HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-12-19; City Council; 5308-2; Regional Growth Management PlanCITY OF CARLSBAD
-AGENDA BILL NO. 5308, Supplement No. 2 Initial
Dept.
DATE: December 19,, 1978 C. Atty.
DEPARTMENT:
Planning C. Mgr.
SUBJECT:
REGIONAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
Statement of the Matter
The County has completely modified the Growth Management'Plan that
the City reviewed early in lg78. The revised plan has been.submitted
to the City for our comments. Staff has reviewed the plan and our
comments are contained in a memo dated December 4, 1978.
Exhibits
Letter to Mayor Packard, dated October 30, 1978
Memo to City Manager, dated December 4, 1978
Regional Growth Management Plan, Volume 1 (exerpts)
Letter to Board of Supervisors, dated April 4, 1978
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council direct staff to prepare a
;letter to the Board of Supervisors thanking them for their
cooperation in attempting to meet the concerns of the City of
Carlsbad. However, we request that the "future urban development"
areas clearly indicate that the County discourages subdivision
of lots of less than 10 acres, and that areas only be developed
for agricultural and related uses. Furthermore, that the County
encourage annexation when all public services are available.
Council action:
12-19-78 Council directed staff to prepare a letter to the Board of
ms Supervisors thanking them for their cooperation in attempting
to meet the concerns of the City, -and to indicate a request
that the "future urban development" areas clearly indicate
that the County discourages subdivision of lots of less than 10
acres, and that areas only be developed for•agricultural and
related uses; further that the County encourage annexation
when all public services are available.
w ,vim
WOLLE V. MOORE
is
_; ECOND DISTRICT SUPERVISOR
" S�g,f' ° ° 3 �' • COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
"aL�• 1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY
SAN DIEG09210"_, Yr ,• p 1I1436.2260
October 30, 1978
A ploy - 319i8
;•;a!'tJ?� l P
Mayor Ronald PackardL,
City of Carlsbad R�S$A r•�.r
1200 Elm Avenue Y of CA ,
Carlsbad, CA 92008 Cplanntng QeQa'�n1en;��
Dear Mayor Packard:
Enclosed are copies of the County Regional Growth
Management Plan and the draft General Plan Land Use
Element. The Growth Management Plan was adopted in
Concept by the Board of Supervisors on August 16,. 1978.
The draft Land Use Elemen.: would, in part, implement
the Growth Management Plan.
Implementation of the Growth,Management Plan will occur
as a three -phased process. AP a'iE% S will include the enclosed
Land Use Element as well as' consider'ation of,a new Regional
Land Use Element map and Subreg.ional Maps. -Public hearings
on Phase I will be held at the Planning Commission on November
15, 17 and 22, and at the .Bcard.of Supervisors on December 4,
6, 7, 8 and 13, 1978. `Phasei•Iz ^will involve consideration
of consistency of existing Community Plans with the Land Use
Element. This should be of particular interest to the cities
since many of the Community Plan areas are adjacent to
incorporated areas. Public hearings for Phase II will occur _
in mid -year 1979. Precise dates have not been set. 'Phase -III
involves consideration of the Growth Management policies°
enumerated in the Growth Management Plan listed on p. 34" of
the Land Use Element. It is intended that these policies be
considered immediately after adoption of the Land Use Element
in December.
When reading the above it becomes obvious that implemen-
tation of the Growth Management Plan requires cooperation
between the County and the individual incorporated cities.
For that reason, when approving the Growth Management Plan,
the Board also directed that the Plan be submitted to the
incorporated cities for information and official response.
Mayor Packard -2- October 30, 1978
'As Chairwoman.of the Board of Supervisors I would like
to emphasize our interest in implementing a Growth Management
Plan that is of benefitto-the entire region. Therefore, your
comments on the County's Growth Management Plan are of primary
importance to us.
If you have any questions on.the Growth. Management Plan
�or the Land Use Element, please do,not hesitate -to call
David C. Nielsen, Director, Growth Management Division:of
the Integrated 'Planiiirig Office at 236=4950.
Sincerellyy i
L CILLE V. MOORE, Chairwoman
Board of Supervisors
LVM:bh
Attachinefit
AWA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 4, 1978
TO: Paul Bussey, City Manager
FROM: James C. Hagaman, Planning Director
SUBJECT: REGIONAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
On January 17, 1978, the Planning staff explained to the City Council
some of the reservations we had with the County Regional Growth
Management Plan. F.t that time you also heard from Supervisor Moore
and County staff explaining the plan and the need for further local
input. The City Council noted concerns at this meeting and a letter,
dated April 4, 1978, was prepared to the Board of Supervisors containing
these comments:
The initial County draft created three growth level designations
(positive, negative, neutral). Carlsbad's Sphere of Influence contained
all three categories, but unfortunately, not where the -City felt
appropriate. Therefore, in the City's letter dated -April 4, 1978, it
was suggested that the County's Management Plari contain a fourth
category indicating that development within Carlsbad's Sphere of
Influence be determined by the City of Carlsbad. Also, we stated
that if the County did not desire to add a fourth category, that
the Growth liar-gement Plan categories be changed in Carlsbad where
appropriate to promote annexation to Carlsbad or .,=-development
areas, pending the Local Coastal Plan completion. Evidently the County
generally agreed with your comments because they completely modified
their growth level categories and designations in Carlsbad, The
plan is now titled Regional Growth Management Plan and it contains
growth level categories more in keeping with the types of growth
levels existing in the County. All property within the Carlsbad
Sphere of Influence is designated as "future urban development"
area (except for the environmentally sensitive Batiquitos Lagoon area).
This +neans that the land can be developed but it is being held in
limbo until it is annexed to the City or the County changes the Growth
Management Plan category to the "current urban development area". To
implement the present Growth Management Plan for "future urban
development" all properties under this category will require a
minimum lot area of 10 acres. At this time I don't know if the County
intends to control this by subdivision actions or to rezone the
properties to holding zones. Conversations with County staff indicate
that they are considering rezoning the properties to a transition zone
with a minimum lot size of at least 10 acres. Their transition zone
is similar to our L-C. It permits agriculture but little else.
City staff is satisfied by the County's present efforts except that the
"future urban development" category should be modified to state clearly
that the property in this category cannot be subdivided into lots with
less than 10 acres; or be developed except for agricultural related
uses. Furthermore, we feel the County should encourage annexation when all
public services are available.
BP:ms
Jowl
�l iV D
AU G 2`41978
NTY OF CARLSBAD
± Riarnina psnnutrrentc REGIOMAL GROWTH
QT PLAN
MANAGEMEM
'VOLUME I
a JUNE 197E
" COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
LIF
..,.A
—z-A
CHAPTER II. PLAN OVERVIEW
A. Goals and Objectives
On July 26, 1977, the Board oZ Supervisors authorized use of
certain goals and objectives for use in preparing a
growth management -plan (see Appendix. I). These goals describe
what the Growth Management Plan should accomplish. They can be
summarized as follows:
- Urban growth should be directed to areas within
or adjacent to existing urban areas. The rural
setting and lifestyle of the remaining areas of
the County should be retained.
- Growth should be phased with facilities. '
- Growth should be managed in order to provide for
affordable housing and balanced communities
throughout the unincorporated area.
- Urban portions of the unincorporated area should
be encouraged to either annex to an adjacent city
or incorporate. As an alternative, urban levels
of service should be financed through County
Service Areas, Community Service Districts or an
alternative mechanism.
B. How the Plan was Developed
1. Selection' of Areas for Growth
The formulation of the Growth Management Plan has cxrsely
resembled the planning clone by an - individual buying
a home or a business establishing a new office or plant.
It began with the selection of sites. Since a majority of
the region's residents now live,and will in the future live
in urban sottint1s, particular attention was paid to the
location of areas with urban development potential.
Criteria for locating the best areas for urban density
were drafted. As is true -for a new business, the siting
of urban development areas took numerous factors into
account, including:
- Facility capacities
- Proximity to existing facilities
- Relation to major transportation routes
Environmental constraints
Using these criteria, tha best sites. -for urban development
were located and mapped. The result was the Candidate '
Growth.Areas map made public in October .1977. The Urban
Development Areas shown.on the Plan -Map in this report -have
,been refined, reflecting further study and 'public comments.
These Candidate Growth or Urban Development Areas are
where most of the County's future development will be
directed. Before 1985, development will be encouraged
in portions of Urban Development Areas closest to'existing
urbanization and where essential facilities are available.
After 105, or as,needed, more remote'lands that,presently
lack essential facilities will become available for urban
development. In the interim, only low density development
will be permitted in those areas.
# -Outside• the Urban Development Areas, portions of the County
have been designated as Estate Development Areas. These
areas will contain large -lot rural residential and agri.-
cultui-al uses.
Beyond the Estate Development areas are the rural portions. .
%ofthe County. They are outside the service boundaries of
',the;County Water Authority and have only limited development
potential. Development in these areas will be constrained
by the availability of groundwater.
interspersed throughout the Estate Development and Rural
.;lreas are small retail/residential centers. It is recom-
mended that growth o£ these Country Towns be confined to
%''-. areas`within and immediately adjacent to existing development.
Certain areas of the County have been identified as being
so sensitive or important that most types of development
should not be permitted on them. These Environmentally
Constrained Lands include flood plains, lagoons, wildlife
habitat areas, etc. '
Two Special Study Areas of the County have been excluded
from the -Plan. They are the desert area of Borrego Springs
and the unincorporated portions of Otay Mesa. The desert
area is unique in the County. In recent years, the Borrego
Springs area has been subject to substantial development
pressures. Due to the unique problems associated with
development in the desert, the Borrego area should be the
:subject of a special study.
-10-
The Otay Mesa area is currently being sL-udied as a
potential center for economic development. Final recom-
mendations regarding land uses on the Mesa must await
-completion of those studiei.
2. Determining When Growth Can Take Place
Having identified where urban growth should go, the next problem
was to determine when or under what conditions growth should be
allowed to take place. Generally,'the plan requires that growth ,
be phased with facilities, in particular: sewer, water, fire,
schools, and roads. A Facilities Adequacy Policy, Capital Improve-
ments Policy, Road Adequacy Policy, and a Rural Groundwater Policy.
are included in the plan to assure that this occurs.
C. Dealing With Other Growth Related Issues
There,are numerous other issues with which a growth management
plan must deal. These include:
1. Housing
Growth management is primarily concerned with the future
location of,housing. The challenge for any growth manage-
ment plan is to manage growth in such a fashion that there
are adequate housing opportunities for all socioeconomic
groups in the region. This plan proposes density bonuses
to encourage inclusion of housing for low and moderate income
persons in new residential developments. It also recommends
overall density and housing mix targets for each Urban Development
Area. Those target:. oncuuracje the development of communities
accessible to all acre, income and ethnic groups.
2. Deterioration and Displacement
Closely related to the housing issue discussed above,
are the problems of deteriorating areas and displace -
of luw-income persons from developing areas. The plan
contains social policy recommendations about ways to
deal. with these problems.
3: Governmental Structure
Growth in the County has resulted in the formation of
tha equivalent of several moderately sized cities in
the unincorporated areas. Each of these areas is under
the jurisdiction of the County Board of Supervisors. '
Services are provided by the -County and numerous special
purpose &vernmental entities. (i.e. Special Districts).
Serious questions have been raised recently about the
appropriate form of government for these areas. Generally,
• it is felt that cities are best suited to do the job.
This plan contains a Local Government Structure Policy'
to assure that the urban communities in the County
seek municipal status or some other appropriate
governmental structure.
A. Costs of Growth
The public is justifiably concerned about the costs associated
with growth and alternative development patterns. Some
of the greatest concerns have to do -with impacts on housing.
In the course of evaluating the preliminary plan, certain
-12-
conclusions have been reached about how growth should
be managed to deal with problems such as these. Detailed
analyses are contained in the previously published
Economic, Fiscal and Environmental Impact Analyses of
the Preliminary Plan. In general, it has been.concl,uded
tip
1. The higher the rate of loner term growth in an area,
the more rapidly costs (and therefore, taxes) are
likely to rise. Sustained, rapid population in"
creases create the need for major public facilities
and improvements which must be paid fok in a relatively,
short time span. Schools are the -most costly of these
facilities.
2. Costs tend to increase more rapidly where growth takes
place .on land that is distant from developed areas.
The costs of fir*k protection and public works (e.g.,
sewers ) are most afk,:�cted.
3. Contiguous development at densities approaching four
dwelling units per acre will tend to reduce housing
costs in the near term. Over the Tong term, this
development pattern will minimize expenditures for
facilities, and air quality maintenance.
A. Land prices will continue to respond to
gro-ing pressures from Orange County and snowbelt
state migration and international investment as well
as locally -generated demand.. The land use designations
of the Plan will not result in significant restriction
yj4":
of urban development, and will provide some -pro-
tection of agricultural uses in outlying areas.
5. Perhaps uniquely'in the San Diego region, economic
growth potential is closely interrelated with the
ability to maintain current high amenity levels.
To the extent that growth reduces this amenity level
in any way, the regional economy is likew'z.se weakened.
D: Conclusion j
Growth Management reflects a broadening of .the concerns expressed
:ifi traditional land use planning:, Consideration of the timing-
.
and costs of new development,' as well as the location and char-
acter of development is necessary in order to deal with the
complexity of the,regional.economy. Growth management recog=
nizes that the decisions.of,government regarding the timing and
location of public projects can have substantial influence on
costs to the public. Similarly, government land use•decisions
influence future patterns of privatL�-deve'lopment. Economic
development policies, taxation and social service delivery pat-
terns affect the long-term viability of urban areas. The Growth
Management Plan attempts to coordinate these policies in order
to guide new urban development into those areas where urbaniza-
tion will. be least costly, conserve future options for develop-
ment and help meet housing and other- needs of County residents.
•'! -14
CHAPTER III. PLAN RECOIhIMENDATIONS
These recommendations have been guided by the Growth Management
goals and objectives. While most of the recommendations are un-
changed from those found.in the Preliminary Regional Growth
Management Plan, some have been revised and a few have=been-added.
Changes and additions are discussed in the following chapters.
The goals and objectives of ,the Regional Growth Management Plan
are found in Appendix I.
The recommendations are divided into the following Greas of con-
cern:
,A. Land Use
B. Environmental Protection
C. Capital Facilities
D. Governmental Structure
E. Housing
F. Social Policy
G. Regional Planning Forecasts (Series V),
A: Land Use Recommendations
1. Adopt the following Growth Management Plan Categories:
a. Current Urban Development Areas
- Uses will include those permitted by the County
General Plan and Zone Compatibility Matrix.
- In areas planned for densities at or above 4.3
dwelling units per acre (General Plan categories
4 through 9) development will be encouraged at
the maximum densities permitted by the General
Plan.
1
On residential lands achievement of overall
' • • :�{:••.` densities of four dwelling units per acre will
be enaou'raged.
Housing mix targets will be established for each
.Urban Development Area. 4
The outer boundaries of'all Urban Development
.Areas will be, designated"as • urban limit 'lines.
4 eyon:dawhich urban.-developinent::,will not -.be•., ems.
.. t=.through,:19�5- r f,:•.: �,::�;::,•:.;:..:.���:.�=:..,,�:�...;.r;!
• Yr`I �.5Wv3
b:-Future•Urban Development Areas. b
On.:ari*;interim basis,, mi,nimum�parcel sizes of ten
-acresor.`.greater will ,`be'.permitted.=--• ,w
'Smaller'"parcel:-'s3.zds"'tirAr-be'-permitted only `when:
• tit.K.J 1.=0 L:..'..n..:.....iG :. w,i.r �'� •1'•.•�.•♦k• ..w+-..`J......4.r , ::3.- —
(1) Ari:•area;i.s-'annexed, to''an.-adjacent•city or
development•, isrcoriditioned.upon annexation.,
2 An. area` is' cYianged•-from Future Urban to
(.. )
"Current. Urban 'status.
Boundaries between Current Urban and ruture•Urban
Development Areas will be evaluated every three j
r
years. If found necessary, boundaries will be, ;
_adi6ted -to accommodate new urban growth demands.
c. rstate-..Development Areas
Where authorized, minimum parcel sizes of'two to i
twenty, acres will be permitted depending on the
slope criteria in the underlying
-General Plan
land use designation.:
Clustering or lot averaging will be permitted,
provided:
(1.) The project is Forty acres or larger.
(2) At least ,forty percent of the project area
is in permanent open space.
(3) The project will not require urban levels
of service.
d. Rural Areas
-- Where authorized, minimum parcel sixes of four to
forty acres will be permitted'depending on the
slope and rainfall criteria in the.Groundwater
Policy, or on adopted General Plan designations
where adequate groundwater is assured.
A
-16-
e.
Country Towns -
Uses will include those permitted by the County
General Plan, zone Compatibility Matrix and,
where appropriate, the Groundwater Policy.
- Expansion of Country Town boundaries will be
discouraged.
- Boundaries will be expanded only for extension
of town facilities to meet emergency health and
safety needs of contiguous, subdivided land.
f.
Constrained Areas
- (See Environmental recommendations, page�17)•
g.
S ecial Study Areas r
• .r
- I.i the Desert Special Study Area in the'vicinity
of Borrego Springs, no application for changes in
the General Plan which would result in an overall
increase in the potential number of dwelling -units
will -be- accepted until a cumulative• environmental
analysis and long-range plan are prepared for the
area.
- In the Otay Mesa area, divisions of land ok rezones
will be discouraged pending comple.:ion of studies on
implementation of the Economic Development District.
2. Adopt the following general recommendations:
a.
Interim Use of the -Growth Management Plan
- Direct that, once approved in -concept, the follow-
ing procedure be followed:
'•(1) All applicants for discretionary permits will
be proyided notice of Growth Management Plan
conceptual.approval.
(2) Applicants will be.informed that, once the
Growth Management Plan is incorporated into
the County General Plan (approximately
•
December 1978), all projects subject to Plan
conformance findings, including those in pro-
cess, must conform to the Growth Management
Plan.
b.
'Incorporation into the Cotin.ty General Plan ,
» Adopt the Regional Growth Management Land Use Plan
Map as the County -wide Land Use Element Map.
Incorporate into the General Plan text appropriate
references to Growth Management goals, objectives•
and policies.
c. Agricultural Lands
- Until an Agricultural Element is completed, areas
designated as Agricultural Preserve in the County
General Plan, but not under contract, and`lands
in agricultural production but not under contract,
should not be subdivided.
B. Environmental Protection Recommendations
1. Designate Environmentally Constrained Areas where:
General Plan land use categories will apply. A site -
specific EIR will be required on project proposals,
including.appropriate mitigation measures'.
- Flood prone areas which are not planned for channeli-
xation will be retained in natural, open and other
r non -urban uses.
Programs leading to public ownership and the develop-
ment of management programs for coastal wetlands will
be accelerated,
2. To assure adequate protection of constrained lands, imple-
ment the following policies and action programs of the
adopted Conservation Element:
a. Sand Management Strategy (Chapter 5).
b. Policies and action programs which will regulate,
conserve, and protect rock quarries and deposits
(Chapter 5).
c. Coastal Wetlands Action Program (Chapter 3).
'd. Native Wildlife and Habitat Action Pro ram, including
adoption of a land clearance ordinance 7Chapter 4)-.
3. Adopt a Groundwater Policy to guide development in the
rural areas of the County.
4. Seek funding to perform a study of groundwater availability
in the rural areas of the County.
C. Capital Facilities TtecommendaL-ions
1, Approve implementation of an Integrated Facilities Adequacy
System, including a raciliti.cs Adequacy Pol•iCy to assure that
Inc_;.a t
water, sewers, fire .00 ac' ities wi 1.. be avail-
ablo concurrently with growth.
A
2.
Revise the existing Growth Information System (GIS) to
fully implement the fac lzties
Adequacy. Policy.
3.
Approve continuation of the Sewer Capadity and Monitoring
Programs, including the Sewer
A110 ac tion Matrix,in conjunc-
tion with the Integrated Facilities Adequacy System.
4.
Adopt a Road Adeauacy Policy to assure that peak roadway
capacity for the County''s Circulation
Element is sufficient
to accommodate the demands resulting from the
discretionary permits. approval of
5.
Adopt a Capital -Improvements Polio to actively support
development and prova-sion Off-a—cilities
and services in
'the unincorporated area consistent with the County Regional
Gr'owth Management
N
Plan.
D. Governmental Structure
1.
Adopt a revised.Board of Supervisors Policy I-55, Local
Government Structure Policy to
assure that urban communi=
ties in the unincorporated area seek municipal status
or
other appropriate governmerital•structure'.
2.
Adopt the Cities' -Review.of nand Use Planning and Develop-
merit_Proposals
zn the Unincorporated Areas Policy to fail_
state annexations and coordznaue planning efforts
with the
cities of the 'region.
E. Housing Recommendations
1.
Prepare revisions to the Housing Element conforming to
State Administrative Guidelines
and specifically addres-
sing housing,needs and implementation programs.
'2.
Establish housing mix targets for each Urban Development*
Area.
3.
Adopt a density bonus option available to all developers
in Urban
Development Areas on public sewers who volun-
tarily serf a percentage of their
units at below market
prices with resale restrictions or provide rental units
FiUr
at Market Rents.
4.
Determine that provision of low or moderate income housing
will constitute
a -basis for findings of overriding social
or economic -benefit under•the provisions of CEQA.
5.
Maximize use of Statc: and Foderal Housing and Community.
Development
programs to reduce housing costs. This in-
cludes;:
A
a. 'Support for Article 34 elections in all local
jurisdictions where, necessary to expand low and
moderate income housing opportunities.
b... Support for the concept of a regional housing
authority to centralize the delivery of housing
assistance to low and' -moderate income households.
6. Adopt the Comprehensive Revision to the County Zoning
Ordinance.
7. Monitor implementation of County, housing policies through
the inclusion of housing production data in the Growth
Information System.
8. Direct continued.implementation of recommendations in the
Office of Program Evaluation report: Evaluation of the.San
-Diego County P,:eject and Permit Processing System.
F. Social Policy Recommendations
1. Adopt a Target.Area.Ex enditure Policy to'assure that
deteriorating areas or areas with major services and
facilities deficiencies are given priority treatment for
public expenditures and incentives for private invest-
ment.
2. Adopt a policy to establish'a uniform method for deter-
mining future social service needs.
3. Approve in concept preparation of a Social Element to be
incorporated into the General Plan.
G.' Regional Planning.Forecasts (Series V)
1. Approve'development and application, in conjunction with
CPO and the, cities, of uniform regional methodologies
for the selection of Urban Development Areas and develop-
ment capability analyses.
2. Approve the Regional Growth Management Plan -for use as the
basis for revisions to the exiting Series IV forecasts.
3. Approve in concept the following factors as the basis for
revisions to existing forecasts on a community by community
basis:
a. Relationship of adopted Series IV forecast to develop-
ment capability analysis.
b. Regional Growth Management recommendations for develop-
ment density, ho►ising mix, and phasing of growth with
facilities.
0
I It
-20- r
c,• community planning group concerns.
d. Regional concerns such as air quality, water quality,
balanced communities and approved Regional Growth
Management objectives. ,
e. The attached population ranges for community plan and
subregional plan areas.
5. Approve in concept the following forecast structure for
the unincorporated area:
- Ultimate population and housing'forecasts based on
development capability analysis of the General Plan
and zoning implementation.
- 1995 population and housing forecasts based on trends:,
availability of facilities and'services, and regional
balancing to accommodate the unincorporated share of
regional growth.
- 1995 forecasts expressed as targets and as percentages
o ultimate buildout or, a community by community basis.
• 6. Approve, for planning purposes, the accommodation of 2.4
million people regionally by 1995 in.the Series V fore-
casts. --
i
1
-21-
CHAPTER IV. LAND USE '
A. Goals
The land use goal and objectives are as follows:
Goal - Wise Use of Land Resources
Promote wise use of the County's'land resources, preserving
options for future uses.
- Encourage future urban growth to be Contiguous with
existing urban areas and maximize use of underutilized
lands within existing urban -areas.
- Retain the rural character of non -urban lands. "
- Limit urban densities in rural areas .to,lands contig-
uous with existing rural towns and communities.
- Encourage continuance and expansion of agricultural
uses in the.unincorporated.area.
,Insure.preservation of continuous regionally signifi-
cant open space corridors.
-B. Discussion of Recommendations:. Plan Categories
The Regional•Growth Management Plan contains four land use
categories designed,to provide a phased regional development
strategy consistent with the availability of public facilities.
These classifications are:
Current Urban Development Areas
Future Urban Development Areas
Estate Development Area
- Rural Area
These "primary" categories are supported by three other sub-
categories to deal with development in unique areas. These
categories are;
- Country Towns
- Environmentally Constrained Areas '
•- Special Study Areas
-22-
The Plan map outlines these land use categories.
In concert with this land use strategy, growth will be phased
through policies addressing facilities adequacy, road adequacy
and groundwater availability discussed in Chapters V and VI.
C. Relation,of Growth Management Plan Categories to County General
Plan
Every effort has been made to use the County General Plan in
.defining Growth Management Plan categories. Urban Development
Areas in most cases correspond to residential categories in
existing community plans. In most cases, permitted uses in
each Growth Management Plan classification are -within the range
of permitted uses in the existing plan.
-The Growth Management Plan complements the existing General
Plan as follows:
An*urban limit line is established between Urban
Development and Estate Development areas.
More precise density and housing mix recommendations
are made for Urban Development Areas, although in most
cases the densities conform to existing plans.
The Current/Future Urban Development Area distinction
provides a method to phase urban.growth.
A system for phasing growth with facilities is formally
added to the County planning process.
D. Plan Categories Description
1. Urban Development Area
Urban Development Areas were identified by use of the '
Candidate Growth Area Selection tlethodology (see
Appendix II).
The Current Urban Development Area includes those C-v»nty
lands to which near -term urban development should be,
directed. ,
The Current Urban Development Areas include primarily those
areas designated as urban (one acre or more dense, cate-
gories 1 through 151, and generally following the previously
in Lakeside, Valle de Oro and
adopted urban limit lines
` Sweetwater. Some additional areas were added to'accommo
-
date areas with high rankings in. the Candidate Growth Area
analysis.
It is recommended that in areas planned for densities at
or above 4.3 dwelling units per acre, development will be
encouraged`at maximum permitted densities. As a guide, it
is further recommended that where residential development
is planned, overall densities of four dwelling units to
the acre will be encouraged. This figure is an average,
,'and need not be`met on all developable land. In some areas
it may be"appropriate to consider the densities of adjacent
cities 0ithin,the same housing market area. It is not the
r
{ intent of this plan to force higher densities into the
! 3
low=density fringes of Urban Development Areas.
The issue of density is a controversial one. However,
these recommendations are made for the following reasons:
•� Housing Costs - Land costs have risen more rapidly
than the other factors influencing housing cost. In
1970 lot costs represented 27 percent of the cost of
a typical housing unit. in 1977, this figure was 40
percent. While not the final solution, achievement
of higher densities is a prerequisite to provision
of affordable housing..
Land Conservation - It has been estimated that, under
existing trends, an -area the size of the City of
National City must be developed each year in order to
accommodate the"203"population forecasts. Unless the
trend is altered, 90,000 new acres would be developed
regionally by 1995.
The Growth Management Plan seeks to contain growth
within specified areas and retain the rural character
of non -urban lands. I£ open space lands are to be '
retained and sprawl contained, theh-achievement of
e;:;:newhat higher densities in urban areas will be
-necessary.
- Efficient Facilities Usage - It is generaxly more costly
to provide low density development with urban services.
In the case of transit, densities of four units per
acre or greater are a prerequisite to the provision of
service.
- Water Conservation - Per capita water consumption
rates decrease as densities increase. This is.primarily
due to reduced landscaping requirements (see Table I).
The -Future Urban Development Area category is regulated by
a "phased zoning" concept. The concept is to encourage
ultimate development at urban densities by holding the land
in reserve until it becomes desirable'for urban development.
Future Urban Development Areas will be permitted to develop
at low densities (ten acre minimum parcel sizes or larger)
until'services can be provided at levels necessary for urban
densities. This will promote'infilling and contiguous urban
development in Current Urban Development Areas. Certain areas
adjacent to cities have also been placed in this category in
order to encourage annexations.
TABLE 1
WATER CONSUMPTION RATES
BY :
DENSITY RANGES
ZONE
DU/AC
THEORETICA:,
DU/AC
"ACTUAL'_
OUR
CONSU;I TION
GALLONS -PER
CAPITA
PER, DAY
LAND USE CATEGORY.'
R-4
43
25.8
•102
Very High
Residential:
R•-3
29
17.4
':04"
High Residential
,.R-2
14.5
-8.7
113
Medium High
Residential
•
8
4.8
1'45
High,'Meditun
Residential
R-l"A
7.3
4.4
155
Medium
Residential
g..1..g
5.8
3.5
190
Medium,
-Residential
4.4.'
2.6
249
'Medium Low
.
Residential
.4
2.4
268
Medium Low
Residential
E•-1--A
2
1.2
515
Medium Low
Residential
Er;l
1
0.6
1,008
Very Low
Residential
-26-
2. Estate Development Area
The°Estate Development Area combines agricultural and 'low
density residential uses. it: corresponds to the Rural
Residential, Agricultural Estates, Agricultural, Mountain
Development and Multiple Rural Use•categori.es (16 through
23) in the existing.General Plan. included in the designa-
tion are those areas,outside the Urban Development Area
line but within the boundaries of the County Water Authority.
ent Area includes much rugged terrain and
The Estate Developm
,rare habitats.. Clustering and lot .averaging are recommended
to preserve certain sensitive areas such as steep slopes and
riparian areas. To avoid abuse, however., it is,recommended
that:
'Clustering be permitted only•on.large parcels (40
• acres or grQater)
At least forty percent -of the project area be in
permanent open space
The project will not require urban levels of,service
It -is not the ;intent of this recommendation to include private
yards iri,the open space requirement.
,Deannexations from the County Water Authority will•be
-supported where there is little likelihood .that service
can feasibly be extended. This may reliev& property owriera,
from taxation and bring water district boundaries into
Closer alignment with areas of actual and possible service
for future planning purposes.. Finally, it seems prudent to
maintain or reduce the area within the water service bound'aty
until regional and statewide questions regarding water
distribution and availability are resolved.
3. Rural Areas
The Rural Area includes all privately owned properties
outside the service boundaries of the County Water 'Authority.
This area is primarily made up of agriculture or unimproved
lands and remote pockets of residential development. Because
of the frequently rugged topography, fire hazards and limited
groundwater sources; the area is -limited in its development ;
potential. It is therefore intended •that parcel sizes be
dictated by slope category and, where appropriate, the Ground-
water Policy .(see Chapter 7).
4., Country Towns
This classification applies to small retail/residential
areas serving surrounding rural areas•or functioning�as
resorts. They are designated on the present Land Use
Element for,Rural Residential or more intense use and are
clearly removed from existing or projected -urban areas.
The Plan provides for containment but at the,same time
allows for residential densities within the -town itself.
i •
outside of the townsite areas the surrounding Estate or
Rural Area residential development standards will apply.
This simple ap'Wroach establishes 'a minimum of planning
restriction while maximizing the integrity of the rural
atmosphere associated with the Country Towns.
It is recommended that the following communities be
designated Country Towns:
Alpine Harbison Pauma
Campo Jacumba Pine Valley -
Crest Jamul Rainbow
Descanso Julian Valley Center
Guatay Morena Village Warner Springs
5. Environmentally Constrained Areas -
These•are'discussed in Chapter V.
i
6. Sp6cial Study Areas
Ir•the desert Special Study Area in the vicinity of BOrrego
Springs, a cumulative environmental analysis is needed in
order to -determine the holding capacity of the area. This
study must address air quality and groundwater conditions,
in particular. It is recommended that no application for
changes in the General Plan which would increase the develop-
ment potential. of the area be accepted until a long-range
plan based on environmental constraints is prepared for the
area.
'The Otay Mesa area is being considered as a potential site
for economic development. Studies are scheduled to deter-
- • .. ,.
mine appropriate long-term land uses in the area. In the
meantime, uevelopinent,in the area should be discouraged.
E. General,Recommendations
1•. Interim Use of the -Growth Management Plan
Implementation of the Growth Management Plan will require
r its incorporation into the County•General Plan. Prior to
that time, all applicants for discretionary permits will
be informed.of the approval, in concept, of the Regional
Growth Management Plan, Once the Plan is adopted through.
the General -Plan Amendment process, all projects -subject to
.plan conformance findings, including those in process, must
bonform to the Plan. This approach will provide adequate
notice of plan adoption without -encouraging a rush to get
applications "in the pipeline" prior to implementation.
2.' Incorporation into the Count General Plan
It has been determined that the most effective way to
implement•this plan is to incorporate it•into the County
General Plan. Therefore, it is recommended that the
Regional Growth Management Lana Use Plan Map become the
• County -wide Land Use Element Map, and that Growth Manage-
ment goals, objectives and policies be incorporated into
the General Plan text. In the future, more specific den-
sity and use recommendations would be contained in individ-
ual community and subregional plan maps.
3. Agricultural Lands
Agriculture is a significant economic activity in the
County which is threatened, by competition for adequate
land, water, and other resources. The complexities of
the agricultural economy require•detailed analysis which
has been initiated by the County in preparation of an
Agricultural Element of the General Plan. The Growth
Management Plan will not preempt the efforts of this
more comprehensive study. _It,is essential, however, •that
in the interim the Growth Management Plan seek to protect
and expand agricultural uses in the unincorporated area.
A fundamental position of the Growth Management Plan is
support for the Agricultural Element. Existing land use
regulations affecting agricultural activities are don-.;
flicting and inadequate. It is essential that, through
r
the Agricultural Element Study,the detailed planning
ordinances and
.policies be developed to identify and pro-
tect prime agricultural lands. Agriculture should not be
treated as an interim use to be displaced by future urban
development.
Un�il an Agricultural Element•is completed, areas desig--
nated as Agricultural Preserves in the County General Plan,
but not under contract, should not be subdivided.
r
i\ a NY1`
ice. ',JYAY • f. ,
• -1
x 1200 ELM AVENUE TELEPHONE:
CARLSBAO, CALIFORNIA 92008 ^� (714)729.1181
c;
Y •
Citp of carwbab
April 4, 1978
Board of Supervisors
COUNTY AITi1INISTRATION BUILDING
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92101
Re: Growth Management Progress Report
Gentlemen:
On January 17, 1978, the Carlsbad City Council discussed the San Diego County !
Candidate Growth -Program. We were privileged to have Lucille Moore, Chairman
of the County Board of Supervisors, and David,D. Nielsen, Executive -Director
of the County Growth Management Team, speak to the Council on•this subject at
the meeting.
The Council of the City of Carlsbad is of the opinion that the County activity
on this subject is a tremendous beginning and we fully support your efforts.
There are, however, some concerns we wish to share, and some modifications we
wish to suggest. A general concern we have is the recognition of the' great need
for coordination between the various public agencies and programs that are
involved directly or indirectly with growth. Carlsbad, along with most other •
cities in the County, is working on some form of growth management. In addition,
we have other programs, such as the 208, and a Local Coastal Program, ihich are
forms of growth management. Growth management will only be effective on a
regional basis, including the incorporated cities. Therefore, we feel that if i
your growth management program is to be effective, all the cities must have ;
confidence in its ability to help solve problems which we all face. Ife•have F
,within our incorporated boundaries approximately 5,190 acres of unincorporated.
county islands which contain all three of the rating categories _. A -specific
concern to Carlsbad as far as how the program would affect us directly,, is ;
in the rating given to our "county islands".
The City of Carlsbad finds no fault with the property,designated•as neutral.
The neutral areas will probably be developed in the next ten years as either
rural estate, or a continuation of existing single-family residential. 'Ilia
areas the County has designated as negative are somewhat suspect, however, since
nobody knows at this time what the fin=i1 plans of the area will he. The -%City
General Plan indicates the area to be Joveloped mostly as single family, with
some set aside for non-residential reserve. However, f— all the property west
of El Camino Real, the Local Co:tal Program must be adopted before growth matters
can be determined. It seems possible that after the LCP is adopted, development
could occur in the next ten years in -this area.
Board of Supervisors
..lpril 4, 1978
Page Two
The most inconsistent category is the positive area. The County indicates that
this has a high potential growth; however, the City's General Plan indicates much
of this area for future planning of non-residential uses, taking into consideration,
specifically, the airport and coastal relationship. This area contains the airport,
the Agua Nedionda floodplain, and much agriculture. It is not possible at this
time for the City to determine what the growth should be, let alone when.
The City of Carlsbad is very concerned about the impacts that the positive
designation would have on the property and how it would affect -City decisions. This
is a concern for all of the areas within the county islands. Dir. Nielson of your
staff indicated to us that it was one of your policy recommendations that the County
not approve development unless the development conforms to the City plan for the -
area, -or until there is some clear indication Ulhat the area is going to annex.
We feel that this policy should be expanded by not permitting any development or
subdivision unless annexed to the City of Carlsbad. A.possible solution is to create
a new category for county islands. This category would give the City complete
Jurisdiction and forecasting of development for such islands.
REC6,NmENDATIm
The City of Carlsbad recommends that the Candidate Growth Program contain a
fourth category to be placed over the county island within the City of Carlsbad.
Tixis fourth category should indicate that growth in these areas shall be
determined by the City of. Carlsbad and developmeet shall be the responsibility
of Carlsbad. If the county does not wish to develop this new category,,%ve would
recommend that the San Diego County Candidate'Growth Program be modified to change
the positive rating in the Carlsbad island area to negative, and that the county
initiate zoning and subdivision regulations that will reduce the development
pressures in all areas within Carlsbad's sphere of influence listed as negative .
in the Growth Management Program. '
ATTACFDM,WS
Map, Potential Candidate Growth Areas, Carlsbad
Sincerely,
Ronald C Packard,
Mayor, City of Carlsbad
RCP: BP: le