HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-08-31; City Council; ; Fiscal Year 2019-20 Growth Management Plan Monitoring ReportMeeting Date: Aug. 31, 2021
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Staff Contact: Corey Funk, Associate Planner
corey.funk@carlsbadca.gov
Subject: Fiscal Year 2019-20 Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report
District: All
Recommended Action
Adopt a resolution accepting the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Growth Management Plan Monitoring
Report (Exhibit 1).
Executive Summary
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.90.130(d) requires the City Planner to prepare an annual
monitoring report to the City Council on the Growth Management Plan, or GMP. Attachment A
to the resolution is the GMP Monitoring Report (report) for fiscal year (FY) 2019-20. The report
includes an analysis of development activity, an adequacy analysis of public facilities and
improvements, public facility financing, and the status of the Proposition E dwelling unit caps.
The report also highlights the City Council action taken on April 6, 2021 adopting a resolution
finding the city’s residential housing caps contained in the General Plan, GMP, and Council
Policy Statement 43 are preempted by state law and unenforceable. However, housing units
are still being tracked for information purposes and the remaining components of the GMP will
be tracked and reported per the city’s Municipal Code. The report is being presented to the City
Council in compliance with Section 21.90.130(d).
Discussion
Overview
In July 1986, the City Council passed a growth management ordinance, which established
growth management control points for residential density and a requirement that new
development must plan for, construct and pay for the public infrastructure and facilities needed
to serve that new development. In November 1986, Carlsbad voters passed Proposition E,
which affirmed the general principles of the Growth Management Plan and established
residential dwelling unit caps that limited the number of dwellings in each city quadrant and
the city as a whole.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 1 of 45
To ensure that adequate public facilities are provided concurrent with new growth, the GMP
identifies performance standards for eleven public facilities - city administration, library,
wastewater treatment, parks, drainage, circulation, fire, open space, schools, sewer collection,
and water distribution. These performance standards are defined in the Citywide Facilities and
Improvements Plan (CFIP) and, depending on the facility, are applied on a citywide level or on a
sub-area level (quadrant, Local Facility Management Zone, or project site). New development
must be measured against the GMP standards and show that they comply with requirements
before being approved. Failure to meet a facility standard could halt development pursuant to
CMC Section 21.90.130.
FY 2019-20 Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report
CMC Section 21.90.130(d) requires preparation of an annual monitoring report on the GMP to
show the status of compliance with the Proposition E dwelling unit caps and the CFIP public
facilities performance standards. As required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.90.130(d),
the FY 2019-20 Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report (Attachment A) includes an
analysis of development activity, an adequacy analysis of public facilities and improvements,
public facility financing and the status of the Proposition E dwelling unit caps. The major
findings of the report are as follows:
•Building permits for 242 dwellings and 342,455 square feet of non-residential space
were issued during FY 2019-20.
•The total number of dwelling units in each quadrant complied with the Proposition E
dwelling unit limitations during FY 2019-20.
•All public facilities met the CFIP performance standards for FY 2019-20. The report also
identifies which public facilities will need to provide additional improvements to meet
their performance standards at buildout of the city.
Impacts of State Law
The Proposition E dwelling unit caps established an overall limit to development in the city and
the growth management ordinance (CMC 21.90.130) can stop development in an affected area
if the City Council determines that a public facility performance standard is not met. However,
updates to state law and the city’s Housing Element limit the city’s ability to halt development.
In 2017 the California Legislature passed SB 166 (No Net Loss Law) and in 2019 passed SB 330
(Housing Crisis Act of 2019). Both of these state laws limit the ability of local jurisdictions to
implement residential growth moratoriums or dwelling unit caps, affecting Carlsbad’s ability to
enforce the public facility performance standards and Proposition E dwelling unit limitations.
As a result, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-208 on Oct. 20, 2020, finding that the
moratorium requirements in CMC Chapter 21.90 (Growth Management) are unenforceable due
to state law. Subsequently, on April 6, 2021, the City adopted Resolution No. 2021-074 finding
the city’s residential housing caps contained in the General Plan, GMP, Council Policy Statement
No. 43, and the city’s municipal zoning code are preempted by state law and unenforceable.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 2 of 45
While the city can no longer stop development, it can still implement the public facility
performance standards by providing public facilities through other measures consistent with
the standard.
Fiscal Analysis
There is no fiscal impact associated with receiving the FY 2019-20 GMP Monitoring Report.
Next Steps
The FY 2019-20 GMP Monitoring Report will be kept on file and posted on the city website.
Environmental Evaluation
The annual monitoring report does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the
California Environmental Quality Act under Public Resources Code Section 21065 in that it has
no potential to cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably
foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and therefore does not require
environmental review.
Public Notification and Outreach
Public notice of this item was posted in keeping with the state's Ralph M. Brown Act and it was
available for public viewing and review at least 72 hours before the scheduled meeting date.
Exhibits
1.City Council resolution
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 3 of 45
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-201
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2019-20 GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN MONITORING REPORT
WHEREAS, in 1986, the city adopted Proposition E (Growth Management Plan), which amended
the General Plan to ensure that adequate public facilities are provided concurrent with growth; and
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Plan (GMP) is implemented through Carlsbad Municipal
Code Chapter 21.90 and the Citywi.de Facilities and Improvements Plan; and
WHEREAS, Carls~ad Municipal Code Section 21.90.130(d) requires the City Planner to prepare
an annual monitoring report to the City Council on the GMP that is to include an analysis of
development activity, public facilities and improvements, public facility financing, and the status of the
Proposition E dwelling unit caps.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as
follows:
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the Fiscal Year 2019-20 GMP Monitoring Report satisfies Carlsbad Municipal Code
Section 21.90.B0(d) by providing information to the City Council regarding the status
of the Carlsbad Growth Management Plan for the fiscal year covering July 1, 2019-June
30, 2020.
3. That the Fiscal Year 2019-20 GMP Monitoring Report (Attachment A) is accepted, and -
the City Planner shall file the report and post it to the city website.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 4 of 45
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 31st day of August 2021, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Hall, Blackburn, Bhat-Patel, Acosta, Norby.
None.
None.
MATT HALL, Mayor
FAVIOLA MEDINA, City Clerk Services Manager
(SEAL)
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 5 of 45
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Fiscal Year 2019-20
Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report
July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020
Carlsbad City Council
Matt Hall, Mayor
Vacant (at the time report drafted), District 1
Keith Blackburn, District 2
Priya Bhat-Patel, District 3
Teresa Acosta, District 4
Report prepared in cooperation with the following departments:
Community Development
Fire
Parks & Recreation
Library & Cultural Arts
Transportation
Utilities
Carlsbad Municipal Water District
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 6 of 45
INTRODUCTION
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.90.130(d) requires the preparation of an annual monitoring report on the
Growth Management Plan. This report satisfies this requirement by providing information regarding the status of
the Carlsbad Growth Management Plan for the fiscal year covering July 1, 2019 – June 30, 2020, and to verify that
the plan is continuing to accomplish its stated objectives.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OVERVIEW
Carefully managing growth and development is critical to maintaining the City of Carlsbad’s excellent quality of
life. In 1986, the City Council passed a growth management ordinance, which put conditions on how growth
could occur, including the requirement that new development must plan for, construct and pay for the public
infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the new development. That November, city voters passed
Proposition E, which affirmed the principles of the Growth Management Program (GMP) and the residential
growth caps. The ideology behind the GMP is to ensure that new development and growth does not outpace
the performance standards established for public facilities such as roads, parks and emergency services. New
development must be measured against the GMP standards and show that they comply with the requirements
before being approved.
There are eleven performance standards identified in the GMP, which cover the following city public facilities: City
Administration facilities, libraries, wastewater treatment facilities, parks, drainage, circulation, fire open space,
sewer collection and water distribution systems. To ensure that established performance standards could be
achieved, the GMP directed the development of financing and management plans describing how/when the public
facilities will be developed. The subsections below provide additional information.
•Performance Standards
Proposition E established broad guidelines for determining adequacy of public facilities. These guidelines are
further defined in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan by means of specific performance standards
for each of the eleven public facilities. These public facilities, their performance standards, status, and
anticipated adequacy at buildout are outlined in Table 1 below:
TABLE 1
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Public
Facility
Performance
Standard Page
City Administrative
Facilities
1,500 sq. ft. per 1,000 population must be scheduled for
construction within a five-year period or prior to
construction of 6,250 dwelling units, beginning at the time
the need is first identified.
12
Library
800 sq. ft. (of library space) per 1,000 population must be
scheduled for construction within a five-year period or prior
to construction of 6,250 dwelling units, beginning at the time
the need is first identified.
14
Wastewater
Treatment
Sewer plant capacity is adequate for at least a five-year
period. 16
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 7 of 45
Public
Facility
Performance
Standard Page
Parks
3.0 acres of Community Park or Special Use Area per 1,000
population within the Park District must be scheduled for
construction within a five year period beginning at the time
the need is first identified. The five-year period shall not
commence prior to August 22, 2017.
17
Drainage Drainage facilities must be provided as required by the city
concurrent with development. 20
Circulation
Implement a comprehensive livable streets network that
serves all users of the system – vehicles, pedestrians,
bicycles and public transit. Maintain LOS D or better for all
modes that are subject to this multi-modal level of service
(MMLOS) standard, as identified in Table 3-1 of the General
Plan Mobility Element, excluding LOS exempt intersections
and streets approved by the City Council.
22
Fire No more than 1,500 dwelling units outside of a five-minute
response time. 32
Open Space
Fifteen percent of the total land area in the Local Facility
Management Zone (LFMZ) exclusive of environmentally
constrained non-developable land must be set aside for
permanent open space and must be available concurrent
with development.
34
Schools
School capacity to meet projected enrollment within the
Local Facility Management Zone (LFMZ) as determined by
the appropriate school district must be provided prior to
projected occupancy.
36
Sewer Collection
System
Trunk-line capacity to meet demand, as determined by the
appropriate sewer districts, must be provided concurrent
with development.
37
Water Distribution
System
Line capacity to meet demand as determined by the
appropriate water district must be provided concurrent with
development. A minimum of 10-day average storage
capacity must be provided prior to any development.
39
As indicated in Table 1, the performance standards for open space and schools is based on a “Local Facility
Management Zone,” which is discussed in the subsection below entitled “facility and improvement plans.”
Also, the performance standards for city administrative facilities, library facilities, and parks are stated in
terms of population. The demand for these facilities is based on each new dwelling unit built and the
estimated number of new residents it adds to the city, which is determined using the average number of
persons per dwelling unit. Utilizing data from the 2010 Federal Census (total population divided by total
number of dwelling units), the average for Carlsbad is 2.358 persons per dwelling unit.
As of June 30, 2020, the city’s population is estimated to be 112,683, which is calculated by multiplying 2.358
persons per dwelling unit by the number of dwelling units, accessory dwelling units, and commercial living
units (which were counted as dwelling units in the 2010 Federal Census); in total there are 47,742 dwellings
and commercial living units, as shown in Table 2 below.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 8 of 45
TABLE 2
FY 2019-20 POPULATION CALCULATION
Quadrant Dwelling
units1
Accessory
dwelling units2
Commercial
living units3 Total units Population
NW 12,488 226 226 12,940 30,513
NE 7,264 46 - 7,310 17,237
SW 10,179 29 685 10,893 25,711
SE 16,426 173 - 16,599 39,222
Total 46,357 474 911 47,742 112,683
As part of the Growth Management Plan monitoring process, the persons per dwelling unit number can be
adjusted in the future when updated Federal Census data is available. It should be noted that the above
population estimates are for growth management facility planning purposes only and may vary from other
official population estimates for Carlsbad.
• Facility and Improvement Plans
To develop a road map for how the above standards could
be met, a Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan was
created in 1986 that detailed how compliance with the
GMP standards will be achieved, how the necessary public
facilities will be provided, and what financing mechanisms
will be used for the facilities. Because planned
development and growth varied throughout the city and at
different levels, Carlsbad was divided into twenty-five Local
Facilities Management Zones (LFMZ), which is reflected in
the figure on the right. Each LFMZ was required to have an
adopted Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) prior to
any development in the LFMZ. Consistent with the GMP
and the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, each
LFMP must describe how the LFMZ will be developed, how
the required public facilities will be provided, and how
those facilities will be paid for.
1 Dwelling units represent the dwellings that are counted for purposes of the city’s growth management dwelling unit limits per Proposition E (excludes
accessory dwelling units and commercial living units); the number of dwelling units shown in this table are updated to June 30, 2020.
2 Accessory dwelling units are accessory to single family dwellings and are separate dwelling units with living space, kitchen and bathroom facilities.
Pursuant to state law, accessory dwelling units cannot be counted as dwellings for purposes of the city’s growth management dwelling limits. However, the units are counted here to ensure all city population is considered in regard to the performance standards for administrative facilities, libraries and parks.
3 Commercial living units, as shown in this table, are professional care facility living units that were counted as dwelling units in the 2010 Federal Census.
Pursuant to city ordinance (CMC Section 21.04.093), commercial living units are not counted as dwellings for purposes of the city’s growth management dwelling limits. However, the units are counted here to ensure all city population is considered in regard to the performance standards for administrative facilities, libraries and parks.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 9 of 45
FAILURE TO MEET A PERFORMANCE STANDARD
The Growth Management Plan requires development activity to stop if a performance standard is not being met.
Some performance standards apply to the city, and others apply to more specific areas, as described below:
• Administrative facilities, library, and wastewater treatment capacity are facilities that serve the entire city.
Their adequacy in meeting the performance standard is analyzed by considering the cumulative impact of
citywide development. The failure of any one of these facilities to meet the adopted performance standard
would affect the city as a whole. In that event, all development in the city would be halted until the
deficiency is corrected.
• Parks are analyzed on a quadrant basis. This means that if the standard is not being met in the quadrant,
development is halted for all Local Facility Management Zones (LFMZs, see description below) in the
quadrant.
• Fire facilities are analyzed on the basis of fire station districts which can comprise multiple LFMZs, and if the
standard is not met for a district, then development would be halted in that district.
• The remaining facilities (drainage, circulation, open space, schools, sewer collection system, and water
distribution system) are analyzed on an LFMZ basis. If one of these facilities falls below the performance
standard in a given LFMZ, development in that LFMZ would stop and other zones would not be affected if
they are continuing to meet all performance standards.
IMPACTS OF STATE LAW
According to the Growth Management Plan, development activity cannot proceed if either the residential
growth caps or public facility performance standards are not met. However, updates to state law and the city’s
Housing Element have modified these components of the GMP.
In 2017 the California Legislature passed SB 166, known as the No Net Loss Law, which requires local
jurisdictions to ensure that their housing element inventories can accommodate, at all times throughout the
planning period, their remaining unmet share of the regional housing need. The California Department of
Housing and Community Development (HCD) has taken the following positions with respect to Carlsbad: that
failure to meet the GMP performance standards cannot be used as a basis for implementing a moratorium that
precludes meeting Carlsbad’s share of the regional housing need, and that the GMP residential unit caps could
not prevent the city from achieving consistency with the Housing Element inventory and SB 166.
In 2019, the legislature passed SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, which prohibits local jurisdictions from
imposing moratoriums on housing development and using residential housing caps or other limits to regulate
the number of housing units built within a jurisdiction. In regard to how this law applies to Carlsbad’s GMP, HCD
considers that a housing moratorium adopted due to non-compliance with a GMP performance standard would
not be allowed under the SB 330 and confirmed that the city cannot use the growth cap limits specified in the
GMP to limit or prohibit residential development.
The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-208 on October 20, 2020 finding that the moratorium
requirements are unenforceable due to state law. On April 6, 2021 the City adopted Resolution No. 2021-074
finding the city’s residential housing caps contained in the General Plan, GMP, Council Policy Statement 43, and
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 10 of 45
the city’s municipal zoning code are preempted by state law and unenforceable. While the city can no longer
stop development, it can still implement the GMP performance standards by providing public facilities
consistent with the standard.
SUMMARY STATUS OF GMP COMPLIANCE FOR REPORTING PERIOD
As further detailed in this report, and summarized in Table 3 below, the city met the GMP performance
standards for the eleven public facilities and city residential growth caps for the FY2019-2020 reporting period.
TABLE 3
FACILITY ADEQUACY STATUS
Public Facility FY 2019-20 Adequacy Status
(Meets performance standard?)
Buildout Adequacy Status
(Meets performance standard?)
City Administrative Facilities Yes Yes
Library Yes Additional facilities to be provided
Wastewater Treatment Capacity Yes Yes
Parks Yes Additional facilities to be provided
Drainage Yes Additional facilities to be provided
Circulation Yes Additional facilities to be provided
Fire Yes Yes
Open Space Yes Additional facilities to be provided
Schools Yes Yes
Sewer Collection System Yes Additional facilities to be provided
Water Distribution System Yes Additional facilities to be provided
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 11 of 45
Residential Growth Caps
A. Standard
The GMP, and Prop E, established the total maximum number of residential dwelling units that can be
constructed citywide, which is distributed by quadrant as reflected below.
NORTHWEST QUADRANT NORTHEAST QUADRANT SOUTHWEST QUADRANT SOUTHEAST QUADRANT CITYWIDE TOTAL
15,370 9,042 12,859 17,328 54,599
B. FY 2019-20 Analysis
The purpose of this part of the report is to demonstrate that the ultimate dwelling unit caps stated in
Proposition E will not be exceeded. Although the city cannot require compliance with the dwelling unit
caps as noted previously, the dwelling units status is monitored for reference. Proposition E states “the
maximum number of residential dwelling units to be constructed or approved in the city after November
4, 1986 is as follows: Northwest Quadrant 5,844; Northeast Quadrant 6,166; Southwest Quadrant
10,667; Southeast Quadrant 10,801.” This resulted in dwelling unit caps as shown in Table 5 (see the
totals for each quadrant below). All quadrants are in compliance with the dwelling unit caps established
by Proposition E for FY 2019-20. As noted above in Table 2, accessory dwelling units and commercial
living units are not counted as dwellings for purposes of Growth Management Plan compliance with the
Proposition E caps.
TABLE 5 – FY 2019-20 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING STATUS PER QUADRANT
As of June 30, 2020
DESCRIPTION
NORTHWEST QUADRANT NORTHEAST
QUADRANT
SOUTHWEST
QUADRANT
SOUTHEAST
QUADRANT
CITYWIDE
TOTAL Outside
Village Village Total
NW
Proposition E Quadrant Dwelling Limit 15,370 9,042 12,859 17,328 54,599
Existing
Dwellings4 11,839 649 12,488 7,264 10,179 16,426 46,357
Unbuilt Planned
Dwellings5 1,989 247 2,236 1,676 1,448 586 5,946
Total Existing & Unbuilt
Planned Dwellings 13,828 896 14,724 8,940 11,627 17,012 52,303
Potential Additional
Dwellings6 118 528 646 102 1,232 316 2,296
4 Existing dwellings represent dwelling units that are counted for purposes of the city’s growth management dwelling unit limits per Proposition E and
exclude accessory dwelling units and commercial living units.
5 All quadrants except the Village - includes unbuilt approved projects, as well as vacant and underdeveloped property designated for residential use by the General Plan. 6 Dwelling unit capacity in addition to what is currently planned by the General Plan or approved as part of an unbuilt project.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 12 of 45
Table 5 represents the number of dwelling units that could be built (based on the applicable growth
management density) on all parcels that have a residential land use designation. The “total existing and
unbuilt planned dwellings”, as shown in the table, assumes all parcels with a residential land use designation
will be developed with residential dwellings, including land that is currently developed with non-residential
uses (e.g., some existing churches and professional care facilities are on land designated for residential use).
Although it is not anticipated that these parcels will convert to residential uses, the dwelling unit potential
for these parcels is tracked to monitor status of the Proposition E dwelling unit limits.
C. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
Table 6 estimates the number of dwellings that will exist at buildout; this estimate assumes that the
residentially designated land currently developed with non-residential uses will not all be developed with
residential uses in the future.
TABLE 6 – ESTIMATED DWELLING UNITS AND POPULATION AT BUILDOUT
Quadrant Dwelling Units Population
NW 15,091 38,775
NE 8,940 22,498
SW 10,918 28,074
SE 16,890 42,514
Total 51,839 131,861
D. Development Activity
Building permits for 242 new dwelling units were issued during the FY 2019-20. Table 7 provides a
breakdown by quadrant and LFMZ, excluding the zones that had no development activity. Figure 2 shows
the recent five-year trend of building permits issued for dwelling units.
TABLE 7 – FY 2019-20 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Quadrant LFMZ Units
NW 1 83
Total NW 83
NE 5 5 25 25
Total NE 30
SW 19 1 20 2 21 58
Total SW 61
SE 6 8 10 1 17 58 18 1
Total SE 68
Total citywide 242
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 13 of 45
FIGURE 2 - FISCAL YEAR DWELLING UNITS PERMITTED
• Non-Residential Development Activity
Building permits for 342,455 square feet of new non-residential construction were issued during FY
2019-20, comprising both commercial and industrial development. Table 5 provides a breakdown by
quadrant and LFMZ, excluding the zones that had no development activity. Figure 3 shows the recent
five-year trend of building permits issued for the square footage of non-residential construction.
TABLE 5 – FY 2019-20 NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Quadrant LFMZ Commercial (SF) Industrial (SF) Combined (SF)
NW 1 20,795
3 723
5(NW) 55,352
Total NW 76,870 - 76,870
NE 15 84,491
16 69,000 111,937
18 400
Total NE 153,491 112,337 265,828
SW 19 8,866
Total SW 8,866 - 8,866
SE 11 5,336
17 15,555
Total SW 20,891 - 20,891
Total citywide 260,118 112,337 372,455
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
# units 208 952 341 375 242
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 14 of 45
FIGURE 3 – FISCAL YEAR NON-RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FEET PERMITTED
2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2019-20
Square Feet 550,245 1,210,993 1,643,467 315,194 372,455
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 15 of 45
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES
A. Performance Standard
1,500 sq. ft. per 1,000 population must be scheduled for construction within a five-year period
or prior to construction of 6,250 dwelling units, beginning at the time the need is first identified.
B. FY 2019-20 Facility Adequacy Analysis
Based on the estimated June 30, 2020 population estimate of 112,683, the current demand for
administrative facilities is 169,024 square feet. To date, city administrative facilities exceed the
performance standard. Staff recently updated the inventory of square footage of existing
facilities, which resulted in refinement to the First Responder Safety Training Center square
footage (to reflect more accurate information) and the addition of the portion of the Harding
Community Center that is used by Parks & Recreation administration. These changes result in a
slightly lower total square footage compared to FY 2018-19 report. The existing inventory of city
and Carlsbad Municipal Water District buildings (leased and owned) occupied for administrative
services are included in Table 8 below:
TABLE 8
Facility Address Square Feet
City Hall Complex 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive 16,000
Faraday Administration Building 1635 Faraday Ave. 68,000
Fleet Service Center 2480 Impala Drive 10,540
Water District (Maintenance & Operations) 5950 El Camino Real 18,212
Parks Yard (Maintenance & Operations) 1166 Carlsbad Village Drive 4,012
Public Works Operations 405 Oak Ave. 9,950
Safety Center (Police and Fire administration) 2560 Orion Way 55,027
First Responder Safety Training Center 5750 Orion Way 15,090
Senior Center (Parks & Recreation
administration) 799 Pine Ave. 5,770
Harding Community Center (Parks &
Recreation administration) 3096 Harding St. 1,335
Total 203,936
C. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
Based on the 2035 projected buildout population of 131,861, the demand for city administrative
facilities will be 197,791 square feet. The existing 203,936 square feet of administrative facilities
exceeds the growth management performance standard at buildout.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 16 of 45
o New Orion Center Project
A development proposal is underway for the Orion Center project, which will centralize the
city’s maintenance and operations functions into a single location on Orion Way. The goal for
the facility is to accommodate the existing and future needs for the following departments:
Public Works (Utilities/CMWD, General Services and Construction Management & Inspection)
and Parks & Recreation (Parks Maintenance). The proposed project will free up three existing
city facilities for redevelopment: 5950 El Camino Real, 405 Oak Street, and 1166 Carlsbad
Village Drive. The new building will be 85, 870 square feet, which will provide a net increase in
city administrative space of 53,696 square feet over the three existing sites which will no longer
be needed.
o New City Hall Project
The new city hall project is in the process of identifying spatial requirements for city staff to
determine the size of the new city hall, and site criteria to determine which of four potential
locations is best suited for the new city hall and civic center. The initial project has three phases,
including the 1) Space Needs Analysis Report, 2) Site Criteria Evaluation, and 3) Best Professional
Recommendation. The City Council approved Phases 1 and 2 on September 17, 2019, with the
third phase estimated to be completed prior to the end of the third quarter of 2021.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 17 of 45
LIBRARY FACILITIES
A. Performance Standard
800 sq. ft. (of library space) per 1,000 population must be scheduled for construction within a
five-year period or prior to construction of 6,250 dwelling units, beginning at the time the need
is first identified.
Library space (leased/owned, public/non-public) is used as a standard library measurement of
customer use and satisfaction and includes collection space, seating, meeting rooms, staff areas,
technology, and other public facility needs. The performance standard, stated above, was
originally developed based on surveys of other libraries of comparable size and based on related
standards (such as volumes per capita) set by the American Library Association.
B. FY 2019-20 Inventory and Adequacy of Facilities
The current inventory of library facilities (city-owned) is shown in Table 9 below:
TABLE 9
Facility Square Feet
Dove Library 64,000
Cole Library 24,600
Learning Center 11,393
Total 99,993
Based on the June 30, 2020 population estimate of 112,683, the growth management standard
requires 90,146 sq. ft. of public library space. The city’s current 99,993 sq. ft. of library facilities
adequately meets the growth management standard.
C. Facility Adequacy at Buildout
Based on the General Plan projected buildout population of 131,861, the demand for library
facilities will be 105,489 sq. ft. The existing 99,993 square feet of library facilities is expected to
fall short of the growth management standard at buildout.
In 2015-16, the city completed major maintenance and renovation for both the Cole and Dove
facilities that addresses current ADA requirements and allows delivery of modern library services
and technology, while extending the life of the Cole Library by 10 to 15 years.
Built in 1967, the design of the Cole Library could not have contemplated modern library services
including the extensive delivery of electronic resources, automated materials handling, and the
variety of new media formats. Additionally, the library’s role as a community gathering space
has increased. With an already maximized building footprint and infrastructure constraints, the
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 18 of 45
Cole Library will not expand further to meet these changing needs. Additional meeting spaces,
technology learning labs and maker spaces are examples of elements desired by the community.
Complete replacement of the Cole facility is included in the Capital Improvement Program budget
between the years 2020 and buildout. Additionally, civic center and city hall site studies, which
are currently underway, will most likely inform the timing and opportunities for a new Cole
facility. One of the sites being considered for a new city hall and potential civic center is the
property that currently includes Cole. As these plans advance, staff will need to evaluate impacts
on a future library space.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 19 of 45
WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY
D. Performance Standard
Sewer plant capacity is adequate for at least a five-year period.
E. FY 2019-20 Facility Adequacy Analysis
The Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF) currently provides adequate capacity
in excess of the performance standard. Carlsbad’s FY 2019-20 annual daily average dry weather
sewer flow was 6.31 million gallons per day (MGD) representing 62% of the city’s 10.26 MGD
capacity rights. The city’s annual daily average sewage flow to the EWPCF for the previous five
years is shown in Table 10 below:
TABLE 10
Fiscal Year Annual daily average flow
FY 2015-16 5.82 MGD
FY 2016-17 6.32 MGD
FY 2017-18 6.18 MGD
FY 2018-19 6.03 MGD
FY 2019-20 6.31 MGD
F. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
The Encina Water Pollution Control Facility Phase V Expansion provides adequate sewer
treatment capacity to ensure compliance with the growth management wastewater
performance standard through buildout of the Carlsbad sewer service area.
The City of Carlsbad 2019 Sewer Master Plan Update contains an analysis of annual daily average
sewer flow through buildout (2040) of the city based on the Carlsbad General Plan land use
projections. The analysis indicates that the city’s projected ultimate buildout flow is
approximately 8.31 MGD. The city has purchased capacity rights to 10.26 MGD in the EWPCF,
which ensures adequate wastewater treatment capacity is available to accommodate an
unanticipated increase in future sewer flows.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 20 of 45
PARKS
A. Performance Standard
3.0 acres of Community Park or Special Use Area per 1,000 population within the Park District7
must be scheduled for construction within a five-year period beginning at the time the need is
first identified8. The five-year period shall not commence prior to August 22, 2017.
B. FY 2019-20 Facility Adequacy Analysis
To date, all quadrants are in compliance with the performance standard as shown in Table 11.
TABLE 11
Quadrant Park acreage inventory existing Park acreage required by
Performance Standards
NW 105.2 91.5
NE 45.3 51.7
SW 70.2 77.1
SE 114.9 117.7
Total 335.6 338.0
The performance standard requirement for park acreage exceeds the inventory of existing and
scheduled park acreage for the NW quadrant, but the other quadrants do not currently meet the
performance standard. Although short of the acreage required, these quadrants are not out of
compliance with the performance standard because the five-year period has not been reached.
For the SW and SE quadrants, the five-year period began on August 22, 2017 as required by City
Council Resolution No. 2017-170. For the NE quadrant, the FY 2017-18 report identified the park
acreage deficit, so the five-year period began on June 30, 2018.
The completion of the Veterans Memorial Park Master Plan will address the referenced deficits
in the NE, SW and SE quadrants. Veterans Memorial Park is a city-owned, undeveloped
community park site located in the northwest quadrant. Because of its size, centralized location,
and citywide significance, the city intends that this site help fulfill future citywide park needs.
Thus, when the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CFIP) was approved in 1986, Veterans
Memorial Park (then known as Macario Canyon) was apportioned equally to all four city
quadrants to meet the GMP parks performance standard.
7 "Park District" = "quadrant". There are four park districts within the city, corresponding to the four quadrants.
8 The threshold for triggering the construction of a new park is as follows: Once a deficit of park acreage in a quadrant is identified, a new
park must be scheduled for construction within the time frame of five years. According to City Council Resolution No. 97-435, “scheduled
for construction” means that the improvements have been designed, a park site has been selected, and a financing plan for construction
of the facility has been approved.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 21 of 45
Further, the City of Carlsbad Community Facilities District No. 1 (CFD) was established in 1991,
creating a special tax lien on vacant properties throughout the city. The purpose of the CFD was
to finance the construction of specific public facilities of citywide obligation and benefit, including
Veterans Memorial Park. Consistent with the intent of the CFIP and the CFD, the General Plan
Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Element credits 22.9 acres of the 91.5-acre Veterans
Memorial Park to each quadrant’s future park inventory (see Table 4-7 of the Open Space,
Conservation and Recreation Element).
The master planning process for that site commenced in December 2018, with the award of a
professional services agreement to RJM Design, and public outreach began in March 2019. The
master plan is scheduled to be completed within the next year, before the conclusion of either
of the five-year periods referenced above. Once the master plan is complete, the park will be
considered “scheduled for construction”8, and all four quadrants will be fully compliant with the
performance standard.
C. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
Based on the current FY 2019-20 CIP list of projects, Veterans Memorial Park is proposed to be
constructed prior to buildout. Construction of this community park would result in the projected
park inventory for all city quadrants exceeding the projected required acreage at buildout, as
shown in Table 12:
TABLE 12
Quadrant Buildout
population9
Buildout
required
acreage9
Current
inventory
Proposed park
acreage
Projected
inventory
NW 38,775 116.3 105.2 22.9 128.1
NE 22,498 67.5 45.3 22.9 68.2
SW 28,074 84.2 70.2 22.9 93.1
SE 42,514 127.5 114.9 22.9 137.8
Total 131,861 395.6 335.6 91.5 427.2
D. Additional Parks Acreage
The proposed park acreage numbers in Table 12 do not include park projects listed in the CIP as
“partially funded” or “unfunded”. Should alternative funding mechanisms be found, and these
parks are built, the additional parks acreage would further aid in meeting/exceeding the growth
management parks performance standard
9 Reflects the General Plan
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 22 of 45
• Partially funded – In the FY 2019-20 CIP, $12,592,000 has been transferred to the
Robertson Ranch Park project (NE – 11.2 acres), which changes its status to “partially
funded”. The master planning process for this park is scheduled to begin in FY 2021-22.
• Unfunded – Zone 5 Business Park Recreational Facility (NW – 9.3 acres) and Cannon Lake
Park (NW – 6.8 acres).
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 23 of 45
DRAINAGE
A. Performance Standard
Drainage facilities must be provided as required by the city concurrent with development.
B. FY 2019-20 Facility Adequacy Analysis
All areas of the city currently meet the growth management drainage performance standard.
The standard for drainage distinguishes it from the other public facility standards because, by its
very nature, drainage facility needs are more accurately assessed as specific development plans
for individual projects are finalized. Therefore, the drainage performance standard was written
to allow the city to require appropriate drainage facilities as development plans are finalized and
approved.
The larger/master planned facilities have been identified in the city’s 2008 Drainage Master Plan.
The associated Planned Local Drainage Area (PLDA) fee program was established to finance the
construction of these facilities. The original Drainage Master Plan was adopted in 1980 with the
goal of assessing the performance of existing drainage infrastructure, identifying anticipated
improvements and developing a funding mechanism to ensure construction of these planned
facilities. The DMP is updated to reflect changes in the general plan, city growth, construction
costs, drainage standards and environmental regulations. At the present, the Public Works
Branch is updating the 2008 Drainage Master Plan to ensure these larger/master planned
facilities will be adequately funded.
The construction of smaller development/project related drainage facilities are addressed during
the review of individual project proposals. Maintenance, repair and replacement projects are
identified on an ongoing basis and are incorporated in the Capital Improvement Program as a
part of the Storm Drain Condition Assessment Program, the Citywide Storm Drain Rehabilitation
and Replacement Program, or as individual/stand-alone projects.
The Agua Hedionda and Calavera Creek channels located east of El Camino Real within the
residential community of Rancho Carlsbad were found to be of inadequate size to fully contain
and convey the 100-year flood event. As a result, the floodplain of these creeks encroaches into
the community and therefore projects located within LFMP Zones 5, 7, 14, 15, 16, 18 and 24 that
drain to the Agua Hedionda Creek or Calavera Creek must comply with the following conditions
to maintain compliance with the drainage performance standard:
1. Payment of the PLDA fee.
2. Install onsite drainage improvements to ensure that direct drainage impacts resulting from
the proposed development do not exacerbate the potential for downstream flooding of
existing development.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 24 of 45
C. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
The 2008 Carlsbad Drainage Master Plan proposes the construction of new facilities to
accommodate potential storm events. Construction of the proposed Master Drainage Facilities
will ensure the drainage performance standard is maintained through buildout of the city. The
current update to the Drainage Master Plan will ensure adequate funds are available for the
construction of needed flood control facilities. The estimated costs for these facilities and the
programming of PLDA funds are included in the annual Capital Improvement Program.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 25 of 45
CIRCULATION
A. Performance Standard
Implement a comprehensive livable streets network that serves all users of the system –
vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles and public transit. Maintain level of service (LOS) D or better for
all modes that are subject to this multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) standard, as identified
in Table 3-1 of the General Plan Mobility Element, excluding LOS exempt intersections and
streets approved by the City Council.
The service levels for each travel mode are represented as a letter “grade” ranging from LOS A
to LOS F: LOS A reflects a high level of service for a travel mode (e.g., outstanding
characteristics and experience for that mode) and LOS F would reflect an inadequate level of
service for a travel mode (e.g., excessive congestion for vehicles or inadequate facilities for
bicycle, pedestrian or transit users).
The performance standard for the circulation system is guided by the General Plan Mobility
Element as follows:
Implementing Policy 3-P.3: Apply and update the city’s multi-modal level of service
(MMLOS) methodology and guidelines that reflect the core values of the Carlsbad
Community Vision related to transportation and connectivity. Utilize the MMLOS
methodology to evaluate impacts of individual development projects and amendments
to the General Plan on the city’s transportation system.
Implementing Policy 3-P.4: Implement the city’s MMLOS methodology and maintain LOS
D or better for each mode of travel for which the MMLOS standard is applicable, as
identified in Table 3-1 and Figure 3-110.
B. Livable Streets
The monitoring program for the circulation system is guided by General Plan Mobility Element
Goal 3-G.1:
Keep Carlsbad moving with livable streets that provide a safe, balanced, cost-effective,
multi-modal transportation system (vehicles, pedestrians, bikes, transit),
accommodating the mobility needs of all community members, including children, the
elderly and the disabled.
The California Complete Streets Act (2008) requires cities in California to plan for a balanced,
multi-modal transportation system that meets the needs of all travel modes. Accomplishing this
state mandate requires a fundamental shift in how the city plans and designs the street system
– recognizing the street as a public space that serves all users of the system (elderly, children,
bicyclists, pedestrians, etc.) within the urban context of that system (e.g., account for the
adjacent land uses).
10 Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1 are found in the General Plan Mobility Element and are summarized in Table 13 of this report.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 26 of 45
• Prior to adoption of the General Plan Mobility Element on Sept. 22, 2015, the growth
management circulation performance standard was based on the circulation needs of a
single mode of travel – the automobile.
• The General Plan Mobility Element identifies a new livable streets strategy for mobility
within the city.
• The livable streets strategy focuses on creating a ‘multi-modal’ street network that supports
the mobility needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users and vehicles.
• Providing travel mode options that reduce dependence on the vehicle also supports the
city’s Climate Action Plan in achieving its goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions within
the city.
C. Street Typology
The city’s approach to provide livable streets recognizes that improving the LOS for one mode of
transportation can sometimes degrade the LOS for another mode. For example, pedestrian-friendly
streets are designed to encourage pedestrian uses and typically have amenities that slow vehicle travel
speeds (e.g., short-distance pedestrian crossings that restrict vehicle mobility). The “street typology” is
defined in the General Plan Mobility Element and determines which travel modes are subject to the
MMLOS D standard, as summarized in Table 13. For example, the vehicular mode of travel is subject to
the MMLOS D standard on the following street typologies: freeways, arterial streets, arterial connector
streets and Industrial streets.
Table 13: Street Typology and MMLOS Standard
STREET TYPOLOLOGY Modes subject to the MMLOS D Standard
Vehicular Transit Pedestrian Bicycle
Freeways Yes Yes No No
Arterial Streets Yes Yes No No
Identity Streets No No Yes Yes
Village Streets No No Yes Yes
Arterial Connector Streets Yes No Yes Yes
Neighborhood Connector Streets No No Yes Yes
Coastal Streets No No Yes Yes
School Streets No No Yes Yes
Employment/Transit Connector Streets No Yes Yes Yes
Industrial Streets Yes Yes No No
Local/Neighborhood Streets No No Yes Yes
All Streets Located Within Half-Mile of a Transit Center No Yes Yes Yes
Bicycle/Pedestrian Pathways No No Yes Yes
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 27 of 45
D. Methods to Measure Service to Different Transportation Modes
a. How vehicular LOS is measured
The city monitors facilities that are subject to the vehicular LOS standard according to
that street’s typology as defined in Table 13. This section of the report summarizes the
vehicular LOS methodology used for monitoring purposes. For the fiscal year (FY) 2019-
20 monitoring report all the street facilities required to meet the vehicular LOS standard
were monitored including the arterial, arterial connector, and industrial street
typologies.
The city evaluates the roadway network at the “facility” level according to Chapter 16 of
the Highway Capacity Manual. A facility is defined as one direction of travel along a
length of road that has similar travel and geometric characteristics, and it typically
extends between multiple signalized intersections. Each facility has an associated
capacity that is defined in the Highway Capacity Manual as “the ability of a
transportation facility or service to meet the quantity of travel demanded of it.” For
Growth Management Plan monitoring purposes, travel demand on a roadway is
measured by the volume of vehicles using the facility during the peak hours of
operation. A volume threshold is established for each LOS grade according to the
Highway Capacity Manual. The vehicular LOS is determined by comparing the traffic
volume against these thresholds. For example, a LOS D is recorded when a traffic
volume exceeds the LOS C threshold but is below the LOS D threshold.
A street “facility” is comprised of smaller and contiguous “segments” that typically
extend between two adjacent signalized intersections. Per the Highway Capacity
Manual, an entire facility is reported as failing if the volume along any one of its
segments exceeds its capacity, which defines LOS F. When a facility has been monitored
and found to operate at LOS D, each segment of that facility will be evaluated the
following monitoring cycle and the LOS will be reported as follows:
• If the volume of any one segment of the facility exceeds the reported capacity
for that segment, the facility will be reported as LOS F; or
• If none of the segment volumes exceeds its reported capacity for that segment,
the facility will be reported as LOS D (or the new level if it has changed).
As noted above, travel demand is assumed to equal the traffic volume measured during
the peak hour of operation. Vehicular LOS is determined based on one mid-block traffic
count collected for each facility (or segment) being evaluated. The data is collected
while school is in session in either the spring or fall. The morning and afternoon
(a.m./p.m.) peak hours’ LOS is reported for each facility or segment. Each street
evaluated will have separate LOS results reported for the a.m. and p.m. peak hour
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 28 of 45
conditions with independent grades reported for each direction of travel. This approach
to data collection is consistent with industry standards.
b. How Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit Service MMLOS is measured
The General Plan Mobility Element calls for the use of a MMLOS methodology to
provide a metric for evaluating bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes of travel. In 2015,
a method for evaluating bicycle and pedestrian LOS was first developed as part of the
General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR); this EIR method was applied on a
broad, program level to evaluate service to pedestrian, bicycle and transit users. When
consultants applied the original method during the preparation of impact studies of
proposed development projects, limitations were discovered in terms of the study area,
directional travel and potential inconsistent interpretations of how the method should
be applied.
Accordingly, a more robust method was developed in 2018 to calculate MMLOS for each
mode and to identify a broader range of improvements that could be implemented to
ensure the minimum operating standard would be met. As noted in General Plan
Mobility Element Policy 3-P.3, the purpose of the MMLOS methodology is to provide a
means for evaluating impacts of individual development projects, as well as monitoring
the LOS for individual streets to ensure that they are meeting the specified standard by
street type. Ultimately the MMLOS methodology was revised to accomplish these goals
and a spreadsheet-based MMLOS Tool was developed to provide an easy-to-use way of
calculating points for a specified location.
The MMLOS Tool generates a letter grade (A through F) to reflect the quality of service
provided to a user of that mode of travel. This grade is based on the applicable
attributes of the associated pedestrian, bicycle or transit mode. Examples of the
attributes used to develop the MMLOS grade for bicycle travel include pavement
condition, posted speed limit, on-street parking and buffered bike lanes. Each attribute
contributes to a point system that corresponds to a MMLOS letter grade, when the total
points for all attributes are added together. A LOS D score indicates that the existing
attributes provide the minimum acceptable service for that mode. The MMLOS grades
are determined using field data related to each attribute used in the scoring criteria.
In FY 2019-20, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit travel modes were monitored but will be
presented separately as the methodology for MMLOS was being updated at the time of
writing this report. The results of the MMLOS will be presented in a separate document
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 29 of 45
after the methodology updates are finalized through the process of working with the
Traffic and Mobility Commission ad-hoc committee and later adoption by City Council.
C. Exemptions to the LOS D Standard
General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9 requires the city to develop and maintain a
list of street facilities where specified modes of travel are exempt from the LOS standard
(LOS-exempt street facilities), as approved by the City Council.
Regarding vehicular LOS standards, the City Council has the authority to exempt a street
facility from the vehicular LOS standard if the street facility meets one or more of the
following criteria from General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9:
• Acquiring the rights of way is not feasible; or
• The proposed improvements would significantly impact the environment in an
unacceptable way and mitigation would not contribute to the nine core values of
the Carlsbad Community Vision; or
• The proposed improvements would result in unacceptable impacts to other
community values or General Plan policies; or
• The proposed improvements would require more than three through travel
lanes in each direction.
General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.11 requires new development that adds
vehicular traffic to street facilities that are exempt from the vehicle LOS D standard to
implement:
• Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies that reduce the reliance
on single-occupant automobiles and assist in achieving the city’s livable streets
vision; and
• Transportation System Management (TSM) strategies that improve traffic signal
coordination and improve transit service.
Each of the previously exempt street facilities were monitored this cycle and evaluated
against the vehicular LOS standard. The results of this evaluation are summarized in
Table 14 below. No changes have occurred since the adoption of these resolutions that
would warrant lifting exemptions for these street facilities.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 30 of 45
Table 14: Vehicle LOS Exempt Street Facilities
Street Facility From To LOS
(AM/PM)
Meets LOS
Standard?
Date of
Exemption
1. La Costa Avenue Interstate-5 El Camino Real B/B Yes
Exempted with
Adoption of
the General
Plan Mobility
Element on
Sept. 22, 2015
2. La Costa Avenue El Camino Real Interstate-5 B/B Yes
3. El Camino Real Palomar Airport Road Camino Vida Roble D/D Yes
4. El Camino Real Camino Vida Roble Poinsettia Lane B/B Yes
5. El Camino Real Poinsettia Lane Aviara Parkway/Alga Road C/C Yes
6. El Camino Real Aviara Parkway/Alga
Road
La Costa Avenue C/C Yes
7. El Camino Real La Costa Avenue Aviara Parkway/Alga Road B/B Yes
8. El Camino Real Aviara Parkway/Alga
Road
Poinsettia Lane C/C Yes
9. El Camino Real Poinsettia Lane Camino Vida Roble B/B Yes
10. El Camino Real Camino Vida Roble Palomar Airport Road D/D Yes
11. Palomar Airport Road Avenida Encinas Paseo del Norte F/F No*
12. Palomar Airport Road Paseo del Norte Armada Drive C/C Yes
13. Palomar Airport Road Armada Drive College Boulevard/Aviara
Parkway
C/C Yes
14. Palomar Airport Road College Blvd./Aviara
Parkway
Armada Drive C/C Yes
15. Palomar Airport Road Armada Drive Paseo del Norte C/C Yes
16. Palomar Airport Road Paseo del Norte Avenida Encinas F/F No*
17. Palomar Airport Road El Camino Real El Fuerte Street B/C Yes
18. Palomar Airport Road El Fuerte Street Melrose Drive B/C Yes
19. Palomar Airport Road Melrose Drive El Fuerte Street C/B Yes
20. Palomar Airport Road El Fuerte Street El Camino Real B/B Yes
21. El Camino Real Oceanside city limits Marron Road E/E No Dec. 17, 2019
Res. 2019-270 22. El Camino Real Marron Road Oceanside city limits E/E No
23. Melrose Drive Vista city limits Palomar Airport Road D/D Yes
24. El Camino Real Cannon Road College Boulevard B/B Yes
Jun. 9, 2020
Res. 2020-105
25. El Camino Real College Boulevard Cannon Road B/C Yes
26. Cannon Road El Camino Real College Boulevard D/D Yes
27. Cannon Road College Boulevard El Camino Real D/D Yes
28. El Camino Real Tamarack Avenue Cannon Road C/C Yes Nov. 3, 2020
Res. 2020-214
29. College Boulevard Carlsbad Village Drive Oceanside City Limits C/C Yes Jan. 12,
2021**
Res. 2021-003
30. Cannon Road Avenida Encinas Paseo del Norte D/D Yes
31. Cannon Road Paseo del Norte Avenida Encinas D/D Yes
* On Dec. 17, 2019, City Council determined four street facilities to be operating at deficient levels of service. One of these deficient street facilities is
southbound College Boulevard from Aston Avenue to Palomar Airport Road, and City Council expedited a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project to
fully address this deficiency by adding a southbound right turn lane and converting the existing right turn lane into a second southbound through lane on
College Boulevard at the intersection of Palomar Airport Road (CIP Project No. 6028).
** On January 12, 2021 City Council also exempted the remaining facility of Palomar Airport Road between Avenida Encinas to Paseo del Norte.
D. FY 2019-20 Facility Adequacy Analysis
The following vehicular LOS and MMLOS results are based on the data reported in the
2019-20 Traffic Monitoring Program City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 31 of 45
1. Vehicular LOS
Except where noted below, vehicular LOS grades reflect traffic data gathered in April,
May, and June of 2020. The traffic volumes were collected during a global pandemic
which included local orders for Carlsbad residents to stay at home unless performing
essential trips. These circumstances resulted in a significant decrease in traffic volumes
throughout the city. The volumes used in this report were not adjusted and reflect the
volumes during the pandemic conditions.
Overall, in April 2020, daily traffic volumes had dropped by an average of 41%
throughout the region and traffic volumes on I-5 decreased by over 50% (SANDAG, May
2020, Infobits). While traffic volumes are likely to partially rise again after the end of
the pandemic, some of the changes in work patterns and the reduction in traffic
volumes may be permanent, due to the pandemic speeding up the transition to
telecommuting through social and technological changes. Consequently, vehicular LOS
values may not return to their pre-pandemic levels. These facilities will be continued to
be monitored.
The LOS results for the vehicular mode are illustrated in Figure 4. In summary, all
roadway facilities were determined to operate at an acceptable LOS D or better except
for the following four facilities:
• Eastbound Palomar Airport Road between Avenida Encinas and Paseo del Norte
(LOS F)
• Westbound Palomar Airport Road between Paseo del Norte and Avenida Encinas
(LOS F)
• Southbound El Camino Real between the Oceanside city limits and Marron Road
(LOS E)
• Northbound El Camino Real between Marron Road and Oceanside city limits
(LOS E)
All the deficient roadway facilities identified above were previously determined by City
Council to be deficient and exempt per General Plan Mobility Policy 3-P.10 and no new
deficient facilities were identified.
Table 15 lists the street facilities which were previously reported as LOS D in the FY
2018-19 monitoring report. The facilities were further studied at the segment level as
part of the FY 2019-20 report to determine the operating LOS of the facility at the
segment level. The results of this analysis show that all of these facilities will still meet
the LOS D standard.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 32 of 45
Figure 4: Vehicular Level of Service (LOS) Results
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 33 of 45
Table 15: Facilities studied at the segment level that were LOS D in
previous reporting year.
2019 2020 AM PM AM PM NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB
El Camino Real Palomar Airport Rd Camino Vida Roble D D D D
Palomar Airport Rd Gateway Rd D D D D
Gateway Rd Town Garden Rd C C C C
Town Garden Rd Camino Vida Roble C C C C
El Camino Real La Costa Ave Leucadia Blvd C D C C
La Costa Ave La Costa Towne Ctr C C C C
La Costa Towne Ctr Levante St D D D D
Levante St Calle Barcelona B B C C
Calle Barcelona Leucadia Blvd C C C C
College Blvd Carlsbad Village Dr Cannon Rd C D D C
Carlsbad Village Dr Redbluff Pl/Inlet Dr C D D C
Redbluff Pl/Inlet Dr Rift Rd/Richfield Dr C C C C
Rift Rd/Richfield Dr Cannon Rd C C C C
College Blvd El Camino Real Aston Ave D D D D
El Camino Real Salk Ave D D D D
Salk Ave Faraday Ave C C C C
Faraday Ave Aston Ave C C C C
Aviara Pkwy/Alga Rd Palomar Airport Rd Poinsettia Ln D D D D
Palomar Airport Rd Laurel Tree Ln D D D D
Laurel Tree Ln Mariposa Rd/Cobblestone Rd D D D D
Mariposa Rd/Cobblestone Rd Plum Tree Rd D D D D
Plum Tree Rd Camino De Las Ondas C C C C
Camino De Las Ondas Poinsettia Ln D D D D
Rancho Santa Fe La Costa Ave Calle Barcelona C C D C
La Costa Ave Camino De Los Coches C C C C
Camino De Los Coches Calle Barcelona C C C C
Cannon Rd Legoland Dr Faraday Ave C C D C
Legoland Dr Grand Pacific Dr C C C C
Grand Pacific Dr Faraday Ave B B B B
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 34 of 45
E. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR evaluated how buildout of the land uses planned by the General
Plan will impact the vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle and transit levels of service, and identified
that additional circulation facilities may need to be constructed to meet the GMP
performance standard at buildout. The following summary provides the results of that
evaluation:
Vehicular Level of Service at Buildout
• Additional future road segments (extensions of College Boulevard, Poinsettia Lane and
Camino Junipero) needed to accommodate the city’s future growth were identified as
part of the General Plan update. The General Plan Mobility Element identifies these
needed future road segments as “Planned City of Carlsbad Street Capacity
Improvements.”
• The General Plan also called out the need to implement the scheduled Interstate-5
North Coast Project and Interstate-5/Interstate-78 Interchange Improvement Project
that are needed to accommodate future growth.
• The CIP funds projects that will upgrade the LOS including several roadway widenings
along El Camino Real near College Boulevard (northbound), La Costa Avenue
(southbound) and Cassia Road (northbound). There is also a CIP project currently in the
design phase to add a second southbound through lane and dedicated right turn lane on
southbound College Boulevard (southbound) from Aston Avenue to Palomar Airport
Road.
• The General Plan EIR identifies TDM and TSM as mitigation measures for roadway
sections that have been determined to be LOS-exempt.
F. Next Steps
Staff will finalize the updates to the pedestrian, bicycle and transit MMLOS methodologies.
Staff will gather stakeholder feedback on the MMLOS Tool, including from the Traffic and
Mobility Commission, to guide this process. Based on the feedback received, staff will
update the MMLOS methodologies accordingly and present to the Traffic and Mobility
Commission for a recommendation to City Council for approval. Once City Council has
approved the refined MMLOS Tool, staff will apply it to the city streets monitored in FY
2019-20 and present the MMLOS results to City Council later this year.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 35 of 45
FIRE
A. Performance Standard
No more than 1,500 dwelling units outside of a five-minute response time.
B. FY 2019-20 Facility Adequacy Analysis
The city’s fire facilities are in compliance with the Growth Management performance
standard. There are no more than 1,500 dwelling units outside of a five-minute response
distance from any of the city’s six fire stations.
The intent of the growth management standard, as applied to fire facilities, is to establish the
distribution of station locations, based upon response distances. At the time the Growth
Management Plan was developed, scientific fire behavior information and recognized best
practices supported the position that a response time of five minutes would result in effective
fire incident intervention. Because the Growth Management Plan provides no other trigger
mechanism for the installation of additional fire stations, it follows that up to 1,500 dwelling
units could exist outside the five-minute reach of the closest fire station for an indeterminate
length of time without violating the growth management standard. The five-minute response
distance measure was selected exclusively as a means of geographically positioning fire
stations throughout the city. Therefore, the standard is applied as a means of measuring
compliance with locating fire facilities in accordance with the Growth Management Plan, not
the performance of the Fire Department in meeting service responsibilities.
C. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
At buildout, the established threshold of more than 1,500 units that exist outside of a five
minute response distance will not be exceeded for any of the fire stations.
To determine if fire facilities comply with the Growth Management Plan at buildout, the
city’s Geographic Information System Department (GIS) created a map based upon the
following information:
• Existing fire station locations
• Anticipated future development
• 2.5-mile road distance from each of the six fire stations (five minute response time
equates to road driving distance of 2.5 miles);
• All planned, major roadway arterials; and
• The number of dwelling units projected at buildout that will be located outside of
the 2.5-mile road (5 minute) distance from each fire station.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 36 of 45
The GIS map, based upon the above-noted assumptions, revealed the following findings as
shown in Table 16:
TABLE 16
Fire Station Number Total number of dwelling units outside of five minutes
1,3 & 4 (aggregated) 1,227
2 902
5 392
6 1,185
As noted above, the GIS map analysis revealed that at build out, the city’s existing and
planned fire facilities will meet the growth management performance standard (i.e. the total
number of dwelling units that will exist outside of a five-minute response distance from the
nearest fire station will not exceed the threshold of 1,500 units).
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 37 of 45
OPEN SPACE
A. Performance Standard
Fifteen percent of the total land area in the Local Facility Management Zone (LFMZ) exclusive
of environmentally constrained non-developable land must be set aside for permanent open
space and must be available concurrent with development.
B. FY 2019-20 Facility Adequacy Analysis
To date, adequate open space has been provided to meet the performance standard.
Open space to meet the performance standard is provided concurrent with approval of
development projects. The location of performance standard open space must be indicated
during project-specific analysis. It must be in addition to any constrained areas, such as
protected wildlife habitat or slopes greater than 40%. At the time the Citywide Facilities and
Improvements Plan was adopted (1986), the LFMZ’s were divided into: a) those that were
considered already developed or in compliance with the growth management open space
performance standard, and b) those that still needed to comply with the standard.
a) In 1986 at the time of the CFIP adoption, LFMZs 1 through 10, and 16 were considered
to be already developed or in compliance with the open space performance
standard11.
In addition, Ordinance No. 9808 provided exemptions from the Growth Management
Plan and all of the performance standards for a number of projects that were
approved and/or in process at that time. These projects are also listed in a memo to
the City Manager on June 10, 1986.
In the case of LFMZ 9, the boundaries of the remaining developable land in the zone
coincided with the project boundaries of the Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park
Master Plan (MP 175, approved 10-22-1985), which was exempted from growth
management by Section 21.90.030(g) of Ordinance No. 9808 if certain restrictions
were met, including a dedication of open space12. In anticipation of future
construction, the developer of MP 175 dedicated the necessary open space
properties, completing that portion of the requirement for 21.90.030(g)13. Although
MP 175 ultimately was never constructed, these open space dedications were
11 City Council Resolution No. 8797
12 The restriction for open space required that “Prior to approval of the final map for Phase I the master plan developer
shall have agreed to participate in the restoration of a significant lagoon and wetland resource area and made any
dedications of property necessary to accomplish the restoration”.
13 City Council Resolution No. 8666 contained an agreement between the city and the developer for the open space
property dedications noted above.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 38 of 45
maintained and became part of the open space for the project that followed, the
Poinsettia Shores Master Plan (MP 175(D), approved 01-18-94), and are the basis for
how MP 175(D) and LFMZ 9 complied with the growth management open space
performance standard14.
b) The remaining LFMZs were required to comply with the performance standard.
Subsequent to the adoption of the CFIP, LFMZs 11-15, 17-21, and 23-25 have provided
adequate open space to meet the performance standard concurrent with
development.
LFMZ 22 has not yet met the performance standard, and as future development
occurs, additional open space will be required.
C. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
As discussed above, all LFMZs, except for Zone 22, have met the growth management open
space performance standard. Future projects in LFMZ 22 must provide open space in
compliance with the performance standard.
14 Poinsettia Shores Master Plan, pages 4 and 22. The master plan states “the Growth Management Open Space
standard is already met for Zone 9 through the earlier preservation of the sensitive bluffs and slopes”.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 39 of 45
SCHOOLS
A. Performance Standard
School capacity to meet projected enrollment within the Local Facility Management Zone
(LFMZ) as determined by the appropriate school district must be provided prior to projected
occupancy.
B. FY 2019-20 Facility Adequacy Analysis
Currently, school capacity is in compliance with the growth management school performance
standard (see below). The city is served by four school districts as listed below:
1. Carlsbad Unified School District (CUSD)
According to both the district’s Long Range Facility Master Plan (approved Jan. 17, 2018)
and CUSD staff, the district can accommodate both the current enrollment levels and
expected future growth. The master plan indicates that the district has plans for
accommodating projected student enrollment levels through the next 15-20 years, which
includes proposals for renovating and replacing a variety of school facilities.
2. San Marcos Unified School District (SMUSD)
SMUSD staff indicated that the schools serving Carlsbad are currently at maximum
capacity, but that will-serve letters are still being issued by SMUSD for proposed
developments in the part of Carlsbad that is served by SMUSD schools, and that the
schools serving Carlsbad could accommodate the expected future growth within this area.
SMUSD completed construction in August 2019 of the La Costa Meadows Elementary
School Reconstruction Project, which reconstructed and modernized the school, and also
increased student capacity by 80 seats.
3. Encinitas Union Elementary School District
According to student enrollment and school capacity information provided by the school
district, sufficient student capacity exists for the 2019-20 school year for schools serving
Carlsbad.
4. San Dieguito Union High School District
According to student enrollment and school capacity information provided by the school
district, sufficient student capacity exists for the 2019-20 school year for schools serving
Carlsbad.
C. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
Based on Chapter 3.11 of the 2015 General Plan EIR, for all school districts at all grade levels,
capacity is expected to be sufficient for the buildout student population with no need for
additional schools.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 40 of 45
SEWER COLLECTION SERVICES
A. Performance Standard
Trunk-line capacity to meet demand, as determined by the appropriate sewer districts, must
be provided concurrent with development.
B. FY 2019-20 Facility Adequacy Analysis
Sewer improvements are provided on a project-by-project basis concurrent with
development. Currently, the City of Carlsbad’s sewer service area pipelines comply with the
growth management performance standard. The sewer agencies that provide sewer
collection systems within the city include: Carlsbad, Leucadia Wastewater District and
Vallecitos Water District. Each agency indicates that they currently have adequate
conveyance capacity in place to meet Carlsbad’s sewer collection demands.
The City of Carlsbad is served by the following six major interceptor systems, as shown in
Table 17 below:
TABLE 17
15 Million gallons per day (MGD)
16 Buena Sanitation District and the City of Carlsbad are negotiating the transfer of this facility to the City of Carlsbad
upon City of Vista’s completion of their Buena Outfall Force Main, Phase III project.
17 The downstream sections (NB8 and NB9) of the North Batiquitos Sewer, often referred to as Ponto Sewer
and originally termed the Occidental Sewer
Interceptor System Sewer Districts Served Carlsbad Capacity Rights15
Vista/Carlsbad Interceptor City of Carlsbad & City of Vista
Ranges from
1.0 MGD up to 41.8 MGD (3.3%
to 50%)
Buena Interceptor16 City of Carlsbad & Buena
Sanitation District
Ranges from
1.2 MGD up to 3.6 MGD (18% to
35%)
Vallecitos Interceptor
City of Carlsbad, Buena
Sanitation District & Vallecitos
Water District
5 MGD
Occidental Sewer17 City of Carlsbad, City of Encinitas
& Leucadia Waste Water District 8.5 MGD (40%)
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 41 of 45
For both the Vista/Carlsbad Interceptor and the Buena Interceptor, the percentage of
Carlsbad capacity rights increases in the downstream reaches of each interceptor system
(3.3% in the upstream reaches as they enter the Carlsbad service area and up to 35% or 50%
in the downstream reaches for Buena Interceptor and Vista/Carlsbad Interceptor,
respectively as they enter the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility).
C. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
The City of Carlsbad 2019 Sewer Master Plan Update evaluated the sewer infrastructure
needs of the Carlsbad sewer service area and identified facilities required to accommodate
future sewer flows at buildout. The master plan identified the Vista/Carlsbad Interceptor and
Buena Interceptor as requiring improvements to accommodate build-out demand (see
below). Sewer trunk main adequacy is estimated by comparing wastewater flow projections
to the capacity of the sewer system using a computer model. Annual sewer flow
measurements are used to assess actual flows and to evaluate capacity in the sewers.
Collection system improvements to meet buildout conditions are identified at three
locations: Faraday Avenue, Poinsettia Avenue and Kelly Drive. These projects are
programmed in the CIP.
The adequacy of major sewer facilities for buildout conditions is summarized as follows:
Vista/Carlsbad Interceptor: The City’s 2019 Sewer Master Plan Update indicates that
portions of the V/C Interceptor do not satisfy buildout system flows. Hydraulic model results
indicate that the 36-inch diameter gravity mains of Reach VC-3 are insufficient to convey
buildout flows. Most of reach VC-3 consists of 36-inch diameter gravity main and is scheduled
for upsizing to 42 inches as a future CIP project to meet buildout flows.
Buena Interceptor: The Buena Interceptor is currently shared by Vista and Carlsbad and,
although the city’s wastewater flows are not projected to exceed its capacity rights, the
combined flows of Buena Sanitation District and City of Carlsbad during peak wet weather
periods exceed the design capacity criterion. As a result, Buena Sanitation District is
constructing a parallel trunk sewer which will allow flow from Buena Sanitation District to be
diverted to the parallel trunk sewer. Once completed in 2021, the City of Carlsbad will be the
only agency with flows remaining in the existing Buena Interceptor and peak wet weather
flow at buildout conditions would reach 7.3 mgd or approximately 69 percent of pipe
capacity.
North Agua Hedionda
Interceptor City of Carlsbad 6 MGD (100%)
South Agua Hedionda
Interceptor City of Carlsbad 4.7 MGD (100%)
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 42 of 45
WATER DISTRIBUTION SERVICES
A. Performance Standard
Line capacity to meet demand as determined by the appropriate water district must be
provided concurrent with development. A minimum of 10-day average storage capacity must
be provided prior to any development.
B. FY 2019-20 Facility Adequacy Analysis
Carlsbad’s water distribution is provided by three agencies including the Carlsbad Municipal
Water District (CMWD), which is a subsidiary district of the City of Carlsbad, serving 32.32
square miles (82.7 percent of the city), Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD) serving
5.28 square miles (13.5 percent of the city), and Vallecitos Water District (VWD) serving 1.48
square miles (3.8 percent of the city). These districts indicate that they have adequate
capacity to meet the growth management performance standard.
Water service demand requirements are estimated using a computer model to simulate two
water distribution scenarios: 1) maximum day demand plus a fire event; 2) peak hour
demand. This computer model was calibrated using actual flow measurements collected in
the field to verify it sufficiently represents the actual water system.
Existing (2014 baseline year) and buildout (2040) daily demand and storage requirements for
CMWD from the CMWD 2019 Potable Water Master Plan are shown in Table 18 below:
TABLE 18
Water Demand Flow Rate 18
Existing Maximum Day Demand 24.1 MGD
Buildout Maximum Day Demand 29.6 MGD
Water Storage Volume19
Existing Storage Requirement 35.4 MG
Existing Storage Capacity 47.5 MG (excluding Maerkle Dam storage)
Based on the water model analysis prepared for the CMWD 2019 Potable Water Master Plan,
future pipelines and water system facilities were identified to ensure water system
improvements are constructed to accommodate future customers. In addition, funds for the
construction of future facilities are included in the Capital Improvement Program. Therefore,
the future water infrastructure is programmed to be in place at the time of need to ensure
compliance with the performance standard.
18 Million gallons per day (MGD)
19 Million gallons (MG)
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 43 of 45
Within the CMWD service area the existing average daily potable water demand for the
previous five years is shown in Table 19 below:
TABLE 19
Fiscal Year MGD
2015-16 11.4
2016-17 12.1
2017-18 13.4
2018-19 12.420
2019-2020 11.9
Water conservation by CMWD customers has resulted in an overall reduction in per capita
consumption. Factors leading to this reduction include (1) an expansion of CMWD’s recycled
water system beginning in 2008, (2) in 2009, a campaign was initiated to reduce customer
consumption by the wholesale water agencies, (3) implementation of a new tiered water rate
structure to encourage water conservation, and (4) voluntary and mandatory conservation
measures in 2015 in response to drought conditions.
The 10-day storage requirement is a city growth management performance standard and a
planning criterion to accommodate pipeline maintenance recommended by the San Diego
County Water Authority. To meet the requirement, CMWD needs 131 MG of storage capacity
based on the average water demand identified in the 2019 Potable Water Master Plan and
187 MG for buildout conditions. CMWD has a total storage capacity of 242.5 MG which
consists of 195 MG of storage capacity at Maerkle Dam and 47.5 MG of storage capacity in
various storage tanks throughout the distribution system.
CMWD also has interagency agreements with OMWD, VWD and Oceanside to provide
additional supply if needed. In 2004, the OMWD completed construction of a water
treatment facility at the San Diego County Water Authority Emergency Storage Reservoir,
which provides the storage necessary to meet the 10-day storage criterion for OMWD.
VWD’s average day demand is 13.3 MGD with an existing storage capacity of 120.5 MG.
Through interagency sharing arrangements, VWD can obtain additional water supplies to
meet a 10-day restriction on imported water supply.
C. Buildout Facility Adequacy Analysis
As proposed land development projects are reviewed by the city, the Water Master Plans
from CMWD, OMWD, and VWD are consulted to check pipeline sizes and facility capacities
to verify adequacy to support the water needs of the project and city. To comply with water
20 Corrected demand for 2018-19 based on potable water sales data.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 44 of 45
master plan requirements, land development projects may be required to construct a master
plan water project concurrent with construction of the development project.
The CMWD 2019 Potable Water Master Plan identifies facilities necessary to meet water
demands for buildout within its service area. These consist of new pipelines and pipeline
rehabilitation projects that are programmed into the CIP, some of which may be constructed
concurrently with new development projects in the northeastern portion of the city.
The 2019 Potable Water Master Plan identified that no additional storage is required to meet
the future storage requirements, due in part to conservation measures and expansion of
CMWD’s recycled water system.
Aug. 31, 2021 Item #6 Page 45 of 45
FY 2019-20 Growth Management
Plan Monitoring Report
Corey Funk, Associate Planner
Community Development Department
August 31, 2021
{city of
Carlsbad
INTRODUCTION
•Annual report required by Municipal Code
•Zoning Code Section 21.90.130(d)
•Provide status:
•Dwelling units and growth caps
•Public facility compliance with
performance standards
•Performance standards ensure public facilities are provided concurrent with growth
{city of
Carlsbad
IMPACT OF STATE LAW
•SB 166 and SB 330
•Prohibits residential growth moratoriums
•Prohibits residential growth caps
•GMP utilizes both as limits to help ensure
the provision of adequate public facilities
•Per HCD, these limits are unenforceable
{city of
Carlsbad
IMPACT OF STATE LAW
•Gov. Code 65583(a)(3)
•Requires Housing Element Sites Inventory
that achieves RHNA
•Must accommodate RHNA at all times throughout the housing cycle
•Per HCD, GMP caps cannot prevent
consistency with inventory
•City Council Resolution Nos. 2020-208 and 2021-074 {city of
Carlsbad
DWELLING UNIT STATUS
Quadrant Existing units
As of June 30, 2020
Prop E Caps
NW 12,488 15,370
NE 7,264 9,042
SW 10,179 12,859
SE 16,426 17,328
Total 46,357 54,599
PUBLIC FACILITY STATUS
Public
Facility
FY 2019-20
compliance Public Facility FY 2019-20
compliance
Admin Yes Sewer Yes
Library Yes Water Yes
Fire Yes Open Space Yes
Schools Yes Parks Yes
Drainage Yes Circulation Yes
Wastewater Yes
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution accepting the Fiscal Year 2019-20
Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report
{city of
Carlsbad