HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-09-09; Housing Element Advisory Committee; ; Regional Housing Needs Allocation – Follow Up on Presentation to City Council on Draft
Meeting Date: September 9, 2020 Item No.
To: Housing Element Advisory Committee Members
From: Scott Donnell, Senior Planner
Staff Contact: Scott Donnell, Senior Planner
Scott.donnell@carlsbadca.gov, 760-602-4618
Subject: Regional Housing Needs Allocation – Follow Up on Presentation to City Council on Draft
Housing Sites Identification Approach
Recommended Action
Receive information on the August 27, 2020, staff presentation to City Council on RHNA and the approach
toward housing sites identification.
Executive Summary
On August 27, 2020, City Council held a special meeting to discuss the Housing Element and approaches to site
identification that have the potential to produce housing. The use of vacant sites, planned projects, and ADUs
were discussed, although the discussion focused on methodologies presented during the August 2020 HEAC
meeting:
• Assume midrange densities
• Up-zone existing residentially zoned properties
• Count proposed projects that include a rezone
• Use city-owned properties
• Rezone select commercial properties to residential
• Rezone select industrial properties to residential
Benefits and drawbacks of each strategy were presented.
During the August HEAC meeting, the HEAC members individually ranked the approaches for the identification
of housing sites for a second time. Following member discussions, the committee recommended a different
priority for the methodologies than that chosen by staff. The chart below compares the rankings.
Staff and Housing Element Advisory Committee priority rankings
Methodologies to meet housing need Staff HEAC
Change assumption about how many units will be built 1 1
Increase units allowed on properties that already allow housing 2 5
Housing Element Advisory Committee Agenda Item 1
September 9, 2020
Page 2
Projects already proposed that require rezoning not yet approved 3 4
Rezone city-owned properties 4 2
Convert some commercial property to residential use 5 3
Convert some industrial to residential uses 6 6
Overall, the committee (and staff) recognized that no one methodology will be able to address the RHNA
requirements and that it will likely take a combination of methodologies to meet our targets. The committee
also recognized that the methodologies involving up-zoning residential properties and rezoning industrial
properties could be supported given certain site characteristics.
August 27, 2020 City Council Meeting
At a special City Council meeting on August 27, Council members were asked to discuss and provide any
direction and input on the six proposed methodologies discussed by the HEAC. For example, as part of its
presentation, staff asked Council members to identify any methodologies to focus on or additional ones to
pursue. To support their deliberations, the meeting staff report, attached, discussed RHNA, described each
methodology and its ranking by the committee and staff, and summarized the comments by committee
members on their rankings.
Additionally, the report identified public input received on potential methodologies through an online survey
that generated very strong participation (over 4,200 respondents). Though the survey methodologies are not
identical to those discussed and ranked by the committee and staff, they are similar enough to enable
comparisons and provide meaningful insights. Please refer to the attached City Council staff report for further
information on the survey, including differences between the rankings of the public, committee, and staff.
Following staff’s presentation and three public speakers, the City Council discussed the staff report. Council
members did not direct staff to pursue or delete any particular methodology. Instead, Council members
commented and asked questions about several relevant topics:
• Accessory dwelling units and their use as affordable housing
• Reevaluation of non-commercial sites, including built, but vacant, industrial and office buildings
• Repurposing commercial centers
• Residential density in high fire areas
• Separation of residential from hazardous material uses in industrial areas
• Building height at higher densities
• Distribution of new housing by quadrant
• Growth Management Plan housing limits
• Commercial/industrial conversions to housing along Palomar Airport Road
• Workforce housing
• Transit access
Housing Element Advisory Committee Agenda Item 1
September 9, 2020
Page 3
Correspondence received by the City Council on this item is provided in the attached staff report and includes
a letter specifically to the HEAC chair and an email with the HEAC copied. This letter and email are also
attached separately.
The City Council meeting video along with general resources are available Housing Plan Update webpage,
www.carlsbadca.gov/housingplan.
Next Steps
City staff will apply the methods described in this report to create a series of maps identifying various
combinations of properties and approaches that will enable the city to meet state housing requirements. City
staff will then contact owners of properties that could potentially be rezoned to determine interest.
The maps created will show properties based on three approaches:
• Staff’s recommended priorities
• Priorities recommended by the Housing Element Advisory Committee
• Priorities identified by survey respondents
The maps will provide a variety of options that can be taken through the next phase of evaluation. This
includes review and input from the Housing Element Advisory Committee and the community as well as
environmental analysis.
The input received and analysis conducted will guide completion of the draft and final Housing Element and
environmental documents. Draft documents for public review are anticipated for release late this year. Final
versions of each will be considered as part of public hearings before Housing Commission, Planning
Commission, and City Council in early 2021.
Public Notification
This item was noticed in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and was available for viewing at least 72
hours prior to the meeting date. Housing Element Advisory Committee agendas and staff reports are available
on the project website, www.carlsbadca.gov/housingplan.
Exhibits
1. August 27, 2020, City Council staff report
2. August 25, 2020 letter from Mark Wendel, Kimco Realty Corporation
3. August 26, 2020 email from Linda Geldner
CA Review __RK__
Meeting Date: August 27, 2020
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Staff Contact: Scott Donnell, Senior Planner
Scott.donnell@carlsbadca.gov or 760-602-4618
Subject: Our Home Our Future – Proposed Methodologies for Choosing Locations
for Future Housing in Carlsbad, as Part of Required Update to Housing
Element of the General Plan
Project Name: Housing Element Update 2021-2029
Project No.: GPA 2019-0003 (PUB 2019-0009)
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1)Receive a report on proposed methods for selecting potential housing sites to meet
Carlsbad’s share of the region’s future housing needs.
2)Provide direction to staff, as needed, on any changes or additions to the proposed
methods.
3)Allocate additional funds not to exceed $55,000 to cover costs for outside legal counsel to
assist in the legal review of the city’s Housing Element Update
Executive Summary
As required under state law, the city has begun updating the Housing Element in the city’s
General Plan. The Housing Element provides the city with a coordinated and comprehensive
strategy for promoting the production of safe, decent and affordable housing for varying income-
levels within the community for the next eight years, from April 2021 through April 2029.
The periodic process of updating local housing elements includes a regional assessment to
quantify the need for housing within each jurisdiction during the specified planning periods. This
is called the regional housing needs assessment, also known as RHNA.
The latest regional housing needs assessment for San Diego County calls for 3,873 housing units,
including 2,195 for residents in the low- and very low-income categories, to be created in
Carlsbad during this period. The city must demonstrate to the state Department of Housing and
Community Development that its local housing plan, the Housing Element, has adequate land
capacity and implementing policies to accommodate building its share of housing units.
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 1 of 91
Exhibit 1
Page 2
There are several ways to meet this need. Based on technical analysis, input from the City
Council-appointed Housing Element Advisory Committee and feedback from the community, staff
developed several approaches or methodologies that could be used to decide how to meet future
housing needs. It is going to take a combination of these methodologies to develop a plan that
will be able to accommodate the assigned housing numbers.
Staff is providing the City Council with this report on these methodologies to receive City Council
input and direction before using them to create draft maps that would show proposed specific
locations where new housing could be built in the future. Once these maps are created, the
following steps will take place:
• Outreach to owners of affected properties to determine interest in land use or zoning
changes
• Environmental analysis
• Review and input by the Housing Element Advisory Committee and the public
Based on feedback and further analysis, staff will return to the City Council in early 2021 with a
draft of the city’s Housing Element update, including the recommended map showing locations of
future housing in Carlsbad.
Discussion
State law requires cities and counties in California to update their housing elements every eight
years. The law and steps taken to update a housing plan are complicated, but to help the
community better understand the terminology and processes used, staff developed an
information bulletin that answers many common questions, including how the state determines
housing requirements for jurisdictions, what qualifies as affordable, how density translates to
affordability, the process localities must follow to secure a certified Housing Element and the
implications for failing to meet required state housing goals. This bulletin is attached as Exhibit 1.
On July 10, 2020, the San Diego Association of Governments Board of Directors adopted the final
Regional Housing Needs Assessment Plan for San Diego County. The plan accepted the state
housing department’s determination that 171,685 housing units were needed in the region.
Based on a SANDAG-developed methodology, those units were allocated to the 18 cities in San
Diego County and its unincorporated areas. The City of Carlsbad’s share is as follows:
2021-2029 Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation by income
Very low Low Moderate Moderate + Total
1,311 784 749 1,029 3,873
When compared to the city’s RHNA allocation for the current housing cycle, from 2013-2021, the
city was assigned 27% fewer housing units overall for this upcoming housing cycle, a drop of
1,126. This is reflected in the chart below:
2013-2021 Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation by income
Very low Low Moderate Moderate + Total
912 693 1,062 2,332 4,999
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 2 of 91
Page 3
The type of housing assigned for the next housing cycle changed significantly. The assessment
included:
• 48% (1,616 units) reduction in housing for moderate and above-moderate income
(“Moderate +”) residents. These types of housing are typically single-family and lower
density development.
• 31% (490 units) increase in housing assigned for low and very-low income categories. This
type of housing is typically higher density development such as apartments and
condominiums.
Net housing increase based on current plan
The first step in updating the city’s housing element is to look at the existing housing element to
determine if the plan already has the capacity to accommodate all or a portion of the assigned
housing units.
The chart below shows the number of housing units, by income category, that staff estimate can
be carried over to the new housing plan. This is only an estimate because the state housing
department has the final say as to whether sites can be counted for future housing. This
determination is made once a draft of the housing element is submitted for review.
Units by income levels
Source Very low/ Low Moderate Moderate +
RHNA (total housing assigned to Carlsbad) 2,095 749 1,029
Housing in General Plan (466) (129) (496)
Housing already planned (no rezoning required)1 (404) (21) (1,409)
Current accessory dwelling units (granny flats) (185) (476) 0
Net amount of new housing required 1,040 123 (876)
Net amount of new housing required with “buffer”2 1,354 235 ---
1 Includes several development projects, three of which propose a state density bonus or local density increase that will result in an
additional 57 very low-income units and 226 moderate + units above the density allowed under current zoning.
2 The state housing department recommends that a buffer be built into the plan in the event a site does not get built at the level of affordability planned. Staff assumed a buffer based on 15% of the gross RHNA total. The state recommends a buffer of 15 to 30%.
Current General Plan
The city’s General Plan is a broad policy document that serves as a blueprint for how land will be
used in the city. The city’s current General Plan was adopted by the City Council in 2015 following
eight years of technical analysis and community input.
The General Plan identifies locations for housing that have been vetted by the community and
undergone analysis required by the California Environmental Quality Act. Using housing units
already included in the city’s General Plan to meet the city’s new housing allocation reduces the
need to find other properties. Finding new properties for housing in Carlsbad requires an
extensive process including legal and technical analysis, environmental analysis, community
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 3 of 91
Page 4
outreach, property owner outreach and potentially legislative action to change land uses and
zoning.
The following three types of properties identified in the city’s General Plan can meet a significant
percentage of the city’s assigned housing needs.
• Vacant/underutilized sites
Underutilized sites are those not developed to their full potential and signify
opportunities for additional housing. A draft map showing both vacant and underutilized
existing eligible sites is attached as Exhibit 2.
• Planned/pending projects (no rezoning proposed)
Under state law, development projects that are in the entitlement processes as of June
30, 2020, and anticipated to be constructed by the end of the eight-year cycle, can be
counted toward the RHNA obligations for the housing plan. The units listed in this section
are associated with development projects that are either approved, that is, entitled but
not built, or pending (Exhibit 3).
The pending projects do not require a change in zoning based on the densities currently
allowed in the General Plan. The exception is noted in the chart above for three projects
whose developers are proposing increased densities through means other than rezoning.
The units built through planned projects are being identified separately because they
represent a realistic view of the type, such as the affordability of unit, and density that can
be achieved on those sites. Should the projects not get approved or built, the city can still
count the sites as part of its housing inventory based on their underlying zoning.
• Accessory dwelling units
In recent years, the state legislature has relaxed laws to promote the production of
accessory dwelling units (granny flats), which the state considers a viable affordable
housing choice. The state housing department now allows jurisdictions to assume a unit
count that is three to five times the average of the housing produced in the past. The
state housing department has advised Carlsbad to base its estimates of producing
accessory dwelling units on permitting data from 2015 and 2016. The city’s annual
average ADU production rate for 2015 and 2016 was 25 units.
To be conservative, staff has assumed a rate three times the average, or 75 accessory
dwelling units per year.1 This assumption likely will need support in the way of proposed
Housing Element programs that, for example, promote ADU awareness and education.
ADU construction is also not linked to a specific quadrant and could occur anywhere in the
city’s residential areas. Their development also does not count toward the caps on
dwelling units contained in the city’s Growth Management Plan.
1 HCD permits a jurisdiction to count toward its RHNA obligations the units it estimates will be produced over a nearly nine-year projection period.
In the San Diego region, this period began June 30, 2020, and will end April 15, 2029.
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 4 of 91
Page 5
Methodologies to meet housing allocation
To identify additional housing locations, beyond what can be accommodated by the three
categories above, city staff have identified the following potential methodologies:
Each methodology is described below, accompanied with the potential number of dwelling units
it is expected to yield, as well as its benefits and possible drawbacks.
Assume midrange densities
The General Plan assigns residential properties a range of densities that can be constructed.
For example, the R-30 land use designation allows a residential density range of 23-30
dwelling units per acre, referred to as du/ac. Under the current housing element, staff
calculated unit yield2 for purposes of Housing Element compliance at the low (minimum) end
of the density range, or, in the case of R-30, at 23 du/ac.
The proposed methodology suggests that by requiring developers to build at the middle of
the residential density range, 26.5 du/ac, instead of at the minimum, 23 du/ac, the city could
generate additional very low and low-income units. This methodology, which would be
applied to existing R-15, R-23 and R-30 sites, as well as any new R-35 and R-40 designated
sites (see next section), could generate several hundred units that could qualify for the
moderate- and lower-income categories.
• Potential benefits
o No change in zoning is required.
o City has used this approach successfully in the 2005-2013 housing cycle.
• Possible drawbacks
o Some sites may not be appropriate for midrange density
Up-zone existing residentially zoned properties
Because the General Plan assigns more than enough sites to meet the city’s above-moderate
income category, some of these sites could be rezoned to higher densities. This is called up-
zoning. Higher density development tends to provide housing for lower income residents.
Under this methodology, the existing designations of the vacant and underutilized sites
might change as follows:
2 Unit yield refers to the number of units, or homes, that can be achieved based on the density allowed per acre.
Assume midrange densities
Up-zone existing residentially zoned properties
Count proposed projects that include a rezone
Use city-owned properties
Rezone select commercial properties to residential
Rezone select industrial properties to residential
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 5 of 91
Page 6
Existing
Designation
du/ac Possible New
Designation
du/ac
R-4 0-4 R-23
R-30
15-23
23-30
R-15 8-15
R-23
R-30
R-35
15-23
23-30
30-35
R-23 15-23
R-30
R-35
R-40
23-30
30-35
35-40
R-30 23-30 R-35
R-40
30-35
35-40
Properties affected by this methodology are mostly in the northeast quadrant near El
Camino Real and College Boulevard (in Sunny Creek/Local Facility Management Zone 15) and
in the southwest quadrant, including the Ponto area (Exhibit 4). Depending on the site and
density applied, this methodology could generate over 1,000 units that would qualify under
the lower income category.
• Potential benefits
o Affects properties that are currently zoned for residential use.
o Helps balance the types (income levels) of housing to be built in the city.
o Additional density could make infrastructure completion more feasible (LFMZ 15).
• Possible drawbacks
o To achieve a density of 35 or 40 du/ac, building size will likely need to be four to
five stories.
o Introduces higher density development in lower density neighborhoods.
o While this methodology increases low income unit counts, it decreases counts for
above moderate units.
Count proposed projects that include a rezone
Not reflected in the planned projects in the section above are two current development
proposals that could contribute to meeting the city’s RHNA need:
• North County Plaza - Residential and commercial project with 240 apartments west of
The Shoppes
• West Oaks - Proposed conversion of vacant industrial land into a 192-unit apartment
project
While development applications have been formally filed, these projects are not counted as
part of the planned projects above because their developers seek a land use change or
propose to residentially develop commercial land. This methodology could generate a little
less than 100 units in the lower income category.
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 6 of 91
Page 7
• Potential benefits
o Actual applications reflecting housing type and density that can be achieved
o Interested property owner
• Possible drawbacks
o Projects require a rezone
o If projects are denied, city loses the units counted toward meetings its RHNA
need.
Utilize city-owned or government agency-owned properties
The city currently owns or holds interest in a few properties that could be rezoned to allow
for future lower income housing (Exhibit 5). Examples include:
• The northern-most city-owned industrial/office lot (Lot 5) on College Boulevard near
Palomar Point Way
• City owned parking lot portion of The Shoppes @ Carlsbad
This methodology could generate around 300 to 400 units that would qualify under lower
income category. This could also include working with the North County Transit District to
possibly use its vacant property in the Village by the Coaster Station.
• Potential benefits
o City-owned property could help reduce overall development costs, resulting in
more potential affordable units.
o Some sites located in areas with services that could possibly accommodate higher
density development (40 du/ac) with higher percentage of dedicated affordable
units
o Some sites are near job centers and transit corridors.
• Possible drawbacks
o Residential use of some city properties is inconsistent with the City Council
adopted 2017 Real Estate Strategic Plan
o Title and ownership issues to resolve
o Actual density possibilities unknown
o Long entitlement process
o Adequate parking for the mall must be maintained
o Jurisdictional boundary concerns
o Roadway improvement concerns
Rezone select commercial properties to residential
While the city must plan for commercial and retail growth to serve the additional housing
growth, there are a few properties in the city that are currently zoned for commercial use
that could feasibly be rezoned to accommodate higher density residential development
(Exhibit 6). As an example:
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 7 of 91
Page 8
• The vacant commercially designated portion of property on the northeast corner of
College Boulevard and El Camino Real (known as the Walmart site) may be able to
accommodate high density residential such as R-30, R-35 or R-40.
• Other sites to consider could include Ponto and vacant land across from The Forum.
• It should be noted that the shopping center just west of The Shoppes already has an
application on file to convert commercial property to residential.
This methodology could generate around 200 to 500 units that would qualify under the
lower-income category, depending upon the density selected.
• Potential benefits
o Sites are generally close to neighborhood goods and services.
• Possible drawbacks
o Not always near local jobs centers
o Loss of sales tax generating land
Rezone select industrial properties to residential
Under the current general plan, there are numerous industrial lots that have remained
vacant since their original grading (Exhibit 7). Only industrial properties free of constraints
(i.e., airport, incompatible industrial uses, fire prevention concerns) would be considered
under this methodology.
• Many of the sites are east and west of Melrose Drive
• One underutilized site along Cougar Drive and Palmer Way just east of El Camino
Real.
Together, the vacant industrial sites total almost 50 acres. City staff recommend rezoning
certain properties from planned industrial to R-30, R-35 or R-40 residential with a minimum
density of 26.5, 32.5 and 37.5, respectively.
It should be noted that the owner of a vacant property off Palomar Airport Road has an
application already on file to convert a planned industrial zoned parcel to R-30 residential
use. This site was considered as a possible housing site in the last Housing Element update
cycle, but was not changed. This methodology could generate more than 1,000 units that
could qualify under lower income category.
• Potential benefits
o Virtually all sites being considered are vacant and unconstrained, thereby
resulting in a high number of units
o Provides housing near job centers.
• Possible drawbacks
o While free from constraints, still located near industrial areas
o Not always convenient to neighborhood goods and services
o Loss of land in areas where jobs are created
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 8 of 91
Page 9
Housing Element Advisory Committee
On Sept. 10, 2019, the City Council established the Housing Element Advisory Committee, a nine-
member committee3 made up of City of Carlsbad residents charged with the oversight of the
Housing Element update effort. At its Aug. 12, 2020, meeting staff presented members the
information contained in this report. Following member discussions, the committee
recommended a different priority for the methodologies than that chosen by staff. The chart
below compares the rankings.
Staff and Housing Element Advisory Committee priority rankings
Methodologies to meet housing need Staff HEAC
Change assumption about how many units will be built 1 1
Increase units allowed on properties that already allow housing 2 5
Projects already proposed that require rezoning not yet approved 3 4
Rezone city-owned properties 4 2
Convert some commercial property to residential use 5 3
Convert some industrial to residential uses 6 6
During deliberations and discussions, committee members made several comments and raised
concerns that led to their recommended prioritization, which are summarized as follows:
• Overall concern that up zoning lower density residential properties to allow for higher
density development could adversely impact existing lower density neighborhoods.
• While R-35 and R-40 could generate more units on a site, the idea of four and five story
structures may affect views.
• Higher densities (R-35 and R-40) and taller buildings may be more appropriate on major
thoroughfares where bulk/scale is not an issue and the road network can handle higher
traffic volumes.
• Concerns that residential use in industrial areas may result in conflicts; but they also
found value in an increased work/housing balance.
• Proposed projects that included a rezone seemed logical (willing property owner to take
on higher density housing, project already in vetting process).
Overall, the committee (and staff) recognized that no one methodology will be able to address
the RHNA requirements and that it will likely take a combination of methodologies to meet our
3 Four representatives from existing city commissions, one resident from each city quadrant, and one at-large member.
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 9 of 91
Page 10
targets. The committee also recognized that the methodologies involving up-zoning residential
properties and rezone industrial properties could be supported given certain site characteristics.
The Growth Management Plan
There are limits on housing in the Growth Management Plan, which
was passed by voters in 1986 as Proposition E. The ideology behind the
plan is to ensure that new development and growth do not outpace the
performance standards established for public facilities such as roads,
parks and emergency services. New development must be measured
against the plan’s standards and show that they comply with the
requirements before being approved. Among other things, the plan
established the maximum number of homes that can be built in the
city, referred to as the growth cap. To ensure even distribution of
housing development, the city was divided into quadrants with each
quadrant assigned a portion of the city’s growth cap, referred to as
quadrant caps. Under the plan, once a quadrant reaches its assigned
cap, the city is precluded from approving any further housing
development in that quadrant.
Housing Crisis Act of 2019
A recent state law prohibits a city’s ability to place a moratorium on development. Senate Bill
330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, took effect on Jan. 1, 2020, and imposed new permitting
regulations for housing that greatly limit public agencies’ ability to deny housing developments.
As it relates to the city’s efforts to update its housing plan, SB 330 prohibits any laws that act as a
cap on the number of housing units that can be approved or constructed. SB 330 goes on to
prohibit a city from enforcing laws that have the effect of imposing a moratorium or similar
restriction or limitation on housing development. On Jan. 21, 2020, an overview of the impacts of
SB 330 were provided at a joint special meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission,
Housing Commission, Traffic & Mobility Commission, and Housing Element Advisory Committee
(Exhibit 8). On Aug. 4, 2020, the city sent a letter to the state Department of Housing &
Community Development requesting an opinion of the enforceability of the city’s growth cap
under SB330 on the housing element update (Exhibit 9). As of the writing of this staff report, staff
has not received a response. The act will expire Jan. 1, 2025, unless extended by the legislature.
Impact on the city’s housing and growth management plans
The chart below provides a status of the citywide and quadrant caps, considering existing
development and planned growth. If the net RHNA target of 1,589 units (1,354 lower income
units and 235 moderate income units) remains unchanged, no quadrant could theoretically
accept all the housing units and maintain consistency with the Growth Management Plan’s cap
on development in a given quadrant. The Southwest Quadrant, which has a remaining GMP
capacity of 1,232 additional units, has the largest remaining capacity of all quadrants.
However, the ability of this quadrant to accommodate a large number of these units is not
practical given the limited number of sites available, land costs, required density, and multi-story
structure type that would be required. In order to develop a new housing element that is
consistent with state law, the required RHNA units will realistically need to be distributed
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 10 of 91
Page 11
between the different quadrants, thereby exceeding one or more quadrant caps. Nevertheless,
the overall citywide unit cap of 54,599 as approved by the voters will not be exceeded.
As the chart below reflects, 2,296 housing units remain to reach the 54,599 citywide cap. It is
important to note that 1,353 of those units were removed by City Council action in 2002, leaving
943 units currently available. To plan for the net RHNA target of 1,589 units, a portion of the units
removed by the City Council will need to be reinstated as part of this Housing Element update.
The chart below shows how many the residential dwelling status of each quadrant of the city:
DESCRIPTION
NORTHWEST QUADRANT NORTHEAST
QUADRANT
SOUTHWEST
QUADRANT
SOUTHEAST
QUADRANT
CITYWIDE
TOTAL Outside
Village Village Total
NW
Units built 11,839 649 12,488 7,264 10,179 16,426 46,357
Units planned 1,989 247 2,236 1,676 1,448 586 5,946
Total built/planned 13,828 896 14,724 8,940 11,627 17,012 52,303
GMP unit caps --- --- 15,370 9,042 12,859 17,328 54,599
Remaining 118 528 646 102 1,232 316 2,296
Notes: Data is current as of June 30, 2020
Total built/planned includes sites in all quadrants except the Village. It includes unbuilt approved projects, as well as vacant
and underdeveloped property designated for residential use by the General Plan.
Remaining refers to dwelling unit capacity in addition to what is currently planned by the General Plan or approved as part of
an unbuilt project. These remaining "potential additional dwellings" must be allocated from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank of
unbuilt units that may be used by other projects.
On June 23, 2020, following the adoption of the fy 2020-21 budget, the City Council expressed
interest in holding a workshop before the end of the year to initiate discussions on how to
approach an update to the city’s Growth Management Plan. Staff is targeting a City Council
workshop later in the fall.
Public input
In addition to engaging the Housing Element Advisory Committee, staff sought input on potential
methodologies from the community. Through an online survey, more than 3,200 respondents
ranked potential methods and responded to other questions related to the housing element
update.
The questions posed to the public addressed various elements of the methodologies being
considered, but were geared to a lay audience. As a result, the priority methodologies identified
by the public cannot be compared directly to the priorities proposed by staff and the committee.
It should also be noted that although the number of respondents was very high (the highest of
any city survey in recent history), the survey is not scientific. Instead it reflects the views of those
who took the survey. Also, please note that the data below reflect responses through Aug. 20.
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 11 of 91
Page 12
The ranking of priorities in the survey responses were:
The survey also included other questions that could help inform the selection of sites for new
housing in Carlsbad. A full report of the results will be available once the survey closes on Aug.
24.
Alternatives
Although there were areas of agreement among professional staff, the committee and the public,
there were also significant differences. For example:
• Survey respondents did not favor accessory dwelling units as a way to help meet the city’s
housing goals. Based on changes in state law, staff expect ADUs will comprise at least a
portion of the city’s housing goals.
• Increasing density was the top choice among staff and the committee and the least
favored among survey respondents.
• Conversely, staff and the committee ranked the conversion of industrial land to
residential as the lowest priority; it was the most popular methodology among survey
respondents
Staff propose developing maps showing properties that could be designated for future housing
using three approaches:
• Staff’s recommended priorities
• Priorities recommended by the Housing Element Advisory Committee
• Priorities identified by survey respondents
• Any additional or different methodologies and priorities provided by the City Council
This approach will provide a variety of options that can be taken through the next phase of
evaluation. This includes review and input from the Housing Element Advisory Committee and
the community as well as environmental analysis.
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 12 of 91
Page 13
Fiscal Analysis
Staff is requesting an allocation of additional funds in the amount of $40,000 for a total not to
exceed $55,000 to cover costs for outside legal counsel to assist in the legal review of the city’s
Housing Element Update. The funding is requested from the City Council’s General Fund
contingency account. The City Council approved the budget for the Housing Element update on
Sept. 10, 2019, when it approved a project work plan, Housing Element Advisory Committee
charter and a budget carry forward4, and on January 28, 2020, when it approved a consultant
contract for the project.
As part of that budget, $15,000 was earmarked for outside assistance with California
Environmental Quality Act and housing element law. Given the complexities of housing element
law and anticipated meetings with state housing department representatives, staff recommends
increasing the fund amount for legal services to a total not to exceed $55,000.
Next Steps
City staff will apply the methods described in this report, including any new direction the City
Council may wish to provide, to create a series of maps identifying various combinations of
properties and approaches that will enable the city to meet state housing requirements. City staff
will then contact owners of properties that could potentially be rezoned to determine interest.
The final map options will be presented to the Housing Element Advisory Committee and the
public for input. They will also undergo environmental analysis to comply with the California
Environmental Quality Act.
Staff will return to the City Council with the feedback and environmental analysis during a public
hearing to consider approval of the final housing element and environmental impact report.
These documents must be approved by April 2021 to meet the state’s deadline.
Environmental Evaluation (CEQA)
The proposed action is not a "project" as defined in California Environmental Quality Act
Guidelines Section 15378 because the action involves a request for guidance and direction from
the city Council on the development and preparation of the city’s Housing Element Update. This
guidance and direction, on its own accord, will not cause significant environmental impact. As
such, this activity is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3). This determination is
predicated on Section 15004 of the guidelines, which provide direction to lead agencies on the
appropriate timing for environmental review. The Housing Element Update, for which this
direction will help develop, will require preparation of an environmental document in accordance
with State CEQA Guidelines.
Public Notification
Public notice of this item was posted in keeping with the Ralph M. Brown Act and it was available
for public viewing and review at least 72 hours before the scheduled meeting date. Notice of this
meeting was also posted on social media and the city’s website and emailed to project
4 A carry forward is unspent prior-year funding reallocated to the new fiscal year for the same purpose.
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 13 of 91
Page 14
stakeholders. Discussion about this item and its consideration by the City Council also occurred as
part of the Housing Element Advisory Committee’s Aug. 12, 2020, meeting.
Exhibits
1. Information bulletins (“How new state mandates impact Carlsbad’s housing plan”)
2. Map of existing eligible sites
3. Map of planned project sites
4. Map of potential residential sites for up zone
5. Map of potential city- and government agency-owned sites
6. Map of potential commercial sites considered for rezone
7. Map of potential industrial sites considered for rezone
8. January 21, 2020, City Council staff report overviewing SB 330
9. August 4, 2020 Letter to HCD on cap growth enforcement
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 14 of 91
OUR HOME OUR FUTURE
Since 1969, California has required that all cities and counties adequately plan for their share of the state’s growing housing needs.
While cities do not build housing – that is the function of private developers – they do adopt plans, regulations and programs that
provide opportunities for how and where housing development occurs. One of the most important housing policy documents used
by jurisdictions is the General Plan; more specifically, the Housing Element of the General Plan.
The General Plan serves as the “blueprint” for how a city will grow and develop and includes seven state required elements: land use,
transportation, conservation, noise, open space, safety, and housing. The law mandating that housing be included as an element of
each jurisdiction’s General Plan is known as “Housing Element Law.”
This information bulletin outlines how the state determines housing requirements for jurisdictions, the process localities must follow
to secure a certified Housing Element, and the implications for failing to meet required state housing goals.
How new state mandates impact
CARLSBAD’S HOUSING PLAN
I. THE REGIONAL HOUSING
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
The California Department of Housing & Community
Development is responsible for developing state housing
production goals. These goals represent the total number of
housing units to be built within an eight year housing cycle
for varying income groups. This process is referred to as the
Regional Housing Needs Assessment.
Once the RHNA is determined, HCD assigns the RHNA figures to
the 21 different council of governments located throughout the
state, who in turn assign the housing goals to their respective
member cities and counties. Carlsbad’s COG is the San Diego
Association of Governments, who represents 18 cities and the
County of San Diego.
The RHNA is developed by HCD and distributed to the
individual cities and counties by the COGs in accordance with
four state directed RHNA objectives:
• Plan for housing at all income levels/all jurisdictions
• Balance jobs and housing
• Focus development in urban areas
• Protect rural areas, open space and habitat land
These objectives are achieved using several regional and local
factors and influences including:
»Share of existing and projected population growth
»Distribution of existing households (by income)
»Existing and projected jobs
»Persons per household
»Opportunities and constraints for housing
»Availability of land suitable for development
»Preserved or protected lands
»Availability of high quality transit corridors
»Historic vacancy rates and loss of units
»Housing cost burdens
»Social equity adjustments
II. HOUSING BASED ON
INCOME CATEGORIES
Under Housing Element Law, RHNA is assigned to four income
groups or categories. Families with...
•Very low household income
•Low household income
•Moderate household income
•Above moderate household income
The household income for each of these categories is based on
a percentage of the Area Median Income, as reflected in
the chart below.
These percentages are applied to the AMI for a region, not a
specific city. Carlsbad falls under the AMI for San Diego County,
which is currently $86,300 per year for a four-person household.
In comparison, Carlsbad’s median income is at $107,600. The
income categories pursuant to the San Diego County AMI is
reflected in the table below for a family of four:
Income Category Percent of AMI
Very Low <50%
Low 51 to 80%
Moderate 81 to 120%
Above Moderate >120%
Income Category Percent of AMI Household
Very Low <50%$53,500
Low 51 to 80%$85,600
Moderate 81 to 120% $103,550
Above Moderate >120% >$103,550
Exhibit 1
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 15 of 91
Community Development Department | 1635 Faraday Ave. | Carlsbad, CA 92008 | www.carlsbadca.gov Page 2 of 4
III.DENSITY AND AFFORDABILITY
The foundation of Housing Element Law is based on the
premise that density is a proxy for affordability. The idea
being, the more housing units on a site (density) translates
to lower construction costs per unit, which translates to
lower rental/sale prices of those units (affordability). As such,
HCD assigns minimum density figures to each income
category as reflected below.
Most cities and counties can attest that higher density
development alone rarely translates to housing that is
affordable at the targeted income categories. As such, the
state requires that cities develop and implement programs
that will help facilitate affordable housing sales/rental costs
(i.e., inclusionary housing requirements, locally-funded
subsidies), but the programs cannot be too onerous as to
make the housing development infeasible to construct
(i.e., require that all higher-density projects be restricted as
affordable).
Until state law changes, this is the formula that cities and
counties must use when planning for housing under state
Housing Element Law.
IV. THE LOCAL HOUSING ELEMENT
Once a jurisdiction receives its RHNA allocations, it
must update its General Plan and Housing Element to
demonstrate how the jurisdiction, particularly through
policies and zoning, can or will accommodate the RHNA.
Generally, a Housing Element must include the following:
•Review of previous Housing Element
•Assessment of housing needs
•Inventory and analysis of adequate sites
•Analysis of potential constraints
•Housing policies and programs
•Quantified objectives
One of the most labor intensive and controversial
components of the process is the inventory and analysis of
adequate sites.
Each jurisdiction must evaluate the Land Use Element of
their General Plan to determine whether there is enough
land available, with adequate zoning (minimum density as
described in Section III), to accommodate their assigned
RHNA allocation for each income category. If unable to
accommodate the housing goals, the jurisdiction must
rezone enough land to meet the RHNA obligation.
In addition to adequately zoning sites, the law requires
that each jurisdiction look for ways to streamline permit
processes and remove processing barriers in order to
facilitate the creation of affordable housing.
A ministerial process with reduced fees and development
incentives (i.e., increased density above plan allowance,
waiver of design standards like parking or setbacks,
expedited permit review) for affordable housing projects
is highly encouraged by HCD.
Ultimately, an effective Housing Element provides the
necessary conditions for developing and preserving an
adequate supply of housing, including housing affordable
to seniors, families, and workers.
The update plan provides the opportunity to develop
housing and land use strategies to reflect local changing
needs, resources, and conditions and provides a vehicle
to adopt approaches addressing state driven regulations
related to sustainability and environmental concerns.
Jurisdictions may also use the Housing Element as an
opportunity to complement their economic development
goals with their housing goals.
Income Category Percent of AMI Minimum Density
1
Very Low $53,500 30 du/ac
Low $85,600 30 du/ac
Moderate $103,550 15 du/ac
Above Moderate >$103,550 <15 du/ac
1 du/ac = Dwelling unit per 1 acre of land
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 16 of 91
Community Development Department | 1635 Faraday Ave. | Carlsbad, CA 92008 | www.carlsbadca.gov Page 3 of 4
V. HCD HOUSING
ELEMENT CERTIFICATION
Once updated, Housing Elements must be reviewed
and approved by HCD and then adopted by the local
jurisdiction (City Council) prior to state mandated deadlines
(described in Section VIII). Failure to timely complete this
process will result in several penalties, as highlighted in the
section below.
VI. PENALTIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE
& LIMITATIONS
Failing to meet the state requirements can result in
significant penalties. Given the current housing crisis
in California, each year the state legislature introduces
new laws that increase and expand the penalties for
noncompliance as well as impose limitations on local
controls affecting housing production. Below are a few of
the more significant State acts.
Housing Accountability and Affordability Act
If HCD finds that a jurisdiction’s RHNA goals are not
being timely satisfied, SB 35 requires cities and counties
to streamline review and approval of eligible affordable
housing projects by providing a ministerial approval
process, exempting such projects from environmental
review under CEQA and public hearing process. Refer to
the City Info Bulletin on this act.
Building Homes and Jobs Act
Under Senate Bill 2, jurisdictions that do not have an
approved HCD certified Housing Element are not eligible
for grant funding. Carlsbad’s current housing element is
HCD certified, which allowed the city to apply for and be
awarded an SB 2 grant in the amount of $310,000.
Housing Development and Financing Act
Under Assembly Bill 101, jurisdictions failing to timely adopt
a local Housing Element may be fined tens of thousands of
dollars per month until HCD determines compliance.
Housing Crisis Act
SB 330 introduces an even more expedited review process
for residential development projects than SB 35 and
prohibits cities from imposing growth caps or moratoriums
on housing projects or plans. This will likely impact how we
can implement Carlsbad’s Growth Management Plan.
Residential Density and Affordability Act
Under SB 166, a city cannot reduce residential density on a
property without concurrently rezoning another property
to make up the lost units. Furthermore, if a city approves
a project that results in a density lower than the housing
plan identified, it must rezone another property to make
up the difference.
Potential lawsuits
Many cities without an approved Housing Element have
been sued by developers and/or affordable housing
advocates, resulting in decisions unfavorable to the city.
For example:
Courts have suspended a jurisdiction’s local land
use authority via a court ordered moratoria; the city
was unable to issue building permits until a Housing
Element was certified and approved. (City of Pasadena)
Courts have assumed land use control over all housing
development permits. Under this scenario, the courts
could approve a housing development project that may
not fit the character of the community. (City of Fremont)
Courts have imposed aggressive timelines for a
jurisdiction to approve a Housing Element (with
threats of court-assumed land use control for
noncompliance), thereby limiting community input in
the housing plan development. (City of Encinitas)
The State Attorney General has filed suit against cities
that do not have an approved or compliant Housing
Element. The implications of the lawsuits are currently
unknown. (City of Huntington Beach)
In virtually all cases, the litigation resulted in the
city paying significant financial penalties and/or
substantive attorney fees.
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 17 of 91
Community Development Department | 1635 Faraday Ave. | Carlsbad, CA 92008 | www.carlsbadca.gov Page 4 of 4
VII. RELATED STATE HOUSING
PROGRAMS/LAWS
Beyond the mandates required under the Housing Element
Law, the state has adopted other regulations and programs
that encourage housing production.
State Density Bonus Law
Density Bonus is a state law that allows a developer to
increase density beyond that allowed under a city’s local
land use plan. An applicant can also receive reductions
in required development standards such as setbacks,
height limits and parking requirements. In exchange for
the increased density, a certain number of the new homes
must be reserved for very low, low, or moderate-income
households or for seniors.
Accessory Dwelling Units
The state has found that allowing Accessory Dwelling Units
in residential zones where primary residences are already
allowed provides additional housing throughout California.
In recent years the state has continued to revise and update
the programs around ADUs, limiting local city control of
them, to more widely allow for ADUs to address housing
production. Refer to the city informational bulletin on ADUs.
VIII. 2021-2029 HOUSING CYCLE
The RHNA process for the next (sixth) Housing Element
cycle is currently in process and will cover the period from
April 2021 – April 2029. The RHNA process can be generally
categorized into the steps bulleted below.
It is important to note that the RHNA process is also being
conducted in conjunction with the development of the
2050 Regional Transportation Plan and its Sustainable
Communities Strategy in accordance with SB 375 (See
Section IX for more on this process).
RHNA Methodology and Allocation
July 2018 – November 2019
This step includes the development of the methodology in
which RHNA will be distributed by SANDAG. Public review
of the draft methodology was completed in September
2019, with HCD approval in November 2019. Currently,
city staff coordinates and collaborates with the SANDAG
and regional jurisdictions through its participation in the
SANDAG RHNA Subcommittee meetings.
RHNA Distribution and Allocation
November 2019 – February 2020
Distribution of the draft RHNA to local jurisdiction
occurred in November 2019. In January 2020 the following
four jurisdictions filed appeals on the RHNA allocation:
Coronado, Imperial Beach, Lemon Grove and Solana Beach.
Results of the appeal are pending.
Certified Local Housing Element
February 2020 – April 2021
Each city and county has until April 2021 to process a
Housing Element update using their assigned RHNA
allocation (this period includes HCD review and City
Council adoption).
IX. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN
AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
STRATEGY
The Regional Transportation Plan is a federally required
long range transportation plan prepared by SANDAG that
is updated every four years, and includes projections of
population, household, employment growth and travel
demand, along with a specific list of proposed projects
to be funded. In Carlsbad, the following local projects are
included in the RTP:
Carlsbad Boulevard realignment
•Village/Barrio roundabouts
•Road extensions for College Boulevard and
Poinsettia Lane
•Road widenings for El Camino Real
•Road widenings for Avenida Encinas
•Other improvements at various locations:
» Intersection improvements
» Turn lane improvements
» ADA improvements
» Complete street improvements
» Traffic signal system improvements
» Pedestrian and bicycle improvements
» Lighting improvements
» Pavement management program
Pursuant to SB 375, SANDAG must also develop a
Sustainable Communities Strategy to integrate land
use and transportation strategies that will achieve
California Air Resources Board greenhouse gas
emissions reduction targets.
The SCS must demonstrate on a regional level, those
areas sufficient to house all the population of the
region, including the eight year projection of the RHNA.
Both the RTP/SCS and RHNA have used local input as
the basis for future demographic projections, including
household growth.
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 18 of 91
T A M A R A C K AV
LACOSTAAV
MELRO
S
E
D
ROLIVENHAIN R DCA
RL
S
B
A
D
B
LA V IARA PY
F A R ADAYAV
C ARLSBADVI L L A G E D
R
RANCHOSA N TA F E RDA L G A R D
ELCAMINOREAL
C O L L E G E BLPAL OMARAIRPORTRD
P O IN S E TT IA L N
CANNONRD
Vacant (Residential)
Underutilized
Quadrants
Split GP Designation
Village & Barrio Master Plan
Existing Major Road
Future Major Road
Local Roads (White)
City of Carlsbad
0 1 20.5 Miles
Sources: City of Carlsbad, 2020; Mintier Harnish 2020
Exhibit 2: Existing Eligible Sites
Revised: 8/11/2020VillageBarrioNW
NE
SW SE
100 Ac.50Ac.CARLSBAD BLTAMA
RA
C
K
AV
Village / Barrio Areas
Pacific Ocean
Exhibit 2
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 19 of 91
T A M A R A C K AV
LACOSTAAV
MELRO
S
E
D
ROLIVENHAIN R DCA
RL
S
B
A
D
B
LA V IARA PY
F A R ADAYAV
C ARLSBADVI L L A G E D
R
RANCHOSA N TA F E RDA L G A R D
ELCAMINOREAL
C O L L E G E BLPAL OMARAIRPORTRD
P O IN S E TT IA L N
CANNONRD
Planned Projects
Other Planned Projects
Quadrants
Village & Barrio Master Plan
Existing Major Road
Future Major Road
Local Roads (White)
City of Carlsbad
0 1 20.5 Miles
Sources: City of Carlsbad, 2020; Mintier Harnish 2020
Exhibit 3: Map of Planned Project Sites
Revised: 8/11/2020VillageBarrioNW
NE
SW SE
100 Ac.50Ac.CARLSBAD BLTAMA
RA
C
K
AV
Village / Barrio Areas
Pacific Ocean
Exhibit 3
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 20 of 91
T A M A R A C K AV
LACOSTAAV
MELRO
S
E
D
ROLIVENHAIN R DCA
RL
S
B
A
D
B
LA V IARA PY
F A R ADAYAV
C ARLSBADVI L L A G E D
R
RANCHOSA N TA F E RDA L G A R D
ELCAMINOREAL
C O L L E G E BLPAL OMARAIRPORTRD
P O IN S E TT IA L N
CANNONRD
Redesignate, Increase Residential Density Quadrants
Split GP Designation
Village & Barrio Master Plan
Existing Major Road
Future Major Road
Local Roads (White)
City of Carlsbad
0 1 20.5 Miles
Sources: City of Carlsbad, 2020; Mintier Harnish 2020
Exhibit 4: Map of Potential Residential Sites for Up Zone
Revised: 8/11/2020VillageBarrioNW
NE
SW SE
100 Ac.50Ac.
Pacific Ocean
Exhibit 4
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 21 of 91
T A M A R A C K AV
LACOSTAAV
MELRO
S
E
D
ROLIVENHAIN R DCA
RL
S
B
A
D
B
LA V IARA PY
F A R ADAYAV
C ARLSBADVI L L A G E D
R
RANCHOSA N TA F E RDA L G A R D
ELCAMINOREAL
C O L L E G E BLPAL OMARAIRPORTRD
P O IN S E TT IA L N
CANNONRD
City-Owned/Gov't Agency Owned Quadrants Existing Major Road
Future Major Road
Local Roads (White)
City of Carlsbad
0 1 20.5 Miles
Sources: City of Carlsbad, 2020; Mintier Harnish 2020
Exhibit 5: Map of City-Owned/Government Agency-Owned Sites
Revised: 8/12/2020
NW
100 Ac.50Ac.
SW
Pacific Ocean
CARLSBAD BLTAMA
RA
C
K
AV
Village / Barrio Areas SE
NE
Exhibit 5
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 22 of 91
T A M A R A C K AV
LACOSTAAV
MELRO
S
E
D
ROLIVENHAIN R DCA
RL
S
B
A
D
B
LA V IARA PY
F A R ADAYAV
C ARLSBADVI L L A G E D
R
RANCHOSA N TA F E RDA L G A R D
ELCAMINOREAL
C O L L E G E BLPAL OMARAIRPORTRD
P O IN S E TT IA L N
CANNONRD
Redesignate Commercial Quadrants
Split GP Designation
Village & Barrio Master Plan
Existing Major Road
Future Major Road
Local Roads (White)
City of Carlsbad
0 1 20.5 Miles
Sources: City of Carlsbad, 2020; Mintier Harnish 2020
Exhibit 6: Map of Potential Commercial Sites Considered for Rezone
Revised: 8/11/2020
NE
SE
NW
SW
Pacific Ocean
Exhibit 6
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 23 of 91
POINSETTIA L
N
ELCAMINOREAL
A L G A R D
C
O
L
L
E
G
EBLPALOMARAIRPORTRD
FARADAYAV
MELROSEDR
Redesignate, Industrial -> Residential Quadrants Existing Major Road
Future Major Road
Local Roads (White)
City of Carlsbad
0 2,000 4,0001,000 Feet
Sources: City of Carlsbad, 2020; Mintier Harnish 2020
Exhibit 7: Map of Potential Industrial Sites Considered for Rezone
Revised: 8/11/2020
NW
NE
SW
SE
100 Ac.50Ac.
Exhibit 7
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 24 of 91
Jan. 21, 2020 Item #1 Page 1 of 17
Exhibit 8
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 25 of 91
(i -.,
.
CAReview (},;B
Joint Special Meeting of the City Co uncil, Planning Commission, Traffic &
Mobility Commission, Housing Commission & Housing Element Advisory Committee
Staff Report
Meeting Date: January 21, 2020
To:
From:
Staff Contact:
Subject:
Mayor and City Council
Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Celia Brewer, City Attorney
760-434-2891
Overview of SB 330: Housing Crisis Act of 2019 and New Regulations on
Accessory Dwelling Units
Recommended Action
Receive a presentation regarding SB330: Housing Crisis Act of 2019 and New Regulations on
Accessory Dwelling Units.
Executive Summary
The City Attorney has worked with The Sohagi Law Group, PLC to prepare the attached memo
regarding SB 330: Housing Crisis Act of 2019 and New Regulations on Accessory Dwelling Units.
Margaret and Tyson Sohagi will be presenting this information to the City Council and
responding to questions.
Fiscal Impact
No funding is being requested at this time.
Environmental Evaluation (CEQA)
Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21065, this action does not constitute a "project"
within the meaning of CEQA 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
This item was noticed in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and was available for public
viewing and review at least 72 hours prior to scheduled meeting date.
Exhibits
1. Memo re SB 330: Housing Crisis Act of 2019 and New Regulations on Accessory Dwelling
Units
Exhibit 9
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 86 of 91
CIT Y OF
CARLSBAD
Office of the City Attorney
Sent via Email & U.S. Mail
August 4, 2020
Anastasia Baskerville, Esq.
Melinda Coy, HCD Policy Specialist
Department of Housing & Community Development
Housing Policy Development Division
2020 W. El Camino Ave, Suite 525
Sacramento, CA 95833
www.carlsbadca.gov
Re: Request for Opinion: Enforceability of City's Growth Cap
Dear Ms. Baskerville and Ms. Coy:
The City of Carlsbad ("City") requests Department of Housing & Community
Development's opinion as to the enforceability of the City's growth cap established pursuant to
the City's Growth Management Program1 (Proposition E and implementing regulations,
collectively "GMP") in light of Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) and the City's need to accommodate
its assigned Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RHNA") for the sixth housing element
cycle.
Specifically, does the growth cap provision of the GMP run afoul of SB 330 that
prohibits housing cap limitations? And are the established growth cap numbers, City-wide and
by quadrant, enforceable if they preclude the City from identifying adequate land capacity to
accommodate its share of the RHNA, some 3,873 housing units? (Gov. Code,§§ 66300, subd.
(b)(B)(ii),2 6_5583,3 and 65863.4)
The City's Growth Management Plan
In 1986, the City passed the GMP. Among other things, the GMP establishes the
maximum number of homes that can be built in the City, referred to as the growth cap. To
ensure even distribution of housing development, the City was divided into quadrants with each
1https://www.carlsbadca.gov/services/depts/planning/growth.asp.
2https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes displayText.xhtml ?lawCode=GOV &di vision= 1.&title
=7.&part=&chapter=12.&article=.
3https ://leginfo. legislature.ca. gov /faces/ codes displaySection.xhtml ?lawCode=GO V §ionN um=6
5583,
4http ://leginf o. legislature. ca. gov /faces/ codes displaySection. xhtml ?sectionN um=65 863 .&lawCode=
GOV
City Attorney
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive I Ca rlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-434-2891 I 760-434-8367 fax
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 87 of 91
Anastasia Baskerville, Esq.
Melinda Coy, HCD Policy Specialist
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
August 3, 2020Page 2
quadrant assigned a pmiion of the City's growth cap, refe1Ted to as quadrant caps. Under the
GMP, once a quadrant reaches its assigned cap, the City is precluded from approving any
further housing development in that quadrant.
The GMP states "The maximum number of residential dwelling units to be constructed
or approved in the City after November 4, 1986 is as follows: Nmihwest Quadrant 5,844;
Nmiheast Quadrant 6,166; Southwest Quadrant 10,667; Southeast Quadrant 10,801. [,r] The
City shall not approve any General Plan amendment, zone change, tentative subdivision map or
other discretionary approval for a development which could result in development above the
limit in any quadrant." (See Footnote 1, supra. See also Carlsbad Municipal Code, § 21.90.1855
[renaming the quadrant limits as "Residential dwelling unit caps"].)
SB 330 Limitations on Regulations for Housing Permits
SB 330, entitled the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, took effect on January 1, 2020 and
adopts new permitting regulations for housing that greatly limit public agencies' ability to deny
housing developments. The Act will sunset January 1, 2025 unless extended by the Legislature.
As it relates to the City's effo1is to update its housing element, SB 330 prohibits any laws that
act as a cap on the number of housing units that can be approved or constructed.
Specifically, SB 330 states that a city "shall not enact a development policy, standard or
condition ... establishing or implementing any provision that: (i) "limits the number of land use
approvals or pe1mits necessary for the approval and construction of housing that will be issued
or allocated within all or a po1iion of the ... city," (ii) "acts as a cap on the number of housing
units that can be approved or constructed either annually or for some other time period," or (iii)
"limits the population of the affected city." (Gov. Code,§ 66300, subd. (b)(l)(D).)
These housing cap limitations from SB 330 raise questions regarding the ability of the
City to enforce (1) its overall growth cap, and (2) the residential "quadrant limits" contained in
the GMP.
The City's RHNA Allocation
On July 10, 2020, the San Diego Association of Governments ("SAND AG") Board of
Directors adopted the final Regional Housing Needs Assessment Plan for the San Diego region,
including HCD's dete1mination of 171,685 housing units needed in the region. Based on a
SAND AG-developed methodology, the City's share of the RHNA allocation for the sixth
housing cycle is as follows:
2021-2029 RHNA Allocation by Income
• Ve1y Low = 1,311
5 http://www.gcode.us/codes/carlsbad/
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 88 of 91
Anastasia Baskerville, Esq.
Melinda Coy, HCD Policy Specialist
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
August 3, 2020Page 3
• Low=784
• Moderate= 749
• Moderate-Plus= 1,029
• Total= 3,873
The City is studying how to meet its RHNA obligation for each income level. The City
is concerned that, at a minimum, it may be necessaiy to exceed the quadrant growth cap(s) to do
so. While the City explores its options to address these deficiencies, we would appreciate
HCD's opinion on the enforceability of the growth cap. This matter is currently scheduled to be
heard by the City Council at a workshop on August 27, 2020.
Attachment: Proposition E
cc: City Manager
Sincerely,
Celia A. Brewer
CITY ATTORNEY
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 89 of 91
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Proposition E
(This ::iropos!Uon wlll appear on !he ballot In the following form.)
E Shall an ordinance be adopted to provide as a part of the 1986
growth managemont plan that 1) NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE
. APPROVED by the City of Carlsbad unlesg It Is guarantAed that
concurrent with need all necessary public facilities be provided as
required by salC, plan with llmphasls on ensuring good traffte clrculatlon,
schools,· parks, Ubraries, eµen space and recreational amenmes; and 2)
the City Council shall not approve residential development which would
Increase the number of dwelling units beyond the limit in said orjinance
WITHOUT AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF THE CITIZENS. The City may
add additional public facilities. The City shall not reduce public facllltles
without a corresponding reduction In the residential dwelllng unit limit.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
The People of the City of Carlsbad do ordain as follows:
A. That the Carlsbad general plan shall be amende.d by the amendment of the
Public Facllitles Md Land Use Elements to add the followi~J:
"The City of Carlsbad In Implementing Its public facilities element and growth
management plan has made an estimate of the number of dwelling units that will be built
as a result of the appllcatlon of the density ranges in the Land Use Element to Individual
projects. The City's Capital lrll)rovement Budget, growth management plan, and public
facllltles plans are all based on this estimate. In order to ensure that all necessary public
facilitles will be available concurrent with need to serve new development It Is necessary to
limit the number of reslden!lal dwelling units which can be constructed In the City to that
estimate. For that purpose the City has been divided lnlo four quadrants along El Camino
. Real and Palomar Airport Road. The maximum number of residen!lal dw01Hng unlls lo 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.
The City shall not appro .. ·e any General Plan amendment, zone change, tentat:ve
subdivision map or other discretionary approval for a development which could result In
development above the llmlt In any quadrant. In order to ensure that development does
not exceed the Urrit !he followfng growth management control polnr~ are establishod tor
the Land Uso Element density ranges.
PA-001,1
ALLOWED DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
General Plan
Density Ranges
RL o :-1.5
RLM O -4.0
RM 4 -8.0
RMH 8 -15.0
RH .15 -23.0
Growth Management
Control Point
1.0
3.2
6.0
11.5
19.0
(Con!lnued on next page)
41S-3e
i
i l l i .
1 I
I I
005301.001
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 90 of 91
,;
;
'
•• J
,: . .. .. ,· ...
·"· ···, ·, . ., . ; ..
·_ r , ., . ,.
i
i
J
l.
I
The c:iy shall not approve any residential development et a density that exceeds the
growth management control point !or the applicable density. range without making the
following flnd!ngs: ·
1. That the project will provide sufficient additional public facllltles for the density In
excess of the oontrol point to ensure that the adequacy of the City's public faclUtlos plans
will not be adversely .Impacted. . :. . : .
2. That there have been sufficient developments approved In the quadrant at
densities below the control point to cover the units In the project above the control point
so the approval wlll not result In excoodlng the quadrant limit.
The City Manager shall monitor all approvals and report to the Planning Commission
and City Council on an annual basis to ensure that the construcUori of residential units
within each quadrant, on a cumulative basis, will be at or below the growth management
control points 11nd that the overall quadrant limits are being maintained.· If the annual
report Indicates In any way that it is likely that the limit may be exceeded, the Council shall
take appropriate action by revising the growth management plan and the City's :zoning
code to ensure that the ceilings will be maintalned.
The City Council or the Planning Col'Mlisslon shall not find that all necessruy public
facilitles will be avallable concurrent with need as required by the Public Facilities Element
and the City's 1986 growth management plan unless the provlsiOn of such facllitles Is
guaranteed. In guaranteeing that the facilities will be provided emphasis shall be given to
ensuring good traffic circulation, schools, par1<s, libraries, open space and recreational
amenities. Public facilities may be added. The City Council shan not materially reduce
public facllltle9 without making corresponding reductions In residential densities ..
Nothing In this section shall be construed as changing the requirement that any
specific resldentlal density above the minimum allowed by the Land Use Elemenl density
ranges and the appllcabl8 zoning shall be Justified acoording to tho requirements ol the
appropriate General Plan and :zoning provisions.
(Contlnued on next pago)
PR•001,:Z 415•39
"--:::•212•••••101lmu11n~!!••~J~~!· ~~~.~ .. ·:~·. ~:":"":·":."~~.--"'.~ ... ·.: ....... . I -------\
005301.002
Aug. 27, 2020 Item #1 Page 91 of 91
,, .,
i: :;
. !
. ..
. .
~ i
. i
.. ,l
. -~·· J
B. The zoning map of the City of Carlsbad shall be smonded to provide that building
permits Issued or approved lor residential dwelling units In the City after November 4, 1986
shall not exceed the limits established In the map In this section. The numbers on the map
shall not be Increased without an affirmative vote of the people.
NE QUADRANT
6,844 Dwelllng Units
SW QUADRANT SE QUADRANT
10,661 Dwel/lng Units
C. The City Council shall adopt amendments to Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code (Growth Management) as necessary to Implement the General Plan
amendment of Section A and the Map or Section B.
0. This ordinance Is Inconsistent wllh and Intended as an alternaUve to any lnlrlarive
ordinance which wciuld place an annual numerical limitation on the rale or resldenlial
construction. II this ordinance and any such Initiative ordinance are both paSSP'; by a
majority voting thereon then the one with the most votes shall prevall."
PA-001,3
-~--
•' , •• ~-....-,..,t"'f,:!'"i~ r .. "T'-.: .. ;:,..~4•,.•t_~H-\:.(1:,l:;ll:.~'.'V '
i I
I I I I
005301.003
All Receive - Agenda Item #____
For the Information of the: CITY COUNCIL Date:08/26/2020 CA X CC X CM X
ACM X DCM (3) X
All Receive - Agenda Item #____
allocate dwelling units to North County Plaza so as to allow us to create an exciting, mixed-use
development which would significant assist the City of Carlsbad to meet California's RHNA
requirements. I would be happy to provide your Committee with more information on our plans if
requested.
Mark Wendel
KIMCO REALTY CORP.
Director of Development I Western Region
cc: Don Neu, Carlsbad City Planner
Paul Klukas, Planning Systems
Lan shire
Housing
Partners Ile.
August 19, 2020
Mayor Matt Hall and City Council Members
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers:
I am a property owner in Carlsbad. Providing affordable housing in our
community is vital given the ever-increasing cost and existing shortage of
housing within our community and across the state of California . I am in strong
support of the Housing Committee's recommendations to the City Council. One
method being considered by the City Council is the up zoning of existing
residential projects within the city. If done properly, this is a viable way to help
achieve the city's housing goals. I strongly urge you to support this measure as
a means to provide more affordable housing opportunities in the city.
Matt Nelson
Managing Member
6815 Flanders Dr. #240 San Diego, CA 92121 off619.804.3417
Mia De Marzo
Subject:
Attachments:
FW: Public Input for August 27th City Council Housing Workshop
letter.pdf
From: Bill Hofman <bhofman@hofmanplanning.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 2:29 PM
To: City Clerk <Clerk@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Public Input for August 27th City Council Housing Workshop
Good afternoon,
Please provide this letter to the City Council for its upcoming workshop to be held on Thursday, August 27th. Thank you .
Bill Hofman
858-442-0554
From: Matt Nelson <matt@ikonlimited.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 9:39 AM
To: Bill Hofman <bhofman@hofmanplanning.com >
Cc: Michael Kootchick <mk@lanshirehousing.com>
Subject: ltr
Matt Nelson
IKON Ltd
matt@lkonlimited.com
I CA UT/ON: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.!
1
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Dear City Clerk staff:
Lani Lutar
Friday, August 21, 2020 5:08 PM
City Clerk
Bill Hofman; Timothy Hoag; Lani Lutar
Fwd: update
revised city letter.pdf
RECEIVED
AUG 2 4 2020
CITY OF CARLSBAD
i-CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Earlier today, a letter was submitted by Bill Hofman on behalf of Timothy Hoag. An incorrect version of the letter
(without contact information) was accidentally submitted. For the purposes of what will be shared/distributed to the
Council and public record, can you please replace that prior letter with this version which includes Mr. Hoag's full
contact information?
Thank you in advance and sorry for the inconvenience.
Regards,
Lani Lutar
on behalf or Timothy Hoag
----------Forwarded message ---------
From: Timothy Hoag
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: update
To: Lani Lutar · ·
Cc: Bill Hofman
See attached is this what you are looking for?
Tim
All Receive -Agenda Item# J_
For the lnformati9n of the:
CIJY COUNCIL
Date@ ;},1 CA v CC ~
CM v ACM ~DCM(3)~
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
1
August 21, 2020
Carlsbad Mayor Matt Hall & City Council
1200 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
RE: Housing Element
Dear Mayor Hall and City Councilmembers:
J I am the owner of an industrial parcel of land in the Bressi Ranch Master Plan. I have been closely
following the meetings of the Housing Element Advisory Committee (HEAC) over the last several
months. I have been impressed with the work of the HEAC, City staff, and supporting consultants. Given
the many constraints within the City of Carlsbad to provide more affordable housing, the Committee has
done an excellent job in laying out a game plan to address this critical need.
For the city to meet the RH NA requirements and other Housing Element goals, all methods need to be
put on the table and examined thoroughly. One method proposed by the Committee is the conversion
of industrial zoned la.nds to residential land use categories. There has been some push back on this
method based on perceived land use compatibility issues. Although this point is well taken, there are a
few industrial sites within Bressi Ranch and throughout the city where such a change would not create
· incompatibilities, and in fact, would result in more desirable land uses. I believe the property I own
would be such a site.
However, this letter is not written to discuss my site, specifically; I understand it is too early in the
process for those types of discussions. I respectfully encourage the City Council to be open to all
methods as recommended by the H EAC, including conversion of appropriate industrial designated land
to residential where there is access to major transportation corridors, transit, schools, retail and
restaurants. The more flexibility the Council leaves itself, the easier it will be to face the challenge of
providing much needed affordable housing in our community.
Thank you for your consideration.
~ Tim Hoar
Owner
JT-Bressi, LLC
3100 Front street, suite A
San Diego, CA92103
858-792-7 405
Tammy Cloud~McMinn RECEIVED
From: Catherine A. Ferguson AUG 2 5 2020
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 5:12 PM CITY OF CARLSBAD .
City Clerk CITY CLERK'S OFFICE To:
Subject: Thursday Council Hearing -Comment on Manager Report Item 1
Please see comment for Manager's Report Item# 1
Council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak on this issue. My name is Catherine Ferguson and I am the
Vice President of the North County YIMBY group. I am writing to encourage you to keep all location strategies on the
table. Our state and region are in a housing crisis and we must be able to consider any and all strategies to increase the
housing supply to ensure that all San Diegans have a place to live. This crisis will require creative problem-solving and
shutting the door on possible solutions is a mistake. Please keep all 6 strategies on the table for consideration while
crafting the Housing Element. Thank you.
CATHERINE FERGUSON• ATTORNEY AT LAW
LOUNSBERY FERGUSON AL TONA & PEAK
960 CANTERBURY PLACE, SUITE 300
ESCONDIDO, CA 92025
T: 760-743-1226 EXT. 111
F: 760-743-9926
CAF@LFAP.COM
WWW.LFAP.COM
• •• ·-·
L OUNSBERY
FERGUSON
ALTONA
&PEAK
All Receive -Agenda Item # _j_ ·
For the Information of the;
9n;_souNCIL
Date 2{Jn CA £__ CC ~
CM --1:::::ACM ;:::::_ DCM (3) ../
The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is confidential and intended to be sent only to the stated recipient of the transmission. It may
therefore be protected from unauthorized use or dissemination by the attorney-client and/or attorney work-product privileges. If you are not the intended recipient
or the intended recipient's agent, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
You are also asked to notify us immediately by telephone and to delete this transmission with any attachments and destroy all copies in any form. Thank you in
advance for your cooperation.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that, to the extent this communication (or any
attachment) addresses any tax matter, it was not written to be (and may not be) relied upon to (i) avoid tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or
(ii) promote, market or recommend to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein (or in any such attachment).
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
1
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
8/25/20
Tuesday, August 25, 2020 12:03 PM
City Clerk
comment for housing meeting 8/ 27 /20
Dear Carlsbad City council members,
My name is marianne grisez.
RECEIVED
• ,...nr-----
/""\VU ~ V L ULU
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
All Receive -Agenda Item#_}_
For the Information of the:
CITY COUNCIL
Date 8 /;J.7 cA v cc ...:::._
CM ~ACM ~ DCM (3) ::::__
'· '
I am a member of the North County YIMBY group (and a resident of Carlsbad). I am writing to encourage you to keep all
location strategies on the table ..
So many folks need affordable housing and Carlsbad, historically has not encouraged builders that could prnvide this
affordable housing option.
The local strategies -
1} vacant land that is zoned for housing development, but not yet developed
2} in areas that are already developed but could be made denser by increasing the number of housing units allowed on
each piece of property.
3} near commercial locations, creating live-work neighborhoods
4) on lots that are underutilized
5) at vacant industrial site that have been converted to residential use
6) on existing singe-family properties as an accessory dwelling unit
Our state and region are in a housing crisis and this crisis will require creative problem-solving and shutting the door on
possible solutions is a mistake.
It may also increase the homeless population.
Please keep all 6 strategies on the table for consideration while crafting the Housing Element.
Thank you,
Marianne Grisez
Carlsbad, Ca. 92011
Sent from my iPhone
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless
1
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Clerk and Councilmembers,
Matthew Loecker
Tuesday, August 25, 2020 3:49 PM
City Clerk
Housing Element
RECEIVED
AUG 2 5 2020
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
All Receive -Agenda Item # _J_
For the lnformiltion.of the:
CIJ'!' COUNCIL
Date ~CA v cc ~
CM ./ ACM -':::::'DCM (3) ~
Thank you for taking comments on future housing strategies in Carlsbad and thank you for working to increase the
housing supply in Carlsbad. My name is Matthew Loecker and I am a resident of Carlsbad and a member of several
activist groups. I am also a current renter, but hoping to buy a home and settle permanently in Carlsbad with my wife
and two young children. Like many residents I am struggling to find affordable housing in Carlsbad, even with an
excellent job and a working spouse.
I am calling/writing to encourage you to keep all location strategies on the table, the more housing the better. Our
state and region are in a housing crisis and we must be able to consider any and all strategies to increase the housing
supply to ensure that all San Diegans have a place to live. This crisis will require creative problem-solving and shutting
the door on possible solutions is a mistake. Please keep all 6 strategies on the table for consideration while crafting the
Housing Element.
Thank you!
Matt
1
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From
Sent:
To:
RECEIVED
AUG 2 7 2020
FARHAD SHARIFI <fhsharifi@gmail.com>
Wednesday, August 26, 2020 4:41 PM
City Clerk · All Receive -Agenda Item # J_
SubjE t:
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Ponto Area Amendment for tomorrow City Council meeting=or the Information of the:
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
To whom it may concern,
~1,:x5ouNCIL
Date ~CA v cc~
CM v ACM ,......-DCM (3) /
I would like to add my comments as part of the document for public input for the City Council meeting tomorrow.
Dear Mayor Hall, Carlsbad City Council, and California Coastal Commission:
I am informed that
1. Carlsbad must consider on Planning Area Fat Ponto the need for a public park at Ponto as part of the Draft
Local Coastal Program Amendment.
2. There is no public park at Ponto even though' City Park Standards requires a minimum of 6.5 acres of parkland .
for Ponto.
3. There is a current 6.6 acre park deficit in Coastal Southwest quadrant of Carlsbad, (south of Palomar Airport
Road and west of El Camino Real).
4. There a·re no Coastal Parks in all of South Carlsbad. 64,000 South Carlsbad citizens have no Coastal Park.
5. Ponto is at the center of a larger 6-mile stretch of coastline in that has no Coastal Parks,
6. Ponto has a city documented 30 acre open-space standard deficit that a Coastal Park would help resolves.
7. And most importantly, I am informed that the City is currently ignoring these issues and in the Draft Local
Coastal Program Amendment is proposing to eliminate the last opportunity to create a much needed Coastal
Park at Ponto
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless
1
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From: RECEIVED
Sent:
AUG 2 7 2020 To:
Subjec :
CITY OF CARLSBAD
. CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
RE: Housing Sites Agenda
C herie Mclarty <cherie.mclarty@yahoo.com>
Wednesday, August 26, 2020 6:54 PM
City Clerk
C ity council agenda Aug 27
All Receive -Agenda Item # J_
For the Information of the:
CIJY COUNCIL
Dater.?/ ~1cA v CC ~
CM v ACM ~DCM (3) V
You may recognize my name as I email often regarding the vacant lot off Ponto and Ave Encinas. This is
because my house is directly across the tracks from this lot. I believe strongly that Carlsbad deserves to make
this beautiful piece of land, the gateway to our coastal city, of which there are few. Leucadia/Encinitas are
destroying it from their side of our border with the building of an extremely large hotel in a very small,
unstable location. We can still make this city of Carlsbad stand out not only for where it is, but how it exists. I
understand business and taxes and revenue. But we also need open and usable space to come and enjoy why
we live here.
This topic can be discussed for a very long time. I ask that you take your time, hear from your citizens (this are
lacks direct representation at this time) and consider the long-term affects of changing the environment with
no take backs ..
There are many of us who are willing to give our time and efforts to make this space the kind of place where
people will come and enjoy and protect the environment for future generations.
Thank you for your time,
Cherie Mclarty
CAUTION : Do hot open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
safe.
1
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From: RECEIVED nda Geidner
All Receive -Agenda Item# J_
For the Information of the:
Sent: ednesday, August 26, 2020 7:04 PM
ity Clerk
CTYCOUNCIL
To:
Cc: AUG 2 7 2020 on Neu; Carolyn Luna
Date B :). 7cA .......-cc .,
CM /ACM v DCM (3) .,,,..-
Subjec CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
omment on Agenda Item #1 Council meeting 8-27-2020
Dear Council Members,
These comments are my pe rsonal opinions, however for transparency please note that I am a member of the Planning
Commission.
1. The location/zoning for Ponto housing could be shifted from beachfront to several properties located near the
intersection of Poinsettia and Avenida Encinas. Currently the Ponto property is zoned for up to 200 units (R-30), .
potentially more with the State mandated density bonus for inclusionary units. There are a number of
advantages to moving the housing away from Ponto:
o It supports the community Vision to keep our beach community character, protect natural resources
and support recreational uses.
o It would create a walkable neighborhood still close to the beach.
o The density and number of units can be increased so we get more units.
o It is closer to the freeway so it will minimize traffic impacts.
o It puts housing within 1 mile of the train station vs about 2 miles away.
2. I suggest we identify several transportation nodes in addition to train stations and locate the higher density
housing near those nodes. They would ideally be located along the freeway to decrease the load on surface
streets. Two examples are Poinsettia at 1-5 and El Camino at Highway 78.
3. The General Plan currently allows housing on sites zoned Local Shopping Center (L), General Commercial (GC)
and Regional Commercial (RC). See table 2-3 on page 2-18 of the General Plan. Unless the plan has been
amended this table states that the density allowed on these sites is R-15 to R-30 and that the RHNA numbers
assume an R-15 count. lfwe just change that assumption from R-15 to R-301 how many additional units do we
get toward our RHNA count? Wouldn't that be a good place to start?
Please also forward a copy to the Housing Element Advisory Committee and thank you for the opportunity fo
participate.
Kind Regards,
Linda Geidner
en attachments or click on links unless ou reco nize the sender and know the content i
1
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From:
Sent:
To:
Subjec l:
RECEIVED
AUG 2 7 2020
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Dteve Linke <splinke@gmail.com>
hursday, August 27, 2020 1 :16 AM
:ity Clerk
~orrespondence for Housing Element Location Met~JPR@~w~s kijt'c?n7di1~~~4it_rlfouncil
meeting) For the Information of the:
,..,c;rl'( ~OUNCIL
Honorable Mayor and City Council:
Date 8/.n CA v CC v'
CM / ACM ,.........-DCM (3) ./
As part of the decision-making process in choosing locations for future housing, please have staff incorporate at least
high-level transportation impact analysis, including both vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and level of service (LOS). Ideally,
new housing projects should be located in areas that minimize VMT impacts and do not add vehicle traffic to already
congested streets. This presents some challenges, because the two metrics sometimes work against each other, but they
are important considerations for many reasons, including the following.
In order to meet the City's growth management and General Plan requirements, housing projects in areas with heavy
vehicle congestion will require mitigation in the form of street projects. And, in order to meet the State's environmental
and the City's General Plan requirements, housing projects in areas with low VMT efficiency and/or streets with such
heavy congestion that they have been exempted from the growth management standard will require mitigation in the
form of measures to promote non-vehicle travel. All of these mitigation strategies can be expensive, so it may be
challenging for developers to offer affordable housing in certain areas. Otherwise, taxpayers may have to pay the
mitigation bills.
Several new developments subject to the new VMT law are currently under review, and they are relying heavily on
residents using transit to move around the city to meet VMT requirements. However, transit service is inconvenient, and
the ridership in Carlsbad is shockingly low. For example, of the 284 bus stops in Carlsbad 86% average 10 or less
boardings per day, and 63% average two or less boardings per day (data for 7 /2018-6/2019 obtained from the North
County Transit District).
A typical approach is to require the developer to add a bench and trash can to the nearest bus stop(s), but that is
unlikely to meaningfully boost ridership and reduce vehicle trips/congestion. Below is a photo of the bus stop on College
Boulevard at Palomar Airport Road, which averages less than one boarding per day, which is typical of the entire
Palomar Airport Road corridor. The City has only minimal influence over transit, and a major overhaul likely will be
necessary to reach the cited VMT and LOS goals.
1
Another issue concerns the re-zoning of commercial or industrial properties to residential. The mixing of commercial
with residential is being promoted as a key strategy to reduce the need for vehicle use and the resultant VMT. This
strategy is further enhanced by affordable housing, because lower income residents are allegedly less likely to own a
vehicle and more likely to use alternative transportation, which is more viable with shorter commutes. However, if there
is not sufficient other commercial area nearby, converting current commercial land use to residential defeats the
purpose of this strategy.
For example, the area of Robertson Ranch just south of Cannon Road and east of El Camino Real was supposed to be
developed with a 66,000 square-foot office building, which could have provided jobs in close proximity to the many
residents in Robertson Ranch and the surrounding large tracts of residences. However, the land use was changed to
residential to build 98 more apartments in three three-story buildings. Now, there effectively wili be no jobs there, and
all of the new residents must travel on the streets in that area, which were just exempted from the growth management
standard due to heavy congestion, to get to their destinations -creating a double-whammy.
In addition, some industrial and other sites are not necessarily close to a large number of jobs or other goods and
services, such as grocery stores, other shopping, schools, parks/recreation, etc. If affordable housing is placed far away
from these critical things, how are the residents going to be expected to utilize! them without racking up huge amounts
ofVMT?
In any event, this is not intended to be a criticism, and I am not sure what the best answers are, but please take both
VMT and LOS into consideration in the decision-making process.
Best regards,
Steve Linke
Carlsbad, CA
2
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Dear Mayor and City Council
Mike Ferrante <mike.ferrante503@gmail.com>
Thursday, August 27, 2020 9:42 AM
City Clerk
Kate E Kessler
Against Proposal to Increase Zoning Density at Ponto
All Receive -Agenda Item # _j_
For the Information of the:
..--,C}!:,,, COUNCIL
Date~ CA ./ CC ~
CM £._ACM ~DCM(3)~
My name is Mike Ferrante and I have lived in Carlsbad for nearly 20 years. I love this City and want
to ensure it remains a wonderful place to live and visit.
I am aware that there is a proposal to increase zoning density at vacant lots at Ponto and increase
the allowable building height to accommodate up to 4 floors of apartment buildings. The city already
has a deficit of 30 acres of open space and a deficit of 6.6 of parks in the southwest. I ask that
the City NOT approve plans to increase building density, and to budget money in their capital
improvement program to purchase Planning Area F and build a park at Ponto to serve
residents and visitors alike. Planning Area F is currently for sale and I request the City contact the
landowner to explore purchasing the site for a needed park.
This land is the entrance to Southern Carlsbad and one of the last remaining pieces of coastal open
space, it is a treasure and should be developed into a space for all to enjoy, not squandered on high
density residential development that would do best located closer to employment at the
Center of Carlsbad.
I ask you to Develop Ponto Right-I ask you to build Ponto Park.
I request that my comments be put on record in the official public records for all things related to
Planning of Ponto, Planning Area F, including the official public records for Carlsbad's City's Budget,
draft Local Coastal Program Amendment, and Parks Master Plan Update; and the CA Coastal
Commission's consideration of Carlsbad's draft Local Coastal Program Amendment.
Thank you,
Mike Ferrante
503 Rudder Ave
Carlsbad, CA 92011
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless
1
Brookfield
Properties
August27,2020
RECEIVED
AUG 2 7 2020
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Mayor Matt Hall and Members of the Carlsbad City Council
. 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
RE: THE SHOPPES AT CARLSBAD
AUGUST 27TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING .
All Receive --Agenda-Item # _1_._--
For the Information of the:
COUNCIL
Date CA v CC .,.,,-
CM_ _v6CM{3) /
ITEM #1 · PROPOSED METHODOLOGIES FOR CHOOSING LOCATIONS FOR FUTURE
HOUSING IN CARLSBAD AS A PART OF REQUIRED UPDATE TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF
THE GENERAL PLAN
Dear Mayor Hall and Council Members:
As the owner of The Shoppes at Carlsbad, Brookfield fully supports designating this location as a potential
candidate site for additional housing density. Adding housing in this location could prove to be very beneficial:
• Housing at The Shoppes will support the retail and food and beverage platform to its highest and best
use ,
• Higher density in this location will facilitate affordable housing options as well as provide more
attainable market rate housing for Carlsbad's employment base
• The site is ideally located with access from the freeway at both El Camino Real and Jefferson Road
• With the transit center located at the site, additional housing density along with a reconfigured
"mobility hub" could provide good synergies within a mixed-use environment
In addition to these benefits, a full suite of land uses and the compounding benefits of mixed-use have the
potential to strengthen the economic base for the site creating long-term operational and economic viability
for the City.
Thank you for considering this site as well as thoughtfully discussing and considering all options for housing
to help fulfill City and community objectives.
Sincerely,
Ted Lohman
Sr. Director, Brookfield Properties
BROOKFIELD PROPERTIES
733 81h Avenue, San Diego, CA, 92101
T +1 619 321 1111 F +1 619 321 1234 brookfieldproperties.com
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
____ from: Jim Burke< > 11 d I ~=---------~~~=~ -----A -Re-ceive~Agen a-1tem-n-=i..:--------i-; ~--
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2020 1 :13 PM For the Information of the:
To: City Clerk CIT){ COUNCIL
Subject: 27 Aug Meeting @ 3 PM Date i//J t A Vee ...---
CM ~CM _..---DCM (3) ._,......--
Dear City Clerk,
Please ensure the following is presented to and read into the 27 Aug 20 meeting transcript:
"We oppose the use of the PONTO area for more high density housing and the proposed widening of Avanida Encinas, a
two Jane road.
1. There are already several prefabricated/mobile home parks in the area. The additional overdevelopment of PONTO
takes us to the Pacific Beach model of urban blight. Who would this be serving? Sacramento? Definitely NOT the South
Carlsbad taxpaying community.
2. A proposal to widen Avenida Encinas is ludicrous for many reasons. I've read the General Plan. Overlooked with the
intentions of mixed commercial/residential use is the assumption that Avenida Encinas can legally and effectively handle
the mass volumes of traffic both during construction and operation of the proposed projects. It is a two Jane road which
at its narrowest {56') (the RR overpass) falls short of the 60' required by California for a four lane road . Where would
the pedestrian and bike Janes go? You can't seriously be considering replacing the overpass. The time and expenses
involved would be prohibitive.
3. The proposal to "rebuild the Coast Highway in South Carlsbad" may be an interesting engineering project but to what
end? Taxpayer dollars wasted on this should be redirected to positive outcomes for our community.
PROPOSAL. Our Ponto Beach area needs to viewed and developed as a whole, as follows:
The most valuable use of the areas north and south of Avenida Encinas would be to serve the park and recreational
needs of CURRENT residents by providing:
1. Multi-use fields (baseball/softball/soccer/concert)
2. Children's playgrounds
3. Additional beach parking
4. Skateboard park
5. Community center
6. Satellite library
7. Dog walking trails and "Dog Park" area
8. Open space
Additionally we should announce our southern city area with the same type of art-deco signage used in Carlsbad Village.
Please acknowledge receipt.
Thank you.
Jim and Terry Burke
Carlsbad CA 92011"
1
,I
All Receive - Agenda Item #____
For the Information of the: CITY COUNCIL Date:08/26/2020 CA X CC X CM X
ACM X DCM (3) X
Exhibit 2
All Receive - Agenda Item #____
allocate dwelling units to North County Plaza so as to allow us to create an exciting, mixed-use
development which would significant assist the City of Carlsbad to meet California's RHNA
requirements. I would be happy to provide your Committee with more information on our plans if
requested.
Mark Wendel
KIMCO REALTY CORP.
Director of Development I Western Region
cc: Don Neu, Carlsbad City Planner
Paul Klukas, Planning Systems
Exhibit 3
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From: RECEIVED nda Geidner
All Receive -Agenda Item# J_
For the Information of the:
Sent: ednesday, August 26, 2020 7:04 PM
ity Clerk
CTYCOUNCIL
To:
Cc: AUG 2 7 2020 on Neu; Carolyn Luna
Date B :). 7cA .......-cc .,
CM /ACM v DCM (3) .,,,..-
Subjec CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
omment on Agenda Item #1 Council meeting 8-27-2020
Dear Council Members,
These comments are my personal opinions, however for transparency please note that I am a member of the Planning
Commission.
1. The location/zoning for Ponto housing could be shifted from beachfront to several properties located near the
intersection of Poinsettia and Avenida Encinas. Currently the Ponto property is zoned for up to 200 units (R-30), .
potentially more with the State mandated density bonus for inclusionary units. There are a number of
advantages to moving the housing away from Ponto:
o It supports the community Vision to keep our beach community character, protect natural resources
and support recreational uses.
o It would create a walkable neighborhood still close to the beach .
o The density and number of units can be increased so we get more units.
o It is closer to the freeway so it will minimize traffic impacts.
o It puts housing within 1 mile of the train station vs about 2 miles away.
2. I suggest we identify several transportation nodes in addition to train stations and locate the higher density
housing near those nodes. They would ideally be located along the freeway to decrease the load on surface
streets. Two examples are Poinsettia at 1-5 and El Camino at Highway 78.
3. The General Plan currently allows housing on sites zoned Local Shopping Center (L), General Commercial (GC)
and Regional Commercial (RC). See table 2-3 on page 2-18 of the General Plan. Unless the plan has been
amended this table states that the density allowed on these sites is R-15 to R-30 and that the RHNA numbers
assume an R-15 count. lfwe just change that assumption from R-15 to R-301 how many additional units do we
get toward our RHNA count? Wouldn't that be a good place to start?
Please also forward a copy to the Housing Element Advisory Committee and thank you for the opportunity fo
participate.
Kind Regards,
Linda Geidner
en attachments or click on links unless ou reco nize the sender and know the content i
1