HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-11-05; City Council; 8394; LAFCO Policy re: City's Sphere of InfluenceD W > 0 [r: e e a
2
a
0 E
8
=! 0 2 3
9B# IF2 9y
MTG. 11/5/85
CIT'3F CARLSBAD - AGEND1'-^3lLL
TITLE: LAFCO POLICY AS TO HOW IT
DETERMINES A CITY'S SPHERE
DEPT. CM I OF INFLUENCE
DEPT. HD.
CITY AlTYM
c ITY M G R. --*
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize Mayor to write to LAFCO urging them to change their
policy regarding having sphere of influence beyond a 10 to 15
year development time frame.
BACKGROUND:
City of Chula Vista adopted a resolution urging LAFCO to
allow a City's sphere of influence to include territories
which may not be developed for more than 15 years in the
future. At the present time LAFCO will not include areas
within the sphere of influence unless it is reasonably certain that urbanization will occur within the next 15 years.
Chula Vista's position is that a sphere of influence should
include all territories which may reasonably be annexed ,
and developed by the City at any time in the future. The
10 to 15 year restriction seems unreasonable and is a
detriment to sound long range planning.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A - letter from City of Chula Vista dated October 16,
1985 with regard to Chula Vista's sphere of influence
City of Chula Vista, California
OFFICE of the CITY COUNCIL
October 16, 1985
The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Carl sbad 1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
Dear Mayor and Members of the Council:
We are writing this letter to apprise you of a recent LAFCO action taken with
regard to Chula Vista's Sphere of Influence. Further, we would like to ask your support to modify San Diego LAFCO policy as to how it determines which
lands shall be included in a city's sphere of influence.
By way of background, all cities in California are in the process of meeting
State requirements under AB 498 to see that spheres of influence are prepared and adopted for our respective jurisdictions. Chula Vista conducted its sphere study in March, 1984. In December, 1984, the City Council formally
adopted the sphere plan, and it was finally acted upon by the LAFCO Commission this past month.
Unfortunately the LAFCO Commission eliminated an integral component of our sphere request, a 10,000 acre area known as Otay Ranch. The Ranch is
surrounded on three sides by the City of Chula Vista, has been in our planning
area for over 20 years and is presently addressed by our General Plan, Growth Management Plan and Regional Transportation Study. In December, 1984, the applicant received permission from the County Board of Supervisors to process a General Plan Amendment in the County.
The analysis and recommendations on the sphere by the LAFCO staff were in a
large part predicated on their Commission's policy guide that "only areas
which might urbanize in the next 10-15 years'' should be included in an
agency's sphere. We believe this pol icy to be unreasonable, inconsistent and, in some cases, illogical to follow. State law defines a sphere of influence as the probable ultimate boundary of a jurisdiction. Sound long-range
planning parameters almost always exceed a 10-15 year time frame. Furthermore, cities as well as the County are equally concerned about conservation, open space preservation, growth control s and devel opment
phasing. To be able to appropriately plan for such lands necessitates their
inclusion in one's sphere of influence.
CIVIC CENTER 276 FOURTH AVENUE CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92010 TELEPHONE (619) 691-5044
The Honorable Mayor and City Council -2- October 16, 1985
In March of 1985, the SANDAG Board of Directors accepted a similar line of reasoning and forwarded their recommendations to LAFCO for imp1 ementation. The Executive Director of LAFCO, by letter dated March 4, 1985 to the
Commission, indicated that while flexibility in the 10-15 year policy might be in order that it was not necessary to revise the guideline.
We respectively disagree and feel the guide1 i ne thwarts responsible
land-planning and jurisdictional organization. This is evidenced by the LAFCO Commission action on our sphere of influence. We would urge your Council to seriously consider the merits of amending or eliminating this LAFCO
restriction and supporting the attached resolution. Thank you.
Sinqerely,
. cox
GK : rms
Attac hen t
W PC 21 86P/2223P