HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-10-18; City Council; 5231; Application of Council Policy No. 17CITY OF CARLSBAD
AGENDA BILL NO. x5"«?s3 / Initial: ^j.
Dept. Hd ^uO>_ <O
DATE: October 18. 1977
DEPARTMENT; Engineering • ' C. Mgr. t:
Subject: APPLICATION OF COUNCIL POLICY NO. 17 (PUBLIC FACILITY AVAILABILITY' LETTERS)
TO -MINOR SUBDIVISIONS
Statement of the Matter
The City Engineer has been assigned certain responsibilities of the City
Council in processing minor subdivisions. Council Policy 17 requires that
public services be available concurrent with need. The San Marcos Unified
School District does not write availability letters on individual projects,
nor do they have a policy on school fees.
The City Engineer proposes to carry out his responsibilities in processing
minor subdivisions (where school availability letters are not provided) by
making a determination as to whether or not a proposed minor subdivision
can be served by the school district. It is the City Engineer's deter-
mination that a minor subdivision to convert an existing R-2 duplex into
a 2-unit condominium project will have no measurable effect on the student
population of the SMUSD and, therefore, is in compliance with Council
Policy No. 17.
Exhibit:
1. Memorandum from City Engineer with attachments dated October 14, 1977.
Recommendations:
Adopt a motion that the City Council concurs with the City Engineer's
determinations as outlined in Exhibit 1.
Council Action:
10-18-77 Council concurred with the City Engineer that Public Facilities
Element, including schools, should be administered by the City
Engineer for Minor Subdivisions.
MEMORANDUM - October 14, 1977
TO: City Manager
FROM: City Engineer
SUBJECT: Application of Council Policy No. 17, (Adequacy of Public Services
in Connection with Development Proposals) to Minor Subdivisions.
Background
Council Policy No. 17 was adopted on October 16, 1973 (see attached) "to
ensure that all necessary public services will be available concurrently with
need." The Policy requires, "That the proponent of the zoning, rezoning,
development, or redevelopment present evidence satisfactory to the City Council
that all required public services, including schools, will in fact be provided
concurrent with the need."
With respect to school facilities, this Policy was implemented by accepting a
letter from the appropriate school district indicating that the proposed
development could be served by the school district. At least one school
district (but not all) adopted procedures whereby a "letter of availability"
was conditioned upon guarantees by the developer that temporary school class-
rooms would be provided to handle the students generated by the development.
The City Council has approved many major and minor subdivisions since then,
each of which provided a letter of availability.
On April 15, 1975, as part of a major revision to the Subdivision Ordinance,
the Council enacted Section 20.24.100 which states, "The responsibilities of
the City Council "...are assigned to the city engineer with respect to those
tentative parcel maps filed pursuant to this chapter."
During the 2-1/2 years this ordinance has been in effect the City Engineer
has accepted a letter of availability from the appropriate school district on
all minor subdivisions that have been processed. Up until recently, the
overwhelming majority of minor subdivision applications has been from the
Carlsbad Unified School District area, and the developers have been able to
provide acceptable letters of availability from the school district. Recently
a large number of building permits have been issued for "duplex" units on
existing, buildable R-2 lots in the La Costa area and within the San Marcos
Unified School District (SMUSD). Many of the permit holders have indicated
their intention to convert these units to 2-unit condominiums. Staff has
determined that such a conversion requires a parcel map (minor subdivision).
One applicant has 53 of these "duplex to condominium conversion" tentative
parcel map applications pending.
MEMO to City Manager -2- October 14, 1977
Attachment 2 is a form letter dated May 9, 1977 which SMUSD has been providing
to all developers who have requested a school availability letter. In staff's
opinion this letter does not satisfy Council Policy No. 17.
Attachment 3 is a letter dated October 3, 1977 from SMUSD Superintendent of
Schools, Ralph E. Kellogg, stating that SMUSD has no policy on school fees
and onlysendsout housing information (Attachment 2) to appropriate agencies
when requested.
Attachment 4 is a letter dated October 10, 1977 from SMUSD indicating a concern
of the school district about annexations to cities where higher land use densities
are approved (as opposed to County land use densities) and where there are no
provisions for "..the collection of fees from subdividers to offset the cost of
classrooms."
Because the school district will not indicate whether or not various develop-
ment projects within the City can be served by the district, staff will be
making an independent analysis in order to make findings consistent with Council
Policy No. 17 (see Attachment 5).
As can be seen on Attachment 5, it is our determination that the conversion of
a duplex unit on an R-2 lot to a 2-unit condominium project will have no signi-
ficant effect on the student population of the schools.
Accordingly, it is my intention,in processing minor subdivision applications in
the SMUSD and other school districts that do not provide school availability
letters, to continue to make staff determinations as to the availability of
schools.
Because the processing procedures we plan to carry out are interpretations of
the intent of Council Policy No. 17, and because the City Engineer is carrying
out the responsibilities of the City Council in these matters, I request that
the City Council either concur in the actions being taken or direct an alternate
course of action.
Tim Flanagan
City Engineer
TCF:ms
c: PWA
City Attorney
Planning
CITY. OF CARLSiiAD
MCCHnlC I IPOLICY STATEMEN
General Subject: Adequacy of PUBLIC SERVICES
in -Connection with' Devel op-
Specific Subject: ment Proposals
Poli iio. 17
Effecti ve D*ts 1 O/ 1 5/73
Cancellation Date
S u o e r s e d e s i-I o .
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and
Division Heads, Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File
BACKGROUND:
In considering zoni
posals for areas within
insure the public health
City Departments, School
regarding the adequacy o
ments expected to occur
required public services
development shows a need
newly developed areas' ha
schools, libraries, fire
ngs. rezoning, development or redevelopment, pro-
the' City, the City Council has, in order to
, safety and welfare, evaluated reports from
Districts, Water Districts and other agencies
public services required to serve the develop-
In many cases, however, "the
been installed by.the time the
been that residents in the
ve been inadequately served v/ith access, parks,
protection and other public services.
within such areas
have'not in fact
The result has
PURPOSE:
will
To establish
be available
a. policy to insure that
concurrently with need..
all necessary public services
POLICY: -.' ' .. •>..; -" '
Before giving approval to zoning, rezoning, development or redevel
opment proposals, the public health and safety and the general welfare
of the community and all its citizens require that provisions be made
by the proponent of the zoning, rezoning, development or redevelopment
in conjunction v/ith appropriate governmental agencies to insure:
1. . That the zoning , 'rezoning , development' or redevelopment be
consistent with a master development plan for the general area'
which has been reviewed by the Planning Commission and adopted
by the City Council. / .--.".
2. That the development plan includes an implementation section
which sets forth in detail measures which will be taken to insure
that all necessary public services are. provided concurrent with
need in the development. • . '
3. That the proponent of the zon.ing, rezoning, development or
redevelopment present evidence satisfactory to the City Council
that all the required public services, including schools, will in
b e p r o v i d e d c o n c u r r e n t w i t h t h e n e e d .f a c t
Attachment 1
: , -S6'< MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL OISTRI
270 San Marcos Boulevard
San Marcos, California 92069
TO: Board of Supervisors • •
FROM: Ralph E. Kellogg, Suprintendent of Schools
RE: Information Relating to Housing and Student Growth,
San Marcos Unified School District
DATE: May 9, 1977
The County Planning Department and other planning departments from time
to time wish information regarding the availability of school housing in
the San Marcos Unified School District.
The information provided here is an attempt to succinctly, accurately
describe the current situation in the San Marcos Unified School District
regarding the (1) current housing of students-, (2) short term enrollment
projections, and (3) future housing capacity.
Numbers of Schools
San Marcos Unified School District consists, at the present time, of four
K-6 elementary schools, one 7-8 junior high, school, one 9-12 senior high
school, and a new to be established continuation school.
Capacities and Projections
Capacity Projection thru June,1?:
Alvin Dunn Elementary, K-6 Maximum, double loading
Kindergarten - 555 524
Richland Elementary, K-6 Maximum, double loading
Kindergarten - 613 611
San Marcos Elementary, K-6 Maximum, double loading
Kindergarten - 613 . 618
Woodland Park Elem., K-6 Maximum, double loading
Kindergarten - 613 786
San Marcos Jr.Hi., 7-8 Maximum - 828 737
San Marcos High, 9-12 Maximum, Regular Permanent
Facilities, 900 1206
Additiona 1 Non f criiuinent Housjjiq
Five additional relocatable classrooms have -been authorized and will be
in place at Woodland Park School for operation during the next schoolyear.
Attachment 2
Board of Supervisors
May 9, 1977 .
Page 2
.'The high school currently has seven relocatable classrooms on campus to
accomodate the existing load.
Future Housing
Architectural plans are under way and funding is available for the addition
•of permanent additions to house students at the high school up to 1350 in
the next projected building increment. This would be completed in January
of 1979. Projections are that this increment would house the then existing
student population in permanent construction without use of the relocatables.
A continuation school will be established in rented facilities for the
coming year. It is expected that this program would accommodate approximately
30 students.
Financing Available for Additional Housing
Currently approved Bond Funds will be exhausted by the high school addition,
relocatables at Woodland Park, and other capital outlay needs. "It is safe
to say that, with the exception of the junior high school, the housing
capacity of the school district for 1978-79 school year will be at capacity.
A citizens ad hoc advisory committee on school housing has been appointed by
the Board and is currently studying projections, housing problems and methods
of finance of housing.
Sincerely,
Authorized Representative of
the School District Ratified by the Governing Board
telph/
Superintendent
SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
270 San Marcos F levard
San Marcos, Calirornia 92069
Phone (714) 744-4776
October 3, 1977
Mr. Paul Bussy, City Manager
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Street
Carlsbad, California
Dear Paul,
This letter is to inform you that the San Marcos Unified School Board of
Trustees has not taken an official policy position, relative to collection
of the builder's fees on developments within this district.
It has directed administration to send housing information to those
appropriate agencies when requested. A copy of that informtion is provided.
We are not, at this time, collecting any builder*s fees.
You are aware that there is recent state legislation in this area. Our
Board will be analyzing this information to determine its future posture.
Singe-rely,
Ralph E. Kellogg
Superintendent
San Marcos Unified School District
REKrld
cc: James C. Ketcherside
Attachment 3
SAN MARCOS UNIFIED
270 San Marcos Blvd.
San Marcos, California 92069
Phone (714) 744-4776
.OOL DISTRICT
October 10, 1977
San Diego County Board of Supervisors
335 San Diego County Administration Center
San Diego, California 92101
Gentlemen:
The Board of Trustees of the San Marcos Unified School District is
concerned about subdividers who have been refused higher density zoning
by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors requesting and receiving
annexation to a contiguous city and then receiving the higher density
zoning they seek from that city. This problem has had an impact on
the ability of this district to house the students generated by the
subdivision. The impact of this practice, if it is allowed to continue,
will'be much greater in the future, particularly in those cities that
do not have an ordinance permitting the collection of fees from sub-
dividers to offset the cost of classrooms.
The Board of Trustees of this district has requested the Local Agency
Formation Commission to refer to this Board any requests for annexation
of territory within the district so that the district can provide input
to LAFCO on the impact of the proposed annexation on the district's
capability of housing students.
Very truly yours,
///.James C. KetchefVside
^'Assistant Superintendent
San Marcos Unified School District
JCK:ld
COPY San Marcos City Council
Vista City Council
Carlsbad City Council ^
Escondido City Council
Attachment 4
MEMORANDUM
October 14, 1977
TO: James C. Hagaman, Planning Director
FROM: Mike Zander, Associate Planner ^"
SUBJECT: School Availability Letters for Projects in the San Marcos
Unified School District
It is my understanding that the San Marcos Unified School District
(SMUSD) has stopped issuing school availability letters for projects
within their district. Since the City is currently processing numerous
projects that are at various stages of development within their district,
I felt it important to analyze these projects in relationship to Council
Policy No. 17 (Public Facilities Policy) and to formulate a recommendation
to the City Council for future processing of these projects.
I have keyed the general status of the various projects within the
district to a colored map (attached). The projects, and their
potential requirement for school availability letters for future City
action, can be categorized as follows:
Orange Areas
.These are areas that are either R-l subdivisions or non-residential
projects that will not require future discretionary actions by the
City or the need for school availability letters. The current policy
of the school district should have no effect on these areas.
Gray Areas
These are areas within the Master Plan boundaries of La Costa or
Carrillo Ranch. As you know, we are currently processing a Master
Plan Amendment for the La Costa area. We have not received an application
to date to amend the Carrillo Ranch Master Plan. We will need further
direction by the City Council on how to handle these Master Plan
Amendments with regards to compliance with Council Policy No. 17.
Blue Areas
These are residential
prior to development,
actions should remain
Red Areas
areas that would have to be further
The Council Policy as utilized for
the same for these areas.
subdivided
past similar
These are the residential areas that are creating the immediate
question and where the emphasis of this report lies. All of these
areas have previously been subdivided, some with condominium notes and
some without. Physical development could potentially occur on all of
these lots without any further discretionary actions by the City,
thus no assurances of school availability would be necessary.
However, further discretionary actions are sometimes requested. A
developer may wish to consolidate two or three existing condo parcels
into one for his project. Also, many developers of existing R-2 lots
wish to apply a condo note to their development so that each unit can
be sold individually. These types of requests require further
discretionary action by the City and, therefore, must comply with
Council Pol icy No. 17.
There are two ways of looking at these types of actions. First of
all, will the action in itself add additional impact to the school
district? Theanswerisno.
Based on figures from the Carlsbad Unified School District, each
duplex unit will generate approximately .25 school age children
(.06 elementary students per unit, .05 junior high students per unit,
and .14 high school students per unit). This generation factor would
apply regardless of whether or not the unit was a condominium or a
rental unit. Therefore, the total number of students generated by
development of the existing R-2 lots would not change by approval of a
condominium map. I have attached an analysis of one such project
presently before the City for approval.
However, there is another way of looking at this problem. Council
Policy No. 17 requires the proponents of these types of actions to
"present evidence satisfactory to the City Council that all required
public services, including schools, will in fact be provided concurrent
with the need." In the past, staff and the Council have accepted
school availability letters from each of the districts as evidence.
Now we. understand that at least one of the school districts does not
intend on issuing any more availability letters for projects within
their district. If this understanding is correct, there are two
options left for the City to follow in regards to implementing Council
Policy No. 17.
First of all, other forms of evidence could be developed and accepted
by Council. This option would require extensive investigation, or at
least involvement, by City staff to verify the alternative evidence.
The second option takes the approach that the City will not
approve any discretionary action without a school availability letter
from the applicable school district. Both of these options overlook the
fact that development of these existing lots could occur without
further discretionary action and application of Council Policy No. 17
by the City and impact the school district to the same degree as would
a condominium development.
MZrjp
-2-
l/.j /; ^
Potential School Impact of Development of 53 R-2 Lots in SMUSD
Elementary School
Based on SMUSD figures, Alvin Dunn Elementary School will have space
for an additional 31 students through June, 1978. All other elementary
schools in the district will be at or exceed capacity by that time.
53 duplexes would generate approximately 7 elementary students (106
units x .06 students per unit). If all other factors are held constant.
there will be capacity to serve the elementary students generated by
this project.
Junior High School
Based on SMUSD figures, San Marcos Junior High School will have space
for an additional 91 students through June, 1978. 53 duplexes would
generate approximately 6 junior high students (106 units x .05 students
per unit). If all other factors are held constant, there will be
capacity to serve the junior high students generated by this project.
High School
Based on SMUSD figures, San Marcos High School will not have space for
any additional students until January, 1979. Permanent additions to be
completed at that time will increase school's capacity from 900 to 1350
students, present excess of students (386 students) is currently
housed in seven relocatable classrooms. 53 duplexes would generate
approximately 15 high school students (106 units x .14 students per
unit). If all other factors are held constant, there will be capacity
to serve the high school students generated by this project by January,
1979.