Loading...
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