REPORT PREPARED BY: Ray Severn, Community Development Director

The City received a series of letters from the Carpinteria Valley Association and the Carpinteria Creek Committee related to retaining a City Biologist. This proposal is also an explicitly stated "Action" noted in the City of Carpinteria On Track to the Future A Community Vision document. This staff report addresses these concerns and requests Council direction on how to proceed from this point.

From staff’s perspective the following issues need to be addressed:

• Should the City hire a City Biologist?
• Should a City Biologist be hired as a full-time employee, part-time employee, consultant on retainer, or independent consultant by project?
• Would the concerns be better addressed by changing the Environmental Review Committee?

The City currently reviews development proposals for conformance to City policy and compliance with State, Regional, and City Planning, Zoning, and Environmental Laws. Review is conducted by the Environmental Review Committee consisting of the Community Development Director, Economic Development Specialists, City Engineer and other staff members as needed. Recent development reviews have included sites within or adjacent to sensitive environmental habitat.

Since 1990, growing community concern has resulted in greater investigation of biological resource impacts. Results have been mixed. However, greater protection and preservation has been accomplished when projects approved and built prior to 1990 are compared with those approved and built afterwards. Improvements can still be made in biological resource impact evaluation, preservation, protection, and impact monitoring.

Staff notes that the City is proceeding with the biological resource mitigation monitoring contract for the Bermant project development location that is based on the City’s conditions of approval for that site.

Increased costs inevitable result from better biological resource protection and preservation. These costs are most directly borne by interested development applicants. Economic and fiscal costs to the city and community can be argued, but are not easily quantified and additional benefits from an increased quality of life also result from appropriate biological resource protection and preservation.

From a community wide perspective and a more optimal planning perspective, the request to hire a City Biologist may be premature. Premature because the proposal to hire a City Biologist is itself an implementation measure of City policy to protect biological resources. Biological resource protection laws and policies are in place but are also in the process of being amended as part of the City’s General Plan Update.

The City Attorney’s office will be present to answer any questions the Council may have.

1. Adopt a standard practice of requiring any development applicant to fund the hiring of an independent City biologist whenever a development proposal results in a potential impact to biological resources within or adjacent to the City (as recommended).
2. Continue discussion of this item after receiving initial public input.
3. While taking action 1, direct staff to incorporate this proposal explicitly into the General Plan Update and revisit the issue when public hearings for the General Plan update begin.

Letters submitted by the Carpinteria Valley Association and Carpinteria Creek Committee

Carpinteria Valley Association and Carpinteria Creek Committee

Home Page

Rays@silcom.com

Agenda