop the issues and objectives which
                    are addressed in the.land use plan. Due to the County's greater.experience
                    and regulatory control.ove*r oil.and gas development, recommendat'ions made
                    for oil and.gas developm ent are far more detailed.than for othir energy
                    facilities such as LNG or thermal power plants.

                    3.6.3 OILAND GAS DEVELOPMENT

                         Background

                         Onshore oil production in Santa Barbara County is predominantly
                    located north of the Santa Ynez Mountains, with the highest production
                    coming from Cat Canyon, Orcutt, Lompoci and Santa Maria fields. Onshore
                    production in the coastal zone is presently limited to a few locations. In
                    contrast with levels of production from inland fields and from State and
                    Federal waters, onshore production in,the coastal zone is low and
                    declining. One area in the coastal zone where increased activity may be  a
                    possibility in the immediate future is the Guadalupe Dunes,:where Union and
                    Husky hold leases.

                         Santa Barbara County has a long history of offshore@oil and petroleum
                    activity, and is.currently subject to increasing offshore development with
                    State leases granted on 37 tidelands parcels and Federal leases granted on,
                    68 tracts in the Channel portion of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
                    Most of these leases have undergone or are experiencing some degree of
                    exploration, development, or production. An additional 54 tracts, almost,
                    all of which are located in the Santa Barbara Channel, were recently sold
                    in lease sale #48. Santa Barbara Channel production is currently about
                    45,000 barrels of oil and 30 million cubic feet of gas'per day. Serving
                    these leases are 13 offshore platforms, 42 subsea wells, 5 marine
                    terminals, and numerous,oil and gas pipleines. Twelve onshore separation
                       treatment facilities, two of which are in Ventura County, process all
                    the-offshore production from the Channel.

                         Offshore oil development is in the,process of expansion with increased
                    activity both in Federal waters and in the St'ate Tidelands. Both Arco and
                    Union are resuming.activity in the State Tidelands near Isla Vista and
                    Point Conception., respectively. Exploratory drilling is now underway for
                    tracts sold in lease sale 48. Proposed,lease sale #53, tentatively
                    scheduled for 1981, will affect areas north of Point Conception.

                                                    -52-

                           The potentials for   significant adve  'rse environmental impacts resulting
                     from oil development expansion are of great concern locally. The develop-
                     ment of the Outer Continental Shelf may be one       of the factors that could
                     prevent the County from meeting National Ambient Air Quality Standards
                     unless stringent steps are taken to control vapor emissions from tanker
                     loading and unloading operations., Air quality.degradation could signifi-
                     cantly impact coastal agriculture and be detrimental to the tourist
                     industry and health of certain segments of the population, such as
                     retirees. The recent OCS.Lands Act amendments gave the Interior Department
                     jurisdiction over OCS-related emissions. When reviewing OCS projects to
                     determine consistency with the approved coastal management program for
                     California., the State Coastal.Comm.ission will consider, among-other things,
                     the effect of acti.vities proposed under those plans on the attainment of
                     State a@d_National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

                          Whi'le 'regulations regarding tanker loading or     unloading exist, the
                     County is concerned about the greater-likelihood of major oil spills,
                     resulting from increased tanker traffic in the Channel and from thecumula-
                     tive effects of daily operations such as loading, unloading, and equipment
                     cleaning, on the marine and beach environments. Natural seeps also contri-
                     bute to air quality degradation.

                          A key problem the County faces in planning for energy development is
                     its lack of jurisdiction over oil and gas development in the State Tide-
                     lands and OCS. County Control over activity in State and Federal waters is
                     limited to regulation of onshore facilities used for drilling, process         .ing,
                     storage, and transshipment of oil an.d.gas, and enforcement of air quality
                     standards for emissions from platforms and marine terminals@ within the
                     three-mile limit.

                          Along wit h the problems associated with lack of County jurisdicti        on,
                     over oil and gas development, local planning for energy facilities is
                     hampered by lack of precisedata regarding future development. Oil
                     companies assert they are unable to anticipate their future activities and
                     facilityneeds beyond three years With any certainty. Many areas           in the
                     channel are still being explored and lease sale #53 has yet to be         held.
                     Increases in the selling price of oil make some oil fields profitable that
                     were previously uneconomical to produce. Evolution i.n technology directly
                     affects bo.th the location of wells and the methods of production,
                     .processing, and transportation., All of these factors suggest that long
                     range planning must occur with a framework of much uncertainty.

                                                          -53-

                         Planning Issues and Scenariosi

                         Oil and gas is currently produced in three areas: onshore,       in the
                    State Tidelands, and in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). OCS production
                    is the largest (36,600 barrels per day) and has the greatest potential. .
                    State Tidelands production i*s relatively small by,comparison, and declining
                    (7,600 B/D). Onshore production within the coastal zone is declining and
                    insignificant by comparison (440 B/D). By contrast, onshore production in
                    the North County fields is 37,700 B/D. Issues surrounding each of these
                    producing areas are examined separately.

                    1. Onshore Production in the Coastal Zone

                         Onshore  production in the coastal zone is presently limited to the
                    Thriftway wells just south of the Santa Maria River, Union wells at'Govern-
                    ment Point, the Shell wells near El Capitan, and the Aminoil, wells at
                    Ellwood. Production at these facilities is low and has been historically
                    declining.

                         In planning for onshore oil production, it is necessary to distinguish
                    among three subregions:

                         a)  the urbanized South Coast between Rincon    and Ellwood;

                         b)  the South Coast between Ellwood and Gaviota; and
                         c)  the North Coast between Gaviota' and the Santa Maria River.

                         These three subregions reflect different land use patterns, zoning
                    designations and regulations, and oil resource development patterns. 'The
                    South Coast between Rincon and Ellwood has seen*considerable activity in
                    the early days of oil exploration and development. Summerland in particu-
                    lar was an extremely active area. These areas were exhausted under the
                    technology of that time. With urbanization over the past 30 years, and
                    changes in land use patterns, oi,l drilling came under increasing restric-
                    tions and prohibitions. Neither the Cities of Santa Barbara and Carpin-
                    teria nor the unincorporated area of Montecito allow oil drilling under
                    existing zoning.   Within the unincorporated area surrounding Carpinteria,

                    fIn order to estimate the need for additional land and/or facilities to
                    accommodate production from onshore fields, State Tidelands, and OCS, it
                    was necessary to develop planning scenarios for each of these areas. In
                    the scenarios, certain assumptions are made regarding the timing and levels
                    of future production and the implications for onshore facilities. The
                    projections used in this plan are based on estimates prepared by the Office
                    of Planning and Research, United States Geologic Survey, and Bureau of Land
                    Management. It must be emphasized that there are problems in discussing
                    capacities in this generalized way. This is done only to paint a rough
                    picture of the implications of one production scenario and to provide a
                    reference point for further discussion.

                                                        -54-

                    the "0" designation (Oil Drilling Combining'Regulations) of the County
                    zoning ordinance is attached to many of the residential, commercial, and
                    agricultural designations, but bears no relation to known oil fields or
                    past oil activity.

                         The South Coast between Ellwood and Gaviota has experienced major
                    increases in recreati-onal use in recent years. Additional areas have been
                    designated for public acquisition by the State Department of Parks and
                    Recreation. At one time, there was considerable oil and gas development
                    activity along this portion of the coast. This is still where the bulkof
                    the oil and gas facilities in the Santa Barbara coastal area is located.
                    These facilities generally relate to offshore fields rather than onshore
                    production. With declining production, many of these facilities have been
                    functioning with considerable excess capacity. Onshore production in this
                    arei-,I@. currently limited to the Shell Capitan wells and Aminoil wells at
                    Ellwood.

                         The North Coast between Gaviota and the  Santa Maria River is the most
                    likely area in the coastal zone for increased onshore producti.on. Antici-
                    pated development in the Guadalupe Dunes area may conflict with protection
                    of habitats and scenic and visual resources.   Union Oil is currently opera-
                    ting facilities in the Government Point area;  however, these facilities
                    relate to production in the State Tidelands.

                    2. State Tidelands Production

                         Oil and gas extraction has been declining historically in the State
                    Tidelands, though it may increase temporarily, depending on improved market
                    conditions and use of enhanced recovery techni.ques. OPR has suggested a
                    production scenario for the State Tidelands area which includes expanded
                    production at Summerland, Carpinteria, and at South Ellwood fields. These
                    are the fields OPR believes are capable of increases and where operators
                    have taken steps to increase production. Sufficient surplus capacity
                    exists at the Chevron plant at Carpinteria to accommodate anticipated
                    increases in the Summerland and Carpinteria fields. ARCO is currently
                    expanding its existing facilities at Ellwood to meet new anticipated levels
                    of production from its State Tidelands leases. Recently, Union Oil has
                    announced plans to begin exploratory drilling in its leases offshore of
                    Point Conception.

                         Substantial surplus capacity exists in other processing facilities
                    presently handling production from the State Tidelands. It is not evident
                    that additional sites will be needed to process oil and gas from the State
                    Tidelands, though existing facilities may have to be modified to meet new
                    emission standards or handle increased production.

                         Anticipated impacts of this increased production on local coastal
                    resources are limited. The volume of production expected from the State
                    Tidelands will be small in comparison to production in the Outer Continen-
                    tal Shelf. Practices currently followed by the County in concert with area
                    operators are consistent with the Coastal Act and recommendations made by
                    OPR. Of special note are the consolidated facilities at the Getty marine

                                                      -55-

                     terminal at Gaviota,. the joint use of ARCO and Aminoil. facilities at
                     Ellwood, joint, use of pier facilities, and multiple company use of gas
                     transmission lines.

                     3.  Federal OCS Production

                          Oil and gas production is expected   to increase  substantially  in the
                     Federal OCS, peaking in 1990 according to a scenario developed by     the State
                     Office of Planning and Research. The OPR scenario was developed for use by
                     the@Joint Industry/Government Pipeline Working Group in assessing the
                     feasibility of an onshore pipeline to transport crude oil as an alternative
                     to tanker transport. Of immediate concern is the production that will take
                     place in the Channel, which includes the Channel portion of lease sale #48
                     plus production from existing Federal leases. The Outer Banks portion of
                     lease sales #35 and #48 is not included in the OPR scenario, as the produc-
                     tion is expected.to be tankered to refining areas, with limited or no
                     impacts on onshore facilities in the County.

                          Two alternate tanker scenarios,-neither of which includes am onshore
                     pipeline, have been developed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in its
                     lease sale #48 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Under the 100 percent
                     tanker scenario, very limited quantities of crude, if any, would come
                     onshore in Santa Barbara County for treatment. This pattern is illustrated
                     by Exxon and its proposed offshore separation and treatment facility for
                     the Hondo field. One consequence of this scenario would be the probable
                     reinjection of gas, although gas could be brought ashore, or liquefied at
                     the platform site and transported by tanker. Pacific Offshore Pipeline
                     Company, a subsidiary of Pacific Lighting Corporation and affiliate of the
                     Southern California Gas Company, plans to build a gas processing facility
                     at Las Flores Canyon to handle. Exxon's production from Hondo.

                         An alternate scenario with tanker shipment at 25 percent and piping to
                     shore facilities at 75 percent  was also consideredin the EIS. Under'this
                     scenario, it was assumed that the oil- will be piped to Ventura County for
                     onshore processing.

                         Thust as far as a need for additional processing     sites is concerned,
                     neither tanker scenario in the EIS for-lease sale #48    indicates heavy
                     impacts on the County. At most, one staging area of about six acres might
                     be needed, primarily for personnel and-supplies transfer. Other major
                     facilities accompanying oi-1 and gas development., especially platform fabri-
                     cation yards, service and staging areas, and pipe coating yards, would
                     probably continue to function where they are currently sited.

                         If crude oil does come onshore for processing, it would be important
                     to determine how much additional processing capacity would be neeeded over
                     and above capacities of existing facilities. The present surplus capacity
                     of existing processing facilities at Chevron-Carpinteria, Phillips-La

                                                        -56-

                     'Conchita, and Mobil-Rincon totals    109,000 B/D, and could accommodate'almost
                     all of peak East Channel production under the OPR scenario including
                     production from lease sale #48, even if all of the crude were' brought
                     onshore. Under a 75 percent onshore piping scenario, no additional surplus
                     capacity wouldb6 needed at peak operating conditions. These are only
                     ballpark figures, and,overlook the impact that differing crude character-.
                     istics and ownership arrangements may have on actual processing capabili-
                     ties.

                           Projections for the West Channel area are open.to some speculation,
                     particularly with the eventual processing location of Exxon's Hondo produc-
                     tion. Exploration has already begun in the West Channel, though production
                     is not yet underway. No onshore facilities exist at present for,processing
                     crude from OCS production in the West Channel. Total production projected
                     from the West Channel under the OPR,scenario, including existing leases as
                     well as lease sale #48 areas, peaks at 118,000 B/D by 1991.

                           If all Channel production is considered as an aggregate under a 75
                     percent onshore pipeline scenario, and an onshore pipeline is assumed,
                     linking East and West Channel areas, an addItional 60,000 B/D of processing
                     capacity would be needed.somewhere. This is equivalent to the present
                     capacity of the Mobil-Rincon plant.
                           While the onshore impacts due to production' activity,from OCS produc-
                     tion, including lease sale #35, Jease sale #48, and existing Federal
                     leases, may be low, total impacts from direct and indirect activity
                     connected with these leases may be significant. By the peak period of
                     activity (1985-1986), the EIS projects-that 3,200 people will be employed
                     directly or indirectly in,oil activity related to these lease sales, This
                     employment will induce employment in other sectors of the economy and
                     result in the need for housing and other services,. (Refer to the County's
                     Proposed Comprehensive Plan for a more detailed analysis of County-wide
                     land use impacts.)

                           Existing County Regulations for Oil    and Gas  Development.

                           Currently, the County regulates oil    and gas  production facilities with
                     a policy statement, Zoning Ordinance No.     661, and the Petroleum Ordinance
                     No. 2795. County Zoning Ordinance No. 661 regulates the permitted loca-
                     tions for the drilling and processing of oil, gas, and other hydrocarbons.
                     In general, production is permitted by right in the U_"Unlimited Agricul-
                     tural" District, AG-"General Agricultural" District, and in any district
                     subject to the '.'OV combining regulations. In-any district with@the "0"
                     combining regulations attached.to the base zone, oil production may be
                     permitted subject to securing a -permit from the,County Planning Commission
                     and a processing facility may be permitted subject to obtaining a Condi-
                     tional Use Permit.

                           "PM" (Planned Manufacturing) zoning is required for all oil and gas
                     processing facilities serving offshore development, and imposes tight

                                                           57-

                    controls over the design of the facility.   Since the "PM" designation must
                    be applied for, this designation effectively requires a rezoning for every
                    processing plant. If such zoning is not consistent with the generalplan,
                    then a general plan amendment must also be applied for. Once the applica-
                    tion has been accepted by the Planning Department, it is reviewed concur-
                    rently by the Department of Environmental Resources, which performs the
                    environmental impact assessment, and other County agencies (APCD, Parks,
                    Planning,.Petroleum Administrator, Public Works,,etc.) to determine confor-
                    mance with other County policies. The Planning Department prepares a,
                    report based on these reviews for the Planning Commission. The Planning
                    Commission then acts@ on the application.and sends the matter to the Board
                    of Supervisors for final action. Before building permits are issued, the.
                    applicant must submit a precise plan which incorporates controls required
                    by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors.
                         Petroleum Ordinance No. 2795 and its amendment (Ordinance No. 2832)
                    contain technical conditions for oil drilling activities in the County.
                    The Ordinance regulates drilling, prdducing, operating, and abandoning
                    wells, pipelines, tanks, and associated equipment; requires a performance
                    bond; and establishes requirements for erosion, pollution, fire, and.safety
                    hazards. In addition, No. 2832 defines standards for emissions and for
                    monitoring emissions, including alert and emergency shutdown procedures.

                        'One potential conflict may exist between the Petroleum Ordinance and
                    the Coastal Act. Under the Ordinance, additional wells drilled in existing
                    oil fields identified on Division of Oil and Gas maps are not subject to
                    environmental review. The Board of Supervisors recently reaffirmed this
                    polity, though the Board requested a separate study for the Guada.lupe.Dunes
                    area, where Husky Oil has applied for a permit to drill and Union Oil is
                    considering,similar activity.

                         The potential conflict arises over the location of sensitive habitats
                    in the Dunes area'which are protected under the Coastal Act and impacts
                    caused by additional oil drilling. The existing,Petroleum Ordinance may
                    need to.be modified. to reconcile this potential conflict. Three possible
                    administrative approaches may reconcile the conflict: (1) giving any major,
                    project in the coastal zone (including the Dunes) major project status
                    requiring environmental review, regardless of,whether or not it is in an
                    existing field; (2) excluding the Santa Barbara Co'unty portion of the ,
                    Guadalupe Dunes oil field from the list of fields exempt from.environimental
                    review; or (3) requiring development on the Dunes to meet specific perfor-
                    mance standards

                         In 1967, the County adopted a "Statement of Policy Relative to the
                    location of Onshore Oil Facilities.," which is its most definitive response
                    to the OCS program. The Policy applies to all applications from Point
                    Conception to the Ventura County line, extending inland to the ridge line
                    of the Santa Ynez Mountains, and to the three-mile limit offshore. In
                    intent, the "Statement of.Policy Relative to the the Location of Onshore
                    Oil Facilities" is consistent with Coastal Act policies because it recog-

                                                      -58-

                    nizes both the need for  onshore sites for oi 1 and gas handling and the
                    necessity of preserving  recreational and scenic coastal resources.

                         It requires that each application for an onshore facility for the
                    purpose of.handling oil or gas production (i.e., marine terminals, tank
                    farms, oil and gas processing facilities) be considered on the basis of:
                    Appearance of the facility from the surrounding areas; impacts of noise,
                    vibration, odor, air pollution, visibility, lighting, traffic, grading,
                    flood and erosion control, pub.lic safety, and land and@water pollution.
                    Presently, the Policy favors "no more than one additional marine terminal."
                    It discourages any tank farms or processing facilities within three miles
                    of any existing facilities and prohibits refining. It only supports expan-
                    sion of existing facilities onto adjacent land, provided all other criteria
                    of the Policy are met. In addition, it encourages consolidation of facili-
                    ties (in keeping with Section 30261 of the Coastal Act) on existing s'ites
                    or on adjacent land as an alternative to the establishment of new separate
                    sites.

                    3.6.4  LAND USE PLAN PROPOSALS

                         The land use plan must specify where, when, and under what conditions
                    energy related and other coastal dependent industrial facilities may locate
                    within the County's coastal zone. The locational is,sues are resolved.in
                    two ways. A separate land use designation, Coastal Dependent Industry,
                    handles uses which require locations on or near the sea in order to be able
                    to function at all. As is current County practice, the land use plan also
                    permits many energy related facilities such as pipelines, transmission.
                    lines, and oil wells.under othe r land use designations. Table 3-1 sh    ows
                    which facilities are permitted in each of the land use designationse

                         Phasing of energy facilities could result in increased protection of
                    coastal resources through use of consolidated facilities coupled with a
                    more even resource recovery schedule. This would lead to an overall reduc-
                    tion in oil spill potential, less air pollution, and fewer facilities.
                    However, phasing would require cooperation of government agencies at all
                    levels with energy,companies, and changes, Iin existing pr'actices and regula-
                    tions. Resolution of those issues is beyond the scope of the Local'Coastal
                    Program.

                         Finally, the land use plan must specify conditions under which energy
                    and coastal dependent industrial development will be permitted. As Santa
                    Barbara County agencies have developed experience over the years with oil
                    and gas operations, relatively few modifications are needed to make local
                    regulations consistent with the Coastal Act. In the following sections,
                    policies are recommended for most categories'of energy and coastal depen-
                    dent industrial uses. Discussion of issues and recommendations for thermal
                    power plants and LNG terminals is included in Sections 3.6.5 and 3.6.6,
                    respectively. In.addition to conformance with the specific energy and
                    industrial policies in the following sections, all energy and coastal

                                                       _59-

                    dependent industrial de  velopment will have to meet the standards set forth
                    in all other applicable policies of the land use plan.

                          Oil and Gas Wells

                          Oil and gas production is regulated under the County's Petroleum
                    Ordinance No. 2795 (as amended by Ordinance No. 2832). This Ordinance
                    incorporates provisions of other administrative units, including the
                    Division.of Oil and Gas and the Water Quality Control Board. Regulations
                    cover drilling, producing, operating and,abandonment; petroleum wells,
                    pi,pelines, tanks, and_associated equipment; erosion; pollution; fire
                    hazards; and, finally, require a performance bond.

                          Operations on the site and impacts of operation on adjoining land uses
                    are covered by the County Zoning Ordinance No. 661, under several sections.
                    These sections regulate setbacks, well density, removalof equipment,
                    piers, safety equipment, erosion, plantings, dust and other emissions,
                    color of structures, duration of daily operation, and general appearance.
                    While the existing ordinances'are generally consistent with the Coastal
                    Act, they need to be clarified in a few instances to sharpen their protec-
                    tion.of resources located in the coastal zone.

                          The Petroleum Ordinance does not distinguish between    exploratory well:s
                    and production wells. However, the cumulative impacts due to production
                    wells spread over an area are different than those of one exploratory well.
                    Should oil be discovered, and additional production wells     established '  the
                    Oil Combining Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance mandate.th'at drilling
                   .s,ites (which may contain more than one well) not be any more dense than one
                    per ten acres. This practice of concentrating production in small.islands
                    and employing directional drilling is consistent with reducing environ-
                    mental impacts.

                          In an' application before the Regional Coastal Commission, Husky Oil
                    entered a proposal for a drilling site in t,he Guadalupe Oil Field    *  As the
                    application was for a project in the Guadalupe Dunes, an important coastal
                    habitat, the Regional Commission wanted the equivalent of an environmental
                    review done,,which the County did 'not require for projects in established
                    oil fields. Husky withdrew its application.

                          Two principles are at work here. First, it makes little sense to
                    permit an exploratory well at a site where, for a variety of reasons,
                    production wells would not be desirable. Second, to assess whether
                    development would be acceptable requires an analysis of the site,'other
                    facilities, coastal resources, and potential buildout. In short, a
                    preliminary assessment of potential impacts needs to begin at-the point of
                    exploration, as the exploratory well could end up being a production well
                    And, potentially, part of a clustered or other development, if oil were
                    found in paying quantities.

                          This initial assessment.could be handled by a preliminary plan,
                    submitted at the time of application for permit.to drill an exploratory

                                                        -60-

                                                                                                  TABLE 3-1

                                                                                    PRINCIPAL LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS

                                                                Mountainous
                                                                    Areas                                                  Coastal         All
                                                   Agriculture       and          All            Rural      All Other     Dependent       Other       Communi
                 ENERGY RELATED ACTIVITIES         I          II Open Lands Commercial      Residential    Residential    Industrial   Industrial    Faciliti

                 1.  Exploratory wells                        P      CCUP                         CCUP                        P            CCUP

                 2.  Onshore oil development,                 P      CCUP                         CCUP                        P            CCUP
                     including wells, pipe-
                     lines, storage tanks,
                     processing facilities,
                     and truck terminals

                 3.  Processing facilities                                                                                    P
                     for offshore.oil
                     development, including
                     marine terminals
                 4.  Thermal power plants   1
                 5.  LNG Terminal  I

                 6.  Pipelines and related         P          P      P             P              P            P              P            P             P
                     facilities, i.e.,
                     pump stations
                 7.  High voltage trans-           CCUP       CCUP   CCUP          CCUP,          CCUP         CCUP           CCUP         CCUP         CCUP
                     mission lines

                 8.  Piers, staging areas                     CCUP                                CCUP                        P

                 9.  Aquaculture                              CCUP   CCUP                         CCUP                        P            P
                 10. Underground   gas storage 2
                     and related   facilities,
                     i.e., compressor stations,
                     gas wells, and pipelines

                                                   KEY
                                           P = perm7tted use as long as all standards      set forth in-land use plan policies are       met
                                        CCUP = requires conditional use permit in the      coastal zone
                                        1                                                                                       2
                                        County jurisdiction over power plants and LNG terminals has been preempted.              Underground   gas storage  a
                                        permitted only at their existing location on the Pacific Lighting property in Goleta.

                    well.   If additional wells are drilled in the same lease area, a detailed
                    development plan could then be required. Should any of the projects under
                    the lease.be subject to CEQA, the development plan would serve as an impor-
                    tant source of information.

                    Where

                         Oil and gas wells are permitted in Coastal Dependent Industry and
                    Agriculture II designations and are conditionally permitted uses in Moun-
                    tainous Areas, Open Lands, Rural Residential, and all other Industrial
                    classifications'(refer,to' Table 3-1).

                    Policies

                         The existing Petroleum Ordinance is generally consistent with the
                    Coastal Act, and shall be-incorporated, with some.m   odifications, within the
                    land use plan. The following modifications are proposed:

                    Policy 6-1:  To assist the Petroleum Administrator in granting permits for
                                 petroleum wells in the coastal zone, a.plan shall be prepared
                                 by the applicant and approved by the County. This plan shall
                                 consist of an Exploratory Plan for an exploratory well and a
                                 Development Plan for development wells. The purpose of the
                                 Exploratory Plan is to enable the Petroleum Administrator to
                                 make a.preliminary assessment of potential coastal resource
                                 impacts, since the-presence of oil or gas, andits depth and
                                 location, would be unknown. The Exploratory Plan would be less
                                 detailed than the Development Plan, but would address the same
                                 issues as the Development Plan.

                    Policy 6-2:  The Devel opment Plan shall accompany the application   for permit
                                 filed with the Petroleum Administrator. It shall be     reviewed
                                 annually by the Petroleum Administrator and updated as needed
                                 or when additional changes-in facilities or operating condi-
                                 tions are proposed and accepted. The Development Plan shal-1
                                 consist of the following:

                                 a. A plot plan of the entire area under lease or ownership,
                                    showing relationship of proposed facilities, including
                                    location of well(s) to ultimate potential development.

                                 b. A map (1" = 50') showing relationship of proposed facili-
                                    ties to other buildings, structures, and/or natural or
                                    artificial features, including habitats, prime agricultural
                                    land, recreational areas, scenic resources, and archaeo-
                                    logical sites within 1,*000 feet of the well(s).

                                 c. A plan for eliminating or   substantially mitigating adverse
                                    impacts on habitat areas,.prime agricultural lands,

                                                        -62-

                                       recreational areas, scenic resources, and archaeological
                                       sites due to siting, construction, or operation of facili-
                                       ties.

                                  d.   An oil spill contingency plan.indicatihg location       and type
                                       of cleanup equipment, designation of.r6sponsibilities for
                                       monitoring cleanup, disposition of wastes, and reporting.of
                                       incident.

                                  e.   An analysis of the potential    for consolidation of facili-
                                       ties, including clustering of wells on production islands,
                                       but especially for consolidation with other operators.

                                  f.   A phasing plan for the stagi,ng of development which indi-
                                       cates the-approximate anticipated t.imetable for project
                                       installation, completion, consolidation, and decommission-
                                       ing.

                     Policy  6-3: All  oiland gas development     in.areas designated as environmen-
                                  tally sensitive habitats in    the land use plan shall be subject
                                  to environmental review.2

                     Policy  6-4: Upon completion of production, the area affected by the
                                  drill ing, processing, or other related petroleum activity,
                                  shall be appropriately,contoured, reseeded, and landscaped,to
                                  conform with the surrounding topography and vegetation.

                     Policy 6-15: Future projects for increas,ing or modifying Production at the
                                  Shell Capitan or Thriftway oil wells shall be permitted only if
                                  the net overall impact of production on coastal visual
                                  resources is improved. In particular, the impact of storage
                                  tanks and.pumping equipment on visual resources shall be miti-
                                  gated by appropriate measures such as siting, depression below
                                  grade, and vegetative screening.

                          Oil and Gas Processing Faci-lities

                          The County currently has twelve oil and      gas processing facilities
                     located i@ the coastal zone, two of which are not in operation (Texaco--St.
                     Augustine and Texaco--Gaviota.) Seven of these facilities process oil and
                     gas from offshore fields and are therefore coastal dependent (Union--Pt.
                     Conception, Arco--Gaviota, Chevron--Gaviota, Shell--Molino, Phillips--Taji-
                     guas, Arco--Ellwood, and Arco--Coal Oil Point). Due to declining produc-
                     tion in the State tidelands, most facilities are functioning with consider-

                     2This policy is subject to'change pe    Inding the outcome of a special study
                     of the Guadalupe Dunes.

                                                          -63-

                    able excess capacity.   These sites may be needed in the future to process
                    oil and gas from development in the Channel.

                    Where

                         Existing areas currently in coastal dependent oil and gas development
                    are designated as Coastal Dependent Industry in the land use,plan. Oil and
                    gas processing facilities are encouraged to expand within these existing
                    sites rather than opening up of new sites. In addition, it is recommended
                    that the County designate the Exxon site at Las Flores for Coastal Depen-
                    dent Industry, provided that any development conform to all policies and
                    standards in this plan. If Las Flores is developed, it will require a
                    pipeline corridor passing through the coastal zone.

                         In accordance with existing County procedures and regulations,
                    processing facilities.required for production from onshore oil wells are
                    permitted in Agriculture II as well as on sites designated as.Coastal
                    Dependent Industry, and are conditionally permitted uses in several other
                    land use classifications (refer to Table 3-1).
                    Policies3

                    Policy 6-6: If new sites for processing facilities   to serve offshore oil
                                and gas development are needed, expansion   of facilities on
                                existing sites or on land adjacent to existing sites shall take
                                precedence overopening up additional areas, unless it can be
                                shown that the environmental impacts of opening up a new site
                                are less than the impacts of expansion on or adjacent to
                                existing sites. Consideration shall also begiven to economic
                                feasibility.

                    Policy 6-7: The sections of the Petroleum Ordinance, Ordinance No. 661, and
                                "Statement of Policy Relative to the Location of On-Shore
                                Facilities" that address oil and gas processing facilities are
                                hereby incorporated by reference in the land use plan.

                    Policy 6-8: If an onshore pipeline for transporting crude oil to refineries
                                is determined to be technically and economically feasible,
                                proposals for expansion, modification, or construction of new
                                coastal dependent oil and gas processing facilities shall be
                                conditioned to require transshipment of oil through the pipe-
                                line when constructed, unless such condition would hot be
                                feasible for a particular operator.

                    3After certification of the LCP, any new processing facility for offshore
                    oil or gas, not on a site designated for Coastal Dependent Industry, will
                    require an amendment to the LCP.

                                                      -64-

                    Policy 6-9:   Applicants for oil and gas   processing facilities shall prepare
                                  and keep updated emergency   response plans to deal with the
                                  potential consequences of hydrocarbon leaks or fires. These
                                  emergency response plans shall be,approved.by the County's
                                  Emergency Services Coordinator and Fire Department.

                    Marine Terminals

                          The County has permit jurisdiction over those portions of a marine
                    terminal that are on land (i.e., pipelines, storage tanks) exce'pt where the
                    portions of a marine terminal which are seaward of the mean high tide line
                    are regulated by the Coast Guard and the State Lands Commission. Further,
                    the County's "Statement of Policy Relative to the Location of On-Shore Oil
                    Facilities" favors no more than one additi-onal marine terminal along the
                    South Coast.

                          While the existing policies and regulations appear consistent with the
                    policies of the Coastal Act, policies addressing the location of new marine
                    terminals need to be clarified in two aspects: (1) the status of marine
                    terminals if an onshore pipeline proves to be feasible, and (2) the impact
                    of lease sale #53 on the need for marine terminals between Point Conception
                    and the Santa Maria River.

                    Where

                          Landward support facilities for existing marine facilities are     desig-
                    nated as Coastal Dependent Industry on the land use plan maps. These
                    include Union--Cojo Bay, Getty--Gaviota, and Aminoil--Coal Oil Point. In
                    the case of the Exxon--Capitan marine terminal,, the storage tanks are     now
                    located north of U.S. 101 on a site which.is highly visible from,the high-
                    way. The land support facilities for this marine terminal should be relo-
                    cated to Las Flores Canyon, which is recommended for designation as Coastal
                    Dependent Industry.

                    Policies

                    Policy 6-10:  All relevant sections of  Ordinance  No. 661, the Petroleum
                                  Ordinance, and "Statement of Policy Relative to the location
                                  of On-Shore Oil Facilities" are hereby incorporated by
                                  reference.
                    Policy 6-11:  If an onshore pi@eline is determined to be technically and
                                  economically feasible, existing marine terminals shall become,
                                  after a specified period, non-conforming uses. Crude oil
                                  shall be transported by pipeline, unless the County makes the

                    4 The County's only granted Tidelands are in Carpinteria. The existing
                    Chevron marine terminal in Carpinteria is under the jurisdiction of the
                    City.

                                                        -65-

                                   finding that transshipment of oil by pipeline is not feasible
                                   for a particular operator.

                    Policy 6-12:   Due to scenic and natural, resources in areas between Point
                                   Conception and the Santa Maria River, marine terminals-are not
                                   considered at present as appropriate development in that area.
                                   If activity under lease sale #53 results in a need for marine
                                   terminal(s).in the North County, detailed studies shall be
                                   undertaken to determine appropriate location(s).

                    Policy 6-13:   The onshore facilities associated with the Exxon--Capitan
                                   marine terminal shall have legal non-conforming use status.
                                   Above-ground facilities shall be moved to the Las Flores site
                                   when this site begins.operation for oil processing and
                                   existing structures removed.

                         Pipelines
                         Technical performance for oil and gas pipelines is governed by Federal
                    regulations administered through the Federal Department of Transportation.
                    However, in California the Public Utilities Commission has the responsibil-
                    ity for administering the Federal regulations covering Public Utility pipe-
                    lines. County Zoning Ordinance #661 currently exempts minor pipelines from
                    permit requirements except in areas zoned "BD"--Beach Development. Major
                    pipelines are permitted with a Conditional Use Permit. After certifica-.
                    tion, pipelines will need to'be reviewed for conformance to the land use
                    plan policies. However, permits shall not be required for pipelines
                    exempted from coastal development,permits under Section 30610 (c) and (e)
                    of the California Coastal Act of 1976 as defined by the Interpretive Guide-
                    lines on Exclusions From Permit Requirements adopted by the State Coastal
                    Commission on September 5, 1918.

                         Pipeline routing poses a number of problems,wh"ich may threaten coastal
                    resources, particularly if the pipeline must be routed through habitat or
                    recreation areas. Here, the threat is twofold: damage.may occur during
                    construction arising,from habitat loss, erosion, disruption of nesting or
                    other biological cycles- or from damage occurring during operation,.due to
                    spills caused by breaching of the lihe.

                    Where

                         Pipelines are permitted uses in most land use classifications. Refer
                    to Table 3-1.

                    Policies
                         The following policies shall apply.to all pipelines on land and
                    associated facilities (i.e., pump stat ons) except that Policies 6-18 and
                    6-19 shall not apply to gas pipelineN

                    5The gas transmission line proposal to carry gas inland from the LNG
                    terminal at Pt. Conception is exempted from Coastal Commission and County
                    approvals by the LNG Terminal Act of 1977.

                                                        -66-

                     Policy 6-14:  Except for pipelines exempted   from coastal development permits
                                   under Section.30610(c) and (e) of the Coastal Act as defined
                                   by the State Coastal Commission's Interpretive Guidel,ines, a
                                   survey shall be conducted along the route of any pipeline in
                                   t,he coastal zone to determine what, if any, coastal resources
                                   may be impacted by construction and operation of a pipeline.
                                   The costs of this survey shall be borne by the applicant.
                                   ,(This survey may be conducted as,a part of environmental
                                   review if an E.I.R. is required for a particular project.)

                                   The survey shall be conducted by a consultant selected jointly
                                   by the applicant, the County, and the Department of Fish and
                                   Game. If it is determined that the area to be disturbed will-
                                   not revegetate naturally or sufficiently quickly.to avoid
                                   other damage, as from erosion, the applicant shall submit a
                                   revegetation plan. The-plan shall also include provisions for
                                   restoration of any habitats which will be disturbed by
                                   construction or operation procedures.

                                   For projects where a revegetation plan and/or habitat restora-
                                   tion plan has been deemed necessary, one year after completion
                                   of construction, the area crossed by the pipeline shall be
                                   resurveyed to assess the effectiveness of the revegetation and
                                   restoration plan. This survey shall continue on an annual
                                   basis to monitor progress in returning the site to pre-con-
                                   struction conditions or until the County feel� no 'additional
                                   progress is possible.

                                   The County may require the posting of aperformance bond by
                                                                                         0
                                   the applicant to ensure compliance with these    provisions.

                     Policy  6-15: Herbicides shall not be used during pipeline construction and
                                   sidecasting of soil may be restricted, when deemed necessary,
                                   by removal of excess soil to an approved'dumping site after
                                   the excavation has been backfilled and compacteds.

                     Policy 6-16:  The pipeline shall be  sited and constructed in such a manner
                                   as to inhibit erosion.

                     Policy 6-17:  When feasible, pipelines shall be routed to avoid      important
                                   coastal resources, including recreation, habitat,    and
                                   archaeological areas.
                     Policy 6-18:' For pipeline segments, passing through important coastal
                                   resource areas, including recreation, habitat, and archaeo-
                                   logical areas, the segment, in the case of a break, shall be
                                   isolated by automatic shutoff valves.

                                                         -67-

                    Policy 6@-19: Unavoidable routing through recreation, habitat, or archaeo-
                                  logical areas, or other areas of significant coastal resource
                                  value, shall be done in a manner that minimizes the impacts
                                  of a spill, should it occur, by considering spill volumes,
                                  d:urati.ohs,-and trajectory. Appropriate measures for cleanup
                                  or structures such as catch basins to contain a spill shall
                                  be included as part of an oil spill contingency plan..
                          Electric Transmission Lines6

                        The Cal.ifornia Public Utilities Commission and California Energy
                    Commission are the agencies responsible in the area of electric trans-
                    mission lines which includes technical and safety.performance an 'd environ-
                    mental concerns. All electric transmission lines proposed for the coastal
                    zone are developments.under the Coastal Act, thus the County will have
                    permit review over them after certification. The only exception is
                    -electric transmission lines proposed as part of a new electric power plant
                    being reviewed by the California Energy Commission. The Warren-Alquist
                    Energy Resources.Conservation and Development;Act of 1975 exempts new power
                    Plants with capacity greater than 50 megawatts and electric transmission
                    lines connecting such plants to the existing electricity transmission
                    system from local government permit authority, and the Coastal Act.exempts
                    them from Coastal Commission permit authority (Section 30264).

                        While impacts from erosion, grading, and the operation of    equipment
                    may occur during construction and result in damage to coastal land
                    resources and habitat areas, the primary concerns are associated with
                    overhead electric transmission lines and their long-term impacts on views
                    and visual resources. Visual impacts are particularly severe in unde-
                    veloped areas, especially the foothills and upland areas, and along the
                    coastal,terrace. Mitigating measures are 1.1mited at this time to alternate
                    route locations and undergrounding'of lines, which is expensive.

                    Where.

                        Refer to Table  3-1.

                    Policies

                    Policy 6-20: Transmission line rights-of-way shall  be routed to.minimize
                                 impacts on the viewshed in the coastal zone, especially in
                                 scenic rural areas, and to avoid locations which are on or
                                 near habitat, recreational, or archaeological.resources, when-
                                 ever feasible. Scarring, grading, or other vegetative removal

                    6Refer to Sections 3.3 and 3.4 for policies regarding electric distribu-
                    tion lines.

                                                      -68-

                                   shall be repaired, and the affected areas revegetated with
                                   plants similar to those in the area to the extent safety and
                                   economic considerations allow.

                     Policy 6-21:  In important scenic areas, where above-ground transmission
                                   line placement would unavoidably affect views, undergrounding
                                   shall be required where it is technically and economically
                                   feasible unless it can be shown that other alternatives are
                                   less environmentally damaging.. When above-ground facilities
                                   are necessary, design and color of the support towers shall be
                                   compatible with the surroundings to the extent safety and
                                   economic considerations allow.

                          Piers and Staging Areas

                          Chevron maintains a staging area, including a pier, near its treatment
                     facility in the City of Carpinteria, which it shares with Union, Sun, and
                     Phillips. Arco and Exxon use the Aminoil pier at Ellwood for personnel
                     transfer to platforms Holly and Hondo. The State Lands Commission, which
                     has jurisdiction over this pier, has. agreed to a plan developed by Arco and
                     Exxon to remove part of the pier and rehabilitate the remainder.                0

                     Where

                          Piers and staging areas are permitted uses in areas designated for
                     Coastal Dependent Industry and conditionally permitted uses in Agriculture
                     11 and k-ural Residential cl.assifications (refer to Table 3-1).

                     Policies

                     Policy 6-22:  All existing piers and staging areas sh   all be permitted to
                                   function where they currently exist. Expansion on adjacent
                                   sites and/or upgrading of facilities shall take precedence
                                   over construction of new facilities.

                     Policy  6-23: The piers at Goleta Beach County Park and Gaviota State Park
                                   are intended primarily forrecreational use. Other uses
                                   may be allowed subject to a conditional use permit if they do
                                   not conflict with recreational use.

                     Policy 6-24:  At such time as piers are no longer needed for petroleum
                                   operations, the County shall be given the right of first
                                   refusal. The piers shall not be dismantled or sold to private
                                   parties unless the County Board of Supervisors has determined
                                   that the pier is not needed for recreational uses in the
                                   foreseeable future, or decides not to purchase it.

                          Other Coastal Dependent Industrial Facilities

                          Aquaculture has become an increasingly impo'rtant.coastal dependent
                     industry. Aquacultural activities range from oyster and abalone culture to

                                                         -69-

                     f i sh hat cheries and fish farms. Significant contributions from both
                     private and public sector enterprises to the State's economy are purrently
                     resulting from the production of salmon, trout, catfish, baitfish, and
                     oysters. The importance of this industry 'is expected to increase because
                     of expanding demand for food in general and because of declining yields of
                     the world's fisheries.

                         Aquaculture sytems can be characterized as either extensive or inten-
                     sive. Extensive aquaculture describes the cultivation of low density popu-
                     lations of aquatic animals i,n large aquatic systems that naturally meet
                     nutritional and environmental needs. Intensive aquaculture usually refers
                     to an artificial growing system such as ponds, raceways, or tanks where
                     supplemental feeding and environmental manipulation is necessary. The
                     facilities can range from simple ponds or suspending shellfish on strings
                     in the water from rafts to mass intensive production operations involving
                     algae ponds, raceways with thousands of trays of shellfish in them, and
                     processing-buildings and laboratories. Access to salt water can be.by
                     dikes, channels or wells. The acreage required can range from one or two
                     to about one hundred if many large ponds are needed as in the raising of
                     prawns. At present, the only commercially viable intensive marine aquacul-
                     ture practiced in California is in the production of molluscan seed stock
                     such as oysters and clams. However, abalone and salmon culture and other
                     species undergoing research and development may become commercially impor-
                     tant in the near future.

                         Aquaculture is subject  to multiple 'regulations governing food, health,
                     effluent discharge, water quality, and navigable waters. Most of these
                     regulations were intended to control other activities and pre-date the
                     development of a viable aquaculture industry. In some cases, it can be
                     demonstrated that these regulations have deterred the growth of the
                     industry. Government agencies at the regional, State, and Federal levels
                     are beginning to respond to some of the problems facing the industry and
                     legislation is being enacted that will clarify some of these regulatory
                     problems. Senate Bill 52, the-California Aquaculture Development Act, is a
                     State response to investigate the current and future status of the industry
                     within the State.

                         The Coastal Act recognizes the importance of coastal dependent activi-
                     ties, such as aquaculture, and.gives priority to uses which require sites
                     on or adjacent to the sea (Section 30255). However, the Act also
                     encoUrages coastal dependent industrial activities to locate or expand
                     within existing sites (Section 30260). Within the unincorporated area of
                     Santa Barbara County coastal zone, there are no aquaculture facilities at
                     present. At one time there was a facility near Tajiguas but it has been
                     closed down.

                     Where

                         Aquaculture that is coastal- dependent is a permitted use in the
                     Coastal Dependent Industry and other industrial classifications. It is a
                     conditionally permitted use in several other-land use classifications
                     (refer to Table 3-1).

                                                      -70-

                     Pol icies

                     Policy 6-25:  Aquaculture facilities located in areas designated as rural on
                                   the land use plan maps shall be sited and designed to be
                                   compatible with the natural surroundings. To minimize impacts
                                   on coastal visual resources, structures shall be well-
                                   screened, and depressed below grade when feasible. Intake and
                                   outfall lines for ocean water shall beundergrounded unless
                                   not feasible for a particular operation,.i.e., salmon culture.
                                   If above-ground channels or pi@pes are necessary, adequate
                                   provisions for lateral beach access shall be required.

                     3.6.5  THERMAL POWER PLANTS

                          There are many issues associated with siting power plants in the
                     coastal zone. Power plants have significant environmentalimpacts asso-
                     ciated with their construction and operation. Power plants require
                     considerable land for siting and have impacts on visoual resources due to
                     their size. Cooling water intake and outfall systems affect organisms
                     through entrainment and changes in ambient water temperatures. Labor
                     requirements during construction have impacts on the local economy,
                     housing, roads, and other public services.

                          The California Energy C ommission (CEC) has siting authority for
                     thermal power plants in California. However, the CEC may not locate new or
                     expanded power plants in the coastal zone in areas designated for exclusion
                     by the Coastal Commission without first obtaining approval from the Coastal
                     Commission.

                          Section 30413.b of the Coastal Act requires the Coastal Commission to
                     designate specific locations in the coastal zone where siting of a power
                     plant would prevent achievement of coastal resource protection goals.
                     Commission staff conducted a siting study in an effort to ensure protection
                     of areas with significant coastal resources. Factors considered in the
                     Commission siting study include: parks,and proposed land acquisition
                     areas, cultivated prime agricultural land, wetlands, marine resources,
                     environmentally sensitive habitat areas, areas of scenic and visual
                     quality, and areas with inadequate public services. Other factors, such      as
                     air quality, and seismicity, which affect the coast in general, were not
                     used as criteria in rejecting specific areas of the coastal zone. The
                     Coastal Commission adopted designations on September 5, 1978. Under the
                     provisions of Section 30413.c, these designations are required to be
                     updated every two years. The Coastal Commission recently amended the
                     original designations as part of their biannual review. The maps showing
                     the areas designated for exclusion are on file at the Coastal Commission.

                          The Coastal Commission has designated most of the County's coastal
                     zone for protection from power plant siting. However, most of the coastal
                     terrace north of Highway 101 between Gaviota and Ellwood remains undesigna-
                     ted.

                                                        -71-

                           In addition to designating areas for -power plant exclusions, the
                      Coastal Commission still retains authority under Sections 30413.d and e of
                      the Coastal Act to participate with the CEC in sitings of coastal power
                      plants outside the exclusion zones. Here the Coastal Commission must
                      .analyze applications and file a suitability report regarding'siting at th,e
                      selected location. Factors which the Coastal Commission must consider are
                      defined in Section 30413.d of the Act.

                      3.6.6 LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS

                           Section 302'61.b of the Coastal Act authorizes siting of one liquefied
                      natural gas facility in the California coastal zone. Since the passage of
                      the CoastalAct, additional legislation (SB 1081) has deleted this section
                      of the Act. Senate Bill-1081 mandated a complex siting procedure invol.ving
                      a number of agencies under the lead.of,the California Public Utilities
                      Commission (CPUC), with a decision to be made not later than July 31, 1978.
                      On that date, the CPUC recommended issuance of a conditional permit for
                      Point Conception, pending the outcome of,further study of seismic hazards
                      and maritime conditions. It is anticipated that these studies will be
                      completed in 1980. At that time, a final permit would be issued unless the
                      findings indicate hazards that clannot.be mitigated by proper design of the
                      facility.
                           Coastal Commission participation' in the siting process has been
                      limited to study of potentialsites and ranking of sites based on potential
                      impacts on Icoastal resources. Camp Pendleton was selected by the Coastal
                      Commission as theleast environmentally damaging site, followed by Rattle-
                      snake Canyon, Point,Conception,.,and Deer Creek in Ventura County. The
                      Commission also recommended conditions to the CPUC for these sites.

                           In selecting Point Conception, the CPUC made the findings.that new,gas
                      supplies would be needed in California by 1983 and that selecti    'on of sites
                      other than Point Conception would result in curtailment of gas supplies to
                      high priority users. The CPUC also determined that a permit could not be
                      issued at the other sites based on considerations of public health, safety,
                      and welfare, thus posi,ng problems if the Point Conception site turns out to
                      be infeasible due to hazards.

                          Three planning issues face.the County in framing a response to an LNG
                      facility at Point Conception. These are: 1) maintaining the population
                      density requirements of the LNG Terminal Siting Act; 2) ensuring compatible
                      land uses in adjacent areas; and 3) developing strategies for the protec-
                      tion of coastal resources which may be impacted by the proposed terminal.

                      1. Population  Density

                          Under the  LNG Terminal Siting Act, local government must restrict
                      development which fails to conform to the distance and population density
                      provisions of the Act. These provisions are.to be implemented by local
                      government and the Coastal Commission through the LCP., In addition, the
                      CPUC may,imposereasonable terms and conditions in the permit so that the

                                                         -72-

                   population density requirements are met. Further, the applicant may use
                   the power. of eminent domain to acquire property to achieve or maintain the
                   required population density.

                        Under SB 1081, the population density shall not exceed (a) 10 persons
                   per square m'ile within one mile of the site, and (b) 60 persons per square
                   mile within four miles of the  Isite. This translates roughly into 27 resi-
                   dents within one mile and 1,800 residents within four miles of the site.

                        Current population levels are,three resident 's within one mile of the
                   site and 72 within four miles. Under current zoning, maximum buildout
                   would allow 183 residents within one mile and 1,552 residents within four
                   ,miles, using a liberal average of 2.7 persons per dwelling unit. The
                   actual per dwelling unit occupancy average for Hollister Ranch is 1.-6
                   persons per dwelling unit.       I

                        The only problem posed by current zoning is for parcels within one
                   mile of the site. Under the lowest density zoning designation currently in
                   effect, which'allows one dwelling unit per 100 acres, the population within
                   one mile under maximum buildout would be limited to 55 persons (assuming
                   2.7 persons per household). Under the land use designation proposal in
                   this plan for the area (Agriculture II - 320 acre minimum parcel size),
                   potential buildout would be well within the density requirements of
                   SB 1081.

                   2. Proposed Land Use Designations for Point Conception Area

                        In keeping with the development and agricultural policies of the
                   Coastal Act, the plan designates the proposed LNG site and the area
                   surrounding it as Agriculture.II. This designation allows most agricul-
                   tural activities and requires a minimum parcel size of 320 acres. Other
                   uses which are permitted under this designation are oil well drilling and
                   production, as long as performance standards are met.

                        Other kinds of land uses which could,be permitted in this area that
                   are consistent with the Coastal Act and with the requirements of the LNG
                   Terminal.Actinclude coastal dependent industrial uses, i.e., oil and gas
                   processing facilities and aquaculture. Union Oil currently has some
                   facilities in this area as a result of drilling activity in the State
                   Tidelands. The land use plan designates one small area west of Cojo Creek
                   that is currently used by Union as Coastal Dependent Industry. The Coastal
                   Commission has already determined that this portion of the County's coastal
                   zone is inappropriate for power plant sites due to the presence of impor-
                   tant coastal resources. No other proposals for other coastal dependent
                   uses, i.e., aquaculture, have been advanced, though kelp harvesting now
                   occurs offshore in this area.,

                        Industry that would makeuse of waste cold has been suggested for
                   coupling with the LNG facility in the event that.it is sited near.Point
                   Conception. With the uncertainty surrounding siting at Point Conception$

                                                      -73-

                     the unde monstrated feasibil,ity of cryo-utilization   at.this site, as well   as
                     the incompatibility of industrialization with the rural character o     ,f this
                     coastal area:, no recommenda'tions.are r@ade for  such uses in this plan. A
                     speci.fic pro,posal in the future could be handled by an amendment to the
                     land use plan.

                     3. Strategies to.Reduce Impacts

                          The remaining issue is the assessment of the impact of the       proposed
                     LNG facility, as conditioned by the CPUC,.,on the ability of the     land use
                     plan to achieve the objectives of the Coastal Act.       Since the CPUC did not
                     accept or weakened several of the conditions proposed by the Planning
                     Commission and Board of Supervisors, the County may experience impacts from
                     construction and operation of a facility that might have been avoided.
                     Despite these setbacks, the-County can Attempt, where possible, to minimize
                     any impacts that may result from construction or operation of the facility.
                     In the coastal zone, the principal land use issues facing the County are:
                     1)*the locati -on of housing for construction workers, and 2) provision for
                     recreation and.access in thevicinity of the site. Special studies will
                     need to be-undertaken by the Cou  nty to adequately respond to these antici-
                     pated impacts if the facility is.sited at Point Conception.
                     Rec.ommendations
                          If the LNG facility is sited,at Point Conception, the      following
                     policies shall take effect:

                     1.  The LNG fac,ility site shall  be given a  Coastal Dependent Industry
                         designation.

                     .2. The Agriculture II land use   designation  shall be retained for the   area
                         Vithin four miles of the 'site perimeter   during-the life of the
                         'project.

                     3.  Residential densities under the Agriculture II     designation for areas
                         within one and four miles of the site perimeter shall.be established       to
                         meet the population density requ-irements of the Terminal Siting Act.

                     4@. In areas not yet subdivided, any residential    development, including
                         subdivision of land, shall not be allowed to    occur which violates the
                         population density requirements of the Terminal Siting Act.

                     5   Industrial land uses which claim a relationship to the LNG facility,       by
                         nature of waste cold utilization, are to be judged on their merits at
                         the'time of proposal. No provisions are made in the land use plan at
                         this time for their inclusion.

                     NOTE:

                         .1. Under  the Federal Coastal Zone,Management Act, the State Coastal
                              Commission now has "consistency" review overFederal activities,

                                                         -74

                             permits, OCS plans,  licenses and grants that affect land and water
                             uses in.the Califor nia coastal zone.' A Federal agency or appli-
                             cant for a Federal permit must first certify to the Commission
                             that the.proposed development is consistent with.the California
                             Coastal Management Program as approved by the Secretary of
                             Commerce. If the Commission objects to specific parts of the
                             development as not being consistent with the Program, then Federal
                             activity cannot take place unless the Coastal Commission's objec-
                             tions are overriden-through a special procedure. The Coastal
                             Management.Program consists primarily of the Cal-ifornia Coastal
                             Act of 1976. The Program states that.LCPs, when certified, will
                             serve as'one basis for the.Coastal,Commission's consistency deter-
                             mination, but that the'.State Coastal Commision will retain the
                             primary authority for evaluating projects and activities subject
                             to the Fed0ral,6onsi,stency determinations (page 85, CCMP).

                         2.  Under the provisions of Section  30603.a (5) of the  Coastal Act,
                             any action taken by a local government on a coastal,dev  *elopment
                             permit application for a major public works project   or major
                             energy facility is appealable.to the State Coastal. Commission.   A
                             major" facility is defined as one costing more than $25,,000,

                                                      -75-

                   3. 7 COASTAL ACCESS AND                           RECREATION

                   3.7.1 COASTAL ACT POLICIES

                        The public's right of access to all beach areas below the ordinary
                   high water mark (mean high tide line) is guaranteed by the California
                   Constitution. The Legislature, in passing the Coastal Act, did not alter
                  .these basic public rights but did establish a policy framework for
                   achieving the goal of providing maximum opportunities for public use and
                   enjoyment of the coast. Coastal Act policies which-address the issues of
                   access and recreation include the following:

                        .3U21U. In carrying out the requirement of.Section 4 of Article X of
                        the California Constitution, maximum access, which shall be conspicu-
                        ously posted, and recreational.opportunities shall..be provided for all
                        the people consistent with public safety needs and the need to protect
                        public rights, rights of private property owners and natural resource
                        areas from overuse.

                        30211. Development shall not interfere with the   public's right of
                        access to the sea where acquired through use, custom, or legislative
                        authorization, including, but not limited to, the use of dry sand and
                        rocky coastal beaches to the first line of terrestrial vegetation.
                        30212. Public access from the nearest public roadway to the shoreline
                        and along the coast shall be provided in new development projects
                        except where (1) it is inconsistent with public safety, military
                        security needs, or the protection of fragile coastal resources; (2)
                        adequate access exists nearby, or; (3) agriculture would be adversely
                      @@affected. -Dedic'ated accessway shall not be required to be opened to
                        public use until a public agency or private association agrees to
                        accept responsibility for maintenance and liability of the accessway.

                            Nothing in this division shall restrict public Access nor shall it
                        excuse the performance of duties and responsibilities of public
                        agencies which are required by Section&.6.6478.1-66478.14, inclusive,
                        of the Government Code and by Section 4 of Article X of the California
                        Constitution.

                        30212.5 Wherever appropriate and feasible, public facilities,
                        including parking areas or facilities, shall be distributed throughout
                        an area so as to mitigate against the impacts, social and otherwise,
                        of overcrowding or overuse by,the public of any single area.

                        30213. Lower cost visitor  and recreational facilities,and housing
                        opportunities for persons of low and.moderate income shall be
                        protected,, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided. Developments
                        providing public recreational opportunities ate preferred...

                                                       76-

                          30220. Coastal areas suited for water-oriented recreational
                          activities that cannot readily be provided at inland water areas         shall
                          be.protected for such uses.

                          30221. Oceanfront land suitable for recreational use shall be
                          protected for.recreational use and development unless present and
                          foreseeable future demand for public. 'or commercial recreational
                          activities that could be accommodated on the property is already
                          adequately provided for in the area.

                          30223. Upland areas necessary to support coastal.recreational uses
                          shall be reserved for such uses, where feasible.

                     3.7.3 -.PLANNING ISSUES

                          The'County of Santa Barbara spans 110 miles of shoreline of which only
                     20.4 miles (18.5 percent) are publicly owned beaches (refer to Table 3-2).
                     The coastline*provides a    diversity of topography and vegetation (i.e., sand
                     dunes, rocky headlands, wide sandy beaches) and supports a range of
                     recreational uses, including surfing,.dune buggies, sunbathing, swimming,,
                     and nature study. These beaches, in addition to receiving extensive use by
                     local residents,,provide popular desti,nation points for visitors. The
                     issues and background data related to recreation and access have been
                     summarized in draft reports which are on file in the County Planning
                     Department; therefore, only a summary Of the key issues is presented below.
                     (A more detailed discussion of the issues for each planningarea is
                     presented in Chapter 4.)

                          Capacity Use of Existing    Facilities

                          Existing beach parks.owned    by the County and   State are being used to
                     capacity, especially during summer weekends. At times of peak demand,
                     existing facilities are insufficient to accommodate recreational needs and
                     people are turned away. Moreover, County and State recreational demand
                     projections indicate that facility deficiencies exist for most recreation
                     activities. These deficiencies are expected to increase due to growth in
                     population, tourism, and the popularity.of many coastal dependent or
                     related recreational activities. Consequently, a program of land
                     acquisition and facility development needs to be implemented if demand fo,r
                     coastal recreation is to be satisfi'ed.

                          Variety of Recreational Opportunities

                          Historically, County and State recreational planning has concentrated
                     on providing beach parks which include a high level of service, such as
                     parking, restrooms', snack bars, picnic tables, camping facilities, etc.
                     Current use of undeveloped coastal areas which are not in public ownership
                     indicates that there is public demand forrecreational areas that,may not
                     require the full range of services supplied at existi,ng beach parks.

                                                           _77-,

                                                         TABLE 3-2
                        COASTLINE  IN.SANTA  BARBARA COUNTYt   JURISDICTION  AND PUBLIC  OWNERSHIP I

                                                Jurisdictional Breakdown

                                County of Santa Barbara                          .60.9
                                     Vandenberg Air Force Base                   37.0
                                     University of California (UCSB)               2.5
                                     U.S.A. (Point Conception)                       .8
                                City of Santa Barbara                              6.3
                                City of Carpinteria                                2.5

                                                             Total Coastline     110.0 Miles

                                                 Publicly Owned Beaches

                                State of California                              11   3
                                County of Santa Barbara                            5.02.
                                City of Santa Barbara                              3.8
                                City of Carpinteria                                  .3

                                                             Total Coastline     20.4  Miles

                            The Channel Islands are excluded.
                        2
                            Includes coastline'at VAFB which is accessible to the public.

                                                                                                   A/

                        Local Versus Out-of-County Recreational  Needs

                        The State Department  of Parks and Recreation  isa major supplier   of
                   coastal recreational opportunities in Santa Barbara County   (refer to Table
                   3-3). Most State park developments along the coast provide.a high level of
                   amenities, including facilities for campers and.trailers. Generally, over-
                   night use of these facilities is by out-of-County users, particularly those
                   living in the Los Angeles metropolitan-area. Provision of recreation for
                   these out-of-C.ounty users needs to be balanced with local day.use demand
                   for recreation, particularly in those 'instances where beathes.historically
                   used by local residents are acquired by the State.

                        Protection of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas

                        Frequently, recreation areas are sited near environmentally sensitive
                   habitat areas, i.e., estuaries, sand dunes. Lack of staff to properly .
                   safequard these habitat resources has resulted in recreational trespass in.
                   some habitat areas, i.e.,,Ocean Beach and Rancho Guadalupe County Parks.
                   :Educational signs and fencing may be needed to ensure preservation of
                   habitat values. In some areas, limitations on the amount and kinds of
                   recreational activities may be necessary'

                        incompatible Recreational Uses

                        In several areas of the County, there is   competition among conflicting
                   .recreational uses of limited shoreline areas, i.e., Haskell's Beach, Guada-_
                   lupe Dunes. For example, surfing and swimming are frequently -incompatible
                   activities.  Off-road vehicle use.of beaches poses hazards for pedestrian
                   use of the same area. Such conflicts need to be.resolved so that coastal
                   ,recreational areas can support a range of activities,without the hazards
                   associated with incompatible uses.

                        Restoration.and Enhancement of Coastal Recreational  Areas

                       'Lack of public jurisdiction, vandalism, and overuse  have contributed
                   to the physical and visual degradation of some coastal areas used for
                   recreational pursuits. Littering, trampling of vegetation, ORV trespass,
                   and vandalism occur adjacent to  some County Parks (i.e., Ocean Beach,
                   Rancho Guadalupe) as well as.areas not contiguous to public parks (i.e.,
                   TajigUas Beach, Haskell's Beach, Loon Point, Santa Barbara Shores/Ellwood,
                   More Mesa). These areas need improvements (i.e., re-vegetation, trash
                   cans, stairways) to restore their full recreational value..

                        Need for Access Corridors to Beaches

                        There is a need for more accessways to the County shoreline, particu-
                   Aarly in the South Coast urban area.*. There.are several areas where public
                   access easements exist, or have been offered., which have not as yet been
                   improved, signed, and officially, opened for public use.  In other areas

                   *Table 3-4 lists existing vertical easements providing shoreline access.

                                                      _79-

                                                        TABLE 3-3

                                           EXISTING COASTAL PARK FACILITIES

                                                          Beach Fronta          Parking         Camper
                                             Acreage       (linear feet?e       Capacity         Sites

                     STATE PARKS
                     Point Sal                 49               4,800               101             0
                     Gaviota                 2,775             27,500              100             59
                     Refugio                   90              14,100              100             85
                     El Capitan                133              9,420              420           147
                         Total               3,047             55982U              MO            T@T

                     COUNTY PARKS
                     Rancho Guadalupe2         26.0               180               18
                     Jalama                    28.0             1,710               30           105
                     Ocean Beach3              36.0            18,480               50
                     Goleta Beach              29 0             3,004              600
                     Arroyo Burro               6:3               601              159
                     Lookout                    3.4               680               74
                     Rincon                     9.4             1,380              100
                     Isla Vista4                1.4               240.                0
                         Total                 139.5           T6,275            1,047           105

                     1
                     The parking lot at Point Sal is unimproved so actual. capacity is unknown.
                     2Guadalupe Park has two parts. Only figures for the      oceanfron t parcel are
                     used.
                     3The beach areas adjacent to Ocean Beach Park are owned by Vandenberg Air
                     Force Base, therefore beach frontage figures are for the areas to which
                     the public is allowed unrestricted access     (subject to VAFB determination).
                     417he Isla Vista Beach is on top of a high bluff and no access to the beach
                     is currently provided.
                     t@e
                 @@T h e
                     is

                                                          -80-

                                                      TABLE  3-4

                                     EASEMENTS PROVIDING  VERTICAL.ACCESS TO SHORELINE

                                 Area                                       Street
                              Isla Vista                                Camino,Majorca
                              Isla Vista                                Camino del Sur

                              Isla Vista                                Camino Pescadero

                              Isla Vista                                El Embarcadero

                              Montecito                                 Eucalyptus Lane
                              Montecito                                 Butterfly Lane,

                              Montecito*                                Edgecliff Lane  (Hammonds)

                                This easement was  acquired by the County in 1973
                                but has not yet been improved.

                                                        -81-

                   where prescriptive rights  exist, the County  has not acquired'the necessary
                   easements to ensure continued public enjoyment of these beaches. For
                   example, there are approximately 25 beaches between Gaviota and Rincon
                   which are commonly used by the public where the adjacent upland ownership
                   is private. At a minimum, access corridors    to these shoreline areas need
                   to be established in order to guarantee continued accessibility of these
                   beaches for the future. Access corridors also need to be provided between
                   the nearest public road and coastal areas, which support specialized recrea-
                   tional pursuits (e.g., surfing spots along Hollister Ranch).
                        Need for Non-Auto De endent Access to Coastal Areas

                        Many coastal areas of Santa Barbara County that have outstanding
                   recreational, scenic, and natural-resource values are inaccessible due to
                   lack of roads or trails, as well as private ownership. While it would not
                   be desirable to open up these.areas to intense recreational use, limited
                   access is needed. Alternatives for increasing opportunities for recrea-
                   tional use of coastal lands without jeopardizing the integrity of natural
                   resources and scenic values need to be expl,ored.
                        In other areas serviced by roads, the coastal shelf between the public
                   road and ocean is too narrow to provide for parking. Consequently,@there
                   is a need for trails for hiking, biking,-and equestrian use to provide
                   increased opportunities for coastail.access and recreational use.

                        Limited Public Funds
                        Provision of access and recrea tion'opportun ities is expensive.   While
                   the major share of public funds goes to the acquisition, improvement, and
                   maintenance of park facilities, other costs include liability insurance and
                   the loss of tax dollars. Some.of these costs can be recovered by user
                   fees. The State has charged fees for use of its facilities for several
                   years and the County is now considering similar action. These fees may
                   present barriers to use of public beaches by persons of low and moderate
                   incomes.

                        Public acquis'ition of.oceanfront lands, however, is not necessarily
                   the only avenue available for increasing opportunities for coastal access
                   and recreation. 'Other less costly measures include: purchase of ease-
                   ments, recreational preserves, etc. Frequently, acquisition of upland area
                   is not necetsary; all t'hat.is needed is an access corridor to connect a
                   public road to the beach. Such corridors can often be acquired as a condi-
                   tion of development for adjacent property. The County, if it is to achieve
                   the State-mandated goal of maximum access and recreation, will have to rely
                   on these alternative methods for providing access and recreation..*

                                                      -82-

                    3.'7.3 RELATED ISSUES

                         Relationsh ip of LCP to Countyand   State Recreation*Planning

                         Some overlap  of responsibilities exists between   the LCP, County Park
                    Department, and the State Department of Parks and Recreation in planning
                    for recreation and access in the coastal zone. The mandate of the LCP, as
                    defined by the Coastal Act, is to provide maximum-opportunities for access
                    and recreation consistent with the protection   Iof natural resources. The
                    State and County Park Departments, in addition to responsibility for acqui-
                    sition of parks, are required to prepare detailed master plans for facility
                    development. Preparation of master,plans for individual park units is
                    beyond the scope of the LCP and the mandate of the Coastal Act. However,
                    the policies and.recommen'dations developed by the LCP are essential for
                    establishing a framework for facility'planning in the coastal zone by.
                    County and State agencies.

                         Issues of particu,lar importance  in the coastal zone are   ensuring  that
                    (1) environmentally sensitive..habitat areas which are sited near existing
                    ,or.proposed recreational areas are protected, and Q) coastal dependent and
                    related recreational uses are given priority in the coastal zone..

                         Recreational Carrying Capacity

                         The Coastal Act goal  of providing maximum opportunities for recreation
                    is clearly subservient,to  the goal of protecting natural resources, partic-
                    ularly environmentally sensitive habitat areas. However, many existing and
                    proposed recreational areas are.adjacent to   sign.ificant habitat resources,
                    i.e., wetlands and sand dunes.- The conce  pt which provides a framework for.
                    resolution'.of these conflicting coastal goals is that of recreational
                    carrying capacity.

                         Recreational carrying capacity   is the type of  use that can  be
                    supported by an area developed at a   certain level over a specified time
                    without causing environmental-damage or adversely affecting the experience
                    of the visitor. Recreational carryi.ng capacity is composed of three compo-
                    nents: environmental, facility,@and social capacities. Environmental
                    capacity refers.strictly to the level of use that can be tolerated by the
                    physical environment, i,ncluding.all plant and animal species, without
                    degradation or damage. Facility capacity refers to the level of use which
                    the built environment can withstand and social capacity to the level of
                    activity most acceptable to the participant. In terms of weighing these
                  .components,.the Coastal Act (Sections 30210 and 30212) gives priority to
                    environmental.capacity as a constraint in determining appropriate intensi-
                    ties and kinds of recreational use's for a site.'

                         While quantification and measurement of recreational    carrying capacity
                    is difficult, sufficient information exists.to generally    describe the
                    environmental carrying capacity of various coastal environments. For

                                                        -83-

                   example, dry sandy beaches can tolerate intense recreational tise without
                   adverse effects. Dunes, on the other hand, are perhaps the most fragile of
                   coastal habitats. Dune vegetation cannot tolerate even foot traffic;
                   .therefore, activities should be limited to scientific or educationaluses.
                   The carrying capacity of uplands and bluffs is dependent on the kinds of
                   plant communities and animal species present. Bluffs are also subject to
                   erosion from heavy foot traffic. Tidepools are extremely fragile environ-
                   ments; the principal impacts of recreational uses are trampling and
                   collecting of specimens. Wetlands and streams are also vulnerable to
                   degradation from recreational activities, particularly trampling of vegeta-
                   tion, erosion, and disturbance of animal species.

                        Coastal Dependent and Related-Recreational Activities

                        The Coastal Act requires that coastal areas suited for water-oriented
                   recreational activities be protected for such uses (Section 30220). There-
                   fore, it is necessary to distinguish between recreational activities that
                   require coastal locati-ons and those that do not. For the purposes of this
                   plan, therefore, the following definitions are used:

                   1.   Coastal dependent recreation: Activities which require a coastal
                        location in order to occur, i.e., ocean swimming, surfing, scuba
                        diving,, fishing, boating, beach activities, and nature study.

                   2.   Coastal related recreation: Activities which are popu)ar in coastal
                        locations but also occur inland, i.e., ORV's (dune buggies), picnick-
                        ing, bicycling, walking, jogging, and camping.

                   3.   Non-coastal dependent recreation: Activities which are unrelated to   a
                        coastal. location, i.e.,,basebalT, basketball, bowling, go1f, swimming.
                        (pool),,tennis, ORV's (motorcycles), 'etc.

                   3.7.4 POLICIES

                        Local policies and recommendations are intended to provide the frame-
                   work for implementation of the Coastal Act goal of providing maximum oppor-
                  .tunities for.access and recreation. The policies are intended to establish
                   guidel-ines regarding: 1) dedication of appropriate access easements in
                   private development; and 2) appropriate kinds, locations, and intensities
                   of recreational development by public agencies and private developers. In
                   addition, new recreational development has to meet all other applicable
                   standards and policies included in this plan. Policies of particular
                   importance are those related to habitat protection (Section 3.9) and
                   hazards (Section 3.3).            -

                        General policies (7-1 thru 7-8) are followed by a set of specific
                   policies and recommendations designed to increase opportunities for access
                   and recreation in each of the planning areas. These recommendations are
                   summarized in Table 3-5. Many of these sites have already been targeted

                                                     -84-

                                                           TABLE 3-5

                                        SUMMARY OF LCP ACCESS AND RECREATION PROPOSALS

                   Planning Area                   Location                     Recommendati ons

                   Carpinteria          Carpinteria bluffs              Vertical access corridor
                                        Padaro Lane                     Vertical  access corridor
                                        Beach Club Drive                Vertical  access corridor

                   Summerland           Loon Point                      Moderate  use recreation  area
                                        Wallace Avenue                  Moderate  use recreation  area

                   Montecito            Miramar Beach                   Vertical  access corridor
                                        Hammonds Meadow                 Vertical  access corridor
                                        Channel Drive                   Moderate  use recreation area

                   Goleta               More Mesa                       Moderate  use recreation area
                                       .Orchid Lane                     Vertical  access corridor
                                        Univ. Exchange  property        Moderate  use recreation area

                   Gaviota Coast        Haskell's Beach                 Coastal park
                                        Dos Pueblos                     Moderate use recreation area
                                        Edwards                         Coastal park
                                        Tajiguas                        Moderate use recreation area
                                        Arroyo Hondo                    Vertical access corridor
                                        Wiada de Guillermo              Vertical access corridor
                                        CaNda del Molino                Vertical access corridor
                                        Ca?fada San Onofre              vertical access corridor

                   North Coast          Gaviota to Jalama               Trail system
                                        Point Sal to Guadalupe          Trail system
                                        Jalama                          Expand County Park
                                      'Guadalupe                        Provide access to Mussel Rock

                    Refer to policies and planning area discussion in Chapter 4 for        details.

                   Vertical Access Corridor: easement to connect public road to beach, bike
                   racks, possibly a few parking spaces, light recreational use.

                   Moderate Use Recreation Area: areas where some limited facilities such as
                   parking and restrooms may be provided where appropriate; intended for day
                   use mostly by local residents.

                   Coastal.Park: a major park facility that would be used by local residents
                   and also may serve as a destination point for out-of-County users, would
                   provide a range of amenities and possible include overnight camping
                   facilities.

                    for acquisition by the  County Park Department and State Department of Parks
                    and Recreation as shown in Table 3-6. In addition, existing and proposed
                    access areas are depicted on the land use plan maps. A schedule for acqui-
                    sition of these sites will be developed during the zoning and implementa-
                    tion phase of the LCP.

                    Policy.7-1:   The County shall take all necessary steps to protect and
                                  defend the public's constitutionally guaranteed rights of
                                  access to and along the shoreline. At a minimum, County
                                  actions.shall include:

                                  a)  Initiating legal action to acquire.easements to beaches
                                      and, access corridors for wh.ich prescriptive rights exist
                                      consistent with the availability of staff and funds.

                                  b)  Accepting offers of dedication which will increase oppor-
                                      tunities for public access and recreation consistent with
                                      the County's ability to assume liability and maintenance
                                      costs.

                    Policy 7-2: For all development between the'first public road and the
                                  oceangranting of an easement to allow vertical access to     the
                                  mean high tide line* shall be mandatory unless:

                                  a)  Another more suitable public access corridor is available
                                      or proposed by the land use plan within a reasonable
                                      distance of the site measured along the shoreline, or

                                  b)  Access at the site would  result in unmitigable adverse
                                      impacts on areas designated as "Habitat.Areas" by the land
                                      use plan, or

                                  c)  Findings are made, consistent with Section 30212 of the
                                      Act, that access isinconsistent with public safety,
                                      military security needs, or that agriculture would.be
                                      adversely affected, or

                                  d) The parcel is too narrow to allow for an.adequate vertical
                                      access corridor without adversely affecting the privacy of
                                      the propert@ owner.

                                  The County may also re quire the applicant to improve the
                                  access corridor and provide bike racks, signs, parking, etc.

                    *The mean high tide line (ordinary high water mark) is an ambulatory line
                    which may vary over time as a result of climatic and other influences. The
                    line is the normal or average inland extent of tidal influence.

                                                       -86-1

                                                     TABLE 3-6

                                    PROPOSED ACQUISITIONS: COUNTY AND STATE

                                        Location                            Approximate'Acreage

                   State (Funded acquisitions):

                        Refugio--Expansion westerly to Arroyo Quemado                 40
                        El Capitan-l-Expansion easterly to,Edwards Ranch              285
                        Haskell's Beach--Partial acquisition                          23

                   County (Proposed parks, not funded):

                        Ellwood--Haskell's Beach and.Ellwood Pier                     59
                        Ellwood--Santa Barbara Shores (east of Sandpiper).            292
                        Goleta--More Mesa                                             86
                        Montecito--Hammonds Meadow                                    22
                        Summe,rland--Wallace Avenue (Serano Beach)
                        Carpinteria--Loon Point                                       57

                                                      -87-

                                  This policy shall not apply to the following kinds of develop-
                                  ment: replacement of structures destroyed by natural disas-
                                  ters, remodeling of existing structures, repair and mainte-
                                  nance activities as defined in Section 30610 of the Act, or
                                  development incidental to an existing use on the site.

                    Policy 7-3:   For all new development.betw'een the first public road and the
                                  ocean, granting of lateral easements toallow for public
                                  access along the shoreline:shall be mandatory. In coastal
                                  areas, where the bluffs exceed five feet in height, all beach
                                  seaward of the base of the bluff shall be dedicated. In
                                  coastal areas where the bluffs are less than five feet, the
                                  area to be dedicated shall be determined by the County. At a
                                  minimum, the dedicated,easemen't shall be adequate to allow for
                                  lateral access during periods of high tide. In no case shall
                                  the dedicated easement be required to be closer than 10 feet
                                  to a residential structure.    In addition, all fences, no
                                  trespassing-signs, and.other obstructions that may limit
                                  public lateral access shall be removed as 'a condition of
                                  development approval.'

                    Policy 7-4:   The County, or appropriate public agency, shall determine the
                                  environmental carrying capacity for all existing and proposed
                                  recreational areas sited on or adjacent to dunes, wetlands,
                                  streams, tidepools, or any other areas designated as "Habitat
                                  Areas" by the land use plan. A management program to control
                                  the kinds, intensities  " and locations of recreational activi-
                                  ties so t,hat.habita.t resources are preserved shall be
                                  developed, implemented, and enforced. The level of facility
                                  development (i.e., parking spaces, camper sites, etc.) shall
                                  be correlated with the environmental carrying capacity'.

                    Policy.7-5:   For areas controlled by Federal,.State, County, or District
                                  agencies, in a zone extending approximately 250 feet inland
                                  from the mean high tide line, priority shall be given to
                                  coastal dependent and related recreational activities and.
                                  support facilities. However, camping facilities should be set
                                  back. from the beach and bluffs and near-shore areas reserved
                                  for day use activities. Recreational activities that are not
                                  coastal dependent may be located within this 250-foot zone if
                                  the less desirable coastal dependent support facilities
                                  (parking, restrooms, etc.) are located inland. In no case
                                  shall facilities,, except,for required structures (i.e., life-
                                  guard towers.- volleyball nets, etc.). be located directly on
                                  the dry sandy beach..

                    Policy 7-6:   Recreational uses on  ocean front lands, both public and
                                  private, that do n.ot require extensive alteration of the
                                  natural environment (i.e., tent campgrounds) shall have
                                  priority over uses requ-iring substantial alteration (i.e.,
                                  recreational vehicle campgrounds).

                                                       -88-

                      Policy 7-7:   During the   zoning and  implementation phase of the     LCP, the
                                    County shall establish a schedule for acquisition        of areas
                                    proposed for new or expanded access and/or recreation. The
                                    ..schedule shall designate responsible agencies, time frame, and.
                                    methods forAmplementing all access and recreation proposals
                                    set forth in this plan.

                           nteri a  Valley Planning Area

                     Policy 7-8:    Increased opportunities for beach access       shall be provided in
                                    the Carpinteria planning area.

                                    Implementing Actions:

                                    a)  The County shall accept and open for use the vertical
                                        easements offered in connection with developments on
                                        Padaro Lane (APN 5-400-35) and Beach Club Drive (APN
                                        5-390-23). A footpath from the public road to the beach,
                                        bike racks, and trash-cans shall be provided and main-
                                        tained.

                                    b)  Dedicatio  n of a vertical access easement and construction
                                        of a trail to the b,each'shall be required of any develop-
                                        ment on the easterly end of the Carpinteria bluffs (refer
                                        to Section 4.2.3).

                     Summerland   Planning Area

                     Policy 7-9:    Additional opportunities for coastal access and recreation
                                    shall be provided in the Summerland,planning       area. Parking,
                                    picnic tables, bike racks, and restrooms shall be provided
                                    where appropriate.

                                    Implementing Actions:

                                    a)  The County shall acquire the beach      and bluff area south of
                                        Wallace Avenue. The parking area along Wallace Avenue
                                        shall be landscaped, and measures taken to minimize
                                        further erosion along the bluffs a'.nd railroad embankment.
                                        Paths to connect the parking Area to the beach shall be
                                        well-defined.

                                    b)  The County shall acquire all dry sandy beach area seaward
                                        of the toe of the bluff, from.the Baka property (APN
                                        5-250-1) to Loon Point.

                                    c)  The County shall acquire an easement along the footpath
                                        that currently connects Padaro Lane to the beach area west
                                        of Loon Point (APN 5-260-7). Limited offstreet parking
                                        shall be provided on the County-owned parcel (APN 5-260-8)
                                        which lies between Padaro Lane and Highway 101.

                                                               -89-

                                   d)  Morris. Place shall  be managed   as part of Lookout Park.
                                       The area shallbe kept in its      natural state as much as
                                       possible.@ A footpath from theparking area in Lookout
                                       Rark to the beach shall be-provided.'

                     Montecito   Planning'Area

                     Policy 7-10:  The County  shall provide increased opportunities for beach
                                   access and  recreation in the Montecito planning area.

                                   Implementing Actions:
                                   a)  The County shall   open the  existing  easement from  Eucalyp-
                                       tus Lane along Edgecliff to Montecito Creek for hiking,
                                       biking, and equestrian use. A easement on the east side
                                       of the creek from the existing easement to the-dry sandy
                                       beach shall also be.required as a condition of development
                                       on Hammond's Meadow. (Refer to Section 4.3.3)

                                   b)  The C ounty., shall acquire an easement for the bluff and
                                       beach area south of Channel Drive between the cemetery and
                                       the-Coral Casino. The easement shall be for public recre-
                                       ation and beach access. Permitted uses shall include
                                       walking, swimming, su.nbathing, walking dogs, etc. The
                                       County shall be respon'sible for maintenance of stairways
                                       and seawalls, collection of trash, provision of       bicycle
                                       racks, and maintenance of landscaping. The County shall
                                       also be responsible for marking off a swimming area during.
                                       the summermonths. At such ti'me as the County       is able to
                                       provide an equivalent amount,of public parking       elsewhere
                                       in the vicinity, parking on.one'side of Channel       Drive
                                       shall be eliminated in order to accommodate         bicycle
                                       lanes.

                                   c)  The County  shall pursueany opti   'ons for increased public
                                       access in the Posilipo Lane a.nd.Fernald Point area that
                                       may become  available in thefuture.

                                   d)  The County  shall. accept the verticaleasement offered,     in
                                      -conjunction  with APN 9-345-37 (,Broida) on Miramar Beach
                                       and open it  for local public use.'

                                   e)  The County shall make improvements (i.e., stairway with
                                       handrail.) to its existing easement at the base of Eucalyp-
                                       tus.Lane to facilitate access to the beach. Bike racks
                                       shall also  be provided.'

                                                          _90-

                                    f)  In order.to   alleviate existing congestion    a long,Eucalyptus
                                        Lane,.the County shall.provide a small public parking area,
                                        Jor approximately   15 carsadjacent to Humphrey Road.
                                        Access to the beach from this parking area      would be via
                                        Eucalyptus Lane or   Edgecliff Lane.

                     Policy  7-11:  Sin ce the Biltmore pier is, of very limited recreational value
                                    and cannot support either fishing or boat l.aundhing, the
                                    County shall support the efforts of the Biltmore Hotel to have
                                    the pier removed.
                     Goleta  Planning Area

                     Policy  7-12:  New opportuni'ties  for beach access.and-coastal recreation
                                    shall. be provided 'in the Goleta planning area.
                                    Implementing Actions:

                                    a) Provision of   a public,moderate use recreation area       includ-
                                        ing parking,  restrooms, blufftop hiking and biking       trails,.
                                        @.picnic tables, and stairway access to the.beach sha.11 be
                                        required'as,a condition of development on the More Mesa
                                        property. (Refer to.Section 4.5.3.)

                                    b)  Provision of  a, vertical easement to allow for beach
                                        access', parking area,, and dedication of public open      space
                                        adjacent to,the'beach shall be required as'a condition of
                                        development  on the University Exchange Property., (Refer
                                        to Secti.on 4.5.4.)
                                    C)  Provision of  a public moderate   use recreation area includ-.
                                        ing parking,  rest.rooms, blufftop hiking,and biking trails,
                                        picnic tables, and appropriate    access to the sandy beach
                                        shall be required as a condition of any future development
                                        on the Santa  Barbara Shores property. In the interim, the
                                        County'shall  obtain a vertical   easement across the eastern
                                        portion of, the property to Provide for publicbeach
                                        access. (Refer to.S.ection 4.5.5.)
                                    d)  The County-shal] encourage the adjacent property owners to
                                        provide beach.access at the-end of Orchid Lane for use by
                                        educational and scientific groups.

                                    e)  The County shall,accept the-la   teral.easements offered in
                                        connection..with development on Hope Ranch (APN 63-1501-10,

                                        The County  should encourage the University to continue to
                                        provide public access to the beach through the University
                                        and use of beaches adjacent to the University property,
                                        particularly the West campus. The County should also

                                         pursue an  agreement. with  U_C.S.B@ to use campus parking
                                         lots to accommodate   the overflow from Goleta Beach Park
                                         during peak-.us,e periods.

                    ,.Gavio'ta Coast Planning Area

                     Policy  7-13: In order to protect natural      and Visual resources of the
                                    coastal zone between Ellwood and Gaviotaj development of
                                    recreational facilities shall not impede views between U.S.
                                   .101 and the ocean, shall minimize grading, removal of vegeta-
                                    tion, and pavi,ng, and be compatible with the rural.character
                                    of the area. Existing natural features shall. remain undis-
                                    turbed to the maximum.extent possible@    , and landscaping shall
                                    consist of dr'ought-tolerant species.

                     Polity 7-14:   Campgrounds and ancillary facilities      sited south,of U.S. 101
                                    between Ellwood and Gaviota shall be      set back as far as
                                    feasible from the beach in order to reserve near-shore areas
                                    for day use. Where feasible, new recreational facility
                                    development, particularly campgrounds and parking lots, shall
                                    be located north of U.S. 101.

                     Policy,7-15:   The vegetation..in the.small canyons at the:mouths of Canada
                                    San Onofre and Canada del Molino streams shall hot be
                                    disturbed by recreational development or use.

                     Policy 7-16    All new development-on State-owned     lands shall be in confor-
                                    mance with a recreational master plan approved by the County
                                    and the Coastal Commission. The master plan shall include
                                    maps showing locations of proposed facilities and a text
                                    describing the entire scope of the State's long-range plans
                                    for the Ellwood.to   Gaviota area, i.e.j numbers of campsites,
                                    restrooms, parking lots, kinds of recreational activities to
                                    be accommodated, etc. In addition, themaster plan shall
                                    conform to the following criteria:

                                    a.   Facilities for  overnight use by out-of-County visitors
                                         shall be balanced,with those for day use by local
                                         residents.

                                    b.   Intensities and kinds of recreational uses shall be
                                         controlled so as not to exceed the environmental carrying
                                         capacity of the area.

                                    c.   Alternative transportation systems to provide access to
                                         State parks,(i.ei., shuttle buses) shall be used where
                                         feasible.

                                                           _92-

                     Policy 7-17: Since existing parks i,n     the Ellwood to Gaviota   area already
                                    provide  extensive faciliti.es  for recreational vehicle, camping,
                                    priority i.n future development shall be for campgrounds.that
                                    Would be   accessible by bicycle and pedestrian trails only and
                                    for hostels.

                     Policy  T@-18: Expanded   opp6rtunities'.for access and recre@tion sh   all be
                                    provided   in the Gaviota Coast planning area.
                                    Impl. ementing Actions:
                                    a. In order to maximize access to the beaches, vertical ease-
                                        -ments connecting the proposed coastal bicycle trail
                                        (linking Santa Barbara and Gaviota) to the beach shall be
                                        acquired by a public agency at   . the following locations:
                                        (21)   Hoa:k6ll's Beach (near Bell Canyon)
                                               D  Pueblos.Canyon
                                        (3)    Edw               0 Canyon)
                                               ajjrds (near Gat
                                          4    T  guas Creek
                                               Arroyo Quemado
                                        R      Arroyo Hondo
                                        @7@    Canada de Guillermo
                                          8    Canada@del Molino
                                          9    Canada San Onofre

                                        The trails connecting the    bicycle  path  to the beach shall
                                        be well-marked and bicycle    racks shall   be provided. Where
                                        necessary, stairways from the top of the bluffs shall be
                                        provided.   Public parking and other facility dev    * elopment,
                                        other t.han staircases, fences, improved trails, bicycle
                                        racks, and  picnic tables, shall not be permitted at these
                                        accessways  except as specified in section b.

                                    b.  In order to  increase opportunities forcoastal dependent
                                        and related  recreational uses, the following areas, which
                                        have recreational   potential:9 should be acquired by a
                                        public  agency:
                                                        Facility Development
                        Haskell's Beach             Hike-in and bike-in campground, parking,
                                                    restrooms, picnic tables, bike rack.
                        Dos Pueblos                 Da         1 , parking, restrooms, pi
                                                    t%juse on    y                         icnic
                                                        es, bike   rack.
                        Edwards                     Parking restrooms, picnic tables,      bike racks,
                                                    store, low-intensity camping.

                        Tajiguas                    Day use only, parkingi'restrooms, bike racks.
                        San Onofre                  Day use  only, parking, picnic tables., bike
                                                    racks

                                                          -93-

                   .''Policy 7-19:Jn order to protect the       marine resources of.Naples Reef and
                                    the adjacent beach as a.hauling     out area for harbor seals,
                                    intensive recreational    use shall not beencouraged. Access,       to.
                                    the site should continue@to be     by@way of boats.
                      North Coast   Planning Area
                      'Policy, 7-20: In order to ensure protection    of marine and biological
                                    resources at Point Sal State     Beach, public recreational use
                                    shall be limited by all of the.following measures:
                                    a.   Brown Road shall not be    expanded to more than   two lanes;
                                         it should be paved.
                                    b.   Improvements to the existing State park shall.be limited
                                         to minor improvements to the parking area to prevent
                                         erosion, and construction of a.trail to connect the
                                         parking area to the beach.
                                    C. ..'Hang-gliding shall not be permitted.
                     @.Policy 7-.21: Jalama shall be m,aintained'as a two-lane      roadtwith  onlyminor
                                    realignment'from the summit to the park. All improvements
                                    shall bedesigned'and constructed to minimi2eadverse impacts
                                    on Jal6ma Creek. Improvements shall not       result in   the removal
                                    of.any riparian vegetation along the creek.
                      P ol i cy -7-22.:. Expanded.opp6.rtunit.ies,for public acce'ss and recreation shall,
                                    be provided in the North Coast planning area.
                                    Implementing Actions:
                                    a.,  The County  shall,study alternatives    for expanding Jalama
                                         Beach County Park   for day an&overnight uses.        Sufficient
                                         excess road:capacity on Jalama.Road     shall be reserved to
                                         accommodate  traffic.gen6rated by increased use at Jalama
                                         County Park.
                                    @b.  A hiking trail wh,ich prov,ides lateral and    vertical access
                                         to beaches shall be deve'loped to connect Rancho Guadalupe
                                         County Park  to Point Sal State Park and Point Arguello or
                                         Jalama Beach  to Gaviota State Park. The County, with the
                                         assistance of the.State Department of Parks and Recreation
                                         and participation of affected property owners, shall
                                         initiate planning studies to determine the precise loca-
                                         tion and procedures for implementing such a trail. The
                                         trail shouldeventually include hostels and/or walk-in
                                         campgrounds where feasible on publicly-owned land; one
                                         possible location for such facilities would be an area        in
                                         the vicinity of Point Conception.
                      Policy 7-23:  In order to ensure preservation of the natural and archaeo-
                                    logical resources of the Guadalupe Dunes and expand public
                                    opportunities for low intensity recreation., the County shall:

                                                           -94-

                                    a   Adopt and enforce an ordinanceprohibiting ORV use, hang-
                                        gliding, and overnight camping on the sand dunes.

                                    b.  Repair  and expand the existing County parking lot.

                                    c.  Provide  more attractive restroom facilities...

                                    d.  Provide  limited picnic facilities.

                                    e.  Install  attractive signs informing the public of     the
                                        ecological importance and fragility of the dunes      and
                                        wetland.

                                    f.  Restrict theCounty park to low intensity recreational
                                        uses, i.e., walking, fishing, and picnicking.

                                    g.  Provide at least one part-time ranger to enforce rules.

                                    h.  Pursue alternative methods for expanding the park area,
                                        south to Mussel Rock.

                     Policy 7-24:   In order to ensure that adequate opportunities for coastal
                                    access and recreation will be available in the future, the
                                    amount of development in the North County should be correlated
                                    w
                                     ith a precise recreation plan for the North Coast planning
                                     i
                                    area. To this end, the County shall initiate studies to
                                    determine the long-range needs and goals for access and recre-
                                    ationin the area from Gaviota to Guadalupe. A long-range.
                                    recreational plan shall be developed which includes the
                                    following elements:

                                    a.  An integrated trails system which will connect existing
                                        County and State Parks and provide vertical access to the
                                        beach at appropriate intervals.

                                    b.  Identification of areas which have the.most recreational
                                        potential and a schedule for acquisition of such areas.

                                    After adoption of a long-range recreation plan, all develop-
                                    ment proposals for the North Coast planning area shall be
                                    reviewed for conformity with this master plan and appropriate
                                    easements, etc., shall be required at the time of development
                                    approval.

                     3.7.5 COASTAL TRAILS

                          Background and Issues

                          Trails along the coastline serve two purposes: they provide recrea-
                     tion for the hiker, bicyclist, and equestrian, and an'alternative mode of

                                                          _95-

                    transportation to coastal recreational areas. Use of. trails can reduce   the
                    impact of parking facilities and vehicle emissions on coastal resources.
                    Trails can also provide a means of public access to scenic and.remote
                    coastal areas that are not served by roads, without the environmental
                    impacts that accompany motor vehicle access.

                         The Park Department is the lead agency for recreational equestrian    and,
                    hiking trails  planning in Santa Barbara County. Although funds for
                    purchase of easements are not part of the Park Department budget, the
                    Department is able to acquire trail'routes by conditioning land develop-
                    ments, pursuit.of prescriptive rights, and acceptance of donations. The
                    County Riding and Hiking Advisory Committee, whose members include Board     of
                    Supervisors appointees, monitors trail proposals and developments, and
                    makes recommendations to County departments.. There are also two South
                    Coast private citizens' groups which are active locally: the Santa Barbara
                    County Trails Council and the Montecito Trails Foundation.

                         Santa Barbara County currently offers limited opportunities for
                    hiking, biking and equestrian use in the coastal zone. While a system of
                    trails has been adopted as part of the County's General Plan, many trails
                    have' not been implemented. Completion of several trails now planned for
                    the coastal zone will substantially increase opportunities for recreational
                    use and access incoastal areas.

                         One trail of particularimportance in the coastal zone is that
                    proposed to connect U.C.S.B. to the State Parks.west of Gol,eta. The State
                    Department of Parks,and Recreation, with assistance from the County and
                    Caltrans, is now completing planning studies for the link between U.C.S.B.
                    and El Capitan. The link between El Capitan and Refugio is already
                    constructed. Beyond Refugio, the State is in the process of-determining
                    which parcels and.easements are.necessary to complete.the trail as far.as
                    Arroyo Quemado. The State does not have any plans at present for the final
                    link to connect Arroyo Quemado to Gaviota.

                         There are currently no hiking, biking, or   riding trails proposed for
                    the northern Santa Barbara County coastal zone   that would increase access
                    to remote.coastal areas between Gaviota and Guadalupe. Bicycle trails are
                    proposed to connect Lompoc to Ocean Beach  and the City of Guadalupe to the
                    County,.Park. 'A trail system in this area would increase opportunities for
                    public access and enjoyment of this relatively undeveloped portion of
                    coastline.

                    Policies

                    Policy 7-25: Easements for trails shall be required as a   condition of
                                 project approval for thatportion of the trail crossing the
                                 parcel upon which the project is proposed.

                    Policy 7-26: All proposed trails for the coastal zone shall be incorporated
                                 into the County's Master Plans for hiking, biking, and
                                 equestrian trails@

                                                      -96-

                    3.7.6 RECREATIONAL BOATING

                         Coastal Act Policy
                         30224. Increased recreational boating use of,coastal   waters shall be
                         encouraged, in accordance with this division, by developing dry
                         storage areas, increasing public launching facilities,.providing addi-
                         tional berthing space in existing harbors, limiting non-water-depen-
                         dent land,uses that congest access corridors and preclude boating
                         support facilities, providing harbors of refuge, and by providing for
                         new boating facilities in natural harbors, new protected water areas,
                             in areas dredged from dry land.
                         Background and Issues
                         The need for expanded boating facilities has been well-documented in
                    studies undertaken by the State Departments of Navigation and Ocean Devel-
                    opment andParks and Recreation. The major requirements for boating acti-
                    vities are mooring or launching-facilities in protected waters.. The City
                    of Santa Barbara marina,'which provides the only berthing facilities in the
                    County, has slightly over 1,000 slips. The waiting period for.a slip now
                    runs over two years. Launching facilities in the County are provided at
                    Goleta Beach County Park and Gaviota State Park.
                         Increasing the supply of berthing facilities in order to meet the
                    demand would require expansion of the City's harbor or construction of a
                    new harbor somewhere in the County. Since the County does not have any
                    natural harborsi such development would require dredging and/or construc-
                    tion of a breakwater. Such activities are known to have adverse effects on
                    marine resources and can interfere with the natural movement of sand along
                    the shore.

                         The Department of Navigation and Ocean Development, in a study
                    prepared for the Coastal Commission (Small Craft Facilities Chapter--Exist-
                   Ping and Future Site Locations, March 14, 1975) has suggested that Point Sal
                    and Cojo Bay be considered as possible locations. for a harbor of refuge;
                    however, a specific project has not been proposed to date. The viability
                    of the Cojo site as a harbor of refuge may be affected if a LNG Terminal is
                    constructed at that location.

                    Policies

                    Policy 7-27: The County shall provide expanded opportunities for recrea-
                                 tional boating where feasible.
                                 Implementing Actions:
                                 a.  The County shall study the feasibiltity of providing
                                     storage for small boats, i.e., catamarans, at exi'sting
                                     County Parks.
                                 b.  The County shall negotiate with oil operators in the area
                                     to acquire options to lease or buy pier, facilities atsuch
                                     time as they are no longer needed by the industry.

                     3.7.7 VISITOR-SERVING   COMMERCIAL  DEVELOPMENT

                          Coastal Act Policies

                          30213. Lower cost visitor and-recreational     facilities and  housing
                          opportunities for persons of low-and m.oderate.income shall    be
                          .1 protected, encouraged, andi where feasible, provided. Developments
                          providng public recreational opportunities are preferred...
                          30222.   The use of,private lands suitable for visitor-serving commer-
                          cial recreation.facilities designed to enhance public opportunities
                          for coastal recreation shall have priority over private residential,
                          general industrial,-or general commercial development, but not over
                          agriculture or coastal-dependent industry..,
                          30250. (c) Visitor-serving facilities that,cannot.feasibly be located
                          in existing developed areas'shall be located in existing isolated
                          developments or  at-selected points of attraction for visitors.
                          Planning   Issues

                          Visitor-serving  commercial development includes hotels, motels,
                     private campgrounds,  restaurants, and commercial-recreational developments,
                     such as shopping and  amusement areas for tourists. These visitor-serving
                     facilitlios together with public parks and beaches provide the major oppor-
                     tunities for public access and recreation on the coast.
                          In the County's coastal zone, public recreational areas rather than
                     commercial visitor-serving facilities are the dominant activity. The
                     majority of commercial visitor-serving facilities* are concentrated within
                     the City of Santa Barbara and, to a lesser extent, the City of Carpinteria.
                     From Ellwood west to Point Conception and north to the San Luis Obispo
                     County line, the.coastal area is rural and remote; extensive State park
                     development, County parks, large cattle ranches, and rugged open areas
                     characterize this area. In the urbanized South Coastarea, both the
                     Biltmore and Miramar Hotels are visitor-serving landmarks in the coastal
                     area of.,Monteci.to. Further east, the novelty shops and restaurants of
                     Santa Claus Lane provide a rest-stop for travelers using Highway 101.
                          As development,  commercial visitor-serving facilities,need to be    sited
                     where public services are adequate and where such facilities would be
                     compatible with adjacent land uses. Also of concern is the Coastal Act
                     mandate that commercial recreation shall not take precedence over agricul-
                     ture or other coastal dependent industry. Based on these considerations,
                     there are few areas within the County's coastal zone which would be appro-
                     priate.for.new commercial visitor-serving development.
                          The land use plan provides limited opportunities for new visitor-
                     serving commercial development. In the Carpinteria planning area, the
                     eastern portion of the Carpinteria bluffs has been designated for a
                     visitor-oriented use (refer to Section 4.2.3). In addition, the Haskell's
                     beach property, which is west of the Sandpiper Golf Course, has been desig-
                     hated for resort use. Development of other visitor-serving facilities in-
                     the rural areas of the County's coastal zone is not viewed as appropriate
                     at this time.

                                                        -98-

                     Pol i ci es

                     Rolicy  7-28:   Visitor@serving  commercial  recreational development    that
                                     involves construction of,major facilities, i.e, motels,-
                                     hotels,-,,restaurants.,, should bellocated within urban areas..'
                                     and should not change the character or     impact residential
                                     areas.

                     Policy  7-29:   Visit,or-serving commercial:recreational    development in rural
                                     areas should be limited to low intensity.uses, i.e., camp-
                                     grounds, that.are,designed. to protect and enhance     visual
                                     re.sources, and mi,nimize,impacts on topography, habitatsi and
                                     water resources.

                     Policy  7-,30:  Visitor-serving facilities. shall be permitted    in rural areas
                                     only,if it is determined that approval of such     development
                                     will not result in  a needlor major ancillary facilities on,
                                     nearby la*ndsl i.e... residences,  stores, gas stations.

                                                         _99-

                   3.8       AGRICULTURE
                        38.1, COASTAL ACT POLICIES
                              30241.,   The maximum amount of prime agricultural land shall main-
                              taind in agricultural production to assure the protection of the
                              areas' agricultural economy, and conflicts shall be minimized between
                              agricultural,and urban land uses through all of the following:                                                                                             wing.
                                     (a) By establishing stable boundaries separating urban and rural
                              areas, including, where necessary clearly defined buffer areas to
                              minimize conflicts between agricuitural and urban uses.
                                     (b) By limiting-conversions of agricultural lands around the
                              periphery of urban areas to the lands where the viability of existing
                              agricultural use is already severely limited by conflicts with urban
                              uses and where the conversion of the lands would complete a logical
                              and viable neighborhood and contribute to the establishment of a
                              stable 11mit to urban development.
                                     (c) By developing available lands not suited for agriculture
                              prior to the conversion of agricultural lands.
                                     (d) By assuring that public service and facility expansions and
                              non-agricultural development do not impair agricultural viability,
                              either through increased assessment costs or degraded air and water
                              quality.
                                    (e) By assuring that all divisions of prime agricultural lands,
                              except those conversions approved pursuant to subdivision (b) of this            .
                              section, and all development adjacent to prime agricultural lands
                              shall not diminish the productivity of such prime agriculturallands.

                              30242.   All other lands suitable for agricultural use shall not be
                              converted to non-agricultural uses unless: (1) continued or renewed
                              agricultural use is notfeasible, or (2) such conversion would
                              preserve prime agricultural land or concentrate development consistent
                              with Section 30250. Any such permitted conversion shall be compatible
                              with continued agricultural use on surrounding lands.

                              30243.  The long-term productivity of soils and timberlands shall be
                              protected, and conversions of coastal commercial timberlands in units
                              of commercial size to other uses or their division into units of non-
                              commercial size shall be limited to providing for necessay timber
                              processing  and related facilities.

                        .3.8.2 PLANNING    ISSUES

                              Agriculture in the County's coastal zone varies with the diverse
                        topography and soil types that distinguish the rocky, rugged coastline of
                        the North County (Hollister.and Bixby Ranches to Guadalupe) from the allu-
                        vial plains and foothills of the South Coast, exemplified by the Carpin-
                        teria Valley. In the Carpinteria Valley,a trend toward higher return
                        specialty crops, e.g., cut flowers'and nursery stock,lemons, and avpcadps,

                                                               -100-

                     has  emerged. in-response to  the area's prime    growing   conditions and the
                     escalating land values characteristic of an       urbanizing area.    Of the
                     approximately 3,900 acres in agricultural use in the Valley        at this time.,
                     3,200 acres are planted to lemons and avocados; 650 acres are devoted to
                     greenhouse and nursery'production; and the remaining acreage is being
                     cultivated for other irrigated crops. An estimated 2,350 acres of the
                     Valley's toils are classified as prime, representing about 60 percent of
                     the lands in production. Bordering the Carpinteria Valley, the non-prime
                     soils and generally steep.slopes north and east of thecommunity of Sumer-
                     land are currently@planted to lemons and.avocados; horse stabling facili-
                     ties, related to the nearby Santa.Barbara Polo Grounds, are also found in
                     this area..

                          Agriculture   in the coastal zone from Montecito to       Ellwood is scattered
                     and of a smaller   scale than that of the Carpinteria Valley. A        number of
                     greenhouses exist in the vicinity of More Mesa in Goleta, and newplantings
                     of lemons,and avocados extend along U. S. 101 west of Ellwood. At El
                     Capitan, a more rugged.topography, less moderate climate, and         lack of water
                     resources foster a natural transition tocattle grazing and large scale
                     ranch operations. The latter activities typify agriculture in the rest of
                     the County's coastal zone  . from Gavi'ota to the San Luis Obispo@Couhty line,
                     except for a small portion of the fertile Santa Maria Valley west of Guada-
                     lupe, which is in vegetable productfon.

                          The County's commitment to the preservation of agricultural lands is
                     demonstrated by the success of its Agricultural Preserve Program. Current-
                     ly, there are 525,760 acres enrolled in preserves throughout the County
                     Tepresenting over 90 percent of the eligible privately owned prime and non-@
                     prime lands. While thePreserve Program has been strongest in the rural
                     .areas of the County, over 20,000 acres of pri.me lands located within one
                     mileof City lim.its are enrolled.' In the Carpinteria Valley, 2,878 acres
                     are under preserve status at this time. Although hone of the greenhouse
                     growers has elected to join the program to date, 55 acres of nursery
                     production have been enrolled.

                          Coastal Act policies require. that the maximum amount of prime agricul-
                     tural lands be maintained in production and that conflicts between agricul-,
                     tural and urban land uses be minimized. The Act also,calls for the protec-
                     tion of the long tenn productivity of soils and stipulates conditions under
                     which the conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses would
                     be appropriate. To carry out the goals of the Coastal Act, the land use
                     plan must delineate stable urban/rural boundaries fn areas where agricul-
                     tural lands are directly affectedby past and potentJal urban encroachment
                     and establish minimum parcel si.zes for agriculture which will tend to
                     strengthen agricultural use over the long term.. Policies and performance
                     standards must also be formul-ated which will prevent adverse impacts on.
                     coastal resources from agricultural development, e.g., erosion caused by
                     orchard de 'velopment on steep hillsides, water quality degradation from
                     agricultural irrigation runoff, and loss of soil productivity from agricul-
                     tural development such as greenhouses.

                        Urban/Rural Boundary

                        Within the County's coastal zone, the need for clearly defined
                   urban/rural boundaries is especially apparent on the South Coast, where
                   prime coastal agriculture has.given way to urban expansion in a rapidly
                   developing area. Lemon orchards and vegetable "truck" farms once charac-
                   teristic of the coastal area of Goleta have gradually been replaced by
                   residential subdivisions and industrial parks as a result of the area's
                   growth. The prime.agricultural lands of the Carpinteria Valley have also
                   been subject to urban,,encroachment. From 1970 to 1975, the City of Carpin-
                   teria experienced its most rapid growth. During that period, the'City
                   annexed two large residential subdivisions and an industrial park, the
                   former encroaching onto prime agricultural soils,to the north of the City
                   and the latter requiring the conversion of some viable orchards to the
                   east. At present, the City's boundaries generally abut prime soils,or.
                   prime agricultural lands. Residential enclaves such as Serena Park and
                   Shepard's Mesa have also emerged in the unincorporated area of the-Carpin-
                   teria Valley, introducing a residential estate land use pattern into the
                   agricultural setting. To the@west, the town of Summerland is surrounded by
                   rural lands which are best suited for continued rural use because of a
                   combination of existing agricultural uses, natural hazards (steep slopes
                   and unstable soils), and resource constraints.

                        The purpose of an urban/rural boundary is to clearly delineate areas
                   appropriate for urban land use, i.e., residential, commercial, and indus.-
                   trial, from areas where rural uses should be sustained, principally agri-
                   culture but including rural residential, coastal dependent industry, and,
                   limited highway commercial activities where necessary. The urban/rural
                   boundary is not necessarily defined on a jurisdictional basis; for example,
                   agriculturally designated lands within city limits that are located on the
                   urban fringe and contiguous with other agricultural parcels would be
                   included in the rural area. Conversely, a residential subdivision
                   contiguous to other urban uses but in an unincorporated area would be
                   considered urban. The principal determinant in establishing an urban/rural
                   boundary is the preservation of existing agricultural lands, while allowing
                   for reasonable growth within urban areas through infilling and logical
                   expansion outward. To this end, criteria for designating agricultural
                   lands, not as a transitional land use but for agricultural use over the
                   long term, need to be developed. The preservation of lands with.prime
                   agricultural soils, i.e., Class I or II according to the U.S. Soil Conser-
                   vation Service, is of highest priority. Prime agricultural lands, as
                   defined in Section 51201 of the Public Resources Code (Appendix A), and
                   lands in existing agricultural production are the next most important to
                   receive agricultural land use designations. Finally, lands not in produc-
                   tion but having agricultural potential (i.e., soils, topography, location
                   and other factors which will support long term agricultural production)
                   need to-be identified for agricultural use.

                        In the land use plan, two agricultural land use designations are used:
                   Agriculture I and Agriculture II. Agriculture I is used to designate the

                                                    -102-

                    high return, specialty crop areas,within the urbanized portion of the South
                    Coast. Minimum parcel sizes under the Agriculture I designation range from
                    five to forty acres and permitted uses include food and fiber crops,
                    orchards, and greenhouse operations; commercial horse stabling facilities
                    would require. a conditional use permit under this designation. The ranches
                    and large scale  grazing operations typical of the rural area from Ellwood
                    to Gaviota, the  Hollister and Bixby Ranches, and,North Coast are shown as
                    Agriculture II. Minimum parcel sizes range from 100 to 320 acres; green-
                    houses would be  a conditional use under the Agriculture II designation.

                         Urban/rural  boundaries are delineated on the land use pl  an maps for
                    the Carpinteria Valley, Summerland, and Goleta areas; each of these
                    proposed boundaries is explained in detail in the respective planning area
                   .discussions in Chapter 4.,

                         Minimum Parcel Size

                         In'addition to designating lands for agricultural use, minimum agri-
                    cultural parcel sizes which will strengthen agricultural uses by allowing
                    for flexibility in the scale of production requ.ired for existi.ng and poten-
                    tially viable crops and preventing parcelization to a point where agricul-
                    tural viability would be jeopardized need to be determined. In several
                    areas of the County's coastal zone, agricultural minimum parcel sizes
                    specified under existing zoning are inadequate to sustain agricultural
                    production over the long term; thus, some increase is,warranted. Counter-
                    ing this need for an increase in minimum parcel sizes, however, is the
                    existence of smaller parcels in many areas of the coastal zone, which
                    limits the degree to which change can be effected.

                       In the Carpinteria Valley, escalating land costs characteristic of an
                    area with urban potential, have contributed to development of the Valley's
                    specialty crop agricultural economy and the formation of smaller agricul.-
                    tural parcels. In,1956, the County instituted the "A-14" zone, establish-
                    ing a five-acre minimum parcel size for the Valley and other areas of the
                    South Coast. This action was prompted by the possibility that urban uses
                    would intrude into existing agricultural areas. In 1971, the County
                    modified the Uniform Rules of 'the Agricultural Preserve Program to allow
                    growers who own as few as five acres of fully planted and commercially
                    producing land to qualify for preserve status if they apply with growers of
                    equal or larger size to meet the 40-acre minimum preserve size required for
                    prime agricultural lands. This action was taken to strengthen the A-14
                    zone in the face of mounting urban pressures. In 1978, the County again
                    modified the Agricultural Preserve requirements to allow five-acre parcels
                    with 4.75 fully producing acres to qualify as preserves if all of the other
                    requirements are also satisfied. Although these measures have been effec-
                    tive in holding the line against further urban encroachment in the Carpin-
                    teria Valley, a buildout of the Valley based on the permitted five- acre
                    minimum would jeopardize the area's agricultural production and lead to
                    adverse impacts on local resources and service systems (see Carpinteria
                    Valley planning area discussion). While a larger minimum parcel size is

                                                       -103-

                    needed in the Valley, the level of increase  that would be appropriate   is
                    conditioned by the existing predominance of   smaller parcel sizes; over half
                    of the parcels In the Valley are less than ten acres in size.

                         Under the land use plan, a ten-acre minimum parcel size is   proposed as
                    a base agricultural minimum in place of the minimum.five acres permitted
                    under the existing A-14 zone in the Carpinteria Valley. However, a range
                    of minimum parcel sizes from five to forty acres is also included to
                    provide for flexibility and to adjust for topographic and soil constraints.
                    Since the Carpinteria Valley is the largest prime agricultural area in the
                    County's coastal zone, the determination of a minimum parcel size for the
                    Valley is Used as the basis for agricultural. minimums in Summerland,
                    Goleta, and other prime agricultural lands within the bounds.of the coastal
                    zone.

                         In the rural area of the County's coastal zone extending west from
                    Ellwood to Point Conception and north to the County line, existing zoning
                   .includes General Agriculture and Limited Agriculture designations. Since
                    agriculture in this area is mostly non-prime, i.e., cattle grazing and
                    forage.crops, large.acreages are required to be economically viable and
                   .100-acre minimums are specified for most areas under present zoning. An
                    Unlimited Agriculture ("U") zone with a ten-acre.minimum also  'exists in
                    some areas. Historically, this designation was used for unclassified lands
                    in the County's rural areas. -On the 'basis of economic viability and
                    resource constraints, both the 100-acre and 10-acre minimums  Iare inade-
                    quate for non-prime agricultural lands. Yet, on the.Gaviota Coast between
                    Ellwood and El Capitan, the vast majority of parcels are less than 100
                    acres in size and existing agriculture is a mixture of prime and non-prime
                    pursuits. A 100-acre minimum, therefore, continues to be the most appro-.
                    priate minimum parcel size for,agriculturally designated lands in this
                    area. West of El Capitan, agriculture in the Gaviota Coast planning area
                    is predominant,ly non-prime due to changes in the topography, climate,.and
                    availability of water resources. Under the land use plan, the agricultural
                    minimum parcel size is increased.to 320 acres in this portion of the
                    planning area to reflect these changes.

                         Along the North Coast, the coastal boundary extends inward, encompass-
                    ing the entire Hollister and Bixby Ranches. Although parcelization has
                    already occurred on Hollister Ranch under the existing 100-acre zoning, the
                    Bixby Ranch remains under single ownership. Because of the need to sustain
                    the economic viability of the County's non-prime agricultural lands on the
                    North Coast and, also, because of the area's remoteness, lack of water
                    resources and public services, an increase in the minimum parcel size is
                    required. The land use plan stipulates a 320-acre minimum for the North
                    Coast to strengthen agric.ulture.as the principal. land use and to bring
                    potential buildout in line with the area.'s available resources.

                        Determination of minimum parcel sizes alone may not be sufficient to
                    sustain the large, non-prime agricultural operations still in existence in
                    the rural areas of the coastal zone, i.e.   ranches in excess of 10   000

                                                     -104-

                     acres. Historically, minimum     parcel  size restrictions have led to parceli-
                     zation of larger holdings into smaller holdings, frequently resulting in
                     parcels unsuited for continuation of       large-scale agricultural activities
                     such as,cattle grazing. Therefore, a new strategy is needed. One alterna-
                     tive would b '0 to:permit a clustered residential development at a density
                     ,greater than that permitted under the specified minimum parcel size on a
                     small portion of the property, with the requirement that the balance of the
                     .land be maintained in agricultural production. Through thi& type of
                     limited development, the vast majority.of the agricultural land would be
                     -retained intact as a single unit, affording the economies.of scale thatare
                     required in non-prime operations.
                          Impact of Greenhouse Development on Coastal Resources
                          UInder the Coastal Act, greenhouses, although an agricultural activity,
                     are also a type.of development and must be evaluated in terms of their
                     impact@on the long-term productivity of     soils and,the preservation of an
                     areals agricultural economy. Issues such as the contribution of green-
                     houses to increased runoff, 'loss of groundwater recharge, the effects of
                     soil coverage and compaction, andimpacts on visual quality need to be
                     addressed.
                          Greenhouse operations vary-,in the amount of'    structural and related
                     land coverage required for production. In      *the Carpinteria Valley, approxi-
                     mately 60 percent of greenhouse production takes place directly in the
                     underlying soil, the remainder taking place in pots or containers. How-
                     ever, aside from the land reserved for growing, asphalt or concrete
                     coverage is generally used for storage, packing and loading areas, walk-
                     ways, driveways, and parking. The cost of removing greenhouse structures
                     and related coverage can be prohibitive, foreclosing the possibility of
                     returning the land to other types of open field agriculture. In some
                     cases., gravel or sand is substituted 'as a covering for driveways and
                     parking areas- but, this type of coverage can also be detrimental to the
                     future produciivity of the soil because.of compaction@and penetration into
                     the topsoil.
                          Although greenhouses are a permitted use in all of the County's agri-
                     cultural zones, specific greenhouse regulations are stipulated only in the
                     A-14 zone. According to the existing ordinance, a greenhouse must be set
                     back 50 feet from the centerline of any street and 20 feet from the lot
                     lines of the parcel on which it is located. These are the only conditions
                     affecting greenhouse lot coverage at this time and they are insufficient in
                     several respects. The 50-foot setback from the centerline of any street is
                     not adequate in the Carpinteria Valley, since the width of the two major
                     roads along which greenhouses are located (Via Real and Foothill) varies,
                     leading to a lack of uniformity in the setback requirement. Where a 20
                     foot setback along property lines is adequate for smaller greenhouse
                     projects (i.e., on existing parcels of less than five acres), an increased
                     setback is needed for projects on lots of five acres or more, particularly.
                     where greenhouses are located adjacent to residential neighborhoods. In
                     addition, the maximum proportion of lot coverage for greenhouse structures
                     and impervious surfaces needs to be specified to control the density of

                                                         -105-

                     development and  mitigate visual impacts. Since setbacks can account for a
                     significantly large proportion of the smaller parcels, setback requirements
                     forthese parcels should be less than for larger parcels; maximum coverage
                     requirements should also be adjusted to reflect this concern.

                          In the Carpinteria Valley, w  ater runoff from greenhouse structures and
                     related impervious surfaces as well as.from agricultural irrigation is
                     directed to the,Valley's natural drainage channels. Two of these water
                     courses, Franklin and Santa Monica Creeks, flow directly into Carpinteria
                     Marsh. Portions of these creeks have been channelized and plans have.been
                     proposed to channelize other-portions within the Marsh itself. The current
                     capacity of the channels is based on existing land use patterns in the
                     Valleyi Additional runoff from a substantial increase in greenhouse,
                     agricultural, or urban development could potentially.overburden these
                     channels, creating a need to enlarge them and resulting in a loss of
                     habitat. In addition,,although there is no present evidence of.water
                     contamination in the Marsh, the impact of runoff waters on the water
                     quality ofthe Marsh heeds to be monitored. The cumulative r6noff and
                     water quality impacts of increased agricultural development in the Valley
                     on the area's resources have not been assessed to date, as projects have
                     been evaluated on a case by case basis. Given the extent of agricultural
                     development in the Valley at this time, an overall assessment of these
                     impacts is needed.
                         With the exception of an area    in the western portion of the     Carpin-
                     teria Valley south of Foothill Road and another narrow strip to the east      of
                     the City, most of the Valley is in a groundwater recharge area. Depending
                     on the amount of impervious surface coverage, greenhouses can,reduce the
                     rate and area of permeability for recharge with the,result of decreasing
                     water repleni-shment to the groundwater basin. However, while some recharg@.
                     may be lost due to greenhouse coverage water is returned to the ground-
                     water basin through internal irrigation. The actual loss of groundwater
                     recharge caused by greenhouse projects. needs to be measured on a case by
                     case basis and mitigating measures required as necessary. Recharge can be
                     restored through use of impoundment basins, porous pavement, and other
                     water management measures.

                         The amount of water used in greenhouse operations is greater than        that
                     required for most open field crops grown in the coastal area. -Because       of
                     existing water constraints on the South Coast, the need for supplementa      1
                     water will be a limiting factor for new greenhouse developments as well as
                     conversions from existing field cro.ps to cover crops (see planning area
                     discussions and Section 3.2).

                         At present, new greenhouse projects.of 2G,000 square feet or more, and
                     additions of 10,000 square feet and over,.which result in a structure in
                     excess of 30,000 square feet, are subject to an impact analysis through the
                     environmental review (EIR) process. Because of the concern for the poten-
                     tial adverse impacts caused by greenhouses, all greenhouse projects of
                     20,000 square feet or more and any addi'ticins to an existing greenhouse
                     development that create a total dev'elopment of 20,000 square feet or more
                     need to be subject to environmental review. In addition, criteria for

                                                        -106-

                      .evaluating adverse  impacts  from  greenhouses need  to be standardized, in
                      order  that these impacts can be    identified and mitigating   measures
                      requ ired.

                           The  industrial appearance   of greenhouses  as viewed from   Highway 101
                      and other  public streets in the    Valley can detract from the   visual quality,
                      of the coastal area if not appropriately landscaped. The County has
                      instituted landscaping requirements which have been effective in most cases
                      .in minimizing the visual, impact of greenhouses. Accordi    ng to the
                      requirements of the A-I-X zone, a landscaping plan must be approved by the
                      County Planning Department and such,landscaping must be capable of
                      screening greenhouse structures,and parking areas within five years, These.
                      measures are adequate to protect    coastal visual resources.

                      3.8.3.,POLICIES

                      Policy  8-1@  An agricultural land   use:designation   shall begiven   to any
                                    parcel  in rural areas   that meets one  or more  of the  following
                                    criteria:

                                    a.  Prime agriculturalsoils (Capability Classes       I and 11 as
                                        determined.by the    U.S. Soil Conservation   Service).

                                    b.  Other prime agricultural lands as defined      -in Section 51201
                                        of the Public Resources Code (Appendix A).

                                    c.  Lands,in existing    Agricultural use.

                                    d.  Lands  with agricultural. potential (e.g., soil,     topography,
                                        and location   that  will support long term.agricultural
                                        use).

                                    These.criteria shall   al so be used for designating    agricultural
                                    land use in urban areas, except where agricultural viability
                                    is already severely   impaired  by conflicts with urban uses.

                      Policy  8-2:  If a parcel is designated for    agricultural use and is located
                                    in a rural area not   contiguous  with.the urban/rural boundary,
                                    conversion to non-agricultural    use shall not@be permitted
                                    unless such conversion of the    entire parcel would allow for
                                    another priority use under the Coastal Act, e.g., coastal
                                    dependent industry, recreation and access, or protection of an
                                    environmentally sensitive habitat. Such conversion shall not
                                    be in conflict with contiguous agricultural operations in the
                                    area, and shall be consistent with Section 30241 and 30242 of
                                    the Coastal Act.

                      Policy 8-3:   If a parcel is designated for agricultural,use and is located
                                    in a rural area contiguous with the urban/rural boundary,
                                    converston shall not be permitted unless:

                                                          @-107-

                                    a.  The  agricultural. use  of the land is   severely impaired
                                        because of physical factors (e.g. high water        table),
                                        topographical constraints, or Urban conflicts (e.g.,
                                        surrounded by urban uses'which inhibit production or        make
                                        it impossible to qualify for agricultural preserve
                                        status)'.-and

                                    b.  Conversion would contribute to the. logical completion of
                                        an existing urban neighborhood, and

                                    c.  There are no alt6rnative areas appr     Iopriate for infilling
                                        @within- the urban area or there a.re,no. other parcels along.
                                        the urban periphery where the agricultural potential is.
                                        more severely restricted.

                    'Policy  8-4:   As  a requirement for approval   of any proposed land division Of
                                    agricultural land designated    as Agriculture I or II in    the
                                    land use plan, the County shall make a'finding that        thelong-
                                    term agricultural productivity of the property will       not,be
                                    diminished by,the proposed division.

                     Policy  8-5:   All, greenhouse projects of 20,000 or more square feet and        all
                                    additions to existing greenhouse development, i.e... greenhouse
                                    expansion, packing sheds, or other' development for a total        of
                                    existing,and additions of 20,000 or more square feet, shall be..
                                    subject to County discretionary approval and, therefore,9,
                                    subject to environmental review under County CEQA guidelines.

                                    Action

                                    The County Planning   Department  shall work with   the Department
                                    of,.Environmental Resources to develop guidelines to standard-
                                    ize the environmental' impact analysis of greenhouse develop-
                                    ments. This action    i,s necessary to ensure that   cumulative
                                    adverse impacts on coastal. resources areAdentified and that
                                    mi.tigation measures are attach,ed to'projects as a condition of.
                                    approval.. Such guideli.nes 'shall include an.evaluation'.of     the
                                    following factors.for each project:

                                    a.  'An assessment ofthe.individual     and cumulative increases
                                        in the amount and rate of runoff that would be caused by.
                                        the proposed project and the potential impact on down-
                                        stream water courses. Mitigating measures shall be
                                        required to prevent runoff waters from entering overbur-
                                        denedwater courses by directing runoff to water courses
                                        capable of handling the increased flow., or to collect the
                                        runoff and proVide.for drainage systems adequate to handle
                                        the increased flow.

                                                         -.108-

                                 .b.  If the project is located in a  groundwater recharge area,
                                      a determination of the amount and rate of recharge that
                                      would occur if the site were uncovered and the net loss of
                                      recharge that will result from the project. Projects will
                                      be required to provide for the net potential loss of
                                      recharge that will result from the project throughthe use
                                      of impoundment basins where feasible or other means of
                                      collecting, storing, and reinjecting water for the purpose
                                      of recharging the groundwater basin.

                                 c.   Assessment of the.impact of materials used for coverage
                                      and amount of.coverage.on the long-term productivity of
                                      soils.

                                 d.   Assessment of the potential adverse impacts of   the project
                                      on-the water quality of affected water bodies and ground-
                                      water basins. Given adequate evidence that.toxicants or
                                      excessive nutrients are present in either point source or
                                      non-point source runoff, mitigation measures shall be
                                      required, including suspension of the runoff and redirec-
                                      tion away from the affected waters or treatment of the
                                      runoff to remove toxicants and nutrients present, if
                                      possible.

                                      To implement this policy  in the Carpinteria Valley, a
                                      program for regular monitoring of the water  quality of the
                                      Carpinteria Marsh and streams affected by greenhouse
                                      development shall be established (see also Recommenda-
                                      tion 8, paragraph b(l), Section 3.9).

                                 e.   Assessment of the potential adver se impacts of the climate
                                      control.aspects of the project on air .quality.

                                 In addition to the mitigating measures listed   above, other
                                 measures necessary tomitigate any adverse impacts identified
                                 as a result of the evaluation of these and other factors shall
                                 be required as a condition of project approval. In order to
                                 adequately assess.the potential individual and cumulative
                                 impacts of greenhouse development,on the coastal resources of
                                 the Carpinteria Valley, the County should conduct a master
                                 environmental impact assessment for the Valley to determine
                                 the level of greenhouse development that the Valley's
                                 resources cansupport without experiencing adverse environ-
                                 mental impacts.

                                                      _109-

                      Pol icy  8-6:  No.greenhouse, hothouse,    or accessory structure sha    11 be
                                     located closer than 50 feet from     the boundary line of a lot
                                     zoned resi'dential. In addition,      setback and maximum lot.
                                     coverage,requirements shall be as'follows:

                                                                    Maximum  Lot Coverage   for Al
                      Parcel Size                Setbacks          Structures

                     Less than 5    acres     30 feet  from the              75 percent
                                              right-of-1way of
                                              any,street and
                                              20 feet  from the
                                              lot lines of the
                                              parcel on which
                                              the greenhouse
                                              is located

                    .5  to 9.99 acres.,       130 feet from the              70  percent
                                              right-of-way of
                                              any street and
                                              from the lot
                                              lines of   the
                                              parcel oh,which
                                              the.greenhouse   is
                                              located

                     10  acres   or more      30 feet  from  the             65  percent
                                              right-of-way   of
                                              any street and
                                              from the lot
                                              lines of the
                                              parcel on which
                                              the' greenhouse
                                              is located

                     Policy 8-7:    Landscaping and screening     shall be installed    within six.months
                                    of completion of new greenhouses and/or accessory buildings.
                                    Such landscaping shall reasonably block the view of greenhouse
                                    structures and p'arking.areas,from     the,nearest,public road(s)
                                    within five years of project completion.

                     Policy 8-8:    The existing-@and. future viability of large, non-prime agricul-
                                    tural lands for which the County of Santa Barbara has not
                                    approved land divisions in the Gaviota Coast, North Coast, and
                                    Santa Rosa Island planning areas (i.e.,       cattle grazing
                                    operations on 10,000 acres.or more) shall be protected.

                                                           _110-

                                 Residential development at a density greater than that allowed
                                 Under the specifiediminimum,parcel size may be permitted only
                                 if clustered on.no m,ore than two percent of.the gross acreage
                                 with the remainingacreage to be left in'agri   cultural
                                 production and/or open space. The maximum density allowable
                                 under a clustered residential development shall be determined
                                 by the County. Such development may be considered subject to
                                 the followi.ng findings and conditions:

                                 1.  The County shall, make the finding that the existing agri-
                                     cultural operation will be enhanced by and not in conflict,
                                     with the proposed development.

                                 .2. The County shall make the fi nding that water resources and
                                     services are adequate.to serve both the proposed develop-
                                     ment.and existing agricultural operations.

                                 3.  The County shall make the finding that the proposed devel-
                                     opment, will have no significant adverse impact on scenic
                                     quality or habitat resources.

                                 If the County.can make these findings, development may be
                                 permitted subjqct@to.the following conditions and pursua,nt.to
                                 an implementing overlay district Under the applicable County
                                 zoning ordinance:

                                 a.  Initial public  capital costs created by the development
                                     shall be borne  by the applicant. Property tax and other
                                     revenues accruing.to local government from-the development
                                     shall be equal to.or exceed all costs of providing
                                     services.such as roads, water, sewers, schools, fire and
                                     police protection. Any development may be required to
                                     provide local security, including fire and police protec-
                                     ti6n.

                                 b.. Permitted development shall be clustered and/or located to
                                     retain at least 98 percent of the gross acreage in produc-
                                     tive agricultural land and/or open space. The residential
                                     units shall be located on no more than 2% of the gross
                                    .acreage which shall. result in residential lots smaller
                                     than the 320 acre minimum permitted under the Agriculture
                                     II designation. The ownership of the 98% of the gross
                                     acreage shall be held in common by the owners of the
                                     individual residential lots and shall never be severed in
                                     ownership from such owner parcels. The creation of the
                                     residential lots shall fully comply with the provisions of
                                     the Subdivision Map Act.

                                 c.  Development rights to  residential uses for that portion of
                                     the property that will remain in agriculture shall be
                                     granted to.the County  and/or a third party such as the

                                       California Coastal   Conservancy in  perpetuity.   The portion
                                       to remain. in agriculture   shall be retained  as a single
                                       un.it and shall not  be further. subdivided.   Development
                                       rights  to be granted pursuant t,o,the.foregoi.ng  shall ..be
                                       delivered,fr6e   and,clear  of any.financial  liens.

                                  d.   Provision for  adequate  public access and recreation shall
                                       be required.

                                  Note regarding.calculation    of:area to be  included in two
                                  percent figure: The two,percent figure is the maximum area
                                  that,will be permitted to be taken out of agricultural
                                  production and committed to    residential andrelated accessory
                                  uses. Areas to be included     in the calculation are:
                                  residential units, new-roads     and parking alreas,,structural
                                 'coverage' for non-agricultural buildings, private open space
                                  such as yards or gardens, etc.

                                                        -112-

                 .3..9-     ENV.IRONMENTALLY                     SENSITIVE            HABITAT
                            AREAS

                      3.9 1 COASTAL    ACT POLICIES

                           The guiding policies for     the protection of   land and marine    habitats. in.
                      the coastal zone set forth in     the Coastal Act of 1976 are:

                           30230. Marine resources      shall be maintained, enhanced, and, where
                           feasible, restored.     Special  protection shall   be given,to areas and
                           species of special biological or economic significance.: Uses of the
                           marine environm  ent shall be carried out in a manner.that will sustain
                           the biologicalproductivity of coastal waters and that will maintain
                           healthy populations ofall species,of marine organisms adequate for
                           long.-term commercia.1, recreational,, scientific, and educational.
                           purposes.

                           30231. The biological productivity and        the quality of coastal    waters
                           streams, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes       appropriate to maintain
                           optimum populations of marine organisms       and for the protection of
                           human-health shall be maintained and, where feasible, restored
                           through, among other means, minimizing adverse effects of waste water
                           discharges and entrainment, controlling runoff, preventing depletion
                           of ground water supplies and encouraging waste water reclamation,
                           maintaining natural vegetation buffer-areas that protect riparian
                           habitats, and minimizing alteration of natural streams.

                           30233. (a) The diking filling, or dredging of open           coastal waters,
                           wetlands, estuaries, an@ lakes shall be permitted in.accordance with
                           other applicable provisions of this division, where        Ithere is no
                           feasible less environmentally damaging alternative, and where
                           feasible,',mitigation measures have b    .een provided to minimize adverse
                           environmental effects, and shall be limited to the following:
                              (1) New or expanded port,,energy, and coastal-dependent industrial
                           facilities, i'nclu.ding commercial fishing facilities.
                             (2) Maintaining existing, or restoring p       IreIvioIusly dredged, depths.
                           in existing navigational channels, turning basins, vessel berthing and
                           mooring areas., and boat launching ramps.
                             (3*) In wetland areas only, entrance channels for new or expanded
                           boating facilities; and in a degraded wetland, identified by the
                           Department of Fish and Game pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section
                           30411, for boating facilities if, in conjunction with such boating
                           facilities, a substantial portion of the degraded wetland is restored
                           and maintained as a biologically productive wetland; provided, how-
                           ever, that in no event shall the.size of the wetland area used for
                           such boating facility, induding berthing space,'turn'ing basins,
                           necessary navigation'channels, and any necessary support service
                           facilities, be greater than, 25 percent of the total wetland.area         to be
                           restored.

                            (4) In open coastal waters, other than wetlands, including streams,
                        .estuaries, and lakes, new or expanded boating facilities.
                            (5) Incidental public service purposes, including, but not limited
                         to,. burying cables and,pipes or inspection of piers and maintenance of
                         existing intake and outfall lines.
                            (6)  Mineral extraction, including sand for restoring beaches,
                         except in environmentally sensitive areas.
                            (7)  Restoration purposes.
                            (8)  Nature study, aquaculture, or similar resource-dependent acti-
                         vities.
                            (b) Dredging and spoils disposal shall be planned and carried out
                         to avoid significant disruption to marine and wildlife habitats and
                         water circulation. Dredge spoils suitable for beach replenishment
                         should be transported for such purposes to appropriate beaches or into
                         suitable longshore current systems.
                            (c) In addition to the other provisions of this section, diking,
                         filling, or dredging in existing estuaries and wetlands shall maintain
                         or enhance the functional capacity of the wetland or estuary. Any
                         alteration of coastal wetlands identified by the Department of Fish
                         and Game, including, but not limited to the 19 coastal wetlands iden-
                         tified in its report entitled, "Acquisition Pri,orities for the Coastal
                         Wetlands of.California" shall be limited to very minor incidental
                         public facilities, restorative measures, nature study, commercial
                         fishing.facilities in Bodega Bay, and development in already developed
                         parts of South San Diego Bay, if otherwise in accordance with this
                         division.

                         30236. Channelizations, dams, or other substantial alterations of
                         rivers and streams shall incorporate the best mitigation measures
                         feasible, and be limited to (1) necessary water supply projects; (2)
                         flood control projects where no other method for protecting existing
                         structures in the flood plainis feasible and where, such.protection is
                         necessary for public safety or to protect existing development, or;
                         (3) developments where the primary function is the improvement of fish
                         and wildlife habitat.

                         30240. (a) Environme   ntally sensitive habitat areas shall be
                         protected against any significant disruption of habitat values, and
                         only uses dependent on such resources shall be allowed within such
                         areas.
                               (b) Development in areas adjacent to environmentally sensitive
                         habitat areas and parks and recreation areas shall be sited and
                         designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade such
                         areas, and shall be compatible with the continuance of,such habitat
                         areas.

                         30607. 1 Where any dike and fill development is permitted in wetlands
                         in conformity with this division, mitigation measures shall include,
                         at a minimum, either acqu.isition of equivalent areas of equal or
                         greater biological produ .ctivity or opening up equivalent areas to

                           tidal action; provided, however, that if no appropriate restoration
                           site is available,. an in-lieu fee sufficient to provide an area of
                           equivalent productive value or surface areas shall be dedicated to an
                           appropriate public agency, or such replacement site shall be purchased
                           before the dike or fill development may proceed. Such mitigation
                           measure shall not be required for temporary or short-term fill or
                           diking: provided, that abond      or other evidence of financial respon
                           sibility i's provided to assure   that restoration will be accomplished
                           in the shortest feasible time.

                     3.9.2 DEFINITION AND LOCATION

                           Although most undeveloped   areas  of the coastal zone, as   well as many
                     .,isolated pockets of open space  within urban areas, provide a    "habitat" for
                     many species of animals and plants, the,intent of the Coastal Act is
                     preservation of significant habitat resources. Environmentally sensitive
                     habitat areas are defined as "any area in which plant or animal life or
                     their hab,itats are either rare or especially valuable because of their
                     special nature or role in an ecosystem,and which could be easily disturbed
                     or degraded by human activities and developments." (Coastal Act, Section
                     30107.5)

                           The, coastal. zone of Santa Barbara-County, as a result of its topog-
                     raphy, climate, and land use patterns, exhibits a wealth and diversity of
                     habitats. The islands of Santa Rosa and Santa Cruz, in particular, are
                     known for their outstanding biological values (refer to Section 4.8 for a
                     discussion of island habitats). All known environmentally sensitive habi-
                     tats on the.islands and mainland have been located on.topographic maps.
                     These resource maps and supporting documentation are on:file at the County
                     Planning Department.

                           Habitats which are found in the County's coastal zone include: rare
                     and endangered species habitats (as identified by the California Department
                     of Fish and Game), wetlands, streams, nearshore reefs, tidepools, offshore
                     rocks, native, plant communities, dunes.. kelp beds, harbor seal, rookeries
                     and hauling out grounds, and.seabird roosting and nesting areas. The
                     ge'neral locations of some of the mainland habitat resources are summarized
                     in the following chart:

                                               Area                                              Habitat Type
                                               Santa Maria River Mouth                 Wetland

                                               Guadalupe Dunes                         Dunes, dune plant habitat. Least   Tern
                                                                                       nesting sites

                                               Mussel Point.                           Rocky point, intertidal area*and   dunes
                                               Point Sal                               Rocky intertidal, coastal strand-plant
                                                                                       community, coastal bluff plant com-
                                                                                       munity

                                               Santa Ynez River Mouth (Surf)           Dune and wetland
                                               Point Conception, Jalama, and           Rocky intertidal, coastal strand corn-
                                               Jualachichi Summit                      munity, wetland and riparian habitats,
                                                                                       chaparral, Pinus muricata stand

                                               Point Conception to,Ellwood             Rocky intertidal areas

                                               Naples Reef                             Rocky subtidal area

                                               Ellwood Pier Area.                      Native grassland
                                               Devereux                                Dunes and wetland.
                                               Coal Oil Point                          Rocky intertidal
                                               Isla Vista Coastal Vernal Pools         Rare and seasonal plant community

                                               Goleta Point                            Rocky intertidal

                                               Goleta-Slough                           Wetland, vernal pools, freshwater
                                                                                       marsh

                                               More Mesa                               White-tailed Kite  habitat

                                               El Estero (Carpinteria Marsh)           Wetland

                                               Carpinteria Reef                        Rocky intertidal

                                               NOTE: Harbor seal hauling grounds, butterfly    trees, streams, and native
                                                       plant communities are found at many locations in the coastal zone.

                            3.9.3 PLANNING ISSUES

                                    Habitats are considered to be environmentally sensitive when they
                            exhibit extreme vulnerability to disturbance or destruction from human
                            activities. In Santa Barbara County, recreational uses, agricultural
                            practices, and development pose the greatest threats to habitats because
                            existing County regulations do not provide adequate protection. These
                            issues are summarized below.

                            Recreational uses: Many.recreat                       ion areas       are located on or near habitat
                            resources. ImpaEts from recreational uses include off-road vehicle (ORV)
                            trespass, tramplin*g or alteration                    ' 'of vegetati.ve cover, disturbance of wild-
                            life, collection of specimen's, and harvesting for food. These problems are
                                         I ,F7A@..

                                                                                   -116-

                     exacerbated by the lack of public awareness of the value of habitats and
                     the potential for damage from-these activities. -Some of these impacts
                     @could be mitigated by.proper management and maintenance of park areas and
                     better control over types and locations of recreational activities.

                     Agricultural uses: Certain agricultural practices which are prevalent in
                     the County have impacts on habitats. These practices include-the use of
                     stream.water for irrigation, land clearing, and pesticide   applications, and
                     may damage habitats by causing stream depletion, erosion,   and contamination
                     through runoff.'

                     Development: Urban and/or industrial development near or    adjacent-to
                     habitats may be accompanied by a host of human activities   and related land
                     uses which are incompatible in many instances with the continued existence
                     of certain species. Specific impacts include noise, pollution, intrusion,
                     and outright habitat removal through grading,. paving, and placement.of
                     structures. Oil.development is an issue of Oart'icular.concern due to the
                     threat,of oil spills. Existing oil spill. contin,gency measures may not be
                     adequate to save wetlands, tidepools, and kelp beds in the,event of a
                     'spill.

                     Existing land use control measures: Existing County procedures and
                     ordinances are not adequate to ensure protection of coastal habitat
                     resources. With the exception of the preserve designation for the Carpin-
                     teria Marsh, habitat areas are not specified or protected in existing,
                     general plan or,zoning designations. Even the recently adopted Conserva-.
                     tion Element is inadequate to protect habitats ' because its policies are
                     advisory rather than mandatory. Consequently, protection of habitats is
                     generally left to the environmental review process. This procedure
                     provides only limited protection of habitat resources; not only are many
                     projects exempt from environmental-review, but it is rare that a project is
                     denied on the basis of findings in environmental documents. Moreover, the
                     lack of existing County policy means that projects are designed without
                     .,benefit of specific guidelines to,ensure protection.of habitat resources.
                     If project re-design is required as a result of environmental   review, costs
                     to developers increase significantly.

                     3.9.4 ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE HA8ITAT AREA OVERLAY DESIGNATION

                         The land use plan proposes an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area
                     overl'ay designation to address the deficiencies in existing regulatory
                     procedures. The overlay designation symbolically,indicates the locations
                     of most habitat areas on the land use plan maps. (Small wetlands and
                     streams, which are habitat areas by definition, are shown only on the
                     resource maps and not on the land use plan overlay.) The resource maps
                     include detailed information on all known habitat locations and should be
                     used along with the land use plan.maps. The policies for each habitat type
                     which fol'low 1ater in.this section are to serve as guidelines for develop-'
                     ment on or adjacent to,tWhabitat    areas designated on the land use plan
                     and resource maps.

                                                      -117-

                          The following criteria were used   in determining  which habitats in the
                    County's coastal.zone warranted.   the Habitat Area overlay designation:

                    1.   unique, rare, or fragile communities   which should be preserved to
                         ensure their survival in the future,    i.e., dune vegetation,  native
                         grasslands.

                    2.   Rare and endangered species   habitats that are also protected by Federal
                         and.State laws, i.e., harbor   seal rookeries and haul out areas.

                    3.   Plant community ranges that,are of significant scientific interest
                         because of extensions of range, or un.usal hybrid, disjunct, and relict
                         species (see definitions in Appendix A).

                    4.   Spe6ialized wildlife habitats which arevital to species      survival,
                         i.e.,, White-tailed kite habitat, butterfly trees.

                    @5.  Outstanding representative natural communities that have      values.ranging
                         from a particularly rich flora and fauna to an unusual d,iversity of
                         species, i.e., Point Sal.

                    6.   Areas with outstanding educational values    that should be protected for
                         scientific research and educational uses now and in the future,, i.e.,
                         Naples Reef.

                    7.   Areas that are important because of their biological     productivity such
                         as wetlands, kelp beds, and interti'dal areas.

                    .8.  Areas that are-structurally important in.protecting natural landforms
                         and species, i.e., dunes which protect inland areas, riparian corridors
                         that protect stream banks from erosion and provide shade, kelp beds
                         which provide cover for many species.
                         Significant habitat resources in the coastal    zo ne which meel at least
                    one  of thesecriteria are,designated.on the land     use plan maps. Environ-
                    mentally sensitive habitat   areas have.been grouped into the following cate-
                    .gories:

                      While the designations reflected on the    land use  plan and resource    maps
                    represent the best available information,    these designations are not    defin-
                    itive and may need modification in the future. The scale of the maps
                    precludes complete accuracy in the mapping of habitat areas and, in some
                    cases, the precise location of habitat areas is not known. In addition,
                    migra.tion of.species or discovery of new habitats.would result in the need
                    for designation of a new area. Therefore, the boundaries of the designa-
                    tions should be updated periodically in order to incorporate new data.
                    Changes in theoverlay designations may,be initiated by the County or by
                    landowners.

                                                       -118-

                         Dunes                          Subtidal Reefs
                         Wetlands2                      Rocky Points and   Intertidal  Areas
                         Native Grasslands              'Kelp Beds
                         Vernal Pools                   Seabird Nesting and    Roosting Areas
                         Butterfly Trees                Native Plantsz
                         Marine Mammal Rookeries        Streams
                           and Hauling  Grounds
                         White-tailed Kite Habitat

                           Due to the  limitations   of mapping techniques    and, in  some cases,.
                     incomplete-information on habitat areas, the following        policies shall    apply
                     to development on parcels designated as a habitat        area on  the land use-plan .
                     and/or resource   maps and to   development on parcels     within 250, feet of  a
                     habitat area.

                     'POLICIES:"

                     9-1:   Prior to theissuance of     a development permit,    all projects on
                            parcels shown on the land    use plan and/or resource maps with a
                            Habitat Area overlay designation or within 250       feet of such designa-
                            tion or projects affecting an environmentally sensitive habitat area
                            shall be found to be in conformity with the applicable habitat.
                            protection policies of the land use plan.       All development plans,
                            grading plans, etc., shall show the precise location,of the
                            habitat(s)  potentially affected by the proposed project. Projects
                            which could adversely impact an environmentally sensitive habitat
                            area may be subject to a site inspection by a qualified biologist         to
                            be selected jointly by the County and the applicant.

                          Habitats found in the County and policies for protecting these
                     habitats are listed below., These policies are in addition to.existing
                     State and Federal regulations which protect.many species of plants.and
                     animals and their habitats.

                     HABITAT TYPE: Dunes

                     Location: 'Guadalupe,    Surf, Devereux,   Channel Islands

                     Description: Dunes are     distinct and   sensitive ecosystems    that contain1many
                     rare, endangered, protected, or     unusual plant and.animal    species.    Dune

                     2 Most native plant communities     are not designated on the     land use  plan
                     and resource maps,because the'                o many locations    throughout the.
                                                     y exist in s
                     coastal zone. Only major streams.and wetlands are shown on,th.e land use
                     plan maps..

                                                         -119-

                    landforms serve an important function in protect    ing inland areas from   st orm
                    damage and erosion. This highly specialized habitat is extremely unstable
                    due to the sensitive.interplay between surf, wind, and sand conditions.
                    Sparse, highly adapted vegetation provides the only stabilization of the
                    constant sand movement. The small-number of undisturbed dune areas in
                    Southern California make many of thedune species uncommon, rare, or
                    endangered. Three rare or endangered plant species found in the dune
                    habitats of Santa Barbara County are Cirsium rhothophil.um, Corethrogyne
                    leudoehylla, and Senecio blochmaniae TNative Plant Society, 1971). The
                    principal threats to dune habitats are land uses or recreational activities
                    which result in removal of the vegetation which stabilizes the sand. Oil
                    and gas development, sand mining, and off-road vehicles use may contribute
                    to degradation of the dune resources unless adequately controlled.

                          The Guadalupe Dunes area extends from the mouth of the Santa Maria
                    River south to Mussel Point. In addition to the rare and endangered plant
                    species listed above, another rare plant, Erigeron foliosus var. bloch-
                    maniae is found here (California Natural Areas Coordinating CounciTT.-The
                    encTangered California least tern nests on these dunes. The Guadalupe Dunes
                   .area has been designated as a National Natural Landmark by the National
                    Park Service in recognition of its outstanding resource values. Current
                    unauthorized recreational use by off-road vehicles and hang-gliders is
                    destroying shallow-rooted plants on the dunes, disturbing bird nesting
                    sites., and may be causing movement of the sand inland onto adjacent agri-
                    cultural lands.

                         The Surf dunes are located at the mouth of     the Santa Ynez River and
                    surround a 40-a.cre County park (Ocean Beach County Park). The area around
                   .the County.park is owned by Vandenberg Air Force Base. The sand dunes
                    which are associated with the Santa Yne2 River wetland area are.of great
                    interest to botanists. Cirsium rhothophilum,.an endangered California
                    plant was first collect     and described in the dunes of Surf (Munz, 1970).
                    Additionally these dunes contain the southernmost populations of several
                    coastal strand dominants, e.g., Evening Primrose (Oenothera cheiranthi-
                    folia), and Sand Verbena (Abronia latifo.lia (Munz_,__19__7_0T._ Nesting sites
                    of least tern have been found on the Surf dunes., Off-road vehicles. and
                    recreational activities have damaged the dune vegetation and disturbed
                    nesting sites.

                         The Devereux sand dunes are located west of the UCSB campus; most of
                    the dunes are protected under the Natural Land and Water Reserve System of
                    the University of California. The University attempts to protect the dunes
                    from adverse impacts by prohibiting trespassing. There are signs, fences,
                    and campus police patrols to act as deterrents. The dune area to the west
                    of Devereux campus is not protected and is subject to impacts from off-road
                    vehicle and uncontrolled recreational access.

                                                       -120-

                     Pol i ci es:

                     9-2:   Because of their State-wide significance, coastal dune habitats shall
                            be preserved and protected from all but resource dependent, scienti-
                            fic, educational, and light recreational uses. Resource dependent
                            uses such as sand mining and oil well drilling may be permitted if it
                            can be shown that no alternative location is feasible and such
                            development is sited and designed to minimize impacts on dune vegeta-
                            tion and animal species-3 Disturbance or destruction of any dune
                            vegetation shall be prohibited, unless no feasible alternative
                            exists, and then only if re-vegetation is made a condition of project
                            approval. Such re-vegetation.shall be with native California plants
                            propagated from the disturbed sites or from the same species at
                            adjacent sites.

                     9-3:   All non-authorized motor vehicles     shall be  banned from beach and dune
                            areas.

                     9-4:   All permitted industrial and recreational uses shall be regulated
                            both during construction and operation to protect critical bird
                            habitats during breeding and nesting seasons. Controls may include
                            restriction of access, noise abatement, restriction of hours of oper-
                            ations of public or private facilities.

                     9-5:   For all permitted uses, including recreation, foot traffic on vege-
                            tated dunes shall be minimized.. Where access through'dunes is neces-
                            sary, well-defined footpaths shall be developed and used.

                     HABITAT TYPE: Wetlands.

                     Location: Santa. Maria River Mouth, Santa Ynez River Mouth, Jalama Creek
                                 Mouth, Carpinteria Marsh     'Devereux Lagoon (UCSB), Goleta Slough
                                 (City of Santa   Barbara), and small wetlands at the mouths of
                                 many streams (refer to resource maps).

                     Description: Wetlands, and their associated biotas (marshes, swamps,
                     lagoons and sloughs) are extremely fertile and productive environments.
                     They act as nurseries for many aquatic species and serve as feeding and
                     nesting areas for many waterfowl including rare and endangered species.
                     Tidal flushing from the ocean and nutrient rich freshwater runoff mix to
                     form a delicate balance that maintains the productivity of these environ-
                     ments. Eighty to ninety percent of ihe.State's shorebirds utilize wetland
                     habitats while in California (Fish and Game, 1971). Furthermore, six
                     endangered and one rare species.are dependent on the coastal wetlands.
                     These include the California brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis),
                     American peregrine falcon,(Falco peregrinus), lightfooted clapper-rail
                     (Rallus longirostris levipe-sT, Californialeast.tern (Sterna albifrons

                     3 Special studies are needed to develop conditions and m       itigation
                     measures for oil.well drilling and sand mining. Refer to Section 3.6 for
                     other policies regarding energy facflities.

                                                         -121-

                    brown.i), and the salt marsh harvest mouse (At the Crossroads, 1976). Loss
                    of 6Fto 70 percent of California's wetland acreage since 1.900 to develop-
                    ment, dredging, and siltation underscores the need to protect remaining
                    wetland habitats. Development activities in upland watersheds and stream
                    alteration pose the greatest threats to 'Continued viability of wetland
                    habitats due to toxic runoff and siltation. Direct impacts include
                    dredging, mosquito abatement practices, and flood control projects.

                         The Santa Maria River Mouth is located at the extreme northern
                    boundary of Santa Barbara County. It is a winter estuary consisting of
                    40-50 acres of tidal mudflat area. Although it has not been subjected to
                    intense study, it-is believed that the brown pelican, an endangered
                    species, may make use of this area. The least.tern, another endangered.
                    species, has been observed in the Santa Maria River Mouth during breeding
                    season. Endangered plant species that have been.located in this vicinity
                    by the California Native Plant Society are Castilleja mollis. Cirsium
                    rhothophilum, C. loncholepis, Erigeron foliosus var. blochmaniae, and
                    @Monardella crispa. According to the California Department of Fish and
                    Game, irrigation runoff water is having.an adverse impact on the Santa
                    Maria River Mouth. ("Water Quality and Quantity Problems of.Fish and Wild-
                    life," 1972).

                         The Santa Ynezwetland area lies in the broad lowflood plain of the
                    lower Santa Ynez River. It consists of salt marsh,, mudflats, shallow tidal
                    channels, and open water. The lagoon and river mouth area have an exten-
                    sive habitat frequented by water-ass 'ociated birds including the endangered
                    California least tern., Wading,birds such as the green heron, American
                    bittern, snowy egret, and great blue heron have been sighted in the back-
                    water areas (Fish and Game, 1976). The endangered plant Cordylanthus
                    maritimus is also found in the.'salt marsh areas (California Native Plant
                    ,Society,,1971). Activities affecting this wetland area.include recrea-
                    tional uses (off-road vehicles, sport fishing, and boating, nearby agricul-
                    tural uses, sedimentation, and dredging.

                         Goleta Slough, which  is mostly within the jurisdictional limits of the
                    City of Santa Barbara, is  located adjacent to the UCSB Campus. It is a
                    @shallow water Salicornia marsh interwoven with several water channels.
                    This Slough once occupied an area of over 1200 acres but as a result of
                    sedimentatio*n and filling for the airport, it has been reduced to a little
                    over 350 acres   Endangered species such as the American peregrine falcon,
                    the California*brown pelican, and Belding's savanna sparrow along with the
                    "protected" white-tailed kite have been sighted in the Slough area. Addi-
                    tionally, an endangered plant, Cordylanthus maritimus, has been found in
                    the Goleta Slough environs by the California Native Plant Society. Adverse
                    impacts have been caused by off-road vehicle enthusiasts.use of the area
                    and mosquito abatement activities.   *Tidal circulation has also been
                    impaired by levee construction, tide gates, and other factors which have
                    increased sedimentation.

                                                      _122-

                           Carpinteria Marsh is located     immediately west of the City of Carpin-
                      teria. The wetland area is listed as a high priority wetland for protec-
                      tion by the California Department of Fish and Game (1974). Two endangered.
                      bird species, the lightfooted clapper rail and Belding's savanna sparrow,
                      inhabit the marsh along with Cordylanthus maritimus, an endangered plant
                      Species. The University of C-aTl7o-rnia has recently purchased 120 acres of
                      this 230 acre marsh for inclusion in its Statewide Natural Land and Water
                      Reserve System. Access,to the marsh is restricted to individuals and
                      groups such.as.Nat  'ural History Museum personnel, Audubon.bird watching
                      groups, and University researchers. Impacts on the ma       rsh from agriculturcil
                      runoff, sedimentation, and mosquito abatement threaten its productivity.

                           Additional wetlands exist at the mouth of numerous streams. These
                      habitats, although smaller, contain many of:the rare and endangered plant
                    ,.and animal species mentioned above and thus are important resoqrces.@to be
                      protected.

                      Policies:

                      9-6: All diking, dredging, and      filling activities   shall  conform to the
                            provisions of Sections 30233 and 30607.1 of the Coastal.Act.
                            Dredging, when t(onsistent with these provisions and wherenec.essary
                            for the maintainence of the tidal flow and continued viability of the
                            wetland habitat or for flood control purposes, shall be subject to
                            the  following conditions:.

                            a..  Dredging shall,be prohibited in breeding and nursery areas and
                                 during periods'of fish migration and spawning.

                            b.   Dredging  shall be  limited  to the smallest area feasible.

                            c.   Designs for dredging   and excavation projects sha    11include
                                 protective measures such as silt curtains, diapers, and weirs to
                                 protect water quality in adjacent areas during construction by
                                 preventing the discharge of refuse, petroleum spills, and
                                 unnecessary dispersal of silt materials. (Projects which          result
                                 in discharge of water into.a wetland require a permit from the
                                 Regional Water Quality Control'Board.)

                      9-7:  Dredge spoils shall not be deposited permanently in areas         subject to
                            tidal influence or in areas where public access would be signifi-
                            cantly adversely affected. When feasible, spoils should be deposited
                            in the littoral drift, except when contaminants would adversely.
                            affect water quality or marine habitats, or on the beach.

                      9-8:  Boating shall be prohibited in     all wetland areas except for research
                            or maintenance purposes.

                      9-9:  A buffer strip, a minimum of 100 feet in width, shall be maintained
                            in natural condition along the periphery of all. wetlands. No
                            per manent structures shall be permitted within the wetland or buffer
                            area.except structures of a minor nature, i.e., f      Iences, or structures
                            necessary to support'the uses in Policy 9-10. (The upland boundary

                                                          -123-

                            of  a wetland sha-11 be the land that is flooded or saturated at some:
                            time during years of normal precipitation.)

                      9,-10: Light recreation such  as birdwatching   or nature study and scientific
                            and educational uses shall be permitted with appropriate controls to
                            prevent adverse impacts.

                      9-11: Wastewater shall not be discharged into any wetland without a permit
                            from.the Regional Water Quality Control Board finding that such,
                            discharge improves the quality of the receiving water.

                      9-12: Wetland sandbars may be dredged, when permitted,pursuant to       Policy
                            9-6 a-bove, and when necess  Iary for maintenance of tidal flow   to ensure
                            the continued biological productivity of the wetland.:

                      9-13: No unadt.horized vehicle traffic.shall,,be permittedin     wetlands and
                            pedestrian traffic shall be regulated and incidental to the permitted
                            uses.;

                      9-14: New development adjacent to wetlands shallnot result inadverse
                            impacts due to additional sediment'. runoff,    noise, and other distur-
                            bances.

                      9-15: Mosquito abatement pract'ices shall be limited to the minimum neces-
                           ,sary to protect health and prevent damage to natural resources.
                            Spraying shall be avoided during nesting seasons to protect wildlife,
                            especially the endangered light-foot6d clapper rail and Belding's
                            savannah sparrow. Biological controls are encouraged.

                      9-16: No grazing or other agricultural uses,shall be permitted in coastal
                            wetlands.

                      HABITAT TYPE: Native Grasslands

                      Location: A small patch of native,grassland      is located,on the   coastal
                                 bluffs west of the Ellwood pier.      Small patches  also.exist in
                                 other locations.

                      Description: At one time, native grassland communities covered much of
                      California. However, overgrazing and competition with European weedy
                      species introduced at the time of Spanish settlement have all but eli,min-
                      ated the native grasses from California. Twenty-six of these native grass
                      species are listed as rare, endangered, or possibly extinct by the Califor-
                      nia Native Plant Society.. Additionally, numerous wildflower species occur
                      within the native grassland community. Wildflowers, because of their
                      varying colors, add a unique visual resource to this habitat. The
                      grassland community is sensitive to disturbance, particul,arly from cattle
                      grazing. Disruption to this community,increases its vulnerability         to
                      takeover by introduced species.,.

                                                         -124-

                     Pol icies:

                     9-17: Grazing shall   be managed  to protect native   grassland  habitat.

                     9 18: Development shall be    sited and d.esigned to. protect   native grassland
                            areas@

                     HABITAT TYPE:   Vernal Pools

                     Locatiow Isla     Vista

                     Description: These small fragile     communities are the result     of rain or
                     runoff in areas of poor drainage,    and support interesting ecological commu-
                     nities during winter and early spring. Plants typical of vernal         Pools
                     .include Downingia spp., Lepidium spp. and LXthrumhyssopifolia. The
                     Pacific Tree Frog, the Western Toad, ihe California Tiger Salamander,        and
                     the Southern Long.-toed Salamander commonly inhabit the pools along wi      th
                     migratory birds who use them in the spring-as resting places. Due to
                     spotty distribution and the degree of adaptation needed for the fluctuating
                     environmental conditions in this community, these,areas often support
                     endangered and rare plant and animal species. The pools also provide water
                     and forage for small grazing animals such as rabbits, mite, voles and
                     gophers (Howald, 1979). Vernal pools are threatened by site development,
                     fire,prevention measures, mosquito control activities,,mowingl disking, and
                     draining. In an undisturbed state, Vernal pools are valuable for scienti-
                     fic and educational purposes.

                          several vernal pools sites are found on undeveloped parcels in the
                     south-westerly area of Isla Vista. These pools are subject to        impacts-from
                     mosquito abatement practices, fire prevention measures, and disking. An
                     endangered.plant, Lasthenia conjugehs@ is found.'in@Lthese pools.,

                     .Policies:

                     9-19: No mosquito control activity    shall  be car,rie.d out in vernal  pools,
                          Anless it is required to avoid severe nuisance.

                     9-20:  Grass cutting for fire prevention    shall. beconducted   -in.such,a manner
                            as to protect.'vernal pool.s. 'No grass cutting shall, be allowed within
                            the vernal pool area or within a buffer zone of five feet or
                            greater.

                     9-21:  Development'shall be sited and designed to avoid vernal pool       sites as
                            depicted on the resource maps.

                     HABITAT TYPE: Butterfly Trees

                     Location: Dos Puebl,os, near Coronado Road in Goleta, near Arroyo Quemado,
                                 Music Academy of the Wes,t.parking lot in MontecitoP Price estate
                                 in Hope Ranch area, Pacific Lighting property near Goleta
                                 Slough, Loon Point.area.

                                                         -125-

                    Description: Tagging studies,indicate that the Monarch Butterfly (Danaus
                    plexipous) migrates southward over long distances to escape the cold
                    winters of the central and northern states. Their wintering grounds are
                    areas within a coastal strip extending from Los.Angeles to Monterey. These
                    wintering grounds are roosting habitats consisting of a circular configura-
                    tion of tall trees, usually eucalyptus, which are essential for the mating
                    phase of the Monarch Butterfly's life cycle. During the fall and winter
                    months the trees are used by massive numbers of Monarch Butterflies as
                    communal roosts. These winter clusters represent the most sensitive part
                    of the Monarch's life cycle. Repopulation of the species depends upon the
                    mating phase which occurs in these specialized habitats. Little is known
                    about the behavior patterns and migration   'routes of, the Monarch Butterfly;
                    therefore, this habitat is of important scientific, educational, and
                    general publ,ic interest.

                    Policies:

                    9-22: Butterfly trees shall not be removed except where they pose a serious
                          threat to life or property, and shall not be pruned during roosting
                          and nesting season.

                    9-23: Adjacent development shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet from the
                       . trees.

                    HABITAT TYPE: Marine Mammal Rookeries and Hauling    Grounds

                    Location: Carpinteria, Goleta, Naples, Point Conception, Channel
                               Islands.4

                    Description: The Santa Barbara Channel is equalled by few localities in
                    its variety and number of marine mammals. Several species of whale,
                    dolphin, seal, and sea lion are found in the Channel. California grey
                    whales migrate through the Santa Barbara Channel on their way back and
                    forth from their breeding grounds off Baja California. Harbor seals and
                    sea lions use isolated beaches and rocks along the coast and offshore
                    islands for hauling out and pupping grounds. Marine mammals are protected
                    under the provisions of the Federal Marine Mammal Protection Act. This
                    legislation encourages '.'efforts to protect the rookeries, mating grounds,
                    and areas of similar significance for each species of marine mammal from
                    the adverse effect of man's action" (Section 2(2)).

                         Harbor seals have a life span of from 15 to 30 years, weigh up to 150
                    kilograms, and average 1.5 to 2.0 meters in length. Population estimates
                    of Harbor seals along the California coast range from a minimum of 1600 to
                    a maximum of 2500 individuals. Harbor seal hauling grounds are usually
                    sandy beaches or rocky outcrops frequented by harbor seals. Some of these
                    areas are used for rookeries (giving birth and nursing). Studies indicate
                    that nearby deep water, headlands whi.ch restrict lateral access, shelf-like

                    4 other locations may exist.

                                                     -126-

                      offshore rocks, and offshore kelp beds..(used for feeding and rafting) are
                      factors influencing selection of hauling grounds.      Harbor seal hauling out.
                      appears to be regulated by the time.of day, tidal fluctuations., and human
                      disturbances. Harbor seals do not haul out on beaches that are used
                      heavily by the public. In fact, they have been known to entirely abandon
                      hauling grounds because of excessive human activity       In some cases,,
                      however, harbor seals have adapted to minor disturb;nces such as occasional
                      beach walkers And noise of boats or aircraft.

                           Male sea lions can grow to eight feet in length and     weigh as much as
                      1,000 pounds, while the female sea lion can extend six feet in length and
                      weigh up to 600 pounds. They range from British Columbia to the Central
                      Mexican coas t and breed in the summertime on rocks and isolated beaches
                      generally from the Santa Barbara Channel south. Although more common on
                      the Channel Islands, sea lions do haul out on Lion Rock near Point Sal.

                           Located 100 meters due east of the Standard Oil Company pier, the
                      Carpinteria hauling grounds and rookery consists of a sandy pocket beach
                      connected by a sand spit to a shelf-like intertidal rock outcrop. Harbor
                      seals use this hauling ground during.the night and occasionally during the
                      day. However,,they do not use the rock outcrop when people or dogs are
                      nearby. Observations indicate as many as.90 seals use the area.

                           The Goleta hauling grounds are located 1.6 kilometers east of Goleta
                      Beath County Park. The harbor seals in this area haul out during the dAy.
                      and night when'tides are low to expose the sand and.rock outcrops. These
                      seals appear to have adjusted somewhat to the human, aircraft, and boat
                      traffic which frequent the area. As many as 79 harbor seals have been
                      observed using these grounds.

                           A pocket beach located appro  ximately .6 kilometers   east of Naples
                      Point provides a secluded hauling ground and rookery, utilized during the
                      day and night. Observations indicate as many as 165 harbor seals use these
                      grounds.

                           Two observations of harbor-seals at Point Conception indicate that
                      between 80 and 150 seals may be using a rocky shelf belo'w,the Coast Guard
                      Lighthouse as hauling grounds..

                      Policies:

                      9-24: Recreational activities near or on   areas  used for marine m  ammal
                           hauling grounds shall be carefully    monitored to ensure continued
                           viability of these habitats.

                      9-25: Marine mammal rooke 'ries shall not be altered or disturbed by recrea-
                           tional, industrial, or any other uses during the.times of the year
                           when such areas are in use for reproductive activities, i.e., mating,
                           pupping, and pup care.

                                                        -127-

                      NOTE   At present, 'there are only harbor seal rooker    ies on the mainland and
                      Santa Cruz and Santa. Rosa Islands.    There is the possibility that other
                      species of marine mammals may establish rookeries in other areas in the
                      future, particularly on the Islands.

                      Times of year when marine mammals use rookery areas:

                      Harbor seals:: February through April
                      Northern Elephant seals: Mid-December through February
                      Sea Lions and fur seals: May through September

                      HABITAT TYPE: White-tailed    Kite

                      Location: More Mesa

                      Description: Within the United States, the White-tailed Kite is currently
                      found only in California. This bird of prey has pure,white under parts and
                      grey and.white tail feathers.. The White-tailed Kite is most often observed
                      alone or in pairs; however, it is known to roost and, in some cases, nest
                      communally.

                           The More Mesa grassland provides a feeding and nesting habitat for the
                      White-tailed Kite. This hawk, designated as a fully protected species. by
                      the California Department of Fish and Game, cannot be "taken or possessed
                      at any time" (California Fish and Game Code, Section 3511). The kites use
                      the oak trees, found in the northwest portion of More Mesa, for communal
                      ro osting at night and as nesting sites during the breeding season. The
                      surrounding grasslands, ravines, and flood plains of Atascadero Creek serve
                      as hunting grounds for the kites, which feed mainly on the meadow vole and
                      harvest mouse. Estimates of the amount of grassland area needed for
                      feeding by a pair of kites range from 30-125 acres depending upon prey
                      populations. Impacts on the White-tailed Kite include conversion of,
                      grassland feeding areas, and disturbances of nesting and roosting sites.

                      Policies:

                      9-26: There shall be no development including agricultural development,
                            i.e., structures, roads, 'within the area used for roosting and
                            nesting.

                      9-27: Recreational use of the roosting and nesting area shall be minimal,
                            i.e., walking, bird watching. Protective measures for this area
                            should include fencing and posting so as to restrict, but not
                            exclude, use by people.

                      9-28: Any development around the nesting and roosting area shall be set
                            .back sufficiently far as to minimize impacts on the habitat area.

                      9-29: In addition to preserving the ravine    plant communities on More Mesa
                            for nesting and roosting sites, the maximum feasible.area shall be
                            retained in grassland'to provide feeding area for the kites.

                                                         -128-

                     HABITAT TYPE: Rocky Points and Intertidal Areas

                     Location: Mussel Point, Point Sal, Point Conception to Ellwood, Coal Oil..
                                Point, Goleta Point,.Carpinteria Bluffs, Channel Islands

                     Description: Rocky points and intertidal areas   provide habitats for a
                     diversity of marine organisms whichare adapted   to harsh and changing
                     environmental conditions such as wave shock and  moisture fluctuation.
                     Direct human disturbance, such as foot traffic,  collecting of organisms,   or
                     any sort of handling is very destructive to the  existing biota. Adverse
                     impacts on marine water quality also affect the  biota which thrive on rocky
                     points and.intertidal areas. Destruction to the organisms at one rocky
                     point decreases the probability of natural replacement of organisms at
                     other points because of their biological interdependence.

                          Mussel Point is located just south of the Guadalupe Dunes. It is a
                     rocky headland backed by high dunes of.up to 450 feet. The rugged coast-
                     line supports a sensitive intertidal community.

                          Point Sal is located south of Mussel Point. Its intertidal area
                     extends from the.Point southeasterly to the State beach park. The Point
                     Sal area is.zoologically.significant because of the relatively undisturbed
                     condition of the tidepools and the exemplary display of vertical. zonation
                     within the intertidal zone.

                          The area from Point Conception  to Ellwood is approximately 30   miles in
                     length. This stretch of coastline has been recommended for preserve status
                     by the Conservation Element due to,.its many fine-intertidalareas. Many-
                     segments of this,coastline remain relatively undisturbed d.ue-to a' lack of
                     public access.

                          Coal Oil Point is a low-lying rocky reef onthe west campus of the
                     University of California. This area is valued for its "remarkably rich
                     intertidal invertebrate fauna" (Conservation Element). These invertebrates
                     include many species of starfish, crabs, octopus, and'molluscs. This area
                     is designated as a Natural Reserve by,the University of California. The
                     reef area is used extensively for educational.purposes. For this reason
                     and its proximity to urban areas,. heavy collecting activity has disturbed
                     the site.

                          Goleta Point is also located on the  main University of California at
                     Santa Barbara campus. This is an  exposed rocky poirt that is subjected to
                     heavy foot traffic because of its proximity to the campus and dormitories.

                          The Carpinteria reef and bluffs, located at the eastern edge of
                     Carpinteria State Beach, present the most diverse intertidal area on the
                     mainland south of Point Arguello (Conservati.on Element). The reef contains
                     organisms from relatively large taxonomic groups which are absent in other
                     areas. Additionally, some species,uncommon on the South Coast have been
                     sighted.in the Carpinteria.Reef.,

                                                      _129-

                      Pol i ci es:

                      9-30: In order to prevent   destruction of organisms whi'ch thrive in inter-
                            tidal areas, no unauthorized vehicles shall be allowed on beaches
                            adjacent to intertidal areas.

                      9-31: Only light recreational use shall be permitted on public beaches
                            which include or are adjacent to rocky points or intertidal.areas.

                      9-32: Shoreline structures, including piers, groins, breakwaters, drain-
                           .ages, and seawallss and pipelines, shouldbesited or routed to avoid
                            significant rocky points and intertidal areas,.

                      HABITAT TYPE: Subtidal Reefs

                      Location: Naples, Carpinteria

                      Description: Su,btidal reefs are   offshore rocky areas that serve asattach-
                      ment points for a hi-gh number and  diversity.of algae, invertebrates, and
                      fish species. The reef environment is a unique and rich resource, used for
                      research, education, and commercial and recreational fishing.

                           Naples Reef is an intertidall and subtidal area six miles west of
                      Goleta extending a mile or so out to sea. According to biologists, this
                      reef contains the largest number and highest diversity of intertidal
                      organisms within the County. The reef is also believed to have the
                      greatest diversity of algae anywhere along the South Coast. Invertebrate
                      zoologists collecting specimens at Naples Reef have observed uncommon
                      organisms (e.g. colonial anthozoans, phoronids, bryozoans, and dorid and
                      aeolid nudibranchs). Moray eels (Gymnothorax) have been found at Naples
                      Reef and at only one other locality in the County. Striped perch (Embio-
                      tica lateralis) and Catalina Goby (Lythrypnus) are also found at the reef
                      and are uncommon in most other parts of the County coastline. Field trips
                      and research projects are conducted at the reef by UCSB researchers and
                      students, and to a lesser extent by Cal Poly at San Luis Obispo, the
                      University of California at Los Angeles, and Santa Barbara City College.
                      Other uses in this area include fishing, surfing, and skin and SCUBA
                      diving. Commercial and recreational fishing and collecting are causing the
                      depletion of lobster, red sea urchin,'and abalone. Continueddepletion
                      will erode the educational value of Naples Reef.

                           Carpinteria Reef is located offshore at the extreme eastern edge of
                      Carpinteria State Beach and extends one mile to the south. This reef is
                      very diverse biologically. For example, Elysia and Tigriopus, two inter-
                      tidal invertebrates which are not often seen on the South Coast, are found
                      on the Carpinteria Reef. The reef is of high scientific and educational
                      value and is sensitive to collecting pressures due to extensive recrea-
                      tional use. Carpinteria Reef is also a popu    lar skin and SCUBA diving area.
                      The California Department of Fish.and.Game'considers this reef to be.a
                      favorite spear fishing spot for opaleye., halfmoon, sheephead, and pile
                      perch.

                                                         -130-

                     Pol icies:

                     9-33:  Naples reef shall be maintained,primarily as a site for scientific
                            research and education. Recreational and commercial uses shall be
                            permitted as long as such uses do not result in depletion of marine
                            resources. If evidence of depletion is found, the County shall work
                            with the Department,of Fishand Game and sport and commercial fishing
                            groups to assets the extent of damage and implement mitigating
                            measures.

                     'HABITAT TYPE: Kelp Beds

                     Location: Along the coast from Jalama      to Carpinteria

                     Description: The Santa Barbara County      coastline supports  a rich kelp bed
                     resource. Kelp beds are productive environments which serve as fish
                     habitats and are therefore important to sport and commerc.ial fishermen and
                     biologists. Kelp beds are destroyed by poor water quality from sources
                     such as sewer outfalls, siltation a-nd other ocean bottom disturbances,
                     water temperature changes, and overgrazing from marine invertebrates (such
                     as the sea urchin) and fish. Extensive kelp bed areas have been destroyed
                     in Southern California coastal areas due to.some of these impacts.        The
                     effect of kelp harvesting on long-term survival and productivi.ty is      a
                     source of considerable controversy'.. The activities of kelp cutters      are
                     currently regulated by the California Department of Fish and.Game.

                     Policies:

                     Since the County does not have direct jurisdiction over activities that
                     could impact kelp resources, it should request that 1) the Department of
                     Fish and Game carefully monitor the kelp harvesting industry to ensure that
                     such activity will not reduce kelp bed size and range or its productivity
                     as a fish nursery habitat, and 2) State and Federal agencies carefully
                     monitor activities that may.affect marine water quality such as sewage
                     disposal, dredging, and energy development.

                     HABITAT TYPE: Seabirds.Nesting and Roosting      Sites

                     Location: Lion Rock, Channel Islands

                     Descriptio n: Seabirds utilize rock outcrops and seacliffs.on the mainland
                     and offshore islands-for nesting and roosting purposes. Birds which nest
                     on the Channel Islands often disperse along the mainland during the non-
                     breeding season. Populations along the coast are,usually high during the
                     winter months and when tidal changes are extreme. Low tides expose
                     normally hidden intertidal invertebrates which serve as food for seabirds.
                     The California brown pelican, western gull, several species of cormorants,
                     loons, and grebes are found in the Santa Barbara Channel region. Impacts
                     upon seabird populations include human disturbances of roosting areas, oil
                     spills, and chemical pollution from mainland outfall.s.

                    'Pol i c 1 es:

                    9-34: Recreational activities near areas used for roosting and nesting
                          shall be controlled to avoid disturbance to seabird populations,
                           particularly during.nesting season.

                    HABITAT TYPE:   Native Plant Communities (examples:. coastal sage scrub,
                                    chaparral, coastal bluff, closed cone pine forest, Califor-
                                    nia native oak woodland (also individual oak trees)),
                                    endangered and rare plant species as designated by the Cali
                                    fornia Native Plant Society, and other plants of special
                                    interest such as endemics.
                    Location:   Countywide5 Areas-with..outsta,nding examples of native plant
                                communities'are Mussel Point, Point Sal and Point Conception.

                    Description: Natural ecological systems composed of native plant species
                    serve many essential functions. They serve as wildlife habitats and
                    provide nesting sites and feeding resources for many animals. Native
                    .plants, due to their adaption to the local,environment, us.e.less water than
                    most introduced species and contribute*to   the stabilization of soil on
                    bluffs, hillsides, and watersheds. In addition, native plants are an
                    integral component of the landscape that makes the Santa Barbara County
                    coastal zone a visual resource of more than local importance. Oak trees
                    need special attention, as they are large and provide important habitat and
                    .shading. They are very long-lived, relatively slow-growing, and are, easily
                    harmed by surrounding land uses. Grazing in the oak-savanna can prevent
                    regeneration of individual trees.

                         A delicate coastal  strand community covers some of the upland area
                    near Mussel Point. In addition to the typical species found in this commu-
                    nity, such as sand verbena,(Abronia maritima and A. umbellata), purple sage
                    (Salvia leucophylla), and lupine (Lupinus albifro7ns), -four rare plant
                    species have been reported: Cirsium rhothophilum. Senecio.blochmaniae,
                    CastijltL mollis and MonardeTT-a-cr-lT'spa.

                         Point Sal is located just south of   Mussel Point. Due to the relative
                    lack of human disturbance and accessibility, several of the Point Sal plant
                    communities are in excellent condition. The vegetation on the steep slopes
                    of the cliffs at Point Sal is made up of the coastal bluff community. This
                    community is rare in Santa Barbara County and Point Sal has the best
                    example on the mainland. An endangered'plant, Sanicula hoffmannii, is
                    found in the coastal sage community, which is also represented at Point
                    Sal.

                    5Most of these habitats are not designated on the   land use maps because
                    they occur  in so many areas. Therefore, the policies will    have to be
                    applied on  a case-by-case basis as projects are reviewed.

                                                      -132-

                           Point Conception   is a broad,  flat marine.terrace with'bluffs up    to 50.
                      meters in height. It    is located  at the point.where the north to south
                      orientation of the Santa Barbara coast changes to an east to west direc-
                      tion.  As with Point Sal,,Point Conception is important from a scientific
                      and educational standpoint. Coastal strand, dune, chaparral, and coastal
                      sage scrub communities are all represented at Point Conception. Two rare
                      and endangered plants found here are Cirsium rhothophilum and Senecio
                      blochmaniae. Point Conception has been minimally disti d, largely
                      because oFthe lack of access to,the site.; all of the la,nd near the Point
                      is privately owned and closely patrolled.

                      Policies:

                      9@35: Oak trees, because they are particularly sensitive to environmental
                            conditions, shall beprotected. All land.use activities, including
                            cultivated agriculture and grazing, should be carried out in such a
                            manner as to avoid damage to native oak trees. Regeneration of oak
                            trees on grazing lands should be encouraged.

                      9-36: When sites are   Igraded or developed, areas with significant amounts    of
                            native vegetation shall be preserved. All development shall be
                            sited, designed, and constructed to minimize impacts of grading,
                            paving, construction of roads or structures, runoff, and erosion on
                            native vegetation.. In particular, grading and paving shall not
                          ..adversely affect root zone aeration and stability of native trees.

                                                         -133-

                               HABITAT TYPE:                     Streams

                               Location:

                                                                        Perennial       intermittant

                                                            POINT SAL

                                                                  Santa Maria River
                                                                  Corralitos Canyon
                                                                  Santa Ynez River

                                                            JALAMA TO GAVIOTA

                                                                  Canada   de la Gaviota                    Canada  de la   Cuarta
                                                                  Canada   del Agua Caliente                Canada    del Coyote
                                                                  Canada   de Alegria                       Canada   del Agua
                                                                  canada    del Sacate                       Canada   de las Panoches
                                                                  Canada  de Santa Anita                   Canada   de las Agustine
                                                                  Arroyo   Bulito,                          Arroyo   San Augustine
                                                                  Barranca Honda                            Canada   de Pescado
                                                                  Canada del Cojo                            Canada de Chiclan
                                                                  Wood Canyon                               Canada  de la Llegua
                                                                  Jalama Creek                              Canada  del Gato,
                                                                  Gaspar   Creek                            Canada   del Cementerio
                                                                  Espada   Creek                            Damsite Canyon
                                                                                                           Black Canyon
                                                                                                            Escondido Creek

                                                            GAVIOTA COAST

                                                                  Canada   San Onofre                      Canada    del  Barro
                                                                  Canada  del Molino                       Canada    del  Cementario
                                                                  Arroyo Quemado                            Canada     Alcatraz
                                                                  Arroyo Quemado                            Canada   del Leon
                                                                  Tajiguas                                  Canada   de la Posta
                                                                  Canada del    Refugio                     Canada   de las Zorillas
                                                                  Canada    del  Corral                      Canada  de la Gallina
                                                                  Canada  del  Capitan                    Canada  de la Huerta
                                                                  Las Llagas    Canyon                      Canada   de la Rita
                                                                                                            Canada   del Venadito
                                                                                                            Canada   de la Destilladora
                                                                                                            Gato Canyon
                                                                                                            Las Varas
                                                                                                            Dos Pueblos
                                                                                                            EagleCanyon
                                                                                                            Tecolote Canyon
                                                                                                            Bell Canyon

                                                            GOLETA

                                                                                                            Atascadero Creek
                                                                                                            San Pedro Creek
                                                                                                            Tecolotito    Creek
                                                                                                            Cameros Creek
                                                                                                            San Jose Creek
                                                                                                            Devereux Creek

                                                            MONTECITO AND SUMMERLAND

                                                                                                            San Ysidro Creek
                                                                                                            R omero  Creek
                                                                                                            Oak Creek
                                                                                                            Montecito Creek

                                                            CARPINTERIA VALLEY

                                                                  Rincon Creek                              Toro Canyon Creek
                                                                                                            Santa Monica Creek
                                                                                                            Franklin Creek
                                                                                                            Carpinteria Creek
                                                                                                            Gobernador Creek
                                                                                                            Arroyo Paredon

                                                                                                                               Source: USGS    Maps

                                                                                               -134-

                       Description:    Streams and creeks provide habi    tats for many bird, animal,
                       and plant species and serve.as major corridors for transporting nutrients
                       and sediments to wetlands and estuaries. They also play a critical role in
                       providing sand for beach replenishment. Streams and creeks provide an
                       environment for plant and animal species that cannot tolerate the arid
                       conditions of the dominant chaparral environment. Riparian v          ,egetation,
                       including California Bays (Umbell,ularia californica), Willows1(Salix.�,E-)J,
                       .Big Leaf Maples (Acer macrophyT-lum), and Sycamores (Plantus racemosa), is
                       found along many Of the County's streams. Strands of -California Walnut
                       (Juglans californica),, uncommon in Santa Barbara County       ., occur along Jalama
                       andRincon Creeks. Additionally, numerous water-loving organis           .ms including
                       the Monterey Salamander (Ensdtina) and the Pacific Pond Turtle (Clemmys
                       marmorata) live within th-esestream environments.

                            Streams and creeks affect both the quantity and quality of local water
                       supplies. Heavy siltation of the stream bed can clog the natural flow of
                       water from 'the surface into groundwater reserves. Increased sedimentation
                       in streams also results in higher flows and increased flood hazards.
                       Polluted runoff from upland development or direct discharge into a stream
                       can infiltrate the groundwater,'thereby polluting underground water
                       resources. Development and land use activity within and,adjacent to the
                       watercourse has profound effects on stream hydrology, channel geometry,, and
                       water quality. Protection of streams requires regulation of land use
                       within the immediate environmen    t as well.as control of land use in the
                       larger watershed.    The following policies.are directed. at development@
                       within the stream corridor. Regulat.io     InIof. 11  land,'u.ses in the watershed is
                       addressed.i.n Section 3.3@of the plan.

                       Definitions:

                       stream: watercourses, includi'ng,.major     and minor streams, draihageways      and
                            small lakes, ponds and marshy areas through which.        streams pass.
                            (Coastal  wetlands are n  ot included.)

                       Major Stream: a stream with a.drainage       area  in excess   of 500 acres.

                       Minor Stream: a stream with 6      drainage  area  l,ess than  500 acres.

                       Riparian Vegetation: vegetation normally found        along the banks and.beds of
                            streams, creeks, and rivers..

                       Stream Corridor: a stream and      its minimum   prescribed buffer strip.

                       Buffer: a designated width of      land adjacent to the stream which is neces-
                           sary to protect biological     productivity, water quality, and hydro-
                          .1ogical characteristics of     the stream.    A buffer strip,is measured
                           horizontally from.the banks.or high water mark of the stream landward.

                                                           _135-

                       Pol icies:

                       .9-37: The  minimum buffer   strip for major streams. shall be 20.feet and, for
                              minor streams...15 feet. These minimum buffers,may be adjusted by.the.
                              County on a case-by-case basis after investigation         of the following
                              factors:
                              .a.  soil type  and stability of    stream corridor;
                              b.   how surface water filters into the ground;
                              C.   types and amount of riparian vegetation and how such vegetation
                                 .@contributes to soil stability an*d habitat value;.
                              d.   slope of the land on either side of the stream; and
                              e.   location.of the 100-year flood plain boundary.
                       9-38:  No structures shall be located within the stream corridor except:
                              dams; structures necessary for flood control purposes; bridges, when
                              supports are located outside the critical habitat; pipelines, when no-
                              alternative route is feasible; and fences.

                       9-39:  Dams or other structures     that would prevent upstream      migration of
                              anadromous fish shall not be allowed in       streams   targeted by the
                              California Department of Fish and Game unless other measures are used
                              to allow fish to bypass obstacles., These streams include: :San,
                              Antonio Creek (Los Alamos area), Santa YneZ River, Jalama Creek,
                              Santa Anita Creek, Gaviota Creek, and Tecolote Creek.

                       9-40:  All development, including dredging, filling, and grading           within
                              stream corridors, shall be limited to.activities necessary for flood
                              control purposes, bridge construction, water supply projects, trail
                              construction, or laying of pipelines, when.no alternative route is
                              feasible. When such activities requ,ire removal of riparian plant
                              species, re-vegetation with local native plants.shall be required
                              except where undesirable for flood control purposes. Minor clearing.
                              of vegetation.for hiking, bikingi and equestrian trails shall be
                              permitted.

                       9-41:  All permitted construction and grading within stream corridors shall
                              be carried out in such a manner as to mini,mize impacts from increased
                              ruhoff, sedimentation, biochemical-degradation, or thermal pollu-
                              tion.

                       9-42:  The following activities shall be prohibited within stream corridors:
                              cultivated agriculture, pesticide applications, except by a mosquito
                              abatement or flood-control district, and installation of septic
                              tanks.

                       9-43:  Other than projects t   hat  are currently approved and/or funded, no
                              further concretechannelization or other major alterations of streams
                              in the coastal@zone shall be permitted unless consistent with the
                              provi,sions of Section 30236 of the Coastal Act.

                                                             -136-

                      3.9.5 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

                      The following actions areneeded to ensure long-term       preservation, of
                      habitat resources in the coastal zone:

                      1.  Immediate publ,ic action is needed t   o halt the unauthorized   use.of:off-
                          road vehicles on the Guadalupe. Dunes,.,
                      2-  The County should pursue funding for     a special  study of-the  Guadalupe
                          Dunes. This study should include an      inventory.of the biological and
                                                                              r s'for sand mining and
                          archaeological resources and performance standa d
                          oil and gas development.

                      3.  The County should pursue additional     measures,.to.ensure   long-term
                          preservation of the habitat resources of the following       areas: Guada-
                          lupe Dunes, Point'Sal, Santa, Cruz and.Santa Rosa Islands., These
                          additional measures mayinclude: public acquisition.,.conservation
                          easements, open space or recreational preserves,, purchase of develop-.
                          ment rights

                      4.  The County should post signs at appropriate-locations which will
                          restrict public access. into the following habitat areas: dunes, wet-
                          lands and estuaries,@and prohibit the coll.ecting of marine organisms in
                          rocky points and intertidal areas.

                      5.  The County should encourage    and support efforts.to increase.public
                          understanding of significant habitat- areas by 'all of the following
                          measures:

                          a.  E,ncouragi.ng educational   programs on habitat areas in the public
                              schools.and informal education programs@through community organiza-.
                              tion�.

                          bo  Providing signs, interpretive    displays, etc.,   on habitat sites
                              which are on or adjacent to County parks.

                        .c.   Pursuing funding for specific    studies to determine the effecton
                              wildlife and habitats of various land.use activiti     :es-and to det er-
                              mine allowable levels   and kinds@of uses as well    as appropriate
                              mitigation measures.

                      6.  The County, in cooperation   with other agencies, including the Depart-
                          ment of.Fish.and Game, needs to undertake systematic investigations of
                          stream ecosystems for purposes of inventory and for development of
                          protection and enhancement programs. Funding sources should be sought
                          for these studies.

                      7o  Public action. is need.ed,to restore   South Coast streams that have.been
                          interrupted or altered by culverts     along Highway .101.

                                                          -137-

                     8.   The County should assume the role    of lead  agency in forming a manage-
                          ment committee to ensure the preservation of the     biological producti-
                          vity and protection of the water quality-of the Carpinteria Marsh.
                          Agencies to be represented on the management committee include: County
                          Flood Control, Mosquito Abatement District, U.C.S.B@., Sandyland Protec-
                          tive Association, Department of Fish and Game, Regional Water Quality
                          Control Board, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.C. Cooperative Exten-
                          sion, Coastal Commission, City of Carpinteria, Nurserymen's Associa-
                          tion, and County Planning Department.

                          a)  The Committee should be responsible    for developing a comprehensive
                              management plan for the slough and surrounding watershed.

                          b)  The plan should include the following elements:

                              (1)  Monitoring Program: Baseline data,evaluating existing water
                                   quality and. biological productivity needs to'be collected. In
                                   partic*ul.ar, research should determine if sedimentation and
                                   pesticides are adversely impacting the marsh. Depending on
                                   the implications of.the baseline data, specific polities,
                                   programs., and performance standards would need to-be
                                   developed.

                              (2)  Management  Program: This element of the plan should provide
                                   for ongoing management of the slough. It should include
                                   recommendation-s for changes to existing ordinances where
                                   nIecessary (i.e., grading, zoning), refinements of the perfor-
                                   mance standards proposed in the.land use plan, and policies
                                   regarding appropriate kinds and intensities of recreational,
                                   educational, and scientific uses.

                      NOTE:  Refer to Section 4.8 for   discussion of habitat resources on.Santa
                             Rosa and Santa Cruz Islands.

                                                        -138-

                 3.10       ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL
                            RESOURCES

                     3.10.1, COASTAL ACT POLICIES

                          30244. Where development would adversely impact archaeological or
                          paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preser-
                          vation Officer, reasonable mi-tigation measures shall be required.

                     3.10.2 @BACKGROUND

                          The South Coast area of Santa Barbara    County is one  of the most impor-
                     tant archaeological regions in California. This area was densely occupied
                     by the Chumash at the time of Spanish contact, and archaeological evidence
                     confirms that it was so occupied for a considerable period of time. Site
                     density in the area is estimated to be very high,.although it has not been
                     systematically surveyed. Approximately 90 percent of the remaining sites
                     directly on the coast have been recorded, chiefly by D. B. Rogers in 1929.
                     Areas just a few hundred Yards away from the.toast are not as well-known,
                     although they are also believed to contafn a high density of sites.

                          Chumash sites are known in the Point Conception.area, and it is
                     probable that more exist. In addition, Point Conception is highly regarded
                     by all North American Indians as the "Western Gate.." It is revered by
                     Native Americans as the passageway for souls from this world to the next
                     and is sacred ground.

                          The only area in northern Santa.Barbara County that has been subjected
                     to intensive survey over the last few ye  .ars is the Vandenberg region.
                     Investigations have revealed a very high density of sites on Vandenberg Air
                     Force Base and adjacent areas. Very little, however, is known at present of
                     the archaeology of other areaslin the northwestern part of the County
                     although it is likely that significant areas exist. For example, several
                     archaeological sites have been identified in the vicinity of the Guadalupe
                     Dunes.

                          Hammond's Meadow is the only site in the coastal    zone that is
                     currently listed on the National Register of Historic    Places.

                          If an adequate survey of the Santa Barbara County coastline were to
                     take place, it is probable that the entire area could be linked into one
                     large, high density archaeological site zone. Because native American
                     Indians have used this area for perhaps up to 7,000 years, many remnants of
                     their villages, camps, food processing, and,ceremonial sites exist in the
                     coastal zone. The physical attributes of these sites include burials,
                     artifacts, house and ceremonial structure remains, kitchen and food

                    processing "mi0dens," shells  and bones, as well as some rock drawings
                    (pictographs and petroglyphs)  and special sites containing only rock arti-
                    facts.

                         Those sites which are currently known are mapped and on file with th   e
                    @County Planning Departme nt and the Department of Environmental Resources.
                    To protect sites,.however, these maps are confidentia,l..

                    3.10.3 PLANNING ISSUES

                         Although factors causing  similar population distribution are probably
                    different, the Indians of Santa Barbara County and the current population
                    show preference for the same general locations. Consequently, present
                    populations have damaged many archaeological sites. In 1973, the Califor-
                    nia State Archaeological Task Force estimated that 50 percent of all
                    archaeological sites in California, and 81 percent in Santa Barbara County,
                    have been destroyed. Since archaeological sites are a non-renewable
                    resource, the remaining sites need to be protected.

                        'At present, urbanization and p0lic access appear to be    the principal
                    sources of destruction of archaeological sites. The direct threats posed
                    by urbanization include: plowing; bulldozing; residential and industrial
                    construction; grading for roads and highways; construction of parking lots,
                    airstrips, and railways; cattle grazing; water projects (eroding and
                    burying sites); off-road vehicles; recreational developments; natural
                    forces (water and wind); and unauthorized collecting of artifacts. One of
                    the most significant indirect threats for   the destruction of archaeological
                    sites is public access. Vandalism has always been a source of destruction
                    to sites, and the probability of it@occurring increases with enhanced
                    -access to areas of archaeological significance. Any increase in temporary
                    or permanent population in the vicinity of a site through construction of
                    housing projects, trailer parks, campgrounds, or recreation areas increases
                    the vulnerability of archaeological sites to disturbance. Construction of
                    public.roads which provide access to areas of archaeological significance
                    or publication of known site locatio'ns or areas of high site density also
                    can increase vandalism.

                    3.10.4 POLICIES

                    Policy 10-1:  All available measures, including purchase,   tax relief,
                                  purchase of development rights,..etc., shall  be explored  to
                                  avoid development on significant historic, prehistoric,
                                  archaeological, and other. classes of cultural sites.

                    Policy 10-2:  When developments are  proposed for parcels where archaeo-
                                  logical or other cultural sites are located, project design
                                  shall be required which,avoids impacts to such cultural
                                  sites if possible.

                                                      -140-

                    Policy 10-3:   When.sufficient planning flexibility does not permit avoiding
                                   construction on*archaeological or other types of cultural
                                   sites, adequate mitigation shall be required. Mitigation
                                   shall be designed in accord with,guidelines of the State.
                                   Office of Historic Preservation and the State of California
                                   Native American Heritage Commission.
                    Policy 10-4:   Off-road vehicle use, unauthorized collecting of artifacts,
                                   and other activities other than development which could
                                   destroy or damage archaeological or cultural sites shall be
                                   prohibited.
                    Policy 10-5:   Native Americans shall be consulted when development propo-
                                   sals are submitted which impact significant archaeological:
                                   or cultural sites.

                    3.10.5   HISTORICAL RESOURCES
                         Santa Barbara's historical heritage is rich and diverse. Prime
                    examples of historic sites survive from each of the major.periods of Cali.,
                    fornia history. In the coastal zone, the majority of these sites are found
                    within the City of Santa Barbara, although a more extensive inventory of
                    historical sites may turn up new sites within the County's jurisdiction.

                         The Vicente Ortega Adobe is probably the most important site within
                    .the coastal zone. This adobe is located in the foothills north of Route
                    101 between Goleta and-Gaviota Pass near Arroyo.Hondo. It was built in the
                    late 18401's or early 1850's by descendents of Jose Francisco Ortega, the
                    founder of Santa B 'arbara. The adobe remains.in its original condition and
                    has not been subjected to restoration. Consequently, it is an extremely
                    importa,nt example of early adobe construction..

                         Nineteen.other historic sites have been inven,toried,within the
                    County's coastal zone. Listed geographicallyfrom north to south, they
                    'include:

                    Point Sal
                    Point Perdernales
                    Point Conception Lighthouse
                    Gaviota Landing
                    Gaviota.Pass (State Historical Landmark)
                    Baron Adobe
                    La Vigia
                    Refugio Beach Park
                    Erro Pepper Tree
                    Ygnacio Ortega Adobe
                    Bruno Orella Adobe
                    El Capitan Beach Park
                    Dos Pueblos (Historic Site, Cabrillo Anchorage)
                    Whaling Camp (Goleta Point Area)
                    Asphaltum Mine (Goleta--UCSB Area)
                    Massini Adobe (Montecito)
                    First Oil Well (Summerland)
                    Fleishman House (Lambert Road)
                    SheparWs Inn (Carpinteria Valley)

                                                      -141-

                     Recommendations':

                          Although the Coastal Act does    not specifical.ly call   for protection  of
                     historical resources, the.followin.g recommendations are made      to ensure,
                     protection of important historical    sites in the coastal    zone of Santa
                     Barbara County.

                     1.   The County should undertake an   inventory of historical   sites in the
                          unincorporated areas of the County.'

                     2.   The si,gnificant sites should be  designated as landmarks   by theCounty
                          Advisory Landmark Committee and   restrictions imposed as,currently
                          permitted by County Ordinance No. 1716.

                          Historic sites of national significance should be nominated for land-
                          mark 'status by the National Historic Landmarks Program and the National
                          Register of Histortc Places. Those of State-wide significance should
                          be nominated for inclusion on the register of California Historical
                          Landmarks.

                     4.   Owners of historical sites meeting the criteria specified in Sections
                          50280-50289 of the Government Code should be encouraged to enter into
                          historical properties contracts with the County (the contract gives the
                          owner the-.benefit of assessment.based on.restricted use of the
                          property) to insure permanent preservaton,of significant sites.

                     NOTE:  Most,.of.the information.for   this section, was taken from the   County's
                     Conservation Element.

                                                        -142-

                .3. 11 AIR QUALITY

                     3.11.1 COASTAL ACT POLICIES

                          'Only two sections ofthe  Coastal Act directly address the issue of air
                     quality. Under Section 30253.(3) of the Coastal Act,     new development shall

                               "Be consistent with requirements imposed by    an air-pollution
                          control district or the State Air Resources Control Board as'to each
                          particular development."
                     In addition, under Section 30253.(4), new development    shall.

                          IlMinimize energy consumption and vehicle miles traveled."

                          A number of other sections of  the Coastal Act reinforce these policies
                     either directly or indirectly. Section 30250 urges that new     development be
                     located near existing developed.areas to prevent excessive sprawl. Section
                     30252 urges that new development be.sited so as to assure the potential for
                     public transit for high intensity uses, and that non-automobile circulation
                     be en couraged within the development.

                        . Under Section 30241, protection of agricultural land by establishing
                     stable urban-rural boundaries, limiting conversions of agricultural land,
                     and controlling public service and facility extensions, further.acts to
                     limit sprawl and thus reduce the distances people travel.

                          In addressing the issue of air quality, the   land.use  plan must be
                     consistent with both the Coastal Act and State.and Federal    air  quality
                     standards.

                     3.11.2 CONSISTENCY WITH COA  STAL ACT

                          By implementing these policies of the Coastal Act,    the land use plan
                     will help to reduce air pollution.   The land use plan designates    boundaries
                     separating urban and rural land uses thus preventing the encroachment of
                     new urban development in agricultural and rural areas. Within the urban
                     areas there is enough vacant land to allow for substantialinfilling.
                     However, if these vacant areas are,developed without phasing controls, the
                     resultant levels of growth may be greater than those permissible for
                     attainment of the Federal air quality standards. By encouraging the
                     concentration of developmentand limiting sprawl, the land use plan should
                     contribute to the reduction of vehicle miles travelled and result in
                     improved public transit and carpools by increasing the density of popula-
                     tion along a given route.

                          The access and recreation proposals in the land use plan reflect mixed
                     effects on air quality. Within the urbanized South Coast area, the land
                     use plan proposes increased opportunities for access and recreation to
                     serve mostly local residents. In many, cases, the plan makes no provision
                     for parking, but encourages,pedestrian and bicycle access. However, the

                                                      -143-

                    plan.also  proposes expansion of access and  recreation in the rural areas of
                    the County. Most of these areas can only,be reached by private transporta-
                    tion, since public transit service does not exist and is not planned.
                    While many of the proposals in the area between Gaviota and Guadalupe are
                    for limited access via hiking trails, autos would still be needed to reach
                    the trail.heads. Provisions for public transit at somefuture date should
                    be considered in framing specific proposals for expanded recreational
                    facilities along the South Coast.

                         The importance of the County, particularly the South Coast, as a
                    recreational area has resulted in the acquisition of large coastal areas by
                    the State Department of Parks and Recreation. State Park facilities
                    generally include overnight campgrounds and thus cater to the out-of-County
                    user. Since most of the State Parks are filled to capacity during the
                    summer months, the amount of traffic generated may be substantial. The
                    State has plans for considerable expansion of its holdings in the area
                    between Ellwood and Gaviota. These plans, if they include proposals for
                    more camping facilities, will need to be evaluated carefully for their
                    impacts on air quality. The State is also planning a bicycle trail that
                    will eventually link Santa Barbara and Goleta with the State Parks at El
                    Capitan, Refugio, a-nd Gaviota. Though this trail will reduce the need by'
                    local residents to use car s to access beaches west of Ellwood, its impact
                    on vehicle miles travelled will be insignificant.

                         In terms of impacts of industrial facilities  on air quality, the land
                    use plan does not propo'se.a substantial expansion of areas available for
                    industrial uses. In the case of oil and gas development, industrial desig-
                    nations.am confined to existing processing facilities. These facilities,
                    which are currently dispersed along the coast between Carpinteria and Point
                    Conception, may need to be expanded and upgraded to serve increased produc-
                    tion in the State Tidelands and Federal OCS.
                    3.11.3 CONSISTENCY WITH THE  AIR gUALITY ATTAINMENT PLAN (AQAP)
                         One mechanism for achieving consistency between.the land use plan and
                    the requirements of the Clean Air Act and its amendments is the applica-
                    tions of,the provisions of the Air Quality Attainment Plan to* the coastal
                    zone. The substance of the AQAP.rests with development of control strate-
                    gi6s for individual pollutants. The control strateg.ies developed under the
                    AQAP effort are based on: (1) inventory of.current emissions; (2) projec-
                    tion of future emissions; (3) analysis of reductions available from control
                    measures; and (4) synthesis'of control measures into a strategy in order to
                    achieve the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The AQAP
                    includes four types of control measures: stationary, transportation, land
                    use, and energy. Only the AQAP land use measures directly impact the    LCP
                    land use plan. Sin 'c"e.the land.use:meas.ures are not yet adopted, the degree
                    of consistency between the LCP,,Ia*nd use plan and the AQAP cannot be deter-
                    mined.

                    Policy:
                    Policy 11,1: The provisions  of the Air Quality Attainment Plan shall apply
                                  to the coastal zone.

                                                      -144-

                              CHAPTER 4:
                      THE PLANNING AREAS

                4.1      INTRODUCTION

                          In order to achieve the level of detailed planning required by the
                    Coastal Act, Santa Barbara County's coastal zone has been divided into
                    seven subareas. These include the Carpinteria Valley, Summerland,
                    Montecito, Gaviota Coast (Ellwood to Gaviota), the North Coast (Gaviota to
                    the Santa Maria River mouth), and the Channel Islands.

                          In this chapter, each planning area discussion begins with a
                    description of the physical characteristics of the area. The character
                    description is followed by a discussion of coastal planning issues which
                    are relevent in the subarea (e.g., the protection of visua'l resources, the
                    availability and demand for coastal recreation and beach access, and low
                    and moderate cost housing accessibility). In a few cases, where large
                    parcels exist within an already urbanized area (i.e., More Mesa, Hammond's
                    Meadow), special planning has been required resulting in specific policies
                    to guide future development of these parcels. Each planning area
                    discussion is concluded with a summary of the land  'use maps. This summary
                    highlights the changes in existing zoning designations that are'proposed
                    for the coastal zone.

                         The resource and  service system capacity data and buildout projections
                    that are referred to throughout the.planning area discussions are contained
                    in Appendices.D and E respectively.

                         The last section of this chapter--the Channel.Islands-- differs in
                    format'-from the discussions for the preceding planning areas. Due to their
                    unique characteristics, a more detailed discussion of the resources and
                    planning issues is included. The Chan'nel Islands section is concluded with
                    a.set of special policies that are proposed to guide future development and
                    recreational use on Santa Rosa and Santa Cruz.

                                                     -145-

                          PAW",

                                                    Wall

           1978 RON MORGAN               4. 2 Carpinteria Valley

                  4.2      CARPINTERIA             VALLEY

                  4.2.1 CHARACTER OF THE PLANNING AREA

                       The Carpinteria Valley is a long, na rrow coastal plain paralleling the
                  shoreline and the Santa Ynez Mountains. It is bounded by the Pacific Ocean
                  and the coastal zone boundary to the north and south, and the Ventura
                  County line and Toro Canyon Road to the east and west.

                       Although the City of Carpinteria has grown rapidly in   recent years,
                  the Valley remains predominately agricultural. From Toro Canyon to the
                  Ventura County.line, orchards, fields of flowers, and grebnh  'ouses are the
                  prevailing landscape. The City of Carpinteria is literally encircled by
                  agriculture.which extends into the Carpinteria foothills.

                       As an agricultural resource, Carpinteria Valley is among the finest in
                  the State of California for the production of specialty crops, which
                  include avocados, cut flowers, and foliage plants. The local climate,
                  prime soils, and relatively clean air make the area highly desirable to
                  growers. The Valley's two climatic.zones, Maritime and Coastal, are
                  characterized by very mild temperature ranges and nearly frost-free growing
                  conditions. Average seasonal temperatures range from 55' F in winter to
                  650 F in summer; and there are between 310 and 330 frost-free days per
                  year. These mild temperatures, combined with a relatively wind-free
                  setting and excellent solar exposure (due to the north-south orientation),
                  help produce excepti-onally fine quality, high-yield crops which can be
                  harvested when other agricultural areas are out of:production. Carpinteria
                  Valley growers thereby enjoy a market advantage  over their coun .terparts
                  elsewhere.

                       Carpinteria Valley has di.stinct agricultural subareas. The Valley's
                  westerly end i.s a mix of avocado orchards, greenhouses, and open field
                  flowers. In recent years, greenhouse development has been particularly
                  active in this area. The Valley floorto the east and north of the City of
                  Carpinteria is one of the most fertile and productive agricultural areas in
                  the Valley and is currently planted,to avocados and lemons. North of
                  Foothill and Casitas Pass Roads, the terrain becomes progressively steeper
                  and rugged. Avocado orchards dominate here, while a few greenhouses and
                  nurseries.occupy some of the level land.. Newly planted avocado orchards
                  extend well into the foothills and beyond the coastal zone boundary into
                  the National Forest Service jurisdiction.

                       Urban development in the Carpinteria  Valley is mainly confined within
                  the city limits of Carpinteria and several neighborhoods scattered about
                  the Valley Floor and along thecoastline. Serena Park, the most westerly
                  neighborhood, is composed of single family residences. Just east and north
                  of Serena Park is a large condominium development which abuts the polo
                  field, a well-known Carpinteria Valley landmark visible from U. S. 101.
                  East of the polo field and north of Foothill Road are the hillside neigh-
                  borhoods of Ocean Oaks and La Mirada. These neighborhoods are small,
                  isolated subdivisions surrounded by agriculture.

                                                     -146-

                         At the opposite end of the Valley to the east is Shepard's Mesa, an
                    area zoned for one to three acre estates and surrounded by steep and
                    marginally productive agricultural land., Homes on Shepard's Mesa have
                    spectacular views of the entire Valley, the Pacific Oceanj and the Channel
                    Islands.

                         Carpinteria's coastline (bordered by Rincon Point to the east     and Loon
                    Point to the west) includes bluffs, sandy beaches, and an estuary. Three
                    residential neighborhoods (Rincon Point, Sandyland Cove, and Padaro Lane)
                    are located along the coastline. Immediately to the west of Rincon       Point
                    is the County's Rincon Beach Park, which provides parking, beach access,
                    and limited facilities. To the north and west of the park, the bluffs rise
                    sharply.in a series of plateaus. The Southern Pacific main line parallels
                    the bluffs and impinges on the shoreline bluff area from Rincon Park
                    through the City of Carpinteria. Carpinteria State Beach Park, the primary
                    recreation facility in this area, is located in the City of Carpinteria and
                    extends from Linden. Avenue to just east of K Street. - Facilities for
                    campers are also''provided by the Carpinteria Camper Park, north of, Highway
                    101 and adjacent to the City's western boundary.

                         The County has jurisdiction over granted tidelands and.submerged lands
                    in two areas of the Carpinteria coastline: Sandyland Cove (from the mouth
                    of Santa Monica Creek to the City's western limits) and from the City's
                    eastern boundary to the County line. These granted lands ex'tend t   Ihree
                    miles seaward from the mean high tide line.

                         El Estero, a large coastal wetland, abuts the City of Carpinteria's
                    westerly boundary. An isolated, highly-private community, Sandyland Cove
                    extends the full length of the wetland and enjoys commanding views of the
                    shoreline and mountain backdrop,. To the west of Sandyland Cove is a high-
                    way commercial development,,'Santa.Claus Village, and a long stretch.of
                    residential development along Padaro Lane..

                    4.2.2 PLANNING   ISSUES

                         Urban/Rural Boundary
                         The rural area of the.Carpin'teria Valley which encompassess the
                    Valley's.agricultural lands, a number of rural residential neighborhoods,
                    Carpinteria Marsh, and other foothill areas accounts for some 7,500 acres,
                    84 percent of the total acreage in,the planning area. Agriculture is the
                    dominant land use in the Valley with an estimated 3,900 acres in production
                    at this time. Urban development, i.e., residential, commercial, indus-
                    trial, etc., is concentrated within the City of Carpinteria which now
                    covers approximately 1,400 acres or 16 percent of the Valley's total
                    acreage.

                         Since its incorporation in  1965, the City has grown from a population
                    of roughly 6,500 to an estimated 10,150 as of January 1, 1979. The City's
                    most rapid growth occurred from 1970 to 1975, when the population increased
                    from 6,982 to 9,325. During that period, three large residential subdivi-
                    sions.and an industrial park1were annexed to the City, expanding the urban
                    boundary to the north and east., The City's easterly expansion has

                                                       -147--

                     paralleled Highway 101, both north and south, on non-prime soils.     Annexa-
                     tion of the Reeder parcels represented the only potential encroachment   on
                     prime soils in the eastern portion of the Valley; however, the Coastal
                     Commission denied a permit to develop these parcels and the area has been
                     retained in agricultural production. The residential subdivisions to the,
                     north are located on prime soils (Class II). Other smaller annexations to
                     the west have claimed lands of marginal agricultural value. At present,
                     the City of Carpinteria's boundaries north of Highway 101 generally abut
                     existing agriculture or prime agricultural  soi Is.

                          Because of the mix of urban and agricultural land uses in, the Carpin-
                     teria Valley, qrban/agricultural conflicts sometimes occur along the urban
                     periphery and in more remote areas of the Valley where neighborhoods have
                     been permitted to develop. The proximity of urban development to lands in
                     agricultural production has contributed to orchard theft andthe spread of
                     avocado root rot on one hand, while the use offertilizers, herbicides, and
                     agricultural machinery has,.on occasion, been of some nuisance to neigh-
                     boring residents. The extent of the nuisance factor appears to be minimal
                     at the present time.

                         Along with other measures for the preservation of agriculture in the
                     Carpinteria Valley, an urban/rural boundary is delineated on the land use
                     plan map (refer to Figure 4-1). The proposed boundary provides a stable
                     demarcation between the agricultural lands of the Carpinteria Valley and
                     those areas appropriate for infi.11ing of urban uses for the foreseeable
                     future. All lands meeting one or more of the criteria listed in Policy 8-1
                     are designated for agricultural use, and, therefore, defined to be within
                     the rural area. The urban area has been expanded to include only those
                     areas contiguous with the existing City limits where the agricultural
                     potential is severely impaired because of poor soils and drainage c.ondi-
                     tions or where conflicts with,surrounding urban uses exist (e.g., parcels
                     fronting Via Real and Cravens Lane west of the City's existing limits
                     (Areas 2 and 4) and an agricultural island adjacent to the industrial.park
                     to the east (Area 14)). A detailed explanation of the rationale for each
                     extension of the urban boundary follows. Overall, under the proposed
                     urban/rural boundary, approximately 115 acres now located outside of the
                     existing City limits wouldbe added to the urban area. An estimated 195
                     additional housing units could,theoret.ically be built in the areas proposed
                     for urban expansion.

                         The proposed boundary follows the existing western limit   s of the City
                     of Carpinteria from the ocean to just south of Highway 101, where the urban
                     boundary extends westward to include two long, narrow parcels on either
                     side of Carpinteria Avenue (Area 1). North of Highway 101, the boundary
                     again extends westward to take in the Carpinteria Camper Park on North Via
                     Real (Area 2) and continues further west to include three parcels in Area 4
                     bounded by Cravens Lane and North Via Real (APN 3-050-20,22,60). and the
                     Sandpiper Mobile Home Park. As existing urban uses, the parcels in Area 2
                     and the mobile home park represent a logical extension of the urban
                     boundary. The agricultural potential of the three parcels located between
                     theseurban uses (Area 4),ls.severely limited by non-prime soil conditions,
                     a high water table and poor drainage. At certain times of the year,

                                                      -148-

                                           Of
                       CARPINTERIA

                                 CALIFORNIA
                                    FIGURE 4-1
              \WMMMMWMkNBl PROPOSED URBANAURAL BOUNDARY

                    portions of these parcels are inundated because of the drainage problems
                    that exist in the area. Therefore, these parcels have also been added to
                    the urban area. The Hall parcel (APN 3-050-17) located to the northeast is
                    not as severely restricted for agricultural uses as the parcels aligning
                    North Via Real;,greenhouses or other annual crops having a shallow rooting
                    depth.would be viable here. Consequently, this parcel is not included
                    within the urban area at this time.

                         To the north, the urban boundary encompasses the existing unincorpora-
                    ted residential subdivision known as Santa Monica Gardens (Area 3) and
                    continues north then east, following the City limits to Franklin Creek.
                    Here the urban boundary is extended to include Areas 5 and 7. Area 5
                    contains the Boy's Club on the west and several small parcels currently
                    'planted to lemons on the east. Continued agricultural production on these
                    parcels is inhibited by parcel size (about one acre each) and the presence
                    .of a high water table, although soils are prime (Class II); the easternmost
                    parcel at the bend in Foothill Road is further limited by a County Flood
                    Control easement through the southeast section of the property. Area 7 is
                    surrounded on three sides by urbanization; soils are prime but agricultural
                    production is limited again because of a high.water table and there is no
                    existing agriculture on the properties at this time. These parcels repre-
                    ,sent a logical extension of the urban boundary. Parcel 6, on the other
                    hand, is.ass.ociated@with the adjacent cel.ery transplant operation and is,
                    therefore, designated for agricultural use and included in the rural area.

                         Parcels 8 and 9, adjacent to the City's northern boundary and south of
                    Casitas Pass Road, are also designated for agricultural use. Both parcels
                    are located on prime soils (Class I and II) and currently support viable
                    orchards.

                         The urban/rural boundary then follows the City's existing limits along
                    Casitas Pass Road and southeast to Carpinteria Creek. At this point, the
                    boundary conforms to the existing mobile home park, proceeds south to North
                    Via Real, and continues eastward along Via Real to the McKeon development.
                    The Reeder parcels (Area 10) and two small parcels in Area 11 are, there-
                    fore, excluded from Oie urban area. The Reeder parcels are located on
                    prime soils and are partially planted to gypsophila at this time. While the
                    western parcel in Area 11 is composed of prime soils, soils on the eastern
                    parcel are non-prime (Class III); both of these parcels are designated for
                    agricultural use because of their agricultural potential.

                         Proceeding eastward, the boundary line follows the existing City
                    limits, separating the McKeon development from rural lands to the north
                    (Area 12). There are nine parcels in this rural area, ranging in size from
                    two to seven acres. Although soils are non-prime, most of the parcels are
                    planted to avocados (new plantings as well as producing trees exist), and a
                    thick stand of oak trees.covers the eastern section. The sloping terrain
                    and ranchette type of land use pattern that prevail in this area provide a
                   @natural buffer between the prime agriculturallands to the north and
                    existing dense,urban development to the south. Area 13, a rural residen-
                    tial subdivision of 15 one-acre l.ots located to the east of Area.12, is
                    also excluded from the urban area.

                                                      -150-

                           The urban line is extended to include a 25-acre agricultural island
                     and a 4-acre parcel adjacent to.this parcel on the northeast (Area 14).
                     Soils in this area are non-prime and agricultural use has been impaired by
                     drainage and other problems created by surrounding urban development. Long
                     term agricultural use of these parcels is further constrained because the
                     area would not qualify for agricultural preserve status due.to the lack of
                     contiguous agricultural lands to meet the 40-acre minimum-requirement.

                           Finally, the urban boundary is extended to include Area 15, which is
                     comprised of some 20 undeveloped acres that should be planned comprehen-,
                     sively with other portions of the bluffs within the City's jurisdiction.
                     (see section 4.2.3 for a'discussion of the proposed land use and conditions
                     for development in this area.) These lands have no agricultural potential
                     and are a logical extension of the urban area for visitor-serving uses
                     because of the area's accessibility to U.S. 101,.ocean.views., and proximity
                     to the dry sandy beach at Rincon County Park.

                           Agriculture
                           The policies' of the Coastal Act concerning agriculture call for the
                     preservation of the maximum amount of prime agricultural lands and the.
                     protection of the long-term productivity of soils. A discussion of these
                     policies and the broad agricultural issues that emanate from them for the
                     County's coastal zone are contained in Section 3.8. Local policies
                     required to resolve these issues are.also-found in Section 3.8, Policies
                     8-1 to 8-8; these policies apply to agricultural uses throughout the
                     County's coastal zone.

                           This sectionfocuses on the specific agricultural issues for the
                     Carpinteria Valley and the measures proposed in the land use plan.for
                     addressing them. The following discussion is based on a special background
                     study of Carpinteria Valley agriculture which assessed the economic viabil-
                     ity and comparative advantages of existing agricultural activities in the
                     Valley.* The study also examined trends in agricultural production and the
                     impacts of greenhouse development on the Valley's primeagricultural soils,
                     limited water resources, and scenic quality.

                           To meet the goal of maintaining the maximum amount of prime agricul-
                     tural lands in production, a land use plan for the Carpinteria VaIley must
                     include the following measures:

                           1) delineation of a stable urban/rural boundary,

                           2) determination of minimum agricultural parcel sizes that will
                              sustain agricultural use over the long term, and

                     *This report was prepared by the    planning staff and is on'-file at the
                     County Planning Department (Agriculture in the Carpinteria Valley, February
                     1978).

                           3)  policies for mitigating and preventing, where possib.le, adverse
                               impacts caused by agricultural development on coastal resources.

                           The proposed urban/rural boundary for the Carpinteria V.alley planning
                     area  is discussed in detail in the preceding section and.delineated on the
                     map shown on Figure 4-1.'

                     Minimum Agricultural Parcel Size

                           Determination of a minimum agricultural parcel size that will best
                     serve the goal of preservin  ,g agriculture in the V-alley over t-he long term
                     is dependent on many factors. In order to make this determination, the
                     adequacy of existing zoning, distri   'bution of existing parcel sizes, and the
                     impact of potential buildout on theagricultural economy over the long term
                     need to be analyzed to evaluate whether changes in the established minimum
                     .parcel sizes are needed and,, if so, the degree to which changes can be
                     effected. In addition, an examination of the economic viability of the
                     Valley's three major agricultural industries: avocados; greenhouses,
                     nurseries, and field flowers; and lemons is required. This entails an
                     understanding of past and existing trends in the area's agricultural
                     production as well as indications for future agricultural options.

                           An estimated 3,900 acres  are in agricultural production in the Valley
                     at this time; this represents   52 percent of the Valley's rural lands
                     (including_Carpinteria Marsh and the existing residential neighborhoods).
                     Avocados are the dominant agricultural land use, accounting for some 2,200
                     acres (56 percent of the total agricultural acreage), followed by lemons
                     with 1,000 acres; 650 acres arein greenhouse andflursery use, and the,
                     remaining 50 acres are planted to various vegetable crops.

                           Avocados have flourished in recent years due to the Valley's prime
                     growing conditions and the industry's expanding market potential. Although
                     avocado root rot'poses a threat to production in some areas of the Valley
                     over the short term, possibilities for developing disease-tolerant trees
                     and other means of eradicating the disease exist over the long run. Also,
                     even if root rot were to spread in the Valley, it would probably not signi-
                     .ficantly affect production on the eastern.portion of the Valley floor
                     because of thelexcellent soil conditions that prevail in that area.

                           Since its introduction to the Valley in.1962, the greenhouse,      nursery,
                     and field flower industry has grown rapidly. The Valley's moderate
                     climate, prime soils, relatively good air quality, and access to markets
                     make the area especially desirable to greenhouse growers. There are now
                     over eight mill.ion square feet of greenhouse developmentin the Valley,
                     compared to under three million square feet in 1970 and only 100,000 square
                     feet in 1962.

                           The lemon market has been affected by periods of overproduction which
                     have  led to reduced prices and, t,herefore, lower returns to local growers.
                     As a  result, there has been a recent trend toward conversion to avocado and
                     greenhouse production in the Valley.

                                                        -152-

                         Approximately 30 percent of the soils in the rural area are classified
                    as prime (Clas's I or II). The remaining non-prime soils are predominantly
                    Class III or IV; many of these soils are in productive agricultural use at
                    this time. Only a few sections of the Valley have little or no.agricul-
                    tural potential, e.g., steep foothill and mountainous regions and areas
                    where fill has been deposited as a result of construction of the freeway.

                         The County's Agricultural Preserve Program has beenhighly successful
                    in the Valley. To date, 2,878 acres are enrolled in preserves, including
                    some 55 acres of nurseries. In order to encourage the retention of smaller
                    agricultural parcels in production, the Agricultural Preserve Program now
                    includes in its "superpri'me" category a provision for growers who-own a
                    minimum of five acres, of which 4.75 acres are fully planted and commer-
                    cially producing land, to qualify for preserve status if they apply with
                    other adjacent growers of equal or larger size' to meet the 40-acre minimum
                    preserve.requirement.
                         The existing agricultural zoning in the Valley is almost exclusively
                    A-14, which permits a five-acre minimum parcel size. This zone, coupled
                    with the Agricultural Preserve Program's superprime option, has been
                    instrumental in holding the line against further urban encroachment in the
                    Carpinteria Valley. However, a theoretical buildout of the Valley based on
                    the permitted five-acre minimum parcel size would allow for approximately
                    800 additional parcels and corresponding number of potential residential
                    units. The level of public services required to accommodate this increased
                    residential use and the additional development needed to support a larger
                    number of individually operated agricultural activities would exceed the
                    Valley's.existing water resources and service system capacities, i.e.,
                    wastewater treatment and roads. For example, the amount of water needed     to
                    accommodate buildout under the existing A-14 zone far exceeds the area's
                    current water supply (see Availability of Resources section below and
                    Section 3.2). Sinc'e most of the rural area is not served by the Carpin-
                    teria Sanitary District, new development would have to rely on septic
                    facilities for the most part; this would be especially problematic in areas
                    where high groundwater, steep slopes, and soi.ls with poor drainage prevail.
                    Many new access roads would need to be constructed to serve the additional
                    parcels and expansion,of Foothill and Casitas Pass Roads would,probably be
                    required. The creation  of smaller parcels and associated level of develop-
                    ment would also lead to higher a:ssessed land values and limit the range of
                    agricultural crops that could profitably be grown in the area. Thus, a
                    buildout under existing zoning'would inevitably result in a transition away
                    from agriculture as the principal land use in the Valley, establishing in
                    its place a residential ranchette or estate type of land use pattern.
                    Since this would not be consistent with the Coastal Act goal of maintaining
                    the'maximum amount of prime agricultural.lands in production, some increase
                    in the agricultural mi,n'imum parcel size is needed.

                                                     -153-

                          The major determinants in establishing   an increase  in the minimum
                    parcel sizes for the Valley are the economic viability of the Valley's
                    major crops, projections for viable agricultural options in the future, and
                    the existing distribution of parcel sizes in the rural area.

                          To determine the minimum economically viable parcel size for various
                    types of agriculture, average costs of production and gross revenues per
                    acre are used to estimate the net returns received per acre for production
                    of a given crop. Then, assuming an annual expected net return orincome
                    for the grower, the. number of acres needed to generate this income can be,
                    ,estimated. These estimates are.greatly limited by the use of average cost
                    and revenue data, which do not reflect factors such as the individual
                    gIroweris management skills and the above average yields that are obtained
                    in many parts of the Carpinteria Valley. Also, assumptions such as the
                    cost of the land (or rent), which is a major fixed cost for all agricul-
                    tural production and depends heavily on when the land was purchased, are
                    necessary.   Because,of these limitations and assumptions, estimates of the
                    minim um economically viable parcel.size are tenuous and should not be used
                    as the sole criterion in determining minimum parcel sizes.

                          For illustrative purposes, however, greenhouses are the    Valley's most
                    profitable agricultural use per acre of production and could     succeed on a
                    minimum parcel as smallas five acres. At present, most of the Valley's
                    greenhouses and nurseries are. located on parcels ranging in size from five
                    to twenty acres, with over half of them on parcels of five to ten acres.

                          Estimates of economically viable minimum parcel sizes for avocados
                    vary widely. Assuming average County yields and prices received as the
                    fruit leaves the orchard, it would take a minimum of fifty acres of
                    avocados to produce an income of $18,000. Valley growers have.commented
                    .that this minimum is too high, pointing out that many avocado operations in
                    the Valley are currently viable on parcels as small as ten to fifteen
                    acres. This is supported by the.fact that only ten percent of the existing
                    avocado orchards in theYalley are on parcels of fifty acres or more and
                    that three-fourths of the avocado orchards are in holdings of from five.to
                    twenty-five acres.

                          Currently, net returns,to a  mature lemon orchard do not offset 'costs;
                    and the high selling price of prime agricultural land in the Valley renders
                    new lemon plantings economically infeasible at this time. Of the remaining
                    1,000 acres of lemons in the Valley, fifty percent of the operations are on
                    parcels of five to ten acres in size; the remaining orchards range in size
                    from ten to twenty-five acres, with only three of them s.ituated on parcels
                    of fifty acres or more.

                          Future viable agricultural options for the Valley could become limited
                    if the -viability of the avocado or greenhouse industries is threatened.
                    Historically, agriculture in the Valley has turned over from lower return

                                                       _154-

                    food crops (e.g., beans and tomatoes) to higher return specialty crops
                    (from walnuts and apricots to today's avocados, lemons, and flowers).
                    Increasing land costs in an urbanizing area have been a major contributor
                    to this trend. Whether this trend could be reversed is a matter of conjec-
                    ture. if land costs continue to increase, future agriculture viability
                    will depend on the Valley's ability to attract even higher.return crops.

                        The other major determinant.in establishing a minimum agricultural
                    parcel size is the existing distribution of parcelsizes and acreage in   the
                    Valley. Acreage in the rural area of the Valley (excluding Carpinteria
                    Marsh and the residential neighborhoods) is fairly evenly distributed
                    (Figure 4-2). Approximately 15 percent of the acreage is in holdings of
                    less than ten acres; 26 percent less than 15 acres; 37 percent less than  20
                    acres. The distribution of parcel sizes, however, is heavily skewed toward
                    ,smaller sizes. As shown in Figure 4-3, 52 percent of the existing parcels
                    in the rural area are less than 10 acres in size; 67 percent are less than
                    15 acres; and 78 percent less than 20 acres. Thus, ten acres is the
                    threshold point at Which over half of the parcels'become non-conforming as
                    to parcel size, an indication of the extent,to Which parceliz.ation has
                    already occurred in.the Valley and the limited degree to,which change can
                    be effected without measures such as recombination of lots or public
                    acquisition.

                        Based on the above findings concerning the economic viability of
                    Valley agriculture and the existing land use pattern, a 10-acre minimum is
                    the largest minimum parcel size that would be appropriate in Carpinteria
                    Valley. Under the 10-acre minimum, theoretical buildout Would be reduced
                    to 300 additional units, a reduction of more than half of the units now
                    permitted under existing zoning. Lot splits would be limited to parcels of
                    20 acres or more, i.e., 80 percent of the parcels could not be further
                    divided. Although the amount of water required to serve even this reduced
                    buildout exceeds available resources, impacts on sanitary facilities and
                    roads would be lessened.

                        The land use plan proposes a range of minimi'm parcel sizes which will
                    tend to strengthen existing agricultural patterns in the Valley and provide
                    greater flexibility for changing',agricultural uses over the years. Five,
                    ten, and forty-acre minimums are proposed to replace the blanket five-acre
                    zoning.

                        In the land use plan, a five-acre minimum is shown for the non-
                    recharge area of the Carpinteria Groundwater Basin on the west side of the
                    Valley between Arroyo Paredon and Sant,a Monica Creeks (refer to land use
                    plan map). Agricultural uses in this area are limited by the presence of a
                    high water table which restricts agricultural production to annual crops
                    with a shallow rooting depth and to greenhouses. Most of the Valley's
                    greenhouses are currently located in this area and continued greenhouse
                    development here would be appropriate.

                                                900

                                                                                                 .817

                                                800--

                                                                                         702
                                                700--
                                                                    688                  ... ....
                                                                                 83

                                                                     .... ...            ... ....
                                                                               .... ...            ....
                                                600--                                                                    588                                                                            580

                                                                                                                                                                                    521

                                                500--
                                                                     .... ....           ....
                                        W
                                                                                                                         ....                                                       ....                ....
                                        w

                                                                                                             412

                                        LL      400--
                                        0

                                        cc
                                        w
                                        ca                           ...

                                                                                                                                                                          289
                                                                                         .... ....                                                                                                      ....
                                                300--                                              .... ....
                                                                        .. ....          .... ....                                                                                                      ....
                                                           4                                                                       60       255
                                                                      .... ....          ....                                                                             .... ....
                                                           ....                              .. ....

                                                200- -                         .... ...            ... ....
                                                                                                                           . .....          ....                                    ....
                                                                                                                         ... ....           ....                                    ....
                                                                                                             ...                                                 67
                                                                                                                                                                 Ti-m

                                                                     .... ....           ...
                                                           ....       .... ..            ....                                                                                       ....        56
                                                                                                                         ....     .... ....

                                                                                                                                                                          ....                  ...     ....
                                                                                                                                                                          .... .....            ....    ....

                                                1
                                                   0--
                                                0

                                                                                                                         X.

                                                                                         ....        ...      ....

                                                                                                                         0)                           M          (m       0)        'm          (R      4
                                    PARCEL SIZE            Q?                    0)      C?          0         0)        0)                           G)         0)       0         cy;         0
                                                                                                                         0i       6         6         0;
                                                                                                                         le                                               9
                                                                                                    C                             to        to        f-r        co
                                                                                                                                                                                                0
                                                                                                                                                                 CD

                                    %OF TOTAL. 4                      11          11     11         13          6        9        4         4           0     2.62 4.54             8J8     2.45        9J.1
                                        ACREAGE

                                                                                                             FIGURE        4-2
                                                                           ACREAGE           DISTRIIWTIO14 -                 CARPINTERIA VALLEY
                                                              (Excluding Carpinteria Marsh                                   and the Rural Neighborhoods)
                                                                              6n--

                       120

                       110       109

                       100--     %% %

                            93

                       9
                        0-

                       so--

                       70--

                                     59
                       60--     X'X

                  (L

                       50
                  LL        ...
                  0

                  Cr
                                          42
                  CD
                       40--
                  z
                                              35

                       30--

                                X.,

                       20.-                   X

                                                        14
                                         Ne.
                                                   12

                       10--
                           ...  ... ...  ....

                                                             5
                                                                 4
                                                                               3
                                                              a                     4
                                                                          2
                                                                                             2
                                                                      0
                                                                                             +
                PARCEL SIZE
                                              CY   co)       W)  to        co            T-9 CY
                                                                                    cc   p
                                              CY                               CD

                % OF ToTA L 24 28    15   11   9   3   4      1  1    0   .5   .8   1   ..2
                   PARCELS

                                                   FIGURE 4-3

                                  PARCEL SIZE DISTRIBUTION - CARPINTERIA VALLEY
                              (Excluding Carpinteria Marsh and the Rural Neighborhoods)

                                                     -157-

                        A ten-acre minimum is proposed for agriculturally designated lands
                   across the Valley floor and into the foothills on slopes of less.than 30
                   percent for the reasons previously explained. For agricultural parcels on
                   slopes in excess of 30 percent, the minimum parcel size is increased to 40
                   acres to provide for the largerscale of production required to compensate
                   for lower yields on steep hillsides and to reduce the level of grading for
                   service roads and irrigation systems that leads to erosion. One area in
                   the northeast portion of the Valley, which lies within the National Forest
                   jurisdication and has slopes in excess of 40 percent, has been designated
                   as a Mountainous Area with a 100-acre minimum parcel size. Agricultural
                   development which requires removal of native vegetation is not permitted
                   within designated mountainous areas. Under the range of minimum parcel
                   sizes proposed in the land use.plan, approximately 56 percent,of the
                   parcels in the rural area would be non-conforming as to parcel size as
                   would approximately 21 percent of the rural acreage.

                   Greenhouse Development

                        The growth of the greenhouse industry over the last decade and
                   pressures for continued expansion have raised several important issues for
                   coastal planning and protection of coastal resources. Depending on the
                   amount and type of coverage required, the cumulative impacts of greenhouses
                   on the long-term productivity of soils, groundwater recharge, and on the
                   ability of downstream watercourses to carry increased runoff can be signi-
                   ficant. A large part of the greenhouse development in the Carpinteria
                   Valley is located within the watershed of Carpinteria Marsh. Because irri-
                   gation runoff is directed to natural drainage channels, i.e., Santa Monica
                   and Franklin Creeks, cumulative impacts on the water quality of the marsh
                   need to be monitored and preventive actions taken as necessary. These
                   impacts are explored in greater detail in Section 3.8. Policies 8-5 to 8-7
                   have been developed to address these impacts and will apply to all new
                   greenhouse projects in the County's coastal zone.

                        The largest constraint to new greenhouse development in the Valley
                   will be the Valley's limited water supply., On the average, water required
                   for greenhouse production is an estimated 4 acre feet.per year per acre
                   (AFY/AC), compared to an estimated 1 AFY/AC for orchards, the Valley's
                   domina.nt crop. Consequently, conversions from open field agriculture to
                   greenhouse crops will result in a net increase in water use. According to
                   estimates of the Valley's water supply and demand balance, a surplus of
                   approximately 950 AFY currently exists, and this surplus must be shared by
                   agricultural and urban users (see Availability of Resources section below).
                   Under the proposed water management plan for the Valley, 70 percent of the
                   available surplus would be allocated for use in the unincorporated area
                   (refer to Section 3.2). A portion of this water allocation would need to
                   be distributed,to agricultural users in proportion to current levels of
                   use, i.e., for orchards, greenhouses, and nurseries, to provide for an
                   equitable distribution. Under current conditions, greenhouses would be
                   entitled to approximately 44 percent of the water available for agricul-
                   tural use.

                                                     -158-

                          Coastal Access and Recreation

                          In the unincorporated portion  of the Carpinteria Valley, existing
                    opportunities for beach access and   recreation are limited to the County
                    Park at Rincon Point. Most of the    demand for coastal recreation in the
                    Valley is satisfied by the City of   Carpinteria and primarily the State
                    Beach Park. There are a few' sites   along Padaro Lane and Santa Claus Lane
                    where the public has gained access   to the ocean by trespassing across
                    private land. The Coastal Commission required the offer of a vertical
                    easement for two of these sites along Padaro Lane and Beach Club Drive (APN
                    5-400-35 and APN 5-390-23); public access at both sites would require
                    follow-through by the County. Because of the limitations due to lack of
                    parking and the need to protect the slough, most of the demand for beach
                    access and recreation will need to be satisfied by the City and State.
                    beaches. Proposals for provision of new opportunities for limited beach
                    access are contained in Policy 7-8.

                          Habitat Areas

                          El Estero, or Carpinteria.Marsh, is located immediately   west of the
                    City  of Carpinteria. El Estero, 230 acres in size, is the largest wetland
                    under County jurisdiction. Approximately 120 acres of the marsh are part
                    of the University of California's Natural Land and Water Reserve System,
                    and the remainder is privately owned, with 35 acres in an Open Space
                    Preserve.

                          On the land use plan map, the marsh is designated as "Open Lands" with
                    a "Habitat Area" overlay which is adequate to protect it from the direct
                    threat of development. However, indirect impacts such as sedimentation or
                    toxic runoff from surrounding land uses can threaten its biological produc-
                    tivity. The principal land uses in the watershed of Carpinteria Marsh
                    include urban development within the City and agriculture, principally
                    greenhouses and orchards, in the rural area. Runoff from excess irrigation
                    and imp!ervious.surfaces related to these-land uses is now directed to the
                    areals natural drainage channels, Franklin and Santa Monica Creeks, which
                    flow directly through the marsh. Both of these creeks have been channel-
                    ized for'flood control purposes, with a design capacity based.on existing
                    land uses. The cumulative impact of increased runoff and sedimentation
                    resulting from additional greenhouses, new orchard development in the
                    foothills, or urban expansion on the water quality of the marsh and
                    adequacy of flood control projects needs to be monitored.

                          General policies for the protection of wetlands are included in
                    Section 3.9. Also Policies 3-13 through 3-22 in Section 3.3 address
                    development  in watershed areas And thus would affect lands surrounding the
                    Carpinteria Marsh. Section 3.9 also contains a specific recommendation.
                    regarding the development of a comprehensive, long-range management program
                    to ensure continued productivity of the marsh.

                                                       _159-

                         Hazards

                         Carpinteria Valley  has a high seismic hazard rating. The Carpinteria
                    and Red Mountain Faults  parallel, the Carpinteria bluffs from Carpinteria
                    State Beach Park to the  Rincon Point.area. Another fault, the Rincon
                    Fault, parallels the coastline further inland. Large parts of the Valley
                    are also subject to high groundwater and liquefaction. High groundwater
                    can be detrimental to agriculture, particularly tree crops that require a
                    greater rooting depth than annual crops. Liquefaction hazards present
                    problems for intense building development. Other hazards include slope
                    instability, which is limited to a small area in Toro Canyon, and tsunami
                    runup, which could inundate much of the City proper, the slough, and some
                   .agricultural areas. The   'County already has mechan-isms for addressing these
                    issues in its grading and subdivision ordinances_@and building code. @Addi-
                    tional.policies governing development in hazardous areas are included in
                    Section 3.3.

                         Shoreline bluffs and cliffs are subject.to undercutting and active
                    slides. Considerable damage., evident throughout the area, resulted from
                    the winter storms of 1978. Beach erosion has been mitigated in some of
                    these areas. In the area south of Santa Claus Lane, heavy rock has been
                    piled up against the top of the beach. The houses south of Sand Point Road
                    are protected by a 3,300-foot long double sea wall system.maintained by a
                    special district, the Sandyland Sea Wall.Association. In 1978, the County
                    Public Works Department administered $15,1,000 worth of repairs due to damage
                    caused by the previous winter storms. The sea wall system has proven
                    effective.in preventing damage to the structures in the area. Future
                    development, however, will require ample setbacks to avoid the need for new
                    bluff protective devices. (Refer to Policies 3-4 through 3-7 in Section
                    3.3.)

                         Flooding had been a major hazard throughout much of Carpinteria prior
                    to recent channelization of Santa Monica.and Franklin Creeks. Creek
                    channelizations have removed substantial areas within the City from the
                   .100-year flood zone. Debris barriers and grade stabilizers have,been
                    installed in the canyon areas to reduce transfer of flood debris and sedi-
                    ment to the Valley floor. Additional channelization is planned along
                    Casitas Pass Road which should remove much of the remaining flood hazard.
                    Areas subject to flooding will then be limited to areas along Carpinteria
                    Creek and Arroyo Paredon, the slough, and small agricultural areas outside
                    the City. There  are no plans at present'for channelizing Carpinteria
                    Creek, as it poses only limited.hazards to development. Setback standards
                    need to be developed, however, to guide future development occurring adja-
                    cent to the stream.

                         In addition to property damage from water and sediment, flood condi-
                    tions have impaired the functioning of the slough as an important ecologi-
                    cal system by de positing massive amounts of sediment as water passes
                    through. Dredging of the slough is planned as part of the second phase of

                                                     _160-

                    work under the Carpinteria Valley Watershed Project. In addition, two silt
                    basins will be constructed at'the points where Franklin and Santa Mon.ica
                    Creeks enter the slough. Regulation of development i.n.the watershed of the
                    slough is needed1to avoid impacts from,erosion and siltation.
                         the land use plan responds to these issues in sev'eral ways. Areas
                    within the 100-year flood plain are designated on the land use plan maps
                    with the Flood Hazard Overlay. New development in these areas is subject
                    to special policies which are included in Section 3.3. Policies 3-13
                    through 3-22 are intended to minimize erosion and siltation impacts from
                    new development occurring on watershed lands.

                         Housing

                         Residential development in the.Carpinteria Valley is largely contained
                    within several rural residential enclaves, namely Shepard's Mesa, Serena
                    Parkl La Mirada, Ocean Oaks, and the shoreline neighborhoods of Padaro
                    Lane, Sandyland Cove, and Rincon Point.   A large condominium complex at the
                    ,Santa Barbara Polo Grounds provides the only multiple-unit housing oppor-
                    tunities in the Valley.. The remaining housing is accessory to agricultural
                    operations.

                         On the land use plan map, the boundaries of the residential neighbor-
                    hoods listed above have been delineated, acknowledging the existing resi-
                    dential use and defining limits for expansion. Low residential densities
                    of one and three acres are de,signated within these neighborhoods, consis-
                    tent with the goal of minimizing urban pressures on agricultural lands.
                    New housing in the Valley should be incidental to agricultural operations,
                    except for infilling within the existing neighborhoods.

                         Commercial Development

                         At 'Present, commercial development outside of the City of Carpinteria
                    is limited to Santa Claus Lane, Which includes both highway strip and
                    highway-related commercial activities. This development is out of
                    character with a coastal setting; another architectural theme would be more
                    appropriate. A camper park adjacent to the City's western boundary on
                    North Via Real provides limited accommodations for visitors.

                         In most areas, expansion of commercial uses in the rural areas of  the
                    Valley would be inconsistent with Coastal Act policies regarding concentra-
                    tion of development and minimizing vehicle miles travelled. One exception
                    is the bluffs area between the City's present easterly boundary and the
                    County Park at Rincon. This area is proposed for inclusion within the
                    urban boundary in order that it may be planned comprehensively with other
                    undeveloped portions of Carpinteria bluffs; it is designated for Resort/
                    Visitor-Serving use on the land use plan maps. A detailed discussion of
                    the rationale for this land use and conditions for development are located
                    in Section 4.2.3.

                                                     -161-

                         Visual Resources

                         The visual resources of the Valley include several fleeting views of
                    the ocean from Highway 101 near Rincon Point; views of the ocean, islands,,
                    and foothills from Rincon Beach Park; and a fleeting view of the ocean from
                    U.S. 101 near Santa Claus Lane. In addition, there are scenic views of the
                    ocean,.the.Channel Islands, and the mountains from the Carpinteria bluffs.

                         The general visual quality of Carpinteria Valley is somewhat marred by
                    the presence of billboards along the freeway within the City of Carpin-
                    teria. The commercial strip development known as Santa Claus Lane obscures
                    views to the ocean and is out of character with the surrounding natural and
                    residential environment.

                         As greenhouse development has proliferated, a conflict has emerged
                    between Valley residents who live on the hillsides and growers who expand
                    their greenhouse operations below. Some Valley residents object to the
                    visual characteristics of the structures and the glare from their translu-
                    cent rooftops, as seen from the hillsides. While this hillside visual
                    impact is largely unresol.vable, the County has developed landscaping,
                    lighting, parking, and setback requirements for al.1 new greenhouse develop-
                    ment in order to minimize the visual impacts of these structures as seen
                    from,U. S. 101 and along Valley roads.

                         General policies addressing protection of visual resources are
                    included in Section 3.4. Policies which concern the visual impacts     of
                    greenhouse development are found in Section 3.8. New development south of
                    Hi ghway 101 in the vicinity of Santa Claus Lane,is subject to the View
                    Corridor Overlay designation (refer to Section 3.4).

                         Service System Capacities and-Availability of Resources

                    Water

                         The boundaries.of the Carpinteria County Water District encompass
                    almost all of the Carpinteria Valley planning area including the City of
                    Carpinteria; one area east of Toro Canyon,Road and extending into a portion
                    of Serena Park is located within the Montecito County Water District. With
                    the exception of several foothill areas in the northern part of the Valley,
                    the entire District is located within the coastal zone. The District
                    derives its water supply from the Carpinteria Groundwater Basin and surface
                    deliveries from Lake Cachuma. The groundwater basin extends beyond the
                    District's boundaries in.only two areas: to the west where the Toro Canyon
                    Subunit is within the Montecito County Wat.er District and to the east where
                    a small portion of,the basin is, in.Ventura County.

                                                      _162-

                           The safe yield of the groundwater basin is estimated to be 4,500 AFY
                     and the District's annual future entitlement to Cachuma water it 39041 AFY.
                     According to current water use,estimates, the District has an existing
                     uncommitted surplus of approximately-950 AFY (Table 4-1). Thus, water use
                     within the District is nearly equaT to the existing supply.

                           Buildout under existing zoning and the land use plan would both
                     require more water than the District can now supply. Under existing
                     zoning, an estimated 2,686 additional units could theoretically be
                     constructed in the,C.ity at some point in the future; approximately 500
                     units could also be'added by conversion of existing units to the higher
                     densities permitted under zoning. Under the proposed land use plan, the
                     number of additional housing units that would be possible is reduced to
                     1,155, largely the'result of the proposed change in the maximum number of
                     housing units permitted on Carpinteria bluffs. In the unincorporated area
                     of the CarpinterialValley, an estimated 1,070 additional housing units are
                     permitted under the'land use plan compared to the'1,700 units allowed under
                     current zoning. (See Appendix E.)

                           An estimated 39500 AFY of additional water    would be required to
                     accommodate theoretical buildout under the land use plans proposed for the
                     City and the unincorporated area. This potentialdemand for water far
                     exceeds the-District's current supply. Consequently, a water management
                     plan is.needed to en  *sure that priori.ty,uses under the Coastal Act, as well
                     as local priorities, are not precluded (see Section 3.2, Policy 2-8).

                           A water management plan for the Carpinteria Valley must reflect the
                     past efforts  of the County, City, and Coastal Commission to resolve the
                     water management issues of the Carpinteria area. These-efforts culminated
                        a public-workshop'in the fall of 1978. The purpose of this workshop was
                     to review existing water supply and demand data in order to reach a consen-
                     sus on the uncommitted, water-surplus in the Carpinteria Water District.
                     Also, public testimony was received concerning-the need to satisfy local as
                     well as Coastal Act,priorities in a water management plan. Information
                     gathered at this meeting formed the basis for the State Coastal Commis@-
                     sion's precedential*action on November 14-15 in wh     .ich the Commission found
                     that:

                           1.  The City of'Carpinteria, through its recent    conservation efforts,
                               has reduced water consumption for Municipal    and Industrial (M&I)
                               uses, thus increasing thetotal uncommitted     surplus in the
                               District.

                           2.  The entire water surplus, not including water conserved by the
                               City, should be reserved for priority uses'.under the Coastal Act,
                               predominantly agriculture.

                           3.  Forty (40) AFY of water would be allocated to the City for M&I
                               uses during"the 1978-79 water year. Following commitment of this
                               allocation, n 'ew development in the City Would be contingent upon
                               proof of new surplus water*derived form 'Pontinued conservation
                               efforts.

                                                        -163-

                                                          TABLE 4-1
                                            CARPINTERIA COUNTY WATER DIStRICT
                                            .1.979 ESTIMATED WATER SUPPLY/DEMANDG)

                                                                         Water Use
                     Supply                                          Acre Feet/Year (AFY)
                     Groundwater Safe Yield(2)                               42500
                     Cachuma Planning   Total                                3,041

                                                                             73,541

                     Water Use
                     Private  Wells(3)           rM & j)(4)                  1,800
                     Municipal and Industrial                                ls922
                     Agriculture (4)                                         22869

                                                                             69591
                     Total Uncommitted Water Surplus                            950

                         reserved for agricultural use     in the County        655
                     30% reserved for M & I uses within the City                285

                     (1)  These estimates are based on 1979 supply figures and five-year average
                          water use data.for,the period 1974-75 to 1978-79.
                     (2)  This figure is likely conservative and may warrant       a revision upward,
                          perhaps by 250 AFY (Letter to Carpinteria County Water District,
                          November 9, 1978, Geotechnical Consultants, Inc.).
                     (3)  Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. "Hydrologic Assessment, Carpinteria
                          Groundwater Basin" (Letter to the Carpinteria County Water District,
                          March 3, 1978,, Page 3).
                     (4)  This is a five year average for the period 1974-75 to 1978-79;.see
                          Carpinteria County Water District letter to City of Carpinteria,
                          July 23, 1,979, Page-4.

                                                         -164-

                         4.   In order to carry out Coastal Act policies on concentration of
                              urban development, residential development in the rural neighbor-
                              hoods of the Carpinteria Valley should be permitted in proportion
                              to development in the City on a ration of 1 to 10.. Since 40 AFY
                              of water was allocated to the City for the 1918-79 water year, 4
                              AFY would be allocated to the'County for residential use.

                         In other precedential decisions, the Commission has denied permits for
                    two back-up water wells on agricultural parcels and for a water well
                    intended to serve orchard expansion into.the foothills. The Commission has
                    also denied greenhouse development partially on the basis of increased
                    water use per acre and possible depletion or contamination of groundwater
                    resources. Thus, although the Commission has found that the entire water
                    surplus should be reserved for agriculture, it has denied greenhouses in
                    certain groundwater recharge areas of the Valley as well as orchard expan-
                    sion into the foothills. Since these are the most. likely forms of new
                    agricultural development in the Valley that would.require increased water
                    for the foreseeable future, the water being reserved for agriculture has
                    limited application at this time. Therefore, the entire water surplus
                    should not be reserved for agriculture, but should be distributed between
                    the City and the County on the basis of historical water use for priority
                    uses under the Coastal Act as well as local priorities. In addition,
                    agricultural water use should be allocated for open field crops (avocados,
                    lemons, vegetables.,@,field flowers, etc.) and greenhouse production accord-
                    ing to established water:use levels. Based on existing crop acreage and
                    average water use per acre,.an estimated 56 percent of the water allocated
                    for agriculture woul.d be Used for open field crops and 44 percent for
                    greenhouses or cover.crop production.

                    Wastewater Treatment Capacity

                         The current capacity of the Carpinteria Sanitary District's wastewater
                    treatment facility'is@ two million gallons per day. With an average dry
                    weather peak flow of 1.6 million gallons per day, the facility is at 80
                    percent of capacity-a'nd is able to provide service for approximately 3,600
                    additional people (Appendix D), Th,is is farmore than the number of people
                    that.could be served by the existing water supply.

                         The entire urbanized area,is presently served by the District. In the
                    rural area, a portion of Padaro.Lane was recently annexed to the District
                    and plans are also underway to annex Serena Park. The remaining unincor-
                    porated area relies.o6,septic tanks, although soil,and drainage in many
                    parts of the Valley-have caused problems for septic systems. For this
                    reason, some of the-.other residential neighborhoods in the rural area have
                    considered annexation.to the District, but the high cost of extending lines
                    into the rural area has historically precluded such action. Because of
                    potential adverse impacts from existing septic systems,.in.the Sandyland
                    Cove area on adjacent Carpinteria Marsh, this neighborhood may need to be
                    annexed to the District at some point in the future. The extension of
                    sewer lines into rural areas is addressed in Secti-on 3.2,-Policy 2-9.

                                                     -165-

                     4.2.3 CARPINTERIA BLUFFS

                          The a rea known as Carpinteria bluffs extends eastward      from the-Chevron
                     oil processing facility within the City of Carpinteria into the unincorpor-
                     ated area north of the County's Rincon Park. There are two major blocks of
                     undeveloped lands within this area: the 72 acres owned by Chevron and Exxon
                     within the City to the west, and another 24 acres owned by Hancock and
                     Ferry (APN 1-210-13, 16, 23, 24) in the unincorporated area at the eastern
                     extent of the bluffs. Although located at opposite ends of the bluffs and
                     separated by an area that is partially developed with industrial park uses,
                     these two subareas offer opportunities for coastal-related recreational use
                     and need to be planned comprehensively to ensure that individual land uses
                     complement each other. Just inside the City's eastern boundary lies an
                     undeveloped parcel (APN 1-210-2   *0) whichAs contiguous with the Hancock
                     property. It, too, should be planned with the adjacent unincorporated
                     parcels.

                          The coastal resources of the eastern subarea of the Carpinteria bluffs
                     include scenic views from the blufftops to the ocean and Channel Islands as
                     well as views of the foothills and Santa Ynez Mountains across the Valley
                     floor, proximity to the dry sandy beach at Rincon County Park, and opportu-
                     nities afforded for coastal-related.visitor-serving uses because of the
                     areals easy access to U. S. 101.

                          Constraints to development in the area include unstable soils, bluff
                     erosion, and the presence of the Red Mountain earthquake fault. The bluffs
                     are tiered in this area, with the railroad running along the first tier .                  I
                     above.the beach; rock revetments have been required to reinforce the bluff
                     in several areas. Soil slippage and erosion are also evident as a result
                     of winter storms.

                          This segment  of the bluffs. is particularly suited for visitor-serving
                     uses because of the area's access to Highway 101, ocean views, and proxi-
                     mity to Rincon County Park. Therefore, the land use plan calls for a
                     visitor-serving type of development which could include a hotel, motel, or
                     lodge with restaurant, along with tourist commercial activities (i.e.,
                     retail shoos) and other recreational amenities (i.e., swimming pool, tennis
                     courts, etc.). The development should be of moderate scale in the range of
                     100 to 200 units and a maximum of two stories in height.        In recent years ,
                     concern has been expressed that overdevelopment of visitor-serving facili-
                     ties could occur on Carpinteria bluffs to the detriment of local commercial
                     activity and community needs. The level of tourist activity that the area
                     can support, in addition to Carpinteria State Beach Park and the limited
                     visitor-serving facilities that exist within the City, has not been deter-
                     mined. While-the bluffs are suited for some additional visitor-serving
                     uses, proliferation of such,uses shou.ld be prevented., Allowing for one
                     centralized resort developmenton this,24-acre site would accomplish this
                     objecti.ve.

                                                        -166-

                          Therefore, a specific plan shall be prepared for the       unincorporated
                     portions of the Carpinteria bluffs (APN 1-210-13, 16, 23,      24) and contigu-
                     ous City parcel (APN 1-210-20),. Such plan shall be subject to environ-
                     mental review and approval by,the Planning Commissions of the County and
                     City of Carpinteria. All future development shall be in conformity to the
                     approved specific plan.
                          The specific.plan shall conform to the following criteria:
                          1. Dedication of the following lands for public use shall be
                               required:

                               (a)  a corridor, minimum 20 feet in width, north of the Southern
                                    Pacific Railroad right-of-way, for a hiking/biking trail. To
                                    minimize alterations to natural topography and vegetation and
                                    to take advantage of scenic vista points, the exact location
                                    and width of the trail shall be determined by the County and
                                    City.   The costs of improv.ing the trail shall be borne by the
                                    applicant(s), not the County or City.-

                               (b)  a mini,mum of one public access corridor connecting Carpin-
                                    teria Avenue with the proposed trail.

                               (c)  all lands south of the Southern Pacific Railroad and north of
                                    the mean high tide line which are not currently in public
                                    ownership.

                          2.   Permitted uses shall include a.hotel, motel, or lodge with restau-
                               rant(s), tourist commercial activities,,and other visitor-serving
                               amenities. Moderate scale overnight lodging facilities shall be
                               permitted.

                          3.   A visitor-serving development which does not at least in part
                               require a coastal location in order to operate shall not be
                               permitted.

                          4.   A safe, public access to the dry sandy beach from the proposed
                               development shall be provided, if feasible (e.g., a trail to the
                               beach with a railroad overcrossing for pedestrians would be one
                               alternative).

                          5.   To the maximum extent possible, drought-resis    tant vegetation shall
                               be used for landscaping.

                     4.2.4 SUMMARY OF THE LAND USE PLAN MAP

                          The most extensive changes proposed in the coastal plan for Carpin-
                     teria Valley concern the land use designations for agricultural lands. In
                     order to conform with-Coastal Act policies which require the maximum
                     protection of existing prime agricultural lands, the land use plan proposes
                     three agricultural designations for the Valley instead of the existing
                     A-14 five-acre minimum agricultural zone, which is the current blanket

                                                         -167-

                     zone. The three designations consist of a 5-acre minimum (A-I-5) for a
                     non-recharge, high water table area on the west; a 10-acre minimum (A-I-10)
                     for all agricultural lands of up to 30 percent slopes; and a 40-acre
                     minimum (A-I-40.) for all agricultural lands with slopes greater than 30
                     percent. Figure 4-4 illustrates the proposed land use map designations        for
                     the Carpinteria Valley planning area.

                          Under the land use plan the A-I-10 designation would replace the
                     existing A-14 zone throughout much of the western part of the Valley
                     between Toro Canyon and Santa Monica Roads. A large parcel north of Arroyo
                     Paredon Creek abutting the La Mirada neighborhood on the east and currently
                     zoned 1-E-1 (one-acre residential lots) would be changed to agriculture
                     under the A-I-10 classification, consistent with the criteria established
                     for designating agricultural lands (Policy 8-1). In general, the A-I-10
                     designation is considered appropriate for this area because prevailing
                     parcel sizes generally exceed ten acres and because the area is not
                     ,subject to high water table problems. North of the Santa Barbara Polo
                     Field and in a line extending eastward, many parcels are designated for
                     40-acre minimums because of the presence of slopes in excess of 30
                     percent.

                          From Arroyo Paredon Creek east to Santa Monica Road and south of
                     Foothill Road, much of the area has been designated for A-I-5, requiring
                     five-acre minimum agricultural,parcels. Here     'the A-I-5 designation, is'
                     appropriate because a high water table limits agriculture to shallow rooted
                     crops or greenhouse,cultivation and because many smaller parc6ls'of ten
                     acres or less already exist.

                          The agricultural lands east of the urban limit line comprising much of
                     the Valley floor and some of thehillside areas north of Casitas Pass Road
                     would be changed from A-14 to A-I-10. Prevailing parcel sizes throughout
                     th is area are generally ten acres or more. Much of the area is important
                     for groundwater recharge and the deep alluvial soils, especially in the
                     vicinity of Carpinteria Creek, support highly productive avocado orchards.

                          The hillsides north of Foothil  1 and Casitas Pass Roads where slopes
                     exceed 30 percent are proposed for the A-I-40 classification requiring
                     minimum parcel sizes of 40 acres. The existing A-14 zone is unsuitable
                     because it could lead to a proliferation of rural ranchette uses which
                     would be incompatible with the agricultural policies of the Coastal Act.
                     One area within the National Forest jurisdiction is designated as a
                     Mountainous Area with a 100-acre minimum because of slopes exceeding 40
                     percent.

                          A number of changes are also   proposed in certain residential zones in
                     the Valley. The western tip of Padaro Lane, now zoned for 20-R-1 and
                     1-E-1, respectively, would be changed to three-acre minimum lots. These
                     lot sizes are more consistent with existing residential patterns and are
                     more compatible with the scenic.qualities of the area.

                                                       -168-

                          North of U. S. 101 and Bailard Avenue a residential wedge currently
                    zoned DR-2 (permitting half-acre minimum lots) would be changed in the land
                    use plan to three-acre minimum lots. This residential area abuts the
                    agricultural heart of the Valley and should be treated more as a transi-
                    tional zone between urban and agricultural land uses.

                          North of Rincon Point a rural neighborhood with one-acre and three-
                    acre  minimum lots is proposed instead of a mix of one acre (1-E-1) and
                    one-half acre (20-R-1) residential zones. This area is decidedly rural in
                    terms of use and character, and the existing zoning is incompatible with
                    these uses. Within this neighborhood, residential parcels now zoned 6-R;-1
                    would be changed to one- and three-acre lots to be more consistent with
                    existing land uses. The 6-R-1 designation for Rincon County Park would be
                    changed to recreation and open space to be consistent with its park usage.

                          In all, the land use plan for Carpinteria Valley would  'reduce the
                    number of potential additional units in the Valley from the 1,700 permitted
                    under existing zoning to an estimated 1,070 (refer to Appendix E). The
                    number of additional units allowed on agriculturally designated lands would
                    decrease from 460 units to 300. Also, through the process of,.a.djusting the
                    boundaries of outlying neighborhoods, the potential number of additional
                    residential units in*the one unit per acre category has been reduced signi-
                    ficantly from 224 units to 76 units.

                                                      -169-

                              A-I' 0

                                                         A- .4
                     .10
                                                           q                          A

                                                                      ot              N,                                          A 140
                                                                                                                                                                      k- -40
                              Padar                      6\                                                  'A-1- 10
                               La e                                     A-1- -15%
                           3
                                    4
                                                                                          ri
                                                                                                                                                                              A-1 1
                                                                                                              cit@

                                            Sandyland
                                                                                                                                                               N

                                                                   I Esterc                                                                               A-1- 40
                                                                                                                             el
                                                        8
                                                                                             Carpinter'o                   A-1               A.1.10
                                                                                                                    col
                  1.   Residential (1 du*/5     20 acres
                                                          -@ 3.3 du/acre)                                                                                               A-I I
                  2    Recreation and/or Qpen Space                       9
         1        3:   Residential ( I du/3acres - 3.3    du/acre)
                                                                                10
                  4.   Highway Commercial                                                                                                                   A -1- 10
         -4
         CD       5.   Highway Commercial
         1        6.   Residential (1 du/3 acres      1.8 du/acre)
                  7.   Cemetery

                                                                                                                                                            ..............
                  8    Residential (3-3 du/acre                                                                                                                       !@
                  9:   Residential (4.6 du/acZ                                                                                                                             15
                 10.   Office and Professional
                 11.   Carpinteria State Beach                                                                               12
                 12.   Residential (1 du/3acres - 2D du/acre)                                                                             13
                 13.   Visitor Serving Commercial
                 14.   Rincon Beach County Park                                                                                                                   01
                 15.   Residential (1 du/3acres   - 1 du/acre)
                                                                                               0                                                  14
                 16.   Educational Facility
                 17.   Residential (1 du/3 acres -   1 du/acre)                                            Mile                                               Rincon lot.
                L18-   Residential (4.6 - 12.3 da/acre)                     dwelling units

                                . FIGURE 4-4
                           Generalized Land Use Plan                                             Land Use Designations -see text tor detinitions
                           Carpinteria Valley Planning                   Area                      0     COMMUNITY FACILITIES                           OPEN LAND US
                           County of Santa Barbara                                                 0     INDUSTRIAL                                     rVq
                           Local Coastal Program                                                   0     COMMERCIAL                                     N N@ I    AGRICULTURE
                                                                                                                                                                  MOUNT4ikU
                                                                                                         RESIDENTIAL                                    ED        OTHER OPEN
                                          COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY                                          (see map list for densities)                      AIN    RECREATION

                                                                                  7-L

               '3C 1978  RON MORGAN         4.3         Summerland

                     4.3 SUMMERLAND

                     4.3.1 CHARACTER OF THE PLANNING AREA

                          Summerland is a small, hillside beach community. Much of the town is
                     perched on a steep, south-facing slope which gives residents a commanding
                     view of the Pacific Ocean and the Channel Islands. The character of the
                     community is compact and informal. Lots are very small, streets narrow, and
                     architectural styles diverse. Homes in Summerland are a mix of single
                     family and multiple, some well-preserved and others badly run-down. The
                     commercial district is small and quiet, consisting of several gas stations,
                     11mom and pop" markets, a boutique, a post office, etc. Along Summerland's
                     main street, Lillie Avenue, commercial and residential uses merge into one
                     another, adding to the informal quality of the community.

                          Summerland is physically isolated from its waterfront by U.S. 101,
                     except for an underpass which provides pedestrian and vehicular access to
                     the beach through a small County park. The shoreline area, like the
                     community, is informally arranged. It is a narrow band of parkland,
                     park'ing lots, abandoned warehouses, a smattering of residences, tightly
                     backed by the Southern Pacific main line and U.S. 101.

                          North of Summerland's developed area are hillsides predominantly
                     covered by native vegetation or planted to avocados and lemons. To the
                     east are several large lemon orchards and oak woodlands which abut Toro
                     Canyon Creek. Several residential enclaves also align Toro Canyon road in
                     the rural area.

                     4.3.2 PLANNING ISSUES

                          Urban/Rural Boundary

                          Development in Summerland is now concentrated between Sears Street on
                     the west, Whitney Avenue to the north, Greenwell Avenue to the east, and
                     the Pacific Ocean to the south. Close to 400 housing units are now
                     contained in this area and there is sufficient open land to accommodate
                     additional units if supplemental water becomes available. However., the
                     degree of infilling that will ultimately be possible within the existing
                     urban area will be conditioned by prevailing geologic constraints, narrow
                     streets, lack of parking, and the prevalence of unusually small lots (2,500
                     sq. ft. or less). Beyond the present urban boundaries, the character of
                     the area is decidedly rural with over half of the acreage in agricultural
                     use. The agricultural potential of the remaining acreage is severely
                     limited by poor soils and@steep slopes. Development of these lands at
                     densities permitted under current zoning would be inconsistent with the
                     rural character of the area and contrary to the Coastal Act goals of
                     concentrating urban development and preserving agriculture.

                          Given Summerland's resource and geologic constraints and the need to
                   ,minimize urban pressures on surrounding agricultural lands, delineation of
                     an urban/rural boundary is necessary. The proposed urban/rural boundary
                     shown on the land Use plan m:ap conforms to the existing Urbanized area to

                                                    _171-

                     the west and north, delineated by Sears Street and Whitney Avenue, respec-
                     tively. On the west, an agricultural parcel and adjacent residenti@l
                     enclave designated for half-acre and one-acre lots have been excluded from
                     the urban area. To the north of the existing single family homes on
                     Whitney Avenue, steep-slopes and unstable soils render the area unsuitable
                     for dense urban development;..therefore, this area has also been excluded
                     from the urban area and de signated for Residential Ranchettes (five to
                     twenty-acre minimum parcels).

                         .To the east, the urban/ rural boundary extends in a line running
                     approximately east/west from Whitney Avenue, across Greenwell Avenue, and
                     through the Roberts property (APN 5-210-01), to conform with the top of the
                     existing knoll. The boundary then proceeds south along the eastern parcel
                     lines of the Roberts and Bourgerie/Glenn properties (APN 5-210-01 and 36)
                     to Via Real. This is a logical extension of the urban limit line given
                     that further infilling within the present urban area will possibly be
                     reduced because of existing geologic conditions and other constraints. In
                     addition, the agricultural potential of the area is severely limited by the
                     presence of non-prime soils and on-shore wind conditions. The entire area
                     is located within the service areas of the Summerland County Water and
                     Sanitary Districts. However, development over the foreseeable future may
                     be hindered by the lack of a 'n adequate water supply and insufficient waste-
                     water treatment capacity (see Availability of Resources section.below).

                          Agriculture

                          Although soils in the rural area  are non-prime (Class III and IV) and
                     the terrain is generally steep (slopes from,15 percent to 75 percent), an
                     estimated 480 acres, or 58 percent of the rural lands, are currently in
                     agricultural use. Given soil, slope, and erosion constraints, existing
                     agriculture for the most part represents the agricultural potential of the
                     area. Avocado and lemon orchards are the dominant agricultural land use,
                     while a trend toward stabling of horses has been established in the heavily
                     wooded areas along Toro Canyon Creek. Steep slopes and wind conditions are
                     a deterrent to major greenhouse development in the area. At present, the
                     remaining rural lands are in open space or partially developed neighbor-
                     hoods.

                         A.wide range of parcel sizes  exists in the rural area; 50 percent of
                     the parcels are ten acres or larger, accounting for 86 percent of the total
                     rural acreage. Most of the agricultural parcels north of the town of
                     Summerland are in holdings that exceed ten acres; smaller parcels are
                     concentrated along Toro Canyon Road.

                      . In recognition of the a   rea's natural geologic limitations, resource
                     constraints, and existing agriculture, land use designations for lower
                     density residential.ranchettes and'larger minimum parcel sizes'for agricul-
                     ture are needed in the rural area.,

                                                    -172-

                            The.agricultural land use designations shown on the land use pl'an map
                      are based on criteria contained in Policy 8-1 (Section 3.8). Policies 8-2
                      to 8-7 also apply to these agriculturally designated lands. In the Summer-
                      land planning area, a 10-acre minimum parcel size for agriculture is estab-
                      lished, consistent with agricultural minimums established for the Carpin-
                      teria Valley. As stated above, 50 percent of the parcels (86% of the
                      acreage) in the rural area would be conforming as to size under the 10-acre
                      minimum. To reduce urban pressures on agricultural lands in the area, an
                      urban/rural boundary is delineated on. the land use plan map as described in
                      the previous section.

                            Coastal Access and Recreation

                            The recreational carrying capacity of    Summerland's beaches is limited.
                      Lack  of parking and beach access points, and the narrowness of the coastal
                      belt  between the railroad and the bluffs, pose constraints on beach use
                      beyond its present level during the peak summer months. Lookout Park is
                      currently the only publicly-owned recreation area. It has recently been
                      expanded to 3.4 acres in size and has a parking capacity of 74 spaces. The
                      park is used to capacity during warm weather. Potential additional
                      vertical accessways are available via the County right-of-ways along Morris
                      Place and Carey Place.

                            The beach area between the Summerland Sanitary District and Loon Point
                      has been commonly used by the public    'for many years. Access is gained from
                      Wallace Avenue and from a footpath at the western end of Padaro Lane. This
                      informal access has contributed to problems of bluff erosion and litter due
                      to lack of maintenance and facilities. Action by t     he County is needed to
                      solve these problems.

                            General policies related to access and recreation are included in
                      Section 3.7 along With specific recommendations for the Summerland area.
                      Existing and proposed accestways and recreation areas are shown on the land
                      use plan maps.

                            Habitat Areas

                            Habitat areas in the Summerland planning    area include Toro Canyon
                      Creek, which is bordered by dense stands of coast live oak, and the exten-
                      sive kelp beds one-half mile offshore. The land use plan map reserves '
                      areas bordering Toro Canyon Creek for agriculture and low density residen-
                      tial land uses. These uses are.consistent with the goal of habitat protec-
                      tion. Policies related to the protection of oak trees, streams, and kelp
                      beds are contained in Section 3..9.

                            Hazards

                            Surrounding Summerland are steep, undeveloped hillsides; soil stabili-
                      ty in many of these areas poses moderate to severe problems. Landslide
                      potential is of high severity for most of Summerland proper, as well as for
                      the hills to the north. The heavy winter rains of 1978 caused serious

                                                       -173-

                      erosion and landslide problems throughout the area. Subsidence to the
                      Southern Pacific Railroad railbed west of Padaro Lane is a further
                      indication of the instabilities that exist. In addition to geologic
                      hazards, the narrow band of oak groves along Toro Canyon Creek presents a
                      high fire hazard during the dry season. These hazards pose severe
                      limitations to new development throughout the Summerland area; therefore,
                      -the pattern of new development should reflect these constraints.

                          The land use plan map for the Summerlahd area shows continuation of
                      the pattern of fairly dense residential and commercial development for the
                      existing community of Summerland. Some vacant parcels are subject to slope
                      and soil stability constraints and may never be developed. All new
                      development is subject to the hazards policies in Section 3.3. The land
                      use pl.an maps show the existing rural areas surrounding the community of
                      Summerland in a combination of Agriculture and low density Residential
                      Ranchette uses. Such uses are consistent with the identified constraints.

                          Housing
                          The community of Summerland  currently provides substantial housing
                      opportunities for persons of low and moderate incomes. In 1974, the annual
                      median income was $89250., 62 percent of the median income for Santa Barbara
                      County residents. According to Federal guidelines,,,Sumerland would be
                      considered a low-income area. An estimated 42 percent of the residents who
                      rented single family residences in the Summerland/Carpinteria Valley unin-
                      corporated area in 1974 paid more than 25 percent of their gross income for
                      housing, as did 44 percent of the renters in two-to-four unit dwell.ings.
                      Thus, overpayment for housing was a problem for a large number of resi-
                      dents. Also, almost half of the community'.s single family housing stock
                      has been identified as being in need of major repair. These housing condi-
                      tions and median income statistics have prompte*d the County.to target the
                      town of Summerland for a housingrehabilitation prog@am financed'by
                      Community Development Block Grant funds.
                          In order to protect ex.isting low and moderate income housing opportu-
                      nitiet in the Summerland planning area and to provide for new opportu-
                      nities, where feasible, residential. development will be subject to the
                      general housing policies contained in Section 3.5. A specific housing
                      rehabilitation program for Summerland is called for in Policy 5-2. In
                      addition,, multiple residential densities which encourage the provision of
                      new low and moderate income housing are designated on the land use plan
                      maps. Under the land use plan, approximately 328 units of potential new
                      housing units in Summerland would be i.n multiple-unit developments. An
                      additional.82 multiple units couldbe provided by converting existing units
                      to a higher density permitted under the plan.
                          Commercial Development
                          Commercial development is limited to the main street,, Lillie Avenue,
                      and primarily serves the town's shopping and service needs. Given the
                      physical separation of the commercial area from the waterfront and the
                    .congestion in both areasi large-scale visi,tor-serving commercial uses
                      cannot easily be accommodated.

                                                     -174-

                         Most of the parcels along Summerland's main street, Li Ilie Avenue, are
                    designated for a combination of Retail and Highway Commercial uses on the
                    land use plan map. These designations are adequate to allow for
                    development to serve visitors to the area.

                         Visual Resources

                         The visual resources of the area are the Pacific Ocean, beach area and
                    bluffs, views to the Channel Islands, and the rural lands north of Highway
                    101. These visua-1 resources which.'establish Summerland's spatial identity
                    and provide a scenic corridor for travelers along U..S. 101 need to be
                    protected.

                         Though physically separated from its waterfront area by U.S. 101,
                    Summerland residents have@a strong visual tie to the coastline below. This
                    visual relationship is somewhat marred by the abandoned industrial struc-
                    tures that are scattered along the bluffs, and by the tangle of cars parked
                    around Lookout Park and along the bluff area in the summertime. The
                  .Southern Pacific Railroad's massive rock revetment intrudes on views from
                    the beach and also hampers lateral access along-the beach during high
                    tides. Landscaping and other des.ign measures should be undertaken to
                    upgrade the area's scenic resources.

                         The County Park Department removed some of the existing industrial
                    structures at Lookout Park. However, several structures still remain.
                    A recommendation for landscaping along Wallace Avenue is included in Policy
                    7-9. Other visual resources issues are addressed through policies
                    contained in Section 3.4. Also, new development in the coastal area south
                    of U.S. 101 between Fernald Point and Loon Point is subject to the policies
                    associated with the View Corridor Overlay designation (Section 3.4).

                         Service System Capacities and Availability of Resources

                    Water Supply

                         The Summerland area is serviced primarily by the Summerland County
                    Water District. The District's boundaries extend west to Ortega Ridge Road
                    and to a line some 1,,500 feet east of Greenwell Avenue, north beyond the
                    coastal zone lineP and south to the Pacific Ocean. The Montecito County
                    Water District serves a portion of the area east of the Summerland County
                    Water District bounds; this area is mostly in agricultural and large lot
                    residential use.

                         The District is totally dependent on the Cachuma Project for its water
                    supply. No groundwater formations underlie the Summerland County Water
                    District; thus., there are no private wells in operation within the District
                    at this time. A portion of the Carpinteria Groundwater Basin underlies the
                    area serviced by the Montecito County Water District and some private wells
                    are in operation in this area.

                                                     -175-

                         Since October 16, 1974 when water supply and demand reached
                    approximate equilibrium, th; Summerland County Water District has had a
                    moratorium on new water hookups in effect. The District's existing and
                    projected water balances for the years 1975-2000 are shown in Table D-3
                    (Appendix D). As shown, an est.imated deficit of close to 200 AFY is
                    projected for 1990, increasing to over 300 AFY by the year 2000. This
                    deficit is due to the District's decreasing allotment from Lake Cachuma.

                         Under the land use plan., an additional 635 housing units could
                    theoretically be constructed in the Summerland planning area;,497 of these
                    additional units would be within the urban area as defined on the land use
                    plan map (see Appendix E). Approximately 200 AFY of supplemental water
                    would be necessary to accommodate additional development within the urban
                    area, since the District's present water supply is totally committed.

                         Because of the District's existing moratorium on new hookups and   the
                    lack of groundwater resources, there will be little or no development   in
                    Summerland until such time as a permanent increase in the water supply is
                    obtained. Should alternative sources of water become available, priorities
                    for the use of this limited new supply will need to be implemented.
                    Policies concerning these priorities,and the adequacy of water resources to
                    provide for them are found in Section 3.2.

                    Wastewater Treatment Capacity

                         The Summerland County Sanitary District boundaries  run from Ortega
                    Ridge on the west to the Water District boundary on the  east, beyond the
                    coastal zone on the north, and the Pacific Ocean to the  south. Existing
                    wastewater treatment capacity is rated at 150,000 gallons per day (gpd)
                    against an estimated wastewater flow of 115,000 gpd. Assuming the plant
                    can operate at its rated 150,000 gpd, there is capacity for approximately
                    318 additional residents (Table D-4, Appendix D). Sewer lines.serve the
                    existing community of Summerland but do not extend to the surrounding rural
                    areas. Policies concerning the extension of sewer lines outside of
                    existing urban areas are contained in the development section of the land
                    use plan (Section 3.2).

                    4.3.3 SUMMARY OF LAND USE PLAN MAP

                         Several major zoning changes are proposed for the Summerland area in
                    order to achieve consistency with the policies of the Coastal Act and to
                    properly reflect limited development potential due to resource constraints.
                    The most extensive changes would take place in the rural lands to the north
                    of Summerland's existing urban boundary. Much of this area is presently
                    zoned for one acre residential use (1-E-1). Under.the land use plan,
                    parcels in this area are designated for either agricultural use (10-acre
                    minimum parcels) or residential ranchettes (5 to 20-acre minimum parcels).

                                                     -176-

                          In conformance with the extension of the urban/rural boundary to the
                     east of Greenwell Avenue, the density of the parcels fronting Via Real is
                     increased under the land use plan from the 8 units per acre permitted under
                     existing zoning to 12.3 units per acre. The adjacent parcel to the north
                     is designated for 3.3 units per acre on the southerly portion of the
                     property that is located within the urban area and residential ranchettes
                     (minimum.5 to 20-acre parcels) on the northern, rural portion.

                          Another large area that is proposed for rezoning lies in the vicinity
                     of Lambert Road and Toro Canyon Creek. One acre residential use (I-E-1) is
                     currently allowed. The land use plan would eliminate the residential zone
                     and replace it with a .10-acre minimum agricultural designation (A-I-10).
                     The basis for this proposed change is that these 1-a'nds support viable
                     orchards and are, therefore, classified as prime agricultural lands.
                     According to the policies of the Coastal Act, prime agricultural lands are
                     to be maintained in agricultural.use unless they are needed for the logical
                     completion of neighborhoods or to promote orderly growth. Since this area
                     is neither part of,an existing neighborhood nor necessary for urban growth,
                     the agricultural designation is a more appropriate land use. Selection of
                     a 10-acre minimum was based on agricultural acreage criteria set forth in
                     the discussion of'Carpinteria Valley agricultural@,parcel sizes (see Section
                     4.2).

                          An existing residentially zoned parcel west of Summerland bordered by
                     Ortega Ridge and Ortega Hill,Road is Also proposed for A-1-10 agricultural
                     zoning. Though nonprime, this parcel is in existing agricultural use and
                     is not needed for Urban growth in the foreseeable future.

                          Other zoning changes in the Summerland area relate to a proposed
                     Recreation and Open Space designation for much of Summerland's waterfront
                     area between U.S..101 and the Pacific Ocean, the removal of a residential
                     zone abutting the Josten's property in favor of industrial park zoning, and
                     relatively minor density decreases in several of Summerland's multiple
                     zones.

                          The magnitude of the proposed changes is most    evident in the rural
                     areas where existing zoning would theoretically permit some 640 additional
                     residences compared with only 140 additional units under the land use plan.
                     Within the urban boundary, the theoretical buildout under the land use plan
                     is greater than that permitted under existing zoning because of the
                     extension of the urban/rural boundary and corresponding increase in
                     residential density. The land use plan would permit an estimated 497
                     units, compared to 423 units under existing zoning (refer to Tables E-6 and
                     E-7, Appendix E).

                                                       -177r-

                                                                                                                                       Rd.

                                                                                       East                      .,.\\eA
                          Santa--
                                                                                                     (n
                                                                              U)                                                                                                                     East
                                                                                                                                    U                                                                                           Valley
                                                                       0
                                                                                                        0                                                                                                     19
                                                   @
                                                                                                     0                                                                             0   (0
                                                                                                                                                  16
                                                                                                                                                                   17
                                                                                     Montecito         13            14
                                                                                                                                                                                              A-1 10      -%"0
                                                                                      12
                                                                                                              ..........
                                                                                                                                      T:

                                                                                                                                                                              ..........     M
                                                                . .........                                                                                                              -X
                                                                    I., ..........
                                                                                                                                      -X
                                                   "R.
                                                                                                                                                                                                             X.
                         CID                       X..                                                                                                                                           ..... ..............
                         CL
                                                                              X0 "I
                                                                                                                                                          2
                                                                                                                                                Pt.              A-1,10
                                                                                                          8
                                                                                                                  A-1.
                                                                                                                                                                                                       26
                                       1           2     3         4       5 6                       7                                                                      21       @3         25          27     28                    ......
                                                                                          Hammond's Meadow
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       29
                                                                              (see    text    for    land use designation)                                                                                                   30
           00
            1                   1      Camet ry                                               14.    Residential (1.0 d.u./acre  max.)                  27.  Park/Open Space                                                    31        32
                                2:     R.sid:,ti.1 (1.8 -12.3 d.u.'*/acre max,)               16.    Educational Facility                               28.  Highway Related
                                3:     Educational Facility                                   16.    Residential (1.0 d.u./acre max.)                   29.  Institution/Governinent Facility
                                4      Visitor Serving Courmercial                            17:    P rk/Dpen.Space                                    30.  Public Utility
                                                                                              I          t
                                S.     leide 11 1 4,1,-,12.3 d.u./acre ux.)                   E      R:sid*ni I   d.u./5    20 acres  max.)             31.  P:rk/Open space
                                6.     Rest dent   i:l (I .u./acre rax.)                      19.    Park/0'n Spa(cle                                   32.  R sidential (1 d.u./5 - 20 acres      max.
                                7      Residential (1.8 - 12.3 d,U,/acrg  mx.)                20.    Industrial Park                                    33.  Residential (0.3 d.u./acre mx.)
                                6:     Visitor Serving Conarcial                              21.    Residential (4.6 d.u./acre max.)                   34.  Residential (1,0 - 1.8 d.u.jacre      max.)
                                1:     1: it din@l il: 11 '11:01 !.u ed                       22.    Central Business District                          35.  Residential (4.6 d.u./acre max.)
                                0                        1,@,
                                11.    ft.,dent,:,         3 7umj                             23.    Lookout Park                                       36.  Residential (3.3 d.u./acre ux.)
                                I      Re den      1,0 - 1.8                                  24.    Residential (4.6 d.u./acre max.)                   37.  Park/Open Space
                                12.    Rest de t   I II:.1 d:u:/:c- max                       25.    Public Utility                                     38.  Residential (1.0 d.u./acre max.)                                           0
                                13.    Re, ide"nt  '.111d u ere ma.:@                         26.    Central Business District                          39.  Residential (I d.u./5      20 acres   max.)                                 I
                                       dwelling units

                                                   FIGURE 4-5.
                                       Generalized Land Use Plan                                                                          Land       Use Designations -see text for definitions
                                       Montecito/Summeriand Planning Areas                                                                    0      COMMUNITY FACILITIES                                            OPEN LAND
                                       County of Santa Barbara                                                                                0      INDUSTRIAL
                                       Local Coastal Program                                                                                 91      COMMERCIAL                                                                    AGRICUL
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   RECREAT
                                         r-3 =3          COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY                                                                       RESIDENTIAL
                                                                                                                                                     (see map list for densities)

                  t if

                                                               AL

                                      4.4 Montecito                             1978 RON MORGAN

                  4.4.,    MONTECITO

                     4.4.1 CHARACTER OF THE PLANNING AREA

                          Montecito  is considered to be among the most attractive residential
                     communities in the County. it is noted for its.elegant homes, beautiful
                     oak woodland setting, scenic waterfront, and ruggedly picturesque mountain
                     backdrop.

                          Montecito's waterfront consists of spacious residential estates,
                     luxurious condominiums, the undeveloped Hammond's Meadow, two resort
                     hotels, and a cluster of beach cottages. Some of the beach cottages and
                     the waterfront residences in the Miramar Beach and Fernald Point area are
                     located almost at sea level, just beyond the mean high tide line.

                          The Southern Pacific main line separates the waterfront from a larger
                     residential area which extends to U. S. 101. Homes in this area are
                     somewhat-more modest, particularly between Olive Mill. and Humphrey Roads.

                          North of U., S. 101, Montecito is almost exclusively residential. The
                     dominant character of this large residential area is rural, in spite of
                     densities which range from multiple to three-acre minimum lots. Because of
                     residents' wishes, many service roads are narrow and winding, without curbs
                     and sidewalks; native vegetation it abundant (particularly oaks and syca-
                     .mores); most homes are custom-built and usually designed to be subordinate
                     to the surrounding landscape.

                          Several coastal streams wind their way through much    of Montecito and
                     greatly enhance the rural charm of the area. A few isolated agricultural
                     parcels stillexist in Montecito. These parcels are found immediate      ly
                     north of Jameson Lane and east of Sheffield Drive, respectively.

                     4.4.2 PLANNING ISSUES

                          Urban/Rural Boundary

                          The entire Montecito planning  area is classified as   urban.   The
                     urban/rural boundaryi which extends,along Ortega Ridge Road to the east,
                     serves as a demarcation between the rural lands surrou   'nding the town of
                     Summerland and Montecito's low-density residential development.

                          Agri culture;
                          The Montecito Avocado  Ranch (APN 7-34U -37, 38') is the 'sole producing
                     agricultural parcel in the  Montecitb planning area. Soils are classified
                     as prime and, in Appeal No. 43-75, the State Coastal Commission ruled that
                     the parcel should be maintained in agricultural use. This parcel has,
                     therefore, been designated for agriculture on the land use plan map.

                          Another large parcel (APN 5-060-7), locatedbetween Picay Creek on the
                     west and Ortega Ridge Road on the east, was partially planted to lemons;

                                                         -179-

                    however, the lemon orchard has now been removed and the only current agri-
                    cultural activity on the property is a non-commercial horse stabling opera-
                    tioh. The topography of the parcel varies from a level area bordering the
                    creek and extending eastward with Class II soils to sharply rising hill-
                    sides composed of non-prime soils and geologically unstable conditions in
                    some areas. Since only 10 acres (20 percent of the parcel)       are potentially
                    viable for agricultural use, the parcel has beendesignated       for 1 and
                    3-acre residential use.

                          Coastal Access and  Recreation

                          Existing opportunities  for shoreline access and   coastal  recreation are
                    limited in Montecito. Only    two easements for access   to the beach from the
                    nea@est public road are   'now available for public use. One is opposite
                    Butterfly Lane, along Channel Drive, and the other at     the base of Eucalyp-
                    tus Lane. Another potential    easement connecting Eucalyptus La.ne to
                    Hammond's Meadow has not yet been opened for public use. The County also
                    has acquired a 20-foot wide lateral easement for the beach fronting the
                    Miramar Hotel. Public use of beaches in the Fernald Point/Shark's Cove
                    area has occurred for many years and is documented by affadavits on file
                    with the County. Generally, people gain,access to this area by parking on
                    North Jameson And walking along the San Ysidro and Buena Vista Creek
                    channels. Overall,, lack of@parking facilities and available access points
                    are serious constraints to efforts to expand access and recreation in
                    Montecito.

                          A potentially significant access and recreation site, known as the
                    Hammond's Meadow, is presently zoned for residential development. A local
                    citizen group, Hammond's Meadow*Preserve Inc., is exploring alternative
                    methods to preserve some 11 acres of the site 'to continue existing meadow
                    and beach recreational uses, including walking, swimming, and surfing.
                    Their@proposal also envisions scientific and cultural,study of the archaeo-
                    logically significant Chumash Indian village site which is alleged,to be
                    the last well-preserved midden deposit along the Santa Barbara coastline..

                          The waterfront area.along,Channel Drive poses additional access and
                    recreational issues, due to existing traffic congestion and potential for
                    future development of vacant lots. The entire beach area       'along Channel
                    Drive is commonly used by the public, but the only public access stairway,
                    near Butterfly Lane, is in a deteriorated condition. Improvement of the
                    existing access and provision of additional access points are warranted.
                    The lack of available parking in the immediatV area and existing traffic
                    congestion along Channel Drive complicate the access issue.

                          Recommendations aimed at improving access opportunities are listed in
                    Policy 7-10. In addition, Hammond's Meadow is designated as a site for
                    Planned Development (see di.scussion in Section 4.4.3) and is subject to      the
                    public open space dedication requirements which are described in Sec-
                    tion 3.2.

                                                       -180-

                          Habitat Areas

                          Montecito's habitat resources include several coastal streams and
                  -,their associated riparian environments, as well as roosting sites for the
                    Monarch Butterfly. 'Policies,ai"med at protection of these habitat areas are
                    found -in Section 3.9.

                          Hazards

                          A number of potentially active   faults pass near or through residential
                    areas in Mont6cito..'While these do    not pose an immediate threat to
                    development, future projects in these areas should be evaluated to minimize
                    potential problems. Policies included in Section 3.3 call.for review of
                    new development to determine potential geologic hazards.

                          Several sections of the bluffs in Montecito are shored up by seawalls
                    of concrete and rock to prevent undercutting and overtopping during high
                    wave conditions. Structures in this area, especially along Miramar Beach,
                    are subject to damage during winter storms. Private measures to protect
                    property from wave damage,may interfere with the public's right to lateral
                    beach access in the affected areas or mar the visual attributes of the
                    coastline. Policies'governing construction of new seawalls and shoreline
                    structures are in Section 3.3.

                          A number'of streams in the Montecito area have flood plains which,
                    during a 100;.-year flood, encroach on large areas of land, particularly
                    downstream in the coastal zone. These streams are Montecito, Oak, San
                    Ysidro, Romero, and Buena Vista Creeks. Flood hazards are increased by
                    debris, deposited during winter storms or flash floods, which clogs the
                    channels and reduces stream capacity, While several debris barriers have
                    been constructed, complete flood protection works have been determined to
                    be too costly to be feasible. More stringent controls are needed to
                    provide greater protection to life and property. Areas within the 100-year
                    flood plain are shown on the land use plan maps and are subject to the
                    policies associated with the Flood.Hazard O'verlay designation.

                          Housing

                          There are no extensive areas of  existing low  or.moderate cost housing
                    within the coastal zone of Montecito. To provide     for balanced housing
                    opportunities in this area of the coastal zone, some low    'or moderate cost
                    housing will need to be required in new multiple-unit developments.

                          An estimated 431 potential additional units could be constructed
                    within areas designated for multiple.residential use on the land use plan,
                    map. New additions to the housing stock.as well'as existing housing oppor-
                    tunities for low and moderate income households will' be subject to the
                    housing policies of-the land use plan., (Refer to Section 3.5.)

                                                       -181-

                           Commercial Devel.6pment

                           The Miramar and Biltmore hotels are      two, large visitor-serving commer-
                      cial facilities in the Montecito coastal zone. The potential for major
                      expansion of these facil,ities or new visitor-serving commerci,al development
                      adjacent to the,coast in Montecito is constrained by the area's limited
                      water resources,.traffic congestion and limited street capacities. Because
                      of the existing water moratorium in the Montecito County Water District,
                      new or expanded devel.opment will be dependent on private water wells unless
                      alternative water supplies are found. The Coastal Commission has denied
                      permits for high-yield wells in this area because of the concern that large
                      withdrawals from the groundwater basin could reduce water levels to such an
                      extent that seawater.intrusion could occur. How       'ever, the Commission has
                      appr6v,ed one low-capacity well for a proposed Biltmore expansion and a
                      back-up well for the Miramar with.conditions on the.rate of pumpage and the
                      maximum amount of water use permitted, to mitigate potential adverse
                      impacts"on the,groundwater resource.

                           Visual  Resources

                           Montecito's primary scenic resources      are the shoreline along Channel
                      Drive, between the cemetery and.Olive Mill Road, and vistas from U. S. 101
                      toFernald Point as one travels west from Summerland to Montecito. Other
                      scenic resources include.Hammond's Meadow and the shoreline        from Eucalyptus
                      Lane to Fernald Point. Under the requirements of Montecito s zoning ordi-
                      nance (No. 453), all new development is subject to design review.

                           Service  System Capacities and Availability of Resources

                      Water Supply

                           The Montecito   County Water   District (MCWD-) services the   Montecito, area
                      with the exception   of several private water purveyors. The District's
                      boundaries are the   Santa Barbara Cemetery on the west, Ortega Ridge Road to
                      the east (the District also serves an area in the Summerland planning area
                      along Toro Canyon Road), beyond the coastal boundary to the north, and the
                      Pacific Ocean to thelsouth. The District draws its water from Jameson and,
                      Cachuma Lakes, Doulton Tunnel, and from wells.

                           On January 18, 1973, theMCWD initiated a water moratorium in antici-
                      pation of a negative water supply/demand situation. The moratorium was, .                     I
                      modified in May 1973 to.include a water allocation program and both remain
                      in effect today. Since the County Health Department began keeping statis-
                      tical records.on the number of private wells in November 1975, some 229
                      well permits have been issued. Private well development is of particular
                    ..concern in the coastal..portion of Montecito's groundwater basin #3. Here,
                      the concern exists:that high.yield well's locatednear the ocean may create
                      salt water intrusion problems which could potentially degrade the aquifer.

                                                           _182-

                         Approximately 700 AFY of water would    be needed.to accommodat  e buildout
                    under the land use plan. However, because of the existing water moratorium
                    inthe District, development potential.will be limited until such time as a
                    permanent increase in the District's water supply is realized. A District
                    policy which allows 33 new permits over the next year is now in effect and
                    applications are being accepted for the meters. However, under these
                    limited resource conditions, priority uses under the.Coastal Act as.well as
                    local priorities for water.use must be established, as discussed in Section
                    3.2 of the plan.

                    WastewaterTreatment Capacity

                         The Montecito County Sanitary District is     bounded by Santa Barbara
                    Cemetery and Ortega Ridge Road to the east and    west, the Pacific''Oce'an to
                    the south, and extends north beyond the coastal bouhdary line. Plant
                    capacity has recently been expanded to .85 mgd. Current wastewater flow is
                    estimated at .70 mgd. Assuming a .15 mgd surplus capacity, the plant can
                    accommodate an additional 454 new residents (Table D-6, Appendix D). Since
                    buildout under the land use plan would allow for a population increase far
                    in excess of present plant capacity (Appendix E), expansion of the
                    District's facilities would be required. However, because of the existing
                    water moratorium in the Mo'ntecito County Water District., even the current
                    capacity level of wastewater treatment is.not likely to be reached; any
                    expansion would be contingent upon a pemanent,,increase in the water
                    supply.

                    4.4.3 HAMMOND'S MEADOW

                         Planning for Hammond's   Meadow (APN  9-360-29, 30) is of special concern
                    to the County because it is   one of a few undeveloped coastal parcels within
                    an existing urbanized area which offers diverse recreational and cultural
                    opportunities. The site, Which comprises some 22 acres, includes broad,
                    stretches of rolling grassland, a low bluff, and some woodl    'and area. views
                    of the Santa Ynez Mountains from the bluff and beach area are spectacular.
                    The coastal portion of the site has been enjoyed for years by sunbathers,
                    surfers, and walkers. The parcel is z    'oned DR-12, which would theoretically
                    permit development of 264 units on the site.     In recent years, a portion of
                    the meadow area has been recognized as,an important archae.ologi.cal resource
                    leading to its inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places on May
                    19, 1978.

                         Access to the meadow and shoreline is primarily f    rom Eucalyptus Lane
                    via the beach. At high tide this lateral beach access can be cut off. An
                    easement does exist paralleling Edgecliff Lane to the north, but it has not
                    been opened for public use. Parking-along Eucalyptus Lane is often
                    .extremely congested. 'Users of Hammond's and Miramar beaches must often
                    park several blocks away, and the resulting congestion is a nuisance to
                    local property owners'.

                          Although a visitor-serving development on Hammond'   s Meadow could
                     provide increased opportunities for public enjoyment of the area    ' the,
                     limited,road.capacity and existing traffic congestion in this area make
                     such a use impractical. Therefore, this site is designated for Planned
                     Development in the land use plan. In addition to the PD requirements
                     listed in Section 3.2, development on Hamm  Iond's Meadow shall be subject,to
                     the following conditions:

                          1.  The project may include up to 40 units provided that the appli-
                              cant can demonstrate that the surrounding roads and other public
                              or private services.(i.e., sewer, schools) are adequate to
                              accommodate the proposed development and that the.project is
                              consistent with all other policies in the land use plan.

                          2.-, Structures and other development shall  be sited and designed in
                              such a manner as to avoid destruction   or disturbance of all
                              archaeological sites of high significance which are listed on the
                              National Register of Historic Places.

                          3.  Structures shall be sited and designed   to minimize impacts on
                              public views from the dry, sandy beach   to the Santa Ynez
                              Mountains.

                          4.1 A minimum of 20 percent of the site shall be required for public
                              open space and shall include the dry, sandy beach area.      The
                              remaining public open space shall be adjacent to the beach.

                          5.  A limited amount of parking not to exceed six (6) spaces shall be
                              provided for the public. In addition, that portion of the
                              existing easement.along the southerly boundary of APN 9-360-30
                              (north of Edgecliff Lane) from Euca  'lyptus Lane to the east side of
                              Montecito Creek shall be improved. The County shall also require
                              dedication of an easement along the east side of Montecito Creek
                              to connect the southerly easement with the beach, in exchange for
                              the existing easement along the easterly boundary of APN 9-360-30.
                              Adjustments to the fencing requirements stipulated in the existing
                              @deed may be necessary to,implembnt this policy. See also Policy
                              7-10.

                    .4.4.4 SUMMARY  OF LAND USE PLAN MAP

                          The land use plan for Montecito   is, for the most part, consistent with
                    existing zoning in the area, as highlighted in Figure 4-6. The most
                    notable changes under the land use plan affect two of Montecito's larger
                    parcels, the Montecito Avocado Ranch (APN 7-340-37, 38) and the Hammond's
                    Meadow (APN 9-360-29,.30). These changes account for most of the reduction
                    in potential additi.onal units from.the current 11352 units to. approximately
                    873 units under the plan (refer to Tables E-8 and E-9, Appendix E).

                                                       -1.84-

                         The Montecito Avocado Ranch pro erty, comprising some 35 acres and
                    zoned for one-half acre lots (204-1@, would be designated for agricultural
                    use under an A-I-5 (5-acre minimum) classification in the land use plan.
                    This change is proposed to comply with the Coastal Act's requirement to
                    protect prime agriculturaI lands whenever possible, and on thebasis of
                    previous Coastal Commission rulings which have supported continued
                    agricultural use for this parcel.

                        The Hammond  s Meadow parcel consists of 22  acres of oce6nfront land
                    now zoned DR-12, permitting a potential. buildout of 264 units. Under the
                    land use plan, the parcel would be designated for Planned Devel opment.
                    Buildout would be restricted to no more than 40 uni-ts,, because of the
                    limited street capacity of Eucalyptus Lane, limited water availability
                    within the.Montecito'Cotihty Water District,, and as a result of extensive
                    public hearings and input concerning the appropriate density for this
                    parcel.

                         North of Hammond's Meadow between the Southern Pacific main  line and
                    Jameson Lane is another vacant parcel (APN 9-320-3) of approximately 14
                    acres in size, currently zoned 6-R-2, permitting multiple development. The
                    land use plan would change the land use designation to a single family
                    density and limit development to 4-.6 units per acre'. Limited street capa-
                    city and water resource constraints are principal reasons forproposing
                    thi s reducti on in density.

                        One other notable change concerns a 50-acre parcel (APN 5-060-7) in
                    the easterly,end of Montecito's coastal zone in the vicinity of Picay Creek
                    and Ortega Ridge-Road. The parcel is now zoned for one-acre residential
                    development. The land use plan proposes to retain one-acre residential use
                    of the bottom land in the,vicinity of Picay Creek and increase minimum lot
                    sizes to.three@acres on the hillsides of the parce1just west of'Ortega
                    Ridge Road because of geologic and slope constraints.

                                                    -185-.

                                                                                                                                                                                      Rd.

                                                                               C,                                  East                                                                                                                                                                                                               0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             38
                                                                                    ol                 an
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       East
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Valley
                                                                                              0                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Rd.
                                                         Cr                                                                               0                                                                                  @T,                                                    19
                                                         0
                                                                                          B       10
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Oe(o                                                                                                                          39
                                                                                                                                                                               15
                                                                                                                                                                      10                                                  17                    18
                                                                                                                                                           14
                                                                                                                                                                                    ................. ......                                                                     ...
                                                                                                                                                                                       .............. ......                                                                      ...
                                                                                    10                           Montecito                                                              ......
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           A-IA
                                                             C,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           x
                                                                                                                                                                             ..... ...........
                                                                                                                                                        X-Xw::,                                                                     ..X.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 'A-1 40
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ...............
                                                                                                                                                        X
                                          Ul
                                                                                                                                                                               U18
                                                                                                     :X@

                                                                       M
                                                                                                                                                                               Fernald Pt.                              A-1-10
                                                                                                                                             0                                                                                                          24
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          X'.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    21            @3
                                                1                 2         3              4                                       .7                                        9                                                                                    25      26                                                                    X
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              of
                                                                                                            6
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   x:
                                                                                                                      Hammond's Meadow                                                                                                                                                             9
                                                                                                       (see text           for     land use designation)
              CID                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       30
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 36                       x
              CM                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    n        t.
                                          I     Cemetery                                                                   14.     Residential (1.0 d.u./acre max.)                                        27.    Park!Open Space.                                                                          31           32         33        Lo                 34       35             37    Serena"
                                          Z.    Residential       (1.8 -12.3 cl.u.-/acre max.)                             15.     Educational Facility                                                    28.    Highway Related
                                          3.    Educational       Facility                                                 16.     Residential (1.0d.u./acre max.)                                         29.    Institution/Government Facility
                                          4.    Visitor Serving Cominercial                                                        Park/Open Space                                                         30.    Public Utility                                                                                                                    N
                                                                                                                           NE:     Resi dhti   al (1                                                       31.    Park/O en Space
                                          5.    Residential (4.6 - 12.3 d.u./acre max.)                                    I                            d.u.15 - 20 acres           =x.)                                   p
                                          6.    Residential       (12.3 d.u./acre max.)                                    19.     Park/Open Space                                                         32.    Residential @1 d.u./S               20 acres       max.)
                                          7.    Residential       (1.8 - 12.3 d.u./acre         max.)                      20.     Industrial Park                                                         33.    Residential (0.3         d.u./acre max.)
                                          B.    Visitor Serving Commercial                                                 21.     Residential (4.6 d.u./acre max.)                                        34.    Residential (1.0 - 1,8 d,u./acre                   max.)
                                          9.    Residential (1.8 d.u.jacre max.)                                           22.     Central Business District                                               35.    Resicential (4.6         u.u./acre max.)
                                      11.       1 il:n!il:ll (11:0          12.3 1.u./.cre      wax.                       23.     Lookout Park                                                            36.    Residential (3.3         d.u./acre max.)
                                      11.       R:, ia nt         1 0       1.8 d.u./acre max.)                            24.     Residential (4.6 d.u./acre max.)                                        37.    Park/Open Space
                                      12.       Residential (1.8 d.u./acre max.)                                           25.     Public Utility                                                          38.    Residential (1.0         d.u. /acre max.)                                                           0
                                      13.       Residential (1.8 d.u./acre max.)                                           26.     Central Business District                                               39.    Residential (1 d.u./5 - 20 acres                   max.
                                                dwelling units                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Mile

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          -flIM4 'J.-ri

                                                                  FIGURE 4-6
                                                Generalized Land Use Plan                                                                                                               Land           Use Designations -see text for definitions
                                                Montecito/Summeriand Planning Areas
                                                County of Santa Barbara                                                                                                                     0          COMMUNITY FACILITIES                                                                 OPEN LAND USES
                                                Local Coastal Program                                                                                                                       0          INDUSTRIAL -                                                                         EN                 AGRICULTURE I (10-40acre min.)
                                                                                                                                                                                            91         COMMERCIAL                                                                               A              RECREATION existing parks and
                                                                                                                                                                                                       RESIDENTIAL                                                                                                                            (open space
                                                =3 M                        COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY                                                                                                      (see map list for densities)

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             lu

                                                                                                                                                                         A@R

                                                                                                                                                                         'A4

                                                                                                                                                        ..........
                                                                                                                                                      .... . . .....

                                                                                                                                                                             @"x

                                                                         MIWI

                                                                                                                                                                               a
                                                                                                                                                                  RE
                                                                                                                                                                    ff

                                            51

                                                                   '7 1

                                                                             4.5 Goleta                                                      DC 1978        RON MORGAN

                    4. 5: GOLETA

                    4.5.1 CHARACTER OF THE PLANNING AREA

                         The Goleta Valley planning area is bounded by the City of Santa
                    Barbara and the Sandpiper Golf Course to the east and west, the coastal
                    zone boundary to the north, and the Pacific Ocean to the south. Extending
                    from the City of Santa Barbara's western boundary to More Mesa is a
                    partially developed residential neighborhood in the Las Positas Valley.
                    This area is likely to be annexed to the City of Santa Barbara in the.
                    future as it is surrounded by lands under City jurisdiction. To the west
                    of this area is the exclusive residential community of Hope.Ranch. The
                    character of this community is rural; the topography, rolling. Hill and
                    bluff-top parcels have spectacular views of the Pacific Ocean and Channel
                    Islands.

                         West of Hope Ranch is a large, undeveloped area known as More Mesa.*
                    It comprises some 300 acres of mostly flat, naturally vegetated land which
                    ends abruptly in a 5heer cliff over More Mesa beach - a popular local
                    recreational area. An alluvial plain is located northwest of.More Mesa,
                    formed by Atascadero Creek.' This flood plain suppo rts truck farming,
                    greenhouses, and nurseries,.
                         In addition to residential development, some truck farming and green-
                    house activity occurs in the Orchid and Anderson Lane area. A line.of
                    eucalyptus trees separates this greenhouse and nursery area  from the
                    Pacific Lighting property to the west, a large parcel which  terminates
                    abruptly at Goleta Beach County Park and the Goleta Slough. Much ofthe
                    Pacific Lighting property, which is used for subsurface gas  storage, is in
                    agricultural use.
                        Goleta Slough and Goleta Beach Park lie to the west of   the Pacific
                    Lighting site. Goleta Beach is a broad, sandy strip of land backed by the
                    slough. The beach area includes Goleta Pier and a grassy picnic area. The
                    slough, which is under the jurisdiction of the City of Santa Barbara, is
                    approximately 400 acres in size and.is bounded by the airport to the north
                    and west, and'a large mobile home park to the east of Ward Memorial Boule-
                    vard. A remnant of Mescalitan Island (a noted archaeological site) ris  'es
                    above the slough just'west of Ward Memorial Boulevard. The Goleta County
                    Sanitary District's wastewater treatment facility is located on this site;
                    it is surrounded by grazing lands and San Jose Creek's channeled water
                    course. The slough is also bisected by Ward Memorial Boulevard.

                        East of Fairview Avenue and south of Hollister Avenue is a commercial-
                    residential area. The condition' of the area is run-down, with a particu-
                    larly forlorn cluster of residences and commercial land uses located just
                    east of the airport and north.of the grazing lands surrounding the waste-
                    water treatment facilities. Portions of the area are located within the
                    airport flightway.
                    wVor tWe-purposes of this plan, More Mesa refers only to the undeveloped
                    300-acre portion of the area between Hope -Ranch and Orchid Lane, not the
                    agricultural and residentially developed lands to the west that were
                    historically part of the More Ranch.

                                                    -187-

                          West of Goleta Beach and the slough is the University of California at
                     Santa-Barbara,,wh,ich includes the main campus and the Devereux Campus on
                     the west side of Isla Vista. The U,niversity is preparinga separate Local
                     Coastal Program for lands under its jurisdict ion.

                          Isla Vista, west of the University main campus, is the most densely
                     populated urban area in Santa Barbara County. Some 10,500 persons live
                     within its approximately half-squa-re-mile confines'--most within a
                     congested atmosphere of two-story apartments. Historically, Isla Vista has
                     been a University-related bedroom community; currently 56 percent of the
                     residents are U.C.S.B. students. While much of Isla Vista is developed,
                     vacant parcels remain along the bluffs and in the northwestern section of
                     the community. Some bluff-top parcels experienced severe cliff retreat in
                     the winter of 1978, threatening several of thedwelling units located along
                     Del Playa Drive. The beach below the Isla Vista bluffs is relatively
                     narrow and is-intermittently scoured by wave action, especially during
                     winter storms.

                          Northwest of Isla Vista and the Devereux Campus is the University Golf
                     Course, University Village, and the Santa Barbara Shores/Ellwood subdivi-
                     sions, all private developments. There are large tracts,of undeveloped
                     land surrounding the University Golf Couirse.and south of the Ellwood subdi-
                     vision. The landscape consists of a broad beach backed by sand dunes and
                     marshland south of the oil treatment facility, and high bluffs south of the
                     Ellwood subdivision. Horse stabling activities now.occur on the large
                     holding of Union Oil. Two groves of mature eucalyptus trees border this
                     property, separating it from the Ellwood subdivision. The Sandpiper Golf
                     Course marks the.Goleta planning area boundary on the west and Cathedral
                     Oaks Road marks the northwest boundary.

                     4.5.2 PLANNING ISSUES

                          Urban/Rural Boundary

                          With the exception of the Goleta Slough, More Mesa, the Santa Barbara
                     Shores area, and a few pockets of agriculture, the Goleta coastal zone
                     between Hope Ranch and Ellwood is urbanized. The rural areas of Goleta are
                     located outside of the coastal zone, extending into the foothills, and
                     joining the.coast again west of Ellwood at the Sandpiper Golf Course.
                     Thus, the only part of the Goleta planning.area where the urban/rural
                     boundary is an issue is in the extreme western portion, in the vicinity of
                     Santa Barbara Shores. Here, there is a large expanse of oceanfront land
                     that is currently undeveloped. Agricalture has not'been a viable use of
                     these lands over the years because of, non-prime soils, topography, and
                     proximity to urban development, although a portion is now,being leased for.
                     horse stabling activity. Therefore, this parcel is included in the urban
                     area and planned for residential use,:and.the urban/rural boundary follows the
                     eastern edge of the Sandpiper Golf Course.. The Boundary line then extends
                     westward along Hollister Avenue to Highway 101, where it crosses thelfree-
                     way and follows Cathedral Oaks Road to the north.

                                                     -188-

                           Agriculture

                           Agriculture in the planning area is confined to the Anderson Lane
                     area, portions of More Mesa east of Orchid Drive, and the Pacific Lighting
                     property. These patches of agriculture are good examples of viable coastal
                     agriculture within an urbanized area. Notwithstanding the lack of prime
                     soils and presence of urban conflicts, some orchards, nurseries, and green-
                     house operations have survived for several decades, and the continuation of
                     these uses should be secured by appropriate land use designations.

                           As shown on  the land use plan map, agriculture with a five-acre mini-
                     mum parcel size is designated for the area bounded by Anderson Lane on the
                     east and the eastern property line of the Pacific Lighting parcel on the
                     west, reflective of existing parcel sizes and the prevailing pattern of
                     development. A ten-acre minimum is called for on other agriculturally
                     designated parcels in the area.. New greenhouse operations in the area will
                     be conditioned by the policies contained in Section 3.8, Policies 8-5 to
                     8-7. All of the other agricultural policies in Section 3.8 will,apply as
                     necessary.

                           Coastal Access and Recreation

                           Two County parks, Arroyo Burro and Goleta, provide the principal
                     public facilities supporting coastal recreation    'in the Goleta.area. Arroyo
                     Burro, which is situated in the City of Santa Barbara, is approximately six
                     acres in size and has 600 feet of ocean frontage, as well as parking capa-
                     city for 159 cars. Goleta Beach Park is 29 acres in size, has 3,004 feet
                     of beach.frontage, parking capacity for 600 cars, a fishing.pier, and hoist
                     for launching boats. The County also owns 1.4 acres of oceanfront land on
                     the Isla Vista bluff at the base of Camino Corto. However,.no beach access
                     is provided at this site. Private beaches with facilities are located in
                     Hope Ranch and Santa Barbara Shores, serving exclusively the residents of
                     the adjacent neighborhoods. Residents of the area west of More Mesa share
                     Use of the.private stairway 'at the foot of Orchid Drive. The University
                     also has extensive beach frontage which is used by students as.well, as
                     other residents.

                           The only publicly owned access corridors connecting public roads to
                     the beach are in Isla Vista at the bases of the following streets:, Camino
                     Majorca, Camino del Sur, Camino Pescadero, and El Embarcadero. Therefore,
                     only two major'beach parks and four access corridors are currently avail-
                     able along this eight-mile stretch of coastline (excluding U.C.S.B.) to'
                     serve the 691,000 residents of the Goleta Valley and other users. Arroyo
                     Burro is situated within the City of Sant.a Barbara and is, therefore, not
                     easily accessible by Goleta residents.

                           Some of the demand for.beach access and    recreation is satisfied by
                     informal use in several areas., Most notable     is use of More Mesa by summer
                     crowds often exceeding 800   persons.-  More Mesa has been the subject of much

                                                        -189-

                     controversy recently due to the issues of nude.sunbathing, dust, and
                     automobile traffic. Informal use of the beach'south of Santa@Barbara
                     Shores subdivision has also been extensive, although recently the gate  to
                     the road,. across from the,Union Oil property, allowing access has been
                     locked  Only residents of the subdivision and horse boarders have keys.
                     Beache; adjacent to the University are commonly used by students and Isla
                     Vista residents. In addition, the beaches adjacent to Isla Vista and Hope
                     Ranch have been commonly used by the public for many years.

                         Santa Barbara Shores and More Mesa offer the most potential in terms
                     of increasing public opportunities for access to the beach. Specific
                     recommendations directed at providing for suchluse areincluded in the.
                     special discussions of these parcels in Sections 4.5.3 and 4.5.5.

                         Habitat Areas

                         The Goleta planni.ng area has several important environmentally sensi-
                     tive habitats. These include several streams (Atascadero, Carneros,
                     Tecolotito, and San Jose Creeks) that provide riparian habitat despite some
                     channelization. In addition, Devereux Creek and several unnamed drainages
                     feed into the Devereux Lagoon. Two wetlands, located in th,is planning
                     area, are not under Santa Barbara County's jurisdiction. The majority of
                     the Goleta Slough is within the jurisdiction of the City of Santa Barbara,
                     and Devereux Lagoon and most of its adjacent dunes are under University of
                     California ownership. Since surrounding land use  activities affect wetland
                     viability,, careful planning is needed for the adjoining land under County
                     jurisdiction.

                         Butterfly trees are found on the Price estate in Hope Ranch, the
                     Pacific Lighting property east of the Goleta Slough, and an area adjacent
                     t.o the'Santa Barbara Shores subdivision. These habitats need to be
                     preserved, as the trees are essential for survival of the species locally.

                         The More Mesa area consists of a relatively flat grassland broken by
                     several shallow ravines which drain into Atascadero Creek. As More Mesa is
                     one of the few remaining large undeveloped parcels in the Goleta area, it
                     supports a range of animal species....The areas of particular value include
                     the creek flood plain, oak savanna, and vegetation in the ravines. 'Large
                     numbers of birds use the site for nesting and roosting, including the
                     White-tailed Kite, designated as a "fully protected" species by the
                     California Department of Fish and Game. (Refer to Section 3.9 for policies
                     related to protection of the White-tailed Kite and Section 4.5.3 for
                     discussion of land use proposals for More Mesa.) Currently the area
                     suffers damage from unauthorized off-street motorcycle use. Should resi-
                     dential or recreational development occur on the site, the More Mesa
                     natural communities will need protection in order to insure their continued
                     viability as habitats for the existing plant and animal species, particu-
                     larly the White-tailed Kite.
                         Harbor seals are often sighted  in large numbers on off-shore rocks
                     along the western end of More Mesa's shoreline, and may come ashore during

                                                    _190-

                        very  low tides. As harbor seals   are sensitive to  the presence of humans$
                        restrictions on recreationalaccess to this area may be necessary. For
                        these reasons, public 'access via the stairway at the end of Orc.hidLane
                        should be limited to residents of the neighborhood and educational and
                        scientific groups (see Policy 7-12).

                              Vernal pools are found on several vacant parcels in Isla Vista: one
                        along the bluffs, and two in the northwestern portion of Isla Vista.
                        Vernal pools are rare and'fragile communities of special ecological signi-
                        ficance. They are the result of rain or runoff in areas where drainage is
                        poor and exist.only during the winter or spring. Weed cuttingto minimize
                        fire hazar.ds,.foot traffic, and mosquito abatement practices can adversely
                        impact vernal pools.

                              Habitats that are.f.ound in the Goleta.pl.anning area are designated on
                        the land use plan maps and policies addressing-their protection are found
                        in Section 3.9.

                              Hazards

                              The entire Goleta Valley has a high seismic hazard rating. There are
                        a number of faults in the immediate area and one., the More Ranch Fault, is
                        classified as active. The area generally drained-by the Goleta Slough,
                        including the airport but excluding the University and Isla Vista, is
                        subject to tsunami runup. Due to high groundwater and soil cond.itions,
                        this same area is subject to:high liquefaction hazard.

                              The bluff and cliff areas are subject to sl'ides and erosion through-
                        out. Measurements made in the area between Santa.Barbara and Coal Oil
                        Point indicate cliff retreat averaging from three to ten inches per year.
                        These are only average figures, as cliff retreat is a spasmodic event,
                        frequently resulting in large chunks of soil breaking off nonuniformly.
                        Housing in Isla Vista, particularly in the 6700 block of.Del Playa, is
                        endangered by continued erosion. This has prompted efforts by affected
                        property owners to explore the possibility of constructing seawalls to try
                        and stabilize the bluff 'area. It is likely that seawalls.in the Isla Vista
                        area would adversely affect lateral public access along the beach.

                              New development in this area is subject to bluff setback requirements
                        (Policy 3-4). In addition, mitigation measures to protect'existing struc-
                        tures must meet the requirements of Policies 3-1 to 3-3   *  Moreover, the
                        land use plan specifies a lower residential density for the seaward portion
                        of Del Playa so that adequ-ate setbacks can be provided in new develop-
                        ments.

                              Serious beach erosion also occurred during the 1978 winter storms,
                        leading to localized and temporary sand removal which exposed several old
                        pier footings from previous oil activity, especially in the Ellwood area.
                        Some of these footings were cut back, but several remain.      Stormconditions
                        also led to a loss of low-lying bluff and auneareas along     the beach in the
                        vicinity of Devereux Dunes and to the west.

                          Substantial  portions of the,Goleta  Slough and the area it drains,
                     including the airport, are subject to flood hazard. Federal funds may soon
                     be available for  flood control which would involve improvements to stream
                     channels flowing  into the slough. Improvements would include channeliza-
                     tion, channel widening and'deepening, removing cross channels, and enlarg-
                     ing the existing basin. While there may be some.loss of riparian habitat,
                     in several instances riparian habitat could be preserved by constructing.
                     diversions around it. According to County Flood Control, the net impact of
                     the project would.beto reduce.flood.hazard, imp   .rove flushing and tidal
                     exchange, improve mosquito abatement, and generally enhance the slough as
                     an important habitat.

                          The County has suggested to the Federal Government that one part of
                     the original.flood control project be deleted. This item calls for
                     improvements for segments of Atascadero and Maria Ygnacia Creeks. As
                     portions of these two creeks flow through agricultural lands, it is not
                     felt.-that the expense of channelization is-merited at this time. tonse-
                     quently, these areas would be left Jn a' flood zone for the foreseeable
                     future. The.land use plan maps designate all areas.that are within the
                     100-year flood plain'with a Flood Hazard Overlay.

                          Housing

                          There are three  identifiable residential neighborhoods   in Goleta's
                     coastal zone: Isla Vista, Ellwood and University Village, and.Anderson
                     'Lane/Shoreline Drive (More Mesa),i Portions of Hope Ranch and pockets of
                     residences scattered  along Fairview Avenue are also within the coastal
                     zone, creating a wide diversity of housing opportunities in this area.

                          According to t.he 1975 Special Census, Isla Vista had 4,019 housing
                     units. Seventy-four'percent of these units were multiple dwellings of five
                     or more units. In 1975, overpayment (i.e., rent exceeds 25 percent of
                     gross,monthly income) was a problem for 81 percent of the rental households
                     in,Isla Vista in dwellings of two to four units and for 79 percent of those
                     structures of five or more units. This situation is reflective of the fact
                     that Isla Vista provides the principal housing opportunities for U.C.S.B.
                     students and more recently for elderly persons; thus, incomes are low and
                     rents proportionately high. In 1975, median incomes in Isla Vista (Census
                     Tracts'29:01 and 29:02) were $3,792 and $5,730, respectively, both less
                     than 60 percent of the County's median income.in 1975 and, therefore,
                     considered very low.

                          One of the recurring complaints about housing conditions in Isla    Vista
                     is that most of the residential units are owned by absentee landlords
                     and/or rental companies. As a 'result, some local interest has been
                     generated for establishing housing coo pe.ratives which would result in  more
                     local control of housing conditions.

                         Another program for,,improvi,ng the.condition..of the existing housing
                     stock would be rehabilitation; however.,- the County has not identified Isla

                                                      .-192-'

                       Vista as a priority area for rehabilitation funding at this time. Oppor-
                       tunities for providing additional, new low and moderateincome housing in
                       Isla Vista areseverely limited by lack of vacant land and water and a
                       prevailing consensus in the community that little if any new residential
                       development is desirable.
                            In the Ellwood/University Village area (Census Tract 29:04), the 19.75
                       Special Census noted 2,786 units with 31 percent of the total units single
                       family residences and 51 percent, multiple residences of five or more
                       units. According to the County's Housing Condition Survey (June 1977), 99
                       percent of the housing in this census tract was in A or B condition. It
                       can be inferred from these results that the housing is either new, nearly
                       new, or in good repair.
                            The median income in Census Tract 29:04 Was"$8,085 in 1975, 60 percent
                       of the County media*n. Although not as low as in 'adjacent Isla Vista, this
                       low-income level is again an indication of the area's proximity to U.C.S.B.
                       and provision of student housing. Forty-three percent (43%) of the rental
                       households in Census Tract 29:04 paid more.than 25 percent of their gross
                       monthly income for housing in 1975. Typical of a university-related neigh-
                       borhood, 6.3 percent of the households were renters.

                            In the rest of the coastal zone in the Goleta planning area, there are
                       a number of widely varying housing neighborhoods. Beginning at the City of
                       Santa Barbara'.s western boundary, the coastal zone extends inland about
                       1,000 yard's and includes part of-Hooe Ranch. Housing in this area is
                       exclusive and of an estate nature.

                            To the west of More Mesa, a small subdivision surrounding Orchid Drive
                       extends south to the bluffs. Residences aligning Anderson and Dorwin Lanes
                       also provide housing opportunities along this portion of the coastline. Jn
                       some cases, these residences are integrated with greenhouse activities on
                       relatively small lots. The large, undeveloped Tots that remain in this
                       area are suitable for agricultural (greenhouse) use.

                            A large mobile home park is located east of Ward Memorial Boulevard,
                       and isolated residential enclaves are intermingled with light industrial
                       and commercial activities east of Fairview, directly under the airport's
                       flight line. Housing in this latter area is adversely impacted by
                       conflicts with commercial, indust rial, and airport uses.

                            Residen'tial development in the Goleta planning area will be subject to
                       the housing policies of the land use plan (Section 3.5). The plan allows
                       for nearly 1,000 potential additional units in multiple residential zones
                       in Golet,.a (excluding Isla Vista), a portion of which will.be required to be
                       affordable to low and moderate income households. In addition the plan
                       specificAJ,ly calls for an additional 60 units of low and moderate income
                       housigg,each on More Mesa and Santa Barbara Shores, and 100 units on the
                       W e,@t' Pev
                             __Are,qx property, as a condition of approval for planned residential
                       dgwe 1,
                            9pmpnt in these areas.

                                                        -1,93-

                          In Isla Vista, another 1,000 units would be possible under proposed
                     multiple-density land use designations. Given the extremely dense develop-
                     ment that exists in.1sla Vista at this time, this buildout should be viewed
                     as a maximum. Reductions in density will be required as necessary to
                     reflect the community's needst- individual site constraints, etc.

                          Commercial Development

                          Commercial development within the coastal zone is concentrated around
                     Hollis ter Avenue and in Isla Vista. South of Hollister and east of Fair-
                     view, there is an area of mixed commercial and residential uses. Isla
                     Vista's commercial development is along Embarcadero del Mar and Embarcadero
                     del.,Norte south of Pardall. The commercial areas along Hollister and in
                     Isla Vista serve primarily the needs of the local neighborhoods and are
                     almost completely built out.

                          Visitor-serving commercial  activities within the coastal zone are
                     limited to a few restaurants in  downtown Goleta and in Isla Vista; there
                     are no campgrounds or overnight  accommodations in this part of the County s
                     coastal zone. (There is a motel close to the airport within the City of
                     Santa Barbara's limits and other motels located further inland along major
                     traffic arteries.) Visitor-serving facilities would be possible alterna-
                     tive land uses for More Mesa and Santa Barbara Shores. However, the need
                     for these facilities is questionable as the City of Santa Barbara, located
                     just ten miles east of Goleta, provides the majority of visitor-serving
                     accommodations for the South Coast. West of Goleta, the State parks which
                     extend from El Capitan to Gaviota provide ample opportunities for overnight
                     camping. Any vi.sitor-serving development in.the Goleta area should be
                     closely tied to the carrying capacity of the road system and not preclude
                     local day use of shoreline areas.

                         Visual Resources

                         There are g enerally very limited views from public roads to the ocean
                     in the Goleta area. Glimpses of the ocean may be seen along Via Roblada in
                     Hope Ranch., from Austin Road and Orchid Drive near More Mesa, along Ward
                     Memorial Boulevard,- from select points.along Del Playa in Isla Vista, and
                     from the@west end of Hollister Avenue just before it connects with U.S.
                     101.

                         There are several large vacant oceanfront parcels that constitute the
                     areals most significant scenic coastal resources. These include More Mesa,
                     the Devereux slough area, and Santa Barbara Shores. Any development of
                     these sites should be designed to maximize open space and minimize visual
                     impact on the character of the area including views of the ocean and moun-
                     tains. Special policies to guide future development on these parcels are
                     included at the end of this section. Other general policies regarding the
                     protection of coastal visual resources are found in Section 3.4.

                                                     -194-

                          Industrial and Energy Development

                          Several, important energy facilities are sited in the Goleta planning
                     area. Pacific Lighting Service and Supply Company   owns several parcels in
                     the vicinity of the slough and airport which it uses for gas storage. Gas
                     is stored underground in depleted oil structures and used to meet peak
                     winterd6mand. Pacific Lighting leases some of the acreage west.of Ander-
                     son Lane to agricultural users. Station KTMS also maintains two broadcast-
                     ing towers-there. In addition, Pacific Lighting has equipment related to
                     the facility itself, including-injection pumps, wells, tanks, and.other
                     related equipment on the site.

                          Just west of Devereux Lagoon, there are a number of oil facilities.
                     Aminoil maintains a marine-terminal, which is used to ship oil from its own
                     production wells onshore at Ellwood and fr 'om Arco's Platform Holly. The
                     terminal consists of two large storage tanks and associated pumps. These
                     facilities are very visible from the beach; better screening could be
                     provided. Under permit conditions established by the Coastal Commission
                     and the County, increased production from Arcols field may proceedonly if
                     stringent air quality standards can be.met. Incentives were established
                     allowing greater production if lower emissions could be achieved at the
                     marine terminal. To this end,, Aminoil is improving tank seals and install-
                     ing vapor recovery on the tanks.
                          Arco and Aminoil have al'so a small oil processi.ng plant very close to
                     the Aminoil terminal facilities. This plant draws oil from subsea comple-
                     tions in a State tidelands lease. This facility is depressed below grade
                     and well-screened. Operations at this facility.are currently suspended,
                     pending renovation. Oil from this facility would normally be shipped
                     through the Aminoil marine terminal.

                          Service System Capacities,and Availab.ility of Resources

                     Water Supply

                          The Goleta County Water District and  the La Cumbre Mutual Water
                     Company are the principal water purveyors  in tfie Goleta area. The Goleta
                     County Water District boundaries.generally extend westerly to the Embarca-
                     dero Subdivision, though an outlying area in the vicinity of El Capitan is
                     also included in the District. The District's eastern terminus is near Las
                     Positas Road, while its northern boundary lies beyond the coastal zone and
                     the Pacific Ocean marks its southern boundary line. The La Cumbre Mutual
                     Water Company boundaries cover, the Hope Ranch area.

                          Lake Cachuma is the District's primary water source, although ground-
                     water is pumped from District Wells. La Cumbre Mutual Water Company buys
                     water wholesale from the Goleta County Water District and also draws
                     groundwater from its four wells.

                                                      -195-,

                           In December  1972, the Goleta   County Water District imposed a water
                     moratorium on new hookups on the basis that its water supply was less than
                     demand. The morat,prium,has remained in effect and strong conservation
                     measures have.been imposed by the District in recent years. The La Cumbre
                     Mutual Water Company is not in a moratorium condition.

                           The Goleta County Water District has adopted Resolution 900,.which
                     states that the Board of Directors of the Goleta County Water District will
                     attempt to acquire, subject to receiving a prior favorable vote of the
                     Goleta Water District electorate,, add.itional water supplies to allow for
                     reasonable agricultural and urban expansion over a twenty Year period            The
                     District defines "reasonable expansion" to'be either at the rate of .@% per
                     :annum, requiring 1,500 acre feet per year by the twentieth year.or at 1%
                     per annum necessitatingan additional 3,000 acre feet per year within the
                     District in the twentieth year.

                           The land use plan for the Goleta planning area (excluding Isla Vista)
                     allows for an estimated 2,790 potential additional units; this includes the
                     300 units that would be possible under the Planned Development alternative
                     for More Mesa, 500 units stipulated for the West Devereux         property, and
                     300 for Santa Barbara Shores. Another 1,059 units would be.possible in
                     Isla Vista. However., unless supplemental water is'made available, lack of
                     water will severely constrict development in the Goleta area. Should the
                     areal swater supply be augmented through conservation, wastewater reclama-
                     tion, or other means, priorities for the use of the limited water surplus
                     within the coastal zone will be necessary (see Section 3.2, Policy 2-7).

                     Wastewater Treatment Capacity

                           The Goleta and Isla Vista Sanitary Districts service the Goleta area.
                     The Goleta Sanitary District's boundaries are Fairview Avenue and the Hope
                     Ranch boundary to the east and west, and the Pacific Ocean to the south.
                     The Isla Vista Sanitary District's boundaries extend west to         approximately
                     Winchester Canyon Road, east to Fairview Avenue, north beyond the coastal
                     boundary, and south to the Pacific Ocean.

                           The Goleta Sanitary District's wastewater treatment plant serves both
                     sanitary districts. Current plant-capacity is ra      ted at 8 mgd against an
                     estimated wastewater flow of 6.23 mgd.' There is sufficient.excess capacity
                     to serve an additional- 16,1090 people. (Refer to Appendix D.)

                           The Goleta and I sla Vista Sanitary Districts' sewer network can serve
                     the levels of growth possible in the land use plan although some improve-
                     ments within the system will b.e required according to a study by Brown and
                     Caldwell Engineers (March 1976).

                                                         -196-

                       4.5.3 MORE MESA

                            More Mesa is one  of the few remaining, large oceanfront parcels in the
                       urbanized South Coast  area which has not been developed. It comprises some
                       300 acres which are divided into  seven parcels (APN 65-320-1,2,4,7,8,9,
                       1O)e All but 35.5 acres are owned by Columbia University. The area is
                       relatively flat, sparsely vegetated, and is,surrounded by residential and
                       agricultural land uses., Soils on the site are mostly non-prime. More Mesa
                       is currently zoned "DR-2" which would allow for residential development of
                       two dwelling units,per gross acre, with a potential buildout of 600,units.
                       The site is being used by ORV enthusiasts, and the beach area below More
                       Mesa receives as many as 800 visitors on warm, sunny days.     Because of its
                       extensive undeveloped nature,,More Mesa supports A range of    animal species
                       including the White-tailed Kite, a hawk which is designated    as a "fully
                       protected".bird by the*Department of Fish and Game.

                            Several problems exist as a result of the   informal use  of More Mesa by
                       motorcyclists and beach goers'. Cyclists have prompted numerous complaints
                       to the County from;adjacent residents because of the noise and dust they
                       generate. They have denuded existing vegetation and disturbed indigenous
                       animal species. Beachgoers congest nearby Vieja D*rive with their cars and
                       have contributed to bluff erosion at the easterly end of More.M'esa where
                       they descend a steep, informal pathway.to the beach.

                            From a coastal planning perspective, More Mesa presents opportunities
                       for providing Coastal Act priority land uses as well as other local land
                       use needs. However, if a successful balance of.uses is to be realized,
                       careful attention must be given to the following factors which constrain
                       potential development of the site: habitat areas, recreational uses, flood
                       and.seismic hazards, scenic values, and the limited access to the site from
                       major traffic arteries.

                           -Potential uses of the  site that 'would be'consistent with Coastal Act
                       policy would include agriculture, visitor-serving facilities,   and residen-
                       tial.development. In addition, a segment of the local population has
                       argued that the site should be largely retained in open space. Problems do
                       exist, however, with some of these. potential land uses.

                            Agricultural use of More Mesa could conflict with the need for habitat
                       protection, public access, and protection of More Mesa's visual resources.
                       Because of the non-prime nature of More Mesa's soils,greenhouse develop-
                       ment or possibly'cut flowers would be the only viable forms of agriculture
                       that could exist on the.site. Extensive development of greenhouses would
                       destroy the habitat of the White@-tailed Kite and the area's scenic values,
                       and constrain the possibilities for developing public access to the beach
                       area due to problems of vandalism.

                           Provision for large-scale visitor-servi-ng facilities on More Mesa
                       encounters other problems. Lack of nearby freeway access from U.S. 101
                       means that out-of-town traffic would need to be,rduted along a congested
                       Hollister Avenue, and through a residential neighborhood. The site is.
                       isolated from the' area's two major tourist destination points    the Gaviota

                                                        _197-

                      Coast and  the City of Santa  Barbara. More importantly,     More Mesa  is a
                      significant local recreational resource for beachgoers and a large influx
                      of visitors could preclude,use.of the beach by local residents. For these
                      reasons it  would appear that   More Mesa would be an inappropriate location
                      for a major visitoe-ori6nted    facility.

                           Maintaining the site exclusively in open space would present the
                      County with a major fiscal obligation. Public funds for the       .purchase and
                      maintenance of open space and parks are scarce and competition among such
                      sites is fierce. In addition, given the South Coast's critical hous,ing
                      needs and More Mesa's proximity to the University and other employment
                      centers, it could well serve as an important new residential site.

                           A planned  residential,development on More Mesa would permit a diver-
                      sity of residential units (rental apartments., condominiums, single family)
                      and provide hoUsing opportunities for persons of.moderate income. Although
                      affordable housing is a local priority,the Coastal Act specifies that
                      visito.r-serving commercial recreational facilities have priority over
                      private,residenti 'al development (Sec. 30222)., For the reasons stated
                      earlier, it is clear that commitment of-the entire site to a commercial use
                      would not be appropriate.

                           Since More Mesa, especially the beach area, has been su     bject to exten-
                      sive historical public use, it is important that granting of a significant
                      area for public recreation,be required as a condition of development. This
                     .Would enhance opportunities for publit recreation in the Goleta area, which
                      are currently limited to Gole   ta Beach and Arroyo Burro.

                           It is unknown  at this time   whether development of the site would
                      result in removal of the White-tailed.Kite. Clearly, development,of
                      parking lots, structures, etc., would result in the loss of viable habitat
                      for many of.the species that now use the area. Although the oak trees that
                      the kites use for roosting and nesting could be protected, keeping 200-250
                      acres in natura,l grassland for feeding would not be possible unless struc-
                      tures were allowed to exceed three stories. Special study of More Mesa is
                      needed to determine whether preservation of grassland on More Mesa is
                      necessary.for the survival of the species locally or whetherthe kites can
                      range distances for feedingand.continue to Use More Mesa mostly for
                    ,roosting and nesting.

                           More Mesa is designated for Planned Development in the land use plan.
                      In addition to the PD requirements described in Section 3.2, development of
                      More Mesa shall be subject'to the following conditions:

                      1.  A specific plan shall be prepared for the entire site (APN 65-320-1,2,
                          497.8.9,10) which incorporates all of the conditions listed below and
                          conforms to all other policies of the.land use plan. The specific plan
                          shall show the locations of roads and structures, and indicate the
                          amount and location of openspace for habitat preservation and public
                          recreation. The specific plan shall be subject to environmental review
                          under County CEQA Guidelines.

                                                        -198-

                             The specific plan  and  accompanying  environmental documents shall be
                             submitted to the Planning Commission, who may recommend additional
                             conditions for development of the site., In adopting the specific plan,
                             t.he Planning Commision shall specify the number and type of housing
                             units, open space requirements, habitat area to be protected, etc., for
                             each.of the parcels which is under separate ownership.

                        2... A maximum of 300 residential units may be.developed on the site of
                             which 20% shall be affordable to persons of moderate income.

                        3.   As a condition of approval, 20 percent (60 acres) of the site shall- be
                             dedicated,to the County or other public agency for public recreational
                            ,use. The majority of the dedicated area shall be adjacent to and
                             include the dfy sandy beach.    Access road(s,), parking area for 300
                             cars, beach access via stairway(s), restrooms, bikeway, and walking
                             trail shall be provided by the developer(s). A sum of money (to be
                             determined by the Departments of Parks and,Public Works) to cover costs
                             of maintenance of these recreati,onal facilities for a period of five
                             years shall be deposited with the County or responsible agency.
                        4.   In order to.preserve open space.and protect.   *v- iews to the foothills,
                             structures shall be clustered to the maximum extent possible on the
                             northern portion of the property excluding a11 habitat sensitive
                             areas.

                        5,   All development on the site, including    structures and roads,, shall be
                             sited and designed to avoid areas used    for nesting and roosting by the
                             White-tailed Kites.,

                       @.6.  To the maximum extent feasibl.e, vegetation   consisting of drought-
                             tolerant species shall be used for landscaping.

                        4.5.4 WEST DEVEREUX PROPERTY

                             This + 240 acre parcel (APN 73-090-10,13,50), which is owned by the
                        University@_Exchange Corporation and IMS Financial Corporation, is bordered
                        by the ocean to the south, the'Devereux Lagoon to the southeast,, Storke
                        Road to the east, the University Village subdivision to the north, and the
                        vacant Union Oil property.(Santa Barbara Shores) to the west. A major
                        portion of the site (66 acres) is currently,developed as a golf course. A
                        further 40.5 acres are leased to Arco and Aminoil.; a marine terminal and
                        small processing plant have been developed on their leases. The rest of
                        the property is currently undeveloped.

                             The undeveloped portion of the site is characterized by       gentle slopes
                        covered by natural vegetat-ion. Several unnamed drainages and Devereux
                        Creek flow through this property into the.Devereux Lagoon. The area
                        between the golf course and oil                facilities is bisected by a road
                                                           processing
                        and transversed by berms, averaging several feet in height, which run
                        generally in an east-west direction. Extensive,erosion has taken place in
                        this area and the resulting sedimentation is, ad'versely affecting the
                        Devereux Lagoon. Extensive ORV use exacerbates this situation.

                                                           -199-

                                                                FIGURE 4-7

                                     WEST DEVEREUX                               PROPERTY

                                            Golf, Cours

                                                                                             Married
                                                                                             Student
                                                                                             Housing

                                               0

                                            0    0

                                        Oil Storage
                                  oool     Tanks

                                                             Devereux
                                                               Lagoon

                                                                        -260-

                            The southern  tip of this property consists of sand dunes which. are.
                       sparsely vegetated due to excessive recreational (sunbathing, horseback
                       riding, picnicking, etc.) and ORV use. This area, unlike the dunes which
                       are within the Univers.ity Ecological Reserve, is not protected by fencing
                       or signs.  A road and trail running along the western boundary of this
                       parcel currently provide beach access for residents of the surrounding
                       rIesidential neighborhoods. Just to the north of the dunes is a large pond
                       area,used as an oil sump.

                            The beach and  dune area is particularly scenic despite the intrusion
                       of the oil storage  tanks into,the viewshed. This parcel along with the
                       Devereux Campus of  U.C.S.B. and the Santa Barbara Shores property consti-
                       tute valuable open  space, scenic, and habitat resources for residents of
                       the.Goleta Valley   ''Careful planning of'the'site-is needed to ensure pro-
                       tection of the natural resources of the area And preservation of the
                       Devereux Lagoon as a viable wetland habitat.

                            The development potential of this site is constrained by a number of
                       factors including the need to provide a substantial buffer around the oil
                       facility due to problems of safety, noise, and odor, and the need to
                       protect dune and adjacent wetl,and habitats. The site is inappropriate for
                       a visitor-serving use because of the oil faci-lity,,the fragility of the
                       dunes area, and the residential character of the surrounding developments.
                       Residential development would be an appropriate use on those portiom of
                       the site which are north of the existing golf course and adjacent to the
                       existing residential neighborhood, as well as the area fronting Storke
                       Road. The majority of the area south of the golf course should be kept in
                       open space to ensure preservation of the dune and slough habitats and to
                       provide an adequate buffer around the oil facility.

                            The oil facility is viewed as a long-term land use and is therefore
                       designated on the land use plan maps as Coastal. Dependent Industry.
                       Development on the remainder of the site shall be subject to the PD
                       requirements in Section 3.2 and the following conditions:

                       1.  A specific plan shall be prepared for the entire site (APN 73-090-10,
                           133, 5.0) which incorporates all of the conditions listed below and
                           conforms to all other policies of the land-use plan. The specific plan
                           shall show the locations of roads,and structures and indicate the
                           amount and location of open space.for habitat preservation and.public
                           recreation. The specific plan.shall be subject to environmental review
                           under County CEQA Guidelirves.

                           The'specific plan and accompanying  environmental,documents shall be
                           submitted to the Planning Commission, who may recommend additional
                           conditions for development of the site. In'adopting the specific plan,
                           the County shall speci   the number and type of housing units, open
                                                 fy   e - ,
                           space.requirements, habitat area to be protected, etc., for each of the
                           parcels.

                                                        _2Q1

                     2.  A maximum of 500  residential units, of which 20% of the units shall be
                         affordable to persons of low and moderate income, may be permitted
                         provided that the existing-66-acre'golf courseis retained in its
                         present use.  The,development rights on the golf course at the rate of
                         70 density credits shall be transferred by the owners of the golf
                         course to the owners of the remaining 174 acres.

                     3.  In addition to the existing golf course, a   minimum of 55 acres (exclud-
                         ing the area now developed for coastal dependent industry) shall be
                         retained in,public and common open space to meet a minimum 50 percent
                         open space requirement. The public open space shall include a trail
                         easement to allow public access from Phelps Road to the beach and a
                         small public parking area for 20 cars at the trailhead.

                     4.  Attractive fencing around the dune area shall be provided to keep out
                         horses and ORVs. Signs shall also be posted informing the,public of
                         the fragility of the area-and requesting that they keep off the dunes.

                     5.  The property owners shall work.with the University and the County to
                         ensure that the specific plan for the area includes appropriate miti-
                         gating measures to protect.the Devereux Lagoon.

                     4.5.5 SANTA BARBARA SHORES

                         South of,the existing Santa Barbara   Shores/ Ellwood subdivisions is a
                     large tract of vacant land. This area, owned by Union Oil and the Security
                     Pacific Bank, is 233 acres in size (APN 79-210,12,13,14,15,17,18,24). The
                     land is currently zoned 6-R-1 and 7-R-1, which would theoretically allow
                     development of 1,072 units.on the site.   The parcels are vacant, except for
                     the Union,Oil holdings which are being.leased for horse stabling activi-
                     ties. Agricultural potential is limited by the non-prime soils (Class III
                     and IV) and wind exposure of the site'.

                         Santa Barbara Shores is fronted by a wide sandy beach and high bluffs
                     which are subject to erosion. The property owners in the adjacent subdivi-
                     sion have an agreement with Union which allows them access to the beach.
                     There is a road from the top of the bluff down to the beach as well as some
                     old restroom facilities; however, the road, parking area, and structures
                     were heavily damaged during the 1978winter storms. The beach is also used
                     extensively by the public; the main access points are from the deadends of
                     north-south streets in the adjacent subdivisions.

                         This site is one of the few remaining   large tracts of vacant ocean-.
                     front land within the urbanized South Coast area. Careful planning is
                     needed to ensure that the scenic, recreational, and open space values of
                     this site are not diminished by future development.    The plan designates
                     the site for Planned DevelopmentOn addition to the PD requirements in
                     Section 3.2., development-of Santa Barbara Shores.shall be subject to the
                     following conditions:

                                                      -202-

                     1   A specific plan shall be prepared for the entir e site (APN 79-210-12,
                         13, 149 15, 17, 18, 24) which incorporates all of the conditions listed
                         below and conforms to all other policies of the land,use.plan. Each
                         parcel in separate ownersh.ip,'under the specific plan, may satisfy
                         separately all development conditions imposed on the entire site. Each
                         parcel in separate ownership, underthe specific plan, may be consid-
                         ered separately in determining the maximum number of housing units to
                         be developed on the site. The specific plan shall show the location of
                         roads andstructure sites, and indicate the location and amount of
                         common and public open.space. The specific plan shall be subject to
                         environmental review under County CEQA Guidelines.

                         The specific plan and accompanying environmental documents shall be
                         submitted to the Planning Commission, who may recommend additional
                         conditions for development of the site. In adopting the specific plan,
                         the Planning Commission shall specify the number and'type of housing
                         units, open space requirements, etc.  for each parcel.

                    2.   A maximum of 300 residentiallunits may be developed on the site of
                         which 20% shall be affordable to persons of low and moderate income.

                    3.   Existing stands of eucalyptus trees that border the property to the
                         north shall be preserved.

                    4.5.6 SUMMARY OF LAND   USE PLAN MAP

                         The proposed land  use plan.for the Goleta Area, including Isla Vista,
                    would reduce potential  additional units by about 1,300 dwelling units;
                    current zoning would permit about 59100 units, while the proposed land use
                    plan would reduce allowable buildout to about 3,800 units. A significant
                    amount of this reduction is the result of proposed changes for the area's
                    large, undeveloped lands designated for residential use, i.e.., More Mesa,
                    Santa Barbara Shores, and West DevereUx.. Planned residential developments
                    With necessary reductions in density are stipulated for these areas because
                    of their outstanding resource values and opportunities for coastal access.

                         In addition to reducing potential buildout, the land use plan would,
                    in response to Coastal Act policies, expand the limited beach access and
                    coastal recreational opportunities in Goleta Valley, protect habitats,
                    provide for substant 'ial hew low-moderate housing opportunities,, and
                    preserve the few viable pockets of agriculture that are found in Goleta's
                    coastal zone.

                         A Planned Development des ignation would be applied to the area's large
                    undeveloped parcels that fall within the urban boundaries of the land use
                    plan to help implement these objectives. These undeveloped parcels include
                    More Mesa, Santa Barbara Shores, and the West Deyereux properties. More
                    Mesa, which comprises some 300-acres and is presently zoned DR-2 permitting
                    up to 600 units would,, under the Planned Development Exchange designation,
                    be permitted a buildout of 300 units:. Twenty percent of the units
                    would be reserved for persons of moderate income under the provisions of

                                                     -203-

                    the plan. Existing informal beach access and recreational uses of More
                    Mesa would be formalized and enhanced by requiring that 60 of the 300 acres
                    be dedicated to the County or other,public agency for public recreational
                    use. Since More Mesa is the habitat of the White-tailed Kite, it is
                    proposed that any development be sited to avoid areas used for nesting and
                    roosting.

                         The West Devereux property which lies northwest of the Devereux Campus
                    of the University of-California, Santa Barbara, is some 240 acres in size
                    and zoned DR-10 and 6-R-1. The land use plan assumes that the existing
                    golf course and oil facility which occupy the land will remain as on-going
                    uses and designates the remaining.130 acres for Planned Development. Up to
                    five hundred units could be developed; twenty percent of the units would be
                    reserved for persons of low and moderate incomes. Since the coastal
                    portions of the West Devereux property are valuable as part of a larger
                    dune and Devereux slough habitat, the land use plan would require a
                    substantial open space requirement to include areas adjacent to the beach
                    Fencing, signing, and other measures are proposed as conditions to ensure
                    continued viability of the wetland, and slough habitats.

                         In the case of Santa Barbara Shores, located west of the Devereux
                    property and zoned for residential use (6-R-1 and 7-R-1, permitting a
                    theoretical buildout of 1,072 units), the land use plan calls for a resi-
                    dential planned development of 300 units.

                         Other changes in current zoning are proposed for the Anderson Lane
                    area, which is presently a mix of low density residential and agricultural
                    uses. The land use plan would support a continuation of agriculture in
                    this area by designating parcels currently in production as A-1-5 and
                    A-1-10.

                         In Isla Vista, density reductions are proposed along Del Playa in
                    response to the hazards of cliff retreat which necessitate larger blufftop
                    setbacks. In addition, the area designated for commercial use along.
                    Pardall Road has been expanded.

                                                    -204-

                                                                                        T

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    r
                                                                                            R
                                            CD                                                                                                                                                      state  St.     1)
                                                                                            0

                                                                                                         Goleta                 0
                            101    Hollister Ave                                                                   12           G                                Cr.                            Laguna 101         Lr-L
                                                                                                                      13      -11?                   sr-                                        Blanca
                                            7                                                                                                                19       20
                                                                                                   14
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       'c
                                                                                                                                                               5-4?
                                                                              0 E                                                                              . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                                  -t                        UT
                                                                                                                                                                                 Hope Ranch

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                461
                                            ever aux@i@i@@
                                            S lou h....*.
                                                                                                                A-1- 5     A-1-10    A-1-5                                                                                         Santa
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Barbara
                                                                                               16                     17          18
                                                                                                                                                                                                       190,
                                       al Oil Pt.
                                3                 4          5                  Goleta Pt.                                              More Mesa
          I        Santa Barbara Shores                                6                                                                    (PD)                                21
         P'.)              (13D)
         C@l                                        -
         un                             I .  Residential 0.3        30 du*/acre max.)       12.   industrial Park
                                        2.   Coastal Dependent Industry                     13.   Residential (12.3 du/acre                                                                               22
                                        3.   Educational Facility                           14.   Industry
                                        4.   Residential (3-3 - 30 du/acre max.)            15.   Public Utility
                                        5.   General Commercial                             16.   Goleta Beach County Park
                                        6.   Educational Facility                           17-   Residential (1.8 du/acre
                                        7.   West Devereux - PD                             18.   Residential (1.8 du/acre
                                        8.   Residential (4.6 di acre)                      19.   Residential. 1 8 du/acre                           0                                                                  3
                                             Residential (30 chy/a-cre)                     20.   Residential 1:0 du/acre
                                       109:  Open Space                                     21.   Residential @l - 3 du/acre)
                                       1-1.  Educational Facility                           22.   Arroyo Burro County Park                                                           Miles
                                            dwelling units

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                If. VAR C9 4

                                       FIGURE 4-8
                              Generalized            Land Use Plan                                             Land Use Designations -see text tor detinitions
                              Goleta Planning Area                                                                       COMMUNITY FACILITIES                              OPEN LAND USES
                              County of Santa Barbara                                                                    INDUSTRIAL
                              Loca( Coastal Program                                                                                                                                   AGRICULTURE I and 1[ (5-100 acre min.)
                                                                                                                         COMMERCIAL                                       El
                                                                                                                                                                                      RECREATION (existing          County parks)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   L
                                                                                                                                                                                                 @agun.
                                                                                                                                                                                                  Jan..

                              =i c= c=3 COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY                                                            RESIDENTIAL
                                                                                                               E3        (see map list for densities)

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                61,

                                       4.6 Gaviota Coast                        0. 1978 RON MORGAN

                 4.6 @GAVIOTA COAST

                    4.6.1 CHARACTER OF THE PLANNING AREA

                         With the exception of    several onshore  oil production, treatment, and
                    storage facilities and a few small    pockets of residential development, the
                    coastline between Ellwood and Gaviota is rural. Prominent.features of this
                    area include a section of broad coastal terrace, rolling grass-covered
                    hillsides, scenic coastal canyons, and coastal promontories. Perennial
                    streams flow through many of the canyons, sometimes forming small.wetlan.ds
                    at their mouths.

                         Tecolote Canyon, at   the  easterly end of the planning area, is the site
                    of the Embarcadero subdivision, 1which consists of single family,'custom
                    residences on lots of one acre or more. Immediately.south of the subdivi-
                    sion, across U.S. 101, is   the popular Haskell.'s beach. Coastal develop-
                    ments in this general area include the-Ellwood Pier, the Sandpiper Golf
                    Course, and the Arco and Aminoil facilities.

                         To the west, the foothills of the Santa Ynez Mountains recede to form
                    a broad coastal terrace in the vicinity of Dos Pueblos.Canyon. This area
                    supports the most agriculturally diverse activities between El      lwood and
                    Gaviota, including some cattle and sheep grazing, lemon and avocado
                    orchards, and greenhouses. Las Varas Ranch, which lies just west of Dos
                    Pueblos Canyon, is anothercoastal agricul     tural area that has been planted
                    to avocados in recent years.

                         To the west of Las Varas Ranch, the coastal shelf broadens, reaching
                    its greatest width in the vicinity of the Edward's Ranch, then narrows
                    dramatically to reveal highly scenic El Capitan Point. El Capitan*.a State
                    Beach Park, is a wide rocky point with dense coastal woodlands. Outstand-
                    ing specimens of oak and sycamore are prominent near the creek mouth and
                    several meadows in this vicinity give the area a unique l.ook and open
                    atmosphere. The beach area to,the west of.El Capitan Point and the upland
                    recreation facilities (picnicking and camping) make El Capitan       one of the
                    more popular of the State beach parks.

                         North of U.S. 101, along El, Capitan Creek, is a private recreation
                    facility and the horse stables of El Capitan Ranch. A network of roads is
                    visible from U.S. 101, remnants of an aborted residential development
                    proposed for the El Capitan.Ranch in the early 1970's.

                         Beyond the El Capitan area the coastal foothills intrude on the coast-
                    line to Refugio State Beach Park. A line of palms which borders the beach
                    and a sharp, precipitous point are RefUgio's distinctive features.

                         West of Refugio the coastal terrain    becomes more rugged; U.S.. 101
                    clings to a narrow band of   coastal -terrace. A bridge crossing is required
                    at Arroyo Quemado Creek, one.of a number of coastal creeks which cut
                    sharply through the sandstoneoutcroppings at the base of the Santa Ynez
                    Mountains. A small cluster of beach homes lies just west of the trestle at
                    Arroyo Quemado. Other develo   pments in..:the area include the County's sani-

                                                        -206-

                     tary landfill at Tajiguas, the Getty Gaviota.Marine.Terminal, Sunburst
                     Store and Restaurant, two gas stations, Vista Del Mar School, and Gaviota
                     State Beach Park. Gaviota Canyon forms the westerly boundary of the
                     planning area. The canyon supports an extensive riparian hab-itat and forms
                     a sharp break in the land forms to the east and.west.

                     4.6.2 PLANNING ISSUES

                          Urban/Rural Boundary

                          The utban/rural boundary conforms to the     eastern parcel line of the
                     Sandpiper Golf Course, the proceeds westerly along Hollister Avenue to U.S.
                     101, across the freeway,-'and north on'Cathedral Oaks Road. Consequently,
                     the Gaviota Coast is located entirely within the designated rural area.
                     The principal land uses specified in the land use plan are agriculture,
                     public recreation, and coastal dependent industry.. Due to lack of
                     services, i.e., sewer,, roads, schools, fire and police protection, and
                     ,limited water resources, this area is not suitable for urban development at
                     the present time.

                          Agriculture

                          Agricultural activity includes some    lemon and avocado production along
                     Highway 101 and in the canyons from Ellwood to El Capitan; a large green-
                     house operation west of Naples; and grazing on the foothills north of High-
                     way 101. The only area where there is sufficient land south of Highway 101
                     to the shoreline for coastalagriculture is between Naples and El Capitan,
                     and-,it.,is here that the Do s Pueblos Orchid Company and several large plant-
                     ings of lemons and avocados are found. Outside of this area, orchards are
                     limited to select, narrow canyons north of Highway 101; grazing is the only
                     other major form of agriculture at the present time.

                          Soils throughout this portion of the coastal zone are generally non-
                     prime; although'some Class II soils and isolated pockets of Class I soils
                     are found in the coastal canyons.

                          None of the agricultural parcels    in the coastal zone east of Refugio
                     is under preserve status. However, extensive preserves exist in Refugio
                     Canyon and in most of the.coastal zone in.the vicinity of Tajiguas, Arroyo
                     Quemado, and west of Canada de la Huerta to Gaviota.

                          Existing zoning is a mixture of "U" (Unlimited Agriculture, 10-acre
                     minimum) ang "AG" (General Agriculture,:100-acre minimum). Permitted uses
                     in both zones include all types of agriculture, oil and gas production, and
                     single family dwellings. Given-that prime*,agriculture exists on a number
                     of parcels now zoned U and that the character of the area is decidedly
                     rural, a ten-acre.minimum parcel size is inappropriate. Also, west of El
                     Capitan, existing 100-acre'zoning,is-inadequate for the non-prime
                     agricultural operations that prevail there.

                                                       -207-

                          The land use plan for the Gaviota Coast, calls for Agriculture II,
                    100-acre minimum parcel size, for the agricultural lands between Ellwood
                    and El Capitan. Agriculture in this area is a combination of prime and
                    non-prime pursuits; lemon and avocado orchards, a substantial greenhouse
                    operation, and some grazing exist. The 100-acre minimum parcel size
                    designation is appropriate 'for this type of agriculture and the rural
                    setting in which it is taking pl'ace.. West of El Capitan, the land use plan
                    calls for a 320-acre minimum parcel size, an increase over the existing
                    100-acre zoning. This increase is needed to reflect the predominance of
                    non-prime agriculture in the more remote, westerly regions of the Gav.iota
                    Coast. Although a 320-acre minimum is not an economically viable parcel
                    size for cattle grazing operations,* it serves.to strengthen agricultural
                    use of the land by reducing the potential for rural residential
                    development.

                         Coastal Access and Recreation

                         The coastal zone between Ellwood and   Gaviota is a recreational
                    resourceof State-wide importance.     Three major State parks, El Capitan,
                    Refugio, and Gaviota currently provide recreational opportunities for local
                    as well as out-of-County visitors. Approximately ten miles of coastline.
                    and 3,047 acres are now   in State ownership. Together, these parks provide
                    630 parking spaces and 291 camper sites.. The State also has plans for
                    expansion of its park holdings easterly from El Capitan and westerly from
                    Refugio, as well as for a new acquisition at Haskell's Beach. One of the
                    reasons for these acquisitions is the increasing demand for camping facili-
                    ties. Vehicle turnaways at the three State parks along this coastline
                    averaged 147 per day during the summer months of 1975 and peaked at 471 on
                    July 4. Moreover, according to PARIS (Parks and Recreation Information
                    System) projections, a 35 percent increase in the existing number of camp-
                    sites is needed to meet recreation demand by 1990.

                         State acquisition and development, of new parks in this planning area
                    is complicated by several factors. Park development to date has focussed
                    on the provision of overnight camping facilities, particularly for RV's,
                    which require grading, paving, and alteration of natural vegetation for
                    construction of level pads needed by RV's. Such development may conflict
                    with Section 30251 of the Coastal Act which requires that development mini-
                    mize the alteration of natural  'landforms. While RV's have experienced
                    considerable increase in popularity over the past years, rising costs of
                    the RV's and gas may.make this form of recreation infeasible for people of
                    moderate incomes in the near future. Consequently, careful consideration
                    should be given to the irreversible commitment of limited coastal resources
                    for development of RV facilities.

                         Another complicating  factor is that areas along this coastline outside
                    existi.ng State parks are already used extensively for recreation by mostly
                    local residents. There are over ten sites along this stretch of coastline
                    where the public now gains vertical access to the beach. On the summer

                    *The Agricultural Extensi6n Service, University of California, estimates
                    that a@minimum of 1,800 acres is needed.

                                                      -208-

                    weekends, well over 200 cars are.parked along Highway 101 or adjacent
                    side roads by users of these beaches. Some b  'f these popularly used beaches
                    have recentlybeen acquired bythe State or are proposed for future
                    acquisition. Therefore, careful planning will be required to ensure that
                    existing local users are not displaced and that the.environmental carrying
                    capacity of the natural en'vl'ro'nment is not exceeded as a result of
                    increased levels' of use.

                         Bicycle trails are being planned,to provide increased access to this
                    coastal area. A trail connecting UCSB to El Capitan is being jointly
                    planned by the County Transportation Department, Cal'trans, and the State
                    Department of Parks and Recreation. The.lihk between El Capitan and
                    RefUgio has recently been completed. Funds have also been allocated to
                    acqui're land for a bikeway that would connect Refugio to Tajiguas. This
                    trails' system may help to lessen the need for committing coastal.land to
                    parking-lots as well as to mitigate the'impact of recreationally oriented
                    traffic on local air quality. In order to complete*the system, vertical
                    easements to connect the,bicycle trail to the beach need to be provided,
                    especially at the beaches that are currently popular destination points.

                         Recommendations for improving access opportunities along the Gaviota
                    Coast and policies which provide a framework for. futureState Park develop-
                    ment are included in Section 3.7. The land use plan maps also show exist-
                    ing and proposed recreational areas and accessways.

                         Habitat Areas

                       .The Gaviota Coast supports many small habitats such as streams, tide-
                    pools, and butterfly trees, important marine resources such as kelp and
                    fish, and three unique habitats: a reef, harbor seal.hauling ground and
                    rookery, and native grassland. There are nine perennial and at least
                    seventeen intermittent coastal streams along thi.s portion of the County's
                    coastline. Adjacent agricultural uses including orchard development and
                    cattle grazing may have adverse effects on stream habitats. All of the
                    Gaviota coast streams-have.been altered by storm"sewers where Highway 101.
                    intercepts their paths to the,coast. Small wetlands occur at the mouths of
                    Canada del Refugio, Las Llagas, Dos Pueblos,,.Tecolote.' and Bell Canyon
                    Creeks.

                         The coastal canyons also provide suitable  environmental conditions for
                    butterfly trees; these have been noted.at Barro Canyon, Del Cementeria
                    Canyon, an area just west ofArroyo Quemado., and near Dos Pueblos Canyon.
                    Some of the butterfly trees in'this area have.been the subject  of research
                    by the University of California.

                         The rocky intertidal areas between Ellwood and Point Conception have
                    been recommended for preserve status (California Coastal Plan, 1975; County
                    Conservation Element). Thiscoastal area is relatively undisturbed and its
                    tidepools are of scientific interest.

                                                     -209-

                          Adjacent to the old townsite    of Naples is an intertidal and subtidal
                     reef which.extends a mile or so out to sea. Naples reef has many
                     recreational and scientific values due to the large number and diversity of
                     organisms that inhabit the area. Several research projects are currently
                     underway at the reef through the Marine Science Institute at UCSB. Due to
                     the uniqueness and value of the area for scientific study, :recreational
                     uses of the area may need to be limited in the future to prevent
                     degradation of habitat values.

                          A harbor seal hauling and   pupping  ground exists,seasonally on the
                     sandy coastal area between Dos   Pueblos  and Eagle Canyons. Since harbor
                     seals will not hau.1. out on beaches that have been disturbed by people,
                     these small po cket beaches need to be protected from intense recreational
                     uses.

                          A small patch of  native grasslands is located    on the coastal bluffs
                     west of Ellwood Pier. Native grasslands are sensitive to disturbance;
                     disruption to this plant community increases its vulnerability to takeover
                     by European weedy plant species. Since native grasslands are now rare in
                     the entire State, remaining areas should be preserved.

                          Plant communiti,es in this,area are typical of much of the coastline
                     and include coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and southern oak woodland.
                     Cattle grazing in this planning area may affect oak regeneration in the
                     savanna. When seedling oaks are grazed, there is no potential for regener-
                     ation*  An endangered plant, black figwort (Scrophularia atrata), is found
                     in an area westerly of Las Varas Canyon.

                          Environmentally sensi,tive habitat areas found in this planning area
                     are designated on the land use plan maps and protected by policies listed
                     in Section 3.9.

                          Hazards

                          The entire  area carries   ahigh seismic hazard  rating. There are a
                     number of faults clustered in the vic  'inity of Ellwood, including Glen
                     Annie, Las Varas, Dos Pueblos, and Eagle. Tsunami hazards are limited to a
                     number of the canyon mouths, including Canada de la Gaviota, Refugio Creek,
                     Canada del Corral, Canada del Capitan, and Bell Canyon. Liquefaction
                     hazards are limited to Tajiguas Creek and Canada del Refugio. In foothill
                     areas, a high landslide hazard exists.

                          Large parts of this planning area are characterized by narrow sandy
                     beaches backed by steep bluffs which are subject to wave action and
                     erosion. In a number of instances,, beach facilities at parks are subject
                     to damage during high wave and flood conditions. In several locations, the
                     railroad embankment is endangered by bluff.erosion. Seawalls have been
                     erected at several locations to protect the base of the bluffs.

                                                        210-

                         The County does not have detailed flood hazard information for the
                    .non-urbanized areas between Ellwood and Gaviota. A moderate fire hazard
                    rating exists for shoreline areas, increasing to extreme hazard in the
                    foothills and beyond. Localized fire hazards also exist in or near wooded
                    canyon or creek bed areas.
                         Since the Gaviota Coast is not planned for urban development, these
                    hazards do not pose major threats to,life or property. Allowable develop-
                    ment. is subject to the hazards.policies contained in Section 3.3.
                         Commercial- Development
                         Exi'sting commercial visitor-serving activities are limited to two
                    service stations along Highway 101 and the.Sunburst RestaurantA.t.-Gaviota
                    Vil.Jage. A privately operated campground is situated north of Highway 101
                    near,El Capitan. Given.the State's plans   to expand its park ownership in
                    this area and thecommitment of remaining   lands to agriculture, opportuni-
                    ties for expansion of visitor-serving facilities would appear to be
                    limited.

                         According to Section 30222 of the Coastal Act, visitor-serving uses
                    have priority over private residential development but not over agriculture
                    or coastal dependent industry., Existing accommodations for visitors along
                    the Gaviota Coast, although extensive, are limited to camping and RV
                    facilities. While there may be a demand for a visitor-serving facility
                    such as a lodge in this area, conversion of agricultural land to a higher
                    intensity use could create tremendous pressure on.surrounding agriculture,
                    particularly grazing lands. Since the Gaviota Coast is within easy
                    commuting distance of Goleta and Santa Barbara, the area has been subject
                    to considerable development pressure in the past.
                         There are only two s'ites that appear suitable for commercial visitor-
                    oriented use in this planning area. The 64-acre site@ known as Haskell's
                    beach is an appropriate site for resort use given its attractive beach,
                    secluded location, access to the freeway, and close proximity to the Sand-
                    piper Golf Course. This parcel does not have any agricultural potential
                    and is not needed for coastal dependent industrial use. This property is
                    designated for Resort/Visitor Serving use in the land use plan along with
                    the existing restaurant, store and gas station complex at Gaviota.
                         Another potential future site for a resort facility is the Dos Pueblos
                    Canyon. This site is low-lying and thus development would not be visible
                    from the freeway. Since Dos Pueblos also has a particularly scenic beach
                    area, it could reasonably be viewed as a destination point for visitors.
                    Since there are other sites within or closer to the urban area which should
                    be developed for visitor-serving uses prior to Dos Pueblos, no accommoda-
                    tion is made for such use in the land use plan at this time.

                         Visual Resources

                         The coastal zone between Ellwood and Gaviota is an area  of unique
                    scenic value. The entire viewshed is a traveller's delight,   as it provides
                    beautiful contrasts between the ocean on one side and the canyons and foot-
                    hills on the other. Two types of development, energy and recreation, have
                    affected the visual resources of this area.

                                                     -211-

                          Energy facilities, mainly  oil and gas facilities, including oil wells,
                    proc essing facilities, storage tanks, offshore platforms, and marine
                    terminals have been located at numerous sites along the coast in this area.
                    These facilities are linked principally to offshore wells and are generally
                    well-.screened to protect views to the ocean. Energy companies have
                    indicated that additional onshore energy facilities may be needed in the
                    future. In addition, a number of areas between-Ellwood and Gaviota north
                    of Highway 101 may be possible sites for future power plants since they
                    were not designated for exclusion by the Coastal Commission. In the event
                    that any new energy-related facilities are constructed in this portion of
                    the coastal zone, the visual quality of the area will need protection.

                          Recent State park expansion has been characterized by development    of
                    facilities for recreational vehicles at high densities. At El Capitan, RV
                    pads have been constructed adjacent to Highway 101. The landscaping, when
                    mature, will mitigate   some of the visual impacts of this development;
                    however, it will also   impede coastal'views. Future development will need
                    to be carefully sited   and designed to avoid impacting visual resources in
                    this area..

                          Between Tajiguas  Creek and Gaviota, a number  of billboards have been
                    erected which detract   from the s.cenic quality of the area. These will be
                    subject to removal.after May 1979. Residential development in the planning
                    area is scattered and well-screened from the highway.

                          The development potential of-the Gaviota Coast under the land use plan
                    is limited; however,  permitted development should be carefully sited and
                    desi.gned to be subordinate to the rural character of the area. Several
                    policies in Section 3.4 are directed at protection of the visual resources
                    of this area. For example, su,bstantial areas south of U.S. 101, where the
                    highway traveller is afforded-ocean views, are designated as View Corridors
                    and are thus subject to special policies regarding view protection. In
                    addition, the plan recommends that this area be designated as a State
                    Scenic Highway (Policy 4-8). Other visual resources in the area, which
                    include the foothills and moun  "tains,to the north, are mostly.outside the
                    coastal zone and,therefore not under Coastal Act jurisdiction.

                          Industrial and Energy Development

                          The majority of the County's ener.gy-related facilities are located
                    between Ellwood and Gaviota. The area includes nine facilities for
                    processing of oil and gas, two marine terminals, as well as some onshore
                    oil production activity. These facilities were built mostly during the
                    1960's to serve production in the State Tidelands. Production in the Tide-
                    lands has been declining historically; consequently, many of these facili-
                    ties are functioning with considerable excess capacity. Production from
                    State leases may increase temporarily if market conditions improve and
                    producers are successful in applying enhanced recovery techniques within a
                    more stringent regulatory environment. These sites also represent poten-
                    tial processing areas for oil recovered from Federal leases. Some of these
                    facilities would need upgrading to become operational under current regula-
                    tions.

                                                       -212-@.

                    Arco Ellwood Facility. Arco is currently upgrading its oil and gas
                    processing facility near Ellwood, just west of the Sandpiper Golf Course,
                    to handle increased production from Platform Holly in its State Tidelands
                    lease. There is sufficient room on the 4.5-acre parcel to accommodate the
                    present expa Insion plans; however, further expansion beyond the present  .site
                    may be difficult. Production from-the.faci.lity will be tankered from the
                    renovated Aminoil marine terminal facility at Coal Oil Point.

                    Aminoil Ellwood Facility    Aminoi.1 's activity on its 143-acre parcel west
                    of Eagle Canyon dates ba@k to the 1920's. While only a small     number of the
                    60 onshore wells are currently producing, enhanced recovery could be
                    applied to increase the number of producing wells. Aminoil has long-term
                    plans for using its acreage as a consolidated staging area for offshore
                    production. While this is unlikely at the 'moment the company still
                    foresees possible offshore development of a platf@rin on State lease 2.08
                    .with associated onshore production and support facilities, and a new marine
                    terminal which would replace the present facility at Coal Oil Point.

                    Shell Capitan Oil Facilities. Shell has been producing oil from wells in
                    the vicinity of Corral CaFy-o-n for the past 40 years. Crude is processed at
                    the site and is trucked to Shell's Santa Maria field, where it is blended
                    with Santa Maria crude prior to transfer to a refinery. These facilities
                    are scattered about the uplands area north of Highway 101, and are highly
                    visible to motorists. Shell will continue to produce as long as it is
                    economically feasible, and may consider tertiary recovery techniques.

                    Exxon Las Flores Canyon. Exxon purchased approximately 1,500 acres near
                    Las Flores Canyon and planned to establish an oil and gas processing
                    facility to'handle production from its Santa Ynez unit.- The oil and gas
                    processing facility was approved by local and State agencies; however,
                    Exxon found unacceptable the conditions imposedby the Coastal Commission
                    allowing only interim use of a marine terminal pending a pipeline
                    feasibility study. Exxon has constructed an offshore'separation and
                    treatment facility which floatsin Federal waters near Platform Hondo.
                    Crude willbe tankered from the offshore.facility and gas will probably be
                    brought onshore. Due to its size, the Exxon,parcel may be a desirable
                    location for consolidating facilities with those of other operators in the
                    area. Exxon has a marine-terminal at the mouth of Canada del Corral,
                    although it is not operative.

                         Recently, the Pacific Offs hor-e Pipeline Company, an affiliate of
                    Southern California Gas Company, announced plans to construct a gas
                    processing facility at the Las Flores site. The Company is proposing     to
                    purchase gas being developed by  Exxon in the Santa Ynez unit  and transport
                    it to shore by pipeline. The   proposed site for the facility  is outside
                    coastal.jurisd,iction although the pipeline will pass through  the coastal
                    zone.

                                                      -213-

                    Phillips Tajiguas Gas  Facility. Phillips operates a gas :processing plant
                    on a narrow four-acre  site just west of Tajiguas Creek, between Highway 101
                    and the railroad. The facility is.well-shielded from the..    road, There is
                    considerable excess capacity at the facility at present. "Phillips current-
                    ly has no plans to expand the facility.

                    Shell Molino Facility. Shell    processes  gas from the Molino field in its
                    State Tidelands lease on a 50-ac@e site    north of Highway 101, in a small
                    canyon (Canada de Huerta) just west of the County sanitary landfill site.
                    There is considerable excess capacity at the facility and land for expan-
                    sion up the canyon.

                    Gettx Marine Terminal at Gaviota. The G    etty marine terminal is the site of
                    a major consolidated facility, though actual activity at the site has
                    declined over the years. At one time, there was a small residential
                    community established on the site for local employees, but this has been
                    dismantled. The facility sits astride Highway 101. On the north, Chevron
                    processes gas from offshore leases and Pacific Lighting Service and Supply
                    Company operates a gas pumping station. South of Highway 101,.Getty.leases
                    storage capacity to North County,producers, who truck oil in and out as
                    required. Arco has a small oil and gas processing facility there.also.
                    Texaco's gas facility, not now in operation, lies on a separate parcel.
                    adjoining Getty's to the west.

                         Collectively, the parcels are screened from the road; although the
                    storage tanks are visible, they have been painted a dull green to blend
                    with the environment. Adequate acreage exists both within the Getty
                    facility and the Texaco parcel for some expansion. Expanston would have.to
                    be assessed for impact's on adjoining state beach areas, particularly if
                    activity at the marine terminal increases..

                    Other Facilities. Most of the coastal zone lands north of Highway 101 have
                    not been designated by the Coastal Commission as inappropriate for power
                    plants and thus represent potential development sites. However, the util-
                    ities have not announced any plans for such development in this area.

                         Service System Capacities and Availability of Resources

                         Between Ellwood and Gaviota there are two service system extensions of
                    the Goleta County Water District. A ten-inch water 1    'ine serves existing
                    residences in the Embarcadero subdivision, and a 33-inch pipeline extends
                    west of Goleta to the El Capitan area.. Both of these serviced areas are
                    under the constraints of the Goleta Water District's moratorium. The
                    remaining area, which is largely in agriculture, depends upon private
                    wells.

                         The area between Ellwood Canyon and Gaviota was investigated by the
                    USGS (1968) which concluded that theaverage annual recharge was 6,000 acre
                    feet per year. Actual safe yield would be less.,because some subsurface
                    outflow would be necessary to prevent seawater intrusion. Present pumpage
                    in the Ellwood-Gaviota area is.reported to be 1,720 acre feet per year.

                                                      -214-

                         The land use plan for the Gaviota Coast reflects   the rural character
                    of the planning area. Agriculture with 100 and 320-acre minimum parcel
                    sizes is the dominant land use designation; thus, new development will be
                    primarily accessory to the area's large-scale grazing and farming
                    activities. Buildout under the land use plan allows for only 115    new
                    units. The area's available resources are.adequate to accommodate this
                    level of rural development.

                    4.6.3 SUMMARY OF LAND USE PLAN MAP

                         In order to further the protection of agriculture along the   Gaviota
                    Coast and encourage concentration of development within the already
                    urbanized areas of the South Coast, increases in minimum parcel sizes are
                    proposed for lands between Ellwood and Gaviota. Much of the area is now
                    zoned "U", permitting minimum parcels of 10 acres; there are also pockets
                    of land zoned for 100-AL throughout the planning area. The land use plan
                    would establish an A-II-100 designation for agricultural lands between
                    Ellwood and El Capitan and an A-II-320 designation westerly of El Capitan,
                    thus discouraging further parcelization which would be detrimental to
                    sustained orchard and grazing activities.

                         Areas which are currently serving offshore oil and gas development are
                    designated for Coastal Dependent Industry.@ The Sunburst Store and Restau-
                    rant complex at Gaviota and the Haskell's beach property are designated as
                    .Visitor-Serving Commercial. The existing community of Arroyo Quemado is
                    shown as Rural Residential.

                        The proposed land use  changes would reduce potential additional units
                    along the Gaviota Coast from a theoretical 1,560 units under existing
                    zoning to 115.units.
                        The land use plan also proposes.an expansion of recreational opportu-
                    nities along the Gaviota Coast to include the establishment of vertical
                    easements at some eight popular informal access points. These access
                    points would be connected by a proposed bicycle trail stretching from Santa
                    Barbara to Gaviota. The plan also calls for the acquisition and develop-
                    ment of new recreational sites to.increase opportunities for coastal depen-
                    dent and related recreational uses., Designated sites include Haskell's
                    Beach, Dos Pueblos, Edwards., and.Tajiguas.

                                                     -215-

                                         101                         Los  SAN7A                    Padres                                    National                             Forest
                                                                                                            10             -
                                                                                                                           0
                                    as                                                                             YNEZ
                                                                                 0                      cc
                                   Cruc7                                0        0        4)
                                                                                                                                                              0
                                                                        0        a)       0                                                                       MOUNTAINS
                                                                                                         a,

                                                                        0
                   -Vt3@20        Gaviota Pass                                   0

                                                                                                                              Wu
                                                                                                                   C)                                                            L)
                               1C.                     20                                               0
                                                                                                               CA
                               uaviota                                          ajigii@iii-                    \A- 31_32 0
                                                                                                                   Capitan
                               1      2        3     4       1         3                                                                                     0
                                                                                                                                                  101

                                                                                        3     6      7
                                                                                                                                                   A - 1U1 - 10 0
                                                                                                                                    9                  "@'@Navles
                                                                                                                                                                                      A-Ir-100
                                                                                                                                                                                                        10
                         1     Gaviota Beach State Park                           P     C     F
                         2:    Highway Related Commercial                                           C                                                                                      Elwood
                                                                                                                                                              44W
                         3.    Goastal Dependent Industry
                         4.    Educational Facility                                                                         0 C                               Naples Reef
                         5.    Rural Residential (1 d.u.*/40-100 Ac. max)                                                                                                                   . . . . . . .
                         6.                                                                                  j1q                         A/
                               Proposed Park (Tajiguas Beach)
                         7.    Refugio State Park
                         8.    El Capitan Beach State Park
                         9.    Proposed Park (Edwards Ranch)                                                                                                                                  Coal Oil Pt
                         10.   Resort/visitor' Serving Commercial                                                                                              10 1                  3 4
                         U.    Proposed Park (Haskell's Beach)                             0                                    5                                   1  3 12
                         12.   Residential (4.6-30 du./acre max)                                                                                                     Santa Barbara Shares
                               dwelling units                                                               Miles                                                              (PD)

                                       FIGURE 4-9
                         Generalized Land Use Plan                                           Land Use Designations- see text for definitions
                         Gaviota Coast Planning Area                                                 CO  IMMUNITY FACILITIES                    OPEN LAND USES
                         County of Santa Barbara                                               0     INDUSTRIAL
                         Local Coastal Program                                                 91    COMMERCIAL                                          AGRICULTURE 11 (100-320acre min.)
                                                                                                                                                         RECREATION existing or proposed
                                                                                                                  N @E_-                C,

                         CM      C3 COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY                                            RESIDENTIAL                                                         (parks and open space)
                                                                                                     (see map list for densities)

                                                                      41

                                    4.7       North       Coast              J01978 RON MORGAN

                4.7       THE NORTH COAST

                    4.7.1 CHARACTER OF THE PLANNING AREA

                         The coastal boundary@sweeps northward at Gaviota, taking in the water-
                    shed of the Santa Ynez Mountains, narrows at Jalama, then moves inland
                    again to encompass the Guadalupe Dunes and the Santa Maria River mouth.
                    (Vandenberg Air Force Base is not subject to local land use controls.)
                    Notable features of this 64-mile stretch of coastline include broad coastal
                    terraces and bluffs, rolling oak woodlands, grasslands, spectacularly
                    rugged coastal headlands, and coves.

                         Hollister Ranch, which extends from Gaviota State Beach Park west to
                    Cojo Creek and includes some 14,400 acres, consists of a broad coastal
                    terrace intersected by coastal streams, several of which are perennial.
                    The Ranch is famed for its pristine coastline and its prime surfing points
                    which include Drakes Bay, St. Augustin6s, and Cojo Bay, the proposed site
                    for an LNG facility.

                         In recent years, the Hollister Ranch has  been subdivided into 135
                    ranch estates of approximately 100 acres each. Some 50 single family homes
                    have now been constructed on the Ranch; the homes are often accompanied by'
                    accessory dwellings, some agricultural development,,.and reservoirs. An
                    extensive network of roads has been built to serve the residential develop-
                    ment. Other developments on the Ranch include three beachside cabanas
                    which are located along the coastline, and the Hollister Ranch Guard
                    Station, immediately west of Gaviota State Beach Park. All of the
                    Hollister Ranch is in an agricultural preserve.

                         To the west and north of the Hollister Ranch is the Bixby Ranch,
                    totaling some 24,000 acres. This expansive holding comprises two subareas
                    known as the Jalama and Cojo Ranches, which meet at the San Julian Ridge.
                    Cojo Ranch lies south of the ridge and has panoramic views of the coast.
                    Portions of the area generally known as the Cojo Ranch are not owned by
                    Bixby; Chevron and Arco also have extensive land holdings in the area.
                    Jalama Ranch, to the north, takes in much of Jalama Creek's extensive
                    drainage and forms a nearly complete watershed.

                         Cojo Ranch's coastal terrace is very broad and is bisected by
                    ephemeral stream courses. Government Point and  Point Conception are its
                    most outstanding features. Government Point is  a massive, flat-topped
                    promontory with a deep and often quiet cove immediately to its eastern
                    shore. Point Conception, by contrast, is a jagged promontory surrounded by
                    turbulent waters. The Point Conception lighthouse and its ancillary
                    structures fuse with the rugged topography, making the area a well-known
                    landmark.

                                                     -217-

                           The Point Conception area is of great     interest to biogeographe.rs. As
                     a result of the seaward movement of the relatively cold California current
                     north of Point Conception, a cold water biota is found north of the Point
                     and a different warm water biota occurs to the south.

                           The area between Point Conception and Jalama Beach County Park is
                     comprised of rocky intertidal areas, broad sandy beaches, and a coastal
                     wetland at the mouth of Jalama Creek.

                           From Jalama Beach County Park north to'the State Park near Point Sal
                     the entire coastline is under the jurisdiction of Vandenberg Air Force Base
                     and is restricted to the public except for areas adjacent.to Ocean Beach
                     County Park (Surf)'at the mouth of'the Santa      Ynez River. The Surf area
                     includes wetland and dune habitats.

                           Point Sal,,to the north, besides being of biological interest       because
                     of its distinct and well-deVeloped plant communities and the species compo-
                     sition of its rocky intertidal area, is one of the most picturesque points
                     in the County. Its rugged scenic features extend to Mussel Point, another
                     jagged coastal promontory.. Three large natural bridges have been carved
                     out of Mussel Point by wave action. Dunes in the vicinity of Mussel Point
                     reach a height of 450 feet and then gradually taper off in elevation as one
                     moves north. The dune environment continues to the Santa Maria River mouth
                     which forms the northern boundary of.the planning area. A small County
                     park and the Thriftway oil drilling operation are situated just south of
                     the river mouth.

                     4.7.2. PLANNING ISSUES,

                           .Urban/Rural Boundary

                           This area is ent,irely rural. Agriculture is     the principal land use,
                     incl-uding large-scale gr.azing and   vegetable production.   Non-agricultural
                    .uses are limited to some low density residential development on the
                     Hollister Ranch and scattered energy-related development.

                           Agriculture

                           Agriculture  in the coastal zone from Gaviota to    Point  Conception and
                     north to the San   Luis Obispo County line encompasses    the grazing operations
                     of Hollister and   Bixby Ranches., as well as multiple crop vegetable produc-
                     tion and grazing   southwest of Guadalupe.

                           Of the 14,400 acres on   the Hollister Ranch, about 100 acres are irri-
                     gated for intensified agricultural uses (some 60 acres are planted to
                     avocados, with the balance of the irrigated acreage in flower production).
                     An estimated 1,000 acres are used for dry farming, i.e., production of
                     oats, barley, wheat, etc. Portions of the Ranch areused for cattle
                     grazing; the.Ranch is entire.ly in agricultural preserve and zoned 100-AL.
                     Soils-are non-prime, except for patches of Class II soils close to the
                    .coast.

                                                         -218-

                                                              ,acres and is primarily a livestock
                            The Bixby Ranch comprises 24,000-,
                       operation. There are from 3,000 to 4,500 head of cattle on the Ranch at
                       this time. Most of the Ranch is in agricultural preserve except for two
                       areas in the western portion south of Jalama Road,.an area east of Govern-
                       ment Point, and Jalachichi Basin. One area'known as the Ramajal Field is
                       irrigated for agricultural production. Soils Are almost exclusively non-
                       prime. Zoning is 100-AG, 100-AL, and U.

                            From Point Sal to the San'Luis Obispo County line, there are about
                       2,000 acres in large-scale grazing and vegetable production. Most of this
                       area is in agricultural preserve; it is currently zoned 100-AG with some.U
                       zoning along the Guadalupe Dunes. To sustain the long@-term viability of
                       agricultural lands, large-lot zoning is needed throughout this area.

                            The land use plan recognizes that the prevailing 100-acre zoning in
                       the North Coast area does not represent a viable minimum parcel size for
                       agricultural grazing operations. According to the Agricultural Extension
                       Service of the University of California, a minim  'um of 1,800 acres is'needed
                       for viable cattle ranching-. The inappropriateness of the 100-acre minimum
                       is further evidenced.by the recent'subdivision and development of the
                       Hollister Ranch. As a result of parcelization into 100-acre holdings,
                       agriculture on the Ranch has become secondary to residential uses, an
                       amenity to a rural'lifestyle rather than an economically viable activity.
                       Moreover., development even at the low densities..@allowed on the Ranch has.
                       resulted in increased demand on limited water resources, the construction
                       of impoundment reservoirs, and scarring of formerly pristine h1illsides to
                       Accommodate service roads and houses.

                           'Clearly, such development is contrary to   the Coastal Act goal of
                       preserving agricultural lands. In recognition of the conflict between
                       local zoning and Coastal policy, the land use plan specifies a higher mini-
                       mum parcel size for agriculturally designated   lands on the North Coast to
                       strengthen agriculture as the principal use.    A 320-acre minimum parcel
                       size is stipulated. This is a one-half mile squ  .are parcel, which, although
                       well below the required minimum for viability, wo  uld strengthen agricul-
                       tural use and reduce the number of potential new parcels and attendant
                       residences by 70 percent. In addition, under the provisions of Policy 8-8
                       (see Section 3.8), clustered residential development on a small portion of
                       the large ranches in this area (i.e., 10,000 acres or more) would be
                       considered as a means of sustaining the agricultural use of the land.
                       Resources and public services would have to be adequate to serve such
                       development and clustering of structures would be required to retain the
                       maximum amount of land in agric ultural use.

                            Coastal Access and Recreation

                            There are only four areas along this 64-mile stretch of coastline that.
                       provide opportunities for public access and recreat.ion:, Rancho Guadalupe
                       County Park, Point Sal State Park, Ocean Beach County Park, and Jalama
                       Beach County Park. These four',parks represent a total of 1.3 miles of
                       linear ocean frontage.@

                                                         _219-

                          The roads leading out to Jalama and   Point Sal  are narrow and winding.
                     Jalama Beach provides 105 camper sites; the other three parks are
                     restricted to day use only. Point Sal provides no-facilities and, at
                     Guadalupe., the facilities are limited to trash cansand portable toilets.
                     Although the County does 'not own any beach frontage at Ocean Beach County
                     Park, Vandenberg Air Force Base allows unrestricted public access along 3.5
                     miles south of the park. (Access is closed during missile launches.) The
                     five miles of beach north of the park are open on weekends and holidays
                     during daylight hours to the first 50 people; however, prior permission
                     must be obtained from the Base Game Warden.

                          There is a substantial amount of informal use of beaches in this
                     planning area. Some of the best surfing in California is found along      the
                     Hollister Ranch. Most surfers gain access to the Ranch by boat. The
                     Guadalupe Dunes area has become a popular area for dune buggy enthusiasts.
                     Most of the use is on privately owned land south of the County Park to
                     Mussel Point. This activity is having adverse impacts on plant communities
                     and archaeological resources in the area. The dune buggies also pose
                     hazards to others using the beach for fishing and walking. Point Sal and
                     Guadalupe Dunes have become popular spots for hang-gliders in recent years    .
                     At Point Sal, extensive foot traffic on the bluffs may be contributing to
                     increased erosion. At.Guadalupe, the problems caused by hang-gliders are
                     similar to those of the dune buggies, since vehicles are used to transport
                     the hang-gliders out onto the dunes.

                          Lack of roads and military restrictions present the principal barriers
                     to expanding opportunities for access and recreation in this planning area.
                     Neither the County nor the State has any immediate plans for acquisition in
                     this area. Opportunities-for limited, low intensity,recreational uses,
                     such as a hiking trailalong portions of the coastj are needed; however,
                     careful planning.will be necessary.to ensure that the extensive natural
                     resources (i.e., dunes, marine organisms, plant species, least tern nesting
                     sites) are protected.

                          The land use plan makes several  proposals for expansion of public
                     recreational opportunities in the-North Coast. These.include recommenda-
                     tions for coastal hiking trails along,the Bixby and.Hollister Ranches.and
                     expansion of the publ.ic parks at Jalama.and,Guadalupe. .(Refer to Section
                     3.7 for details.),

                         Habitat-Areas

                     Gaviota to Jalama

                         Th e coastal zone broadens at  Gaviota to take in many  natural communi-
                     ties. The entire area is rural and is, therefore, a pristine environment
                     for many of the common native animal species such as the red-tailed hawk
                     and mule deer. The area is characterized by plant communities such as
                     dense stands of southern oak woodland, coastal-sage scrub, chaparral, and
                     grasslands areas with individual coast live oak trees. Endangered plants
                     in this area include Eriodictyon  calitatum, Cirsium rhothophilum, and
                     Dicentra ochroleuca. 7-alifornia  wal,nut, Juglans calT-fornica, is a disjunct
                     @-Iant species found along Jalama Creek.

                                                       -220-

                              An area of special botanical interest is Jalachichi Summit. Bishop
                        pine  (Pinus muricata), a tree rarely found in Santa Barbara County,
                        persists here with other north coast vegetation, an unusual occurrence in
                        an area dominated by chaparral and grassland.

                              Marine habitats include pristine rocky headlands and tidepools, harbor
                        seal hauling grounds, and kelp beds. Many interesting intertidal inverte-
                        brate habitats (headlands and tidepools) are found along the coastlines of
                        the Holli.ster and Bixby Ranches at such points as Razprbacks, Drakes,
                        Panoches, and Ranch House Point. Harbor seals'are found at Drakes and
                        Panoches. Other portions of this coast may also be suitable habitats for
                        the seals. Offshore fishery resources include steelhead, spiney lobster,
                        squid,.clams, halibut, rock crabs, and abalone'i as well as some of the most
                        productive kelp beds in California.

                              The riparian habitats from Gaviota to Jalama consist of twelve peren-
                        nial and fourteen intermittent creeks. Since riparian areas support a
                        large number,and diversity,of species, these creeks warrant protection.
                        Jalama Creek is large and located almost entirely within the coastal zone.
                        boundary. This creek is very scenic and supports many water-loving
                        organisms s.u ch as the western pond turtle and Monterey salamander. In
                        addition, a small wetland is located at the Jalama Creek mouth.

                        Surf, Point Sal, and Guadalupe

                              Spectacular and unique coastal environments     are found in the coastal
                        area from Vandenberg Air Force Base north to the      San Luis Obispo County
                        border. Large and extensive sand dunes, scenic coastal bluffs, offshore
                        rocks, interesting intertidal areas, and a wetland are theenvironmentally
                        sensitive habitats in this. portion of the Santa Barbara County coastline.

                              One of the most distinctive and sensitive ecosystems within this,
                        coastal area is the dune habitat. The Gudalupe Dunes extend from the mouth
                        of the Santa Maria-River south to Mussel Point. The dunes are as high as
                        450 feet in some places, and an endangered bird, the Least Tern nests in
                        various locations in the dune complex. Unauthorized offroad vehicle use
                        here has scarred much of the area.

                              The Santa Maria River mouth consists of 40 to 50 acres of tidal
                        mudflat area and is a good waterfowl and shorebird habitat. Endangered
                        plant-species found in the wetland and dunes area include Castilleja
                        mollis, Cirsium rhothophilum, C. loncholepis, Erigero foliosus, and Monar-
                        della crispa. In addition to the Santa Maria River, another perenniaT
                        stream, Corralitos Canyon, is located near the inland coastal zone
                        boundary.

                              Point. Sal is located just south.of Mussel Point and is a highly scenic
                        area., Many of the plant communities here are in excellent condition. Of
                        special note is the coastal bluff vegetation on the-steep cliff slopes at
                        Point,Sal. This is the best    example. of the'coastal bl-uff community on the

                                                            -221-

                     Santa Barbara County mainland, and, in the spring,     giant coreopsis covers
                     the bluffs with yellow blooms. Rare plants such as Sanicula hoffmannii,
                     Dudleya blockmanae, and Dichondra donnelliana are also in the vicinity.

                          The intertidal area at Point Sal shows outstanding numbers of inverte-
                     brates and is an interesting exampl-e of intertidal zonation. Just offshore
                     is Lion Rock, a seabird roosting and sea lion habitat.

                          Commercial and fishery resources in the vicinity of Point Sal include
                     abalone in rocky areas, Pismo clams and, at 10-40 fathoms, vermillion,
                     lingcod, boccacio, olive, blue, yellowtail, whitebelly,.and rosy rockfish.

                          The'entire Surf area is under Federal jurisdiction with the exception
                     of a 36-acre park belonging to the County. The wetland area of the Santa
                     Ynez River adjacent to the park consists of salt marsh, mudflats, shallow
                     tide channels, and open water, and is frequented by many water-associated
                     birds. Another significant ecosystem, the Surf dunes, is in the vicinity
                     of the County park. Recreational uses of the Surf area need to be regulated
                     to protect the resource values,of the area.

                          Environmentally sensitive habitat areas found in the North Coast area
                     are,designated on the land use plan maps. Policies addressing their pro-
                     tection are found in Section'3@9.

                          Hazards

                          The coastal zone from Gaviota to Point Arguello is in a high seismic
                     hazard area. Except for a high seismic hazard band between Purisima Point
                     and Point Sal, the,remaining coastal area lies in a moderate hazard zone.
                     The most significant faults are the Santa Ynez Fault, including its north
                     and south branches, and the Pacifico FaultP which are in the Bixby/Hollis-
                     ter area; several other faults lie in the vicinity of the North Coast,
                     including the Honda Fault, Lion's Head Fault, and Pezzoni Fault.

                          Tsunami hazards are limited to the mouth of the Santa Ynez and Santa
                     Maria Rivers, and to a small beach area between Purisima Point and Point
                     Sal. Large sections of the coastline between Gaviota and Point Arguello,
                     including substantial sections inland at Hollister and Bixby Ranches, are
                     subject to high sl,ope instability, while areas north of Point Arguello
                     along the coast are generallystable.

                         @Due to low population densities and lack of development, damage
                     resulting from beach and bluff erosion has been minimal. In a number        of
                     locations, attempts have been made to protect the railbed by erecting       sea-
                     walls at the toe of the cliff.

                          Fire hazard is moderate along the coastal terrace between Gaviota       and
                     Point Arguello and becomes extreme along the rest of the North Coast.
                     Detailed information is not available on flood hazards outside of urban
                     areas. Hazards would be concentrated in the numerous canyon beds which
                     could be flooded on a seasonal basis. The.Santa Ynez River is subject to
                     extensive flooding conditions in the valley areas., but this.is outside the
                     coastal zone.

                                                        -222-

                            Since the North Coast is,not planned for urban development, these
                       hazards do not pose major threats.to life or property. Allowable
                       development is subject.to the hazards policies in Section 3.3.

                           .Housing

                            Since large-scale agricultural operations  and a rugged coastline
                       characterize this area of the coastal zone, housing is primarily incidental
                       to agricultural uses. However, as a means of sustaining the existing
                       large, non-prime ranches of 10,000 acres or more, additional residential
                       development may be permitted when clustered on a small portion of the
                       property. (Refer to Section 3.8)

                            Commercial Development

                            There are currently no commercial visitor-serving facil'ities in the
                       North Coast. The only opportunities for.public access to the coast are
                       provided by parks at Jalama, Surf 'Point Sal, and Guadalupe. Theland use
                       plan makes no provision for visitor-serving facilities in the North Coast
                       -because such.use wouldlead to conversion of agricultural lands inconsis-
                       tent with Section 30222@of the Coast.al Act.

                            Visual Resources

                            The scenic quality of the coastal zone  in the North Coast planning
                       area is outstanding. The rural charac ter and tremendous  diversity in land-
                       scapes combine to make this area a visual resource of national signifi-
                       cance. Most of the coastal zone north of Point Sal State Park has been
                       designated as a National Nat'ural Landmark due to its unique scenic and
                       resource values. General policies directed at the protection of visual
                       resources are contained in Section 3.4.

                            Between Gaviota and the Santa Maria River., public access roads are
                       extremely lim.ited. The principal corridors to the ocean are along Jalama
                       Road to Jalama Beach County Park, Route 246 to Ocean Beach County Park,
                       Brown Road to Point Sal, and West Main Street to the Guadalupe.Dunes.
                       While the corridors themselves provide beautiful rural views, vi ews to the
                       ocean and along the coast are generally not, available until the public
                       areas are reached at the 'ends of the roads. Therefore, no view corridors
                       are designated on the land use plan maps.

                            Industrial and Energy Development

                            Energy facilities are limited to isolated locations in the area
                       between Gaviota and the Santa Maria River. Union has production and
                       processing facilities at Government Point and a marine terminal at Cojo.
                       Thriftway has a small production island along the beach at Guadalupe.
                       Activity in this area may increase. Both Husky and Union have leases south
                       of the Santa Maria River and plan to conduct exploratory oil drilling  in
                       this area. The:Public Utilities Commission has selected Point Conception
                       for the location of a liquefied.natural gas terminal. Finally, lease #53

                                                       -223-:

                    could lead to an increase in offshore exploration and production activity
                    which may impact the coastal zone due to the need for onshore facilities to
                    support oil and gas development and the possibility of oil spills.

                         The land use plan designates Union's marine terminal-and processing
                    facilities as Coastal Dependent Industry. Policies governing future energy
                    developmentin the coastal zone are found in Section 3.6.

                         Service System Capacities and Availability of Resources

                         There are no public water or sanitary services provided in the North
                    Coast planning area. Groundwater resources are sparse; the Santa Barbara
                    County Water Agency has estimated that the safe yield of the groundwater
                    basins in the Point Conception area is something less than 2,000 acre feet
                    per year. For this reason, there is limited irrigated agriculture, and
                    residential units are completely dependent on private wells and on-site
                    waste systems. Existing water resources are adequate to serve the 257
                    .additional units that would theoretically be possible under the land use
                    plan for the North Coast.

                    4.7.3 SUMMARY OF LAND USE PLAN MAP

                         For the Point Conception, Guadalupe Dunes, and Point Sal areas which
                    comprise the North Coast, the land use plan proposes a substantial increase
                    in minimum parcel size requirements. Most of the area, now zoned for 10
                    and 100-acre minimum parcels (U and 100-AL, respectively), would be desig-
                    nated A-II-320 in the land use plan requiring minimum parcels of 320 acres.
                    This increase is deemed appropriate because the land holdings (i.e., Bixby
                    Ranch) are generally very large and could be subject to extensive parceli-
                    zation under existing zoning. Such parcelization could.undermine sustained
                    ranching.operations and thus jeopardize the agricultural viability of the
                    entire area.

                         Existing zoning would permit up to 883 potential additional units,
                    while the proposed land use plan would reduce the number of new housing
                    units to 257,

                                                    -224-

                                                           A-11 100
                                   Rancho Guadalupe                                 ---Lu Is
                                   County Park
                                                                    Guadalupe

                                    Open Land                                        Santa
                                                         A-II-32
                                                                                     Maria

                                           Fit. Sa I

                                        Pt. Sal Beach
                                        State Park

                                                                          M
                                                                          a

                                                                      S?   Casmalia
                                                                                                      101

                                                            4\ S.

                                           Purisima Pt.
                                                                     VANDENBERG
                                                                    AIR FORCE BASE                                      Los Alamos

                                           Ocean Beach
                                           County Park  Surf

                                                                              Lompoc

                                                                                                                   R,

                                        Fit. Arguello                                    /VE
                                                                                                          MOUNTAINS

                                                                                                                                  101

                                                                                                                                  Los Padres
                                                                                                                                   Nit. Foi
                                                             Jalama Beach                 A-II-320
                                                             County Park

                                                                   Pt. Conception                           Gaviota Beach      Educational
                             0               5              10                                              State Park         Facility
                                             I  ,  ,  - ,    i                      Coastal Dependent
                                           Miles                                    Industry
                                                                                                                   Coastal Dependent
                                                                                                                   Industry

                                    FIGURE 4-10
                              Generalized Land Use Plan                                  Land Use Designations- see text for definitions
                              North Coast Planning Area
                              County of Santa Barbara                                      0   COMMUNITY FACILITIES
                              Local Coastal Program                                       0    1 NDUSTRIAL
                                                                                               OPEN LAND USES
                              17-1 C:3     COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY                               F7 17   AGRICULTURE U (100-320acre min.)
                                                                                                 &     RECREATION (existing parks)
                                           LAND UNDER FEDERAL JURISDICTION                     r7=
                                                                                                       OPEN LAND

                                                                               -225-

                         4.8     The Channel          Islands LC-)1975 RON MORGAN

               4.8        THE      CHANNEL ISLANDS

                         The Channel Islands that lie within the County of Santa Barbara are
                    San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, and,Santa Barbara. San Miguel and
                    Santa Barbara Islands are owned And managed by the Federal Government.
                    Only the islands under the jurisdiction of the County of'Santa Barbara
                    (i.e., Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa) are discussed here.

                    4.8.1 SANTA CRUZ ISLAND

                         Santa Cruz Island is located  in the Santa Barbara Channel, 19 miles
                    .south of the mainland. The largest of the Channel Islands, Santa Cruz
                    Island is 24 miles long, ranges,from 1.5 - 6.6 miles in   width, and has
                    approximately 60 miles of coastline., Santa Cruz IsTand   is-62,000 acres in
                    size.

                         Santa Cruz Island is the mos t:topographically varied of al I the
                    islands. The highest point on the islandlis 2,450 feet; it is flanked on
                    the east and west by a range of peaks, many of wh.ich reach an elevation in
                    excess of 1,700 feet. The predominant central valley, which lies below the.
                    southern slope of the main ridge, runs approximately east-west along a
                    fault bordered by volcanic and sedimentary rock.ridges. Although the
                    coastline is steep and rugged, this island has many anchorages and
                    landings. Other interesting features of the coastline include sea caves
                    and pocket beaches.

                         The vegetation on Santa Cruz Island is diverse. Plant communities
                    here range from somewhat op en communities such as grasslands, coastal sage
                    scrub, and chaparral to wooded groves of oak woodland and closed cone pine
                    forests. The central valley and narrow.central region of the  ' island are
                    characterized by grasslands and oak woodl.and. Coastal sage scrub is found
                    on south-facing slopes on the south side of the island, while chaparral and
                    woodlands are found along the moist canyons and north-facing.slopes.

                         Land Use

                         Recreational and commercial uses of.-the waters surrounding Santa Cruz-
                    Island are increasing. Access to the general public is available only by
                    private boat and yachtspersons anchor at the many small harbors throughout
                    the island. A permit with conditions and restrictions for the purpose of
                    protecting the island's resources 'is required from the private owners in
                    order to land on Santa Cruz Island. On land, recreational uses such as
                    hiking are limited to daytime. Sport and commercial fishing take place
                    around Santa Cruz Island;'skindivers harvest abalone, rock scallop,-
                    California Sheephead,_ spiney lobster, kelp bass, and other species.

                        The western 55,000 acres of Santa Cruz Island are operated as a cattle
                    ranch. The base of this operation is a ranch in the central valley; cattle

                                                      -Z26-

                     are transported to and from   the island  by boat. Recently, the Nature
                     Conservancy purchased 12,500 acres and    negotiated a,conservation easement
                     for the remaining 42,500 acres'of this    cattle ranch. The eastern portion
                     of the island, bor 'dered on the west by  a ridge of low mountains, is opera-
                     ted under separate ownership for sheep    grazing. On this sheep ranch, a
                                                  p
                     group of buildings and a house for the    ranch-foreman are located at Scor-
                     pion anchorage. Other structures on this Oorti,?n of the'     island.include a
                     group of buildings at-Sm.uggler's Cove.

                           Feral pigs and feral sheep also*range on the rugged northern portion
                     of the island. A.hunting club, hbused,at Christy Ranch, and an archery
                     club serve a function in the control of these destructive animals.

                           Another important. activity on Santa Cruz Island is research. Two
                     research station installations are located in the valley; the University of
                     California field station approximately one mile west of the cattle ranch
                     headquarters and the General Motors Research station to the east at Valley
                     Anchorage. Permission has also been granted to other researchers and[or
                     institutions to conduct biological research on the island.

                           A naval communications  station is located atop a ridge running near
                     the middle portion of the island. The Coast Guard maintains a navigation
                     light on Gull Island on the south side of Santa,Cruz Island.

                     4.8.2 SANTA ROSA ISLAND

                           Santa Rosa Island is located three miles east of San Miguel Island,
                     six miles west of Santa Cruz Island, and approximately 27 miles from the
                     mainland coast. Santa Rosa is about 14.5 miles long and 10 miles wide.        It
                     is the second largest of the Channel Islands with 53,000 acres.

                           The 45-mile shoreline of Santa Rosa Isl  and ranges in character from
                     rocky sea bluffs to sandy beaches. Dunes of various ages are found near
                     the east, west and north sides of the island and scenic sea caves also dot
                     the shoreline. Compared to Santa Cruz.1sland, the topography of Santa Rosa
                     Island is of lower relief. The highest point on the island is Soledad
                     Mountain at 1,574 feet in elevation. Soledad Mountain is located near       the
                     center of the island. On the north and east shore there are a number of
                     canyons, many of which are the result of recent dissecti-on of marine
                     terraces.

                           Much of Santa Rosa Island is annual gra's 'sland. The grassland commu-
                     nity covers virtually all of the flat terraces, slopes and rolling ridge
                     tops of the island. Coastal dune vegetation is found on the dunes on the
                     east, west and north sides of the island. On the south side of the island,
                     there are some areas of. scrub vegetation.

                                                       -227-

                           More-vari ety is found in the-gullies   and canyons where trees such as
                     oak and'toyon are found. The best developed vegetation includes the grove
                     of torrey pines on the coast east of the ranch; and the oaks, toyon,
                     willows, and island cherries in Lobo Canyoh.-,These species plus island
                     ironwood and pines are found on the north slope of Black Mountain. Willows
                     and eucalyptus trees.occur near the ranch.

                           Santa Rosa Island is very windy, and this has given a windpruned
                     aspect to the vegetation on the seaward exposures and along the crests of
                     ridges. In,the more protected canyons and leeward,slopes, the vegetation
                     attains a. more upright aspect.-,

                           Land Use

                         ..Beca.use.Santa Rosa Island is fairly remote and lacks suita,ble.anchor-
                     ages, it is not intensively used for recreation. A landing permit system
                     is also in existence on this island.

                           As with all of the Channel Islands, the offshore area of Santa Rosa
                     Island is used for commercial and recreational fishing. The California
                     Department of Fish and Game reports that spiney lobster, abalone, rock
                     scallop, rockfish, kelp bass, ahd.California sheephe'ad have been taken by
                     skindivers in these waters.

                           The major land use act:ivity  on the island is cattle grazing. Vail and
                     Vickers maintain ranching facilities and a pier on the Channel side of the
                     island at Beecher's Bay. The cattle,boat operated for this island also
                     provides transportation for the livestock'on Santa Cruz Island.

                           Fera.1-pigs are also found on Santa Rosa-Island. Groups are occasion-
                     ally  permitted to hunt introduced Roosevelt Elk and Kaibab mule deei- on
                     this  island.

                           Several military installations have been developed on the island and
                     have  been abandoned. These installations include an air base with a pier
                     at Johnson's Lee along the south coast as well as.radar installations
                     located on the high peaks above Johnson's Lee. Many passable roads origi-
                     nate from Beecher's Bay and stretch,out across the island.. These roads
                     connect with Southwest Anchorage, Johns'ones Lee, and the high western
                     portion of the island.

                     4.8.3 RESOURCES OF SANTA CRUZ AND SANTA ROSA ISLANDS

                           Marine Mammals

                           Taken together, the Channel Islands of Southern California host     the
                     largest, most diverse pinniped population to be found in the temperate
                     waters of the world and represent a mix of northern and southern faunal
                     types. Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa Islands., alone,-now provide relatively
                     undisturbed hauling grounds for harbor seals and sea lions only. In the
                     1950's, a'Steller sea lion rookery.was noted on the south side of Santa

                                                       -228-

                      Rosa Island and the   potential for  reestablishment  of this species exists.
                      The Guadalupe fur seal and the California sea otter are two other marine
                      mammal.species that once existed on.San.ta Cruz and Santa Ros.a Is.lands.
                      These species  are currently extending their ranges    and 'may one,day reestab-
                      lish on these  islands.

                           Land Mammals

                          ..Relatively.few  land mammals exist  on Santa  Cruz  and Santa Rosa
                      Islands   The most conspicuous,ani.mal,   the island'fox (Urocyon    littoralis),
                      is list;d as rare by the California Department.of Fish @i_nd Game7.-This
                      animal is distributed throughout the islands    *' The subspecies, Urocyon
                      littoralis santacruzae, is found on Santa Cruz     Island and U. littoralis
                      santarosae is Tound.on Santa Rosa Island. There are other uncommon or
                      endemic animals such as spotted skunk, Santa Cruz island gopher snake and
                      the Pacific slender salamander  Ion these i,slands.   Several.species of rare
                      and endangered snails and slugs are also found on     both islands.

                           Seabirds

                           Islands are important   seabird habitats,.although    current seabird
                      populations on the islands   are only remnants of what they once were. The
                      seabirds in the area of Santa Cruz and Santa,Rosa Islands use a wide
                      variety of marine and coastal habitats. Island cliffs, bluffs, and off-
                      shore islets are utilized for nesting:, while nearshore waters, inter-island,
                      channels, and oceanic waters of the California current are utilized for
                      feeding and rafting. Brant's Cormorant, Pelagic Cormorant, and Pigeon
                      Guillemot nest on Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa Islands.. In addition, Western
                      Gull and Cassin's Auklet nest on Santa Cruz Island. The California Brown
                      Pelican has been known to.nest on Scorpion Rock at Santa Cruz Island and.is
                      accorded special protection by the California Department of Fish and Game
                      as a rare and endangered species.,

                           Land Birds

                           The number of land bird species on Santa Rosa Island is      limited,
                      largely due to low habitat diversity. Santa Cruz Island supports 40 to 50
                      species of resident land birds; however, this number of species is ,                      I
                      relatively small in comparison to similar habitats on the mainland. About
                      a dozen of these birds are'subspecies endemic to the islands. The unique
                      Santa Cruz island scrub jay is a well-differentiaied island race.
                      Formerly, the Southern Bald Eagle, and American Peregrine Fal,con,      nested on.
                      Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa Islands.

                           Plants

                          Many outstanding plant communities.and interesting rare and       endemic
                      plants occur on Santa.Cruz and Santa R   osa Islands. Of all the California
                      Islands, Santa Cruz supports the largest number of plant -communities due to
                      its large,size and varied topography. Cl.osed cone pine'forests (Pinus
                      muricata).c.an be found in several areas. Some elements (Lcer ma6-rophyllum,

                                                         -229-

                      Arbutus menziesii, etc.) of    the,mixed evergreen woodland community are
                          d on a few canyons on the north side of the island. A unique type          of
                      'woodland, the Channel Islands woodlands, is well represented on Santa Cruz
                      Islandt where it is characterized by Cercocarpus betuloides var.-blancheae,
                      Heteromeles arbutifolia, Lyonothamnus flortbundus, Prunus-iXonii, Quercus
                      agrifolia, Quercus macdonaldii and Quercus tomentella. Chamise chaparral,
                      -coastal sage scruT,--an-J-Channel Islands chaparral can also be found on
                      Santa Cruz island. Patches of native grasses,still per ist on portions of
                                                                                   si
                      Santa Cruz Island in spite of heavy grazing.
                           There are relatively fe1w trees on Santa Rosa Island. These include
                      three types  of oak,,two pines, cottonwood, cherry, and ironwood. Of these
                      trees, the island ironwood (Lyonothamnus floribundus SSD. asplenifolius),
                      island oak  (Quercus tomentel-f7a, and island cheery     1@ru nus.lyonii). are
                      jound only  on the California islands. The Torrey,Pine Pinus torreyana) is
                      found only  on Santa Rosa Island and at one     mainland locality,         Mar,
                      twenty miles north of San Diego. Santa Rosa Island has three         endemic plant
                      taxa: Dudleya blochmanae ssp. insularis (Live,Forever), ArctostaphXlos
                      confert-i"forT(Manzanita), and -G-171a tenuflora ssp.. ho fmannii (Gilia).

                           Another interesting resource     that adds to  the educational and research
                      value of Sant,a Cruz Island is the Willow Creek     fossil flora located in
                      Sauces-Canyon. These fossil remnants' of pleistocene plant association that
                      are currently extinct on the island-add to the knowledge of ancient plant
                      distribution and climates.

                           Ntertidal Areas

                           Due to their location    in a transition zone between northern and
                      southern faunal regions, Santa.Cruz and Santa Rosa Islands support a          rich
                      diversity of intertidal life. Invertebrate species such as barnacles,
                      abalone, anemones, starfish, and crabs occur in greater abundance on the
                      islands than on the mainland.- The extens@ive rocky areas,. superior water
                      quality, and relatively-undisturbed nature of the Santa Cruz Island and
                      Santa Rosa Island intertidal areas contribute to this abundance and diver-
                      sity. These coastal, waters provide a valuable resource,for educational,
                      scientific, recreational, and commercial fishingAnterests alike. In
                      addition, these rocky intertidal areas are important food sources for
                      seabirds and marine mammals.

                           Because these resources    are so valuable and are vulnerable to distur-
                      bance from oil spills, poor water quality,,and over-harvesting, their
                      importance has been recognized by,incl.usion in a California oil and gas
                      sanctuary which prohibits oil development within a three-mile area. In
                      addition, the State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)'has desig-
                      nated the islands as an "Area of Special Biological Significance." The
                      islands were designated because.they were found to contain "biological
                      communities of such extra'ordinary,@even though uhquanti,fiable, value that

                                                          -230-

                      no acceptable risk of@change in   their environments   as a result of man's
                      activities can be entertained."     (RWQCB)*

                           Historic and  Archaeological_Resources

                           Humans  have a long history of occupation-on    the islands. Radiocarbon
                      dating of a  human femur by Phil Orr of-the Santa    Barbara Museum of Natural
                      History suggests human occupation of Santa Rosa Island at least 10,-000
                      years before the  present. The.most recentof the Indian cultures on the
                      islands was the Canalino Chumash. These Indians occupied the islands at
                      various population densities until their demise in the early nineteenth
                      century after contact with European disease and culture. Early Spanish
                      explo,rers,,vi.sited the islands as early as,the mid-sixteenth century.' By
                      the mid-ni,neteenth century,, white settlers arrived and introduced grazing
                      animals, a use which persists to the'present.

                           This rich history of exploration and    settlement has produced some of
                      the'most Outstanding examples of archaeological and historical resources in
                      the coastal zone'.of-California. Many of the archaeological sites on the
                      islands are relatively u.nd.isturbed. Reasons for this include the lack of
                      development, relative isolation, and few -burr'owing rodent.populations to
                      disturb sites,. The excellent stratification of the island.sites areof
                      special interest to researchers.

                           Research and Education

                           These extraordinary biological   and  cultural resources have made the
                      islands @invaluable for scientific and educational studies. Scientists are
                      provided'with many unique and.rare species of plants, animals, birds,
                      f.ossil'forms, and,geological@ structures to study. Biologists, for example,
                      are able to compare island and mainland individuals of similar species and
                      the phenomena of island endemism,-gigantism, and dwarfism. The historical
                      and archaeological resources provide valuable records for.study ofearlier
                      cultures and societies due to.the unique   ness and pristine  condition of many
                      of the sites.

                      4.8.4 COASTAL ACT   POLICIES

                           The,policies from Chapter   3 of the Coastal Act which are most perti-
                      nent to the planning issues for the islandsinclude:

                             30240. (a) Environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be
                           protected against any significant disruption of habitat values,       and
                           only uses dependent on such resources shall be allowed within such
                           areas
                             (b) Development in areas adjacent to environmentally sensitive
                           habitat areas and parks  'and recreationareas shall be sited and
                          ,designed to prevent  impact's which would significantly degrade such
                           areas,-and shall be  compatible 'With the continuance of such habitat
                           areas.

                                                        -231-

                           30230. Marine resources shall be maintained, enhanced, and, where
                         feasible, restored. Special protection shall be given to areas and
                         ,species of special biological or economic significance. Uses of the
                         marine environment shall be carried out  in a manner that will sustain
                         the biological. productivity of coastal waters and that will maintain
                         healthy populations of all species of marifie organisms adequate for
                         long-term commercial, recreational, scientific, and educational
                         purposes.

                           30221. Oceanfront land suitable   for recreational use shall be
                         protected for recreational use and  development unless present and
                         foreseeable future demand for,public or commercial recreational
                         activities that could be accommodated on the property i's already
                         adequately provided for in the area.

                           30222. The use of private lands suitable for visitor-serving
                         commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public oppor-
                         tunities for coastal recreation shall have priority over private resi-
                         dent,ial, general industrial, or,ge.neral!commercial development, but
                         not over agriculture or coastal-dependent industry.

                           30224. Increased recreational boating use of coastal waters shall
                         be encouraged, in accordance with this division, by developing dry
                         storage areas, increasing public launching facilities, providing
                         additional berthing space in existi ng harbors, limiting non-water-
                         support facilities, provi-ding harbors of refuge, and by providing for
                         new boating facil-ities in natural harbors,.new protected water areas,
                         and in areas dredged from dry land.

                           30263. (a) New or expanded.r.efineries   or petr ochemical facilities
                         not otherwise consistent'with-the provisions of this division shall be
                         permitted if: ... (4) the facility is not.located in a highly scenic
                         or seismically hazardous area, on any of the Channel Islands, or
                         within or contiguous to environmentally sensitive areas; ...

                          '30250. (a) New development, except as otherwise provided in this
                        Aivision, shall be located within, contiguous with, or in close proxi-
                         mity to, existing developed areas able to accommodate it or, where
                         such areas are not able to accommodate it, in other areas with
                         adequate public services and where it will.nothave significant
                         adverse effects, either individually or cumulatively, on coastal
                         resources.

                   4.8.5 PLANNING ISSUES

                         Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa Island s are relatively isolated; access is
                   not.readily available to the general public, and development pressures have
                   not been great. However, the Channel Is-land.8 are nationally known for
                   their unique and undisturbed'habitats, natural, beauty,and cultural signi-
                   ficance. Therefore, theseislands require special protection from incom-
                   patible land uses to protect their incomparable resource values..

                                                     -232-

                      Existing and potential   threats to 'island resources   are discussed below.

                           Feral Animals

                           Uncontrolled grazing by    feral animals has   resulted  in the greatest
                      destruction to island natural resources of any      activity on Santa Cruz and
                      Santa Rosa Islands. Although grazing activity       is now appropriately managed
                      in most areas, sheep and cattle overgrazing in      the past caused the decline
                      of native grass species in the same manner as on the mainland. Feral sheep
                      from the early days have persisted in large areas-on Santa Cruz Island.
                      (There is a controlled sheep ranching operation on the eastern portion of
                      Santa Cruz Island.) Currently a hunting club keeps the number of feral
                      sheep down but total eradication, an extremely difficult task, is needed,.to
                      solve the problem. Severe erosion is occurring in areas where sheep ha,ve
                      removed most of the vegetation, and overgrazing is preventing the regpnera-
                      tion of new plants.. Feral pigs a,re also found on Santa Rosa and San,,t-,'a,.Cruz
                      Islands where they cause extensive disturbance and destruction by upr@66t-,-_inq
                      native herbs in the moist grasslands.

                           Recreational Trespass

                           Th@,e@-l@i,.&,-14'andsi,-,,p,a,rticularly Santa Cruz Island, are popular destination
                      poirf-t`s@ f6r1-`Ya'd- jeapT`e, and the number of vessels visiting the islands
                      increases each@yZr. Unfortunately, not all people who go ashore obtain
                      landing permits which specify strict rules on allowable uses. As the
                      unauthorized recreational uses increase, impacts from these uses may result
                      in greater disturbance of the islands' ecosystem. These include distur-
                      bance to animals, trampling of plants, frightening of marine mammals, trail
                      development, and. collection of intertidal organisms. Because species have
                      smaller populations on islands and recolonization from the mainland or
                      other islands is less likely, plants and animals are more vulnerable to
                      local extinction. It. is possible that the numbers of native island species
                      could decline if human traffic increases from the present relatively low
                      level without propermanagement. Archaeological sites may also be
                      threatened 'by va,ndalism with increased recreational use.

                           Othrercu:rrent @issues which result from uncontrolled recreational uses
                      include,
                           - problems of.litter, sewage disposal, and safety. Sewage dumped
                      from boats into the more popular harbors may be affecting marine water
                      quality Ond garbage and litter are being left on the islands. Also, wild-
                      fire potential increases with recreational use as does the probability of
                           - -1.111; .I
                               ri n
                      peloplebe g   lost or injured. While the small anchorages and natural
                      ha',r@bors ,, Or adequate protection for boats during fair weather, the
                             smurrounding the islands can be exceedingly hazardous during storm
                      tonditi.46s. These problems may increase without proper management of
                      r         al  uses in the  future.

                                                         -233-

                           Commercial and Sport Fishlio
                          Although the islands' intertidal and subtidal areas are still quite
                     rich  in.commercial and game species, conflicts occur now between commercial
                     and sport fishermen. Regulations dilter for the two groups, and each
                     believes the other may contribute to depletion of these resources. There
                     is some sentiment among members of the local scientific community that a
                     subtidal marine reserve should be established to allow for repopulation of
                     depleted species. The specific area that has been suggested is on the west
                     end of Santa.Cruz Island between West Point and Black Point.

                          Energy Development

                          Energy development in the    Channel may threaten the islands. Oil
                     development will increase as a    result of Lease Sales 35 and 48, as will the
                     amount of tanker traffic in the Channel. Oil spillage will, therefore,
                     continue to pose a constant threat to island resources. In addition, a
                     site near China Harbor (Santa Cruz Island) was considered for a potential
                     LNG plant. Of the four offshore sites evaluated, this site was found to be
                     least appropriate because of potential impacts on coastal resources. It is
                     possible, however, that other industrial uses may be proposed in the
                     future. It is unlikely that the impacts of major,energy or industrial
                     facilities could be mitigated to avoid irreversible impacts on island
                     resources.

                          Space  Shuttle

                          Plans  to launch the space shuttle over the no   rthern Channel Islands,
                     with attendant sonic booms of staggering proportions, could physically
                     destroy much of the rocky cliffhabitat and seriously threaten breeding
                     populations of seabirds and marine mammals, Careful analysis and monitor-
                     ing of these threats is necessary to insure adequate protection of the
                     islands.

                     4.8.6 LAND USE PLAN PROPOSALS

                          Land Use Designations

                          The islands have been used for low-intensity agriculture for many
                     years; a major change in this historical land use coul.d have significant
                     unba"lancing effects on the present equilibrium of the ecosystem. There-
                     fore, Santa Rosa and Santa Cruz Islands-are designated as Agriculture II.
                     The minimum permitted parcel size is 320 acres. Santa Rosa Island is
                     eligible for a clustered residential development under the provisions of
                     Policy 8-8.

                         A separate set of resources-maps showing all      known environmentally
                     sensitive habitat areas has been prepared for the     islands. All development
                     within these habitat areas shall be subject to the specific habitat protec-
                     tion policies*in Section 3.9. (Archaeological and historical sites are not
                     mapped.)

                                                       -234-

                          Policies and  Actions

                          The following policies andlactions are proposed to ensure long-term
                     preservation of the natural resources of,Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa
                     Islands:

                     Pol icy 1: Agricultural activities should continue to be carried out in a
                                @manner consistent with historical-practices, future technology,
                                and good cultural practices, and with.the maintenance of natural
                                flora and fauna, preservation of soils and.topography, and
                                protection of the quality of surface and-subsurface waters.

                     Policy 2:  Prior to the issuance of a permit for any major grading or
                                constructJon, the site to be disturbed shall be inspected by both
                                a qualified archaeologist and biologist, to be selected jointly
                                by the applicant and the County. If archaeological or environ-
                                mentally sensitive habitat resources are found, measures to miti-
                                gate or avoid impacts shall be required for issuance of a permit.
                                (For the purposes of this policy, major grading or construction
                                is defined as any project which is subject to environmental
                                review under CEQA and does not include general rule and categori-
                                cally exempt projects.*)

                     Policy 3:  Introduction of any non-native animal, other than cattle, sheep,
                                horses, dogs, and domestic fowl, or plant species which could be
                                detrimental to the ecological equilibrium of the islands is
                                prohibited.

                     Policy 4:  Construction of major facilities for commercial and/or recrea-
                                tional purposes is prohibited except where found not to have
                                significant unavoidable adverse impacts. In this context, major
                                harbor facilities mean development involving construction of
                                breakwaters, permanent slips, or related commercial support
                                facil.ities (i.e., gas stations, restaurants) for use by visitors
                                to the islands. Upgrading or expansion of existing pier facili-
                                ties or moorings for agricultural, educational, scientific, or
                                low-intensity public recreational purposes may be allowed with a
                                conditional use permit.

                     Policy  5: Light recreational uses, both public and private, may be allowed
                                with a conditional use,permit provided that the kinds, intensity,
                                and location of uses are managed to avoid impacts to all habitat,
                                archaeological, and historical resources.. The existing hunt
                                clubs and landing permit systems which are operated by the
                                property owners shall be allowed to continue at their current
                                levels without permit requirements.

                     *State of California En vironmenial-Quality Guidelines; Article 6,
                     Section 15060 - General Rule, and Article 8, Sections 15100-15124
                     Categorical Exemptions.

                                                       -235-

                     Policy 6: Permitted development.shall   be sited and designed   to be subordi-
                               nate to the natural setting. Construction of new       above-ground
                               structures in excess of 1,000 square feet excluding structures
                               for agricultural'purposes shall be subject to design review by
                               the County Board of Architectural Review..

                    Action  1@ The County in  consultation  with the Department of Fish and Game,
                               the landowners, commercial   and sport fishing groups, and other
                               interested persons shall determine whether certain intertidal and
                               subtidal areas adjacent to the islands qualify for preserve
                               status. Such preserves, if established,, shall not be used for
                               commercial or sport fi.shing. Permitted uses shall be limited to
                               non-appropriative recreation (i.e., diving or photography) and
                               scientific research. The County shall also work with these
                               groups to determine thefeasibility of prohibiting all uses,
                               including overnight anchoring of boats, within and in close
                               proximity to marine bird.nesting sites and pinniped rookeries
                               during the time when such u�eswould create disturbances to those
                               habitats and the species utilizing them.

                    Action 2:  Until such ti me as feral animals are eliminated from the islands,
                               the County should encourage and support efforts by landowners or
                               other interested parties to protect areas with significant native
                               vegetation by fencing or other such enclosures.

                    Action 3:  The County shall encourage the nomination of Santa Rosa and Santa
                               Cruz Islands to.the National Register of Historic Places.

                          In addition, the following'policies from   Chapter 3 of the land use
                    plan shall apply to Santa.Cruz and Santa Rosa    Islands:

                    Section 3 3 Hazards: All poli ies
                    Section 3:9 Environmentally Secnsitive Habitat   Areas: All policies
                    Section 3.10 Archaeological and Historical Resources@ All policies
                    See also Section 3.8 Agriculture, Policy 8-8

                                                                                                                 C:zl    C40       C:i,
                                                                 C@o C::3 C-71                                                            114c:*              vr-@ "PC= C0,1=` 4:Z4
                                                              4)            CZ4              West Point
                                               C=3 C:3
                          lc@@j C=                                                                                                                                                                     ocm=

                                                                                                                                                                                      on
                                                                                                                                                                                     Anchorage

           San Miguel                                                                                                                                                              SawMlers
            Is         Sandy                                           Beechers                                        Santa      Cruz island                                      Cove
                        Point                                                                                                                                                                          Anacapa
                                                                                                                                                                                                        Is-
                                                                                                                               A-11 320                   Valley
                                          Santa Rosa          Island                                                                                      An chorage                    1619e
                                                       A-1(-@320                                                                                                                C2

                                                                                                                                                       coo
                                                                                                                             c4rzxt:zi C=3
                                                               nsons                                                                    C3 co C:@
                                                                                                                                                                                  N

                                                    ctum                                                                                                         0
                                                                                                                                                                  I i A A       A       I
                                                                    P    A C I F I C                          0 C E A N

                                                                                                                                                                                           N. ckup,.-  jr/rii

                      Generalized Land Use Plan
                      Channel Islands Planning Area                                                     Land Use Designation           am text for CIO finition
                      County of Santa Barbara
                      Local Coastal Program                                                                     AGRICULTURE It         320 acre min.

                      1=3 cm C=3 COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY
                                                                                        40

                                     LAND UNDER FEDERAL JURISDICTION
         L4
         U1                                                                                                                                                                                                    lu

                                        Definitions

    													APPENDIX A

                                                     DEFINITIONS

                   CHAPTER 3

                   3.2 DEVELOPMENT

                           30106. "Development" means, on land, in or under water, the      place-
                         ment or erection of Wn-y solid material or structure; discharge   or
                         disposal of any dredged material or of any gaseous, liquid, solid, or
                         -thermal waste; grading, removing, dredging, mining, or extraction of
                         any materials; change in the density or intensity of use of land,
                         including but not limited to, subdivision pursuant to the Subdivision
                         Map Act (commencing with Section 66410-of the Government-Code), and
                         any other division of land, including lot splits, except where the
                         land division.is brought about in connection with the purchase of such
                         land by a public agency for public recreational use; change in the
                         intensity of use of water, or of access thereto; construction,'recon-
                         struction, demolition, or alteration of the size of any structure,
                         including any facility of any private, public, or municipal utility;
                         and the removal or harvesting of major vegetation other than for agri-
                         cultural purposes, kelp harvesting, and timber operations whith are in
                         accordance with,a timber harvesting plan submitted pursuant to the
                         provisions of the Z'berg-Neiedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 (commenc"
                         ina with Section 4511).

                         Structure

                         As used in this section,  "structure" includes, but-is not limited   to
                   any building, road, pipe, flume, conduit, siphon, aqueduct, telephone line,
                   electrical -power transmission and distribution line, and fences and walls
                   exceeding six feet in height.

                           30114.  "Public works"  means the following:
                           (a) All production, storage, transmission, and recovery facilities
                         for water, sewerage, telephone, and other similar utilities owned or
                         operated by any public agency or by any utility subject to the juris-
                         diction of the Public Utilities Commission except for energy facili-
                         ties.
                           (b) All public transportation facilities, including streets, roads,
                         highways, public parking lots and structures, ports, harbors, air-
                         ports, railroads, and mass transit facilities and stations, bridges,
                         trolley wires, and other related facilities. For purposes of this
                         division, neither the Ports of Hueneme, Long Beach, Los Angeles, nor
                         San Diego Unified Port District nor any of the developments within
                         these ports shall be considered public works.
                          .(c) All. publicly financed recreational facilities and any develop-
                         ment by a special district.
                           W All community college facilities.

                                                        A-1

                   3.3 HAZARDS

                        Floodway and Floodway Fringe

                        The floodway is the channel of a stream, plus any adjacent flood plain
                   area, that must be kept free of encroachment in order that the 100-year
                   flood be carried without substantial increase in flood height. As minimum
                   standards, the Federal Insurance Administration limits such increases in
                   flood heights to 1.0 foot, provided that hazardous velocities are not
                   produced.

                        The area between the floodway and the boundary of the 100-year flood
                   is termed the floodway fringe. The floodway fringe thus encompasses the
                   portion of the flood plain that could becompletely obstructed without
                   increasing the water-surface elevation of the 100-year flood more than 1.0
                   foot at any point.

                        Hillside

                        H,illsides are defined as lands with slopes exceeding twenty percent.

                        Watershed

                        Watersheds are defined as regions or areas drained by a network of
                   surface or subsurface watercourses and have the potential for impacts-on
                   coastal streams, wetlands, estuaries, and groundwater basins through runoff
                   and percolation.

                   3.5  HOUSING

                        Definition of Low and Moderate Income

                        In accordance with the regulations of the California Housing Finance
                   Aqency, "persons of low and moderate income" are defined to include all the
                   following:

                        (1)  A "very low income family" is a family whose income does not
                             exceed 50 peYcent of the medin  income for the area, as deter-
                             mined by HUD with adjustments   for smaller and larger
                             families.

                        (2)  A "low income family" is a family whose income does not exceed 80
                             perIent of the median2income for the area, as determined by '              11'
                             HUD with adjustments for smaller or larger families, except
                             that income limits higher or lower than 80 percent may be estab-
                             lished on the basis of its findings that such variations are
                             necessary because of the prevailing levels of construction costs,
                             usually high or low incomes, or other factors.

                   lGenerally defined by HUD as a county; 2adjustments as made by HUD.

                                                       A-2

                        (3)  A II moderate income family" is a family whose income does not
                             exceed 120 pT rcent of the medir income for the area,'as deter-
                             mined by HUD with adjustments for smaller and larger
                             famflies.

                        (4)  For purposes of this section "family" includes an elderly,
                             handicapped, disabled, or displaced person and the remaining
                             member of a tenant family as defined in Section 201 (a) of the
                             Housing and Community Development Act of 1974.

                       A generally accepted definition of affordable housing is that for
                  which costs do not exceed 25 percent of the family gross income. Housing
                  costs include rent or mortgage payment, property takes, insurance, heat.and
                  utilities, and maintenance and repairs.

                       Definition of Housing Condition

                  Condition A    New, near new, housing under construction and older housing
                                 which has been exceptionally well maintained.

                  Condition B    Housing where minor deficiencies are apparent, where roofs
                                 need repair work, buildings need painting and other weather
                                 protection, garage doors are sagging or inoperable. Housing
                                 where an expenditure of from $1,000 to $5,000 and good
                                 ongoing maintenance will extend the useful life of the
                                 building beyond a 40-year period.

                  Condition  C   Housing where major deficiencies are  apparent, often without
                                 foundations, roofs sagging, paint and weather protection work
                                 needed, some structural failures in porches and steps. These
                                 are. usually older buildings (pre-building code) whose
                                 original construction was inadequate or buildings which have
                                 had little or inadequate maintenance. Buildings in this
                                 condition, unless rehabilitated, could be beyond,reasonable
                                 economic repair within a three- to ten-year period. "C"
                                 condition housing would likely require a $5,000 to $20,000
                                 expenditure and a program of sound maintenance to provide the
                                 building with an additional 40-year life.

                  Condition D    Dilapidated housing which had deteriorated beyond reasonable
                                 economic repair. The term "reasonable economic repair" is
                                 meant to mean that a sum of money in excess of 50 percent of
                                 the as-is value of the building would be required to rehabil-
                                 itate the dwelling to livable standards.

                                                  Source: Santa Barbara County Housi  ng Condi-
                                                           tion Inventory, June 197-7.-

                  lGenerally defined by HUD as a county; 2adjustments as made by HUD.

                                                       A-3

                   3.6  INDUSTRIAL AND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT

                          30107. of Energy facilityll means any public or private processing,
                        producing, generatingl.sFo-ring, transmitting, or recovering facility
                        for electricity, natural.gas, petroleum, coal, or other source of
                        energy.

                        Aquaculture

                            Aquaculture is the culture of plants   and animals in an aquatic
                        medium.

                   3.8  AGRICULTURE

                        Definition of Prime Agricultural Lands

                        Section 51201 of the California Government Code:

                        (1)  All land which qualifies for rating as Class I or Class II in the
                             Soil Conservation Service land use capability classifications.

                        (2)  Land which qualifies for rating 80 through 100 in the Storie
                             Index Rating.

                        (3)  Land which supports livestock used for the production of food and
                             fiber and which has an annual carrying capacity equivalent to at
                             least one animal unit per acre as defined by the United States
                             Department of Agriculture.

                        (4)  Land planted with fruit- or nut-bearing trees, vines, bushes, or
                             crops which have a nonbearing period of less than five years and
                             which will normally return during the commercial bearing period
                             on an.annual basis from the production of unprocessed agricu.1--
                             tural plant production not less than two hundred dollars per
                             acre.

                        (5)  Land which has returned from the production of unprocessed agri-
                             cultural plant products an annual gross value of not less than
                             two hundred dollars ($200) per acre for three of the previous
                             five years.

                   3.9  ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE HABITAT AREAS

                          30121. "Wetland" means' lands within the coastal zone which may be
                        covered per155F-EaTly or permanently with shallow water and include
                        saltwater marshes, freshwater marshes, open or closed brackish water
                        marshes, swamps, mudflats, and fens.

                                                      A-4

                         Definitions of other commonly used terms include-

                   Biota: all plants and animals ocurring within a certain region.

                   Coastal Strand: a plant community found i.n sandy beaches and dunes
                      scattered along the entire coast. The vegetation is low or prostrate,
                      often succulent and late flowering.

                   Coastal Sage Scrub: a plant community    found on dry rocky or gravelly
                      slopes below 1,000 feet composed of   shrubs, one to five feet tall.

                   Community: an assemblage of plant and    animal populations occupying a  given
                      area.

                   Chaparral: a dense, sometimes impenetrable plant community found on     dry
                      s1opes and ridges. Chamis.e, toyon, scrub oak, ceonothus, and manzanita
                      are dominant species.

                   Disjunct: a plant or animal species found in an area outside of its-usual.
                      range.

                   Ecosystem: a system formed by the interaction of a community     of organisms
                      with their environment.

                   Estuary: that part of the mouth or lower course of a river in     which the
                      river's current meets the sea's tide.

                   Hybrid: an offspring of two animals or plants of different     variety or
                      species.

                   Intertidal: of or pertaining to the seashore    region that is above  the
                      low-water mark and below the high-water mark.
                   Invertebrate Fauna:. animals lacking   a backbone and int ernal skeleton such!
                      as a sea anemone.

                   Marsh: a tract of low, wet land, often treeless and periodically     inun-
                      dated, characterized by grasses, sedoes, cattails, and rushes.

                   Mudflat: a mud-covered, gently sloping tract of land, alternately covered
                      or left bare by tidal waters.

                   Reef: a ridge of rocks or sand at or near the surface of the water.

                   Relict: a persistent remnant of an otherwwise extinct flora or fauna.

                   Salt Marsh: a marshy tract that is wet with salt water or flooded by the
                      sea.

                   Salicornia Marsh: a wetland or marsh area in which the dominant vegetation
                      is pickleweed  (Salicornia spp.).

                                                         A-5

                   Sloughs:   an area of soft, muddy ground, swamp, or swamplike region; a
                      marthy  or reedy pool, pond inlet, backwater, or the like.

                   Subtidal: the area just beyond the intertidal zone not subject to tidal
                      fluctuation below the low tide line.

                   Tideflats: a marshy, sandy, or muddy nearly horizontal coastal flatland
                      which is alternately covered and exposed as the tide rises and falls.

                   Tidepool: an accumulation of sea water remaining in a depression on a
                      beach or reef after the tide recedes, occupied by a variety of plant   and
                      animal species.

                        RARE AND ENDANGERED SPECIES

                        Animals (California DeDartment of Fish and Game)

                        An animal whose existence is threatened by one or more conditions as
                   listed below is considered rare and endangered.

                        1. The mortality rate exceeds the birth rate.

                        2. The species is not capable of adapting to    environmental change.

                        3. The species' habitat is threatened by destruction or serious
                            disturbance.

                        4.  Survival is threatened by the unwanted introduction of other
                            species through predation, competition, or disease.

                        5.  Environmental pollution threatens the species' survival.

                        Fully Protected Status (Fish and Game Code)

                        3511. Fully protected birds and parts thereof may not be taken or
                   possessed at any time and no provision of this code or any other law shall
                   be construed to authorize the issuances of permits or licenses to take any
                   fully protected bird and no such permits or licenses heretofore issued
                   shall have any force or effect for any such purpose; except that the
                   commission may authorize the collecting of such species for necessary
                   scientific research.

                        Plants (California Native Plant Society)

                        A plant is rare if:

                        1. It exists in only one   or a very few restricted localit ies.

                        2. It occurs in  such small numbers that it is seldom seen or
                            collected regardless of its total area.

                                                       A-6

                        3. 'It exists only on.a type of habitat that is likely to disappear or
                            change for any reason.

                        A plant is endangered if:

                        1.  It is actively threatened with extinction and not likely to
                            survive unless some protective measures are taken.

                        Marine Mammals Protection Act (1972)

                        Public Law 92-522: This Act establishes a moratorium on the taking
                  and  importation of marine mammals and-marine mammal products. Additionally
                  the Act encourages "efforts to protect the rookeries, mating grounds, and
                  areas,.of,similar significance for each species of marine mammal from,the
                  adverse effect of man's action."

                                                     A-7

                          'Land Use Definitions

                                                 LAND USE D61NITIONS

                          The following definitions describe the principal permitted uses for
                    each land use designation (see also Table 3-1 in Section 3.6, Policy 5-10
                    in Section 3.5, a nd Policy 8-8 in Section 3.8).

                    AGRICULTURE

                         The purpose  of an agriculture designation is to identify and preserve
                    agricultural land for the cultivation of plant crops and the raising of
                    animals. Lands eligible for this designation include, but are not limited
                    to, lands with prime soils, prime agricultural land (see Appendix A), land
                    in.existing agricultural use, land with agricultural potential, and lands
                    under Wil liamson Act contracts. Plant crops include food and fiber crops,
                    orchards, field crops, nuseries, and greenhouses. Animal raising includes
                    grazing and stock raising activities. In addition to such uses, agricul-
                    tural lands may be utilized for a limited number of other uses, including
                    related or incidental residential uses, buildings and structures related to
                    the agricultural use of the site, and uses of a publi   'c works, public
                    service, or public utility nature. In the coastal zone, oil drilling and
                    related activities are permitted in AG II.
                         Agriculture 1 (5 to 40 acres minimum parcel size)

                         This designation applies to acreages of prime or non-prime farmlands
                    and agricultural uses which are located within or adjacent to the generally
                    urbanized areas. Agriculture I uses include, but are not limited to, food,
                    fiber, orchards such as citrus, avocado, and walnuts, flower and vegetable
                    growing, berries, vineyards, field flowers, nurseries, and greenhouse
                    operations. Only structures related to these activities, single family
                    residences (one unit per specified minimum parcel size), and guest houses
                    (one per parcel,-no kitchen) are permitted. Additional dwellings (struc-
                    tures or trailors) for workers engaged full-time in agriculture on the farm
                    or ranch on which the dwelling is located may be allowed subject to a
                    conditional use permit. Raising of animals for commercial purposes, the
                    boarding of animals, riding stables and animal husbandry services are also
                    permitted as conditional uses.

                         Agriculture 11 (40, 100, 320 acres minimum parcel size)

                         This designation applies to agricultural uses which include, but      are
                    not limited to, field crops, orchards, vineyards, truck crops, apiculture,
                    aviculture, cattle, horse and animal ratsing, and pasture and forage crops.
                    Only structures related to these activities, single family residences (one

                    NOTE: Only the definitions for classifications used in the coastal zone
                    are included here. For other designations, refer to the.Comprehensive
                    Plan.

                                                         B-1

                    (one unit per specified minimum parcel size), and guest houses (one @per
                    parcel, no kitchen) are permitted under this designation. Additional
                    dwellings (structures or trailors) for workers engaged full-time in agri-
                    culture on the farm or ranch on which the dwelling is located may be
                    allowed subject to a conditional use permit. Greenhouses and low intensity
                    recreationally oriented facilities such as hiking trails, stables, and
                    campgrounds may be permitted subject to a conditional use permit if they
                    conform to all other policies specified in the land use plan.

                    PARK AND RECREATION AREAS

                         Existing Public and Private Recreation and/or Open Space

                         The purpose of this designation is to provide opportunities for
                    various forms of outdoor recreation    ' of a public or private nature, which
                    require access to open spaces and natural settings for their realization.
                    These open space recreational uses include, but are not limited to, the
                    following: public parks containing facilities for picnicking, camping,
                    riding, hiking, walking, biking, on a day or longer use basis; flood .
                    control easements providing access to and along stream channels and other
                    drainage areas; and golf courses. Structures or other facilities shall be
                    limited to those required to support the recreational activities. These
                    may include parking areas, corrals and stabling areas, picnic and camping
                    areas, trails, water and sanitary facilities, safety and first aid
                    stations, ranger stations, and limited concession facilities. Other recre-
                    ational structures and facilities of a more intensive.nature, such as
                    .swimming and tennis clubs, may also be permitted. However, intense commer-
                    cial recreational development shall be limited to areas designated for
                    commercial uses. For example, fairgrounds, amusement parks and large
                    indoor recreational complexes, along with visitor-serving faci.lities such
                    as hotels and Motels, are not permitted in areas designated for recrea-
                    tion.

                         Proposed Public Access Corridors or Recreation Areas

                         This designation identifies those lands suitable for future access
                    corridors and recreational areas.

                    MOUNTAINOUS AREAS (40 and 100 acres minimum parcel size)

                         The purpose of this designation is to delineate land      having an average
                    slope in excess of 4.0 percent and isolated table land surrounded by slopes
                    exceeding 40 percent. These lands have extreme fire hazards and a minimum
                    of public roads and services. These areas. shall be kept free of intensive
                    development to preserve them for such uses as watershed, scenic enjoyment,
                    grazing and certain low-intensity residential uses (not to exceed one
                    principal residence and one guest house, no kitchen, per specified minimum
                    parcel size).

                                                           B-2

                    OPEN LANDS (100 or   320 acres minimum   parcel size)

                         These areas are lands which have,   outstanding  resource,values, are
                    subject to environmental constraints    on development, and have no agricul-
                    tural potential. One principal residence and one guest house (no kitchen)
                    per specified minimum parcel size are permitted in this category provided that
                    the dwelling is sited to minimize impacts on sensitive areas. Resource
                    dependent uses such as sand-mining and oil well drilling may be al-lowed
                    subject.to a conditional use permit.

                    RESIDENTIAL LAND USES

                         Density is the primary parameter within which residential land uses
                    are defined. Density is used to describe the number of dwelling units
                    permitted on an acre of land or, in later tra.nslation into zoning, the
                    number of dwelling units permitted on a lot of a given size. Within urban
                    areas, residential uses permitted may include child day care, family care
                    homes, fraternities, sororities, dormitories, guest houses (no kitchen),
                    boarding-and lodging houses, 'in addition to single and multiple family
                    dwelling units. Special care homes and mobile home and traflor parks may
                    be permitted with a conditional use permit as specified in the County
                    Zoning Ordinance. The following three designations merit special
                    attention.

                         Rural Residential (40 - 100 acres minimum parcel size) and
                         Residential Ranchette (5 - 20 acres minimum parcel size)

                         The intent of these designations is to provide for low density resi-
                    dential development that will preserve the rural character of an area and
                    minimize the services required by smaller lot development. Rural residen-
                    tial and residential ranchette lands are generally' of marginal agricultural
                    value. Uses permitted within these areas include single family dwell      -ings,
                    all forms of agriculture permitted under the Agriculture I designation,
                    except greenhouses, buildings and structures incidental to lightagricul-
                    ture, and agricultural hobbiest activities. However, these agricultu      'Pal
                    uses are permitted and encouraged only as long as appropriate performance
                    standards regarding noise, traffic, dust, etc. can be met. Livestock for
                    commercial sale, kennels, and market gardens may be permitted subject to a
                    conditional-use permit. Intensive commercial animal husbandry would not be
                    permitted.

                         Planned Development
                         The Planned Development@designation has    been given to large, unde-
                    veloped parcels suitable for residential uses      The purpose of this desig-
                    nation is to prevent piecemeal development by requiring that the entire
                    parcel be planned and developed as a unit. Use.of flexible and innovative
                    design concepts is encouraged.    Refer to Section 3.2.3 for the detailed
                    requirements and permitted uses   in the Planned Development designation.

                                                          B-3

                     Residential Designations

                                                                        Maximum Dwelling
                                                                              Units

                     Rural Residential                                  1 unit/40 acres to
                                                                        1 unit/100 acres

                     Residential Ranchette                              1 unit/5 acres to
                                                                        1 unit/20 acres

                     Sin gle Family (minimum  lot size)
                          3 or more acres                                     0.3/acre
                          1 acre or more                                      1.0/acre
                          20,000'sq. ft.   or more                            1.8/acre
                          101,000 sq. ft.  or more                            3.3/acre
                           7,000 sq. ft.   or more                            4.6/acre

                     Multiple (minimum land   area per  unit)
                           3,500 sq,. ft. or  more                            12.3/acre
                           2,180 sq. ft. or   more                            20.0/acre
                           1,450 sq. ft. or   more                            30.0/acre

                     COMMUNITY FACILITIES

                          Educational Facilities (Public or Private)        inc lude all proposed and
                     existing public schools from elementary through college level.

                          Institution/Government - is for al I major public and quasi--'public land
                     .uses not included in the categories already defined, such as military
                   .installations, State office buildings, County hospitals.

                          Public Utility (UT) - an area designated for the facilities and
                     service of a public   utility or public service entity. Screening, land-
                     scaping, and other design requirements may be. prescribed by the Zoning
                     Ordinance to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses.

                          Civic Center     an area designated for public and quasi-public build-
                     ings and services, which may include libraries, public auditoria, post
                     offices, fire and emergency services, and other public uses.

                     INDUSTRIAL

                          Coastal Dependent Industry - the intent of this designation is to
                     recognize that certain industrial uses require a site on, or adjacent to,
                     the sea to be able to function at all. Coastal dependent industrial uses
                     include onshore processing facilities for offshore oil and gas production,
                     liquefied natural gas facilities,,marine terminals, staging'areas, port and
                     harbor areas, fishing facilities, Aquaculture including fish hatcheries,
                     and areas for deploying oil spill cleanu    .p equipment. Other uses, though

                                                            B-4

                    not strictly coastal dependent, may need access to      the ocean u nder  special
                    conditions, for example, thermal power plants sited to take advantage of
                    ocean cooling water. Policies governing these uses are specified in
                    Section 3.6. Within this designation,'other industri      'al uses may also be
                    permitted, including production and processing of crude oil and gas from
                    onshore wel 1 s.

                          Industrial Park - this category is not limited to a specific list of
                    uses. It is any industrial use which is housed in well-designed buildings
                    set in attractively landscaped grounds. This is industry in a park-like
                    atmosphere. Uses permitted may-also include commercial, as specified in
                    the Santa Barbara County Zoning Ordinance.

                          Light Industry - includes industrial plants and warehouses without
                    nuisance features but not necessarily in an industrial park.'

                          Service Industry - lumber yards, warehousing, laundries, contractors'
                    service yards, bulk petrol  'eum storage, concrete batching plants, and other
                    construction and development   ,activities.

                          General Industry    all industrial   uses.

                    COMMERCIAL

                          General Commercial (C)

                          This designation has been used   to denote areas suitable for many types
                    of commercial activities. Central business district areas, district
                    centers, service commercial, neighborhood centers, and design commercial
                    are all contained under this designation. Permitted uses in the General
                    Commercial designation range from convenience activities, which serve such
                    day-to-day needs as food, drugs, gasoline, and other incidentals., to whole-
                    sale facilities which support agricultural, construction, and transporta-
                    tion  activities.

                          .Highway Commercial (H)

                          When shown in small centers along highways and freeways, this designa-
                    tion  permits only those uses which serve the highway traveler such as
                    hotels, motels, restaurants, garages, and service stations.      , Additionally,
                    overnight recreation-vehicle facilities may be permitted subject to a
                    conditional use permit.

                          Resort/Visitor Serving Commercial (V)

                          The intent of this designation is to cater to the needs of visitors to
                    coastal recreational areas. Visitor serving commercial uses will normally
                    be found adjacent to important recreational resource areas, at special
                    points of interest, or in special neighborhoods or communities. The inten-
                    sity of the commercial development shall be subordinate to the character of
                    the recreational setting. Uses shall include, but not be limited to, the

                                                           B-5

                    following- resort hotels, motels, restaurants, country clubs, guest
                    ranches, riding stables, and beach clubs. Uses, buildings, and structures
                    customarily incidental and accessory to such recreational facilities,
                    including commercial uses and services, are also permitted. Uses not
                    permitted under this designation include other retail services, unrelated
                    office and professional services, highway related services for transients
                    normally found at major highway interchanges or highway' exits.

                         Office and Profes sional (P) - This category was developed to specifi-
                    cally relate to the PI, Professional Institutional Zone, of Ordinance No.
                    661. Permitted uses are offices, hospitals, schools, churches, etc., as
                    specified in the Santa Barbara County Zoning Ordinance.

                    OVERLAY DESIGNATIONS

                         The purpose of the overlay designations  is to indicate locations where
                    the presence of hazards or special resources  places constraints on develop-
                    ment. These overlay designations carry special policies which are included
                    in the land use plan text.

                         Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas - This designation applies to
                    sensitive ecological communities or significant natural habitats. (Refer
                    to Section 3.9.)

                         View Corridor - The view corridor overlay delineates areas where there
                    are views from a principal public road to the ocean and along the coast.
                    (Refer to Section 3.4.)

                       @ Flood,Hazard - The flood hazard overlay indicates the 100-year flood
                    plain, which i   he largest area inundated by the 100-year flood. (Refer
                    to Section.3.3.)

                         Site Design -,The purpose of the site design overlay designation is to
                    insure well-planned development of large, undeveloped, residentially desig-
                    nated lots that are subject*to environmental constraints (i.e., geologic or
                    flood hazards, habitat areas, steep slopes). To avoid piecemeal subdivid-
                    ing of these parcels, the overlay designation requires that the entire
                    parcel be planned as a unit. (Refer to Section 3.2.)

                    BOUNDARY LINES

                         Urban /Rural - A boundary line shown on the land use plan map which
                    separates those areas intended for urban land uses, i.e., residential
                    (generally developed to a density of two or more units per acre), commer-
                    cial, industrial, etc., from those areas designated for rural land uses,
                    principally agriculture and low density residential. Agriculture, open
                    space, recreational activities and related uses are also permitted and
                    encouraged throughout the urban area. Limited commercial and coastal
                    dependent industrial uses are permitted within a rural area as necessary.

                                                        B-6

                        Rural Nei@hborhood   A neighborhood area that has developed
                   historically with lots smaller than those found in the surrounding rural
                   lands. The purpose of the neighborhood boundary is to keep pockets of
                   rural residential development from expanding onto adjacent agricultural
                   lands. Within the rural neighborhood boundary, infilling of parcels at
                   ,densities specified on the land use plan maps is.permitted.

                                                       B-7

                               References

                 Section 3.2:. Development

                 American Society of Plannin g Officials, Planned Unit DeveloRment Ordinances,
                 Chicago, 1973@
                 Urban Land institute, PUD   A Better Way_for the Suburbs Washington, D.C.,
                 1971.

                                                      C-1

                      Section 3.3: Hazards

                      American Society of'PlOnning Officials, Planning Advisory Service,
                      Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands- A Practical Guide for Local
                      Administrators, Report #307, 308, prepared by Charles Thurow, William
                      Toner, anF15-uncan Erley, June 1975.

                      City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities
                      Areas, Environmental Protection: Model Ordinances for Use by Local
                                  -M ......h
                      Governments, arc

                      Conservation Foundation, Physical Management of Coastal Floodplains,
                      December 1977.

                      County of Santa Barbara, Engineering and Geologic Investigation - Cliff
                      Stability and Related ProBT-em-s-5 Isla Vista, 1963, prepared by Dames
                         Moore.

                      County of Santa Barbara, Seismic Safety and Safety Element, January 1979.

                      County of Santa Barbara, Conservation Element, April 1979.

                      State of California,.Coastal Commission, Planning for an Eroding Shore-
                      line, draft report, June 1978.

                      State of California, South Central Regional Coastal Commission, Geology,
                      April 1974.

                      State of California, Department of Navigation and Ocean Development,
                      Assessment and Atlas-of Shoreline Erosion'Along the California Coast,
                      July 1977.

                      United States, Department of Agriculture, Soil.Conservation Service,
                      Carpinteria Vall,21 Watershed Project - Draft Environmental. Impact State-
                      ment'Uctober 1975.

                      United States, Department of the Amy, Corps of Engineers, Beach Erosion
                      Study - Santa Barbara County, May 1973.

                      United States, Department,of Commerce, Office of Coastal Zone Management,
                      Natural Hazard' Management in Coastal Areas, November 1976.

                      United States., Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal
                      Insurance Administration, Flood Insurance Study   Santa Barbara County,
                      5@6ptem_ber 1978.

                                                      C-2

                 Secti on 3.4: Visual Resources

                 State of California, South Central Coast Regional Commission,  Appearance,
                 and DesLqn, August 1974.

                 United States, Department of.Commerce, Office of Coastal Zone  Management,
                 Aesthetic Resources of the Coastal Zone, July 1975.

                                                      C-3'

                  Section 3.5:  Housing

                  California Coastal Commission, "Housing Opportunities   Guidelines,"
                  Adopted October 4, 1977.

                  City of Carpinteria, Housing Assistance Plan, 1975.

                  City of Santa Barbara, Local Coastal Program, Draft Report on Housin2.,
                  August 1978.

                  General Research Corporation, An Evaluation of the Housing Market for UCSB
                  Students, April 1977.

                  Patterson, Langford and Stewart, Careinteria Area Community Development
                  Program - Existing Conditions Data, September

                  Patterson, Langford and Stewart, Housing Condition Inventory - Santa Barbara
                  County Unincorporated Area, June 1977.

                  Santa Barbara County-Cities Area Planning Council, Alternatives to
                  Facilitate Development of Low-Moderate Income Housing: Den's-"F-M-nus
                  TbRa-ft, February 1979.

                         Areawide Housing Element for Santa Barbara County, April 1977.

                         Fair Share Housing Allocation Plan (Draft), March
                         T Tr9 _.

                         Alternatives to Facilitate Deve oement of Low-Moderate Income
                         To-u'si-n-g Site Development Subsidies tDraft), March 1979.

                  State of California, Department of Finance, 1975 Santa Barbara County.
                  Census Tables produced by General Research Corporation for the Santa
                  Barbara County Planning Department, 1978.

                  State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development,
                  "Model Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance," October 25, 1978.

                                                      C-4

                  Section 3.6: Industrial and Ener.U Development

                  Arthur D. Little, Inc., Technical Reports for the Draft Environmental Impact
                  Report Point Conception LNG Project, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1977-1978.

                  California Energy Resources Conservation-and Development Commission, California
                  Energy Trends and Choices, 1977 Biennial Report of the State Energy Commission.
                  California Public Utilities,Commission, Final Environmental Impact Report for
                  the Point Conception LNG Terminal Projec@,, 1978.
                  County of Santa Barbara, Dep ariment of Environmental Resources, Onshore Oil-
                  Pipeline Feasibility Study, prepared by Dev Vrat, draft, May 197T

                  County of Santa Barbara, Office of Air Quality Planning, Draft Air Quality
                  Attainment*Plan. February 26, 1979.

                  Dames and Moore, Geologic Investigation Proposed LNG Terminal Point Conception,.L
                  California,for Western LNG Terminal Company, July 8, 1977.

                  George J. Taylor, "Air -Quality Impacts of Outer Continental Shelf Oil
                  Development in the'Santa Barbara Channel," ERT Report P-5086, prepared for the
                  Office of Planning and Research and the Office of Environmental Quality,
                  March 15, 1977.

                  State of California, Office of Planning and Research, Offshore Oil and   Gas
                  Development: Southern California, Volume 1 and 2, October 1977.

                  United States, Department of the Air Force, Final Environmental Imeact State-
                  ment Space Shuttle Program Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, January 1978.

                  United States, Department of the Inteior, Bureau of Land Management,-Draft
                  Environmental-Statement for 1979 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas re-ase
                  Sale Offshore Southern.California, 19M.
                  United States'Coast Guard, Port Safety Detachment Santa Barbara OCS Area Oil
                  and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency'Plan, June 10, 1977.

                  Western LNG Terminal Associates, "Application before the Public Utilities
                  Commission of the State of California," No. 57626, no date.

                                                      C-5

                     Section 3.7: Coastal Accessand Recreation

                     California Coastal Zone Conservation Commissions, South.Central Coast
                     Regional Commission. Recreation, August 15, 1-974. Prepared by Carl
                     C. Hetrick.

                     Hetrick, Carl, The Santa Barbara County Coastal Zone and Environmental
                     Policy Survey: _MeFl@e_sponse Summary, January 19737

                     McCormick, R. B. and Hanshew, R.L., A  Stuu of,Visitor Use in -Coastal
                     Units of the California State Park SysTem, Summer 1969, Department oF
                     Parks and Recreation,-YecTip No. 3, September 1970.

                     McCormick, R. B. and Tolley, R., Visitor Origin.Patterns at Outdoor
                     Recreation-Sites in California 1965-1.970, Nepartmentof Parks ana-
                     Recreation, RecTip Ro. 6. December 1973.
                     Obern,-.Vivian and Rook, Lehua, Santa Barbara Coun@y Coastal Trails
                     System, Santa Barbara County Trails Counc-M, October 1973.

                     Santa Barbara County, Proposed Comprehensive Plan - Recreation Element,
                     December 1974.

                     State of California, Department of Parks and Recreatio n, California
                     Outdoor Recreation Resources Plan, February 1974.

                     State of California, Department of Parks,and Recreation, California
                     Coastline Preservation and Recreation Plan, August 1971.
                     State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, South Central
                     Coastal Study, February 1966.

                     State of California, Department of Navigation and,Ocean Development,
                     Small Craft Facilities Chapter:__Existing and Future Site Locations%
                     March 1977.-

                     United States, Department of Commerce, Office of Coastal Zo ne Management,
                     Coastal Recreation: A Handbook-for Planners and Managers, January 1976.

                     United States, Department of Interior, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation,
                     Optimum Recreation Carrying Capacity, prepared by Urban Research
                     Development Corporation, January 19//.

                                                      C-6

                  Section 3.8: Agriculture

                  Agricultural Extension Services  University of California, letter to
                  California Coastal Commission, January 19, 1979.

                  California Regional Water Quality Control Board,,Nursery Greenhouse Waste-
                  water Study, 1977.

                  Lemon Administrative Committee, 1975-76 Annual Report, Los Angeles,
                  October 1976.

                  Pennsylvania Flower Growers, "Production Planning-Pot Spacing,  Bulletin
                  218, May 1969.

                  Santa Barbara County, Agricultural Commissioner-,* Annual Crop Report 1933-76.

                  Santa Barbara County Environmental Resources Department, Draft Report on
                  Greenhouses in the'Carpinteria Valley, Prepared by Alan Minee, 1977.

                  Santa Barbara County Planning Department, Greenhouse Land Use Survey
                  Carpinteria Valley, June 1977.

                  United States Department of Agriculture, Statistical Reporting Service,
                  California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, Avocado Acreage, October
                  15, 1975.

                  United States Department of Agriculture, Statistical Reporting Service,
                  Crop Reporting Board, "Flowers and Foliage Plants:. Production.and Sales,
                  1973 and 1974, Intentions for 1975," SpCr 6-1 (75), Washington, D.C.

                  United States International Trade Commission, Fresh Cut Flowers, USITC
                  Publication 827, Washington, D.C., August 1977.

                  University of California, Cooperative Extension, Economic Trends in the
                  California Avocado Indust' , May 1974.
                                           ry

                  University of California, Cooperative Extension, Economic Trends in the
                  California Avocado Industry, Statistical Suppleme-n-t-,-J-anuary 1976.

                  University of California, Cooperative Extension, Santa Barbara County,
                  ."Lemon Orchard Development Costs," 1971.
                  University of California, Cooperative Extension, Expansion in the California
                  Avocado Industry, Riverside, California, November 1974.

                  University of California, Cooperative Extension, Santa Barbara County,
                  "Avocado Orchard Production Costs," 1977.

                  University of California, County of Santa Barbara, Agricultural Extension,
                  Irrioation Water Use for Principal Crops Grown in Santa Barbara Coun@L.
                  April 1913.

                                                      C-7

                 University of California, Division of Agricultural Sciences, Compaction of
                 Soil by Agricultural Equipment, October 1977.

                 University of California, Division of Agricultural Sciences Economic  Trends
                 in the California Lemon Industry, Riverside, California, Ma@cF=T.-

                 University of California, Division of Agricultural Sciences, Managing
                 Compacted Soils, March 1977.

                 "Ventura Lemons: 3,000 Acres Out,  More Going," Citrograft, September 1977,
                 pp. 323-325.

                                                    Ca-8

                  Section 3.9: Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas

                  Atwood, J. C., P. D. Jorgenson, Ronald Jurek, and T. D. Manolis, "California
                  Least Tern Census and Nesting Survey," California Department of Fish and
                  Game, 1977.

                  Bauer, Richard D. and John W. Speth,,Acquisition Priorities.for t.he,Coastal
                  Wetlands of California, California Department of Fish and Game.a-nd-Bureau
                  of Sport Fisherie       Wildlife, April 1974.

                  Bender, Kristen, Nongame Wildlife Investigati  ons, "Least Tern Popul.ation
                  and Nesting Survey," California Department of Fish and Game, 1973.
                  Bowland, J. L., A Stu!u of Six Harbor Seal Hauling Grounds Along the Central
                  California Coast7 Environmental Studies Thesis, UCSB, Fall 1978.

                  Brown, Leslie and Dean Amadon, EaSles, Hawks and Falcons of the World,
                  McGraw-Hill, 1968, Vol. 1, pg. 236-238.

                  California Coastal Zone Conservation Commissions, The California Coastal
                  .Plan, 1975.

                  California Department of Fish and Game, At the Crossroads, 1976, A Report on
                  California Endangered and Rare Fish and Wildlife, January 1976.
                          The Natural Resources of the Nipomo Dunes and Wetlands, June 19-76.
                          "Utilization of Kelp-Bed Resources in Southern California:'Fish
                          Bulletin 139, 1968.

                          Coastal County Fish and Wildlife Resources and Their Utilization,
                          1971.

                          Fish and Wildlife Resource Planning Guide, 1969.

                          Fish and Wildlife Resources Relationshies and Water Quality Require-
                          Ments, Water Quality Planning Project, August 191Z.

                          The Natural Resources of the Goleta Slough and Recommendations for
                          Use and Development, August 1970.

                          Summau Plans for Fish and Wildlife in the Marine and Coastal Zone,
                          April 1971.

                          Water Quality and  Quantity Problems of Fish and Wildlife, Water
                         .@uality Planning Project, September 19727

                  California Department of Navigation and Ocean Development, Comprehensive
                  Ocean Area Plan: Education and Research, 1972.

                  California Department of Parks and Recreation, California Outdoor Recreation
                  Resources Plan, February 1974.

                                                        C-9

                         "Gaviota Coast: An Underwater Park Recommendation," no date.

                 California Native Plant Society, "Inventory of Rare, Endangered, and Possibly
                 Extinct Vascular Plants of California,". January 19, 1973.

                 Cheatham, Norden H. and J. Robert Haller, "An Annotated List of California
                 Habitat Types," University of California Natural-Land and Water Reserves
                 System, 1975.

                 Connell, J. H. and R. E. Engel, J. R. Haller, R. Howmiller and  W. W. Murdock,
                 Environmental Biology Element of the General Plan foe Santa Barbara_County,
                 UniversiTty oT M iforpia, Santa Barbara, May 22, 1974.
                 Dames and Moore, National Shoreline StugZ California Regional Inventory,
                 U. S. Amy Corps of Engineers, August 1971.
                         Preliminau Environmental Impact Study More Mesa Development for
                         Tyrolian Village, Inc., September 14, 1972.

                 Environmental Quality Advisory Board, City of Santa  Barbara, "Memo to City
                 Council: Goleta Slough," January 6, 1970.

                 Haaker, P. L. and K. C. Wilson, "Giant Kelp," Marine Resources Leaflet No. 9,
                 California Department of Fish and Game, 1975.

                 Hannan, Joseph A., Management,and Preservation Plan for the Go.leta Slough,
                 Community Services Department, City of Santa Barbara, OctoEer 7, 1975.

                 Harlan, Ron and Robert Mesick, "Prospe ctive Subtidal Marine Resources," A
                 Report to the University of California Natural Land and Water Reserve System.

                 Heritage Oaks Committee, Native Oaks_, Our Valley Heritage, Sacramento,
                 California, 1976.

                 Hetrick, Carl, Letter to Britt Johnson re: Anadromous Fish Resources, May 9,
                 1977.

                 Hill, H. F.9 "Reproductive Behavior in an Overwintering  Aggregation of
                 Monarch Butterflies," The American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 95, January 1976.

                 Hood, Leslie (editor), California Natural Areas Coordinating Council,
                 "Inventory of California Natural Areas," Vol. VI, 1976.

                 Kellogg, Martin, "Description of Vernal Pool Sites," IVCC Ecosystem Manage-
                 ment Group, February 10, 1977.

                 Lindstedt-Siva, June, "Oil Spill Response Planning for Biologically   Sensitive
                 Areas," 1977 Oil Spill Conference.

                 Livingston and Blayney, Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan, Conservation
                 Element, August 1974.

                                                      C-10

                   MacDonald,   Keith B., The Natural   Resources of Carpinteria    Marsh, Their   Status
                   and Future, California-Te-partment of Fish and ame, April

                   Mahrdt, Clark R., Thomas A, Overbauer, John P. Rieger, Joseph'R.. Verfaillie,
                   Bruce M. Browning and John W. Speth,      Natural Resources,.of Coastal Wetlands
                   in Northern Santa Barbara County, California Department of Fish-and Game,.
                   May 1979--

                   Metcalf, Nelson T. Birds of the Santa Barbara Region, Santa Barbara Museum
                   of Natural History: Occasiona-T-P-apers No. 8, 1972.

                   Osborne, Timothy and Jack G. Reynolds, "California       Seabird  Breeding Ground
                   Survey 1969-70," California Department of Fish and       Game, 1974.

                   Outer Continental Shelf Project Task Force, Office       of Planning and Research,
                  .Offshore Oil. and Gas Development: Southern California, Preliminary Draft,
                   December 1976-.

                   Resources, Consultants in Resource Management, Santa Barbara        Channel Martne,
                   Sanctuary Management, Information and Nomination Reports, June 1978.

                   Santa Barbara News-Press, "County     Board Seeks to Bar Four Wheelers,"     May  17,
                   1977.

                   Small, Arnold, The Birds of California, Winchester Press, New-York,         1974,
                   pg. 144-169.

                   Soil Conservation Service, Draft EIS, Carpinteria Valley Watershed-Project,
                   October 1975.

                   South Central  Coast Reg,ional  Commissioni Coastal Land Environment, June 28,
                   1974.

                   South Central  Coast,Regional   Commission, Marine Element, 1974.

                   State Lands Commission, A Program for Managing the Ocean and Tidal Areas,
                   December 1, 1970.

                   Stubchaer, James M., Memo Subject: Coastal Act and Flood Control District
                   Activities, April 12, 1977.

                   Tetra Tech, Inc., Environmental Assessment Report, Crude Oil Transportation
                   System Valdez, Alaska, to Lo-ng Beach-, California., Appendix A, U. S. Army.
                   Corps of Engineers, 1976.

                   The Conservation Foundation Physical Management of Coastal Floodplains:
                   Guidelines for Hazards and Losystem Management, D-e-c-e-mFe-71977.

                   Thurow, Charles, William Toner, and Duncan Erley      I Performance Controls for
                   Sensitive Lands, Planning Advisory Service, Report Nos.,307; 308, 1977.1-

                                                            C-11

                 United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                 Administration, Natural Hazard ManaSement in Coastal Areas, November 1976.
                 Urquhart, F. A., "Found at Last: the Monarch.'s Winter Home,'.' National
                 Geographic, August 1976.

                 Waian, L. B. and Rey C. Stendall, "The White-Tailed Kite in California with
                 Observations of the Santa Barbara Population," California Department of Fish
                 and Game, 56 (3);*188-189, 1970.
                 Wilson,.Kenneth C,., Kelp Restoratibn,in Southern California, Oregon State
                 University Press, 197F.-

                 Woodhouse, Charles D., Santa Barbara's Mermaidsi Museum Talk, Vol. 49, No. 4,
                 1975, pp. 82-92.
                 Brown, Vinson, Sea Mammals and Reptile s,of the Pacific Coast, Macmillan
                 Publishing Co., Inc., New-York, 1976.

                 Dougherty, Anita E., Marine Mammals of California, Department of Fish and
                 Game, 1972.

                                                     G-l 2

                     Section 4.8:   THE CHANNEL ISLANDS

                     Anderson, D.  W., Jurek, R. M., and  Keith,  T. 0., "The Status of Brown
                         Pelicans at-Anacapa Islands in   1975,"  misc. pub. California Fish and
                         Game, in  press.

                     Bills, A. J.,  "A Study of the Distribution and Morphology.of the Mice      of
                         Santa Cruz Island: an Example of Divergence," University of California
                         at Santa Barbara, MastersThesis, 1969.

                     California Coastal Commission', "Offshore LNG Terminal Study,"    September 15,
                         1978.

                     California Coastal Zone  Conservation Commissions, California Coastal Plan,
                         1975.

                     California Department of  Fish and Game, "At the Crossroads, A Report on
                         California's Endangered and Rare Fish and Wildlife," 1974.

                     Chaney, R. W., and Mason, H. L., 4A.Pleistocene Flora From Santa Cruz
                         island California," Carnegie Institution of Washington D.C., PUb.'#4,25:.
                         1-24, 1930.
                     Connell, J. H., Engel, R. E., Haller,   J. R., Howmiller, R.., Mu rdoch, W.* W.,
                          Environmental Biology Element of   the General Plan for Santa Barbara
                         County," May 22, 1974.

                     Dunkle, M. B., Contributions from the   Los Angeles Museum - Channel Islands
                         Biological Survey 27,.Flora@of the Channel Islands National Monument,
                         Bull., S. Calif. Acad. Sci. 41: 125-157, 1942.

                     Glassow,.M. A., "An Archeological Overview of the Northern Channel islands,
                         California, Including Santa Barbara Island," Western Archeol,ogical.
                         Center, National Park Service, Tucson, AZ, 1977.

                     Gress, Franklin, "Reproductive Status of the California Brown     Pelican in
                         1970, with Notes on Breeding Biology and Natural.History," Wildlife
                         Management Branch Admin. Report No. 70-6, "Special Wildlife
                         Investigations," CA. Dept. of Fish and Game, 1,970.

                     Harlan, Ron and Robert Mesick, "Prospective Subtidal Marine Reserves",
                         Unpubli-shed Report (U.C.S.B.) 1977.

                     Holland, Francis R., Jr., "Santa Rosa Island: An Archeological and
                         Historical Study," Journal of the West, Vol. 1 #1: 42-65,.1962.

                     Hood, Leslie (ed.), "Inventory of California Natural Areas," vol. 11 Calif.
                         Natural Areas Coordinating Council, 1975.

                                                         C-13

                   Hussey, John A., "A-Brief Sketch    of the Archeology of Santa Cruz Island,
                        California," Western Explorer, vol. 1, #3, 1-8, 1961.

                   Laughrin, Lyndal L...'"California Island Fox Survey," Dept. Fish and Game,
                        Admin. Report.#73-5, 1973.

                   Major J.,  and Barbour, M.G., Terrestial Vegetation of California,.Wiley and
                        Company, New York, 1977.

                   National Park Service, Pacific Coast Recreation Survey, A Report by the U..
                        S. Department of the Interior,, 1959.

                   National Park Service, Natural Resources Management Plan and Environmental
                        Assessment, U. S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, Channel
                        'Islands National-Monument, 1975.

                   National Park Service, Statement for Management Channel Islands National
                        Monument, U. S. Dept. of Interior, Channel Islands National Monument,
                        T976.

                   Norris et al., Draft Final   Report, 1975-1976, Marine Mammal and Seabird
                        Survey of the Southern  California Bight Area, vol.. III, Principal
                        Tnvestigators Reports,  The Regents of the Onivers'ity of California,
                        Bureau of Land Management, 1976.

                   Office of Planning and Research, Offshore Oil and Gas Development:
                        Southern California Preliminary Draft/December 1         Outer Continental
                        Shelf Project Task Force, 1976.

                   Osborne, Timothy,  and Reynolds, Jack G.,   "California  Seabird Breeding
                        Ground Survey-1969-1970," Cal. Dept.   Fish and Game, Admin. Report No.
                        71-73 ,5pecial Wildlife Investigations, 1971.

                   Orr, Phil.  C, "Radiocarbon Dates from Santa Rosa     Island I." Santa Barbara
                        Museum of'Natural History, Bull. No. 2. Dept.    Anthropology, 1956.

                   Orr, Phil.  C.2 "Radiocarbon Dates from Santa Rosa    Island II," Santa Barbara
                        Museum of Natural History, Bull. No. 3, Dept.    Anthropology, 1960'.

                   Patterson,  Charles, "Santa Cruz Island, Its Natural History and Ecology,"
                        for the Nature Conservancy, 1978.

                   Philbrick,  R. N., Correspondence with Ralph M. Harris, re. Introduced
                        Exotics on Santa Barbara Island, June 7, 1974.

                   Philbrick,  R. N., "The Plants of Santa Barbara Island, California,"
                        Madrono, 21 (5), Pt. 2: 329-93, 1972.

                                                         C-14

                   Philbrick, R. N., "Preliminary Survey of the Pl ants of Insular Santa
                       Barbara and Ventura Counties," 1970.

                   Philbrick, R. N., (ed.), Proceedings of the Symposium on the Biology of the
                       California Islands, S5-nta Barbara Botanic Garden, 1967.

                   Powell, W. Robert, Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of -
                       California, CaL Native Plant Society, Special Pub. November 1, 1974.

                   Resources, Santa Barbara Channel Marine Sanctuary Nomination and
                       Appendices, Prepared for County of Santa Barbara, June 24, T978.

                   Santa Barbara County Planning Commission, Proposed Amendment to the Master
                       Plan to Change Designation of Certain Portions of Santa Cruz Island,
                       submitted by Mr. Pier Gherini, Case #65-GP-1, Exhibit #4, October 20,
                       1965.

                   Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, "A Multidisciplinary Symposium on
                       the California Islands, Abstracts of Papers, "February 27 through March
                       1, 1978.

                   Schreiber, Ralph W., Delong, Robert L., "Brown Pelican Status in
                       California," Audubon Field Notes, Vol. 23, No. 1: 57-59, 1969.

                   Schreiber, Ralph W., Risebrough, Robert.W.., "Studies of the Brown Pelican,"
                       Wilson Bulletin 1957,'29: 119-135, 1957.

                   Smith, Clifton F., A Flora of the Santa Barbara Region,Ca.lifornia, Santa
                       Barbara.Museum of Natural History,, B-1-6-.

                   Smithsonian Institution, Report on Endangered and Threatened Species of the
                       United States, presented to U. S. Congress by the Se-cretary,
                       Smithsonian Institution, December 1.5, 1974.

                   Russel, G. V. (F.A.L.A.) & Associates, A Master Plan for the Gherini Ranch
                       Development, Santa Cruz Island, Santa Barbara, California, June 1965.

                   Thelander, Carl G.., "Distribution and Reproductive Success of Peregrine
                       Falcons (Facio peregrinus anatum) in California during 1975 and 1976,"
                       Cal. Dept-.7-is-h-a-n-d-G-ame, Admin. Report No. 76-3, 1976.

                   United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Channel
                       Islands, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington D. C., 190.

                   United States Geological Survey, Oil and Gas Development in the Santa
                       Barbara Channel, Outer Continental Shelf office, California,Dept.,of
                       Interior, @@eoogic Survey, 3 volumes, 1976.

                                                      C-15

                    Usher, Howell D.,  "The'Channel Islands-; an Overview," Prepared for the
                        Santa Barbara  County Local Coastal, Program, June 12, 1977.1

                                                   PERSON& CONTACTED.

                    Benedict, Michael,  Research Associate, Santa Barbara.Botanic Garden,    Re:
                        Island Resources.

                    Cambell, D. G., Lieutenant Commander,   U.S. Coast  Guard, Re: Light House
                        Locations.@,

                    Collins, Paul W., Associate Vertebrate   Curator,  Santa Barbara Museum  of.
                        Natural History, Re: Birds, Mammals;@and General     -Information.

                    Cook, Bil-l,. County Assessors-Office, Re: Taxation and Assessment.

                    Craig, Steve, U.C.S.B., Re: Archaeological Sites.

                    Ebling, Alfred, Marine Science Institute, Re: Intertidal Reserves.

                    Ehorn, William, Superintendant,   Channel Islands National  Monument,  Re:
                        Sensitive Coastal Areas and   Norris Report.

                    Freel, Mayten, Bureau  of Land Management,  Los Angeles OCS Office, Re.:
                        Sensitive Coastal  Areas and  Norris Report.

                    Hochberg, Eric, Santa  Barbara Museum of Natural History, Re:
                        Invertebrates, and General   Information.

                    Hudson, Travis, Curator of Ant hropology, Santa Barbara Museum    of Nat ural
                        History, Re: Archaeological Sites.

                    Laughrin, Lyndal L., Resident Manager, Santa Cruz    Island Field Station,
                        U.C.S.B., re: Island Fox.

                    Mall, Rolf E., Environmental Services Coordinator,    Cal. Dept. Fish and
                        Game, Re: Terrestrial Mammals and Birds.

                    Major, Mary, California Native-Plant Society., Re:    Rare and Engangered
                        Plants.

                    Norris, Ken, BLM Project Leader,   University of Cal ifornia, Santa Cruz, Re:
                        Marine Mammals.

                    Philbrick, R.N., Director, Santa    Barbar a Botanic Garden, Re: Significant
                        Plant Locations and General Information.

                    Power, Dennis, Director, Museum of Natural   History, Re: Birds and General
                        Information.

                                                          'C-16

                   Schreiber, Ralph W., Curator Vertebrate Biology, Los Angeles Museum of
                       Natural History, Re: California Brown Pelica'n Nesting Sites.

                   Schwarzbach, Steve, Environmental Consultant, Re: Rare and.Endangered
                       Plants.

                   Smith, Clifton, Librarian and Botanist, Santa Barbara Museum of Natural
                       History, Re: Significant  Plant Locations.

                   Wenner, Adrian, U.C.S.B., Re: Intertidal Preserves.

                   Whalen, Nick, Channel Islands National Monument, Re: Sensitive Marine
                       Mammal Areas.

                   Wiley, Ken, Preserve Manager for Nature Conservancy on Santa Cruz Island,
                       Re: Management Plans.

                   Woodhouse, Charles D., Research Associate, Santa Barbara Museum.-of Natural
                       History, Re: Sensitive Marine Mammal. Areas.

                                                      C-17

                        Service System Data

                                             Service Syttern-Datal

                      This appendix contains water supply and demand and wastewater treatment
                 capacity data for the Carpinteria Valley, Summerland, Montecito, and Goleta
                 planning areas. Water supply and demand estimates are drawn from data.com-
                 piled by the County Water Agency during 1977 and,1978. Therefore, these
                 projections do not reflect the results of the March 6, 1979, election when
                 County voters rejected the importation of State water as a means of aug-
                 menting the County's limited water resources. This decision will undoubtedly
                 affect the County',s population growth, %creases in the number,of new housing
                 units, and attendant.demand for water, at least on an interim basis or until
                 alternative local water resources can be developed.

                                                     D-1

                                                             TABLE D-1

                                              CARPINTERIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
                                              1975-2000 Water Supply and       Demand

                                                                    1975           1980          1990         2000
                                                                                          (2)           (2)         (2)
              1. POPUIATION SERVED                                                 14,200         15,200      15,200
                                    (3)
              2. DWELLING UNITS

                                     Sq.  ft./DU
                   High               1,425- 3,     00              1,950          2,809          3,170       3,243
                   Medium              .7,000-10,000                1,865          2,078          2,192       2,213
                   Mediu6-Low         10,OOG-20,000                   177             275           371         415
                   LOW                20,000-43,560                    43              52             74          83

                   Tbtal Dwelling    Units                          4,035          5,214          5,807       .5,954
                            (4)
              3.   ACREAGE
                   Industrial  (5)                                     36              50             80        100
                   Cammercial                                         142             150           170         190
                   Public Authority                                   469             470           480         480
                   Agriculture                                      3,847          4,100          4,500       4,800

              4.   SUPPLY (AFY)
                   Groundwater Safe Yield     (6)                   4,500          4,500          4,500            0
                   Surface Water(7)                                 4,686          3,041          3,041       3,041

                   Thtal supply                                     9,186          7,541          7,541       .7,541

              5. DMM/WATER N= (AFY)

                   Residential
                     High                                             390             700           800         810
                     Medixzn                                         .578             710           750         .750
                     Medium-Iow                                        64             100           130         150
                     i0w                                               37              70           100         110
                     Subtotal Residential                           1,1059         1,580          1,780       1,820

                   Industrial                                         207             350           560         700
                   Cam-ercial,                                        584             600           680         760
                   Public Authority                                   188             190           190         190
                   Thtal M&I                                        2,038          2,720          3,210       3,470

                   Agriculture                                      5,607          6,200          6,800       7,200

                   Total Water Needs without Conservation           7,645          8,920         10,010       10,670

                   Tbtai water Needs (AFY) With
                   Conservation(9)                                                 8,243-         9,175-      9,716-
                                                                                   8,523          9,519       10,084

                                                                D-2

               C:arpinteria County Water District

                                                               1975          1980         1990      2000

               6.  SURPUJS/ (DEFICIT) (AFY)

                   Without Conservation                                     (1,379)      (2,469)    (3,129@

                   With Conservation                                          (702)-     (1,634)-    (2,175)-
                                                                              (982)      (1,978)    (2,543)

                                    Footnotes: Carpinteria    County Water District

               1.  Source:.  1975 Special Census

               2.  The Santa Barbara County Planning Department prepared these population projections
                   for the County Water Agency; they are based.on existing general plan policies
                   effective 4/1/76 and on the assumption of unconstrained water use, i.e., overdraft
                   followed by additional water supply-

               .3. Sources: 1,975 - City of Carpinteria    1975 Existing Tana Use Map (Prepared by
                              Patterson, Iangford, and Stewart); 1975 Special Census data.

                             .1980 through.2000 - Santa Barbara County Planning Department
                              projections for the City of Carpinteria and County (unincorporated)
                              areas within the Water District.

                   Note: 1.    only occupied dwelling units are included here.
                          2. Since census data concerning dwelling units a         not broken down into
                               the density categories used in this report, LCP staff worked with City
                               and County Planning staffs to make these allocations.

               4. Sources:    1975 - Carpinteria County Water District 1975 Annual Acreage Report.
                              1980 through 2000 -.City of Carpinteria General Plan.(Amended 1974);
                              Santa Barbara County Oonservation Element to'Proposed General Plan.

               5. Industrial   acreage includes light and heavy industry such as M&F.Packing, Infrared,
                   and Standard Oil. Industrial park and other types of industry that use less water
                   per acre are treated as ccmTercial uses for the'purposes of this report.

               6.  Source: Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., Hydrologic      IInvestigation of the Carpinteria
                            Ground Water Basin, June 1976.

                   Note: This is the safe yield estimate presently used by the District for         planning
                          purposes.

               7. Source:   1975 - actual amount of water from Lake Cachuma purchased during       the
                            1975-76 water year.

                            1980 through 2000 - the District's average future entitlement for water
                            f ran Cachurra.

               8. The following 1975 water unit uses factors are derived from the known number of
                   dwelling unitsand known amount of delivered water in that year; 1980-2000 factors
                   are average unit use factors developed by the Water District for projection purposes:

                                                          D-3

             Carpinteria  County Water District

                                                                        Water 'Unit
                             Residential                                Use (AFY)

                                                                  1975       1980-2000

                             High                                   .20           .25
                             Medium                                 .31           .34
                             MediuM- Low                           .36.          .36
                             LoW                                   .85         1.34

                             Industrial                             7.00        7.00
                             Comercial                            4.00        4.00
                             Public Authority                       .40           .40
                             Agricultural                          1.5          1.5

             9. Source: County Water Agency draft report on water demand (1977); these are
                          estimates and are not tied to an adopted District program.

                                                      D-4

                                                     TABLE 0-2

                                        Carpinteria County Sanitary District

                                                            1975       1980        1990        2000
                   1. Population Within District(l)                   11,750     .13,000      13,000
                       Current Capacity (mgd)(2)            2.0
                   3.  Estimated Wastewater Flow(3)         1.1        1.3         1.4         1.4
                   4.  Proposed Capacity (mgd)(4)                      2.0         2.0         2.0
                   5.  GPCD(5)                              110

                   6.  Surplus/Deficit (mgd)                  .9         .7         .6 -        .6
                   7.  Additio'hal Population Capacity,     .8,000     6,400       59500       53 500,

                                                      FOOTNOTES
                   MPopulation estimates for the     district are based on actual (1975) and
                      projected population f.igures  (1980-2000) for the City of   .Carpinteria
                      and areas outside of the City that have been annexed to the district.
                      These are estimates which will need to be reviewed by Santa Barbara
                      County Planning Department.
                   (2)Source: Carpinteria.Sanitary District.
                   (3)This is the estimated average daily flow based on information received
                      from Tony Hamilton at the district sanitation-plant and Bill Ghormley,
                      engineer for the district.
                   (4)Source:  Carpinteria Sanitary   Di s tri ct."
                   (5)110 GPCD is an estimate de rived from LCP   research on other  sanitary
                      districts on the South Coast.

                                                          D-5

                                                             TABLE D-3

                                               SUWCW-,AND COUNTY WATER DISMICT
                                              1975-2000 Water Supply and Demand

                                                                      1975          1980         1990         2000

              1. POPULATION SERVED
                   District  (1)                                      1,050         1,150        1,450        1,500

              2.   DWMLING UNITS

                                   Sq. ft. /Du
                   High             1,425- 3,500                        .224         227          299          311
                   Medium           7,000-10,000                        192          195          252          263
                   Miedium-jpw      10,000-20,000                        11           11           18           18
                   LOW              20,000-43,560                        13           13           19           19
                   Lowest                1-3 acres                         4             4           6            6

              3.   ACREAGE.

                   Industrial-CcFmv--rcial                               14           15           20           20
                   Public'Authority                                        6             6           6            6
                   Agricultural                                         219          219          320          420

              4.   SUPPLY    (AFY)
                                 (2)
                   Groundwater                                          --                        --
                   Surface Water                                        380          430          350          350
                   Total Known Supply                                   380          430          3510         350
                          (3)
              5. DEMAND

                   Residential
                     Highest                                                                       36           39
                     High                                                             24           30           31
                     Medium                                                           62           77           81
                     Medium-Low                                                          5           9            9
                     Law                                                 -               9         11           11
                     Lowest                                                              8         10           10
                   'Total Residential                                   119          137          173          181

                   Industrial
                   Ccnynercial                                           30           36           47           47
                   Public Authority
                   Subtotal M&I                                         149          173          220          228
                   Agricultural  (4)                                     50          241          352          462

                   Total Demand Without Conservation                    199          414          572          690

                   Total Demand With Conservation                                36.9-395     508-545      625-666

                                                                D-6

             Summeriana county Water District

                                                              1975       1980         1990        2000

             6.  SURPLUS/DEFICIT (AFY)

                 Without Conservation                          178         16         (222)       (340)
                 With Conservation                                       61-35      (158)-(195) (275)-(316)

                                   '@tnotes: Summerland County Water District

             1.  Estimates for 1975 and 1980 were made by the Water Agency as reflected in data
                 received frcm. the SCWD and from other estimates made for the District. The popu7-
                 lation figure derived frcin the 1975 Special Census is considered low by the SCWD
                 because it does not reflect the larger household sizes found in Summerland. The
                 Water Agency estimated the 1975 and 1980 figures from a population curve representing
                 the growth since 1965. The SCWD reports a.figure of 1,127 for 1976. Figures for
                 1990 and 2000 are from projections estimated by Cliff Pauley of the Santa Barbara
                 County Planning Department.

             2.  Summerland rests on consolidated rock and, as such, has M groundwater supply.
                 Cachuma Project water is the District's sole supply source.

             3.  The Water Agency and SCWD use similar methodologies in determining water demands.
                 The data presented for 1975 a     directly from SCWD data, which represent actual
                 1975 deliveries. Projections for 1980-2000, by the Water Agency, use unit use factors
                 for residences and duties in AF/acre for other land uses. An adjustment was made
                 to the 1980 unit use factors. By raising each,unit use value by .01, the increase
                 in population absorbed primarily in existing residences because of the moratorium re-
                 flects the additional population's water needs with few additional dwelling unitg,
                 The original unit use values pravided,by SCWD were increased by 10 percent to ac         unt
                 for system losses. The resultant values represent average annual unit demands
                 for the years 1980, 1590, and 2000:

                               Lowest Density Residential                           1.71/unit-
                               Low Density Residential                              0.61/unit
                               Medium-Low Density Residential                       0.47/unit
                               Medium Density Residential                           0.32/unit
                               High Density Residential                             0.24/unit
                               Highest Density Residential                          Ml/unit
                               Camk-xci.al/Didustrial/Institutional                 1.71/acre
                               Irrigation                                           1.10/acre

                 Data provided  by SCWD via letter 7/1/76 requested by Water Agency regarding water
                 demand. 1976   and 1980 figures a    for I'dry year" conditions. 1990 and 2000
                 figures are for "average rainfall" conditions.

            4.   Water,Agency estimates of future irrigated lands are based upon the availability
                 of suitable parcels and the plans of land owners who.were about to increase their
                 plantings before the moratorium halted their activity. The figure for the year
                 2000 represents almst a doubling of the irrigated lands i     n the hills behind
                 Summerland.

            5.   Conservation figures are  shown as a range between moderate and high conservation
                 rates as developed by the Santa Barbara County Water Agency.

                                                         D-7

                                                       TABLE D-4

                                          SwoumD couNTY smrrARY DISTRICr
                    1.  Population Served(')          1975             1980          1990            2000
                                                        820             812          1438            1500
                    2.  Current  Capacity (mgd)(2)     .150

                    3.  Estimated Wastewater
                        Flow (mgd)                     .115            .115          .158            .165
                    4.  propc)sed Capacity (Mgd)(3).150                .150          .150            .150

                    5.  Gallons Per Capita
                        Per Day (GPCD) (4)            1106             .110            110            110

                    6.  Surplus/Deficit (mgd)          .035            .035          -.008          -.@015

                    7.  Additional Pomilation
                        Capacity (5)                   318              318              0               0

                    Source: Local Coastal Program.based,on information supplied by the
                              Sum-erland Sanitary District.

               (1)  Santa Barbara County Planning Department estimate. The decline in pcpulatacn
                    projected for 1980. assumes continuation. of the current Mrat0riuM Scme sur-
                    plus water may become available in Summerland according to the SuMMerland
                    County Water District because of a lmer water demand for agriculture than
                    expected. If this proves true, the projected 1980 population will have to
                    reflect new building potential.

               (2)  Telephone discussion with Mr Bill W-eatly, Manager of the Summerland
                    Sanitary District,, October 4; 1977.

               (3)  Capacity rating obtained fram telephone conversation with Mr. Bill M-leatly
                    (October 4, 1977) and the California Regional Water Quality control Board.
                    Mr. Weatly has indicated that plant capacity can be increased to 2.25 Md,
                    but this figure does not represent a Summerland Sanitary District Ward Policyr
                    nor is it mentioned in any communications between the Sanitary District and the
                    Regional Water Quality Board. The District apparently has no facility treat-
                    ment expansion plans at this time, although the Regional Water Quality Control
                    Board is seeking Federal funds to enable the Stmmerland Sanitary District to
                    prepare a technical report on future operations.

               (4)  Gallons per capita/day based on SLzmme,r1and Sanitary District estimates. The
                    serviced populatim/wastewater flaw ratio suggests that a 110 gpod figure may
                    be high for projection purposes.

               (5) Additional Popula        cap
                    (demand) f        tion     -acity is determitned by subtracting the w.-Wtew;ater f JoK
                              rcm Plant Capacity and dividing this nu-mber by a factor of JJG,

                                                            D-8

                                                             TABLE D-5

                                                MONTECITIO COUNTY MMR DISTRICT
                                                1975-2000 Water Supply and Demand

                                                                        1975          1980           1990        2000

               1.   POP=ION SERVMD

                    District                                          9,711           10,250         11,625      13,0W

               2.   DWELLING UNITS

                                                Sq. ft./DU
                    Multiple family unit          1,425- 3,500          305             315            411       1,108
                    Duplex & fourplex'             7,000-10,000         694             736            952          494
                                                10,000-20,000
                    Single family               20,000-43,560         3,018           3,172          3,1821      4,331
                                                      1-3 acres

                    Thtal                                             40,017          4,223          5,,184      5,933

               3.   ACRFAGE

                    Ccmmercial & Resort                                 112             113            132          147
                    Institutional                                       220             220            220          220
                    Recreation                                          230             230            230          230
                    Agricultural                                      1,282             7145           745          7145

               4.   SUPPLY (AFY)
                                 (2)
                    Groundwater     (3)                               1,200           1,200                      1,200
                    Surface Water                                     3,610           3,786          3,659       3,609
                    Thtal Supply                                      4,821           4,,9816        4,859       4,809
                    (including delivery to City of
                    Santa Barbara)
               5.   DEMM (AFY)    (4)

                    Residential
                      Single Family
                     Duplex-Fourplex                                  2,904           3#1776         4,609       5,256
                       multiple Family

                    Ccarrercial & Resort
                    Institutional                                       901           1,250          1,280       1,300
                    Recreational

                    Thtal M&I                                         3,805           5,026          5,885.      6,@56
                    Agricultural                                        592             800            800          800

                    Total Demand Without Conservation                 4,397           5,826          6,685       70,356

                    Thtal Demand With Conservation (5)                                4,640-        .5,143-      5,514-
                                                                                      5,364          6,085       6,484
                                                                   D-9

             Montecito County Water District

                                                             1975          1980         1990       2000

             6. SURPLUS/DEFICIT (AFY)

                 Without Conservation                          413          (840)      (1,826)    (2,547)
                 With Conservation                                        346-(378)    (284)-       (705)-,
                                                                                       (1,226).   (1,675)

                                    Footnotes: biontecito County Water District

             1. Population estimates were prepared by the Santa Barbara County Planning Department
                 based on the 1975 Special Census.

            2.  Groundwaterestimates for the Montecito County Water District are based On
                the NOERgeologic Investi2@@on of montecito Groundwater Basins, Geotechnical
                Consultants, Inc., 1974. This invesE17a=on established a 1,2           acre feet
                per year safe yield figure for the Montecito Groundwater Basin and 200 to 300
                AFY for the Tbro,Canyon Subunit of the Carpinteria Groundwater Basin which is
                also located within the District's boundaries.

             3. The decline in surface water is due to projected decl      ines in the capacity of
                 Jameson and Gibralter Reservoirs resulting from siltation.

             4. Demand is based on the following,water use unit factors developed by the Santa
                 Barbara County Water Agency:

                             YUltiple family                 .50 AFY
                             Duplex-fourplex                 .75 AFY,
                             Single family                  1. 00 AFY
                             counercial & Resort            2. 8 AFY
                             Institutional                  1.2 AFY
                             Recreational                   2.1 AFY

             5.  Conservation figures a     shown as a range between moderate and high conservation,
                 rates,as developed by the Santa Barbara County Water Agency.

                                                         D-10

                                                       TABLE D-6

                                              MOINTECITO SANITARY DISTRICT

                                                                  1975        1980       1990         2000
                1.   Population Within District 1                8,442      8 969       10,408       11,470
                     Population Served                           7,000       7,527       8,9.66      10,028
                2.   Current Capacity (mgd.)2                      .75

                3.   Estimated Wastewater (mgd.) Flow@             @.70       .90         1.07         1.23
                4.   Proposed Capacity (ingd.)3                               .85         1.7         1.7
                5.   GPCD4                                         120        120         1.20        120

                6.   Surplus/Deficit (mgd.)                         05
                                                                              .05.                       .47
                7.   Additional Population.Capacity  5             454         0        5,250         3,916

                     Source: Local Coastal Program   figures compiled from district information

                The  difference between the District   Population and the Service Population is
                due  to the fact that many Montecito   residences utilize septic systems. For
                projection purposes it is assumed that all future residential growth will be
                sewered. District estimates are those of the Santa Barbara County Planning
                Department based on the 1975 Special Census. Serviced population projections
                are those of the Montecito Sanitary District.

                2
                Demand is based on wastewater flow estimates provided by the Montecito
                Sanitary District and on Gallon Per Capita Per Day (GPCD) figures supplied
                by Brown & Caldwell, 1972. According to the District (Jerry Smith, October 4,
                1977), wastewater flows have stabilized since implementation of the Montecito
                water moratorium. This has remained the case despite the fact that about 50
                new connections have been made each year since the moratorium as a,result of
                private well drillings. This apparent conservation factor could result in
                lower projected wastewater demand.

                A two-stage expansion is proposed   for the Montecito wastewater trea  tment
                facility. The first stage, now 90% complete involves a .1 mgd. increase.
                The second and ultimate expansion is proposed to serve a saturation     pqpula-
                tion beyond the year 2000 of 15,690, based on the Wastewater Management Study
                by Brown & Caldwell, July 1972.
                4A wastewater projection figure of 120 gpqd is developed in the Wastewa   'ter
                Management Study by Brown & Caldwell, July 1972.
                5Additional population capacity is based on   the difference between current
                demand and capacity divided by the 120 GPCD developed in the.Wastewater
                Management Study by Brown & Caldwell, July 1972.

                                                        D-1 I

                                                           TABLE D-7

                                                GOI= ODUNTY WATER DISTRICr
                                             1975-2000 Water.Supply and Demand

                                                                    1975         1980        1990         2000

              1.   POPLUATION SERVED
                   GCWD District (1)                               70, 500       70,500     78,490       871800
                                                                    31600        .3i830      4,100        4,350

              2.   Ujaff
                                    (2)

                                  Sq. ft./DU
                   High            1,425- 3,500                    10,482        10,482     12,100       14,370
                   Medium           7,000-10,000                    8,032        8,032       8,800        9,650
                   Medium-Low 10,0010-20,000                        3,273        3,273       3,460        3,750
                   LOW       @'-,2 0, 000-43,560                      584          584          650          740
                   Lower                1- 3 acres                  1,795        1,795       2,000        2,200
                   Ia,vest                   acres                      56           50           55           60
              3..  ACR@MGE   (3)

                   Industrial                                         410          415          490          570
                   Cmrercial                                          400          420          520          620
                   Public Authority                                   720          720          720          720
                   Recreation,                                        400.         400          440          440
                   Agricultural                                     5,049        51200       6,200        7,300

              4.   SUPPLY

                   Groundwater (4)                                  4,200        4,100       4,100        4,000
                   Surface Water (5)                                9,310        9,520      10,080       10,080
                   Total Knom Supply (6.)                          13,510        .13,620    14,180       14,080
              5.   DEMAND  (AFy) (7)

                   Residential
                     High                                                        .2,730      3,150        3,740
                     Medium                                                      31290       3,600        3,960
                     Medium-Low                                                  1,770       1,870        2,030
                     LOW                                                           390          440          500
                     IDwer                                                       1,650       1,700       @1,750
                     lamest                                                          50           60          60
                     Total Residential                              8,515.       5f880      10,820       12,040
                   Industrial (8)
                   Ccmrkercial                                      2,685        2,720       3,030        3,340
                   Public Authority
                  .Total M&I                                       11,200-       12,600     13,900       15,400

                                                              D-1 2

              Goleta County Water District

                                                                    1975         1980         1990         2000

              5.   DEMAND (AFY).(Continued)
                   Agricultural(q)                                   4,570        5,120       9,770,      12,380
                   (incl. private pumpage)
                   Sales to La Cumbre Mutual Water Co.                  300         350         350          350
                   La Cumbre Matual Water Co. Demand                 1,470        1,530       11670        1,830
                   Sunset-Las Positas.MC's*                              60

                   Total Demand w/o Conservation                   17,600       19,600       25,690       29,960,
                   Total Demand w/Conservation(10)                              16,220-      21,500-      214,990-
                                                                                18,350       23,660       27,470

              6.   SUIRPLUS/DEFICIT (AFY)                          (4,090)      (5,980)    J11,510)      (15,880)
                   W11TIUM ODNSERVATICN

                   SURPLUS/DEFICIT WITH    CONSER@WION             (4,090)      (2,600)-     (7,320)-    (10,910)-
                                                                                (4F780)      (9,480)     (13,390)

                                        Footnotes: Goleta County Water District

              1.   Data for 1975 is from the Special County Census as adjusted by            the SBCPD, the GCWD,
                   and the SBCWA to reflect the service population within the GCM. Included in the
                   total is the service population of the La Cumbre Matual Water Ccnpany and two smaller
                   private mutual water ccnpanies, Sunset and Las Positas. Excluded from the total is
                   the population of the areas served by the City of Santa Barbara. The projected
                   population schedule was prepared by the SBCPD and adjusted by the Water Agency to
                   reflect.the GCWD service population.

              2.   Santa Barbara County Water Agency.

              3.   Santa Barbara County Water Agency.

              4.   Groundwater estimates have been revised downward since 1975 to reflect the findings
                   of a safe yield study by John Mann, consultant for the Goleta County Water District.

              5.   The actual surface deliveries to the GCWD in 1975 were greater than the volume shown,
                   due to the availability of surplus water. Addit-lonal Now Release Schedule (NRS).
                   water friom Cachuma was taken in advance to fulfill the demand. otherwise, the
                   figures are based on Cadbuma Entitlement obligations.
              6.   Data for 1975 represents sales by the GCWD and an estimate of 485 AF supplied privately
                   for agriculture during the water year 1975-76. Sales by the District to commercial,
                   industrial, and institutional accounts were determined through District records to
                   be 2,685 AF. Residential sales were determined as 8,515 AF, or the remainder of
                   11,200 Ar of domestic sales within the GCWD and including residents in the City.
                   Four areas within the District are served by the District yet bi-Iled and maintained
                   by the City. Likewise, one area within the City is served by City yet billed and
                   maintained by the GCWD. Each of the entities receive. compensation for their respective
                   deliveries through a bi-montbly exchange. For planning purposes, these,small exchanges
                   are excluded in the projections.

                                                              D-1 3

             Gole ta County Water District

             7.  Projected residential needs are based upon future dwelling units and-average unit
                 use values determined frcrn a GCWD survey. The survey revealed unit water uses fOr
                 different lot sizes as defined on the.General,Plan Maps. This survEO? was taken in
                 1975 and may reflect a certain amount of conservation. The Water Agency assumes
                 these values are average water needs for the projected dwelling units and a
                 presented as follows:

                              Lot Size                      AFY/D.U.

                              3+ acres                      1.07
                              1-3 acres                     .92
                              20,000 sq. ft.                .67
                              10,000 sq. ft.                .54
                               7,000 sq. ft.                .41
                               1,450-3,500 sq.  ft.         .26

             8. ProjectEil,,water needs of ocmmercial, industrial, and institutional uses are deter-
                 mined by applying a'water use duty of 1.75 AFY/acre.. This is considered an average
                 value and is-determined as such:
                                           2,685 AF (sales)    1.75
                                           1,530 (acreage)

             9.  Agricultural water demands are presented for the  area east of El Capitan. Agri-
                 cultural demands west of that point are discussed under Misc. Areas. Value for 1975
                 represents 4,080 AF sold by the District to irrigated agriculture, and recreation,
                 plus an estimate of private pumpage at 485 AF from the Goleta basin, 900 AF within
                 the western section of the District, and 600 in the Goleta area, east of El Capitan.
                 Values for 1980 represent 4,480 AF sold by the District to irrigated agriculture
                 and recreation, representing an increase of 400 AF in District deliveries to
                 existing acreage.to allow for the maturing of groves. The 1980 figure also represents
                 an increase in private pumpage to 2,220 AF inside and outside the District east of
                 El Capitan. -Demands for the year 1990 and 2000 are based upon acreage projections.
                 A water duty of 1.5 AFY/acre was applied to the acreages, assuming the maturity of
                 groves during the planning period. Recreational water demands are 800 AF for 1990
                 and 2000, bringing the totals to 10,100 and 11,750 for those respectivej@ears.
                 Private purpage could possibly meet 2,000 AF of this demand with theremainder
                 supplied by the District, assuming the availability of water.

           10.   Water conservation estimates are those of the Santa Barbara County Water Agency.

                                                       D-14

                                                  TABLE 0-8

                                   GOIEM AND ISTA VIS TA SANITARY DISTRICTS
                                         PROPOSED SBCMMAM TREAMMM

                                                1975           1980         1990          2000
            1. Population Served (1)           65,970         64,719      74,938         83,438
                (Both Districts)

            2.  Current Capacity (mgd)          8.0
            3.  Estimated Wastewater (2)
                Flows (mgd)                     6.23          .7.33         8.49          9.45

            4.  Proposed Capacity (mgd)                        8.0          8.0           8.0
            5.  GpCD (3)                        110            110          110           110

            6.  Surplus/Deficit                 1.77            .67         (.49)       (1.85)

            7.  Additional Populaticn
                capacity                       16,G9O          6,090       (4,454)     (13,181)

                Source: Iocal Coastal Program, 1978

                                                   FOOTNOTES

            1.  Population figures are for the ccmbined Goleta County and the Isla Vista
                Sanitary Districts as both these Districts feed into the Goleta Wastewater
                Treatment Facility. Figures are based on the 1975 Special Census. The
                projections assume the continuation of moratorium conditions through 1980.

            2.  Current wastewater flow is based on a compilation of flow estimates from
                Tables 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, and 4-5 (P. 82-86) of 22Z@-@    Wastewater Treatment
                and Ocean Disposal Facilities, Brown and Caldwell, March 1976. These figures
                are subject to change when accurate metering is implemented.

            3.  110 gallons per capita per day is derived from R. E. Blanton, Goleta Sanitary
                District Manager. A straight division of current wastewater flow by
                the existing population will yield a figure of about 94 gpcd. Brown and
                Caldwell indicate that current metering of wastewater flows is unreliable and
                this may explain the discrepancy.

                                                      D-1 5

                       Transportation

                       Based on current resource  constraints and prevailing public attitudes,
                  the Santa Barbara County-Cities Area Planning Council and the Santa Barbara
                  County Transportation Department have projected minimal expansion of the
                  transportation infrastructure. The Regional Transportation Plan calls for
                  modest highway and airport improvements, and an ambitious improvement pro-
                  gram for public transportation services and bicycle facilities. Even at a
                  modest level, the highway program contained in the Plan cannot be funded
                  with existing levels of tax revenue. Without additional revenues in the
                  form of increased State gas taxes, levels of maintenance will be reduced,
                  and highway construction will be eliminated entfrely in the near future.

                       Under 06,Plan, projects to increase the capacity of the region's free-
                  way and arterial system through the provision of additional traffic lanes
                  would be considered only when the existing facility can no longer provide
                  an acceptable level of service. An acceptable level of service is defined
                  by the Plan as one that "can accommodate peak hours traffic at somewhat less
                  than free flow, and which is equivalent to level of Service "D"." Level
                  "Y operation is defined by the Highway Capacity Manual as follows:
                  11approaching unstable flow, with operating speeds tolerable but fluctuating;
                  there is little freedom to maneuver, comfort and convenience are low. In
                  urban areas, delays tovehicles approaching intersections may be substantial
                  during short periods, but the intersections clear periodically, preventing
                  excessive backups."

                       Within the coastal zone, proposed transportation improvements are mini-
                  mal with one exception,.the widening of the Route 101 freeway to six.lanes
                  from Fairview Avenue to the Ventura County line. At present, this.route
                  consists of a four-lane freeway from the Ventura County line to downtown
                  Santa Barbara, a conventional fout-lane arterial (non-freeway) through
                  downtown Santa Barbara, and a four-lane freeway through the west side of the
                  City and on through the 6oleta. Valley. The projected need for six lanes
                  east of the City of Santa Barbara through Carpinteria and Montecito (all
                  within the coastal zone) is largely determined by CALTRANS traffic projections
                  of greatly increased traffic at the Ventura County line (more than double
                  today's traffic). If this traffic growth does occur, the addition of free-
                  way lanes would not be needed until about 1995. There is considerable doubt
                  that traffic growth will occur to the extent anticipated due to possible
                  future fuel availability constraints and projected growth trends.

                      Detailed information regarding road capacity constraints  fo r each of
                  the planning areas is not a.vailable. Transportation constraints will haye
                  to be analyzed on a case-by-case basis as projects are submitted for review.

                                                       D-16

                               Buildout Project

    										APPENDIX E

                                                BUILDOUT  PROJECTIONS.

                        This appendix contains buildout projections under    existing zoning and
                   the land use plan for each of the planning areas. These buildout calcula-
                   tions are based on the estimated total number of residential units that
                   would be permitted; total projected bui'ldout includes existing units as well
                   as potential additional units. There are a number of reasons to believe that
                   the buildout calculations with respect to,the number of possible units and
                   population overstate the case. Some areas within the coastal zone are cur-
                   rentlydeveloped at lower densities than those permitted under existing zoning;
                   this could also occur under the land use plan. Major demolition of recently
                   constructed single family homes and duplexes to permit conversion to higher
                   density development is unlikely even if the areas in question are zoned for
                   multiple units. Furthermore, there are areas within the coastal zone where
                   complete buildout under the land use plan is improbable because of site con-
                   straints, such as hazards and inadequate lot sizes. Therefore, the buildout
                   projections used for analyses.in,each-of the planning.areas are hypothetical
                   and are used only to provide a general frame of.reference for discussing
                   service system and resource constraints.

                        In Table E-1, the percentage increases   in estimated population as a re-
                   sult of buildout under existing zoning and the land use plan are summarized.
                   This table also shows the estimated number of years that would be required
                   to reach buildout under the land use plan, assuming that growth were to occur
                   at an annual rate of one percent. It should be noted,that the one percent
                   growth rate was selected for illustrative purposes only. Actual growth rates
                   will vary among the planning areas depending on such factors as availability
                   of land and resources (primarily water), air quality standards, wastewater
                   treatment, road capacities, etc.

                                                         E-1

                                                                              @TABLE E-1

                                                                Comparative Potential Populations.
                                                          Under Existing @oning andthe Land Use Plan,

                                                               Estimated                           Estimated
                                                               Population'.                        Population
                                                            Under Buildout                      Under Buildout
                                          Population           of Exis             Percent             of               Percent
                      Subarea                  1975              Zonintq           Growth         Land Use Plan(l)      Growth

             Summerland, urban              1,000                2,003             100.3             2,151              115.1
             Summerland, rural                  208              1 694             714.14              533              156.3
             Montecito                      2,613                5,152              97.2                                 67.6
             Carpinteria Valley             3,248                7,185             121.2             5,992               @84. 5
             Isla Vista                     12,855              16,371              27.4           15,031                16.9
      rn     Goleta                         5,620               15,374             173.6           12,6660)             125.4
                             (4)
             Gaviota Coast                      148              1,707          1,053.4                263               71.7
             North Coast   (4                    35                  918        2,522.9                297              748.6

             Footnotes:

             1
              Estimates for population buildout under           existing   zoning and the     land'use plan do     not  make  allo
             setback, lot size, and other restrictions          that would normally inhibit the prospects for,maximum
             sequently, the zoning and land use plan population estimates are probably in excess                    of what.woul
             2Th e number of years es    tablished for buildout is based on. the following formula:                   n    log Pt-@
                                                                                                                              log
                   where: P = Population            n    Integer for Time Period         Pt+n     Population at
                             t = Time Period       Pt    Population at Time t                     Time t + n
                                                                                         R        Rate of Growth Expressed as
             3
              Includes More Mesa, Santa Barbara.Shores, and West Devereux               properties.
             4
              Household size factors are not available for these areas for both,1990 and the base year; there
              in population associated with buildout could not be estimated for the Gaviota Coast and North C
              tions shown for these planning areas are based on housing units rather than population.

                                                                            TABLE E-2

                                                CARPINTERIA  VALLEY      BUILDOUT UNDER   EXISTING    ZONING

                                             Household                    Potential                                      Hous
                              Existing          Size                      Additional      Potential      Potential           Si
                Zoning          Units           1975         Population      units        Conversions    Buildout            19
                DR-25            144            2.1          .302.4           200                           344              1.
                6-R-1             67            2.5          167.5             36                           @103             2*
                7-R-1             56            3* 2         179.2             33                            89              3:
                6-R-4              0            3.2             .0              6                            @6              3.
                8-R-1            .110           3.2-         352.0            117                           227              3.
               10-R-1             25            2.9            72.5            89                           114              2.
              12-R-1             @35            2.9          101.5              6                            41              2.
                DR 3.5             0            2.9.            0              14                                            2.
               20-R-1             58            2.7          156.6             31                            89              2.
                DR-2               7            2.7            18.9            98@             6            .111             2.
                l-E-1            112            2.5          280 0            224                           336              2.
                2-E-1              7            2.5            17:5             4                            11              2.
                3-E-1             40            2.5          100.0             61                           101              2.
                A-1-X            363            2.5          907.5            760                        1,123               2.
                T overlay        281            2.0          562.0             0                            281              2.
                20AL               0            2.5,            0              22                            22              2.
                40AL               0            2.5             .0              8                              8             2.
               100AG               3            2.5             7.5             0                              3             2.
                Other              9            2.5                             0                              9             2.
                               1,317                        3,247.6                            6         3,032

                                                                                    TABLE E-3

                                                      CARPINTERIA    VALLEY        BUILDOUT UNDER THE LAND          USE PLAN

                                                Existing      Household                          Potential         Potential        Househol
                                                  Units          Size                            Additional          Build-             Size
                       Land Use                   1975           1975,         Population.           Units             Out              1990
                1 u,nit/7,000 sq.     ft.         620            3.2           1,984.               170                790              3.0
                1 unit/10,000 sq. ft.             169            2.9             490.1               60                229              2.6
                1 unit/20,000 sq.      - f t.       65           2.7             175.5               2.7                92              2.4
                I unit/3,500 sq.      ft.             3                                              95                 98              2.0
                1 unit/2,180 sq.      ft.             1                                             259                260              1.6
                l.unit/l acre                       90           2.5             225                 76                166              2.4
                1 un,it/3 acres                   100            2.5             250                 73                173              2.4
                Ranchettes 5-20 ac.                   9          2.5               22.5                6                15              2.4
                Ag 1 (5)                            21           2.5               60                43                 64              2.  4
                Ag 1 (10)                         2.19           2 ' 5           550                219                438              2.4
                AgI (40)                              7          2.5               17.5              36                 43              2.4
                Other                               10           2.5.              25.                 0                10              2.4
                MA 100                                0          2.5                0.                 5                  5             2.4

                                                 1,314                          3,799.6          1,069               2,383

                                                                                                              TABLE E-4

                                                                                  crry OF CAMINTEIUA - BUnD-OUr UNUM EXISTING ZONM

                                                                            1975                                Potential                                                    1990
                                                   Existing            Household                                Additional         Potential        Potential            Household
                           Zoning                    Units                  Size         Population                 units        Conversions         Build-Out               Size
                           6-R-1                       375                  2.5              937.5                  116                 0                491                 2.4
                           6-R-2                        83                  2.1              174.3
                                                                                                                    134                 19               236                 2.0
                           6-R-3                       518                  2.1           1,087.8                    47                 30               595                 1.8
                           6-R-4                       268                  2.1              562.8                  138               .137               543                 1.8
                           7-R-1                       737                  3.2           2,358.4                   129                 0                866                 3.0
                           7-R-2                         5,                 2.5                12.5                   2                 3                  10                2.4
                           8-R-1                       246                  3.2              787.2                   74                 0                320                 3.0

                  m        DR-8                         11                  2.5                27.5                   2                 0                  13                2.4
                  (.n      DR-10                        89                  2.5              222.5                   20                 0                109                 2.4
                           DR-13                        92                  2.1              193.2                  126                 1                219                 2.0
                           DR-14                         0                  2.1                0.0                   56                 0                  56                2.0
                           DR-15                        64                  2.1              134.4                   56                 4                .124                2.0
                           'DR-18                        0                  2.1                0.0                   61                 0                @61                 2.0
                           DR-20                       789                  2.1           1,656.-9                   45               305              1,139                 2.0
                           141PPD                      582                  2.5           1,455.0                    20                 0                602                 2.4
                           A-I-X                         1                  2.5                2.5                    0                 0                   1                2.4
                           Other                       386                  2.5              965.0                    0                 0                386                 2.38

                           PM                            0                                     0                 1 660                  0                "0                  2.4
                                                     T,-246                               10,577.5                                    499

                                                                      TABLE E-5

                                           CITY OF CARPINTERIA       BUILDOUT UNDER THE IAND USE PLAN

                                                     Household                    Potential
          Land Use.                   Existing          Size                      Additional     Potential      Potential
          Designation                   Units           1975       Population       Units        Conversions Buildout*

          2,180 sq. ft.   or  more     1,920           2.1         4,032.0          280             603          2,803
          3, 5 00 s4. ft. or more        765           2.5         1,912.5          301              49          1,115

          7,000 sq. ft.   or rmre      1,444           3.2         4,620.8          269               0          1,713

          20,000 sq. ft. or more          11           2.7             29.7            .1             0

          AG                                2          2.5              5.0'           3              0                5

      m Other                            110           2.6            286.0            0              0             110

          Planned Development               0                              0.       433               0             433
                                       41,252                      10,886.0        1,287             652         6,191

           *Potential build-out      existing units   + potential additionalunits;        potential cmversions.,

                                                                       TABLE E-6

                                                   SUMMERLAND       BUILDOUT UNDER EXISTING ZONING

                                            Household                    Potential                       Potential      H
                               Existing         Size                     Additional      Potential         Build-
              Zoning             Units          1975     Population          Units      Conversions          Out

              Within urban   limit line:

              DR-3                                                            69                              69
              DR-8                  -            -           -               108                             108
              DR-25                10           2.1         21.0              20                              30
              7-R-3                38           2.1         79.8              33            43               .114
              7-R-1                93           3* 2      297.6              105             -               198
              6-R-2               161           2 5       402.5               51            28               240
             10-R-1                 7           2:9         20' 3             22             -                29
             20-R-1                 2           2.7          5.4                                              12
        M     l-E-1                 0                                          4                                4
        14    5-E-1                 0                                          1                                1
              Trailer Park         39           1.7         66.3               0                              39
              Other                43           2.5       107.5                0                              43

                 Total                                   TIOW-T              TIff           7T               M7

              Rural:

              DR-8                                                            40                              40
             'DR-3                                                            69             -                .69
             20-R-1                 2           2.7          5.4              64             -                66
              l-E-1                72           2.5       180                423             -               495
              5-E-1                 9           2.5         22.5              43             -                52
              40-AL                 -            -           -                 1             -                  1

                 Total             83                     207.9               4-0

                                                                  TABLE E-7

                                               SUMMERLAND.-- BUILDOUT UNDER  THE  LAND USE PLAN

                                                   Potential                         Potential     Household
                                   Existing        Additional       Potential          Build-         Size
               Urban Area:           Units            Units        conversions           Out          1990

             10,000 sq. ft.              9            93                0                102          2.6
             @7,000 sq. ft.            93             75.8              0                168.8        3.0
              3,500 sq. ft.           182             301              24                507          2.0
              1,450 sq. ft.            48             27               58                133          1.6
             Other (Comercial)         61               01              0                 61          2.5
        m
        80
               TOTAL Urban            393             496.8            82                971.8

                Rural Area:

             Ag  1                     12             .33                                 45
                                                                                                      2'14
             Residential Ranchette     19             20                                  @39         &A
             1 unit/I acre             48             70                                 118          Z.@-4
             I unit/3 acres              2              9                                  11         2,4
             20,000 sq. ft.              2              7                                  9          2,.4

               TOTAL Rural             83             139                                222

                                                                                        TABLE E-8

                                                               MONTECITO          BUILDOUT UNDER EXISTING ZONING

                                                 Existing        Household                           Potential          Potential          Household
                                                    Units            Size                            Additional            Build-               Size
                   Zoning                            1975            1975         Population.             Units             Out                 1990
                 DR-1 2                               212            2il               445.2              262              474                  2.0
                 6-R-12                               316            1.9               600.4              651.7            967.7                1.8
                20-R-1                                438            2.7             1,182.6              176              614                  2.4
                 1 -;-E-1                             100            2.5               250                204              304                  21.4
                 @PRV                                   50           2.7               135                 58              108                  2.4
                                                    1,116                            2,613.2           1,351.7          29467.7

                                                                                        TABLE E-9;

                                                              MONTECITO          BUILDOUT     UNDER    THE  LAND.USE      PLAN
                     Land,Use
                 3,500:sq. ft.                        55Z                                                 431              983                  2.0.
                 7-,000.sq. ft.                         15                                                 07              1112                 ZA
               20,000 sq. ft.                         455                                                 116              57jr                 2,* 4
                 1 unit/l acre                          92                                                1781,            270                  2A
                 1 u,ni,t/3 acres                       0                                                   5-r               5                 2A
                 AM (5)                                 1                                                   6.                7,                12.4
                 REC                                    O@                                                  O@                0
                 SCHOOL                                 11                                                  0-                1                 2-.4
                 PO                                     0.                                                 40.               40                 2.4

                                                                                                                        I non
                                                    1,116                                                 873

                                                                          TABLE E-10

                                                       @GOLETA -- BUILDOUT UNDER EXISTING ZONING
                                                             (EXCLUDIE ISLA-VISTA AND UCSB)

                                          Household                    Potential                                      Househo
                           Existing          Size                      Additional     Potential       Potential            Size
             Zoraxig         Units'          1975        Population      Units         Conversions Build6ut,            .1990
             6-R-1              0            2.9               0           308                           308               2.6
             7-R-1           439             3.8           1,668.2         394                           833               3.4
            10-R-1           205             3.6             738            47                           252               3.2
            20-R-1           .86             3.4             292.4         224                           310               3.2
             1.5-EX-1        114             3.2             364.8          89                           203               3.0
             2.5-EX-1          31            3.2               99.2         14                             45              3.0
             3.5-EX-1          36            3.2             115.2          29                             65              3.0
             DR-2               7            3.4               23.8        592              5            604               3.2
             DR-10           129             2.9.            374.1        1,680                         1,809              2.6
             7-R-3           418             2.9           1,212.2         160                           578               2.6
             40-AL              1            3.2                3.2           1                             2              3* 0
             A-1-X              1            3.2               -3.2         89                             90              2.0
             Other           234             3.1             725.4            0                          234               2.9
                           1,701                           5,619.7        3,627             5          5,333

                                                                                         TABLE E-1 1

                                                                  GOLETA       BUILDOUT UNDER THE LAND USE               PLAN
                                                                          (EXCLUDING ISLA VISTA AND UCSB)
                                                  Existing       Household                            Potential          Potential         Household
                                                     Units           Size                             Additional            Build-              S,ize
                        Land    -Use                  1975           1975          Population.            Un'its              Out               1990
                  1,450 sq.     ft.                   577            2.1             1,211.7             226               -  803               1.8
                  3,500 sq.     ft.                   258            2.9               748.2             769                1,027               2.6
                          sq.   ft.                   439            3.8             1,.668.2            342                  781               3.4
                20,000 sq.      ft.                     86           3.4               292.4               70                 156               3.2
       rn          ac.   or more                      149,           3.2               476.8             2313                 382               3.0.
                3 ac.    or more                        36,          3.2               115.2               26                  62               3..'0
                PD                                       0                0              Oi           1    00*              1,100               3.2
                AG@  5@                                 20           3.2                64                 12                  32               3 0
                AG   1.0                                 4,          3.2                 12,8              12                  16               3:.0
                Other                                 138            3.1               427..8                0                1-3&              2@.9

                                                    1,707                           5,017-. 1           2,790               4,497,

                *Includes 300 potential units              on More     Mesa, 300 units        on Santa@Barbara Shores, a,nd 500.units f
                West   D.ev'ereux property.

                                                                          TAME E-12
                                                       ISLA VISTA    BUILD-OUT UNDER EXISTING    ZONING

                                       Household                 Potential
                           Existing        Size                 Additional        Potential     Potential
               Zoning      Units           1975_ Population         Units        Conversions'    Buildout

               10-R-1          92          3.6         331.2        123                 0          215

               SR-2-D      1,,458          2.9       4,228.2        633               236        2,327

               SR-4-D      3.,720          2.1       7,812.0        769               611        5,100

               Other          156          3.1         483.6                            0          156

               Totals      5,426                    12,855.0     1,525                847        7,198

                                                                               -13
                                                                        TABLE.E
                                                      ISLA VISTA'-- BUILDOUT UNDER THE LAND USE'PLAN
              Land Use

            1,450 sq.ft.   1,587                                    493               270
            2,180 sq.ft.   3,375                                    327               101        3,803
            3,500 sq.ft.      165                                   100                 17         282
            7,000 sq.ft.        0                                      4                0             4
           10,000 sq.ft.       99                                   135                 0          234
            Other             200                                      0                0          200
            Totals         5,426                                 1,059                388        6,873

                                                                                                TABLE E-14

                                                                     GAVIOTA COAST           BUILDOUT UNDER         EXISTING ZONING

                                                            Existing                 Household                                   'Potential
                                                               Units                      size                                    Additional
                                    Zoning                      1975                      1975             Population                  Units

                                8-R-1                                                      3.2                 0                         101
                                10-R-1                             4                       3.2                 12.8                      954"
                                30.-R-1                            0                       3.21                0                         45
                                l-E-1                            .34                       3.2              .108.8                       4Z
                                U (Ag)                           96                        3.2              @307.2                       398;
                 rn             100 AL    (Ag)
                                                                 1.4                       3.2                 44.8                      i9

                                                                 1.48                                        473.6                    1,559

                                                                                                 TABLE E-15

                                                                     .GAVIOTA COAST          BUILDOUT UNDER THE LAND USE              PLAN   I

                                     Land Use

                                1  unit/acre                     34                        3.2               108.8                       24'
                                Rural Residential                46                        3.2               147.2                       36
                                A-II-100                         15-                       3.2                 48.0                      45
                                A-II-320                         10                        3.2                 32.0                      10
                                Other                            43                        3.2               137.6                           0

                                                                 148                                         473.6                       11.5

                                                                           TABLE E-16

                                                      NORTH COAST       BUILDOUT  VNDER EXISTING ZONING

                                                                                        Potential                       Poten
                                                        Existing                        Additional                        Bui
                      Zoning                              -Unit's.                          Units                          Ou

                      100 AL   (Ag)                                                          374                           40
                       40 AG                                   0                               18
                         U (Ag)                                1                             491                           49

                                                              35                             883                           91

            rn

                                                                           TABLE E-17

                                                      NORTH COAST       BUILDOUT UNDER THE LAND USE PLAN
                      Land Use

                      Ag-II-100                                4                               18                            2
                      Ag-II-320                               35                             .239                          27
                      Other
                                                                                                0

                                                              40                             257                           29

                                                                           3 6668 14109 1555