HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-04-03; City Council; 10567; FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE CARLSBAD GENERAL PLAN_"
AB#$$!%#-- TITLE:
MTG.
DEPT.
FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE CARLSBAD
FIN GENERAL PLAN
DEPT.
CITY 1
CITY I 7,
0 g 9=
!i
.. z 2 5 4
d $ 3 0 0
\ ClTIOF CARLSBAD - AUtNUeILL a
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve by minute motion, the form of the Request for Proposal for tt fiscal impact analysis of the General Plan and direct staff to see proposal s from qual if i ed consul ti ng firms.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
During the past few years, the City Council and many advisory committef have indicated that the long term economic health of the City of Carlsbi is of primary importance. The planning process, as it is current' structured, deals with the land use decisions necessary to create a Cii that ultimately meets the aesthetic goals of the Council. However, tl process does not currently consider the long range fiscal impact ( development under the present General P1 an.
Sometime ago, the Council indicated an interest in undertaking a detailc fiscal impact analysis of the General Plan to determine the viability ( the existing Plan and to recommend changes, if necessary, to balance tl ultimate land use mix. Although this study was initially undertaken by Ci. staff, it rapidly became evident that unless staff members could I dedicated to this project to the exclusion of all of their othc assignments, the study would take an excessively long time.
At this point, the staff is recommending that, in the interest of completil the fiscal impact analysis in a reasonable amount of time, the Counc consider authorizing the distribution of the attached Request for Propos and ultimately select a consulting firm to assist with the development the fiscal impact analysis. The RFP is asking for assistance in sever areas.
Economic Analysis of the existing General Plan including curre status and future status.
An analysis of revenues generated by various land use types a the cost of providing services to various land use types.
changes in land use.
economic result .
0
0
0 Creation of a computer model to be used in the evaluation
0 Comments on changes in land use mix to create a balanc
Should the Council choose to approve the Request for Proposal, it will distributed to various firms who have expertise in preparing fiscal impa models. The results of the Request for Proposal will be returned to Counc for approval in the appropriation of funds.
I
Q
Page Two of Agenda Bill No. /? 567 rL
re
FISCAL IMPACT:
The 1989-90 operating budget does not currently include funding for tl preparation of the fiscal impact analysis. Staff will return to Counc
when bids have been received from qualified consultants and will request appropriation of funds at that time. It is difficult at this time estimate the range of costs for these services. When the City fir considered this project, cost estimates ranged from $50,000 to $75,001 Funding for this project can be made available from the General Fu unappropri ated fund bal ance.
EXHI BITS :
Draft Request for Proposal for Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Carlsb General P1 an.
e Q -
TEL
(61 9)
4 1200 ELM AVENUE
r
CARLSBAD, CA 92008-1989 .
aitu of aarlt3bnil
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
April , 1990
Request for Proposal
of the Carl sbad General P1 an Preparation of a Fiscal Impact Analysis
Introduction
The City Council has indicated that the long term economic health of the City of Carlsbad is a primary goal of the planning process. This point has been emphasized over the years by the Citizen's Committee to Study Growth as well as the Planning Commission and City staff. Although the City is currently in good fiscal condition and is economically diverse, the long range fiscal effects of development must be understood by today's decision makers to insure the future quality of life for residents of Carlsbad.
The Council has directed the staff to undertake a fiscal analysis of the General Plan to determine the economic viability of the existing plan and, if necessary, recommend changes to the general land use plan to provide a fiscally sound future. The City is seeking proposals from various firms interested in providing the following services:
0 Economic analysis of the existing General Plan including
a) A brief review of the current economic position of the City
b) Phased review of the economic position of the City at various points during buildout
c) An economic analysis of the final General Plan land use.
d) Each analysis should consider both operating and capital costs and revenue, as well as the fiscal impact of development occurring in surrounding communities (i.e. competition for economic share of the market).
Recommendations on changes in the land use mix to create a more balanced economic result between now and buildout. 0
.+ 0 e -
1
Request for Proposal Carl sbad General P1 an April , 1990 Page No. 2
e Creation of a computer model to be used to model the fiscal impact of changes in the land use plan. The model shall be designed to run on an IBM-AT or 386 compatible PC.
An analysis of the revenues generated by various types of land use and the costs of providing required city services at the present, during development and at buildout.
Proposals submitted to the City should also address the following points:
e All services should be provided within six months of selection of a consultant. Proposals should provide a detailed time table for completion of all tasks within this period.
The consultant will be required to attend up to six public meetings with the City Council, and to provide presentations to community groups or committees as required by the City.
The consultant will be required to provide 30 copies of the final report, a reproducible copy of the report, and two unprotected copies of the computer models complete with operation manuals and operator training.
e The proposal should provide a description of personnel experience and qualifications.
e The proposal shall be signed by an official authorized to bind the proposer for a minimum of 90 days and shall contain a statement that all work will be performed at a not-to- exceed contract price.
e The consultant will be required to sign the attached agreement. Any terms and conditions which are not acceptable should be noted in the response to the RFP.
Five copies of the proposal should be provided to the City at the address shown below by May 15, 1990:
e
e
e
City of Carl sbad Finance Department 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Attn: James F. Elliott, Finance Director
-+ e -
b
u Request for Proposal Carl sbad General P1 an April , 1990 Page No. 3
General Backqround
The City of Carlsbad is located about 30 miles north of San Diego and about 90 miles south of Los Angeles on the pacific coast. Carlsbad covers 40 square miles including coastal and inland areas and significant areas of environmental importance. The present land use includes regional shopping centers, auto mal 1 s, i ndustri a1 and commerci a1 uses, agricultural areas and vari ous types of resident i a1 devel opment . The present popul at i on i s 62,030. (January 1, 1989.) About 50% of the usable property in the City has been devel oped.
During a review of the General Plan, a 24-member citizens committee prepared a wide range of recommendations for changes and improvements to the Plan. One of these recommendations suggested the preparation of a fiscal impact analysis of the Plan to provide some assurance that the ultimate development plan will provide the necessary revenue to operate the infrastructure being created to meet the standards set by the citizens of Carlsbad.
On July 1, 1986, the City Council adopted a growth management program that was ratified by the voters in November, 1986. This program established a defined set of planning requirements to ensure that eleven public facility performance standards are complied with as development occurs in the City. This program will provide a significant amount of land use data to be used in conjunction with the Fiscal Analysis requested by this RFP.
The City staff will be available to meet with the consultant prior to the preparation of response to this RFP to provide additional information.
The distribution of this RFP does not commit the City to award a contract, contract for services or supplies. The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals received as a result of this request.
Additional Information
Attached to this Request for Proposal are several documents which may be useful in preparing a response. Some additional information may be available from various staff members. A list of key staff representatives has also been included.
1. Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan - The attached introductory section ofthe City’s Growth Management Program provides an overview of the City of Carlsbad, the capital facility standards and some of the data that can be made avai 1 ab1 e to the consultant.
-. e 0
.I v .., Request for Proposal Carl sbad General P1 an April , 1990 Page No. 4
2. Sample Facilities Plan - This section of one of the City’s facility plans provides an overview of the type of data that is currently available. Approved plans exist in 14 of the City’s 25 planning zones. An additional seven plans are currently being prepared by consultant.
List of key City Staff.
Consulting Agreement with the City of Carlsbad.
3.
4.
e 0 ..
4. SECTION 1. OVERVIEW
- The Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan will implement the
City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance by ensuring that
development does not occur unless adequate public facilities and
services exist or will be provided concurrent with new
development. The preparation of the Citywide Plan is the first
phase in the imp1ementatiOn process of the City's Growth
Management ordinance which was adopted by Ordinance NO. 9810 on
July 1, 1986 by the Carlsbad City Council. Once the Citywide
Plan is adopted, a Local Facility Management Plan will he
required for each of the 25 local zones into which the City has
been divided. This must be done befare any additional
development is allowed in any one of the zones. Then, when
individual development projects are considered, a public
facilities adequacy analysis will be provided as part of the
report on the project to ensure that it is consistent with
both the Citywide and Local Zone Plan.
SECTION II. CONTENTS OF THE CITYWIDE FAClLlTlE
AND IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
The Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan consists of the
following:
1. Identification of the existing level of development in the
city and a projection of the ultimate future buildout based
upon recent controls placed upon development as specified i
the General Plan and by the zoning.
2. Identification of all current and future public facilities
and improvements necessary to accommodate existing and
buildout demands for the land uses specified in the General
Plan and by the zoning.
3. Establishment of ongoing service level requirements for
public facilities through the adoption of specific
performance standards for each of the following public
facilities and improvements:
a) City Administrative Facilities
bl Library
c) Wastewater Treatment Capacity
d) Parks
e) Drainage
f 1 Circulation
g) Fire
-1-
" e a
e-
L h) Open Space
i) Schools
j) Sewer Collection System
k) Water Distribution System
4. Establishment of specific boundaries for each of the 25
Local Facility Management Zones and adoption of guidelines
for the preparation of plans for the local zones. The local
plans will specifically address the timing and financing of
public facilities.
5. Identification of the potential financing method, or
methods, for each public facility and improvement.
6. Establishment of an informational data based system to:
A) project demand for public facilities and
B) aid in the preparation of Local Facility Management
c) provide a mechanism to monitor the adequacy of
improvements,
Plans, and
public facilities on an ongoing basis.
The purpose of the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan is
to assure the elimination of the shortages of public facilities
identified by the City Council to be detrimental to the public
health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Carlsbad. Through
the accomplishment ot those tasks outlined above, the City will
be able to ensure adequate public facilities and improvements or
it will halt development until provisions have been made to
correct these inadequacies.
Again, the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan is the firsi
phase in the implementation of the City's overall Growth
Management Ordinance and it is intended to provide the framework
necessary to allow more detailed phasing and financing plans to
be accepted in the form of Local Facility Management Zone Plans.
-2-
UIREMENTS FOR L~AL FACILITY RP - SECTION 111.
M NAGEMENT PLANS - RELATIONSHIP
TO THE CITYWIDE FACILITIES AND
IMPROVEMENTS PLAN - AS part of the overall Growth Management Program the city was
-
broken down into 25 Local Facility Management Zones (See
Figure 1). The boundaries for each of the 25 Local Facility
Management Zones were established based upon logical facilities
and improvements planning, COnStrUCtlon and service relationships
to ensure the econo1aically efficient and timely installation of
required public facilities and improvements. After the adoption
of the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan and prior to any
development occurring in any of these zones, a Local Facility
Management Plan must be submitted and approved. The plan must be
consistent with all aspects of the Citywide Facilities
Improvements Plan and shall implement the Citywide Facilities and
Improvements Plan within the Zone. It must ensure that each
public facility and improvement meets the adopted performance
standard prior to allowing any development.
FIGURE 1
I LOCAL FACILITY
MANAGEMENT ZONES
-3-
comparison of Citywide and Local Plan
Citywide Plan Local Plan
s tand ar ds Sets Standards Shows How Standards
Complied With
P rov is ion Inventory of Phasing from
For Public Existing and Existing to Future
Facilities Future Buildout
Needs
Funding Funding Detailed
of options Financing Plan Facilities
L
@ e
L SECTION IV. BUILDOUT ASSUMPTIONS AND PROJECT~O - 1x1 order to adequately assess and plan for Citywide public
facilities and services, it was necessary to project the level of
development that can be anticipated to the ultimate buildout of
the City. These projections take into consideration recent
ordinances adopted by the City which reduce residential density and restrict the overall future intensity of development
throughout the City.
The process used to estimate the total number of dwelling units
in the City at ultimate buildout is relatively straightforward.
using the City's General Plan map as a basis, all of the land
uses shown were entered into a computer by the San ~iego
Association of Governments (SANDAG) using a process known as
"digitizing." The computer converted this digitized information
into gross acres for each land use designation. Environmentally
constrained areas, beaches, wetlands, floodways, other water
bodies, riparian and woodland habitats, were also digitized and
converted into acreage figures in the same way. Other
constrained areas included slopes greater than 25 percent, major
roadways, railroad tracks, and major power line easements. The
primary sources used in identifying these areas included previous
environmental impact reports prepared for projects throughout the
City and a Citywide slope analysis map. To obtain net
developable acres, all of the 100 percent constrained acres and
one-half of the areas shown as 25-40 percent slopes were
subtracted from the gross acreage figure for each land use
category. In this way, a net developable acreage figure could be
established for the overall City, for each quadrant of the City,
and for each of the 25 Local Facility Management Zones.
The net developable acreage figure was then multiplied by the
number of dwelling units allowed per acre using the City's
"Control Yield" density ranges, which are listed below:
Residential Land Use Control Yield
RL 1 .o
RLH 3.2
RM 6.0
RMH 11.5
RH 19.0
The Control Yield densities represent either the midpoint of the
City's adopted density ranges or actual experience using existing
developments within each land use category.
By applying the Control Yield densities to the net developable
acreage figures, an estimate of the total number of dwelling
units at full buildout can be derived. To carry the process one
step further, the per capita household size data provided by the
-5-
0 0
L State Department of Finance can be used to estimate buildout
- average household size of 2.471 persons on January 1, 1986.
population. The data indicate that the City of Carlsbad had an
The same type of calculations were used to estimate the total
number of square feet of industrial and commercial land uses at
buildout. Howev.er, instead of residential density ranges, a set
of assumptions regarding Qite coverage for industrial and
commercial development was applied to the net developable acreage
figures. It was assumed that every net developable acre of
industrial/commercial, would result in a maximum square eootage
yield of 40%.
The methodology described in the previous paragraphs was used to
provide a basis for determining the amount and types of public
facilities that will be needed to adequately serve the City at
buildout. However, it has a number of acknowledged short-
comings. For example, the digitizing process itself is not 100
percent accurate, and when applied: to small geographical areas,
such as Local Facility Management Zones, some inaccuracies can
occut. A much more accurate means of providing the same
information would be via a parcel-level Geobase system, however,
such systems are very complex and require a substantially longer
time frame to implement. Therefore, concurrent with the
development of the overall Growth Management Program, the City
has begun work on developing such a Geobase system, which, at
some point in time will supplant the methodology described in the
previous paragraphs.
Likewise, the dwelling unit estimates at buildout represent a
straight conversion of acres to units, with no regard to the
number of units already existing or approved throughout the City.
This may result in inequities within certain zones where
development has previously occurred under less constraining
conditions or using higher density ranges than those represented
by the Control Yield. In those cases, remaining develoQment wilL
have to occur at densities lower than the Control Yield figure.
Despite these recognized shortcomings, the approach and
methodology used within the Citywide Facilities and Improvements
Plan has been found to be quite adequate for the purpose to which
it was intended, namely long-range facility planning. Therefore,
until the parcel-level Geobase system described earlier is implemented, this approach will be used to provide the baseline
estimates needed for both mid-term and long-term facilities
planning.
Other planning assumptions used in preparing the Citywide
projections included:
1. Dwelling unit projections do not include any density
increases for special housing projects such as senior or
low income projects.
-6-
6 0 0
h 2. Hotel, motel, time-share, board and care, and housing
units without individual kitchen facilities which do
qualify as dwelling units in the building code were n
considered as units for the purpose of dwelling unit
calculations.
3. Likely changes to the City's Land Use Plan from a
residential to non-residential use.
The projection made for the total number of dwelling units in
City at ultimate buildout has been translated into a Density
Control Map (see Figure 3). The map shows existing, future an
total dwelling units for each quadrant of the City.
Figure 4 (Citywide Acreage Information) shows the number of ac in each land use category which was used to make the Citywide
projections for ultimate buildout.
Figure 5 (Projected Dwelling Units and Population at Buildout)
shows how the acreage was converted into Projected dwelling ur
and population totals.
Figure 6 (Dwelling Unit Summary) provides a summary of existir
approved and remaining dwelling units in the City.
The information regarding buildout projections and assumptions
needed to determine the required demand for public facilities
services as growth occurs. The methodogy for projecting dwell
units at buildout, a "control yield', follows the procedure wk
has always been used by the City in implementing the density
ranges of the Land Use Plan. It is important to formalize thi
procedure as part of the Citywide Facilities and Improvements
plan since the projection has been translated into ultimate
demand for public facilities and services. If the .control
yield" is not closely adhered to, then the planned facilities
improvements may not be adequate.
-7-
* FIG e @ DENSITY CO
SEPTEMBER 1(
NORTHEAST QUAOR ANT
OWELLINQ UNITS
-
17.32
I -8-
0 0
* FIGURE 4
CITYWIDE ACREAGE INFORMATION
..............................................................................
LAND USE DESIGNATION GROSS CONSTRAINED SLOP e NET
---e-- ........................................................................
- . GENERAL PLAN 100% 25%-40%
RESIDENTIAL:
RL LOW (0-1.5) 1,824 27 0 379 1,364
RLM LorMed (0-41 7,935 710 660 6,895
RM Medium (4-8) 2,638 184 156 2,375
RMA Med-Hi (8-15) 1,231 110 79 1,081
RH High (15-23) 243 8 5 233
COMMERCIAL :
CBD Central Bus Dist 70 0 70
C community 321 41 28 0
RC Recreation 108 30 78
TS Travel Services 191 31 160
0 Prof'l 6 Related 333 80 253
RRE Extensive Retail 32 0 32
RRI Intensive Retail 119 5 114
N Neighborhood 49 11 38
RS Regional Service 39 0 39
INDUSTRIAL:
PI Planned Ind 2,175 148 2,027
OTHER :
E Elementary School 200 9 191
J Jr. High School 79 0 79
H High School 202 10 192
HC Continuation School 4 0 4
P Private School 17 0 17
G Government Facility 268 0 26 8
rJ Public Utilities 158 19 139
NRR Non-Res Reserve 38 2 2 38 0
OS Open Space 4,398 2,078 2,320
RR Railroad 117 117 0
FW Freeway 21 3 213 0
MAJ Major Arterial 525 525 0
MIN Minor Arterial 510 510 0
COL Collector St 54 1 54 1 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
TOTAL 24,920 5,652 1,279 18,629
Citl -9-
LAND USE NET CONTROL D.U.s at POPULA’I ACRES Y lEtD BUILDOUT at BUILDI
RL 1,364 1 1,364 3,37 1
RLM 6,895 3.2 22,065 54,522
RM 2,376 6 14,252 35,21(
RMH 1,081 11.5 12,430 30,7 12
RH (& RVH) 233 19 4,488 11,09c
NON-RES 6,680
18,629 54,599 134,914
I IY 0 0 SEPTEMBER
k
CITY OF CARLSBAD
DWELLING UNIT SUMMARY
/
EXISTING 21,121
APPROVED 10,298
REMAINING 23J 80
BUILDOUT 54,599
ci -11-
0 e
SECTION V. CITYWIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC
FACILITIES AND SERVICES - EXISTING 4-
TO BUILDOUT - The Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan addresses eleven
separate facilities:
1) City Administrative Facilities
2) Library
3 1 Wastewater Treatment Capacity
4) Parks
5) Drainage
6) Circulation
7) Fire
8) Open Space
9) Schools
10) Sewer Collection System
11) Water Distribution System
For each one of these facilities and services the following is
I provided:
1) An illustrative map showing what is existing and what
needed Citywide at buildout (Figures 8 through 18).
City Administrative Facilities, Library and Fire have
been combined into one map - Figure 8 (A, E, C) and
Wastewater Treatment and Sewer Collection have been
combined into one map - Figure 9;
2) District boundary maps where applicable;
3) Adopted service level performance standard which must
be complied with at all times as growth occurs in the
City; and
41 A detailed facility planning and adequacy analysis foi
each of the three Citywide facilities. A general
description of the facility planning information €or !
remaining eight facilities. Compliance with the adopt
performance standard for each of these eight facilitic
will be analyzed when a Local Facility Management Plai
is submitted.
Compliance with the adopted Performance Standards will be
reviewed and analyzed in the following manner:
Citywide Basis
1) City Administrative Facilities,
2) Library,
3) Wastewater Treatment Capacity.
These facilities will not need to be included in the Local
Facility Management Plan, so long as the pteparers of those
plans feel these Citywide facilities will be constructed at a
time and on an adequate basis to correspond with projected development within the zone.
-12-
0 e
Quadrant Bas i s
4) Parks
Compliance will be determined at the time a Local ?acility
Management Plan is submitted for the zone.
Zone Basis
5) Circulation
6) Drainage
7) Fire
8) Open Space
9) Schools
10) Sewer Collection System
11) Water Distribution System
compliance of each of these facilities will be determined at t
At that time, the responsible governing agency will determine
adequacy of schools, sewer and water.
Figure 7 (Determination of Compliance with Performance Standa~
summarizes how compliance will be determined.
c time a Local Facility Management Plan is submitted for the ZOI
FIGURE 7
DETERMINATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH PERFORMANCE STANDARD
OF ADEQUACY DETERMIN-
-13-
I 0 0
-1 The type of adequacy and phasing analysis that is contained in
1 the Citywide Plan for City Administrative Facilities, Library an
Wastewater Treatment Capacity is similar to what will be expect=
for all the remaining facilities addressed in the Local ?acility
Management Plans for each zone.
It should be emphasized regarding the maps in this section, that
because of their scale they are for illustrative purposes only.
~arger descriptive maps have also been prepared, however, precis
locations of facilities should be determined from Master Pacilit
plans available in the department or agency responsible for the
facility. Also, because of the detail required, the maps for
sewer, water and drainage only illustrate future planned
facilities or improvements.
-14-
0 0 Attachment 2
t
4-
. -
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAH
LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN
ZONE 12
Prepared For:
City of Carlsbad
Planning Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, California 92009
. .. Prepa.red By: , '. .~ *.. . .t .: 2 .I ' . -. . . .1
I.. -. *
. ..
.. ... .
... .. .. *...
'."., January , .zu'," .... 1988 '
0 0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- PA. I,
..
EXECUTIVES-Y ...................
INTRODUCTION .....................
BUILD OUT PROJECTIONS .................
PHASING PROJECTIONS. .................
ZONE 12 REQUIREMFXXS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES ............
PERFORMANCE STANDARD ............... FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS ..... MITIGATION ....................
FINANCING ....................
LIBRARY FACILITIES ..................
PERFORMANCE STANDARD ............... FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS .....
MITIGATION. ................... FINANCING ....................
WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY .............
PERFORMANCE STANDARD ............... FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS .....
MITIGATION. ...................
FINANCING ....................
PARKFACILITIES.. 9 . .
PERFORMANCE STANDARD . e 0 .
FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS MITIGATION. 0 . FINANCING . s s.
I
1
.................. 5 DRAINAGE FACILITIES
PERFORMANCE STANDARD . 0 . s
FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS. s
MITIGATION. . e . 0 0 s
CIRClJLATION. 0 0 0. 0 -*e 1C
PERFORMANCE STANDARD ................ 10
FACILITY ADEQUACY ANALYSIS AND PLANNING ..... 10 MITIGATION .................... 11 FINANCING . 9 9. . . . - 12
FIRE FACILITIES . . . . * - - 12 PERFORMANCE STANDARD. .............. 12 FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS 0 * 12 MITIGATION. . . . . 0 13
0 0
.-
FINANCING ..................
# OPESJ SPACE FACILITIES ...............
FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS ... - PERFORMANCE STANDARD .............
MITIGATION ..................
FINANCING ..................
SCHOOL FACILITIES .................
PERFORMANCE STANDARD .............
FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS ... ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT .......
SAN DIEGUITO HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT ......
SEWERFACILITIES ................. PERFORMANCE STANDARD .............
FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS ... MITIGATION 0 0 0 . .
WATER FACILITIES .................
PERFORMANCE STANDARD .............
FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS ... MITIGATION 0 4 .
FINANCING. ....................
FACILITY FINANCING MATRIX ..........
REFERENCES ....................
APPENDICES . . . e
1. ZONE 12 LAND OWNERSHIP
2. CONSTRAINTS MAP
3. LIBRARY - AGENDA BILL 8867
4. WASTEWATER - LCWD LETTER
5. PARKS - PARKS INVENTORY JOINT USE AGREEMENTS WITH
SMUSD AND EUESD
(I
W e
I1 . INTRODUCTION
This Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP 87-12) completes second phase of Carlsbad's overall Growth Management Program
Zone 12. Phase one of the Growth Management Program completed with the adoption of the 1986 Citywide Facilities Improvements Plan ('86 CFIP). For purposes of public facilit analysis the '86 CFIP separated the City into 25 Local Facilit Management Zones as shown on Exhibit 1 on page 8.
A. PLAN OVERVIEW
This LFMP provides a detailed description and analysis
how facilities will be provided in Zone 12 of the City f now to build out of the zone.
parts as follows:
The plan is divided into
I - Executive Summary: Summarizes the plan highlights all conditions proposed by the plan.
I1 - Introduction: Provides an introduction to format and content of the plan.
I11 - Build Out Projections: Projects the ultim amount of development in Zone 11, along w itemizing existing, developing and future 1 uses.
IV - Phasing: Attempts to project how and wl development will be phased in Zone 11.
V - Analysis of Public Facilities Requiremenl Provides a complete description and analysis when and how each facility will be provided i
financed based on build out projections i phasing assumptions.
VI - Finance: Provides a summary of the financi alternatives available to fund each facility anc discussion of the LFMP's impact on City finances
VI1 - Appendices: Provides the technical materials us in preparation of this plan.
The most detailed part of the plan is Part V.
divided into eleven separate sections; one for es facility. Each section provides a detailed analysis of t
facility.
If a facility is not conforming with the adopted performar standard, there will be a discussion describing tk
This part
23
e 0
*-
situation, a description of mitigation or alternativc a financing discussion. Each facility section will CI with adequacy findings. Adequacy findings summarize I or not the public facility conforms with the q performance standard.
€3. OVERVIEW OF MANAGEMENT ZONE 12
Management Zone 12 is located in the southeast quad: Carlsbad as shown on Exhibit 1 on page 8. The z
bounded by El Camino Real to the west,Olivenhain Road south, Management Zone 11 to the east and Management
to the north. Zone 12 comprises approximately 665 acres. Exhibit 6 on page 25 shows the major land own the location of their holdings.
Primarily a residentiax area, Carlsbad's General Pla for residential land uses ranging in densit
Residential Low-Medium (0-4 dwelling units/ac
Residential Medium-High (8-15 dwelling units/acre).
residential land uses within Zone 12 include Cor Travel Service along El Camino Real. Two school si designated within the zone: a 20 acre junior high
site and a 10 acre elementary school site. The Gener Designations within Zone 12 are shown on Exhibit 7
26.
The General Plan Land Use designations for Zone broken down into sub-areas. These sub-areas allok identification of public facilities demand and
These sub-areas are used consistently throughout thi:
The land use zoning within Zone 12 is shown on Exhil:
page 27. As shown on Exhibit 8, most of Zone 12 i:
the adopted La Costa Master Plan (MP-149G). The e1 Costa Master Plan is undergoing a city initiated :
(MP-149(0))
24
. ~'
,a~~~..,.,I~~~ma~~~-.~ 1-1 .I
\
I
8.
I.
I
w W
., :/.La..
r n -e.* c % z 2 w w 1.. .i j R ' ,':, I
~ ** ii I,' j * ?:. ' i..
.?. b ! 1:. 1 ,: 1:.
rG' 9, fi EO z1.a c
n5 WN. 0
%IN IN
CZ 5 'L an g 0
I
z
e I sg;
E:;
0 m *E *I
mag I
b 2 -!
UZ E8 2! I EA0
00- 3bh ,;. 8 \t~
': i .i A. ~
.+
,*$ .* .*. .
.L:
.e b
.. '.
I, '-7
'* /'. '. ;
!I B yp.. 1' +p',? .yJh; %\
.. _I *;f,,/T,,! :Si\-.<-) li
\\ ii3 1 Ji
2 1 id<-/ $&f71 7 I$ 1
(I on[,[b B 10
-7-. . ,/--. -\g->\ yc 11 li 7, //(
Ll-q$J $.ti ..----_.A
I:, ,-, ', i yg n; !k UJ C 3ejlbi : $',.A . \\.L L-\\ J a: ;I B
mu \ 2 ,..., ~ I. '*\
.-_--. -l!
i;
i I(
i I i
m
d# -
io
';A
I D'
...?J- I
n 1: i'
'O I i i !3
l'.- - .-_ ~', , -, - ',,,"", , F I I E"' 1 r-, r i-= 1'- 1 --• - _. .. . , .. '.. Cl ,I
1' &* ., ,*4*
1: *4* 0
.;*#*e 0
,...- \
:\ 4 N *#* uf z d
z
u
N I u c
L1
m'
Iu ; u -
i
I !
z UJ IB 2:
I
t-
Jb a +arc &si
Es'7 I
1 1 ! ! I
I
I I
i i 1: I/
;,: D
$.$ -*:
I1 a IW*!
e 0
~-
- 111. BUILD OUT PRWECTIONS
To properly assess and plan for facilities to serve Zone 12
necessary to project the type and intensity of Land Use i zone builds out. These build out projections define La1 intensity and corresponding facilities demands. The basj this build out projection is the Carlsbad General Plan
5/1/87.
The methodology used in compiling this build out project consistent with that used in the '86 CFIP. The methodoll
briefly described as follows:
A. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
General Plan Land Use Designations were plotted on t
200' base map. A reduction of this map and sum( acreage calculations are shown on Exhibits 9 and 10 on 29 and 30. These designations were divided into suk to ease in facility analysis. The gross acreage of sub-areas was determined by planimeter measux Appendix 2 provides a detailed itemization of the su
calculations along with a map at 1" = 200' scale.
B. GENERALIZED CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
Consistent with adopted City policies and ordir
development constraints within each sub-area
identified. Constraints that may have existed on lan
is developed or has land use approvals were not inclu this analysis.
Constraints fall into two basic categories: 1) full partial. Fully constrained areas can not be u:
calculate residential density and are cons undevelopable. A portion of the area of 1 developmental constraints can be used in residential c
calculations.
Since development constraints sometimes overlap each for accounting purposes, constraints are organized hierarchy beginning at 'A' - major powerline easeme ending in 'J' - slopes between 25% - 40%. When this c only the area of the highest level constraint is calc for build out projection purposes. It is recognizE
underlying constraints exist and that these constraj well as others will be defined by specific envirol review for individual development projects
28
c
e EXHIBIT 10 0
ZONE 12 - LFMP BUILD OUT PROJECTIONS - CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS (AS OF 12/1/87)
-- ---____ ----------------------------------------------------.-------.-.--.-----------------------------
- I GENERAL PLAN1 I FULL I PARTIAL ISCHWL
ACRES OF DEVELOPMENTAL CONSTRAINTS (1) -----------------------------------------.----.---------------------------------
LAND US€ GROSS -----------------------------------------.----------------.-------------- ______
--------_--__-----------------------------------------------------.-.-------------.----------.---------- I 6.4 I 14.7 7.4 1 20.3
I I I
1 DESIGNATION 1 ACRES 1 A B C D E F G H I I TOTAL1 J J/2 1 K I RLH-1 j .l4l:z j 4.0 0.5 1.3 0.6 1 RLH-3 5.8 0.4 0.6 1 6.8 I 10.2 05:: I 1 RLM TOTAL I 412.4 I 4.0 6.3 0.0 1.7 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I 13.2 I 25.5 12.8 I 20.3 1 RH-1 I 26.0 I 0.5 I 0.5 I 0.8 0.4 I 1.1 RH-? 1 RH-3 I RH TOTAL I 115.8 I 0.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I 11.4 I 4.0 2.0 I 1.1
0.0 0.6 RLH-2 13.5
_____________-______---------------------------------------------.-.------------------------------------
----.------________ _-----_-_____---_--.--------------------------.--------.--------------.--------------
5.4 0.0 0.0 1.2 4.2 1 89:; 1 5.4 0.1 1 5.5 I 3.2 1.6 I _._..__-_-__--__---_---------------------.---------.--.---------.---------.---*-------------------------
I----------------------------------------------------------------------.-----------.--------..-----------
I RMH-1 I 7-8 I 0.6 0.2 I 0.8 I 0.0 0.0 1 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.0 RHH-2 I RMH-3 I ::: 1 I 0.0 I 0.0 0.0 I I RHH-4 I
1 :::'HIGH I 4.5 I 0-4 Om4 0.0 0.0 I A:: I I I
I I :LEM (2) I OS I
I
I
I 8-0 I 1 .o I 1.0 I 0.2 0.1 I _____________----------------------------------*-----..-.---.----------------------.---------------------
RMH TOTAL I 27.5 I 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 0;3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I 2.4 I 0.2 0.1 I
TOTAL RES I 555.7 I 4.0 15.0 0.0 1.7 6.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I 27.0 I 29.7 14.9 I 21.4
........................................................................................................ ........................................................................................................
............................................... ........................................................................................................
0.2
I 6.6 I 5.8 I 2.6 0.5 I !:7 I I 92.0 I 8.1 0.5 0.3 6.0 14.9 1 _____________--_________________________------------------------------------------------.---------------
9.1 II I 9-1 I 1 1 EL I 9.1 I
1.1 I 1.1 1 I
I
I
EX1 STING
_____-_________---__---------------------------------------------------------.---------.---.------------
EX1 STING 1 EKY 1 1.1 I ____________________------.-----------------------------.-----------.-----------------------------------
EXISTING I COLLECTOR I 1.3 1 1.3 I 1.3 I --------------------------------------------------------=--=--------------------------------------------- ........................................................ -- ............................................. I TOTAL ZONE I 669.5 I 15.1 27.9 0.0 2.2 12.3 0.0 ,o.o 0.0 0.0 I 57.5 I 29.7 14.9 I 30.0 ____________________---------------------------------------.---------------------------------------------
NOTES: (1) CONSTRAINTS: I - OTHER ENVIR. FEATURE
K - SCHOOL SITE OVERLAY
A - MAJOR POWERLINE EASEMENT E - RIPARIW
B - CIRCULATION F - VETLANDS J - SLOPES 25% TO 40%
C - RAILROAD ROU G - FLOOOPLAIN D - SLOPES > 40% H - PERMANENT 8m'I OF UATER
(2) SCHOOL DEDICATIOW TO COME FROM UNCONSTRAINED LAND UITHIN THE UNDERLYING GP CATEGORY (SEI (3) EXISTING DEDlUTED RIGHT-OF-UAV SOLELY YITHIN ZONE 11.
30
W W
Full environmental constraints are as follows:
A. Major (2 69 kv) power-line easements B. Proposed circulation element roadways
C. Railroad track beds or R-o-W
Do Slopes of 40% or more in grade E. Significant riparian, or woodland habitats
F. Significant wetlands
G. Floodways
H. Permanent bodies of water I. Other significant environmental features determined by the Environmental Rec process.
Partial Developmental Constraints include:
J. Slopes between 25-40% in grade: only 1/2 the area within slopes between 25-40%
grade can be used in residential dens calculations.
Also included in the constraint analysis is the program of:
K. Planned school facilities
The approximate area and location of school facilities indicated in the General Plan. The beneficial and effic:
provision of these facilities require a minimum area of : free of development constraints. Consistent with City
school district policy, the minimum acreage identified the General Plan for school facilities was not used in applicable sub-area's residential density calculations.
C. EXISTING LAND USE
Existing land uses within each sub-area as of 1/1/87 I identified. Only residential uses exist in Zone 12. TI are shown on Exhibit 11 on page 32.
D. DEVELOPING LAND USE
Developing land use is a category which defines the St; or stage in the developing process a Land Use proposal project is in. The development process begins whe development application is submitted to the City. Var procedures are followed depending on the type of aPPlica' submitted. In all cases, applications are reviewed ensure that all City standards are met and conform with
previous discretionary approvals prior to finalizing
31
0 e
Projects and issuing building permits. Once the proje received final occupancy, the development process en( the Land Use is identified as an existing land use.
EXHIBIT 11 EXISTING LAND USE AS OF 1/1/87 ......................................................
Residential:
General Plan Project
Land Use Gross Phas Sub-area Acres Project Name Project # DU's
RLM - 3 120 Rancho del CT 73-18 419 Ponderosa
RLM - 3 51 Santa Fe CT 83-16 170 Ridge ------------------------------------------------------.
Land use in the developing process was identified review of the City Of Carlsbad Planning Depa: Development records. A detailed itemization of deve
land uses is provided in Exhibit 12 on page 34.
receiving tentative discretionary approval, a land c considered approved. The approval is valid until thc use is developed and occupied or the tentative apl
expires.
E. BUILD OUT PROJECTIONS CALCULATIONS
Both residential and non-residential build out proj ec
as of 1/1/87 for Zone 12 are shown on Exhibit 13 and
pages 35 and 36. Build out projections are calculat
follows:
1. Residential Build Out Projections
The net developable acreage of each residential use sub-area is multiplied by the adopted ( Management control point as shown below:
32
0 W
Growth Management
General Plan Control Point6 Land Use Desianation Dwellina Units/Ac
RL 1.0
RLM 3.2
RM 6.0
RMH 11.5 RH 19.0
The result provides the base residential dwelling build out projections for each sub-area consistent
the passage of Proposition E on November 4, 1986.
existing and approved dwelling units are subtracted this yield to indicate the amount of future reside
development in the -zone.
2. Non-Residential Build Out Projections
The net-developable acreage of each non-residential
use sub-area is multiplied by either .3 or .' described below. The resultant figures providc estimate of ultimate land use intensity as define building square footage for each sub-area. This est
is used for facility planning purposes.
6 Dwelling unit per acre of non-constrained land pursu:
to 21.53 and 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
33
4 0 EXHIBIT 12 e '. ZONE 12 - DEVELOPING LAND USES AS OF 1/1/87
----------.-----------------------------.-------------.----.-------------.---.------------------.--------
I I I I I
I GENERAL PLAN! I I I I I 1 I DEVELOPING STATUS
I LAN0 USE I GROSS I PROJECT I PROJECT I APPLICATION I TENTATIVE 1 FINAL I BUILDING 11 rOTAL 1 SUB-AREA I ACRES 1 NUMBER I ACRES I SUBMITTAL I APPROVAL I IUP I PERMITS I I
I RLH-1 I 146.5 I I 33.0 I I 85 I I II 85
I---------------------------------------------------------
I---------------------------------.---------------------------------.----------------------------------.-,
I RLM-2 I 13.5 I I I I I I II 0 \ RLM-3 I 252.4 I CT 73-18 1 100.0 I I I I II 1 RLM-3 I I CT 83-16 I 42.0 I I I 1 II I------------.------------------------------------------------.---------------------------------.----.---
I-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------..--------.-----.--
I RM-1 I 26.0 I I I I I 1 II 0
] RM-2 1 6.9 I I I I I 1 II a 1 RM-3 I 82.9 I I 68.8 I : I 578 I 1 iI 57e I------..-------------.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I RM TOTAL I 115.8 I I 68.8 1 01 578 I 01 0 II 57E I--*---------.----------------------------------.-----------.------------.--------.---------------------. I RMH-1 I 7.8 I I I I I 1 II t I RMH-2 I 7.2 I I I I I 1 11 (
I RMH-3 I 4-5 I I I I I 1 II I RMH-4 I 8.0 I I 8.0 I I 126 I 1 II 12 I-----------------------*----------------------------------------------------.--------------------..----
I RHH TOTAL I 27.5 I 0.0 I 8.0 I 01 126 I 01 0 II 12 ........................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
I 1s-1 I 4.5 I i I I I 1 Ii
1 JR. HIGH I 0.0 I I I I I 1 II I ELEM (2) I I I I I I 1 11 I" I 5.8 I I 1 I I 1 II 1 0s I 92.0 I I I I I 1 11
I RLH TOTAL I 412.4 I 1 175.0 I 01 85 I 01 0 I1 85
t
I TOTAL RES I 555.7 1 1 251.8 I 01 789 I 01 0 II 78
---X------------- - ----- --- --------------------------. .................................................. -------------Off-=I-----r---1---=--------------------------'
NOTES; (1) SEE EXHIBIT 11.
34
e 0
I1 -1 I A I II I1 - I 11 I I
I
I I I
I w I~~~l~ldmmlOlt-4I~blNll~ll~lo~~ I p.da I QI I .d cv I m I CObmd 110 11 Q) 11 pI I r( 11 I 3rnlcv dlald dl I -1 d II \o I1 rl I m 11 B- I II -1 I I II II - 1 I1 11 I1 I I1 II I I1 It I1 I I1 II I I1 I I I1 It I I1 II I 11
23 1
1 I 1-1 1-1 I - I1 - It I 11 n I I I1 II I II I1 I 11 b I 0 IV) 1V)l COlCOl ~IIIIQIII IcnII a l w la) Irnl PIPI NlcvllcoII ICOII I I1 InlVII dldllbll IbII SI 2 I;.
Fr I 4QI I1 I1 I II II I II w
I II I1 I IId
2 I VJtn I I1 I1 I II ll I II E; &
I x3 I I1 I1 I I1 I1 I I1 H Cr I
h I 4 VJI I1 I1 I 11 11-I Ids E
3 0 IWHGIhI I1 I1 I II II I II E
22
lx
I1 I1 I II II I I1 I lxtn I I1 I1 I I1 II I ll b I II 11 1 II m I II II I I1
I1 I1 I II II I II c3 I-11-11 I
I (olao1 It I IIaoII ICOII 2 m1m1 I1 I IIV)II ImII 0
I H- I I1 I1 I II II I I1 2 w 0 H wn I I1 II I II II I II 0 VJ 1 I II I1 I I1 I1 I II PC 2 E.c u w I I 1-1 I -1 I - II - II
0 I 4 2 I ON0 I N I *am I Q) I duSNo\ I co I1 fi I1 m I CO I1 oe I HI30 I Ie'lz I b I * UI IO I QlbUIpI I CO II \o I1 P I CO I1 & I l33Hlm fildld *tal I N 110 II t-4 I co II BB
dl3 I w UI Id1 II I IINII I~IIOZ I ZOBI
I now I1 I1 I II II I It u 3
I II II I 11 Ec G4 I VJVJHO I II II I4W3S I I1 II I I1 II I II 2 0 ma HA I rPSrPP( I I1 It I II II I II w XEW I I If I1 I II II I I1 c 2 I I I --I 1-1 I-11-I1 I IIWO
I P( INNNI 10001 1murlnm1 I1 11 I II4W J I 0-1 ..*I I .**I 1 ***'I II 11-1 IIZW
H w-I II I 11 II I II II I II VJ 1-1 I-11-lldl IIZH B z W I I I1 11 0 I VJ I LnNm I N I oma I FI I o\DlnQI IO II m II I II 3 H I Bwl * *I *I *I *I *I *I1 *IIOIV1IIOW VJ I W# I cum0 I \o I *dm I d I Pcu)*I I m I1 N I1 I3 I Ec I1 p:w I ZOldd*l\olCu PI01 I (v II QI II I H I1 Wvl
II al I I I1 I II II II rl N I1
I I
I I I -I 1-1 I -ll-lI w I w II -- I I 11 II 1 II II z I z II I1 I1
I I& *I41 **I I* I J II VJ II E I w II & -141 --141- I4 II zil II 0 I3 II 0
GI
I
I E.c II S II ps 10 li z d
w I
I I
I a- I I1 I1 I a3 I I1 I1
0 I I I I --I 1-1 VI I I II II I ut mlml 'I I I I1 m II I QI I1
m I &I 11 I1 I II 11 I II
I 4
I 21 Y
I 91 11 I 11 -11-1 -11 ZH 0
I I I1 II I I1 II I II W H
I
I
zdlmmml I\oI\ol IdF4rldl ll IIcvI I Iddddl II 11-1 HZ
I I 1-1 I II 1141 IIBP
4r
I Il~llNlZII 141 I II IId!311-- I1 T" N1ml 2
E
cv I old I
I JtOWI IBI 141 I 0 I1 ll E4 I II I $=%dNC)IBI 101
0 I ZZCPI ZJZJZJ; ZJ 1 I 1 I I I zzzE5: 13: II Ec II* I Ec I1
I II II 0 I H I1 *. I II IlNI~IIVJ I nl I1 I --I 11 I- I II I1 I c;l 11 w I3 :
lbl IO I dmm* 1 E.c II c7 I1 I c7 I1 2 I WCIIIIIII I~~N~IBI IIIII IIRII~~I~II
N I ~~ei...l.i~~"~~~~~~~~t~~~in!~~ II 0 II 3 I 0 I1
I 11 I I1 I1
35
0 0
I I II I1 IC] 1fioo4, II\oII IW lu700-r IIOII -I\O00-P lIFll\ WE.( I - - - - I1 -11 p:L I -0co-e II fi 11 I H3 I*Q)Crcl IIOrlI I BB.1
A I w3a1
fi I WRVll II II II - II Q) I I I I II II I1 II I I I PI II II II II I I LC 1 0 I I
q I
!I r( I!
2 2 s; OLC I I II I1 II II E *I ll II
I1 II E& i 11 I1
2
I H Xoll -1 . II II II II E
8 E
E.( I I4 zl~ooa IIWII
0 I woEl*oao* II14cII
I
I1 II II II II H II - II I I
I I II I1 I1 I t3I 1 I
I &LC I II I1 I QYI I1 I1 I
I wvl I . II I1 I I I1 II I I II - II 4 CnI I1 II
Y 2 1 I 2% I
O H
w
3 IZH OlaOOV IlOll eo I OBBH I WOO* IIPIII
r( I223 I ---9
ad I nom~ammm II~II HH I MHdh I I1 4 II m3 I fnClIH0 I I1 I1 II II II II 11 I1
Hn3
I I I I II - I1 I* de I1 II 0 I1 II
c) I1 II I dH E.l
II II I HVJ I" I1 II I IBZWI P
H I ZZWF I I1 II I OW& II I1 II II II II
VJ w
l&fn E11 II II I EW3fn I II II I wgdw 1 II I1 I I II II Z II - II I I & I I II I1 I I mool-a I1 l- II
I rp 1 rnOONQD It a II d I 4vII Cvd WIIOII
II II II II I1 II II I1 II I1
I w I z I PI I I I1 I1 I I I1 - II I I II II
I I1 w I1 I1 z II I PC HI I WBI x It 0 It I GlQY4l g I1 N I1
II 4 II II Ec II I ZZCnl I 'W ClllCnfzGl rnIIOII 0 I BtyW30 II Ec It I I1 It I
1 $mE I
I & 10
I zazs! I
E4 "3 I
3
7 B
I 3 I *II *I1 E
I I pw' 11 4 I1 cv I I 2381 II II
(-I I w4 t ZI
ON
I HHHl
II n I 3 E:
II d H I m5: x
I 83
I W~HI~ E
36
e w
The Growth Management Program uses the .3 facto estimate building square footage yields on eithe unapproved and unimproved vacant unconstrained land 1
2) urbanized underdeveloped non-residential sites. r
urbanized underdeveloped sites typically exk
significant man-made constraints to development. Pr constraints are: a) compatibility with surrounding
uses and b) proper interfacing with exis
infrastructure and public facilities.
The .4 factor is used to estimate building square fol
yields on unconstrained lots which have approved lanc
projects and have all infrastructure in place. A
January, 1987, no non-residential areas of this
exist in the zone. The land use intensity of
existing and approved non-residential developmen' subtracted from this estimate to indicate the amour future non-residential land use intensity.
The .4 factor is used to estimate building square foc yields on areas which have approved land use projects have all infrastructure in place.
F. DWELLING UNIT TRANSFER
The build out projections for Zone 12 include a dwelling
transfer of 179 dwelling units out of Zone 12 and into 11. A dwelling unit transfer may be allowed within a quac
pursuant to the Goals and Policies of the General Plan
Title 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. A dwelling transfer must assure 1) the overall unit count in the quac
is not changed, 2) no other property owners are advei affected, and 3) the maximum number of units allowed by General Plan land use designations must not be exceeded.
The total dwelling unit transfer between Zones 10, 11 ar
includes a transfer of 206 dwelling units from Zone 10 anc units from Zone 12 into Zone 11. Units transferred from 2 io and 12 must be offset by additional permanent open SF
Throughout this document, the dwelling unit transfer of dwelling units out of Zone 12 is accounted for in all PU facility build out and phasing projections.
37
* 0 0
I.
G. BUILD OUT POPULATION PROJECTION
The build out population projection for Management Zone determined by applying a population generation rate o persons/dwelling unit. The build out population proj
for Zone 12 are shown on Exhibit 15 on page 39. Thes out population projections are used consistently thr this plan for the purpose of predicting demand for
facilities.
38
W 0
---------_- ------------- ------ ; zzz :~-~~~:~ON~;~:~~~~:hI~Z;~!I~~~ ; -8N: : *ONIT: N: Q-:ZI!Q:$II I(
I * I1 . I Y II - I) -I .I I-c ,
-27 I
OO *
I -----,
8 I I , I1
I1 Ln 4
II I1
I It I1
I II * I; :I II II II
: s5:y : "ON: -*-a : 283 : I 0 I
-1 , ---- I -II -, 4 -11 II - I! 11 ' --- : - : --- :
1 n II
II - I Y II
ns 1,
0
I I I ,
28 20. e a ~~~~~~~~~~i~j~~~~:~~~~:~II~~~ I-CcF I Pl II h I IT I1 N 11 I I I I N, : VI YI
'0: 3:3: I n (I - II
a CICI J" IlrlI
; ----- : ---: -: ---: -: ----: -: -: -11 -:
I I i s. a
i ---: -: ---: -: ----: I -I: - : -I( If - 11 II : KKK' :hChCc: :hChC;hC: 11 : , K I: II
I I I I II 2 I! If I: 8
I
I
I I I 0 I t
, I
I
I
II II I
I: - : 8-1
I I It 11 11 I1 II I 11 I1
n 0 II I1 VI II II 0. I1
II u I: 11
lnllnl : !ln: ;:,I: : !<;
I i-: II - II
' ----- 1 --- I - I ---I -: ---_: -I( -, -
, I
I
-'-lloI
I t I I I 4
I I
I I
1 I
n II 4; *, : e. : ;j;qqi 9% :z 80. ;N
I I 8 I I I I a a I v)I 2,
c, UI -*
%I
< 2
3: Y
8 ; ===== Ly
I I I I I
mlml 1 nm, r I
I I
I I I I
8% :
I I
I t
-*-a VI: *-: WI -0. I I-
X
I ---- I - n - I - 11 - 11 I1 n
$+Yl n II n II
---, - I --- I -, I -, c, 3 5 : I FESe:***: < WPlIddd: :cUcUN@ I???: :N"ni: I???*: : I: ;q /i I I t I I I , I I
, I n
n
I
I I , , *
I I I
?: O*
I I , I
I I: II - I --- I - e ---- I -I - I - 11 - II
I "I: 4
l B II fl:
WI I1 I-----l----I-l---: - I ---- I -I - I -11 - 11 I I 0:olfo: I)*::
II II - II - I1 a I -----, ---, n dl
-I : Nr: s:U-n:O:FsNh:N:-: ' IO:! 31
NI CI
2
S/$N_j
I ----- I --- I - I ---, - I ----I --I: -,
A
I I I ':Pl:Qb"$;s:$;g:s: I j2 ;E*si*:' WI
4; e:e: lnllnl !2:Sc:s: iff:
I 8 I I I I e
I I I I
I
I I I
I I I I
I,
me
1
I u I1
i
:o ra I
I I s: av)
I I
I I * I ,
I
I
1 I ,
I I I I I ,
I I I I IIII
I I , I
I II n II n II I1 nn
n IIdZ
:Sria%
I? n~ I I I I
E' * ----- I i --- I I - e --- t - i ---- I : - I i - 8 - n - f mI -1
I I SI , 1 I I
I I I I I 1 I I I 1
I I
, I I ig! nanN me -* uv) : , memo
8 I I 8 t I I I
I I , I
I a
I I
$:$I am1
x,
w.
t I I
I , I I I
II , I I I
#I ,
I I: ;;;a*
I : IISSZ
XI E2 :
v)
X W I
t ,
I I
-
an n u MU n urn- I I I t ----- i --- * - 4 --- 1 - t ---- 8 - fl - I - m - n
I Wdhv) I NO: ' 's"$dq:c"cU yb:si3#zz: IlYYb%
i Qhm' i Ni?! cn .lICt I .- .C :zz2a ;3*k:F: p I:"""
I II II 1 1 2 : z-"" awwl :;a: : z2g f
8 ----- I --- I - I --- I - I ---- I -a - # - I1 - I1 Y Y Y
:3
Wcrl *d# *<I *de I *<a(Y*<a :d:v):z! I1 u i i 4ni
:g: :z: :pa:2; II I <a= : : gal? :Y??:*' #-ym:E:YYT?: :<;t:<II
* ; zav) yzz @==X# id&&ifiizgjz:LLf b ==I= I =IC oaa3:S:E:3aEi
'-----------~---I-'-,,,'_q,L,,,
I l * =AI--: IC, :Ne I-ll%Xh;
I
I I I I I I , I I I I
I -1
I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I I
I I I , I I I I
* mea-
I I I I
1 I I
#I , * I I
I , I I I
I
I t I I 11 II VI v) v) n II n una- I1 I1 c N Pl
IW I a .. I I
I I
I
I
I ,
I * I I
I I
I
I I
.I
I , I I t I , I I
:: n am *am nw II :2rr ig
1 dW<U
n c II
39
e 0
*-
e IV- PHASING PROJEazQNS
Phasing projections estimate when, where and how much devel8 will occur in Zone 12 between now and build out. ~l difficult to predict exactly, phasing projections begin tc
possible advance planning and programming of public facilit
assure adopted performance standards are continually Specifically phasing projections:
Project estimated demands for public facilit a yearly basis until build out.
2. Project and establish thresholds when and public facilities improvements are needed.
3. By projecting facility thresholds allow suff lead time for facility programming to i performance standards are continually met.
4. Through threshold identification allow the Cj efficiently and effectively implement I
facility improvements.
The '86 CFIP projects residential phasing to be 1,250 dwc units per year. This projection was based on a review of tl
Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projections alonc
those utilized in the City's Capital Improvement Program a1 Public Facilities Management Systems, Monitoring Report of 1
1986. The '86 CFIP's public facility programming was baE
part on this projection.
Zone 12's phasing projections consider the Citywide reside
phasing projections used in the '86 CFIP to identify I
facility thresholds.
1.
A. ZONE 12 LAND USE PHASING
1. pesidentiak
The residential phasing projections for Zone 1
shown on Exhibit 16 on page 42. The proj residential phasing schedule is intended to be USE
projecting future need and timing of public facili It is a tool to allow the city to anticipate f public facility needs and to budget monies for
improvement. The pro] ected residential pk
schedule is not absolute. The actual numb€ dwelling units to be built each year Will
depending on economic conditions.
40
0 e
Exhibit 16 also shows the residential phasing schedu: of the adopted LFMP's. The adopted LFMP's include L1 Zones 1-6 and 19. For purposes of this analysis, Z(
11 is included in the phasing table, Exhibit 16 shc
the adopted yearly phasing schedules for these 201 and shows the adopted '86 CFIP Citywide projeci phasing schedule.
Exhibit 17 on page 45 shows a similar phasing schedl for the zones located within the southeast quadrant
the city. The southeast quadrant phasing projectic
are provided to make the review and future update i
monitoring of quadrant specific facilities mc manageable and easier to understand. Also, a Zone
residential phasing schedule is shown on Exhibit 18 page 46 for use in the review and update of zc
specific public facilities.
41
e EXHIBIT 16 0
CITY UIDE RESIDENTIAL PHASING PROJECTIOWS
FOR FACILITY PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY t
I.?
..................................................................................................
I I
I I \ I-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------*--------------
I
I I I I I
5 6 7 I I I IAS OF 1/11 1 2 3 4
I I I I I I (1) (21 (3) (4) (5 1 (6) I I I.---------------.----------.----------------.--------------------------------.--------------------
(EXISTING I 1 1987 I 9,012 1,993 231 2,668 0 6,426 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*-------
IPROJECTED I I 1987 I 508 225 2 230 1% I I I I 1988 \ 305 226. 3 115 130 I I I I 1989 I 292 0' 3 115 0 I I I I 1mI 92 0 5 121 0 I I I I 1991 I 48 36 2 BLD CUT 235 I I I I 19921 94 36 2 230 I I I I 1993 I 98 36 2 246 I
I I I 1994 I 98 21 1 2n 1 I I I 199s I 98 5 1 131 I I I I 19961 98 BLD OUT BLD CUT 1 20 I I I I 1997 I 98 36 I I I I 1998 I 98 85 I I I I 19991 98 85 I I I I 2000 I 98 85 I I I I 2001 I 98 85 I I I I 2002 I 98 85 I
I I I 2003 I 98 85 I I I I 2004 1 98 85 I I I 1 2005 I 9a 85 I I I I 2006 I 9a 85 I I I I 2007 I 96 85 I I I I 2008 I 98 85 I I I I 2009 I 98 85 I I I I 2010 I 98 85 1 I I I 2011 1 98 85 I I I I 2012 I 8W OUT BLD OUT I
IEUILD OUT1 I 2013 I I I.----.-------------------.--------------------------.---------------------------------*----------- I
TOTAL 12,220 2,576 252 3,029 9,218 I I
I STATUS I I YEARS I LOCAL FACILITY UANAGEMENT ZONES
I I NOTES 1
-_.-_______-_______-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES: (1) Zone 1 LFW, adopted Scpt-r 1, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9221.
(21 Zone 2 LFW, adopted Jura 16, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9123.
(3) Zone 3 LFW, adopted Ray 19, 1987, C.C. Reso. NO. 9064.
(4) Zona 4 LFW, adopt& Jrna 16, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9122.
(5) Zone 5 LFUP, adopted August 4, 1987, C.C Reso. No. 9188.
(6) Zone 6 LFW, adapted Wovcnbsr 10, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9291.
42
0 EXHIBlT 16 (page 2 of 3) m
----*-----------------------.-----------------------.-------------------.-.----------------------------
I I I-------.*-----*--------------------------------------------------------------------.-------------------
I I
/AS OF 1/11 a 9
I I t I ( 7) I----------------------------------------.----.-----------------------..----.---------------------------
I I I I l------------------------------------------.------.------.-----------------------------------------.-..-.
I 1987 I 383 0 I 1988 I 117 . 0 I 1989 I 432 436
I 1990 I 510 382
1 YEARS I LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEHENT ZONES
10 11 12 13 14 1s 16 17
I 1987 1 580 589
I 1991 I 375 296
I 1992 I 275 1 85
I 1993 I 260 BLD OUT
I 1994 I 240
I 1996 I 164
I 1997 1 72
I 1WI I 2000 I I 2001 I I ZOO2 I
I 2004 I I 2005 1
I 2006 I
I 2008 I I 2009 I I 2010 I I 2011 I I 2012 I
I---------.---------.----.----.-----------*---*.-----------------------------------------------------------
I TOTAL I 3,S% 1,886
I 1995 I 207
I 1998 I BLD WT
I 2003 I
1 2007 1
I 2013 I
_--______1-___-__1__-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: (7) The Zw 12 LFUP phasing nunkrs are inc1Ud.d bacMe of the interrelated
fil)MC. plM with ZOrn 11.
43
e EXHIBIT 16 (page 3 of 3) 0
t.
*
.................................................................................................
I II II I I I TOTALS OF ADOPTED LFMPs I I
I YEARS I LOCAL FACILITY HANAGEMEN1 ZONES 11 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL 11 I I 11 ADOPTED CITYUIDE CITYVIDE 11
IAS OF 1/1 I 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 11 PHASED D.U.'S POPULATION~I
1 I 11 DU'S AS OF 1/1
I---------------------------------------.---------------------------------------------------------
II I I (8) II II I_._______-__-______----------------------------------.-------------------------------------------
I I II II I I II II I--------------------------------------------------------------------------.----------------------
I 1987 I 0 11 21,279 23,348 57,693 11
I 1987 I 0 11 1,543 23,348 57,693 \\ I 1988 I 139 11 1,035 24,891 61,506 11 I 1989 I 251 11 1,529 25,926 64,063 11 I 1990 I 392 11 1,502 27,455 67,841 I I 1 lW1 1 426 11 1,418 28,957 71,553 I I I lW2 I 362 11 1,184 30,375 75,057 11 I 1993 I 410 11 1,032 31,559 T7,982 11 I 1994 I 332 II 969 32,591 80,533 11 I 1995 I 431 11 873 33,561 82,929 11 I 1996 I 301 11 683 36,434 85,087 11 I 1997 I 226 \I 432 35,117 86,m 11 I 1998 I BLD OUT 11 184 35,550 87,844 11
I 19991 11 1% 35,733 88,297 11 I 2000 I 11 184 35,917 88,751 11 I 2001 I 11 184 36,100 89,201 11 I 2002 I 11 184 36,284 89,657 11 I 2003 I 11 184 36,467 90,111 11
I 20% I II 184 36,651 90,564 11 I 2005 1 11 1% 36,834 91,018 11
1 2006 I 11 184 37,018 91,471 11 I 2007 I I\ 184 37,201 91,925 II
I 2008 I 11 184 37,385 92,378 11
I 2009 I 11 184 37,568 92,832 I\ I 2010 I 11 184 37,752 93,285 11
I 2012 I II 38,119 91,192 I I
I 2013 I II 38,119 96,192 I I
I 2011 I 11 184 37,935 93,T39 II
I----------------------------------------------------------------.-------------------------------.
I TOTAL I 3,270 36,050 .--------- ____________________-----------------------.------------------------------------------
Notes: (8) Zone 19, adopted Dtcanbar 8, 1987, C.C. Resolution 19322.
44
w EXHIBIT 17
SOUTHEAST QUADRANT RESIOENTIAL PHASING PROJECTIONS
FOR FACILITY PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY * ........................................................................................................
I 11 TOTALS OF I I\ AOOPTED LFHP'
I YEARS I LOCAL FACILITY MNAGEUENT ZONES 11 TOTAL TO 1 STATUS I
I I 1 I I [QUAORANT QUAOR
18 11 O.U.'S POPULA I I IAS OF 1/11 6-SE 10 11 12 17
I I I I IIAS OF 1/1 I 1 NOTES I
I EXISTING I I 1987 I 6,019 580 589 11 7,188 17,;
I--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I II I---------------------*------------------------------------------------------------------.------------.--.
I I I I II I I I I II I------------.----------------------------------------------------*--------------------------------------.
I I I 1988 I 70 117 0 11 7,766 19,'
I PROJECTED I I 1987 I 1% 383 0 11 7,188 17,;
I I I 1989 I 0 432 436 11 7,953 19,( I I I lopol 0 510 382 11 8,821 21,' I I I 1991 I 184 375 296 11 9,713 24,l I I 1 1992 I 180 27s 185 11 10,568 26, I I I 1993) 246 240 BLD CUT 11 11,208 27,t I I I 19961 246 240 11 11,694 28,E I I I 199) 1 131 207 I I 12,180 30,C I I I 1996 I 120 164 11 12,518 30,5 I 1 1 1997 1 36 72 11 12,802 31,t I I I 1998 I 85 Bu) CUT 11 12,910 31,5 I I I 19991 8s 11 12,995 32,l
1 I I 2000 I 85 11 13,080 32,3 I 2001 I 85 11 13,165 32,s
I I I 2002 I 85 11 13,250 32,7 11 13,335 32,S I I I 2003 I 85
85 11 13,420 33,l
I I I 200s I 85 11 13,505 33,3 I I I 20061 85 11 13,590 33,s~ I I I 2007 I 85 11 13,675 33,7' I I I 2-1 85 11 13,760 34,O I I I 2WI 85 11 13,845 34,2 I I I 2010 I 85 11 13,930 34,4 I I I 2011 1 85 11 14,015 34,6 I I I 2012 I BLD OUT 11 14,100 34,8
I BUILD OUT I I 2013 I
I I
I I 1 2004 I
11 16,100 34,& I-----------------------------.-------------------------------------------------------------*-------------
I TOTAL 8,617 3,595 1,m -_-_________________----------------.-----------------------------.-------------------------------------- -_-________I________------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------
IPROPOSITIOM E RESIDENTIAL QUADRANT CAP 17,328 42,8 -__-________________--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
45
0
EXHIBIT 18 e
1-
-,- ZONE 12 RESIDENTIAL PHASING PROJECTION
FOR FACILITY PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY
--------------------_____________I______- .....................
I 11 TOTALS OF I
I--------------------------------------------------------------- I 11 ADOPTED LFMP'S I
I STATUS I I YEARS I 11 TOTAL TOTAL 1 I I I I 11 ZONE ZONE I I I IAS OF 1/11 ZONE 12 11 D.U.'S POPULATION(
I I I IIAS OF 1/1 I I II I
I I I----------------------.------------------.-----------.---------
I I I I II I I I I I II I I.------------------------------------.-------------------------
I NOTES I
EXISTING I I 1987 I 589 11 589 1,455 I
I PROJECTED I I 1987 I 0 11 589 5,481 I
I I I '1988 I 0 11 589 1,455 I
I I I 1989 I 436 I I 589 1,455 I
I I I 1990 I 382 11 1,025 2,533 I
I I I 1991 I 296 11 1,407 3,477 I
I I I 1992 1 185 11 1,703 4,208 I I 1993 I BLD OUT 11 1,888 4,665 I 1 I I1 1,888 4,665 I I I I 1994 I I I I 1995 I ll 1,888 6,665 I
I I I '997 I II 1,888 4,665 I II 1,888 4,665 I I I I 1998 I 11 1,888 4,665 I I 1 I 1=1 I I I 2000 I II 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2001 I I1 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2002 1 II 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2003 I I1 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2004 I I1 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2005 1' 11 1,888 4,665 I I 1 I 2006 I 11 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2007 I 11 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2008 I I1 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2009 I 11 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2010 I 11 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2011 I I\ 1,888 4,665 I I I I 2012 I I[ 1,888 4,665 I
lBUIL0 owl I 2013 I 11 1,888 4,665 I
I-------------------------------------------------------------- I
TOTAL 1,888 I I
I I I 1996 I 11 1,888 4,665 I
_______-_________-__------------------------------------------
46
W w
2. Non-Residential
The citywide non-residential phasing projection including Zone 12, are shown on Exhibit 19 cn page 4 Similar to residential phasing, these projections a estimated for purposes of public facility plannin
Exhibit 20 on page 51 indicates the southeast quadra non-residential phasing projections page 52 shows the Zone 12 non-residential phasi
projections. Comparable to residential phasi projections, these exhibits are provided to facilita
future monitoring of this Local Facility Manageme Plan
and Exhibit 21
3. Phasina Summarv
Both residential and non-residential phasi projections are provided in order to plan for pub1 facilities. The plan provides these projections establish thresholds which necessitate the need f additional facilities. The Growth Management Progr and the Zone 12 LFMP anticipate that the actual phasj
of development in this zone will vary from the projections.
phasing result in the failure of any performar standard to be met. The public facility threshol established in this plan will ensure that compliar
with the adopted performance standards is maintained no development will be allowed until compliance reached.
In no instance, however, will a change
47
e 0 EXHIBIT 19
J- ZONE 12 - CITY WIDE NOW-RESIDENTIAL PROJECTIONS -.
1. FOR PLANNING PURPOSES auLy * * t
----*-----------------------------------------------------------.--------------------------------
\ STATUS \ I YEARS I LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONES
I I I I I I I I 1 2 3 4 5 I 1 1 I I
I.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.-----------------------
I___-----___----------------------------------------------------~~-~~~~~~.~~~~~~~--~~-~~~~~--~----~
I I I 1988 I as,o60 0 141,134 0 954,530 ( I I I 1989 I 113,750 40,249 9,148 0 954,530 ( I I 1 1990 I 5,000 116,566 78,408 o 954,530 34,a7! I I I 1991 I 44,500 ELD OUT 37,897 89,211 956,530 34,a7! I I 1 1992 I 55,400 30,056 ELD OUT 954,530 34.8~ I I 1 1993 I 28,000 44,431 954 , 530 34, ai” I I I 1994 I 67,500 13,068 954.530 34, ai” I I I 1995 I 62,000 1,307 956,530 34,877 I I I 1996 1 65,000 99,317 954,530 34,875 I I I 1997 1 95,000 ELD OUT 493,788 34,875 I I I 1998 I 77,000 493,788 34,875 I I I 1999 1 62,000 493,788 30,875 I I I 2000 1 88,560 493,788 34,875 I I 1 2001 1 65,500 493,788 34,a7! I I I 2002 I 38,000 493,788 34,875 I I I 2003 I 28,000 493,788 34,875 I I I 2004 I 75,000 493,788 34,875
I I I 2006 I 75,000 493.788 34,875 I I I 2007 I 75.000 493,788 34,875 I I I 2008 I 82,550 493,788 34,875
493,788 34,875
I I I 2010 I 96,800 493,788 34,875
I I I 2011 I 192,700 493,7193 34,875 1 I I 2012 I 195,700 493,7193 34,875
IBUILD UJTl I 2013 I 214,700 m,m 34,875
I=IPalt=~lltll-t~~~~8*-%8~~=~a8~-==a8%8~~====8~88~~x===aa====
I
I (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (61 I I NOTES: I
IEXISTING I I 1987 I 2,230,160 266,499 1,679,832 0 4,256.609 841,434
0 954,530 100,00[ I PROJECTED I I 1987 I 139,500 0 90,169
I I I 2005 I 127,550 493,788 34,075
I I I ZOO9 I 94,050
TOT# 4,578,980 423,314 2,224,767 89,211 22,196,299 1,778,434
====P====lOl-*r---~===8=-~-==~==¶===~====~=~=a==~====================
NOTES: (1) zona 1 LFW, *tcd scptmtwr I, 1987, C.C. R~O. YO. 9221.
(2) Zone 2 LFW, adopted Jmo 16, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9123.
(3) Zone 3 LFW, adopted May 19, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9084.
(4) Zone 4 LFW, adopted ~mo 16, 1987, C.C. Ruo. NO. 9122, indicates a 2.1 net acre s
however, no phasing is provided.
(5) Zone 5 LFW, adopted August 4, 1987, C.C. Reso. NO. 9188.
(6) Zone 6 LFW, adopted Novabar 10, 1987, C.C. RMO. NO. 9291.
48
W EXHlBIT 19 (page 2 of 3)
-----_-------------------------------------------------------------*----------------------.---------
I 1 YEARS I LOCAL FACILITY WNAGEHEWT ZOWES
I I 8 9 10 11 12 13 16 15 16 17 18 I
I 1 I ( 7)
I (---------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------
I I 1987 I 0 0
I I---------------------------------------*------------------------------------------------------------
I I 1987 1 0 0
I I '1988 1 0 0
I I 1989 [ 46,885 0
I I 1990 I 285,789 0
I 199' I 20s,7a9 60,984 I I 1992 I 285,189 8L.D OUT I I I 1993 I
I 1994 I I I 1995 i I
I 1996 I I I 1997 I I I 1998 I I I 1WI I I 2000 1 I I 2001 I I I 2002 I I I 2003 k I I 2004 , I I 2005 I I I 2006 I I I 2007 I I I 2008 I I I 2009 I I I 2010 I I I 2011 I I I 2012 I I I 2013 I I I I aIaIf.U111- --~m~~3m~mxaI~~~~s11a~~~x~x~~a~ax=aa========
I TOTAL #)c,252 60,984 I
I I I
I I I
8LD CUT
=a-3rm -~-~~-lXffPllf==~=~=~==IDD======
NOTES: (7) The Zw 11 LFW @asir!q nakrs are included kMse of the interrelated finance
ph with 2- 12.
49
e EXHIBIT 19 (pnge 2 of 3) 0
----*--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I YEARS I LOCAL FACILITY MAMACEWEI(T ZONES
I I 8 9 10 11 12 13 16 15 16 17
I I
I I I I ( 7) i----------------------------------------------------------------------------.---.------..--------
I 1987 I 0 0 I-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.-----------
I 1987 I 0 0 I 7988 I 0 0
I 1989 I 16,885 0
I 1990 I 205 I 789 0 I '991 I 2stm 6oe9% 2stm elg OUT I 1-2 I I 1993 I I '994 I I 1995 I I 1996 I I '997 I I 1998 I I '=I I 2000 I I 2001 I I 2002 I
I 2004
I 2006 I
I ma I I 2009 I I 2010 I
1 2011 I I 2012 1
I- I TOTAL %,a2 M#9#
8LO OUT
I 2003 '
I 2005 I
I 2007 I
I 2013 I
--mv-asanssxnaaxss~s=:
=a=aasX rr-~--~*~asa~=~s~-n~==ax=~===========
NOTES: (7) Tho Zano 11 LFW phasing nukrs ere inclukd kcauao of tho interrelated finance
pln uith Zone 12.
49
e EXHIBIT 19 (page 3 of 3) ab
-----------------------------------------------------------------------.--------------------
I YEARS I LOCAL FACILITY MNAGEMENT ZONES I TOTAL I I I I ADOPTED I I I 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I YON-RESIDENTIAL I I I I SOUARE I
I I (8) I FOOTAGE I
I 1987 I I 9,274,534 I I I-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
I j.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------.-------------
1 1987 I I 1,284,199 1 I 1988 I 0 I 1,180,726 I I 1989 I 0 I 1,164,562 I I 1990 I 10,654 I 1,685,622 I 1 1991 [ 325,829 I 1,833,615 I I 1992 1 BLD OUT I 1,360,650 I
I 1993 I I 1,061,836 1
I 1994 I I 1,069,973 1
I 1- I I 1,052,712 I
I 1996 I 1 1,153,722 I
I 1997 I I 623,663 I
I '998 1 1 605,663 I
I 2000 I I 617,223 I
I 2001 I I 594,163 I
I 2003 I I 556,663 I I 20% I I 603,663 I
656,213 I
I 1-1 I 590,663 I
I 2002 I I 566.663 I
I 2005 I I I 2006 I I 603,663 I
I 2007 I . I 603,663 I
I 2008 I I 611,213 I
I 2009 I I 622,713 I
I 2010 I I 625,663 I
I 2012 I I 726,363 I I 2011 I I n1,= I
I 2013 I I 743,357 I I sf= S-~-rtrt--a~x-~~=======~==xx=====~
I TOTAL 336,283 32,592,526 I
n===~-xx=aa~=fxa=na-~=a=a=================== ==a-
NOTES: (8) Zona 19 LFMP, adapted Oecamkr 22, 1987, C.C. Reso. No. 9322.
50
m EXHIBIT 20 0
ZONE 12 - SOUTHEAST QUADRANT NOW-RESIDENTIAL PROJECTIONS
* FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY
---_-------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------ __________.
I STATUS I I YEARS / LOCAL FACILITY CUNAGEHEHT ZONES
I I I I I AD1 I I I I 6-SE 10 11 12 17 18 I WON-RESIDE
I
I i I I I sc I (1) I FOC I--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.----------------
0 0 I 841 I-----------------------*-----------------------------------------*------.--------------------.---------
I PROJECTED I I 1987 I 0 0 I I I '988 I 0 0 0
I I NOTES: I
1EXISTING 1 I 1987 I 841,434
0 I
I I I I 1989 I 0 46,885 0 I GC I i I 1990 1 34,875 205 , 789 0 I 32C I I I 1991 I 34,875 285,789 60,984 I 381 1 I 1 1992 I 34,875 . 285,789 BLO OUT I 32G I I I 1993 I 36,875 BLD OUT I 34 I I I 1994 I 34,875 I 34
I I I 1995 I 36,875 I 34 I I I 1996 1 36,875 I 34 I I I 1997 I 36,875 I 34 I I I 1998 I 34,875 I 34 I 1 I 1999 I 34,875 I 34 I I I 2000 I 34,875 I 34 I I I 2001 I 34,875 I 34
I I I 2002 1 34,875 I 34 I I I 2003 I 34,815 I 34 ~ 1 I I 2004 I 34,875 I 34, I I 1 2005 I 34,875 I 34 8 I I I 2006 I 36,875 I 34 0 I I I 2007 I 34,875 I 34 # I I I 2008 I 36,875 I 34, I I I 2009 I 34,875 I 34 1 I I I 2010 I 34,875 I 34,
I I I 2011 I 34,875 I 34 t I I I 2012 I 31,815 I 34 I
l6UlLD WTl I 2013 I 34,875 1 34 L
I=ollltn=a~l-~*==~~-=~x=a~==~===~=~a~============~x=a==a==~=====~===================
TOTAL 1 , 678,434 904,252 60,964 I 2,643. I
t=======~-=-la==r~a=~==a==============a~=ax===a~n===~================================
NOTES: (1) The Zone 11 LFMP phasing nunkrs are includcd because of the interrelated finance
plen with Zum 12.
51
e EXHIBIT 20 0
ZONE 12 - SOUTHEAST WAORANT NOM-RESIDENTIAL PROJECTIONS
* FOR PUNNING PURPOSES ONLY
-_---------------.-----------------------------------------------.------------------------ ______
LOCAL FACILITY WNAGEWEWT ZONES I I I I I I
I I I I I I (1 1 I I------.----------.------.-------------------------------.----------------------------------.-----
0 I IEXISTING I I 1987 I 841,434 0 1._.________._______---------------------------------.----~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~.~.~-~~~~~--~-~----.~
0 0 I IPROJECTED I I 1987 I 0
0 O I I '9M I 0
I 1989 1 0 46,885 0 i
I I I I
I 1 I 1990 I 34,875 285,789 0 I I 1 I 1991 I 34,875 285,789 60,984 I I 1 I
I I I 1993 I 31,875 BtD CUT I
I I I 1991 I 31,875 I I I I 1995 I 34,875 I I I I 1996 I 3,875 I I I I 1997 I 34,875 I I I I 1998 I 31,8A 1 I I I 1999 I 34,875 I I I I 2000 I 34,875 I
I I I 2001 I 34,875 I
I 1 I 2002 I 34,875 I
I I I 2003 I 34,875 I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I 2008 I 34,875 1
I I I ZOO9 I 34,875 I I I I 2010 I 34,875 I I I I 2011 1 34,875 I
I I I 2012 I 34,875 I
lSUILD CUT) I 2013 I 34,875 I
TOTAL 1 , 678, 134 904,252 60,984 I I
I STATUS I 1 YEARS I
I I I I 6-SE 10 11 12 17
I I NOTES: I
18 I WON-Rt
I 1992 I 34,875 . 285,789 BW (x11
I 2004 I 31,875 I 2005 I 34,875
I 2006 I 34,87S 1 2007 1 34,875
I =====0=xx8n=-----~~n~-=~xu88xxxxx=x=xn~X==~X=========:
=PftOlll-~-xxxxx-~~x~=~~x--=n~n-===x=====PX===XX============:
NOTES: (1) The Zone 11 LW phasing nrmkrs are included because of the interrelated finance
ptan uith Zona 12.
51
0 EXHIBIT 21 e
ZONE 12 MOW-RESIDENTIAL PROJECTIOMS
* FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY *
...................................................................
I STATUS I YEARS I ZONE 12 I
I I I I I I------------------------------------------------*------------------
01 I i-------------------------------------------------------------------
01
I I 1988 I Ql QI
I I 1990 I QI I I 199’ I 60,984 I I I 1992 I : EL0 OUT I
I I 19931 I I I I 1994 I I I I 1995 I
I I 19961 I I I I 1997 I I I I 1998 I I I 19991 I I I 2000 I I I I I 2001 I
I I 2002 I I I 1 I I 2004 I I I I
I I 2WI 1 I
I I 2008 I I I I 2WI I I I I I 2011 I I I I 2012 I I I
I
TOTAL M,9S I I
I EXISTING 1 1987 I
I PROJECTED I 1987 I
I I 1989 I
I 2003 1
1 2005 I
I I 2007 1
I 2010 I
I BUILD QlT { 2013 I
-rna-l-a~=l=ln~=~~==n==~~a=I
:-~3t13=-~lII~Px~===a==========~a===========
52
w
V. ZONE 12 REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 addresses ele
separate facilities at three levels of analysis.
Level of Analvsis
Citwide Ouadrant - zo Facil itv
City Admin. Facilities X Library X
Treatment Capacity X
Park X Drainage
Circulation Fire Open Space Schools Sewer Collection
Water Distribution
Wastewater
Each of these facilities is evaluated to determine conformal
with the adopted performance standard. For each facil. analysis the following is provided:
a. An illustrative map showing facilities discussed
in the section and district boundaries;
b. The adopted service level performance standard wh:
must be complied with at all times as developmc occurs ;
c. A detailed facility adequacy and planning
analysis
d. A list of conditions necessary to ensure
conformance with the adopted performance standard; and
e. A discussion of mitigation measures and financing
mechanisms.
53
0 a
-
-- v. ZONE 12 REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC. FACILITIES AND SERVICES
The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 12 addresses separate facilities at three levels of analysis.
Level of Analvsis
Facilitv Citwide Ouadrant
City Admin. Facilities
Wastewater
Park Drainage Circulation Fire Open Space
Schools Sewer Collection Water Distribution
X Library X
X Treatment Capacity
X
Each of these facilities is evaluated to determine conf with the adopted performance standard. For each f
analysis the following is provided:
a. An illustrative map showing facilities discuss in the section and district boundaries;
b. The adopted service level performance standarc
must be complied with at all times as deve occurs :
c. A detailed facility adequacy and planning
analysis
d. A list of conditions necessary to ensc
conformance with the adopted performance standa~ and
A discussion of mitigation measures and financ.
mechanisms. e.
53
0 e
2-
--
Citywide facilities (City Administrative, Library, and Wastc Treatment) have been analyzed in the adopted '86 CFIP. An of these facilities are also included in this Local Faci Management Plan to verify compliance with the '86 CFIP suggest alternatives that assure conformance with the a1 performance standard.
This plan shows how each adopted performance standard w: complied with as development occurs within Zone 12. Thi!
includes financing of all public facilities and services. plan also includes a complete far;ility phasing schedule wh
linked to public facility demands within the zone.
54
e e
.4 At t ac hmen.
CITY OF CARLSBAD
FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
KEY CITY STAFF MEMBERS
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
NAME TITLE TELEPHONE NO.
James F. Elliott Finance Director 434- 2867 Cheryl Allen Acting Asst. Finance Director 434-2969 Debbie Nevi 11 e Senior Management Analyst 434-2973
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
NAME TITLE TELEPHONE NO.
Michael Hol tzmi 11 er P1 anning Director 438- 4430 Gary Wayne Acting Asst. Planning Director 438-4430
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
NAME TITLE TELEPHONE NO.
Don Rideout Senior Management Analyst 438-42 12 Brian Hunter Senior P1 anner 438- 444 1 Steve Jantz Associate Civil Engineer 438-4354
ENGINEERING
NAME TITLE TELEPHONE NO.
Lloyd Hubbs City Engineer 438-4391 David Hauser Asst. City Engineer 438- 4262 Richard A1 1 en Principal Civil Engineer 438-4389
0
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD
e
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of 9 1990, and effective immediately by and between
(hereinafter called the "Consultant") and the City of Carl sbad (hereinafter called "City") , WITNESSETH THAT,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the long range fiscal impact of development within the City has a definite effect on the City's ability to provide services at desired levels; and
WHEREAS, Consultant is staffed with personnel know1 edgeable and experienced in providing services related to the creation of a fiscal impact analysis as described below; and
WHEREAS, as City has hereby employed Consultant to perform tasks describe( under Scope of Services below to help determine the economic effects oi development to help the City Council to plan a fiscally sound future for Carl sbad.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
ErnPlovment of Consultant. City agrees to engage Consultant an( Consultant hereby agrees to perform the services described it ScoDe of Services below.
Scope of Services. Consultant shall do, perform, and carry ou in a good and professional manner the following services:
A) Preparation of an economic analysis of the existing Genera Plan including:
1) A review of the current economic position of the City
2) Phased review of the economic position of the City a various points during buildout.
3) An analysis of City's fiscal position at buildout ( City's General Plan land use.
4) Each analysis should consider both operating ar capital costs and revenues, as well as the fisc; impact of development occurring in surroundi r communities.
B) Development of recommendations on changes in the land uc mix to create a more balanced economic result between n and bui 1 dout .
Creation of a computer model to be used to model the fisc impact of changes in the land use plan. The model shall designed to run on an IBM-AT or 386 compatible PC.
(1)
(2)
C)
e 0
D) Preparation of an analysis of the revenues generated I various types of land use and the costs of providii requi red city services at the present, during devel opmei and at buildout.
-
E) In addition, Consultant shall:
1) Complete all work within six months of award I
2) Attend up to six public meetings with the Cii Council, and provide presentations to community groui or committees as required by the City.
Provide 30 copies of the final report, a reproducib‘ copy of the report, and two unprotected copies of tt computer model s compl ete with operati on manual s at operator training.
F) Consultant shall designate a project manager who shall t responsible for completing all the obligations containe within this agreement. Consultant shall provide service in accordance to the response to City’s RFP attached a
Exhibit and shall not utilize new or different staf without City’s prior authorization.
Consultant shall provide training on the operation of an computer model generated as a result of this project, to u to two (2) City staff members and shall provid documentation for all software systems that meets with th approval of the Information Systems Director, including use manuals and technical descriptions.
Time of Performance. The services to be performed hereunder b Consultant shall be undertaken and completed in such sequence a to assure their expeditious completion and best carry out th purposes of the agreement. All services required hereunder shal be completed six months from the date of this contract.
Comensation. City agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to excee for all services required herein. $
Method of Pavment. Payment will be made by City to Consultant ul to the amount agreed upon in Paragraph 4 as follows: Consultani will provide a progress billing to City upon presentation of i draft report. Final payment will be made upon acceptance of tht complete report by City Council.
Chanqes. City may, from time to time, require changes in thc scope of services of Consultant to be performed hereunder. Sucl changes, which are mutually agreed upon by and between City an( Consultant, shall be incorporated in written amendment to thi 5 agreement.
contract.
3)
G)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
2
e
.I Services and Materials to be Furnished by City. City shall
provide Consultant with reasonable access to any material in the (7)
available to provide direction and input into the review process
.
w possession of City. City will further make appropriate City staff
as necessary.
Termination of Aqreement for Cause. If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in timely and proper manner his
obligation under this agreement, City shall thereupon have the right to terminate this agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective data thereof, at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination.
Information and ReDorts. Consultant shall, at such time and in form as City may require, furnish periodic reports concerning the status of the project.
Records and Inspection. Consultant shall maintain full and accurate records within respect to all matters covered under this agreement. City shall have free access at all proper times tc such records, and the right to examine and audit the same and tc make transcripts therefore, and to inspect all data, documents, proceedings, and activities.
Accomplishment of Pro.iect. Consultant shall commence, carry on, and complete the project with all practicable dispatch, in z sound, economical , and efficient manner in accordance with the provi si ons thereof and a1 1 appl icabl e 1 aws.
Matters to be Disreqarded. The titles of the several sections subsections, and paragraphs set forth in this contract art inserted for convenience of reference only and shall b disregarded in construing or interpreting any of the provision
of this contract.
Completeness of Contract. This agreement and any additional o supplementary document or documents incorporated herein b specific reference contain all the terms and conditions agree upon by the parties hereto, and no other agreements, oral o otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this contract or ap party thereof shall have any validity or bind any of the partie hereto.
Citv Not Obliqation to Third Parties. City shall not be obligate or liable hereunder to any party other than Consultant.
When Riqhts and Remedies Not Waived. In no event shall the makir by City of any payment to Consultant constitute or be construc as a waiver by City of any breach of covenant, or any defaul which may then exist, on the part of Consultant, and the makit of any such payment by City while any such breach or default sha- exist in no way impair or prejudice any right or remedy availab to City in respect to such breach or default.
.
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
3
e 0
c Personnel. Consultant represents that he has, or will secure a
his own expense, all personnel required in performing the service (16)
under this agreement. All of the services required hereunder wil . be performed by Consultant or under his supervision, and a1
personnel engaged in the work shall be qualified to perform SUC services. Consultant shall not substitute personnel for thos specified in the attached proposal (Exhibit A) without specifi prior permission of City.
Notices. Any notices, bills, invoices, or reports required t this agreement shall be sufficient if sent by the parties in th United States mail, postage paid, to the address noted below:
James F. Elliott "Consultant" Finance Director City of Carl sbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008
Covenant aciainst Continqent Fees. Consultant warrants that thei firm has not employed or retained any company or person, othe than a bona fide employee working for Consultant, to solicit a secure this agreement, and that Consultant has not paid or agree to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, an fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, first or any othe consideration contingent or violation of this warranty, City shal have the right to annul this agreement without liability, or, i its discretion, to deduct from the agreement price o consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or contingent fee.
Nondiscrimination Clause. Consultant shall comply with appl icabl State and Federal laws regarding nondiscrimination.
Termination of Contract. In the event of Consultant's failure t prosecute, deliver or perform the work as provided for in thi agreement, City may terminate this agreement for nonperformancc by notifying Consultant by certified mail of the termination o the agreement. Consultant, thereupon, has five (5) working day to deliver any and all documents owned by City under thi agreement and all work in progress to the City Finance Director The City Finance Director shall make a determination of fact base1 upon the documents delivered to City of the percentage of worl which Consultant has performed that is usable and of worth to Cit. in having the agreement completed. Based upon that finding a reported to the City Council, the Council shall determine thl final payment of the agreement. This shall be deemed to includl any software developed by Consultant.
Disputes. If a dispute should arise regarding the performance 01 work under this agreement, the following procedure shall be use( to resolve any questions of fact or interpretation not otherwist settled by agreement between parties. Such questions, if the; become identified as a part of a dispute among persons operatin! under the provisions of this agreement, shall be reduced tc writing by the principal of Consultant or the City Financt
*
4
(17)
(18)
(19)
(20)
(21)
4
0
.r Director. A copy of such documented dispute shall be forwarded
a to both parties involved along with recommended methods of resolution which would be of benefit to both parties. The City Finance Director or principal receiving the letter shall reply to the letter along with a recommended method of resolution within ten (10) calendar days. If the resolution thus obtained is unsatisfactory to the aggrieved party, a letter outlining the dispute shall be forwarded to the City Council for their resolution through the office of the City Manager. The City Council may then opt to consider the directed solution to the problem. In such cases, the action of the City Council shall be binding upon the parties involved, although nothing in this procedure shall prohibit the parties seeking remedies avai 1 ab1 e to them at law.
Suspension or Termination of Services. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon tendering thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. In the event of such suspensions or termination, upon request of City, Consultant shall assemble the work product and put same in order to proper filing and closing and deliver said product to City. In the event of termination, Consultant shall be paid for work performed to the termination date; however, the total shall not exceed the guaranteed total maximum. City shall make the final determination as to thc portions of tasks completed and the compensation to be made Compensation is to be made in compl iance with the Code of Federa' Regul ati ons. This shall be deemed to i ncl ude software devel opmeni by Consultant .
Status of the Consultant. Consultant shall perform the service! provided for herein in Consultant's own way as an independen contractor and in pursuit of Consultant's independent calling, an not as an employee of the City. Consultant shall be under contro of City only as to the result to be accomplished and the personne assigned to the project, but shall consult with City as provide for in the request for proposal.
Consultant is an independent contractor of City. The payment mad to Consultant pursuant to this agreement shall be the full ar complete compensation to which Consultant is entitled pursuar this agreement. City shall not make any federal or state t; withholdings on behalf of Consultant. City shall not be requirc to pay any workers' compensation insurance on behalf ( Consultant. Consultant agrees to indemnify City for any tal retirement contribution, social security, overtime paymenl workers' compensation payment which City may be required to mal on behalf of Consultant payment which City may be required to ma on behalf of Consultant or any employee of Consultant for wo done under this agreement.
Consultant shall be aware of the requirements of the Immigrati Reform and Control Act of 1985 (8 USC Sec. 1101 - 1525) and sha comply with those requirements, including, but not limited t verifying the eligibility for employment of all agents, employee sub-contractors and consultants that are included in tt agreement.
4 -
(22)
(23)
5
* e e
I OwnershiD of Documents. All plans, studies, sketches, drawings, reports, software or computer programs and specifications as (24)
herein required are the property of City, whether the work for which they are made be expected or not. In the event this contract is terminated, all documents, plans, specifications, drawings, reports and studies shall be delivered forthwith to City. Consultant shall have the right to make one copy of the plans for his/her records.
- .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this agreement as of the date first written above.
City of Carlsbad
By: Claude A. Lewis Mayor
ATTEST :
"Consultant"
By : Name Title
6