The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLFMP 06; LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 06; LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 6; 1987-09-02CITY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 6 Plan Sponsor: City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Cdrlsbad, CA 92008 ( 619) 434-2820 Preparer: Planning Department City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 (619) 438-1161 September 2, 1987 I. II. III. IV. v. VI. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary. ........................ •· ..... Introduction •••••• ........................... Buildout Projections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Phasing ••••••••••• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zone Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A~alysis of Public Facilities Requirements 1 • 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 1 0. 11 • City Administrative Facilities •• Adequacy Findings •••••••••• Library •••.••••...••...••. Adequacy Findings •••• Wastewater Treatment Capacity •• Adequacy. Findings ••••••••• Parks ••••.•••••••...•.•• Adequacy Findings •• Drainage •••••••••••••• ~. Adequacy Findings •• Circulation •••••••••••• Adequacy Findings •• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fire •••..••••.••..•••••• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Adequacy Findings •• . . . . . . . . . . . .. Open Space •••••••••••••• . . . . . . Adequacy Findings •• Schools ............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Adequacy Findings •••• . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sewer Collection System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Adequacy Findings •• Water Distribution System. Adequacy Findings ••••• . ............ . 1 Page No. 1 15 22 38 46 49 54 58 65 66 74 79 87 92 96 98 105 122 127 130 136 138 151 154 162 166 172 VI. Appendices Page No. Executive Su■■ary Appendix 1 Growth Management Ordinance •••••••••••••••••••••• 174 Appendix 2 Planning Conwnission Resolution No. 2670 •••••••••• 197 Appendix 3 City Council Resolution No. 9291 ••••••••••••••••• 201 City Council Resolution No. 9292 ••••••••••••••••• 204 Introduction Appendix 4 Sources of Data •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 205 Appendix 5 Glossary •••.••.•.••.••••.•..•..••.•••••..•••••.•. 207 Appendix 6 Public Facility Agencies Serving Zone 6 •••••••••• 212 Appendix 7 Zone 6 Development Projects as of 1-1-87 ••••••••• 214 Appendix 8 Zone 6 Land Ownership •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 224 Appendix 9 Zone 6 General Plan land Use Sub-Areas Acreage Summary as of 1-1-87 ••••••••••••••••••••• 232 Buildout Projections and Assu■ptlons Appendix 10 Estimated Ultimate Buildout: Summary of Existing, Developing & Potential Land Use Under the General Plan by Zone 6 Sub-Areas ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 238 Appendix 11 Zone 6: Developing Land Uses by Zone 6 Sub-Areas .••••••••••••••••.•.•••..•••••••.••••.•• 247 Appendix 12 Zone 6: Parcel Breakdown of land in the Developing Process ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 253 Appendix 13 Zone 6: Undeveloped Vacant land Development Potential •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 256 Appendix 14 Zone 6: Theoretical Dwelling Unit Yield at Buildout ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 259 Appendix 15 Zone 6: Detailed Existing Non-Residential Building Square Footage Breakdowns as of 1-1-87 ••••••••••• 261 11 APPENDICES (CONTINUED) Page No~ Phasing Appendix 16 Proposed Zone 6 Local Facilities ~nagement Plan Monitoring Program ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 263 Appendix 17 Library Agenda Bill for 7-7-87 City Council Meeting ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 269 Appendix 18 July 23, 1987 Memo from Frank Mannen Concerning South Carlsbad Library Facilities ••••••••••••••• 284 Wastewater Treat■ent Capacity Appendix 19 Leucadia County Water District's Leased Capacity •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 295 Parks Appendix 20 City Council Agenda Bill 9192: Park Inventory ••.••.•.•..••..•••.••.••••..•.•.•....•• 297 Drainage Circulation Appendix 21 Zone 6 Estimated Traffic Generation as of 1-1-87 with 1986 San Diego Traffic Generation Rates •••••• 311 Appendix 22 Circulation: Existing & Proposed Improvements •••• 316 Appendix 23 Presents the ICU (Intersection Capacity Utilization) Analysis for the Failing Intersections Impacted from Zone 6 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 324 Appendix 24 Not Used ••..•••••••.••••••.•..•..•..••••••....••.. 349 Open Space Appendix 25 Open Space Inventory: Detailed Itemization as of 1-1-87 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 350 iii APPENDICES (CONTINUED) Page No. Schools Appendix 26 Letter from Carlsbad Unified School District Dated August 17, 198 7. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3 5 7 Letter from Encinitas Union School District Dated August 13, 1987 Letter from Dieguito Union High School District Dated August 19, 1987 Letter from San Marcos Unified School District Dated Sewer Collection System Appendix 27 ~eimbursement Agreement for Wastewater Treatment and Disposal for Carlsbad Tract #73-29 Carrillo Estates Unit #2, August 20, 1981 .•....•.................................. 365 Water Distribution Syste■ Appendix 28 Letter from Costa Real Municipal Water District Dated March S, 1987 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 368 Letter from Olivenhain Municipal Water District Dated March 3, 1987 Letter from San Marcos County Water District Dated iv Exhibit # ~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 MAP CHART CHART LIST LIST MAP MAP TABLE LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit Title Page No. Executive Su■■ary Local Facilities Management Plan Boundaries •••••••• 1 Public Facilities Summary Chart •••••••••••••••••••• 3 Public Facilities Summary Sheet •••••••••••••••••••• 5 General Conditions for Zone 6 •••••••••••••••••••••• 6 Special Conditions for Zone 6 •••••••••••••••••••••• 7 Introduction General Plan -Land Use Map •••••••••••••••••••••••• 19 Zoning Map •••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 20 General Plan -Land Use Acreage Summary as of 1-1-87 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 21 Buildout Projections 9 TABLE Ultimate Buildout: Summary of Existing, Developing, & Potential Land Use Under the General Plan as of 1-1-87 ••••••••••••••••••••• 27 10 TABLE Zone 6 Developing Land Uses as of 1-1-87 ••••••••••• 32 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE MAP CHART TABLE CHART MAP CHART TABLE Phasing Residential Phasing Schedule ••••••••••••••••••••••• 42 Undeveloped Potential Residential Land Use ••••••••• 43 Non-residential Phasing Schedule ••••••••••••••••••• 44 Citywide, Quadrant and Zone 6 Residential Phasing Schedules •••••••••••••••••.•••••.•••••••.. 45 City Ad■inistrative Facilities Map. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 50 Sun111ary Sheet. . . . . • • • • • • • • • • . • • . . . . • . . • . • . • • . . . . • . . 51 Citywide and Zone 6 Phasing of City City Administrative Facilities •••••..••••••••••••• 55 City Administrative Demand Comparison •••••••••••••• 57 Library Map. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 59 Summary Sheet •••.••..•..•....••.••••..•.••......••• 60 Citywide and Zone 6 Phasing of library Facilities.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 22 CHART Library Demand Comparison ••••••••••••••••••••••..•• 65a V Exhibitlt ~ 23 MAP Exhibit Title EXHIBITS (Continued) Wastewater Treat ■ent Sewer Districts & Wastewater Treatment Page No. Facilities ••••••••••••..••••••••.•••••••••••••••• 67 24 CHART Summary Sheet -City of Carlsbad Service Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 25 CHART Summary Sheet -Leucadia County Sewer District Service Area ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 69 26 CHART Summary Sheet -San Marcos Sewer District Service Area...................................... 70 27 TABLE Encina WPCF Capacity Analysis •••••••••••••••••••••• 76 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 MAP MAP CHART CHART TABLE TABLE CHART CHART MAP CHART MAP CHART MAP CHART MAP CHART MAP TABLE TABLE Parks Park Districts Park Facilities .................................. . Park District 113 Summary Sheet ••••••••••••••••••••• Park District #4 Summary Sheet ••••••••••••••••••••• Southwest Quadrant -Park District 3 -Zone 6 Phasing of Park Facilities ...................... . Southeast Quadrant -Park District 4 -Zone 6 Phasing of Park Facilities ••••••••••••••••••••••••• Southwest Quadrant & Zone 6 Park Facilities ........................................ . Southeast Quadrant & Zone 6 Park 80 81 82 83 85 86 87 Facilities......................................... 88 Drainage Drainage System ......•.•.....••••......••.••....... 93 Summar)' Sheet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Circulation Circulation Element Roads . . . . • . • • • . . . . . • • • . . . . . . . • 99 Su111111ary Sheet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Circulation Trip Distribution •••••••••••••••••••••• 103 Circulation Improvement Costs •••••••••••••••••••••• 118 Fire Citywide Fire Facilities ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 123 Fire Facilities Summary Sheet •••••••••••••••••••• 124 Fire Facilities ••••••••••••••••.••••••••..••••••. 125 Development Outside of 5 Minute Response Time as of 1-1-87 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 128 Fire Facilities Phasing •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 129 vi Exhibit# 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 Type CHART TABLE MAP TABLE EXHIBITS (Continued) Exhibit Title Open Space Page No. Summary Sheet •••••••••.•••••••••••••.••••••••••• 131 Open Space Inventory •••••••••••••••••••••••.•••• 134 Open Space •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 135 Open Space Phasing •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 137 Schools MAP School Districts... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 CHART Carlsbad Unified School District Summary Sheet. . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 CHART Encinitas Union Elementary School District Summary Sheet. . . • . • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 CHART San Dieguito High School District Summary Sheet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 CHART San Marcos Unified School District MAP TABLE TABLE TABLE Summary Sheet. . • • • . . . . . . . • • • • . • . . . . . • . • . • . . . . . • 143 Schoo 1 Lo cat ions. • . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . 144 Schools to Serve Zone 6 ...••.••........••..•.•• 145 Zone 6 School Facility Demand Table - Carlsbad Unified School District as of 1/1/87 •• 147 Zone 6 School Facility Demand Table -Encinitas Union & San Dieguito Union School Ditricts as of 1-1-87 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 148 TABLE Zone 6 School Facility Demand Table -San Marcos Unified School District as of 1-1-87 ••••••••••• 149 MAP Zone 6 School Facility Demand Map ••••••••••••••• 150 TABLE Student Generation Rates •••••••••••••••••••••••• 153 MAP CHART MAP CHART MAP MAP MAP CHART Sewer Collection System Sewer Districts ..••••.....•••....•...•.••......• 155 Summary Sheet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . 156 Sewer Collection Facilities ••••••••••••••••••••• 157 Buildout Projections •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 164 Conveyance Facilities Recommended Improvements -Leucadia County Water District ••••••••••••••• 165 Water Distribution Syste■ Water Service Districts ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 167 Water Distribution System ••••••••••••••••••••••• 168 Summary Sheet. . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 169 vii Exhibit I 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 77a 78 79 Type MAP MAP MAP MAP MAP MAP MAP MAP MAP MAP Exhibit Title EXHIBITS (Continued) Traffic Impact Fee ••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••. Page No. 211a Bridge and Thoroughfare District............... 211b Development Projects........................... 215 Development Projects........................... 221 Development Projects........................... 222 Development Projects........................... 223 Major Land Ownership........................... 225 General Plan Sub Areas......................... 237 Developing Land Use............................ 252 Circulation -Existing and Proposed Improvements................................. 319 viii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ZONE 6 EXHIBIT 1 t Clly of C•l1Hd Gtaw,,. Uanagem9nt Pr017 .. ~ JANUARY 1987 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT BOUN·DARIES I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Local Facilities Management Plan (the Plan) for Zone 6 was prepared pursuant to the City's Growth Management Program, Title 21, Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. A copy of the ordinance is provided in Appendix 1. The contents of the plan follow the outline established by Section 21.90.110 of the Growth Management Ordinance. .The plan is consistent with and implements the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan adopted September 23, 1986 (CC Reso 8797). The plan begins with the assumptions used to generate the buildout projections for · residential and non-residential development within Zone 6. Buildout is the type and amount of land use planned for by the City's General Plan. The plan then phases or estimates the Zone's development on a yearly basis until buildout is reached. Phasing is done to predict future facility demands. Each facility that is required to be addressed is then analyzed. The analysis includes an inventory of existing and proposed facilities, a phasing schedule that establishes the timing for the provision of facilities in relationship to demand, and a financing plan that establishes various methods of funding facilities that are identified by the plan as needed. Since the plan is a regulatory document, each facility section contains conditions to ensure that facilities will conform to the adopted performance standards. The conditions will be adopted as part of the approval of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6. Mandatory compliance with the plan and conditions will reoulate future development within Zone 6. Exhibit 1: "Local Facilities Management Plan Boundaries" on Page 1 graphically illustrates where Zone 6 is within the City. Exhibit 2: "Zone 6 Public Facilities Summary Chart'' on Page 3 provides a brief synopsis of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6. Exhibit 3: "Zone 6 Public Facilities Summary Sheet" on Page 5 provides a one page highlight of the synopsis. 2 EXHIBIT Z: City Ad ■inlstrative Library Wastewater Treat ■ent Capacity Parks Drainage Circulation Fire ZONE 6 PUBLIC FACILITIES SUMMARY CHART Existing facilities meet the adopted performance standard until the year 2005. Existing and programmed facilities meet the adopted performance stan- dard until the year 2003. Existing facilities meet the adopted performance standard Park District 3 (southwest quadrant) currently does not meet the adopted performance standard. Park District 4 (southeast quadrant) currently does not meet the adopted performance standard. Existing facilities along with minor improvements will serve to meet the adopted performance standard to buildout of Zone 6. Three intersections impacted by Zone 6 do not currently meet the adopted performance standard. Until the per- formance standard is met, at each location, no development may be allowed in the Zone. With existing plus committed traffic two inter- sections will fail to meet the standard. At buildout, three inter- sections are projected to fall below the standard unless mitigating im- provements occur. Existing facilities do not meet the adopted performance standard. 3 Open Space Schools Sewer Collection Water Distribution Existing open space meets the adop- the adopted performance standard. An ongoing work program will assure the open space performance standard is maintained through buildout. For areas of Zone 6 within: Carlsbad Unified School District; Encinitas Union School District; San Dieguito Union High School District; San Marcos Unified School District. The adopted performance standard is indicated as being met. Areas of Zone 6 within: City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District will meet the adopted per- formance standard to buildout Leucadia County not meet the standard unless Leucadia County is implemented. Water District will adopted performance the "Planning Study Water District,9-85" San Marcos County Water District will meet the adopted performance standard to buildout. Water service to Zone 6 meets the adopted performance standards to the buildout of the Zone. 4 EXHIBIT 3 ZONE & PUBLIC FACILITIES SUNNARY SHEET LFMP 87-6 1) City Administrative Facilities 2) Library 3) Wastewater Treatment Capacity -Carlsbad -Leucadia -San Marcos 4) Parks S) Drainage 6) Circulation 7) Fire 8) Open Space 9) Schools -Carlsbad Unified -Encinitas Union -San Dieguito Union -San Marcos Unified 10) Sewer Collection System 11} Water Distribution System Notes: ( 1 ) (2) (3) (4) s Confor■ance with Adopted Standard Citywide Yes; until 2005 Yes; until 2003 With Phase IV expansion Yes Quadrant SW SE No No Zone & Yes; to Buildout Mo No Yes; to Buildout with ongoing work program Yes; at the present Yes; to Buildout Yes; to Buildout EXHIBIT 4 GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR ZONE 6 LFNP 87-6 1. All development within Zone 6 shall conform to the provisions of Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and to the provisions and conditions of this Local Facilities Management Plan. 2. All development within Zone 6 shall be required to pay a public facility fee pursuant to the standards adopted by the City Council on July 28, 1987, and as amended from time to time and all other applicable fees. Development in.Zone 6 shall also be responsible for any additional fees to be incorporated into this plan that are found to be necessary to enable facilities to meet the adopted performance standard. 3. The City of Carlsbad shall monitor all facilities in Zone 6 pursuant to Subsections 21.90.130(c), (d) and (e) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 4. All development in Zone 6 shall be in conformance with the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan as adopted by City Council Resolution 8797 on September 23, 1987. 5. Periodic amendment to the Zone 6 Local Facilities Management Plan is anticipated to incorporate newly acquired data, to add conditions and upgrade standards as determined through the required monitoring program. Amendment to this Plan may be initiated by action of the Planning Commission or City Council at anytime. 6. If a public facility or service is found not to be in conformance with an adopted performance standard during the yearly monitoring, or at any other time, the matter will be immediately brought before the City Council. If the City Council determines that a non-conformance does exist then no future building or development permits shall be issued until those facilities are brought into conformance with the adopted performance standard. 7. After adoption of this Plan by the City Council, no building permits will be allowed unless the performance standards are complied with. This includes all projects which were exempt under Section 21.90.080(c) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. 6 EXHIBIT 5 SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR ZONE 6 LFNP 87-6 The following Special Conditions apply specifically to development in Zone 6 and must be complied with in addition to the General Conditions for Zone 6. These conditions are also listed separately under the analysis discussion of each facility. City Administrative Facilities No special conditions are necessary at this time. Library No special conditions are necessary at this time. Wastewater Treatment Capacity 1. The following actions shall be pursued jointly by each sewer district to ensure adequate wastewater.treatment capacity throughout a five (5) year period: a. Monitor Encina treatment plant flows on a monthly basis to determine actual flow rates and·to have an early warning of capacity problems. b. Actively pursue acceleration and phasing of treatment plant Phase IV expansion to provide adequate capacity. c. Increase National Pollutant Discharge Eliminations Systems (NPDES) permit to 27.45 MGD to allow full utilization of reclamation plant and ocean outfall. 2. All development within Zone 6 shall pay the applicable required Carlsbad Sewer District, Leucadia County Water District or San Marcos County Water District fees. 7 Parks Park District# 3 Southwest Quadrant: No residential building permits shall be issued for the portion of Zone 6 within the southwest quadrant of the City until the City Council takes action approving measures which provide for park facilities to meet the adopted performance standard. Park District #4 Southeast Quadrant: No residential building permits shall be issued for the portion of Zone 6 within the southeast quadrant of the City until the City Council takes action approving measures which provide for park facilities to meet the adopted performance standard. Drainage 1. Drainage facilities shall be provided at the time of development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 2. Prior to approval of final maps within Zone 6 the applicant shall pay or enter into an agreement with the City to pay for a proportional share of any drainage area fees established as a result of the forthcoming Master Drainage Plan update. Circulation The following circulation improvements shall be implemented as detailed below: Now: 1. La Costa Avenue at I-5 n~rthbound and southbound will consist of widening la Costa Avenue to provide two through lanes both eastbound and westbound and double left-turn lanes for the westbound-to-southbound traffic. The intersections of the ramps would also be signalized. 1 -3 Years: 1. El Camino Real at Alga will require adding a free right- turn lane northbound to westbound and restripping of the intersection. 4-6 Years: 1. El Camino Real at Olivenhain will require widening the northbound approach to provide two through lanes and a double right-turn lane in addition to widening the westbound approach to provide three lan~s, two left-turn lanes and one right-turn lane. 8 Buildout: 1 • Rancho Santa addition of eastbound in lane. Fe at La a through addition Costa Avenue will require the lane northbound, southbound, and to adding a westbound left-turn 2. El Camino Real at La Costa Avenue will require the addition of a free right-turn lane northbound to eastbound plus acquiring additional right-of-way. 3. El Camino Real at Olivenhain will require adding a northbound through lane and free right turn. Adding southbound two left-turn lanes, one through lane and one free right-turn lane. Westbound requires three through lanes and eastbound two through lanes, one left lane, and one right-turn lane. Fire 1. A 5 minute response map shall be prepared for Fire Station # 6 prior to it's becoming operational. That map shall become a part of this Local Facilities Management Plan. 2. Until: A. Fire Station #6 is operational; and B. The 5 minute response time map for Fire Station #6 indicates that a 5 minute fire response to Zone 6 can be achieved. No building permits shall be approved in Zone 6. Open Space 1. As a part of the annual monitoring program for the Local Facilities· Management Plan for Zone 6, the Planning Department shall compile a yearly identification of the developed and developing acreage in Zone 6 along with the amount of performance standard open space acreage within Zone 6. The Planning Depart-ent shall fully analyze the ability of Zone 6 to provide performance standard open space facilities to meet the demand at buildout on a yearly basis. 2 ·Additional open space facilities in Zone 6 shall be physically and functionally linked to existing performance standard open space facilities as identified in the Local Facilities· Management Plan for Zone 6. 3. As part of the ongoing review of proposed development in Zone 6, the Planning Department shall identify the type and amount of additional open space facilities to meet the open space performance standard in Zone 6 at buildout. 9 overall Zone 6 Financial Mitigation A1ternative The detailed analysis contained in this plan identifies several public facility shortfalls which must be brought into compliance with the adopted performance standards prior to allowing any future development to occur in Zone 6. An overall mitigation alternative is being presented because the nature of these non-conforming facilities requires a comprehensive approach to guarantee that each facility can be corrected as required under the provisions of the Growth Management Program. A comprehensive and coordinated plan is also necessary due to the cost and impacts related with bringing these facilities into conformance with the adopted performance standards. A single solution for each facility shown to be below standard does not appear practical or available at this time. Altought these facility shortfalls affect several other Local Facility Management Zones, Zone 6 developers are responsible to bring these facilities into conformance with the adopted performance standards prior to being allowed to develop their specific projects. Short of that, they can wait until the City or some other Local Facilities Management Plan (s) determines how to bring these facilities up to standard. The purpose of this section is to present an effective alternative financing mitigation plan to resolve the current public facilities which have been identified to be below the adopted performance standards in this Local Facilities Management Plan. The following facilities have been identified in this plan to be non-conforming and need to be brought up to standard: 1. Parks -In the southwest quadrant or Park District 3 there exists a shortage of 26.34 acres as of January 1, 1987. With aetive building permits issued in this quadrant this shortage will grow to 32.08 acres. In the southeast quadrant or Park District 4 there exists a shortage of 2.22 acres as of January 1, 1987. With active building permits issued in this quadrant this shortage will grow to 9.57 acres. 2. Circulation - 3. Fire - La Costa Avenue at northbound and southbound Interstate 5. Station No. 6 is needed now. -11 - Facility Cost s11-ary The total cost associated with bringing these facilities into conformance with the adopted standards is approximately $ 8. 3 million with a 15% contingencies cost, bringing the total cost estimate to $9.6 million. Specifically, these costs breakdown into the following categories: 1. Parks -To guarantee that the existing shortage in the southeast quadrant is resolved $ 1.5 million will be required and an additional$ 1.6 million will also be required to meet the demand generated by the approved projects in Zone 6. No development can occur in the southwest quadrant until the City adopts a revised Capital Improvements Budget which includes the development of 32.08 acres of park land within 5 years. An additional$ 191,000 is needed to meet the demand generated by the approved projects in Zone 6. 2. Circulation - La Costa Avenue at the I-5 Interchange totals $ 3.3 million. 3. Fire Station No. 6 - Station construction and equipment costs total $ 650, 000 and an early opening date would require two years of operational costs of $ 1, 052, 000 to be paid for because the City had not planned to open this station until January 1991. Financial Mitigation Plan The actual plan to bring these facilities into conformance with the adopted performance standards would require a majority of the developers in Zone 6 to up-front the funds necessary to mitigate the existing facility shortfalls. In all, there are 1,499 residential dwelling units in Zone 6 which have received either tentative or final approval, but are on hold pending the adoption of this Local Facilities Management Plan and the subsequent finding that all eleven public facility performance standards have been met. This local plan shows that three of these standards can not be complied with without mitigation. -12 - As stated previously, a individually does not appear comprehensive plan to mitigate each facility available or practical, therefore a financial mitigation alternative consideration. is being presented for This comprehensive plan would entail all of the current developers in Zone 6 to pay up-front a Local Facilities Management Fee of approximately $ 7, 000 per unit to guarantee bringing these facilities up to standard. The fee calculation is based upon 100 percent participation among all current developers who are in the developing process. Of course, this fee could be modified depending upon the actual number of current developers wishing to participate. However, in no case could the total amount needed to mitigate these facility shortages be reduced without guaranteeing some other funding source which would also bring these facilities into conformance. This type of comprehensive financial alternative anticipates that certain costs associated with this Local Facilities Management Fee in Zone 6 would be available for reimbursement. The overall philosophy would be to provide a mechanism to reimburse some costs where a pay-as-you-go fee is also being collected for the same improvement identified in the Local Facilities Management Fee calculation. Those funds collected above the amount associated with another fee could become reimburseable as future development occurred. A specific example can be shown by using the amount of up-front money to be collected for the improvements at I;..5 and La Costa Avenue from the developers in Zone 6. Up-front cost Bridge and Thoroughfare Fees (pay-as-you go fee) Potentially Reimburseable Amount $ 3,300,000 794.470 $ 2,505,530 Other fees such as Traffic Impact Fees could also be reimburseable in this same fashion. Those funds utilized to construct and buy equipment to operate a new fire station would become reimburseable at the point in time the city had originally planned to open the facility. Operating costs as a result of an early opening date would not be reimburseable. The exact formula used to determine the amount of the Local Facilities Management Fee necessary to ensure that this comprehensive approach brings all facilities into conformance with the adopted performance standards will be based upon the number of current developers agreeing to up-front the funds to make these facility improvements. -13 - Financial Mitigation Conclusion Again, this is an alternative which appears to be a feasible mechanism to mitigate those public facility shortages identified in this Local Facilities Management Plan. Whether it can be implemented depends upon the current developers in Zone 6. If this alternative is not pursued and implemented, then the developers in Zone 6 will need to work together to provide another solution to the facility shortages detailed in this plan or wait until the City or some other Local Facilities Management Plan (s) determines how to bring all eleven public facilities into conformance with the adopted performance standard. Until this is done, no development in Zone 6 may proceed. 15 INTRODUCTION II. Introduction This local Facilities Management Plan (lFMP) completes the second phase of Carlsbad's overall Growth Management Program for Zone 6. Phase One of the Growth Management Program established the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan which was based upon a Citywide phased buildout of the City's General Plan. The Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan was adopted by City Council Resolution No. 8797. For purposes of public facilities analysis, the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan separated the City into 25 Local Facilities Manaqement Zones as shown on Exhibit 1: "local Facility Management Plan Boundaries", on Page 2. PLAN OVERVIEW This LFMP provides a detailed description and analysis of how facilities for Zone 6 of the City will develop from January 1, 1987 to buildout. The plan is divided into six parts: Part I Part II Part III Part IV Part V Part VI Executive Summary. Introduction. Identifies developing projections Zone. the amount of existing and land uses in Zone 6 and makes as to the ultimate buildout of the Attempts to project how and when development will be phased in Zone 6. Provides a complete description and analysis of how each facility and improvement will be financed and when mitigation will be necessary. Appendix of technical materials. The most detailed part of the plan is Part V. This part is divided into eleven separate sections; one for each facility. Each·· section provides a summary sheet which highlights the important information described in the analysis. This summary is broken down into three categories: 1) Existing, 2) Existing plus approved, and 3) Future. The facility demand column in each of these categories will show two numbers: 16 Facility Demand The top number (1) identifies the Citywide, Quadrant, public facility district, or Zone 6 demand, depending upon the public facility being evaluated. The Bottom number (2) identifies the specific facility demand for Zone 6 or sub-area of Zone 6. Following the summary sheet is a detailed analysis of the facility along with additional information. If a facility is not conforming with the adopted performance standard, there will be a discussion describing this situation, a description of mitigation or alternatives, and a financing discussion. Each facility section will conclude with adequacy findings. Adequacy findings summarize whether or not the public facility conforms with the adopted performance standard. Source of data used in this plan is found in Appendix 4. A glossary of terms used in this plan is provided in Appendix 5. ZONE 6 -OVERVIEW The plan is consistent with the Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan (City Council Resolution #8797). The Plan ensures that the adopted facility performance standards shall be complied with as development occurs. Local Facilities Management Zone 6 generally covers the developed and developing areas of the La Costa Community of Carlsbad. Zone 6 is predominately in the southeast quadrant of the City. However, a small portion between La Costa Avenue and the future Carrillo Way west of El Camino Real is the southwest quadrant of the City. The exact boundaries are shown on the Zone 6 base map at a scale of 1" = 200' on file at the Planning Department. Zone 6 is graphically illustrated in Exhibit 1: "Local Facilities Management Plan Boundaries" on Page 2. The Zone 6 Plan is somewhat more detailed than the other City prepared Local Facilities Management Plans. There are two reasons for this. First, Zone 6 was the last Local Facilities Management Plan prepared by the City, and has consequently benefited from information and experiences gained by the prior plans. Second, Zone 6 extends over 3 Wastewater Treatment Districts, 2 Park Districts, 2 Fire Station Service Areas, 4 School Districts, 3 Sewer Collection Districts, and 3 Water Districts. This multiplicity of facility districts required more detailed accounting of facility impacts and supply. A list of public facilities providers in Zone 6 is shown on Appendix 6. 17 There are approximately 2,674 gross acres in Zone 6. As of January 1, 1987 approximately 2,140 acres, or 80%, is either developed or committed to permanent open space. Another 320 acres, or 12%, is in the process of developing and 214 acres, or 8%, is undeveloped, but has development potential. Appendix 7 lists development projects in Zone 6 as of January 1, 1987. Major land ownerships are shown on Appendix 8. Of the 2,140 acres of developed or committed land use, approximately 1,589 acres or 79% are general planned residential. 114 acres or 5% are general planned commercial, 23 acres or 1% are general planned for schools and 295 acres or 18% are general planned open space. Future development in the Zone will mostly be limited to small to midsized infill developments of detached and attached residential dwellings along with the potential redevelopment of some existing non-residential land uses. Exhibit 6: "Zone 6: General Plan Land Use Map," on Page 19 denotes General Plan Land Use designations for Zone 6. The accompanying Zoning is shown on Exhibit 7: "Zone 6: Zoning Map", on page 20. Exhibit 8: "Zone 6 General Plan Land Use Acreage Summary" on Page 21 lists the acres for each land use allocated by the General Plan. Acreage is also identified by quadrant. The General Plan Land Use designations for Zone 6 are also broken down into sub-areas. These "Zone 6 General Plan Land Use Sub-Areas" allow easier indication of public facilities demand and supply. These sub-areas are used consistently throughout this plan. 18 ... • I ··-·-·-I I RLM -_J, ~ I .. I .. • RLM ZONE 19 HSIDINTIAL Ill WWDENSITY(0·l.5) llLM WW-MEDIUM DENSITY (0-4) RM-MEDIUM DENSITY(4-8) ltMH MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY (8· IS' RH HIGH DENSITY (15·23) COMMIRCIAL RRI INTENSIVE REGIONAL llETAIL RR£ EXTENSIVE REGIONAL llETAIL RS REGIONAL SERVICE C COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL N NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TS TIIAVEL SERVICES COMMERCIAL 0 PIIOFESSIONAL REIATED CBD CENlltAL Bl'SIN~ DISTIUCT Pl PLANNED INDUSTIUAL G GOVERNMENT fACIUTIES U PUBLIC UTIUTIES RC RECREATION COMMERCIAL SCHOOLS E ELEMENTARY J JUNIOR HIGH H HIGH S<.:HCX>l P PRIVATE OS OPEN SPA(:E NU NON RESIDENTIAL RESERVE ~ # I , ..... a.I ZONE 6 \ ,-•-·- -JRMH I I -I ·-·-· RM C ZONE 10 RLM . .. OS I RLM -I I -I I I ,.. , ... --·-·-· --•-' f .. . .... ~« . ·-·' ZONE "12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN .. ·-·-·-· ·-·-·-· RM RLM I -·-·-·-·,f GENERAL PLAN· ZONE 11 EXHIBIT 8 CHy olC_,_ Growlh Manaoemenr Program JANUARY 1887 I I L-C -.. I .. I ~---, .,, %' I ~ I J;, I I I " R-1 ·~ , ZONE 19 I I II,) 0 1 P-C R-A R·E R-1 R-2 R-3 R-3L RD·M IID-H llMHP R·P l(f RW 0 C-1 C-2 C-T C·M M P-M Batlqulloa IESIDENTIAL PUNNED COMMUNITY ZONE R£SIDEN11AI. AGRICULRJIW. ZONE · RURAL IIESIDEN11AI. ESTATE ZONE ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE T'X'O-FAMfLY RESIDENTIAL ZONE Ml!ll'IPLE FAMlll' RE..lilDEN'TIAL ZUNI! Laaao UMll"ED MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAi. ZONE RESIDENTIAi. DENSITY-MULTIPLE ZONE RESIDENTI<l. DENSITY-HIGH ZONE IESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME PAK ZONE RESIDENTIAL PROF"ESSIONAl ZONE llESIOENTIAL TotJRIST ZONE IIESlDENTIAL WATEll\l'AY ZONE COMMIRCIAL OFFICE ZONE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAl ZONE GENEIW. COMMERCIAL ZONE COMMERCIAl·TOURJST ZONE HEAVY COMMERCIAl·IJMIIlD INDtJ5TRW, ZONE INDUS11UAL ZONE PLANNED INDUS11UAL ZONE OTHla F-P ROODPLAIN OVERLAY ZONE L-C LIMITED CONTIIOL 05 OPl!N SPACE P•U PUBLIC lffiUTY ZONE Q QUAIJFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE ZONE 6 I PC ZONE 1(! ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 11 .ZONING EXHIBIT 7 CUy of C■1l1bad Growlh Mana~m•n1 Prow~m JANUARY 1987 EXHIBIT 8 ZONE 6: GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ACREAGE SUMMARY As of 1-1-87 Gross Acres Southwest Southeast Quadrant Quadrant Zone 6 Acreage 207.4 2466.7 Residential: Rl 216.7 RLM 118. 5 884.95 RM 63.5 348.3 RMH 419.65 RH 67.6 Combination: RH/0 2.3 Commercial: C 13.8 N 40.67 RC 73.8 Utility: u 4.8 School: E 23.8 Open Space: OS 11. 6 384.2 21 Total Zone 6 2674.1 216.7 1003.45 411.8 419.65 67.6 2.3 13.8 40.6 73.8 4.8 23.8 395.8 22 BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS III. BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS To properly assess and plan for public facilities and services in Zone 6, it is necessary to project the type and level of land use that can be anticipated at the zone's ultimate buildout. Buildout projections are used to define existing land uses and to assess the ultimate land use potential that may be reached at the time Zone 6 is built out according to the General Plan as adopted on 5/1/87. The ultimate buildout of Zone 6 has been determined by exami~ing: 1. The type and amount of land use planned for according to the General Plan 2. The type and amount of existing land use, 3. The type and amount of developing land uses, and 4. The type and amount of vacant or possibly underdeveloped land which has the potential for developing. This is defined as potential land use. The methodology used to compile the buildout projections is consistent with that used in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (City Council Resolution 8797}. The methodology is described below: 1. General Plan 2. 3. Land uses planned for by the General Plan were plotted on a 1" = 200' base map. The type and acreage of planned land use was itemized from this map. Existing Land Use Surveys, field checks and subsequent research ascertained how existing developed parcels were utilized. The intensity of residential development as well as the square footage of existing non- residential structures were identified. Developing Land Use Developing land use defines the status or stage in the development process a land development proposal or project ls in. The development process begins when a development application is submitted to the City. The process continues through to tentative approval or disapproval, final technical approval, the issuance of grading and/or building permits, and then final certification of occupancy. At the 23 time of final certification of occupancy the development process ends and the development is identified as an existing land use. Land use in the developing process was identified by a review of City of Carlsbad Community Development files and records. The data was organized by General Plan Land Use designation. By identifying developing land uses immediate impact to public facilities can be anticipated and planned for in accordance with the adopted Performance Standards. 4. Potential land Use Potential land use estimates the type and amount of land use that can be expected on both vacant undeveloped land and on land that may be potentially underdeveloped. The General Plan as of 5/1/87 was used to establish the ultimate potential land use on these lands. Development potential was organized by General Plan Land Use designation. Where information was available and accurate, areas of environmental constraints were subtracted from the land's development potential consistent with the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CC Reso. 8797). The development potential for residential land use designations was muliplied by the approved Growth Management Control point as shown below: General Plan land Use Designation RL RLM RM RMH RH Growth Management Control Point* (21.90 C.M.C.) DU/AC 1.0 3.2 6.0 11.5 19.0 *Dwelling unit per acre of nonconstrained land C.M.C. = Carlsbad Municipal Code For non-residential land use designations it was projected that non-constrained acreage would yield 30% building square footage. This yield is based upon researching the files of recently approved non-residential developments. The yield also takes into account height limits, setback requirements, and other regulations as of 5/1/87 which affect overall site useage. The yield also considers that existing underdeveloped non-residential land use in Zone 6 may not meet all current development standards. 24 Since most of Zone 6 has been urbanized, vacant land consist of either graded finished lots or smaller isolated infill areas. Most of this vacant land has limited environmental constraints. The dominant constraints in these areas are typically man made. These constraints are primarily 1) compatibility with the positive aspects of the surrounding land uses, and 2) interfacing with existing infrastructure. These constraints can best be analyzed during the "developing land use" process discussed above. That process will in effect accurately identify the ultimate potential land use. However, until that time potential land use estimates are used to project maximum possible land uses. The summary of existing, developing and potential land use and the ultimate buildout of Zone 6 as of 1/1/87 is shown on a table and map as Exhibit 9: "Zone 6 Ultimate Buildout: Summary of Existing, Developing and Potential Land Use Under the General Plan As of 1/1/87", on Page 27. The detailed breakdown of developing land uses is shown on Exhibit 10, "Zone 6: Developing Land Uses as of 1/1/87", on Page 32. Exhibits 9 and 10 were also broken down according to Zone 6 General Plan Land Use sub-areas. These breakdowns are itemized in Appendix 10 and 11. Appendix 12 lists by parcel land in the developing process. Appendix 13 lists the number of lots and potential dwelling units on vacant land. Estimated Ultimate Buildout Projection Conformance with Proposition E As shown on Exhibit 9 on Page 27 as of 1-1-87, there were 6,426 existing dwelling units within Zone 6. Of the 6,426 dwelling units, 407 were in the southw~st quadrant and 6,019 were in the southeast quadrant. There are approximately 1,499 dwelling units in the developing process of which 161 are in the southwest quadrant and 1,338 are in the southeast quadrant. There exists an undeveloped potential for an additional 1,223 dwelling units in Zone 6, 31 in the southwest quadrant and 1,192 in the southeast quadrant. In all, Zone 6 has an estimated ultimate dwelling unit buildout potential of 9,148 dwelling units, of which 599 are in the southwest quadrant and 8,549 in the southest quadrant. 25 When applying the growth control yield densities to the residentially designated land within Zone 6, this results in a theoretical yield of 12,053 dwelling units within Zone 6 at ultimate buildout. This is shown in Appendix 14. This theoretical yield does not exclude areas of environmental constraints. Environmental constraints were not used in this analysis since Zone 6 is almost fully developed and recreating past environmental constraints, on developed land would be inappropriate in this particular case. Thus at buildout Zone 6 is projected to be below the growth control point by an estimamted 2,905 dwelling units. Therefore, growth in the southwest and southeast quadrants is projected to be consistent with the Carlsbad Municipal Code as amended pursuant to the approval of Proposition Eon November 4, 1986, and is projected to be in conformance with the quadrant residential dwelling unit caps. 26 N ...., EXHIBIT 9, Page 1 of S ZONE 6 ESTIMATED ULTIMATE BUILDOUT: SUMMARY OF EXISTING, DEVELOPING AND POTENTIAL LAND USE UNDER THE GENERAL PLAN As of 3anuary 1, 1987 lore 6 Gross t-cres lore 6 2£,74.1 SouttMest Q.Jadralt 'lfJ7.4 Southeast Q.Jadralt 24&i.7 General Plan Lard ExlstirYJ ~elopi~ Udeveloped Fbt.ential Ult.lnete Use Desig-iation 00/N:. 00/N:. Fbt.ential 00/N:. fui.l<b.Jt 00 Residential .... 216.7 101/149.9') 0/0 87/71.71 188 SW S£ 216.7 101 /144. 9'J 0/0 67/71.71 188 llLM 1003.45 2489/895.8 139/55.19 130/52.46 2758 SW 118.5 'l!J6/73 101/45.5 0/0 m SE BE¢1..95 2193/822.8 38/9.96 130/52.46 2361 AM 411.8 1002/228.55 671/167.06 ~/16.19 1847 SW 63.5 111/42.78 60/14.8 31/5.9'l 2(2 SE 348.3 971/185.77 611/152.26 63/10.27 1645 N CIQ Rt-H !:NI SE !Mellirg l.hits Carrrercial Sq. Ft. RH SW SE Carbination RH/0 SW SE Total Residential SW SE lore 6 Gross /vxes 419.85 419.85 410.35 9.3 67.6 67.6 2.3 2.3 2121.5 182 1939.5 Existirg Cevelopirg rJJ/f,C_ [lJ/K, 1S01rJJ/268 621/85.99 55,81~/9.3 /277.76 /85.~ 1S01/268 621/85.~ 55,816.'f"/9.3 0/0 853/':A.38 17/.52 853/54.38 17/.52 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 6426/1592.18 1499/300.71 407/115.78 161/00.3 6019/1476.4 1338/248.41 EXHIBIT 9 9 Page Z of 5 Potential lhdeveloped Potmtial 00/K 621/59.44 /59.44 621/59.44 0/0 230/12.7 230/12.7 30,056.'f"/2.3 or 61 llJ 30,056.'f" or 6100/2.3 1223/214.8 31/5.92 1192/200.8 lll.timate fi.tilchrt: [l.J 3, 1~ 00 & 55,816 sq. ft. 3,1~ 55,816 sq. ft. 1,100 1,100 30,056 sq. ft. or 61 llJ 30,056 s=-or or 61 llJ 9,148 599 8,549 EXHIBIT 9, Page 3 of 5 Potential General Plan Lard lfxe 6 Existirg ~elopirg Lhdeveloped Ultinate Use Desig.ation Gross '4cres Sq. ft./N:, Sq. Ft./N:'. ~tential Sq. ft/N:. EW.loout Sq. Ft. Non-Residential Camercial C 13.8 0/0 100, <XX)/ 13, 8 0/0 100, 00) (Approx. ) (Approx.) SW 13.8 0/0 100, <XX)/ 13. 8 0/0 100,00) (Approx.) (Approx.) SE N 40.6 . 223,380/40.6 0/0 ~7, 180/40.6 5~,5(i() SW 4,ax:> dlt.rdl ""' SE 40.6 /40.6 0/0 ~7, 180/40.6 5~,56) c.o RC 73.8 558,238/73.8 0/0 406, 100/73.8 964,418 SW SE 73.8 558,238/73.8 0/0 406, 100/73.8 964,418 Utility u 4.8 4,00)/4.8 0/0 58,726/4.8 62,726 SW SE 4.8 4,0:X)/4.8 0/0 58,726/4.8 62,726 EXHIBIT 9 9 Page• of 5 Potential General Plan Lard mre6 Exist~ D:!velopiIYJ Udevelqioo lAt.imate Use Desiglatioo Q-ossfttes Sq. ft./N:. Sq. ft//N:, f\>tential Sq. ft/N:. fuilcbJt Sq. Ft. Total tbl4"lesiCEntial A. Cesignated Camercial * 128.2 781,618/114.4 100, 00)/13. 8 713360/114.4 1,5!:Jl.,978 SW 13.8 0/0 100, 00)/13.8 0/0 100,00) SE 114.4 781,618/114.4 0/0 713360/114.4 1,4!:JI., 978 B. ~signated Coonercial & Coot>inationff lX>.5 781,618/114.4 100, 00>/13. 8 743,416/116.7 1,625,034 SW 13.8 0/0 100,00)/13.8 0/0 100,00) SE 116.7 781,618/114.4 0/0 743,416/116.7 1,525,034 w 0 c. Camercial*H 139.8 837,434/123. 7 100,(XX)/13.8 743,416/116.7 1,600,850 SW 13.8 0/0 100,00)/13.8 0/0 100,00) SE 126 837,434/123.7 0/0 743, 416/116. 7 1,500,850 D. t-bn-residential -IHHHI-144.6 fll.1,434/126.5 100,00)/13.8 002, 142/121.5 1,743,576 SW 13.8 0/0 100, 00)/13. 8 0/0 100,00) SE 130.8 841,434/128.5 0/0 002, 142/121.5 1,643,576 * This is a theoretical IJBX.inun ~termined by JDJltiplyi~ tro ~oss ~reage by .3. ~t .sq..iare footage aoo t)pe of rnl-residentlal lard use, is ~tenni.noo by Plamirg cral)-sis an ~al. ff Incll.Xles oalrulations for RH/0 desig,ated Area. -!Hf* Area Jncll.Xles oalrulations for RH/0 am lffi lesiglated Camercial -1H-1Ht Inell.lies calculations for 1¼1/0, Mi ~ignated Coomercial, an U ~ignatm Areas w .... General Plan Lam Use Oesig\cltion E SW SE Open~ OS SW SE lnre 6 Existirg Cross /v::xes WIN:. 23.8 15.0 8.8 395.2 11.6 384.2 lx!velopirYJ DJ/N.:. EXHIBIT 9 9 Page 5 of 5 Potential lWeveloped ill tinate Potential 00/PC lliiloo.rt: ru General Plan Land Use Desi~tion QJad RESIIINTIAL: IU-1 LDw~ (0-4) SE SW RM t-'Wiun (4-8) SE w N SE SE SE SE SW SE EXHIBIT 10 9 1 of 4 ZONE 6: DEVELOPING LAND USES As of January 1 9 1987 IBB..CPil'C STAR6 NOO\ffi Wor Application Tentative Final kres File It>. Sq. ft. Slbmittal* Awroval Approval 9.69 CT 81-29 38 40.0 CT 85-34 101 101 49.69 2 139 101 2.9 CT 85-16 14 14 28.0 CT 85-19 112 112 41.0 CT 84-23 220 86 12.0 CT 85-8 70 70 01-.0 CT 84-41 229 229 7.26 CT 82-23 €l) 4.36 SlP &i--8(A) 100 100 (a lot in CT 84-23) 159.52 7 005 14 411 186 Gra:lirg/ Exlstirg Euildirg as of Permit 1/1/87** 38 38 134 134 EXHIBIT 10, Page 2 of - OC\.fL<POC STAn.6 NffiCMD Gra:Urg/ ExistiIYJ General Plan [ii or t;lpliration Tentative Final f\Jildirg as of Land Use Desiglation Q.iad Acres File !lb. Sq. ft. &bnittal* Awroval AJ"l)roval Pennit 1/1/87** RH--l t-hi-Hi (8-15) SE 2.27 CT-85-28 34 34 SE 10.0 CT 85-7 136 136 SE 1.1 CT 79-12 18 18 SE 1.5 CT 85-1 22 SE:. 1.48 CT 84-43 24 24 w SE 1.22 CT 81-24 10 8 2 w SE 5.2 CT 84-10 00 00 SE 7.8 CT 83-1 120 120 SE 5.26 CT 82-26 70 (i6 4 SE 40.42 <J>-36(A) 336 81 83 172 76.25 10 850 22 212 281 157 178 RH Hig1(15-23) SE .52 CT 79-26 17 17 ~ 1 77 77 EXHIBIT 10 9 Page 3 of 4 [£\fl_(PJl'-G STAll6 fiiffio\fD Gra:lirg/ Existirg General Plan llJ or Application Tentative Final fi.Jildirg as of Land Use Desig1ation QJad /v::res File tb. Sq. ft. Stbnittal* Approval Approval Pernrl.t 1/1/87* COOINt\ TIOl: RH/0 Residential: High (15-23) Camercial: Prof. & felated w OMiOCIAL: .,= C Ccmn .. nity 9N 18.28 SP 86-11 100,00) 100,(XX) (J\wrox.) (Approx.) N lt!igtborrood RC Recreation EXHIBIT 10 9 Page -of - lBfl..<Plt-C STARS ,4fffO\£I) Grcliirg/ Existirg General Plan ll.lor Application Tentative Final B.Jildirg as of Land Use Desiglation Q.Jad faes file t--b. Sq. ft. Slbnittal* Approval Approval Permit 1/1/87** Ollffi: E Elementary 5n>ol u F\.blic ll.ilities OS (pen Space w TOTAL f£.5Il£NTIAL 285.98 20 1811 llJ 137 llJ 623 llJ 484 llJ 255 llJ 312 u, SW 161 101 0 0 00 0 SE 1650 36 623 484 195 312 --- TOTAL ClJ,t,OCJAL 18.28 1 100,(XX) 100,(XX) 0 0 0 0 (Approx.) (Approx.) (Approx.) SW 18.28 1 100,CXX) 100,(XX) 0 0 0 0 (Approx.) (Approx.) (Approx.) SE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * Calculations uider ,wlication s.tmittal are swject to d'lange based 01 Plannirg alalysis cn:J discretionary ,wroval. ** Calculations identified in this oolum have been cCXXJLntoo for as existU11 land use in Exhibit 9, on Pages 27-31. BUILDOUT RESIDENTIAL P~PULATION AND NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE PROJECTIONS Residential Population The residential buildout population projection for Zone 6 was determined by applying a population generation rate of 2.471 persons per dwelling unit to the existing, developing and potential dwelling units. The population projections for Zone 6 as of 1/1/87 are as follows: Population Buildout Dwelling Units per Dwelling ·population Existing Developin2 Potential Buildout Unit Rate Projection SW Quad 407 + 161 + 31 = 599 X 2.471 = 1,480 people SE Quad 6019 + 1338 + 1192 = 8549 X 2.471 = 21,124 people Zone 6 6426 + 1499 + 1223 = 9148 X 2.471 = 22,604 people These buildout population projections are used consistently throughout this plan for the purpose of predicting demand for public facilities and improvements. Non-Residential Building Square Foota2e The non-residential square footage buildout projection for Management Zone 6 was determined by totaling the existing, developing and potential square footage of non-residential buildings. This data was organized by non-residential General Plan land use category. Carlsbad Community Development files were researched to determine existing and and developing square footages. A detailed listing of existing non-residential building square footage is found in Appendix 15. The building square footage for vacant and potentially underdevelQped non- residential land use was also calculated. That calculation projects that the building square footage could reach a maximum of 30% of the total land area of a non-residential site. This calculation was refined where more detailed and accurate information was available. The non-residential building square footage buildout projections are as follows: Existing Developing Potential Buildout sq.ft/AC sq.ft/AC sq.ft/AC sq.ft/AC SW Quad 0/0 100,000/13.8 0/0 100,000/13.8 SE Quad 841,434/128.5 0/0 802,142/121.5 1,643,576/130.8 Zone 6 841,434/128.5 100, 000/13._8 802, 142/121.5 1,743,576/144.6 36 The following identifies the refinements to the basic non- residential square footage calculation listed in Zone 6: 1. Include calculations for non-residential land use in RH/0, RMH, and U General Plan land use designations. 2. Include the most acreage projections southwest quadrant. development process. recent building square footage and for developing land use in the The projections may change during the 3. Include estimates for the redevelopment of potentially underdeveloped sites. This estimate of redevelopment potential does not include the following: 1. The developing land use SOP 86-11 on "C", Commercial, designated land in the southwest quadrant because this project will most likely be approved under this Local Facilities Management Plan and therefore should accurately reflect facility demands to buildout 2. The Westbluff Plaza commercial complex (CT 77-8 and SDP-77-1): because of the sites less efficient· shape and potential parking issues it was assumed this site ls presently at a projected maximum buildout condition. 37 PHASING 38 IV. PHASING AN OVERVIEW It is necessary to provide a phasing schedule of development for the entire City, each quadrant, and each of the 25 Local Facilities Management Zones for the purpose of: 1. Projecting future yearly basis; and demands for public facilities on a 2. Establishing the thresholds which identify when a public facility is needed; and 3. Assisting with the development of the City's Capital Improvement Program budget. In the Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan, phasing of residential development was projected to be 1,250 dwelling units per year. These projections were based on a review of the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projections along with those utilized in the City's Capital Improvement Program and the Public Facilities Management Systems, Monitoring Report of April, 1986. In each Local Plan a key element will be the projected phasing schedule of development within that specific zone. These schedules are presented for the purpose of establishing thresholds for demand and future demands for public facilities. By projecting these future public facility demands the appropriate funds may be allocated into the Capital Improvement Budget to assure they are in place as development occurs. The phasing schedule is not presented to establish a rate of growth within the City. It will be used to assure that growth occurs only as public facilities are available to ensure compliance with the adopted performance standards. The specific phasing schedule presented in this plan is provided to accomplish the three purposes of phasing which were discussed above. These projections have been established by reviewing development in the developing process which have tentative and final approval as well as submitted applications. The same type of phasing has been prepared for SANDAG's Series VII for the entire City and will be utilized to review phasing projections presented in this and other local plans to determine the overall impact on public facilities and services. Zone 6 -Phasing Schedules Phasing for Zone 6 incorporates the Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan (CC Reso 8798) projections as well as localized factors unique to the Zone. 39 These localized circumstances include: 1. The amount and type of developing land uses: -Building/grading permits issued -Final approvals -Tentative approvals -Submitted applications 2. The ultimate type and amount of potential land use. 3. The type and amount of development that can be reasonably absorbed into the market. LAND USE PHASING Residential The specific residential phasing schedule for Zone 6 is shown by Exhibit 11, "Zone 6 Residential Phasing Schedule", on Page 42. The schedule assumes the zone will be completely built out by the end of 2013. The phasing schedule assumes those land uses identified in the developing process will develop beginning in 1987 through 1997. The phasing schedule then assumes the zone's vacant or underdeveloped land (with no submitted applications) will be developed beginning in 1998 and phased through the buildout of the zone. It is recognized that for a variety of potential reasons some land uses with City approvals may never be developed and that some vacant land with no submitted applications may develop immediately. As stated earlier, the phasing projections are best guesses as to future development activity in Zone 6. Exhibit 10, "Undeveloped Potential Residential land Use", itemizes the source of undeveloped potential dwelling units in the phasing schedule. In all, it is projected that a total of 9,148 residential dwelling units will exist at the buildout of Zone 6. This dwelling unit total, is in compliance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code as modified by the passage of Proposition Eon November, 4, 1986 and incorporated into the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Non-Residential Non-residential land uses in Zone 6 are phased based upon previous growth trends, location and function of land uses, along with submitted applications being considered by the Planning Department. This projected phasing is shown on Exhibit 13, "Zone 6 Non-Residential Phasing Schedule", on Page 44. It is projected that non-residential land uses will be completely built out by the year 2013. This assumes a phasing schedule which begins as of 1/1/88 with land use in the developing process. At this time there is a single submitted application for non-residential land use. Undeveloped potential non-residential development in Zone 6 entails the redevelopment of existing non-residential land 40 uses. This existing stock of non-residential land use appears balanced with the present amount of residential land use. Further, no significant obsolesence is indicated in the non- residential development. Therefore it is projected that potential non-residential development will begin phasing in 1991 in increments of 34,875 square feet and continue until buildout in 2013. The yearly increments reflect assumed minor redevelopments and remodels of existing non-residential development, along with the cumulative potential for a major redevelopment by buildout in the year 2013. Phasing Summary It is estimated that all the possible residential dwelling units in Zone 6 will build out by 2013. Yearly residential growth ls expected to range from a high of 246 dwelling units in 1993 and 1994 to a low of O dwellings in 1989 and 1990. Non- residential development of Zone 6 was estimated to buildout by 2013. The phasing schedules make several assumptions. First is that land uses in the developing process (Exhibit 11 on Page 42) will phase first. The assumption is that these developing land uses will phase according to their development status. That is land uses with valid building permits will develop first followed by land uses with final approvals, then tentative approvals and lastly land uses with submitted applications. Second is that undeveloped land use potential will phase after land use in the development process, and that this will occur in even increments until buildout in the year 2013. Third, is that for a two year period 1989-90 no development will phase. This third assumption is based on facility shortages identified and explained in detail in this plan. This phasing assumption reflects the time necessary to correct those inadequacies. The residential phasing schedules of both the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CC Reso 8797) and this Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6 are compared on Exhibit 14, "Citywide and Zone 6 Residential Phasing Schedules" on Page 45. Specific phasing of Zone 6, is presented for the purpose of determining future annual demand and thresholds for public facilities. It ls nearly impossible to predict the exact way development will occur in this zone of the City. However, through these phasing projections the City will be able to establish a direct link between development and the need for public facilities. This link will allow the City to ensure compliance with the adopted public facilities performance standards at all times as growth occurs. If compliance is not maintained, development will be stopped until the adopted performance standards are complied with. 41 .i:: N EXHIBIT 11 -ZONE 6: RESIDENTIAL PHASING SCHEDULE DWELLING UNITS SE QUADRANT SW QUADRANT ZONE 6 AS OF APPROX. APPROX. APPROX. · GROSS GROSS GROSS I STATUS 1/1/ RL RLM RM RMH RH RH/0 TOTAL ACRES RLM RM RMH TOTAL ACRES TOTAL ACRES Existing 1987 6019 1476 407 115 6426 1592 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Developing 1987 38 157 195 * 0 * 1988 0 60 60 1989 0 0 1990 0 0 1991 86 81 17 184 51 51 1992 100 80 180 50 50 1993 175 71 246 0 1994 176 70 246 31** 1995 60 71 131 0 1996 120 120 0 1997 14 22 36 0 Undeveloped Potential 1998 15 1999 15 2000 75 2001 15 2002 75 2003 75 2004 75 2005 75 2006 74 2007 74 2008 74 2009 74 2010 74 2011 74 2012 74 Buildout 2013 74 Developing & Undeveloped Potential Total 2530 192 Total Buildout 8549 2467 599 207 * Will be updated annually as part of the Zone 6 Growth Management Monitoring Program ** Includes 31 dwelling units of undeveloped potential 195 60 0 0 235 230 246 277 131 120 36* 15 15 75 15 15 15 75 15 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 2722 9148 2112 EXHIBIT 12 ZONE 6: UNDEVELOPED POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL LAND USE General Plan Zone 6 General Sub Area Zone 6 Quadrant Designation Plan Sub Area Dwelling Units Total Dwelling Units SE RL N-RL-1 82 87 S-RL-1 5 RLM N-RLM-4 8 130 N-RLM-5 4 N-RLM-.6 35 N-RLM-7 9 S-RLM-1 35 S-RLM-2 16 S-RLM-3 21 S-RLM-5 2 .,:: RM N-RM-5 28 63 w S-RM-2 9 S-RM-3 26 RMH N-RMH-4 73 621 N-RMH-5 28 S-RMH-1 51 S-RMH-2 46 S-RMH-4 320 S-HMH-6 103 Hli S-RH-2 64 230 S-RH-3 123 S-RH-4 43 RH/0 S-RH/0-1 61 61 TOTAL 1192 SW RM N-RM-7 31 31 TOTAL 31 TOTAL ZONE 6 1223 EXHIBIT 13 -ZONE 6: NON-RESIDENTIAL PHASING SCHEDULE llJIU)ll'C ~ FOOTN:E g:: QJfflANT . SW~ ZOE 6 As of ftwrox ~ox ,¾ii-ox Status 1/1 Comrercial Utility Carbination Residential Total }a-es Canrercial /Jcres Total Acres Neiqtlorhood Rec u Ff1/0 R'fl -Cann.nity ExistirYJ 1987 223,38()!1-558,238 4,(XX) 0 55,816 841,4.34 114 0 0 841,4.34 114 Develop- irq 1987 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 100,CXX)H 13.8 100,00)H 13.8 1989 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19'.X> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 lhJevel-1991 13,355 17,660 2,553 1,307 0 .34,875 0 .34,875 oped 1992 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 Potential 1993 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 .34,875 19'A 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 1995 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 1996 , 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 1997 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 1998 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 .34,875 0 34,875 .i:: 1999 13,35.5 17,6€£1 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 .i:: 2cm 13,355 17,660 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 2001 13,355 17,6([) 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 2002 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 2003 13,355 17,6BJ 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 200+ 13,355 17,6([) 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 2005 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 2(,()6 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 2007 13,355 17,«JJ 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 .34,875 200, 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 2009 13,355 17,6([) 2,553 1,307 0 34.875 0 34,875 2010 13,355 17,6([) 2,553 1,'307 0 34,875 0 34,875 2011 13,355 17,660 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 2012 13,355 17,«JJ 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 2013 13,355 17,6€0 2,553 1,307 0 34,875 0 34,875 DevelopirYJ & Lh1eveloped F\>tential Total 307,180 405,180 58,726 '30,056 0 002, 142 100,CXX)H ffi2, 142 Total l:i!iloout 530,58) %4,418 62,726 30,056 55,816 1,643,576 100,CXX)IHI-1,743,576 ----------------------------itfllus a 4,800 sq. ft. churdl **,4wroximate figure *-11-lf.ue to l'OllldirYJ off of the calculations the s.m total of the yearly i:rojections will be slightly different fran the t.otal i:rojections EXHIBIT 14 CITYWIDE AND ZONE 6 RESIDENTIAL PHASING SCHEDULES CITYWIDE ZONE 6 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I I SE QUAD SW QUAD TOTAL I STATUS I AS OF D.U. 'S POP. I D.U. 'S POP. D.U. •s POP. D.U.'S POP. I JAN 1 (2.471/DU) I (2.471/DU) (2.471/DU) (2.471/DU) I ---------,-----------------------------1-----------------------------------------------------------1 EXISTING I 1987 23,348 57,693 I 6,019 14,873 407 1,006 6,426 15,879 I ---------,----·······----------------------------------------------···········--------------------1 PROJECTED 1987 23,348 57,693 195 482 0 0 195 482 I 1988 24,598 60,782 0 0 60 148 60 148 I 1989 25,848 63,870 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990 27,098 66,959 0 0 0 0 0 0 1991 28,348 70,048 184 455 51 126 235 581 1992 29,598 73,137 180 445 50 124 230 568 1993 30,848 76,225 246 608 0 0 246 608 1994 32,098 79,314 246 608 31 77 277 684 1995 33,348 82,403 131 324 0 0 131 324 1996 34,598 85,492 120 297 0 0 120 297 1997 35,848 88,580 36 89 0 0 36 89 1998 37,098 91,669 75 185 0 0 75 185 1999 38,348 94,758 75 185 0 0 75 185 2000 39,598 97,847 75 185 0 0 75 185 2001 40,848 100,935 75 185 0 0 75 185 2002 42,098 104,024 75 185 0 0 75 185 2003 43,348 107,113 75 185 0 0 75 185 2004 44,598 110,202 75 185 0 0 75 185 2005 45,848 113,290 75 185 0 0 75 185 2006 47,098 116,379 74 183 0 0 74 183 2007 48,348 119,468 74 183 0 0 74 183 2008 49,598 122,557 74 183 0 0 74 183 2009 50,848 125,645 74 183 0 0 74 183 2010 52,098 128,734 74 183 0 0 74 183 2011 53,348 131,823 74 183 0 0 74 183 2012 54,598 134,912 74 183 0 0 74 183 BUILDOUT 2013 54,599 134,914 74 183 0 0 74 183 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTALS I 8,549 21,125 599 1,480 9,148 22,604 ------==--••···••=-===--------··•-•=--=-•=••---------------•==•=------==---------------······· q5 46 ZONE REQUIREMENTS V. ZONE 6 REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6 addresses eleven separate facilities: A. Citywide Facilities: 1. City Administrative Facilities 2. Library 3. Wastewater Treatment Capacity B. Quadrant Facility: 4. Parks C. Local Facilities: 5. Drainage 6. Circulation 7. Fire 8. Open Space 9. Schools 10. Sewer Collection System 11. Water Distribution System Each of these facilities is evaluated to determine conformance with the adopted performance standard (City Council Resolution #8796) The evaluation is made in three stages based on existing facility demand, existing and approved facility demand, and future (i.e. ultimate potential) facility demand at buildout. For each facility the following ls provided: 1. An illustrative map showing what facilities are existing and what will be needed as Zone 6 develops to its ultimate buildout; 2. District boundary maps where facilities are provided by special districts (i.e., school, water, sewer); 3. Adopted service level performance standards (City Council Resolution 18796) which must be complied with at all times as development occurs; 4. A detailed facility adequacy and planning analysis; 5. A list of special conditions to ensure conformance with the adopted performance standard; and 6. A discussion of mitigation measures and financing mechanisms. 47 Citywide facilities, which include City Administrative Facilities, Library, and Wastewater Treatment, have been analyzed in the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CC Reso 8797). These facilities are also included in this Local Facilities Management Plan to show compliance or to suggest alternatives that assure conformance with the adopted performance standard. This plan will show how each adopted performance standard will be complied with as development occurs within the zone. As a part of this objective, this plan includes a proposed monitoring program as shown in Appendix 16. This plan includes financing of all public facilities and services where non- conformance with the performance standard requires mitigation. The plan also includes a complete facility phasing schedule which is linked to development demands within the zone. 49 CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES CITY HALL ZONE 6 CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES _!!9."'--' ... __ ,,,,,. t • CITY ADMNHIIATION-U-~ Q QTY ACMIN18TIIATION•flL-ID I I I I , ,~~- EXHIBIT 15 SAFETY CENTER ----r------.... , ' ' I , I •0 \ 'J. ' \.-. ', ,o .... ~ '-.. I LAS PAtl.tAS ,,,, \ \~ I I I I JANUARY 1887 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN so EXHIBIT 16 LOCAL . FA C I LIT IE S MA N·A GEM E N T PL A N -Zone e CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES SUMMARY SHEET BUILDOUT ADEQUACY PROJECTION (CGibiiWU MIT/GA TION w/8tw'ldard) EXISTING YES N/A EXISTING + APPROVED YES N/A ( 1) "' cC 202,371 :c Q. FUTU.RE NO ( 2) 33,906 Notes: (1) Based on 5 year phasing projections (i) By the year 2005 ~here could be a shortage of City Administrative Facilities 51 FUNDING N/A N/A CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD 1,500 square feet per 1,000 population must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS This standard is complies with Improvements Facilities. analysis determines whether or not the performance being met, and if the facility demand from Zone 6 the analysis of the adopted Citywide Facilities and Plan (CC Reso 8797) for City Administrative A. Inventory 1. Facility Demand Existing (Citywide/Zone 6) as of (1/87/1/87) Ultimate Buildout (Citywide/Zone 6) as of (2013/2013) Population Projections* 57,495/15,879 134,914/22,604 Required Square Footage 86,539/23,818 202,371/33,906 *(See phasing section; Exhibit 14 on Page 45 for Citywide and Zone 6 population projection breakdowns) 2. Existing City Administrative Facilities: City Hall Finance Dept. Modular Purchasing/Personnel Dept. Modular Satellite Offices Redevelopment 2965 Roosevelt· 52 Permanent Space 12,899 SQUARE FEET OF Temporary Leased Space Space 2,700 1,800 2,000** Total Space Community Development Dept. 2075 Las Palmas Drive*** Public Safety and Service Center 2560 Orion Way -Phase I Police and Fire Depts. Vehicle Maintennace Total Existing Facilities $ of Total 22,627 53,700 10,358 99,584 93.9$ 4,500 4.2$ 2,000 1.9$ 106,084 100$ ** The lease expired 3/3/83 but has been extended on a year to year option. *** On 6/23/87 the City Council authorized the City Manager to proceed with the purchase of the Community Development Department Building. As indicated on the preceeding table approximately 1.9$ of existing administrative facilities are leased and 4.2$ are temporary (portable modular units). If the space leases are terminated or the modulars are no longer used, the total existing square footage of City Administrative Facilities will be reduced. At that time, this Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6, as well as the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CC Reso 8797), will need to be amended to modify the phasing assumptions in order to plan for more City Administrative Facilities at an earlier time. Further City Administrative space ls dispersed throughout the City. This separation between various City functions may or may not promote operational inefficiencies, thus diminishing the quality of the space. 3. Phased City Administrative Facilities: The City's Five Year Capital Improvements Program Item a. Public Safety Center Phase II* Total Design Construction Sq Ft. Year Amount 86-87 $ 255,000 62,000 89-90 $3,455,000 62,000 Financing Source PFF** PFF/5/W** * Public Safety Center Phase II. Phase II icludes yard offices, maintenace shops, and purchasing warehouse for the use of Utility Maintenance, Parks and Recreation Maintenance, Street Maintenance and Purchasing facilities. The approximate size is 62,000 square feet. This includes a two-story yard office and purchasing warehouse with a 6,400 square foot mezzanine. ** PFF -Public Facilities Fee S -Sewer W -Water Enterprise -53- B. Phasing For the phasing of City Administrative Facilities, Zone 6 Citywide population projections are based on Exhibit 14 "Citywide and Zone 6 Residential Phasing Schedules" on Page 45. · From these population projections, demands for City Administrative Facilities has been assessed. As stated in Part IV "Phasing" of this Plan (Page 38), the exact phasing of dwelling units and subsequint population may vary. Consequenty public facility improvements would also vary to continually assure the adopted performance standard ls maintained. Exhibit 17: Citywide and Zone 6 Phasing of City Administrative Facilities on Page 55 projects the phased demand and supply of city administrative facilities consistent with the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CC Reso 8797). As shown on Exhibit 17 on Page 55, as of 1/1/87 Zone 6 generates 27% of the total Citywide demand for City Administrative Facilities. At the projected buildout of Zone 6, in 2013, the percent of demand for Zone 6 is expected to decrease to 16% of the total Citywide demand. B. Adequacy Findings Based upon the projected phasing of development within the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CC Reso 8797) and this Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6, City Administrative Facilities will conform with the adopted standard until the year 2005. Exhibit 18, Zone 6: "City Administrative Facilitie~", on Page 57 charts existing and committed City Administrative Facilities supply along with phased Citywide and Zone .6 City Administrative Facilities demand. As shown on this chart the amount of City Administrative Facilities ls adequate. City Ad~inlstrative Facilities currently conform to the adopted performance standard. Also the relativi quality of City Administrative Facilities has improved due to greater accessabllity created by more central locations. Zone 6's relative demand for City Administrative Facilities is projected to decrease as development occurs both Citywide and in Zone 6. Consequently most of Zone 6's demand for City Administrative Facilities has been generated by existing land use and has been provided for by revenues from Zone 6. Zone 6 has so far provided for its proportional share of City Administrative Facilities. III. A. MITIGATION Special Conditions for Zone 6 No special conditions are necessary at this time. 54 EXHIBIT 17 CITYWIDE AND ZONE 6 -PHASING OF CITY ADMINISTATIVE FACILITIES * PLANNING PROJECTIONS ONLY* -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------CITYWIDE ZONE 6 CITYWIDE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN (CC Reso.8797) PLAN -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------STATUS NOTES AS OF D.U.'S POP. SQ. FT. OF CONFORMANCE/ D.U.'S POP SQ. FT. ZONE 6'5 X JAN 1 (2.471/DU) DEMAND SUPPLY (NON-CONFORMANCE) (2.471/DU) OF DEMAND OF THE TOTAL CITYWIDE DEMAND --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXISTING 1987 23,348 57,693 86,539 106,084 19,545 6,426 15,879 23,818 27.52X ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROJECTED 1988 24,598 60,782 91,172 106,084 14,912 6,621 16,360 24,541 26.92X 1989 25,848 63,870 95,806 106,084 10,278 6,681 16,509 24,763 25.85X 1990 27,098 66,959 100,439 106,084 5,645 6,681 16,509 24,763 24.65X (1) 1991 28,348 70,048 105,072 168,084 63,012 6,681 16,509 24,763 23.57X 1992 29,598 73, 137 109,705 168,084 58,379 6,916 17,089 25,634 23.37X 1993 30,848 76,225 114,338 168,084 53,746 7, 146 17,658 26,487 23.17X 1994 32,098 79,314 118,971 168,084 49, 113 7,392 18,266 27,398 23.03X 1995 33,348 82,403 123,604 168,084 44,480 7,669 18,950 28,425 23.00X UI 1996 34,598 85,492 128,237 168,084 39,847 7,800 19,274 28,911 22.54X UI 1997 35,848 88,580 132,871 168,084 35,213 7,920 19,570 29,355 22.09X 1998 37,098 91,669 137,504 168,084 30,580 8,031 19,845 29,767 21.65X 1999 38,348 94,758 142,137 168,084 25,947 8,106 20,030 30,045 21.14X 2000 39,598 97,847 146,no 168,084 21,314 8,181 20,215 30,323 20.66X 2001 40,848 100,935 151,403 168,084 16,681 8,256 20,401 30,601 20.21X 2002 42,098 104,024 156,036 168,084 12,048 8,331 20,586 30,879 19.79X 2003 43,348 107,113 160,669 168,084 7,415 8,406 20, n1 31, 157 19.39X 2004 44,598 110,202 165,302 168,084 2,782 8,481 20,957 31,435 19.02X 2005 45,848 113,290 169,936 168,084 (1,852) 8,556 21, 142 31,713 18.66X 2006 47,098 116,379 174,569 168,084 (6,485) 8,630 21,325 31,987 18.32X 2007 48,348 119,468 179,202 168,084 (11,118) 8,704 21,508 32,261 18.00X 2008 49,598 122,557 183,835 168,084 (15,751) 8,778 21,690 32,536 17.70X 2009 50,848 125,645 188,468 168,084 (20,384) 8,852 21,873 32,810 17.41X 2010 52,098 128,734 193, 101 168,084 (25,017) 8,926 22,056 33,084 17 .13X 2011 53,348 131,823 197,734 168,084 (29,650) 9,000 22,239 33,359 16.87X 2012 54,598 134,912 202,367 168,084 (34,283) 9,074 22,422 33,633 16.62X BUILDOUT 2013 54,599 134,914 202,371 168,084 (34,287) 9, 148 22,604 33,906 16.75X ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTES: (1) PHASE II OF THE SAFETY CENTER (+APPROX. 62000 SQ. FT.) B. Financing Public Facilities fees are continuing to be collected both Citywide and in Zone 6. Future development in Zone 6 will be required to pay the public facilities fee to mitigate the incremental demand for City Administrative Facilities. This will assure that Zone 6 continues to provide for its proportional demand for City Administrative Facilities. 56 EXHIBIT 18 CITY ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES ZONE 6 210 200 190 (/) 180 w i= 170 168,084 168,084 168,084 :J 0 160 tI. w 150 > i= 140 <( ......... Cl:'. (/) 130 I-"'O (/) C 120 Z 0 -(/) U1 ~ :J 110 ..., oo <( £ I-100 I ...._,, . I-90 w 80 w u.. w 70 Cl:'. <( 60 ::) 0 50 (/) 40 31,713 33,906 30 20 1990 1995 2000 2005 2013 YEARS ZONE D D 0 0 0 8 DEMAND D SUPPLY CITYWIDE DEMAND y y. y.. 58 LIBRARY ZONE 6 LA COSTA BRANCH ._ISRARY ■ LIIIIAll■S-IXIITINCI Q UNA,-9-ft.ANNBI LIBRARY EXHIBIT 19 .. -r--------,.,~i I I I I I 10 I \ ' ', ......... ..... , ' \ I I c11,o1c:.r-o,o••n .......,.. ... PrOtJ.,.. & JANUARY 1987 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN 59 EXHIBIT 20 LOCAL. FACILITIES MAN·AGEMENT PLAN-Zone e BUILDOUT PROJECTION DEMAND EXISTING APPROVED ( 3) C, LIBRARY FACILITIES SUMMARY SHEET MIT/GA TION FUNDING YES (1) N/A YES 48,000 Z 25,634 ...... -----~-~----+-----+-------i---------'----..J "' <107,931 J: G. FUTURE N0(2) Notes: (1) Based upon action of the City Council on 7/7/87 to schedule and finance the construction of additional Library space, the adopted performance standard is being complied with. (2) By the year 2003, there could be a shortage of Library facilities. (3) For year 1992 -60 - LIBRARY I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD 800 square feet per 1,000 population of Library must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS This analysis determines whether or not the performance standard is being met and, if the facility demand from Zone 6 is consistent with the analysis of the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CC Reso 8797) for Library Facilities. A. Inventory 1. Facility Demand Population Projections* Required Square Footage Existing as of (Citywide/Zone 6) (1-87/1-87) 57,693/15,897 46,154/23,818 Ultimate Buildout (Citywide/Zone 6) 134,914/22,604 107,931/33,906 as of (2013/2013) *See Phasing section: Exhibit 14 on Page 45 for Citywide and Zone 6 population projection breakdowns. 2. Existing Library Facilities*: Owned Library Facilities (As of 1/1/87) Sq.Ft. Civic Center Library (1200 Elm Ave) 24,600 Adult Learning Center (1207 Elm Ave)· La Costa Area Library (7750 El Camino Real) Warehouse Total 24,600 (% of Space) (78%) Leased Sq. Ft. 400 4,500** 2,000 6,900 (22%) * Source -Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CC Reso 8797) . Total Sq. Ft. 31,500 (100%) ** The La Costa Area Library lease will terminate when the new South Carlsbad Library is constructed. 61 3. Phased Library Facilities: A) The City's Five Year Capital Improvement Program: The City's adopted Five Year C.I.P. for fiscal years 1986- 91 includes $650,000 for the design of a main South Carlsbad Library. B) Other information On July 7, 1987 the City Council took three actions to provide for the South Carlsbad Library. They were: 1. Approved the recommended South Carlsbad Library site within Zone 6 (portion of N-RM-1) and directed the City Manager to negotiate purchase agreement with the owner. 2. Directed the City Manager to include funds in the CIP for land acquisition and construction of the South Carlsbad Library. 3. Directed the City Manager methods of financing and Carlsbad Library. to evaluate alternative constructing the South These actions are incorporated into the 1987-92 CIP. Appendix 17 provides a copy of the draft Agenda Bill that went before the City Council. At this time the following time and cost schedules have been developed: Description Land Acquiiition Grading Design Construction CIP Fiscal Year 1988-89 1988-89 1988-89 89-90 to 90-91 Estimated Costs In 1987 Dollars $ 1.1 Mil .9 Mil .6 Mil 8.4 Mil $11.0 Mil The South Carlsbad Library will involve building a 5R,OOO square foot facility of which 48,000 square feet will be occupied for library use in 1991. The additional 10,000 square feet will be · leased out by the City until it is needed. Appendix 18 expands upon the proposed useage of the South Carlsbad Library. It is projected this additional 10,000 square feet of space would be needed in· 2002 based on the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plans phasing assumptions. The following summarizes existing and phased Library Facilities which serve to meet the performance standard for the years 1987- 2013. 62 Existing Library Facilities: Owned Leased Total Civic Center Library (1200 Elm Ave) Adult Learning Center (1207 Elm Ave) La Costa Area Library (7750 El Camino Warehouse Real) Sq. Ft. 24,600 Sq. Ft Sq. Ft. 400 4,500 2,000 Total 24,600 6,900 31,500 (% of Space) (78%) Approved Phased Library Facilities: 1987-92: Phase in -1992 South Carlsbad Library (Phase I) 48,000 Phase out -1992 Adult Learning Center (1207 Elm Avenue) La Costa Area library (7750 El Camino Rd) Warehouse Total Library space that meets Performance Standard for years 1987-1991 72,600 (% of Space) (100%) Phase-in -1999 to 2002 South Carlsbad Library (Phase II} 10,000 Total 82,600 {$ of Space) (100%) B. Phasing ( 22 % } 400 4,500 2,000 ·6, 900 ( 0%) 0 0 (0%) (100%) 72,600 (100$) 10,000 82,600 ( 100%) For the phasing of Library Facilities Zone 6 and Citywide population projections are based on Exhibit 14: "Citywide and Zone 6 Residential Phasing Schedules" on Page 45. From these population projections demands for Library facilities has been assessed. As stated in Part IV "Phasing" of this Plan (Pages 39 -45), the exact phasing of dwelling units and subsequent population may vary. Consequently public facility improvements would also vary to continually assure the adopted performance standard is maintained. Exhibit 21: "Citywide and Zone 6 Phasing of Library Facilities" on Page 64, projects the phased demand and supply of Library facilities consistent with the adopted Citywide facilities and Improvements Plan (CC Reso 8797} and recent City Council action. Exhibit 22, on Page 65acharts existing and committed Library Facilities supply along with phased Citywide and Zone 6 Library Facilities demand. 63 EXHIBIT 21 CITYWIDE AND ZONE 6 • PHASING OF LIBRARY FACILITIES • PLANNING PROJECTIONS ONLY* CITYWIDE (1) ZONE 6 (2) -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------STATUS NOTES AS OF D.u.•s POP. SQ. FT. OF CONFORMANCE/ D.U. 'S POP SQ. FT. OF ZONE 6'S I JAN 1 (2.471/DU) DEMAND SUPPLY (NON-CONFORMANCE) DEMAND OF THE TOTAL CITYWIDE DEMAND ---------............... -------------------------------········------------------------------------------------------------------------ EXISTING (3) 1987 23,348 57,693 46,154 31,500 SEE NOTE (3) 6,426 15,879 23,818 51.611 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROJECTED (3) 1988 24,598 60,782 48,625 31,500 SEE NOTE (3) 6,621 16,360 24,541 50.47" (3) 1989 25,848 63,870 51,096 31,500 SEE NOTE (3) 6,681 16,509 24,763 48.461 (3) 1990 27,098 66,959 53,567 31,500 SEE NOTE (3) 6,681 16,509 24,763 46.231 (4) 1991 28,348 70,048 56,038 31,500 SEE NOTE (3) 6,681 16,509 24,763 44.19" 1992 29,598 73,137 58,509 72,600 14,091 6,916 17,089 25,634 43.811 1993 30,848 76,225 60,980 72,600 11,620 7,146 17,658 26,487 43.431 1994 32,098 79,314 63,451 72,600 9,149 7,392 18,266 27,398 43.18" en 1995 33,348 82,403 65,922 72,600 6,678 7,669 18,950 28,425 43.12" ,I: 1996 34,598 85,492 68,393 72,600 4,207 7,800 19,274 28,911 42.27" (5) 1997 35,848 88,580 70,864 82,600 11,736 7,920 19,570 29,355 41.42X 1998 37,098 91,669 73,335 82,600 9,265 8,031 19,845 29,767 40.59" 1999 38,348 94,758 75,806 82,600 6,794 8,106 20,030 30,045 39.631 2000 39,598 97,847 78,277 82,600 4,323 8,181 20,215 30,323 38.741 2001 40,848 100,935 80,748 82,600 1,852 8,256 20,401 30,601 37.90X 2002 42,098 104,024 83,219 82,600 (619) 8,331 20,586 30,879 37.111 2003 43,348 107,113 85,690 82,600 (3,090) 8,406 20,771 31,157 36.361 2004 44,598 110,202 88,161 82,600 (5,561) 8,481 20,957 31,435 35.661 2005 45,848 113,290 90,632 82,600 (8,032) 8,556 21, 142 31,713 34.99X 2006 47,098 116,379 93,103 82,600 (10,503) 8,630 21,325 31,987 34.361 2007 48,348 119,468 95,574 82,600 (12,974) 8,704 21,508 32,261 33.761 2008 49,598 122,557 98,045 82,600 (15,445) 8,778 21,690 32,536 33.181 2009 50,848 125,645 100,516 82,600 (17,916) 8,852 21,873 32,810 32.641 2010 52,098 128,734 102,987 82,600 (20,387) 8,926 22,056 33,084 32.12X 2011 53,348 131,823 105,458 82,600 (22,858) 9,000 22,239 33,359 31.63X 2012 54,598 134,912 107,929 82,600 (25,329) 9,074 22,422 33,633 31.161 BUILDOOT 2013 54,599 134,914 107,931 82,600 (25,331) 9,148 22,604 33,906 31.411 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTES: (1) FROM CITYWIDE FACITILITES AND IMPROVEMENTS·PLAN (CC Reso 8797) (2) FROM ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN (3) BASED UPON ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON 7/7/87 TO SCHEDULE AND FINANCE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SOOTH CARLSBAD LIBRARY, THE ADOPTED PERFORMANCE STANDARD IS BEING COMPLIED WITH UNTIL 1992. (4) SOOTH CARLSBAD LIBRARY PHASE I AND DELETION OF LEASED SPACE. (5) SOOTH CARLSBAD LIBRARY PHASE 11 C. Adequacy Findings The City Council, on July 7, 1987, earmarked funds for site acquisition and construction of a 58,000 square foot facility to be built by 1992. 48,000 square feet is expected to be occupied as a library and 10,000 square feet is expected to be leased out by the City until needed. This action brings Library Facilities into compliance with the performance standard. It is projected the 48,000 square feet of additional space will enable the City to comply with the Library Performance Standard until the year 2002. Attached as Appendix 17 is the Agenda Bill to the City Council which describes the action taken and provides additional background information. III. A. B. MITIGATION Special Conditions for Zone 6 1. No conditions are necessary for the purchase of Library facilities in Zone 6 because the City Council has taken action to provide needed Library Facilities in accordance with the adopted performance standard. This action included: a. Approving a preferred South Carlsbad Library site. b. Directing the City Manager to negotiate an agreement to acquire the site. c. Earmarking funds to guarantee the financing needed for site acquisiton and construction of a 58,000 square foot Library Facility. d. Providing for constrction to be completed by 1991 (within 5 years). 2. Once the design of South Carlsbad Library is approved by the City, the City shall in the next yearly review of this plan make adjustments to the land u_se and public facility demands from Zone 6 to reflect the addition of the Library and deletion of potential residential development. Financing The City Council on July 7, 1987 took action to earmark sufficient funds to acquire the site and to construct a 58,000 square foot South Carlsbad Library. The City Council has guaranteed the necessary funds to accomplish this project, although the specific long-term financing mechanism has not been determined. The City currently collects a Public Facility Fee (PFF) which is set at 3.5% of permit valuation. This fee is applied at the time of building permit issuance. 65 0\ 01 Ill EXHIBIT 22 LIBRARY ZONE 6 110 -..----------------------------------------, 100 90 >-0::: 80 <( 0::: rn -,,..--.. _J (/) I~ 70 I-0 w (/) w :J LL 0 60 £ wt, 0::: <( :::J 50 0 (/) 40 30 20 SUPPLY ◊ 0 0 31, 00 1990 72, 5,922 1995 2000 YEARS CITYWIDE DEMAND '/c Y '/c 0,632 82,600 82,600 33,906 2005 2013 ZONE e DEMAND O O O 66 WASTEWATER . Control Faoltlty SEWER DISTRICTS & WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES EXHIBIT 23 Calavera HIiia Trea_tment Facfllty CARLSBAD WEA SERVICE DISTRICTS Gafner Wastewater Reclamation rraclllty· •o lark tlon ■ WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES. MANAGEMENT PLAN -67 - Cltw-ot C•l1beO Growth ManaQement Ptooram n JANUARY 1987 EXHIBlT 24 LOCAL.· FA C I L IT IE S MAN-A G E M E N T PL A N -Zone 6 BUILIJOUT PROJECTION EXISTING MGD APPROVED MGD C, z -"' c( J: Q. FUTURE MGD WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY Carlsbad Service Area SUMMARY SHEET ADEQUACY DEMAND SUPPLY (C ..... ,.-.. wi9taldard) MITIGATION 4.7 5.7 NO SEE PAGE 77 a 6.6d 8.6b,d YES N/A --- . 7. 7c 10.65c,d YES N/A --- FUNDING SEE PAGE 78 N/A N/A a. Buildout assumptions are for the entire sewer service area which includes Zone 6. The following analysis of a citywide facility, therefore, focuses on the entire sewer service area, and not just on Zone 6. b. Assumes Phase IV expansion of Encina. c. Demand and Supply, as of 1995. d. Demand and Supply, as of 1991. The above supply analysis does not include the treatment capacity available at the Calavera Hills Treatment Facility. 68 EXHIBIT 25 L O C A L . F A C I L I T I E S MA N·A G E M E N T PL A N -Zone 8 BUILDOUT PROJECTION EXISTING MGD APPROVED MGD C, z -"' < J: ~ FUTU.RE MGD WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY Leucadia County Water District SUMMARY SHEET ADEQUACY DEMAND SUPPLY (Ccdamwat w/8tandard) MIT/GA TION a 6.22c,d NO SEE PAGE 77 d 6.37b,d YES N/A a 8.25d YES N/A FUNDING SEE PAGE 78 N/A N/A a. Demand analysis assumptions are for the entire sewer district's service area which includes a portion of Zone 6. Each individual development within Zone 6 shall provide a letter of availability from LCWD addressing the adequacy of sewer treatment capacity. b. Assumes Phase IV expansion of Encina. c. Includes leased capacity from the following agencies: Vista to LCWD 1.20 MGD Buena to LCWD 0.375 MGD Encinitas to LCWD 0.150 MGD (these leases expire in 1992) d. Includes 0.75 MGD capacity at the Gafner WRP. 69 BUILOOUT EXHIBIT 28 LOCAL. FACILITIES MAN·AGEMENT PLAN-Zone 8 WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY San Marcos County Water o•strlct SUMMARY SHEET ADEQUACY PROJECTION DEMAND SUPPLY (CGN,_.. wllll8ldlrd) MITIGATION FUNDING EXISTING a 6.00 C SEE MGD NO SEE PAGE 77 PAGE 78 a 8.00b,d APPROVED YES N/A N/A MGD C, z -rn < ~ 0.. a 12.00d FUTURE YES N/A N/A MGD a. .Demand analysis assumptions are for the entire sewer area which includes a portion of Zone 6. Each individual development within Zone 6 shall provide a letter of availability from SMCWD addressing the _adequacy of sewer treatment capacity. b. Assumes Phase IV expansion of Encina. c. Includes existing 2.0 MGD capacity at the Meadowlark Treatment Facility d. Includes ultimate 4.0 MGD capacity at the Meadowlark Treatment Facility 70 WASTEWATER TREATNENT CAPACITY I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD Sewer treatment plant capacity for at least a five year period. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS A. Inventory Wastewater Treatment in the City of Carlsbad is provided by three separate and independent agencies: The City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District, Leucadia County Water District (LCWD), and San Marcos County Water District (SMCWD). Wastewater Treatment for Zone 6 is provided by the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF). Ownership as well as a wastewater treatment capacity of the Encina WPCF is shared on a percentage basis by six independent sewer districts. The Chart on Page 76 lists all six agencies and their permitted treatment capacity to the Encina WPCF. Currently, the Encina WPCF has capacity to treat 22.5 million gallons per day (MGD). Ultimately, this facility will be able to treat up to 45 MGD. As shown in the chart below, the three sewer districts which provide wastewater treatment to their respective sewer service areas within Zone 6 own limited treatment capacity at the Encina WPCF as well as capacity in smaller localized satellite treatment facilities. Capacity at E.\RF" Satellite Facilities level of Existirg lil.timate ~ Percent M.G.D. Nate Treatnert: Capacity Capacity Carlsbai 25.4 5.72 Calavera Hill# Secxnfary 1.2~ 1.2 MID Leucadia 16.67 3.75 Gafner Secxnfary 0.75 M(D 1.5 M(l) · San Marcos 17.78 4.00 Meaiowlark Tertiary 2.0 MID 4.0 MID * Currently not in operation ** LCWD has leased capacity from 3 other agencies. Vista to LCWD 1.20 MGD Buena to LCWO 0.375 MGD Encinitas to LCWD 0.15 MGD (These leases expire in 1992) Total Existirg Treatment Capacity 5.72 MID 6.22 t«])II+ 6.00 MID Capacity at the Encina WPCF is separated into two categories: treatment capacity and outfall capacity. This analysis will deal primarily with treatment capacity. 71 The Encina Ocean Outfall is a drainage line which transports the treated sewage (effluent) from the Encina WPCF as well as effuent from the various satellite treatment facilities and discharges approximately 8,900 feet into the Pacific Ocean. Currently, the ocean outfall has capacity to transport approximately 65 MGD. The outfall is projected to provide sufficient capacity, for the six sewer districts to the year 2000. Outfall capacity just as treatment capacity, is shared on a percentage basis by the six sewer service districts. Existing Facilities To facilitate the Zone 6, each independent separately. analysis of wastewater treatment for sewer district will be discussed 1) City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District 2) The City of Carlsbad has capacity available at two wastewater treatment plant facilities. Primary treatment capacity is provided through the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (Encina WPCF) which is a regional facility owned by six member agencies. The current rated capacity of Encina WPCF is 22.5 MGD of which Carlsbad retains ownership of 25.4 percent or 5.72 MGD. The City of Carlsbad also holds title to the Calavera Hills Wastewater Treatment Plant which has a capacity of 1.2 MGD. The Calavera Facility is not operational at this time and will require the expenditure of $1.1 to $1.5 million to make it operational. Operation of the Calavera Hills Plant is estimated to cost $360,000 per year. Comparable treatment at the Encina WPCF is estimated at $135,000 per year. The Calavera Hills Plant is not economical to operate for treatment capacity except in the absence of needed capacity at Encina WPCF. Leucadia County Water District Two sources of wastewater treatment capacity are available to the LCWD: (1) Encina WPCF and (2) LCWD Gafner Water Reclamation Plant (GWRP). Disposal of effluent for both plants is through the Enclna Ocean Outfall. The Leucadia County Water District's wastewater is conveyed to the outfall through two methods. The first involves pumping raw sewage and wastewater to Encina for treatment and subsequent disposal to the ocean outfall. The second involves pumping effluent from the Gafner plant through a 12 and 14-inch effluent pipeline (failsafe pipeline) 72 directly to the ocean outfall where it is blended with Encina effluent and effluent from the other satellite reclamation plants. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the Gafner plant will remain at the present capacity of 0.75 MGD and that no new treatement facilities will be constructed within the LCWD Service Area. Therefore, all additional treatment capacity is projected to be obtained at the Encina WPCF. This assumption can always be modified in the future if, for instance, it -is deemed appropriate to increase the capacity of the Gafner plant as a result of increased demand for reclaimed water. 3) San Marcos County Water District The San Marcos County Water District also utilizes two treatment plant facilities, 1) Encina WPCF, and 2) Meadowlark Treatment Plant. Primary treatment capacity is provided through the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. SMCWD currently retains a 17.78 percent ownership which represents 4.0 MGD treatment capacity. The Meadowlark Treatment Plant ability to treat 2.0 MGD of capacity is 4.0 MGD. currently sewage. has the Ultimate LCWD and SMCWD presently have an active program to provide for the storage of reclaimed water. These two districts currently have reclaimed water storage facilities, however, the market for the re-sale of reclaimed water is not fully available. Presently, certain open space areas and the La Costa Hotel and Spa Golf Course use reclaimed water for irrigation purposes. Phasing and Service Demand Wastewater treatment service area population projections for the Encina WPCF service district is depicted in the following chart: -73 - ENCINA WPCF PLAN SEWER SERVICE AREA POPULATION PROJECTIONS(2) Year Service 1980 1990 1995 2000 Vista 35,300 46,200 49,100 52,700 Carlsbad 24,400 56,500 69,000 81,500 Buena 5,500 15,900 22,800 24,100 Vista (1) 0 3,000 6,100 6,100 San Marcos 20,800 45,000 49,000 53,000 Leucadia 25,000 48,000 61,000 74,000 Encinitas 7,000 8,300 8,900 9,500 Totals 118,000 222,900 265,900 300,900 SANDAG Series VI 137,400 214,700 250,000 281,500 (1) Portion of the City of Vista served by Buena Sanitation District (2) Projections approved by Joint Advisory Committee January 28, 1987. ADEQUACY FINDINGS 1) City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District Based on analysis of existing flow data and a range of projections it ls llke 1 y that current treatment capacity will be reached between 1988 and 1990, and that additional interim capacity will be required to meet the performance standard (see chart below). Options exist to provide interim treatment capacity which wnuld allow Zone 6 as well as the City's Sewer Service Area to meet the performance standard. These alternatives are incorporated into the proposed special conditions outlined in the following mitigation section. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures will ensure conformance with the adopted performance standard for the Carlsbad Sewer Service District through buildout of Zone 6. 74 oasw>~CEN£AIE-W-O At-0 AVAII..AEl£ W\SlEWAlER 11£AMNr CAf¥CilY TRE'ATKNT C'AA1\ClTY FUlV PRKECTI061 E<JJivalent Dwelli.rg Flow at 220 Flow at 2"6 ~ CftL,\\ffil\ Year Lhlts (Ell.J'S) Gal/EIX.l(KD)2 Gal/Ell.I (KD) 8'C.m\ (KD) HD.LS (KD) TOTM.. (MD) 1987 1988 1989 19SO 19'J1 199'2 19')3 1994 1995 Note: 21,354 4.69 5.25 5.71 o.o 23,"3f!A.3 5.14 5.75 5.71 0.6 2'f-,49l 5.40 6.03 5.72 0.7 25,(00 5.63 6.29 5.71 0.7 26,708 5.87 6.57 8.57 o.o 27,816 6.12 6.84 8.57 o.o 28,9l4 6.36 7.12 8.57 o.o l),032 6.00 7 • .38 8.57 o.o 31,140 6.85 7.66 8.57 0.0 Qrrently, the City of Carl!bad recognizes a, average se¥ter generation rate of 2"6 gallons ~r day per E.D.U. ktual flows have been cmµ.ttro W'lich ~ a, average of 220 gallons per day per E.D.U. For design ,nj aialysis p.rposes, a generation rate of 2"6 gallons per day per E.D.U. st-oul.d be~- ( 1 ) 1989 to 1995 EOO' s are expamro 1, 143 per )'ear. Tili.s represents 905 chelli.rg units am 2.38 Ell.J's of CXJlllffclal ,nj .industrial. (428,400 sq. ft. at 1,800 sq. ft. ~r Ell.J.) Each )ear is irojected t.o J.tl.y 1 to rorresp:>rti t.o fiscal year w:lgeti.rg .rd cdjusted for a 3' vacancy. (2) KD = Million of Gallons per Day. (3) 1988 EllJ's = 22,965 ED.J's .iSSlEd 3-31-87 + 1, 143 per tbte 1 adjusted for 3$ Vacancy (22,965 + 1,143) X 0.'J'l = 23,"3f!I+. 2) Leucadia County Water District Currently, LCWD has adequate treatment capacity at the Encina WPCF to handle existing sewer needs for their service area. -75 - 5.71 6.31 6.42 6.41 8.57 8.57 8.57 8.57 8.57 As shown on Exhibit 27: "Encina Capacity Analysis" on Page 76, LCWD has 1.92 MGD outfall capacity available for the district. LCWD projects a growth rate of 660 EDU's per year. Also, the majority of capacity leases granted to the LCWD is scheduled to expire when the Phase IV expansion begins in 1989. EXHIBIT 27: ENCINA WPCF CAPACITY ANALYSIS The following analysis assumes that the current permitted treatment capacity of 22.5 million gallons per day (MGD) applies to treatment plant ownership and incorporates flows from reclaiming operation. Agency treatment capacity equals a percentage of plant ownership. TOTAL PERMITTED CAPACITY: 22.5 MGD Agency Permit Capacity (MGD) AADWF Capacity* Adjusted For Leases Existing** Flow (MGD) Available Permit Capacity (MGD) Amended Permit Capacity Revised Available Permit Capacity Vista 6.75 5.55 5.21 0.34 5.55 0.34 Carlsbad 5.72 5.72 4.88 0.84 6.92 2.04 Buena 1.03 0.65 1.13 -0.47 1. 65 0.53 San Marcos 4.00 4.00 3.73 0.27 6.00 2.27 Leucadia 3.75 5.48 3.56 1. 92 6.23 2.67 Encinatas 1.25 1.10 0.82 0.28 1.10 0.28 Total 22.50 22.50 19.33 3.18 27.45 8.13 * Summary of leases: Vista to LCWO 1.2 MGD Buena to LCWD 0.375 MGD Encinitas to LCWD 0.15 MGD ** Average of March, April, May and June 1987 flows MGD -Million Gallons per Day AADWF -Average Annual Dry Weather Flow 76 The following mitigation section will outline possible alternatives so that the district may provide treatment capacity to Zone 6 until the Phase IV expansion of the Encina WPCF is completed. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures will ensure conformance with the adopted performance standard through buildout of Zone 6. 3) San Marcos County Water District As depicted on Exhibit 27: "Encina WPCF Capacity Analysis" on Page 76, SMCWD is nearing their allotted permit capacity. Some alternatives are available to the district to mitigate this impact. These alternatives are incorporated into the proposed special conditions outlined in the following mitigation section and will assure conformance with the adopted performance standard. III. 1 • MITIGATION The following actions shall be pursued jointly by each sewer district to ensure adequate wastewater treatment capacity throughout a five (5) year period: a. Monitor Encina treatment plant flows on a monthly basis to determine actual flow rates and to have an early warning of capacity problems. b. Actively pursue acceleration and phasina of treatment plant Phase IV expansion to provide adequate capacity. c. Increase National Pollutant Discharge Eliminations Systems (NPDES) permit to 27.45 MGD to allow full utilization of reclamation plant and ocean outfall. d. The six member agencies shall form an agreement to maximize the utilization of available treatment capacity at Encina WPCF. 77 B. Financing Sewer connection fees provide the primary source of funding for both sewer line upgrades and expansion of treatment plant capacity. The timing of sewer facilities upgrades and the mechanism of financing are critical to analysis of the adequacy of funding for plant expansion. A complete financial and cash flow analysis should be conducted in conjunction with the Citywide Sewer Master Plan update. This analysis will provide a basis to evaluate development phasing within sewer basins and each Growth Management Zone. Priority for funding should be given to wastewater treatment capacity. 78 79 PARKS PARK DISTRICTS EXHIBIT 28 2 •o t OtyotC....,.. Grawtt, Managemttnt l'POQJam ZONE 6 & JANUARY 198i LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -80 - ZONE 6 LAG RIVIERA o"' .,,_,' c.•""".!:---~-C-ARI~~ CAVNON PARK ZONE 19 COMMUNITY PARKS 0 EXISTING • FUTURE e SPECIAL USE AREA PARK FACILITIES EXHIBIT 29 ----r-------."l I I I I I 10 JANUARY 1887 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -81 - EXHIBIT 30 LOCAL"FACILITIES MAN·AGEMENT PLAN-Zone e BUILOOUT PROJECTION DEMAND EXISTING APPROVED FUTURE 26.34 ... tn 95.33 < ~ Q. 4.44 PARK FACILITIES PARK DISTRICT 3 SUMMARY SHEET NO 0 0 NO 82 MITIGATION FUNDING EXHIBIT 31 LOCAL . FA CI LIT IE S MA N·A GEM ENT PLAN -Zone 8 BUILDOUT PROJECTION EXISTING APPROVED DEMAND 52.22 PARK FACILITIES PARK DISTRICT 4 SUMMARY SHEET ADEQUACY SU pp L Y (Ccnlom•ice wl9ttnard) 50 NO 22 MIT/GA TION FUNDING i---------4 -i-------i'--------t--------+-------i--------i ~128.45 J: Q. FUTURE NO 83 PARKS I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD Three acres of Community Park or Special Use Area per 1,000 population within a park district, must be scheduled for construction within a 5-year period. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS This analysis determines whether or not the adopted performance standard for park facilities is being met in Zone 6. Zone 6 lies within two of the City's four Park Districts as shown on Exhibit 28: "Zone 6 Park Districts" on Page 80. Therefore, this analysis will address park facilities in both Park Districts #3 and #4. The following two tables itemize existinq and planned park facilities in Park Districts #3 and #4. These facilities are grdphlcally shown on Exhibit 29: "Zone 6 Park Facilities" on Page 81. A. Inventory The following inventory utilizes the Park Facilities inventory established by the City Council in Agenda Bill 9129 on 8-11-87. A copy of that Agenda Bill is attached as Appendix 20. 1. Park District 3 (Southwest Quadrant) Existing Park Facilities as of 8/11/87 a. b. Community Parks None Special Use Areas Ownership Total Existing Community Parks Ownership Acres 0 0 Acres None 0 Planned Park Facilities a. Community Parks Altamira Macario Canyon (1/4 of total Park site) Zone 9 City Acquisition Zone 19 Total Existing Park Facilities -----0 Ownership City City Passive Active Total Planned Community Parks 83a Scheduled for Acres Construction 12.0 25.0 10.0 10.0 28.0 85.0 b. Special Use Areas School District Sites Ownership School Dist. Active 6.0 Total Planned Park Facilities 91.0 Buildout Park Facilities 91.0 2. Park District II, (Southeast Quadrant) Existing Park Facilities as of 8/11/87 a. Community Parks La Costa Canyon Stagecoach Ownership City City Natural/Passive Active Acres 9.0 28.0 Total Existing Community Parks 37.0 b. Special Use Areas Ownership* Cadencia City El Fuerte City La Costa Meadows Elem. . SMUSD La Costa Heights Elem.** EUESD Total Existing Type Active Active Active Active Special Use Areas Acres 2.0 3.6 2.0 5.4 13.0 Total Existing Park Facilities 50.0 Planned Park Facilities a. Conununity Parks Alga Norte Macario Canyon (1/4 of total park site) b. Special Use Areas Carrillo Ranch Ownership Type City Active City Active Total Planned Community Parks Ownership City Active Total Planned Park Facilities Buildout Park Facilities SMUSD = San Marcos Unified School District EUESD = Encinitas Union Elementary School District Acres 21.0 25.0 46.0 Acres 10.0 56.0 106.0 * All facilities owned by other agencies have one year joint- use agreements, renewable yearly with a 60 day cancellation clause which may be initiated by either party. ** Referred to as "Levante" 83b B. Phasing For phasing of park facilities serving Zone 6 both southwest quadrant (Park District 3) and southeast quadrant (Park District 4) dwelling unit and subsequent population projections were made. These projections are based on Exhibit 14: "Citywide Quadrant and Zone 6 Residential Phasing Schedules" on Page 45. From these population projections, demand for park facilities has been assessed. As stated in Part IV "Phasing" of this Plan (Page 38), the exact phasing of dwelling units and subsequent population may vary. Consequently public facility improvements would also vary to assure the adopted performance standard is continually maintained. Exhibit 32: "Southwest Quadrant Phasing of Park Facilities" on Page 85 and Exhibit 33: "Southeast Quadrant Phasing of Park Facilities" on Page 86 projects the phased demand for park facilities consistent with both the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan (CC Reso 8797) and the Residential Phasing Schedule for Zone 6. Information must be generated from each zone in the quadrant before the whole quadrant can be fully analyzed. Where Local Facilities Management Plans have been adopted, their data has been incorporated. As additional Local Facilities Management Plans in the quadrants are adopted Exhibits 32 and 33 will be updated to reflect more accurate and appropriate phasing estimates. Park facility supply was determined by analyzing existing park facilities and any park facilities scheduled for construction in the next 5 years (FY 86/91). Park facility supply and demand was compared to determine if and when the performance standard is being met. C. Park Demand from Zone 6 1. Evaluation of Zone 6 Park Facilities Demand within Park District 13. As shown on Exhibit 32 on Page 85 as of 1/1/87 there exists 26.34 acres of park facilities demand and O acres of park facilities supply in Park District #3. Zone 6 contributes 3.02 acres of the existing demand and is projected at buildout to produce another 1.42 acres of demand for a total buildout demand within Zone 6 of 4.44 acres. This demand represents 4.65% of the projected total buildout park facilities demand of 95.33 acres in Park District #3. 2. Evaluation of Zone 6 Park Facilities Demand within Park District #4. As shown on Exhibit 33 on Page 86 as of 1/1/87 there exists 52.22 acres of park facilities demand and 50.0 acres of 84 CIO U1 EXHIBIT 32 SCXJTHWEST QUADRANT· PARK DISTRICT 3 -PHASING OF PARK FACILITIES * PLANNING PROJECTIONS ONLY * -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONES SCXJTHEAST QUADRANT ACRES OF PARK FACILITIES --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------STATUS I NOTES YEAR 4 5 6 9 19 20 21 22 23 YEARLY TOTAL YEARLY TOTAL ZONE 6 SW QUAD SW QUAD CONFORMING/ SE SW DWELLING DWELLING POP. POP. PARKS PARKS PARKS (NON· I (1) (2) (3) (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) UNITS UNITS DEMAND DEMAND SUPPLY CONFORMING) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------EXISTING I (5) 111181 I 2,484 407 3,553 3,553 8,779 8,779 3.02 26.34 0.00 (26.34) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROJECTED BUILDCXJT --------- 1987 230 0 0 359 3,912 887 9,667 3.02 29.00 0.00 (29.00) 1988 115 0 60 283 4,195 699 10,366 3.46 31.10 0.00 (31.10) 1989 115 0 0 321 4,516 793 11,159 3.46 33.48 0.00 (33.48) 1990 121 0 0 464 4,980 1,147 12,306 3.46 36.92 0.00 (36.92) 1991 0 0 51 597 5,577 1,475 13,781 3.84 41.34 0.00 (41.34) 1992 0 0 50 568 6,145 1,404 15,184 4.21 45.55 0.00 (45.55) 1993 0 0 0 450 6,595 1,112 16,296 4.21 48.89 0.00 (48.89) 1994 0 0 0 435 7,030 1,075 17,371 4.21 52.11 0.00 (52.11) 1995 0 0 31 620 7,650 1,532 18,903 4.44 56.71 0.00 (56.71) 1996 0 0 0 608 8,258 1,502 20,406 4.44 61.22 0.00 (61.22) 1997 0 0 0 513 8,771 1,268 21,673 4.44 65.02 o.oo (65.02) 1998 0 0 ·o 483 9,254 1,193 22,867 4.44 68.60 0.00 (68.60) 1999 0 0 0 232 9,486 573 23,440 4.44 70.32 0.00 (70.32) 2000 0 0 0 257 9,743 636 24,076 4.44 72.23 0.00 (72.23) 2001 0 0 0 257 10,000 635 24,711 4.44 74.13 0.00 (74.13) 2002 0 0 0 257 10,257 635 25,346 4.44 76.04 0.00 (76.04) 2003 0 0 0 257 10,514 635 25,981 4.44 77.94 0.00 (77.94) 2004 0 0 0 257 10,771 635 26,616 4.44 79.85 0.00 (79.85) 2005 0 0 0 257 11,028 635 27,251 4.44 81.75 0.00 (81. 75) 2006 0 0 0 257 11,285 635 27,886 4.44 83.66 0.00 (83.66) 2007 0 0 0 257 11,542 635 28,521 4.44 85.56 0.00 (85.56) 2008 0 0 0 257 11,799 635 29, 156 4.44 87.47 0.00 (87.47) 2009 0 0 0 257 12,056 635 29,791 4.44 89.37 0.00 (89.37) 2010 0 0 0 258 12,314 638 30,429 4.44 91.29 0.00 (91.29) 2011 0 0 0 258 12,572 638 31,066 4.44 93.20 0.00 (93.20) 2012 0 0 0 253 12,825 625 31,691 4.44 95.07 0.00 (95.07) 2013 0 0 0 34 12,859 84 31,775 4.44 95.33 0.00 (95.33) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTES: (1) ZONE 4 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN (2) ZONE 5 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN (3) ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN (4) NO CONFIRMED DATA AT THIS TIME. AS THESE LOCAL PLANS ARE ADOPTED MORE ACCURATE PHASING SCHEDULES WILL BE PREPARED. (5) TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION 8·11·87 CITY CCXJNCIL ACTION EXHIBIT 33 SOUTHEAST QUADRANT· PARK DISTRICT 4 · PHASING OF PARK FACILITIES .. •----· * PLANNING PROJECTIONS ONLY • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONES SOUTHEAST QUADRANT ACRES OF PARK FACILITIES --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------STATUS NOTES YEAR 5 6 10 ,, 12 17 18 YEARLY TOTAL YEARLY TOTAL ZONE 6 SE QUAD SE QUAD CONFORMING/ SE SE DWELLING DWELLING POP. POP. PARKS PARKS PARKS (NON- (1) (2) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) UNITS UNITS DEMAND DEMAND SUPPLY CONFORMING) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------·-·····----------------------------------------------------EXISTING (4) 111181 I 0 6,019 7,045 7,045 17,408 17,408 44.62 52.22 50.00 (2.22) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROJECTED 1987 0 195 482 7,527 1,191 18,599 46.06 55.80 50.00 (5.80) 1988 0 0 0 7,527 0 18,599 46.06 55.80 50.00 (5.80) 1989 0 0 263 7,790 650 19,249 46.06 57.75 50.00 (7.75) 1990 0 0 800 8,590 1,977 21,226 46.06 63.68 50.00 (13.68) 1991 0 184 1,287 9,877 3,180 24,406 47.43 73.22 50.00 (23.22) 1992 0 180 731 10,608 1,806 26,212 48.76 78.64 50.00 (28.64) 1993 0 246 634 11,242 1,566 27,778 50.59 83.33 50.00 (33.33) 1994 0 246 497 11,738 1,228 29,006 52.41 87.02 50.00 (37.02) 1995 0 131 305 12,043 754 29,759 53.38 89.28 50.00 (39.28) 1996 0 120 372 12,415 919 30,678 54.27 92.04 50.00 (42.04) 1997 0 36 258 12,673 637 31,315 54.54 93.95 50.00 (43.95) 0) 1998 0 75 297 12,970 733 32,049 55.09 96.15 50.00 (46.15) 0\ 1999 0 75 297 13,267 733 32,782 55.65 98.35 50.00 (48.35) 2000 0 75 297 13,564 733 33,516 56.21 100.55 50.00 (50.55) 2001 0 75 297 13,861 733 34,249 56.76 102.75 50.00 (52.75) 2002 0 75 260 14,121 643 34,892 57.32 104.68 50.00 (54.68) 2003 0 75 260 14,381 643 35,535 57.87 106.60 50.00 (56.60) 2004 0 75 260 14,641 643 36,177 58.43 108.53 50.00 (58.53) 2005 0 75 260 14,901 643 36,820 58.99 110.46 50.00 (60.46) 2006 0 74 304 15,205 751 37,571 59.53 112.71 50.00 (62.71) 2007 0 74 304 15,509 751 38,322 60.08 114.97 50.00 (64.97) 2008 0 74 304 15,813 751 39,073 60.63 117.22 50.00 (67.22) 2009 0 73 303 16,116 749 39,822 61.17 119.47 50.00 (69.47) 2010 0 73 303 16,419 749 40,571 61.71 121. 71 50.00 (71.71) 2011 0 73 303 16,722 749 41,320 62.25 123.96 50.00 (73.96) 2012 0 73 303 17,025 749 42,069 62.80 126.21 50.00 (16.21) IBUILDOUT 2013 0 73 303 17,328 749 42,817 63.34 128.45 50.00 (78.45) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTES: (1) ZONE 5 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN (2) ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN (3) NO CONFIRMED DATA AT THIS TINE. AS THESE LOCAL PLANS ARE ADOPTED MORE ACCURATE PHASING SCHEDULES WILL BE PREPARED. (4) TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION 8·11-87 CITY COUNCIL ACTION park facilities supply in Park District #4. Zone 6 contributes 44.62 acres of the existing demand and is projected at buildout to produce another 18.18 acres of demand for a total buildout demand within Zone 6 of 62.80 acres. This demand represents 49% of the projected total buildout park facilities demand of 128.45 acres in Park District #4. D. Adequacy Findings 1. Park District 3: Park District 3 does not conform with the adopted performance standard. Ther'eis a current shortage of 26.34 acres and based upon those development projects which have already pulled building permits in the quadrant, the shortage will increase to 32.05 acres. 2. Park District 4: Park District 4 does not conform with the adopted performance standard. There is~current shortage of 2.22 acres and based upon those development projects which have already pulled building permits in the quadrant, the shortage will increase to 5.80 acres. III. MITIGATION 1. Park District 13: The current Capital Improvements Program (CIP) contains an appropriation for $190,000 to design a community park in the southwest quadrant (Park District 3). The development of this park was contingent upon City negotiations with the Zone 9 and Zone 19 property owners for the possible construction of a "turn- key" park. To date, these negotiations have not resulted in the City obtaining even the land for the proposed park. Zone 6 in the southwest quadrant is largely developed. However, a few smaller vacant undeveloped or developing areas exist. Some of these areas have the potential to help resolve the park facility shortage. Following are several alternatives which could be considered. A. The CIP could be funds to purchase acreage. 87 amended to include the necessary a suitable park site of adequate B. The City could wait until the other Zones in Park District 3 (LFMP 9, 19, 20, 21, 22 & 23) submit Facilities Plans which would resolve the shortage. Zones 9, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 are largely undeveloped and have the potential to provide developed park land. Ufider this alternative no residential development would be allowed in Park District 3 until another zone resolved the park shortage. C. A portion of the General Plan Land Use sub-area within Zone 6 S-OS-5 could be analyzed for development as a potential Special Use Area related to trails and viewpoints along Batiquitos Lagoon. D. A portion of land within the General Plan Land Use sub-areas of N-RLM-1, N-RM-1 and N-C-1 could be analyzed as a potential Special Use Area associated with the proposed South Carlsbad library. Special Considerations for Park District 3 Zone As 3 mentioned in the Local Facilities Management Plan for and 4 the future usability of Alta Mira Park should be addressed. On 8-8-87 the City Council considered this issue in Agenda Bill 9129, and took two actions. First, was to define and implement an inventory of park facilities that are to be used in the preparation of Local Facilities Management Plans. Second, was to direct use of this inventory as a basis for the update of the City's Park and Recreation Element of the General Plan. That revision is expected to consider the recreational needs for more active and developed park facilities. These active facilities are typically fully developed and intensely used. To allow for this development and use, potential park sites must be developable. Developable land is in part defined as those areas free of environmental or physical constraints (such as slopes, wetlands, very poor soil, etc.). In taking these actions the City Council reaffirmed the view that park facilities must be physically and functionally adequate to perform as a city park and the quality of park facilities is an important factor in the provision of recreational opportunities in meeting Carlsbad's recreational needs. 88 In addition as shown on Exhibit 32 on Page 85 Park District #3 is projected to have a bulldout park facility demand of 95.33 acres. As shown on Pages 82 and 83 currently there are 0.0 acres of existing parks facilities and 91.0 acres of planned park facilities in Park District 3. This total of 91.0 acres of projected buildout supply of park facilities ls 5.33 acres below the projected buildout demand. Programming of more park facilities in Park District 3 is needed to bring park supply even with or in excess of demand at buildout. On 8-11-87 the City Council directed staff to begin an update of the Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan so this issue may be resolved. Special Conditions for Zone 6 within the Southwest Quadrant The facility analysis has indicated that the parks standard within the southwest quadrant is not being met. Therefore, pursuant to Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, no residential development may be allowed in the southwest quadrant until the performance standard ls complied with. 2. Park District•-= There are several alternatives available to mitigate the existing park deficiency: A. The CIP could be amended to include the necessary funds to schedule the purchase and improvement of one or more of the planned Park District #4 park facilities within a five-year period. These park facilities include: Community Parks Alga Norte Macario Canyon (1/4 or total site) Special Use Areas Carrillo Ranch Approximate Acres 23 25 10.3 B. The City could wait until the other Zones in Park District /14 (LFMP 10, 11, 12, 17 & 18) submit Local Facilities Management Plans which would resolve the shortage. At present the City has accepted the Zone 11 and Zone 12 plans for processing and has received a draft of the Zone 18 plan. Zone 11, 12, 18, 10 and 17 are largely or wholely undeveloped and have the potential to provide developed park facilities. The proposed Alga Norte park is located in Zone 10. The proposed Carrillo Ranch Special Use Area is in Zone 1 8. 89 c. The following areas within Zone 6 could be analyzed for acquisition and development within 5 years as potential Special Use Areas: Zone 6 General Plan Laro Use ra-teral ,Approx. Site &.lb-Area Location ,baeage Fbtentlal Park Facili~ FI.J'ICtion N-R.M-6 Sooth of El Fuerte 3.~ A small reigtt>orrood p:irk linked (JX)rtion) bebe:!n Esb.Jrion & with the slq,ed q:Jen space OOITiclor Cacat.ua Streets alorg El Fuerte N-Rff.6 ~ corner of Alga 9.95 L1nl<ed with the funner St. El.izaJeth & El Fuerte Seton OU'dl Special Use Area N-ft-1-6 l'brth of Corintia 4.36 L1nl<ed with the q:Jen space alorg (protion) St. , vest of 1-ttlrose San Marcos Creek Can)OO Ave. (SIP f!A-8/A) S..fffi-4 ~ the extrare SE Can Vary To be linked with the C'nlf Cwrse, (JX)rtion) comer, alorg the San Marcos Creek Can>on a-d La Costa golf ca.rse Canyon Park S-ffi-1 Alorg the north & Can Vary To be linked with the q:Jen spice (JX)rtion) \\eSt side of alorg San Marcos Creek Can)On a-d Ca:iencia Street Ca:lencia Spacial Use Area S..fffi-6 South of La Costa Can Vary L1nl<ed t.o the durdl a-d Car lsba:i ( JX)rtions) Ave., east of Ebys a-d Girls Cltb ~ivities in Randlo Santa Fe Rd. the c:rea S..a+i-3 East of El Canino 7.8 In cJl area with little p:irk Real & rnrth of facilities Levc:11te Street Special Considerations for Park District 4 As shown on Exhibit 33 on Page 86 Park District 4 is projected to have an overall park demand of 128.45 acres at buildout. As shown on Page 83 currently there are 50.0 acres of existing park facilities and an additional 56.0 acres of planned park facilities in Park District 4. This total of 106.0 acres of buildout supply of park facilities is over 22 acres below the projected buildout demand. Programming of more park facilities in Park District 4 is needed to bring park supply even with or in excess of demand at buildout. On 8-8-87 the City Council directed Staff to begin an update of the Park and Recreation Element of the General Plan so this issue may be resolved. 90 Special Conditions for Zone 6 within the Southe~st Quadrant The facility analysis has indicated that the parks standard within the southeast quadrant is not being met. Therefore pursuant to Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. No residential development may be allowed in the southeast quadrant until the park performance standard is complied with. -91 - 92 DRAINAGE ID w I . I . L.., -~ EXISTING STORM DRAIN & SIZE FUTURE STORM DRAIN & SIZE .. OPEN CHANNEL .. DEBRIS BASIN ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAINAGE SYSTEM EXHIBIT 38 t CIIWGIC•l-0,owlll .. .,.._..,., Pr0t, .. JANUARY 1887 EXHIBIT 37 LOCAL. FACILITIES MAN·AGEMENT PLAN-Zone e BUILDOUT DEMAND PROJECTION EXISTING * APPROVED C, --- z -"' c( :c a. FUTURE --- DRAINAGE SYSTEM SUMMARY SHEET ADEQUACY SUPPLY (Callolnwa w/8t__,d) * YES ---YES ---YES MITIGA T/ON N/A N/A ** FUNDING N/A N/A ** * Specific drainage facilities will be required as individual projects are approved within Zone 6. ** Construction of improvements, phasing and financing mechanism will be identified in drainage master plan update. -94 - DRAINAGE I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD Drainage facilities must be provided as required by the City concurrent with development. II. FACILITY PLANNING ANO ADEQUACY ANALYSIS As was indicted in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, drainage is distinguished from all other public facilities and improvements because by its very nature it is more accurately assessed as specific development plans are finalized. However, certain facilities may be necessary which are larger than those required from a single development project and, therefore, need to be identified so that the proper funding can be collected for the construction of these facilities. A. Inventory Master Drainage Plan, completed in March, 1980, drainage facilities within Zone 6. The Master currently being revised; however, preliminary there will be no significant impacts in Zone The City's identifies major Drainage Plan is research indicates 6. Zone 6 contains no Master Drainage Plan fee areas. When the fee areas were established in 1980, the southerly one-third of the City including all of Zone 6 was located in the San Diego County Flood Control Dictrict Zone 1. In July of 1986 the County transferred ownership and maintenance responsiblity over all its drainage and flood control facilities to the City. 1. Existing Facilities The existing drainage facilities within Zone 6 are graphically shown on Exhibit 36: "Zone 6 Drainage System" on Page 93. Zone 6 is divided into two separate drainage basins which each empty into the Batiquitos Lagoon. The Batiquitos Lagoon is a large shallow body of brackish water which empties directly into the Pacific Ocean but is not normally subject to tidal flows. The majority of Zone 6 drains through numerous underground and above ground drainage facilities into the San Marcos Creek. The San Marcos Creek Drainage Basin drains a 38 square mile area which includes ~ortions of Zone 6, 10 and 11 as well as portions of the Cities of San Marcos and Escondido. The upper portion of San Marcos Creek within Zone 6 flows within a narrow rock walled canyon which opens up in the west to form a moderately wide flood plain over 95 8. which the La Costa Golf Course has been built. The Lake San Marcos Dam lies approximately 5 miles upstream from El Camino Real. This facility provides excellent siltation control from upstream development but will provide little relief from flooding which would occur in a major storm. A small area located in the southwest corner of Zone 6 drains through a series of underground pipes into the Encinitas Creek located just west of El Camino Real. The Encinitas Creek Basin drains 7.4 square miles of area which includes drainage from portions of Zones 6, 11, 12 and 23 as well as portions of the City of Encinitas. In addition to the two above noted major drainage basins, a small portion of Zone 6 located west of El Camino Real drains through an underground pipe system and empties into an existing master planned desiltation basin which discharges directly into the Batiquitos Lagoon. 2. Future Facilities Currently there are three master planned drainage facilities which will need to be constructed to carry drainage from Zone 6. These facilities are identified as DI, DH and DR on the drainage exhibit. In addition to these facilities the City is working on the Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Project which includes a program for the control of siltation into the lagoon. As an outgrowth of this program additional drainage facilities and desiltation basins may be required. These facilities will be identified and funding sources indicated in the Master Drainage Plan Update. Phasing Since the demand for future drainage facilities within Zone 6 will be localized and generated by specific development, it will be addressed as that development occurs. c. Adequacy Findings Presently all existing drainage systems within Zone 6 are adequate for the protection of the public and property. The additional facilities identified in the Master Drainage Plan will be needed and required as the adjacent development occurs. It has not been determined if the adjacent developments will be able to totally fund the proposed Master Plan facilities or the proposed disiltation facilities required for the Batiquitos -96 - Lagoon Enhancement Program. For this reason City staff is recommending a special condition which will require all future subdivision developments to pay drainage area fees established by Council or agree to pay any drainage area fees which result from the upcoming review of the Master Drainage Plan. III. MITIGATION A. Special Condition for Zone 6 Prior to approval of further final maps within Zone 6, the developer shall pay or enter into an agreement with the City to pay for a proportional share of any drainage area fees established as a result of the forthcoming Master Drainage Plan Update. 8. Financing All drainage improvements impacted by Zone 6 will be financed by developers or by the imposition of drainage fees collected by the City. Certain of the desiltation facilities for the enhancement of the Batiquitos Lagoon may be financed directly from the Coastal Conservancy Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Fund. -97 - 98 CIRCULATION CD CD ZONE 21 -I I I -,-■-■.,_ • •-I I • I -I -I BatlQulto• Lagoon ZONE 6 ZONE 10 lfVANJf ST LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 11 cae., o, c.,,,, •• Growtll lqnateff'Mlt PrOS,MI -JANUARY 1887 BUILOOUT EXHIBIT 39 L O C A L . F A C I L I T I E S MA N ·A G E M E N T PL A N -z 0 n e 6 CIRCULATION SUMMARY SHEET ADEQUACY PROJECTION DEMAND SUPPLY (C~ w18t...,.d) MITIGATION FUNDING EXISTING See See NO** Pages Page * * 106-121 11 8 APPROVED * * NO** See See FUTURE Pages C, 106-121 z -u, c( :c Q. * * NO** See Page 106-121 * Page 105, Level of Service chart summarizes Zone 6 intersections that fall below the adopted performance standard. Page 118 See Page 118 ** Each of identified failing intersections or road segments will meet the adopted performance standard with the proposed mitigation. 100 CIRCULATION I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD No road segment or intersection in the zone nor any Circulation Element Road segment or intersection out of the zone which is impacted by development in the zone shall be projected to exceed a Service Level C during off-peak hours, nor Service Level O during peak hours. Impacted means where twenty percent or more of the traffic generated by th~ Local Facility Management Zone will use the road segment or intersection. 11. FACILITY ADEQUACY ANALYSIS AND PLANNING This analysis determines whether or not the circulation system within Zone -6 conforms to the adopted performance standards. The analysis also addresses all Circulation Element Roads and intersections outside of Zone 6 impacted by twenty percent or more of the traffic generated by Zone 6 to ensure conformance with the adopted performance standard. A. Inventory The purpose of this analysis is to determine whether or not the circulation system within Zone 6 conforms to the adopted performance standards for the management zones. It wlll also address all Circulation Element roads and intersections outside of Zone 6 impacted by twenty percent or more of the traffic generated by Zone 6 to ensure conformance with the adopted performance standard. Improvements needed to completely develop the Circulation Element Roads, such as sidewalks, street lights, etc. are discussed separately for informational purposes in Appendix 22. As shown on Exhibit 38 "Zone 6 Circulation" on Page 99, the following circulation element roads and intersections are located within Zone 6: Number of Lanes Roadways: Existing Buildout Classification El Camino Real 4 6 Prime Arterial Rancho Santa Fe Rd. 2/6 6 Prime Arterial Melrose Drive 4 6 Prime Arterial Alga Road 4 4 Major Arterial El Fuerte Street 2 4 Secondary Arterial La Costa Avenue 4 4 Secondary Arterial Intersections: Name Alga Road at Alicante Road Alga Road at £1 Fuerte Street El Camino Real at Alga Road El Camino Real at La Costa Avenue El Camino Real and Levante Street Melrose Drive at Alga Road Melrose Drive at Rancho Santa Fe Road Rancho Santa Fe Road at La Costa Avenue Staff has determined that the following roads and intersections outside of Zone 6 are impacted by 20% or more of Zone 6 traffic: Roadways: Number of Lanes Existing Buildout El Camino Real from Zone 6 to Olivenhain Rd. La Costa Avenue from El Camino Real to I-5 In.tersect ions: Name 4 2 El Camino Real at Olivenhain Road La Costa Avenue at I-5 Northbound La Costa Avenue at I-5 Southbound -102 - 6 4 Classification Prime Arterial Major Arterial 1 5 / 1 0 \ \•-·-· .... 0 (I,) ZONE 21 ,-·-·, . -·-I -I -- ZONE 19 Ballqulloa Lagoon ._ CIRCULATION ELEMENT ROADWAYS #/# 1' of Zone Traffic EXISTING/BUILDOUT ZONE 6 - ZONE 10 LEV ANTE ST 1 • ._ Cl RC ULA TION • '-.... 0 I 3 • TR IP ! ~... . 0 / 5 DIST RIB UT ION I .._ --•-·•••• ... , -·-·-·-·-·-·-·-· . -! , EXHIBIT 40 I --:::;;:;::::.~~ • I -I -I -I -I - ZONE 11 /5 Cltv ol Cerlsbad G,owU• Management Program JANUARY 1987 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN B. Phasing Although considered an infill zone, phasing of circulation system impacts and required improvements are more complicated in Zone 6. First, there is still a significant amount of development and redevelopment potential within Zone 6. Ultimate buildout projections (Exhibit 9 on Page 27) estimates an additional 2722 dwelling units and 902,142 square feet of non-residential land use will be developed in Zone 6 between January 1987 and ultimate buildout (2013). Second, due to Zone 6's unique factors of location and land use mix, traffic generation will increase with the general growth of the region as a whole. Some of these factors include: 1. A significant proportion of expensive housing stock with typically higher traffic generation. 2. Employment opportunities that do not significantly match the housing stock which increases the potential for commuting. 3. The La Costa Hotel and Spa a prominent resort bringing in tourist traffic. 4. Zone 6's location along the following: 1) Major N-S corridor east of Batiquitos lagoon 2) Major NE-SW corridor from Highway 78 to I-5 Further, Zone 6 circulation is different from the previous S zones in that staff utilized both the Barton-Aschman traffic study and SANDAG traffic projections (1980). Barton-Aschman is used in this .report for analysis of the existing and existing plus committed traffic projections, while SANDAG is used for buildout traffic projections. As was done with Zones 1 and S the existing plus committed traffic improvement needs, presented in the Barton-Aschman study, have been separated into three time based phases as noted below: Improvements needed in 1 3 years Improvements needed in 4 -6 years Improvements needed in 7 10 years The buildout phase of Zone 6 is projected to be from 1987-2013. 104 c. Adequacy Findings The following chart lists the intersections studied within this report and indicates the existing, existing plus committed and buildout levels of service for each of the intersections. ZONE 6: INTERSECTIONS -LEVELS OF SERVICE Existin~ Existing/Committed Buildout AM ~ AM ~ AA ~ Intersections Peak Peak Peak Peak Peak Peak Alga Rd./Alicante St. A D A A Alga Rd./El Fuerte St. A A A A A D El Camino Real/Alga Rd. A D F F F F El Camino Real/La Costa Ave A* B* F F El Camino Real/Levante St. A A A A A A El Camino Real/Olivenhain Rd. A A E F F F La Costa Ave/I-5 Northbound E E B* B* B C La Costa Ave/I-5 Southbound F D A* C* D D Melrose Dr./Alga Road A D Melrose Dr./Rancho Santa Fe Rd. C D Rancho Santa Fe Rd/La Costa A A A D D E *Assumes that the improvements required to accommodate existing traffic have been implemented. As can be seen on the chart there are currently three intersections which fail to meet the adopted performance standard. With existing plus committed traffic, an additional two intersections fail to meet the standard. And, with buildout traffic there are three intersections which will fail to meet the performance standard unless mitigation beyond the City standard improvements is constructed. These intersections are identified in tabular form on Chart shown below. This chart also represents an estimated time to failure in the four separate periods as discussed previously under phasing. Intersections ZONE 6: INTERSECTIONS -FAILURE PROJECTIONS Before Existing 1-3 Years 4-6 Years 7-10 Years Buildout El Camino Real/Alga Rd. -------------X El Camino Real/La Costa Ave. ---X-----------------------------------------X El Camino Real/Olivenhain Rd.-----------------------X---------------------X La Costa Ave/I-5 Northbound ---X La Costa Ave/I-5 Southbound ---X Rancho Santa Fe Rd/La Costa ---------------------------------------------X Appendix 23 presents the ICU (Intersection Capacity Utilization) analysis for the failing intersections impacted from Zone 6. 105 No road segments have been projected to fail with existing or existing plus committed traffic. Prior to buildout there will be a need to widen La Costa Avenue and El Camino Real to the improvement requirements of their clasisfication. The City is currently in the process of preparing plans for the widening of La Costa Avenue. (See issues section on Page 116) III. MITIGATION The proposed mitigation is divided into three sections. The first section will deal with the mitigation needed to accommodate existing traffic. The second section will deal with existing plus committed traffic. This section is divided in three parts -improvements needed in 1-3 years, 4-6 years and 7- 10 years. The third section will deal with mitigation for buildout traffic demands. It should be understood that all cost estimates presented in this plan are preliminary in nature and will need further refinement as the actual scope of work, utility needs and right-of-way dedications are determined. 106 Improvements Needed to Accommodate Existing Traffic La Costa Avenue at I-5 Northbound and Southbound These two intersections will be mitigated as a unit because they are both dependent on construction of the bridge overpass at the Interstate-5 freeway. The Barton-Aschman Citywide traffic study has recommended the following improvements to be made to La Costa Avenue and the freeway ramps to bring these intersections into conformance with the adopted performance standard. These recommended improvements are subject to revision and modification as the bridge plans become finalized. The Caltrans process for construction of interstate bridges require more detailed traffic analysis and study be done on the specific area prior to their approval than was done with the Citywide Barton-Aschman traffic study. The level of service analysis for existing conditions determined that during the morning and afternoon peak hours, La Costa Avenue at I-5 southbound would operate at Level of Service (LOS) E and La Costa Avenue at I-5 northbound would operate at LOS F during the morning peak hour and LOS D during the afternoon. The poor levels of service result because of the two- lane roadway. Separate left-turn lanes at each of the intersections could improve conditions to acceptable levels of service. However, the width of the bridge over I-5 is too narrow to allow installation of the required lane. The cost to widen the bridge to accommodate the additional lane and the interruption to traffic conditions during construction would be significant. Because of these considerations, improvements to accommodate existing traffic only would not be practical. A schematic of the proposed improvements follows this discussion. The proposed improvements consist of widening of La Costa Avenue to provide two through lanes both eastbound and westbound and double left-turn lanes for the westbound-to-southbound direction which would result in Level of Service A during both the morning and afternoon periods. The additional width would result in Levels of Service A and Bat I-5 north ramps during the morning and afternoon, respectively. The intersections of the ramps (southbound and northbound) at La Costa Avenue would also have to be signalized. 107 Since the Barton-Aschman report required construction of the bridge widening as mitigation for intersections, the bridge installation and improvements needed to bring both intersections into conformance would be required immediately. The best estimates at this point are that the bridge could not be installed through the normal Caltrans process until 1992 or 1993 at the earliest. There are two alternatives which if implemented together or separately may be able to provide an interim solution to allow continued development in the zone until the bridge widening is in place. More detailed traffic analysis will be needed to determine the actual impacts each of these proposed alternatives would have on the performance level of the freeway intersections. The alternatives are as follows: 1. Installation of Alga Road/Poinsettia Lane from El Camino Real to I-5. This roadway link would siphon some existing and proposed traffic off of La Costa Avenue. 2. Installation of Olivenhain Road/Leucadia Blvd. from El Camino Real to I-5. This would have a similar effect as the Alga Road/Poinsettia Lane link. Staff believes this link would have less impact to reduce traffic on La Costa Avenue than the Alga/Poinsettia link. The following cost estimates for the mitigation and each of the alternatives are preliminary in nature and subject to change as detailed engineering studies and plans are prepared. Cost of bridge and intersection improvements $3,300,000. Alternatives: Alga Road/Poinsettia Lane connection -$3,000,000 Olivenhain Road/Leucadia Blvd. connection -$6,000,000 SERVICE ST A TION .,. J'-1. PARK ANO RICE LOT \ ~ 1:: r.::-c:= LA COSTA AVENUE RESICENTIAL 1T VACANT 108 El Camino Real at La Costa Avenue The level of service analysis for existing conditions indicates this intersection is operating at Level of Service E in the morning peak hour and F in the afternoon peak hour. The City is currently overseeing a construction project which will mitigate the intersection Level of Service to A and B for A.M. and P.M. peak hours respectively. The new construction will provide the intersection configuration as shown in the figure below. The Barton-Aschman study indicates these new improvements may not be adequate to handle the existing plus committed traffic volumes. Aarton-Aschman proposes the addition of protected right turn lanes for both northbound and southbound traffic on El Camino Real. Staff believes these additional two lanes can be deferred until a future date since it is likely an alternative east/west freeway connection will be made before traffic levels reach critical proportions. This will have the effect of reducing the projected volume of traffic at the intersection. Staff therefore recommends this intersection be monitored closely once it is constructed to better determine when the additional lanes may be needed. The issue may be resolved as surrounding zone plans supply more focused circulation studies for this area. If the other zone plans indicate the need for additional improvements to this intersection in the near future, the proposed improvements will be incorporated into this zone plan. Under construction ' I I I I I I I I I I i i i ..... i L l. , , t t t, I I 109 .,j .. w a: 0 3 2 ,c .. m LA C08TA AVENUE ! II Improvements Needed for Existing Plus Committed Traffic Needed Within 1 -3 Years El Camino Real at Alga Road The Barton-Aschman study indicates that this intersection will operate at Level of Service F during morning and afternoon peak periods with existing plus committed traffic volumes. Staff estimates the failure of this intersection will occur within the next three years unless some form of mitigation is installed. The Barton-Aschman study did make certain recommendations to mitigate this intersection to an acceptable level of service. Staff has compared this recommended mitigation to the proposed buildout mitigation determined by Staff based on the latest SANDAG projections. Since there is essentially little difference between the · temporary and buildout mitigations, Staff is recommending construction of the buildout mitigation at this time. This will eliminate unnecessary interruption of traffic at this major intersection at a future time. The proposed buildout mitigation is as noted and graphically shown below. Northbound 3 Through Lanes 1 Left-turn Lane 1 Free Right-turn Lane Eastbound 2 Through Lanes 1 Left-turn Lane Southbound 3 Through Lanes 2 Left-turn Lanes Westbound 2 Through Lanes 2 Left-turn Lanes These improvements will result in Level of Service D for both A.M. and P.M. peak periods at buildout. Cost Estimate: $50,000 _, ---------------- -110 - I I I I I I l .., C Ill a: 0 z 2 C u .., Ill '" ..-..- ALGA RO Note: Page number 111 was not used. 111 Needed Within 4-6 Years El Camino Real at Olivenhain Road The Barton-Aschman study indicates that for existing plus committed conditions this intersection will operate at Level of Service E and F during the morning and afternoon peak periods. Improvements required at this location consist of widening the northbound approach to provide double right-turn lanes in addition to two through lanes and widening of the westbound approach to provide three lanes, two left-turn lanes and one right-turn lane. These improvements would provide Level of Service Band C during A.M. and P.M. peak periods, respectively. The proposed improvements are noted and graphically shown below. Cost Estimate: $71,000 VACANT VACANT l l '- " ~ OLIVENHAIN ROAD '--' ~ r a: i-------i r :& c::=====:.._ __ < (,) _, w .. t t r r VACANT -112 - Improvements Needed Before Buildout Traffic Rancho Santa Fe Road at La Costa Avenue The projected buildout condition Level of Service for this intersection is indicated to be D and E during the morning and afternoon peak periods, respectively. With the following improvements, the intersection is expected to operate at Level of Service C during the A.M. and P.M. peak periods at buildout. The buildout configuration of this intersection would include: Northbound 3 Through Lanes 2 Left-turn Lanes 1 Right-turn Lane Eastbound 2 Through Lanes 2 Left-turn Lanes Cost Estimate: $251,000.00 .....t --------------- Southbound 3 Through Lanes 1 Left-turn Lane 1 Right-turn Lane Westbound 2 Through Lanes 2 Left-turn Lanes 1 Right-turn Lane r::, ,c 0 "' .. ... ,c 'i ,c ., i ~ ,c a: 11 !1 f f f LA COSTA AVENUE 113 El Camino Real at La Costa Avenue It is projected that this intersection will operate at Level of Service F during the morning and afternoon peak periods at buildout. The proposed improvements shown below would result in this intersection conforming with the adopted performance standard at buildout. The buildout configuration would consist 0 f: Northbound 4 Through Lanes 2 Left-turn Lanes Eastbound 2 Through Lanes 2 Left-turn Lanes 1 Right-turn Lane Southbound 4 Through Lanes 2 Left-turn Lanes 1 Free Right Turn Lane Westbound 2 Through Lanes 1 Left-turn Lane 1 Right-turn Lane As a result of these improvements, the projected Level of Service at this intersection would be D during A.M. and C during P.M. peak periods. Cost Estimate: $124,000.00 _, -----------------------,. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I ll l l l L. "' i ., -114 - t t t c r: I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I ~ ... Ill b.. ------------· -tE---- LA COSTA AVE A 11 El Camino Real at Olivenhain Road The buildout level of service analysis projects this intersection will operate at Level of Service F during both the morning and afternoon peak periods. The diagram below shows the improvements necessary to allow the intersection to operate at an acceptable level of service through buildout. The ultimate configuration for buildout conditions would include: Northbound Southbound 3 Through Lanes 3 Through Lanes 1 Left-turn Lane 2 Left-turn Lanes 1 Free Right-turn Lane 1 Right-turn Lane Eastbound Westbound 2 Through Lanes 3 Through Lanes 2 Left-turn Lanes 2 left-turn Lanes 1 Free Right-turn lane 1 Free Right-turn Lane As a result of this mitigation, it is projected that this intersection will operate at Level of Service C during the morning and Level of Service D during the afternoon peak periods. Cost Estimate: $500,000.00 - , t t t : -115 - .., C Ill a: 0 z :i C u .., Ill OLIVENHAIN ROAD A I\ Timing and Financing of Mitigation Each of the needed improvements have been separated into four categories which indicate a specific time range for the improvements to be made. These categories are more specific than the three levels of analysis which were done for the Barton- Aschman Traffic Study. Those were existing, existing plus committed, and buildout. Exhibit 41, summarizes these improvements in projected to be 1991, 1994, 1998, "Circulation Improvement Costs," on Page 118 categories. The matrix classifies all terms of the year in which the improvement is needed, i.e., specific improvements needed by and 2013. The financing A summary identified 1. 2. 3. 4. exhibit further identifies the estimated cost and options available to provide each of the improvements. shows the cost estimates to complete the improvements in each category as follows: Constructed by 1991 Constructed by 1994 Constructed by 1998 Constructed by 2013 Total 3,350,000 71,000 0 875,000 4,296,000 These cost estimates will be reviewed and updated as detailed improvement plans are prepared. The exact timing of these improvements has been related directly to staff's phasing of the Zone as stated earlier in the phasing part of this report. There is the potential for this schedule to be modified as individual development projects are proposed which vary from staff's projected phasing. Under whatever phasing scenario actually occurs, the adopted performance standard will be maintained or no development shall be allowed to proceed. The financing of these needed circulation improvements can be accomplished through a number of available financing alternatives. Each alternative will have different advantages and disadvantages which must be evaluated prior to selecting the best method for a given improvement. The specific advantages and disadvantages change over time so that selecting a precise financing method today for a future improvement may create unforseen consequences. For that reason, staff has developed a flexible financing matrix which prioritizei the best financing options available today for each needed improvement as identified. Other financing options may be available and more appropriate as these improvements are needed in the future. 116 Where the City is currently collecting a fee for a specific improvement, this financing source has been identified as the City's first priority. However, because there is a lag time between when fees are collected, when the traffic impact is experienced and when the construction of the needed improvements can be made, funds from these sources may not be available to finance an improvement concurrent with need. Therefore, another source must be found such as a developer contribution or some other innovative financing alternative. If no other viable and equitable financing options exist, then development in Zone 6 must wait until the City through it's establishh financing mechanisms can finance the improvements. This plan establishs a sound basis for the City to ensure needed circulation improvements are made in accordance with the adopted performance standard. It also sets in place adaptable financing options that can be used to select the best alternative funding mechanism available when the improvement is needed. -117 - .... .... 00 CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT COSTS PROJECT FINANCING PRIORITIES TO BE CONSTRUCTED NOW COST OPTION 1 OPTION 2 1. LA COSTA AVENUE/I-5 NORTHBOUND AND SOUTHBOUND 3,300,000 B.T.B.D. ==================================================== ------------------------------------------------============= TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY 1991 1. EL CAMINO REAL/ALGA 50,000 T.I.F. ===================================================~ ------------------------ TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY 1994 1. EL CAMINO REAL/OLIVENHAIN 71,000 T.I.F DEVELOPER ==================================---------========------------------------------------------------- TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY 1998 NONE ==================================================== ------------------------------------------------============ TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY 2013 1. RANCHO SANTA FE/LA COSTA AVENUE 251,000 T.I.F. 2. EL CAMINO REAL/LA COSTA AVENUE 124,000 T.I.F. 3. EL CAMINO REAL/OLIVENHAIN 500,000 T.I.F. TOTAL BY 2013 875,000 =================================================================================================== TOTAL IMPROVEMENT COSTS 4,296,000 ------------------------ m >< :c m --t .,.. .... 1. ZONE 6 ISSUES Interstate 5 (which affects the La Costa Ave. Interchange) The latest SANDAG projection for Interstate 5 is that it will need to carry 173,000 average daily trips through Carlsbad at the buildout year of 2013. In order to accommodate this amount of traffic it is likely that additional lanes and some form of ramp metering will be required. Ramp metering is a method whereby the flow rate of vehicles entering onto the freeway is controlled to eliminate congestion caused by vehicles merging into the flow of traffic. A side effect of metering is increased congestion which occurs on the freeway on ramps and the arterial feeders as traffic backs up waiting to get onto the freeway. There is little the City can do to relieve the problems related to this type of congestion. The freeway system and ramp metering programs are not within the control of the City but are the jurisdiction of Caltrans. As the City and region nears buildout failures of this nature will become unavoidable. In order to help mitigate these problems the City can do the following: 1) 2) 3) Work closely with Caltrans on freeway interchanges to provide areas on freeway ramps. the redesign of greater queing Develop Program service, work hour an effective Peak Hour Traffic Management which includes provision for express bus car pooling, bike riding and alternative scheduling. Encourage greater participation in regional transportation programs which includes rapid transit and light rail use. 2. La Costa Avenue from El Camino Real to I-5 The Barton-Aschman study analyzed the effect of existing plus committed traffic volumes on this roadway link. Their analysis indicated the existing 2 lane road can handle both A.M. and P.M. peak hour volumes within the accepta~le Level of Service (D or better). The report did indicate the westbound A.M. peak and the eastbound P.M. peak were at the low end of D Level of Service. It further stated a slight change in traffic volume could result in Level of Service E. The Barton-Aschman study was prepared on the assumption that no other east/west links from the La Costa area to Interstate 5 would be made. It is increasingly likely that the Alga Road/Poinsettia Lane connection will be constructed in -119 - advance of completion of the La Costa Avenue/I-5 Interchange improvements. Construction of this alternative link will siphon approximately 4,000 -6,000 average daily trips from this section of La Costa Avenue. A reduction of this magnitude would have the effect of improving the level of service to and extending the useful life of the existing two lane roadway for many more years. The City is presently completing design of the La Costa Avenue improvements between El Camino Real anrl I-5. It has been proposed that construction should begin as soon as funding is available. Engineering staff recommend that the need for this facility be investigated thoroughly with regard to Growth Management implications prior to making further commitment to the construction of the project. 3. Corte De La Vista/Gibralter Street Bridge Connection Presently there exists a restricted use service road connection between Corte De La Vista and Gibralter Street. This service road drops down into the San Marcos Canyon from Alfil Way, crosses the San Marcos Creek across an "Arizona Crossing" (water flows over the street during rains) and rises back up the other side of the canyon to Gibralter Street. Public traffic is not allowed on this road due to the danger of the "Arizona Crossing" and it has not been publicly dedicated. It does, however, represent the only means of connecting north and south La Costa outside of using either El Camino Real or Rancho Santa Fe Road. Engineering staff believes that installation of a bridge and connecting roadway merits serious consideration. This connection would reduce the need for traffic to utilize arterial roads for local use and could result in improved levels of service along La Costa's arterial roads and intersections. 4. Melrose Drive at Rancho Santa Fe Currently this intersection operates at Level of Service A for A.M. and P.M. peak hours. With existing plus committed traffic it will still operate at an acceptable level of service. However, due to a traffic fatality which occurred at this intersection, City Council requested staff to investigate alternative designs and recommend ways to improve safety at this intersection. At a subsequent Council meeting staff presented several alternative proposals for improving the intersection. Council selected an alternative which would realign Melrose Avenue north of its current location. This alignment would curve Melrose into Rancho Santa Fe Road making a more nearly 90 degree intersection. Interim improvements to include signalization would be installed along this alignment to handle the existing ~nd near term traffic needs within the accepted performance standard. 120 The interim improvements will be constructed by the City utilizing City funds as well as funds provided by the City of San Marcos and the County of San Diego. Both the Carlsbad and San Marcos share of the project will be subject to reimbursement by the developer at the time adjacent development occurs. The developer will also be responsible for the ultimate improvement of Melrose Avenue as a condition of development. 5. El Camino Real at Levante Street The SANDAG buildout projections for this intersection is at odds with the Barton-Aschman buildout projections. Staff analysis of the SANDAG projections indicate this interesection will operate at an acceptable level of service (A for both A.M. and P.M. peaks). The Barton Aschman study of this intersection indicates a Level of Service F and E for A.M. and P.M. peak hours respectively. As noted in the phasing section of the report, staff is utilizing the SANDAG projections and therefore does not recommend mitigation at this time. City staff is currently working with SANDAG to obtain updated traffic projections for the City. If the new study indicates a change in the projections for this intersection then appropriate mitigation will be recommended and included in this zone plan. As an added note it should be understood both the SANDAG and Barton-Aschman projections assume Levante will 'T' into El Camino Real with no extension into the undeveloped property to the west. It is likely this intersection will be made '4 way' to provide access to the Green Valley area. Staff will require the Zone 23 Plan, which includes this property, to adequately address this impact at the time the plan is submitted. -121 - 122 FIRE CITYWIDE FIRE FACILITIES * FIRI STATIONS-EXISTING 0 l'IRE ST ATIONS-PLANNIID (II minute) FIRE RESPONSE TIME ( G • n • r • I I z • d ) --STATION 1 --STATION 2 ■--STATION 3 ••• -STATION 4 ZONE 6 -I 123 - EXHIBIT 42 , I CllyotC•I- Growtf\ Manaoe,nenr PrOQram JANUARY 1887 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN EXHIBIT 43 LOCAL.· FACILITIES MAN-AGEMENT PLAN-Zone e BUILOOUT PROJECTION EXISTING APPROVED FUTURE Notes: ( 1 ) 1 • 2. 3. . 4. (!J z -(/'J < X 0. DEMAND 1534 + ( 1) FIRE FACILITIES SUMMARY SHEET SUPPLY ADEQUACY (COl"ilcJin•ice w/9tandard) Fire Station 112 . NO Fire Stations YES i/2 & 116 YES A Church (CUP 229) MIT/GA TION Construe- tion & Operation of Fire Station 116 N/A N/A La Costa Canyon Park (9 acres) Cadencia Special Use Area (4.1 acres) San Marcos Creek Canyon (unknown acreage) 124 FUNDING ... ~ OI I ZONE 10 . qj:::11:::: I H.-. oa-a-.e.;? .... 1111:111111: ;:::::::tr .=-=•:•· -.❖: a··· -::: ZONE 19 \:::::::•·· ~ -N_2!!!!t __ •• •. -fl •ouTH ::11111~ r:~'~ m;; m~ 1;;~~ ~;;~i;; ~"'~~'.:'.:~:::;;~:~::1::,..:•!lii,;;,::;;.;.;.: .,.---······ FIRE STATION "'2 0 EXISTING FIRE STATION • FUTURE FIRE ST ATIQN rz:J AREA IN ZONE 8 WITHIN & MINUTE RESPONSE. TIME OF STATION "'2 ... :f !f f Jl\\\;;ttli~:-❖·-4·• ·-• •-••' I .• "# .:..:, I RI.M-1 • ZONE 12 • •, -f ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FIRE FACILITIES EXHIBIT 44 . ..._ (FUTURE) FIRE STATION t Clly al C:11ltHd 0,0111111 Llanaoe-ant flrot,Ml JANUARY 1987 FIRE I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD No more than 1500 dwelling units outside of a five minute response time. A. Inventory 1. Existing Facilities As of 1/1/87 Zone 6 is only served by Fire Station #2 located at 1906 Arenal Road, Exhibit 42: "Citywide Fire Facilities" on Page 123 shows generalized fire service in Zone 6 According to the Fire Department, the area within the five minute response time is based on the distance that can be covered from a fire station on public streets at an average speed of 30 MPH. This distance is equivalent to 2.5 miles. Fire Station #2 and the area of Zone 6 within its 5 minute response are shown in detail on Exhibit 44 "Zone 6 Fire Facilities" on Page 125. The areas outside of the 5 minute response time of Fire Station #2 in Zone 6 are in the eastern portion of the zone. An itemization of development outside of Station #2's five minute response as of 1/1/87 is itemized on Exhibit 45 "Zone 6 Development Outside of Fire Department 5 Minute Response" on Page 128. As shown on Exhibit 45 on Page 128, as of 1/1/87 there are, within Zone 6, 1,534 dwelling units, a church (CUP-229), La Costa Canyon Park (9 acres), Cadencia Special Use Area (4.1 acres) and an undeterminable amount of acreage of San Marcos Creek Canyon which are outside of the five minute response time of a fire station. This condition fails to meet the performance standard. 2. Planned Facilities Exhibit 44 on Page 125 shows the general location of the planned Fire Station #6. This station's projected 5 minute response time will overlap the 5 minute response time of the existing Fire Station #2 and will extend the fire department's 5 minute response time to the southern and eastern city limits within the southeast quadrant. At this time it is projected that no development in Zone 6 will be outside of a fire station's 5 minute response once Fire Station #6 is operational. The City of Carlsbad has purchased a .5 acre site for Fire Station #6. The five year CIP (FY 1987 -1992) plans for the construction of Fire Station #6 in 1989-90. This station would be operational six months after construction begins. 126 B. Phasing Exhibit 46 on Page 129 lists the projected phasing of development and fire facilities in Zone 6. Development phasing information is taken from Exhibits 11 and 13 on Pages 42 and 44. c. Adequacy Findings As of 1/1/87 Zone 6 does not meet the performance standard for fire facilities. Fire Station #2 provides 5 minute response to a large portion of Zone 6. However all of Zone 6 presently does not meet the performance standard. Zone 6 will not be able to meet, the performance standard until Fire Station #6 is operational. III. MITIGATION B. Special conditions for Zone 6: 1 • response map shall be prepared for Fire prior to it's becoming operational. That become a part of this local Facilities Plan. A 5 minute Station 116 map shall Management 2. Until: A. Fire Station #6 is operational; and B. The 5 minute response time map for Fire Station 06 indicates that a 5 minute fire response to Zone 6 can be achieved. No building permits shall be approved within Zone 6. Financing The 5 year CIP (FY 87 construction and operation of those funds is -92) identifies funds for the Fire Station 06. The amount of Construction Operation Notes: (FY 89 -90) $545,000 (1) $ 263,281 (2) (1) 6 months to build (2) 6 months of costs 127 Source of Funds PFF ... N 00 EXHIBIT 46 ZONE 6 DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE OF FIRE DEPARTMENT 5 MINUTE RESPONSE TIME AS OF 1/1/87 General Status of Dwellin9 Units Plan Land Use Zone 6 file Undeveloped Ultimate Oesl9nation Quadrant Sub-Acre No. Existing Develoelng Potential Buildout RLM SE N-RLM-6 N/A 15 0 14 29 S-RLM-1 N/A 293 0 1 294 S-RLM-2 NIA 288 0 16 304 SUBTOTAL 596 0 3f 627 RM SE N-RM-6 N/A 335 0 0 335 CT 84-23 134 86 0 220. CT 85-8 0 70 0 70 SOP 84-8(A) 0 100 0 100 CT 85-19 0 112 0 112 SUBTOTAL 469 368 0 837 RMH SE S-RMH-5 N/A 278 0 0 278 CP 36(A) 172 164 0 336 S-RMH-6 NIA 19 0 103 122 CUP 229 Church 0 0 Church SUBTOTAL 469 + 164 103 736 + Church Church OS SE S-OS-1 1. La Costa Canyon Park 9 acres 2. Cadencia Special Use Area 4.1 Acres 3. San Marcos Creek Canyon Undetermined Acreage TOTAL DWELLING UNITS OUTSIDE IF 5 MIU. RESPONSE TIME 1534 532 134 2200 Total other development/land use 1. Church (CUP 229) 2. La Costa Canyon Park (9 ac.) 3. Cadencia Special Use Area (4.1 ac.) 4. San Marcos Creek Canyon (unknown acreage) Status Notes 1/1/ Existing ( 1) 1987 EXHIBIT 46: ZONE 6 FIRE FACILITIES PHASING AS OF 1-1-87 Residential Dwelling Units ZORE'. 6 Approximate Total Gross Acres 6426 1592 Non-Residential Sguare Footage ZONE'. 6 Total Aproximate Acres 841,434 114 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Developing 1987 195 *** 1988 60 1989 0 (2) 1990 0 1991 235 1992 230 1993 246 1994 246 1995 131 1996 120 1997 67* Undeveloped Potential 1998 75 1999 75 2000 75 2001 75 2002 75 2003 75 2004 75 2005 75 2006 74 2007 74 2008 74 2009 74 2010 74 2011 74 2012 74 Buildout 2013 74 Total 9148 2112 Notes: * Includes 31 dwelling units of undeveloped potential ** Approximate figure 0 100,000** 0 0 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 34,875 1,743,576 *** Will be updated yearly as part of the Zone 6 Growth Management Monitoring Program ( 1 ) Fire Station 112 operational (2) Fire Station #6 projected to be operational 129 *** 13.8 130 OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT 47 LO C AL . FA C I LIT IE S MA N·A GEM E N T PL A N -Zone e BUILiJOUT DEMAND PROJECTION EXISTING 238.83 APPROVED 285.13 C, z -rn < :c a. FUTURE 401.11 OPEN SPACE SUMMARY SHEET ADEQUACY SUPPLY (Cc:dai,wme w18t■ldllrd) 377.73 YES 377.73 YES YES 131 MITIGATION N/A N/A 23.39 AC of Common Noncon- strained Open Space FUNDING N/A N/A * OPEN SPACE I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD Fifteen percent of the total land area in the zone exclusive of environmentally constrained non-developable land must be set aside for permanent open space and must be available concurrent with development. Open Space Overview Through a generalized Citywide analysis the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (cc Reso 8797) determi~ed that certain areas of the City are substantially developed, or meet or exceed the performance standard for open space. These areas included Local Facility Management Zones 1 through 10, and 16. The preparation of local plans allows the City to review more detailed information about a given facility within a smaller area of the City. In the course of developing this local plan a detailed itemization of development and future development within Zone 6 was done. This analysis shows the Zone's present percentage of open space is 23.72%. Between now and the time this zone builds out an additional 23.38 acres must be added to the current 373.73 acres of open space. This open space must be secured as the remaining 1,081.9 acres of developing and potentially developable areas are reviewed and approved by the City. In order to assure that this occurs, this plan has included a detailed adequacy analysis and an action program for open space facilities. A. Inventory Exhibit 48: "Zone 6 Open Space Inventory" on Page 134 summarizes existing and ultimate buildout open space in Zone 6. This summary is itemized in detail in Appendix 24. This open space inventory is graphically shown on Exhibit 49: "Zone 6 Open Space" on Page 135. Exhibit 48 makes several assumptions with regard to the quality of open space that can be counted toward meeting the performance standard. These assumptions are: 1. That the Zone and large visible private open space (specifically La Costa Hotel and Spa Golf Course that is within 6} can be used to meet the performance standard; 132 2. That residential lots of 7,500 square foot must be the dominate residential dwelling unit type in the zone before the lots can be considered to meet the Zone's open space performance standard. The following table indicates the estimated buildout status of 7,500 square foot or greater lots in Zone 6. ZONE 6 General Plan Ultimate % of Total Zone 6 Dwelling Units Land Use Category RL* RLM* Typically on Lots of 7500 Square Feet or Greater RM** RMH*** RH*** RH/0*** Total Buildout Dwelling 188 2758 1847 3194 1100 61 9148 Units 2946 6202 32% 20% 35% 12% 1% 68% 100% 100% * Typically with dwelling units on lots 7,500 square feet or greater ** Typically small lot subdivisions (less than 6000 square feet) or multifamily *** Typically multifamily As shown on the preceding table, single family detached residential lots of 7,500 square feet or greater are not the dominate form of dwelling units in Zone 6. Therefore, no open space facilities ·credit can be given for residential lots of 7,500 square feet or greater within Zone 6. Common usable open space must be provided in the zone. As shown on Exhibit 48 on Page 134, as of 1/1/87 Zone 6 currently meets the open space performance standard. However at buildout Zone 6 is projected to be deficient by 23.39 acres in unconstrained and usable open space. B. Phasing Exhibit 50 "Zone 6 Open Space Phasing'', on Page 137 projects Zone 6's supply and demand for open space. The phased supply of open space is based on what is known and committed to meeting the open space performance standard as of 1/1/87. The phased demand is based on Zone 6's residential and non- residential phasing schedules shown on Exhibits 11 and 13 on Pages 42 and 44. Since 133 .... w .i= General Plan Gross Land Use Acres of Assumetion Oeen Seace OS 395.8 E 3.67 RL 36.37 RLM 10.24 RM 7.35 RMH 2.79 N .64 RC .29 457.15 Total Existing Developed Acreage in Zone 6 1592.2 Total 1) Existing and 2) Developing Acreage in Zone 6 1900.9 ( 1592.2 +308. 7) Total Potential Developed Acreage at Buildout of Zone 6** 2674.1 EXHIBIT 48 ZONE 6 OPEN SPACE INVENTORY AS Of 1/1/87 Environmentally Constrained Udeveloped Develoeed 23.1 240.86* 1.85 36.37 8.75 1.49 6.31 1.04 2.11 .68 .64 .29 79.42 244.07 Environmentally Unconstrained 131. 84 1. 82 133. 66 * 182.6 acres in private golf course (La Costa Hotel & Spa) % of Zone 6 in Used to Calculate Open Performance Space Performance Standard Standard Compliance Open Space 372. 7 1. 82 1.49 1.04 .68 377. 73 377.73 377.73 377. 73 23.72% 19.87% 14.13%** ** Open space performance standard will not be met at buildout of Zone 6 withoutmitigation. *** See Appendix 24 for a detailed breakdown of open space acreage. .... 6> (JI ZONE 6 _J, ZONE 19 --~ I I.!-. 08-3~:-:-. I RLM-1 ,.. , .. ·-·-· --•-"" f ., ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ··-·- -·-·-· ·-·-·-· RM-11 RLM-1 I OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT 49 City of c.,1,ttad Gtawn, Mll\lgetn.nl Pt<>Qram JANUARY 1987 the phasing schedules do not address the yearly amount of acres developed within Zone 6, no phasing of open space facilities demand can be projected at this time. As part of the yearly monitoring program these records will be maintained in Zone 6. C. Adequacy Findings As of 1/1/87 Zone 6 has sufficient open space to meet the performance standard. Based upon the findings made in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (cc Reso 8797) the adopted Open Space standard does not apply to this zone. However, as projected in this plan, Zone 6 will require an additional 23.72 acres of open space at buildout. For that reason, the following Special Conditions are being added to this plan. 1. 2. Special Condition for Zone 6 A. As a part of the annual monitoring program for the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6, the Planning Department shall compile a yearly identification of the developed and developing acreage in Zone 6 along with the amount of performance standard open space acreage within Zone 6. The Planning Department shall fully analyze the ability of Zone 6 to provide performance standard open space facilities to meet the demand at buildout on a yearly basis. B. Additional open space facilities in Zone 6 shall be physically and functionally linked to existing performance standard open space facilities as identified in the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6. C. As part of the ongoing review of proposed development in Zone 6, the Planning Department shall identify the type and amount of additional open space facilities to meet the open space. performance standard in Zone 6 at buildout. Prior to approval of a proposed development in Zone 6, the approving authority shall be required to find that the development contributes to meeting the open space facility performance standard at buildout and that the development does not preclude the provision of performance standard open space at the buildout of Zone 6. Financing No open space financing is needed at this time. -136 - As of Status 1/1/ Existing 1987 Pro-1988 Jected 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Buildout 2013 Notes: EXHIBIT 50 ZONE 6 OPEN SPACE PHASING Acres of Developed Land Use 1592.2 -lE-¼ Rate of Open Space to Meet Performance Standard .15 Acres of Unconstrained or Developed Open Space Reguired Supplied* 238.83 377.73 ** ** *Fora detailed breakdown identification of Open Space in Zone 6 see: 1) Exhibit 48: "Zone 6 Open Space Inventory" on Page 134 and 2) Appendix 25 **Tobe updated annually in the Zone 6 Monitoring Program 137 Acres of Surplus (Deficit) 138.9 -lE-¼ 138 SCHOOLS SCHOOL DISTRICTS t ZONE 6 CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT SAN DIEGUITO HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT • ENCINITAS UNION ELEMENTRY SCHOOL DISTRICT -139 - LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN RD EXHIBIT 51 Cllyo!Carll- Grctwlll ........... Pr°"MI -JANUARY 1987 EXHIBIT 52 LOCAL -FACILITIES MAN-AGE MEN T PLAN-Zone 6 SCHOOLS SUMMARY SHEET CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BUILiJOUT DEMAND SUPPLY ADEQUACY (Ca.NIIWIE» PROJECTION wl8t...,d) MITIGATION FUNDING EXISTING ., * YES N/A N/A * APPROVED * * YES N/A N/A FUTURE C, z -rn < :c Q. * * YES N/A N/A * The Carlsbad Unified School District has capacity to meet the existing demands generated from Zone 6. ** Because the future school demand from Zone 6 is minimal, the School District ls able to provide capacity at all times as the Zone builds out. -140 - EXHIBIT 53 LOCAL. FACILITIES MAN·AGEMENT PLAN-Zone 6 SCHOOLS SUMMARY SHEET ENCINITAS UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT BUILDOUT DEMAND SUPPLY ADEQUACY (CGINIIIMI» PROJECTION wl8tandard) MITIGATION FUNDING EXISTING .. * * YES N/A N/A APPROVED * * YES N/A N/A FUTURE CJ z -u, < :c a. * * YES N/A N/A * The Unified School District has capacity to meet the existing demands generated from Zone 6. ** Because the future school demand from Zone 6 is minimal, the School District is able to provide capacity at all times as the Zone builds out. -1111 - EXHIBIT 54 LOCAL. FACILITIES MAN·AGEMENT PLAN-Zone 8 BU/LDOUT PROJECTION EXISTING APPROVED CJ z -"' < :c a. FUTURE SCHOOLS SUMMARY SHEET SAN DIEGUITO UNION HIGH SCHOOL ADEQUACY DEMAND SUPPLY (CCHCIIIIWl0ii w,._.,d) MIT/GA TION * * YES* * * * YES* * ** ** YES** ** FUNDING Developer fees and state funding. Developer fees and state funding. Developer fees and state funding. * The School District is currently exceeding its fixed capacity however it is mitigating this shortage by utilizing relocatable units. It will continue to service the existing and approved demands generated by Zone 6 in this fashion. ** Future school demands from Zone 6, 11 and 12 plus the northern areas of the district will require a new senior high school and junior high school. 142 EXHIBIT 55 LOCAL. f'. ACILITIES MAN·AGEMENT PLAN-Zone 8 SCHOOLS SUMMARY SHEET SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BUILDOUT DEMAND SUPPLY ADEQUACY (Com1•Di PROJECTION w18181dard) MITIGATION FUNDING Developer EXISTING .. fee~ and * * YES* * state funding. Developer APPROVED fees and * * YES* * state FUTURE C, funding. z -rn < J: ~ Developer fees and * * YES* ** state funding. * The School District ls currently servicing the demand generated from Zone 6 and will be able to provide capacity for the approved projects in Zone 6. Temporary classrooms and relocatables are being used by the district to provide capacity. ** The School District believes it will be able to provide capacity at buildout, although feels it is premature to indicate adequacy because this is contingent upon the development and implementation of a successful financing plan. 143 .. Carlabad High School ' • .. . • .. . • ..... . •••••• • . SCHOOL LOCATIONS EXHIBIT 56 • • • • • • • • . . . •••• • . . . . • . . . . . . . CARLSBAD UNIFI E:D . • . • ~ SCHOOL DISTRICT: • • • . San Marco• Junior High School Valley Jr. High ZONE 6 . . . ••••• : Alvln Dunn : : Elem. : •• • ,t : .••.......•.. ··········:: . 'e • • • • • • • • ~--...:At1.~---1--~=~------J;µr~a~n~M a r CO 8 Dlegueno Junior~ High School an Dlegu gh Scho a... High School Elem. SAN MARCOS UNFED SCHOOL OOTRICT •••••••••••••••• . • ·•··•···· ~·········: SAN DEGUITO HIGH SCHOOL DIST. ENCf.41T AS UNION ELEM. SCHOOL DIST. 0., La Coata High SC h 00 I Rancho Santa Fe Elem. LEGEND • Existilg School O Proposed School •··· Schoo I District Boundary LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -144 - .... .i:: U1 EXHIBIT 57: SCHOOLS TO SERVE ZONE 6 S&ool District 1. Carlsbad U.S.D. A. Existirg B. Future &tool ~ School ~ E ~lly J1 Valley Jr. High School H Carlsbad High School E lOle 10 School site (or ~MID) E Alga Road J1 Alga Road E fbinsettia/Alga/College School Cooplex J-1 fbirisettia/Alga/College School Cooplex H fbinsettia/Alga/College School Cooplex 2. Encinitas u.E.s.u. & San Dieguito H.S.0. A. Existirg E .1-l .1-l H B. Future E E J-1 H 3. San Maroos U.S.D. E A. Existirg E :l-1 H B. Future E Notes: La Costa Heights CW< Crest :C. High School (Q-c:res 7-9) DiegLenO ::t-. High School (Gr.res 7-9) San Dieguito High School (Gr~es 10-12) Rando Santa Fe lore 12 School Site lore 12 :C. High School Site La Costa High School Al Vin D.rln La Costa t,1e<ll)WS San Maroos Jr. High School San Marcos High School lme 10 School Site ( or CL6D) (1) Letter fran ::klhr, Blair roceived 8-17-87 (See ~ix 25) (2) 8-12-87 Letter fran [bnald Lirdstran (See Appendix 25) (3) 8-13-87 Letter fran Willian A. Perrier (See Apperdix 25) (4) 8-19-87 Letter ard 'Oraft Lorg Rarge Cooµ-ehensive Master Plan" fran Jeffrey A. Ck.i (See Apperrlix 25) ( 5) Aug-rented capacity Student Capacity Existlrg(E) or Projected(P) (ffi(E) 842(E) 1,670(E) 1, 139(£)(5) 1,003(E)(5) 2,039(E)(5) 750(£) 679(E) 761(£) 1,195(£) Student Enrollment Existirg (E) or Projected(P) As of 933(£) 912(£) 1,922(£) 758(E) 570(£) 872.(E) 1,612(E) 10-86 10-86 10-86 6-87 6-87 6-87 6-87 -lC£ = Elanentary 5:nx>l K-6 Year (l>erational Existirg (E) or &Jurce Projected(P) of Data 1987(E) (1) 1987(E) (1) 1987(E) (1) t-0 (1) 19Xl(P) (1) 19Xl(P) (1) t-0 t-0 t-0 1987(£) 1987(£) 1987(E) 1987(£) t{) t-0 t{) t{) 1987(£) 1987(E) 1987(E) 1987(£) t{) (2) (3) (3) (3) (4) (4) (4) (4) J-1 = htior High School 7-8 typically H = High Scrool 9-12 typically SCHOOLS I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD School capacity to meet the projected enrollment within the zone as determined by the appropriate school district must be provided prior to projected occupancy. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS A. Inventory Zone 6 is served by four school districts: School District 1. Carlsbad Unified School District 2. Encinitas Union Elementary School Dist. 3. San Dieguito High School District 4. San Marcos Unified School District For Grades K thru 12 K thru 6 7 thru 12 K thru 12 These four school districts divide Zone 6 into three school service areas. The three school service areas are shown on Exhibit 56 "Zone 6 School Districts" on Page 144. The qeneral location of existing and future schools is shown on Exhibit 51 "Zone 6 School Locations" on Page 139. An .itemization of existing and future schools serving Zone 6 are shown on Exhibit S7 "Schools to Serve Zone 6", on Page 145. Student capacity in existing school facilities is primarily a function of how many tempor~ry or relocatable classrooms can be accommodated at a given school site to augment permanent school capacity. Many times placement of these temporary or relocatable classrooms encroach into playground or open space areas. The existing, developing and potential demand for school facilities from Zone 6 is provided for each school service area. The following 3 tables itemize Zone 6's estimated school demand·: 1. Exhibit 58 "Zone 6: Carlsbad Unified School District School Facilities Demand Table" on Page 147. 2 • Ex hi b it 5 9 " Zone 6 : Enc in it as Un ion E 1 em en tar y Sc ho o 1 District and San Dieguito High School District School Facilities Demand Table on Page 148; and 3. Exhibit 60 "Zone 6: San Marcos Unified School District School Facilities Demand Table on Page 149. 146 ... ... ..., I GENERAL PLAN I LAND USE SUB-AREA --------------RESIDENTIAL -----------RLM1-N RLM2-N RLM3-N RM1-N RM2-N RM3-N RM7-ti RMH1·N RMH1-S RH/0-1S RH1-S --------------NON-RESIDENTIAL --------------RC1-S C1·N OS1-N 0S1-S OS5-S 0S2-N OS3-N EXHIBIT 68 ZONE 6 SCHOOL FACILITY DEMAND TABLE -CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AS OF 1-1-87 RES. IN D.U.'S AND NON-RES. IN SQ.FT. STUDENT GENERATION RATES EXISTING DEVELOPING -------------------------------------EXISTING DEVELOPING UNDEVELOPED ESTIMATED POTENTIAL ULTIMATE BUILDOUT E. JH HS E. JH HS E. JH HS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 101 0 101 0.270 0.075 0.155 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.27 7.58 15.66 296 0 0 296 0.270 0.075 0.155 79.92 22.20 45.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 87 0 0 87 0.270 0.075 0.155 23.49 6.53 13.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 60 0 60 0.270 0.075 0.155 0.00 o.oo 0.00 16.20 4.50 9.30 36 0 0 36 0.270 0.075 0.155 9.72 2.70 5.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 75 0 0 75 0.270 0.075 0.155 20.25 5.63 11.63 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0 0 31 31 0.270 0.075 0.155 0.00 o.oo 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 358 0 0 358 0.270 .0.075 0.155 96.66 26.85 55.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 0 51 58 0.270 0.075 0.155 1.89 0.53 1.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 61 61 0.270 0.075 0.155 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 96 0 0 96 0.270 0.075 0.155 25.92 7.20 14.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 558,238 0 406,180 964,418 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 100,000 0 100,000 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNDEVELOPED ESTIMATED POTENTIAL ULTIMATE BUILD<lJT E. JH HS E. JH HS ---------------------------------------- o.oo 0.00 0.00 27.27 7.58 15.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 79.92 22.20 45.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.49 6.53 13.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.20 4.50 9.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.72 2.70 5.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.25 5.63 11.63 8.37 2.33 4.81 8.37 2.33 4.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 96.66 26.85 55.49 13.77 3.83 7.91 15.66 4.35 8.99 16.47 4.58 9.46 16.47 4.58 9.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.92 7.20 14.88 ---------------------------------------- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SUMMARY I EXISTING DEVELOPING UNDEVELOPED ESTIMATED I ESTIMATED EXISTING DEVELOPING UNDEVELOPED I ESTIMATED INFORMATION POTENTIAL ULTIMATE STUDENT GENERATION POTENTIAL ULTIMATE BUILD<lJT FROM ZONE 6 BUILDOUT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I TOTALS I I ELEMENTARY 258 I 43 I 39 22 I 340 D.U.S 955 161 143 1,259 JUNIOR HIGH 72 12 11 94 I SQ.FT. I 558,238 100,000 406,180 1,064,418 SENIOR HIGH 148 I 25 195 -----------~---------------·--------------~---·-------------·------------------------------·---·------------------------------------------------------------------·----------- .... ~ Q) I I I GENERAL PLAN LAND USE SUB·AREA ...................... _____ RESIDENTIAL ......................... RLM1·S RLM2·S RLM3·S RM2·S RM3·S RMH2·S RMH3·S RMH5·S RMH6·S RH2·S RH3·S RH4·S _____ ..,..,. _______ NON·RESIOENTIAL -----·-------- U1·S N1·S E1 RC1·S OS1·S OS2·S OS3·S OS4·S EXHIBIT 59 ZONE 6 SCHOOL FACILITY DEMAND TABLE • ENCINITAS UNION-SAN DIEGUTO UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS AS OF 1·1·87 RES. IN D.U.'S AND NON·RES. IN SQ.FT. STll>ENT GENERATION RATES EXISTING DEVELOPING UNDEVELOPED -------------------------------------POTENTIAL EXISTING DEVELOPING UNDEVELOPED ESTIMATED POTENTIAL ULTIMATE BUILOWT E. JH HS E. JH HS E. JH HS E. JH HS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1,113 0 35 1,148 0.390 0.120 0.250 434.07 133.56 278.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.65 4.20 8.75 288 0 16 304 0.390 0.120 0.250 112.32 34.56 72.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.24 1.92 4.00 41 0 21 62 0.390 0.120 0.250 15.99 4.92 10.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.19 2.52 5.25 0 0 9 9 0.200 0.089 0.175 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.80 1.58 200 0 26 226 0.200 0.089 0.175 40.00 17.80 35.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.20 2.31 4.55 58 0 46 104 0.200 0.089 0.175 11.60 5.16 10.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.20 4.09 8.05 0 120 0 120 0.200 0.089 0.175 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.00 10.68 21.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo 564 164 0 728 0.200 0.089 0.175 112.80 50.20 98.70 32.80 14.60 28.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 0 103 122 0.200 0.089 0.175 3.80 1.69 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.60 9.17 18.03 447 0 64 511 0.200 0.089 0.175 89.40 39.78 78.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.80 5.70 11.20 239 17 123 379 0.200 0.089 0.175 47.80 21.27 41.83 3.40 1.51 2.98 24.60 10.95 21.53 71 0 43 114 0.200 0.089 0.175 14.20 6.32 12.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.60 3.83 7.53 -------·······----------------------------------------------------------·------------------··--·------------------------------ 4,000 0 58,726 62,n6 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 223,380 0 224,852 448,232 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0 <i 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 O.O(l 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ESTIMATED ULTIMATE BUILOOUT E. JH HS --------------------- 447.72 137.76 287.00 118. 56 36.48 76.00 24.18 7.44 15.50 1.80 0.80 1.58 45.20 20.11 39.55 20.80 9.26 18.20 24.00 10.68 21.00 145.60 64.79 127.40 24.40 10.86 21.35 102.20 45.48 89.43 75.80 33.73 66.33 22.80 10.15 19.95 --------------------- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -----·--·----------------------------------------------------·~-------------------------------------------------------··--~-------------------------------------------------SUMMARY I EXISTING DEVELOPING UNDEVELOPED ESTIMATED I ESTIMATED EXISTING DEVELOPING UNDEVELOPED ESTIMATED INFORMATION POTENTIAL ULTIMATE STUDENT GENERATION POTENTIAL ULTIMATE I BUILOOUT I FROM ZONE 6 BUILOWT -------------------------------.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~-- I TOTALS I I ELEMENTARY 882 I 60 I 111 I 1053 D.U.S 3,040 301 486 3,827 JUNIOR HIGH 315 27 45 388 SQ.FT. I 227,380 0 283,578 510,958 I SENIOR HIGH 640 53 I 90 I 783 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ,_ !_,., (0 I GENERAL PLAN LANO USE SUB-AREA ----·---------- RESIDENT JAL ----------- RL1-N RL1-S RLM4-N RLM5·N RLM6-N RLM7·N RLM4-S RLM5-S RM4-N RM5·N RM6-N RMH3-N RMH4-N RMH5-N RMH6-N RMH4-S .............................. NON-RESIDENTIAL --------·----- N1-N (1) OS4-N OS1-S I SUMMARY I INFORMATION EXHIBIT 60 ZONE 6 SCHOOL FACILITY DEMAND TABLE -SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AS OF 1-1-87 RES. IN D.U.'S AND NON-RES. IN SQ.FT. -------------------------------------EXISTING DEVELOPING UNDEVELOPED ESTIMATED POTENTIAL ULTIMATE BUILDOUT ---------------·--------------------------- 86 0 82 168 15 0 5 20 56 0 8 64 0 0 4 4 530 0 35 565 68 0 9 n 0 38 0 38 10 0 2 12 0 229 0 229 218 14 28 260 553 268 0 847 3n 34 0 406 145 0 73 218 118 64 28 210 0 136 0 136 260 154 320 734 ------------------------------------------- 4,800 0 82,328 82,328 0 0 0 0 0 0 I EXISTING DEVELOPING UNDEVELOPED ESTIMATED I POTENTIAL ULTIMATE BUILDOJT 0 0 STUDENT GENERATION RATES E. JH HS ------------------------ 0.320 0.980 0.199 0.320 0.098 0.194 0.320 0.098 0.194 0.320 0.098 0.194 0.320 0.098 0.194 0.320 0.098 0.194 0.320 0.098 0.194 0.320 0.098 0.194 0.094 0.028 0.057 0.094 0.028 0.057 0.094 0.028 0.057 0 0.028 0.057 0 0.028 0.057 0 0.028 0.057 0 0.028 0.057 0 0.028 0.057 ------------------------ 0 0 0 0 0 0 I ESTIMATED I STUDENT GENERATION FROM ZONE 6 0 0 0 EXISTING DEVELOPING E. JH HS E. JH HS ----·----------------------------------- 27.52 84.28 17. 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.80 1.47 2.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.92 5.49 10.86 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 169.60 51.94 102.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.76 6.66 13.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.16 3.n 7.37 3.20 0.98 1.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.53 6.41 13.05 20.49 6.10 12.43 1.32 0.39 0.80 51.98 15.48 31.52 25.19 7.50 15.28 34.97 10.42 21.20 3.20 0.95 1.94 13.63 4.06 8.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.09 3.30 6.73 6.02 1.79 3.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.78 3.81 7.75 24.44 7.28 14.82 14.48 4.31 8.78 ---------------------------------------- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 EXISTING DEVELOPING I UNDEVELOPED POTENTIAL E. JH HS ------------------- 26.24 80.36 16.32 1.60 0.49 0.97 2.56 0.78 1.55 1.28 0.39 0.78 11.20 3.43 6.79 2.88 0.88 1.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.20 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.63 0.78 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.86 2.04 4.16 2.63 0.78 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.08 8.96 18.24 ------------------- 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 UNDEVELOPED POTENTIAL ESTIMATED ULTIMATE BUILDOUT E. JH HS --------------------- 53. 76 164.64 33.43 6.40 1.96 3.88 20.48 6.27 12.42 1.28 0.39 0.78 180.80 55.37 109.61 24.64 7.55 14.94 12.16 3.n 7.37 3.84 1.18 2.33 21.53 6.41 13.05 24.44 7.28 14.82 79.62 23.72 48.28 38.16 11.37 23.14 20.49 6.10 12.43 19.74 5.88 11.97 12.78 3.81 7.75 69.00 20.55 41.84 -------·------------- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ESTIMATED ULTIMATE BUILDOUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 -------------------------------------·-------------------·······---------------------·---·······----------------------------~-----------------------------------·-------------I TOTALS I D.U.S SQ.FT. 2,431 4,800 937 0 594 82,328 I 3,988 I 82,328 NOTES: (1) EXISTING 4,800 SQ.FT. IS A CHURCH ELEMENTARY JUNIOR HIGH SENIOR HIGH 401 197 I 244 I 97 29 59 I 89 589 99 326 358 Carlsbad \ ··-·-Unified School District .... .JRMH-t I I ... en 0 1•-•-•-.. I -·-·-· -I RM-1 i RLM-1 - __J,,,=_==. ~~~~~ I .. I .. • ' • ZONE 19 I . __ NORTH s;.;;;;--~-.-ii 1-..,,,,,~.i ~ ___ ,,,.------- B,ilhp..ilns la111M,n Enc inlta s Union S C h O O I O i S t r i C t & RLM-1 San· Di eg u i to Union ,'I ,, High School District --·•••• --•-' r '!a:: ...... ·-· ZONI "12 ZONE 6 -I 1 -1 -ALM -1 ; :. I -I -I -•if LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN San Marcos Unified School Dlstrl ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ~ ir cur _. c .. 11~•0 Growth M11Ngem.nt PrOQJam JANUARY 1887 School facility demand is based on the estimated rate of students that a given land use will generate. Exhibit 61 "Zone 6 School Facility Demand Map" on Page 150 graphically illustrates the source of this demand. Exhibits 58 -60 on Pages 147 -149 incorporate Zone 6's Land Use, Dwelling Unit and Population Projections from Exhibits 11 and 13 on Pages 42 and 44. Exhibit 62, on Page 153 also incorporates the student generation rates accepted and utilized by each respective school district. These generation rates are shown on Exhibit "Student Generation Rates" on Page 153. It should be kept in mind that the student generation rates are estimates and are subject to revision based on short and long term land use and population trends. Phasing Phased demand for school facilities in Zone 6 is difficult. Four school districts service the Zone and the four service areas include large areas outside of Zone 6. In fact, three of the four school districts service areas extend outside of the City of Carlsbad. Consequently, phased demand and supply of school facilities serving Zone 6 is best defined by each respective school district with data provided by this and other Local Facilities Nanagement Plans along with data from other jurisdictions which these districts serve. Adequacy findings For the reasons mentioned in Phasing above, each of these four districts have reviewed the phasing schedules and projected future demands as shown in this Zone Plan. Each district has indicated that it has the ability to service the current demands generated from this Zone. In certain cases these school districts have reached their district's permanent facility capacities, but are augmenting that permanent capacity by utilizing temporary or relocatable classrooms to increase their overall available capacities. Again, data generated from this plan has analyzed, and verified by each school district. are copies of the specific letters received by the school district. been reviewed, In Appendix 26 City from each In the yearly review of this Zone Plan the City shall communicate with each school district to provide them with any updated land use and development information along with receiving their comments and new information on school facilities. 151 MITIGATION III. A. Special Conditions for Zone 6 There are no However, the City will district to provide receiving their input B. Financing special conditions necessary at this time. continue to communicate and work with each them with updated information along with and new information on school facilities. All developers in Zone 6 will be required to pay the appropriate school fees and/or dedicate school facilities as established by the specific school district. 152 School District Carlsbad(1) U.S.D. Encinitas U.S.D.(2) San Oieguito U.H.S.D. (3) San Marcos u.s.o. (4) Notes: EXHIBIT 62: STUDENT GENERATION RATES Land Use G.P. Land Student Student Type Use Desi9. Type Gen. Rate Residential Residential E .27/0U JH .075/0U H .155/DU SFD RL, RLM E .39/0U MF RM,RMH,RH E .20/DU SFD RL, RLM JH .12/DU MF RM,RMH,RH JH .089/DU SFD RL, RLM H .25/DU MF RM,RMH,RH H • 175/DU SFD RL, RLM E .32/0U MF RM,RMH, RH E .094/DU SFD RL, RLM JH .098/DU MF RM,RMH,RH JH .028/DU SFD RL, RLM H .194/DU MF RM,RMH,RH H .057/0U SFD = Single family detached standard lot size HF = Multi-family attached condominum and small lot subdivision ( 1) Verified by letter of 8/17/87 (See Appendix 26) (2) Verified by letter of 8/12/87 (See Appendix 26) (3) Verified by letter of 8/13/87 (See Appendix 26) (4) Verified by letter of 8/19/87 (See Appendix 26) 15.3 Source of Student Gen Rate 154 SEWER SYSTEM SEWER DISTRICTS EXHIBIT 63 CARLSBAD S . ER SERVICE DISTRICT AO PA l OM AR ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -15 5 - CUy of c.1,bN Growth Maneg11ment Proo,ant ~ JANUARY 198 EXHIBIT 64 LO C AL . FA C I L IT IE S MA N·A GEM E N T PL A N -zone 6 SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM «: IIMM An V C: I-IS:-S:-T BUILDOUT ADEQUACY PROJECTION DEMAND SUPPLY (CO,,C.,11WD1 wll!ttaldllrd) MITIGATION FUNDING EXISTING ** ** YES N/A N/A MGD APPROVED ** ** YES SEE PAGE 162 SEE PAGE 163 MGD C, z -r.n < :c 0. FUTURE ** ** YES SEE PAGE 162 SEE PAGE 163 MGD * Demand analysis for all three independent sewer districts is shown on Exhibit 66, "Zone 6: Buildout Projections", on Page 164. ** Interceptors are not monitored for existing capacity. The determination of adequacy of trunk line capacity will be the sole responsibility df each sewer district. 156 .... Ol ..... Q > .., • Q C • • .., a: C u ENCINA WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY .. .!. CARLSBAD SEWER SERVICE DISTRICT ZONE 19 ·••on, PUMpln11 ll■llon ZONE 6 ZONE 21 ,-·-·--... I -I -I I I -I - ZONE 10 ZONE 12 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN SEWER COLLECTION FACILITIES I,·;.: Mea<lowa No. a Pumping Station SAN IIARCOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Q EXISTING LIFT STATION 0 SEWER TREATMENT FACILITY -SEWER LINE ---FORCE MAIN RIIM IEWER DISTRICT BOUNDARY LINE City GI Ca,ltla•d O,owtll MANQl!fftenl Pr09"affl JANUARY 1887 SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD Trunk line appropriate sewer development. capacity district to meet demand as determined by the must be provided concurrent with II.· FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS Service Area Sewer service for Zone 6 is provided by three independent sewer agencies: the City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District, tne Leucadia County Water District (LCWD), and the San Marcos County Water District (SMCWD). A. Inventory and Description Since sewer service to this zone is provided by three sewer districts, each will be described separately. The boundaries of each sewer district in Zone 6 are shown on Exhibit 63 ''Zone 6 Sew~r Districts" on Page 155. The sewer collection facilities for the three districts are illustrated on Exhibit 65: "Zone 6: Sewer Collection Facilities" on Page 157. 1 } City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District The City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District provides sewer service to the most westerly and northerly portions of Zone 6 within the district. Sewage generated in the westerly portion of this area flows through a series of local collector pipes and discharges into the North Batiquitos Interceptor. The interceptor is owned and maintained by the City of Carlsbad. The Batiquitos Interceptor flows west along the north shore of the Batiquitos Lagoon to a pump station located at the south end of Batiquitos Lane east of Interstate 5. The sewage is then pumped under I-5 to the Ponto Interceptor, which is 40% owned and maintained by the City. The Ponto Interceptor carries the sewage north to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. The northerly portion of the City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District includes a portion of the Carrillo Estates housing development (CT 73-19). There are 111 dwelling units within this area. Since the City lacks any trunk line facilities in this area an agreement was approved by the City Council to temporarily direct the sewage from these 111 units into facilities owned and maintained by the Leucadia County Water District. A copy of this agreement is included as Appendix 27. 158 2) Leucadia County Water District The Leucadia County Water District provides sewer service to the majority of Zone 6. Sewage generated within Leucadia County Water District's jurisdiction is transported by gravity sewers and 3 local lift stations (Meadows, Meadows #3, and La Costa) to the major lift station (Leucadia Pumping Station) near the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue. From this lift station the sewage is pumped through a network of lift stations (Leucadia Pump Station, Saxony Pump Station and the Batiquitos Pump Station) along La Costa Avenue, Carlsbad Blvd., and the railroad right-of-way to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. 3) San Marcos County Water District The San Marcos County Water District provides sewer service to a northeasterly portion of Zone 6. Sewage generated within this area flows by gravity to the Meadowlark Treatment Plant and Lift Station #2. This plant is located within the City of Carlsbad in Local Facility Management Zone 11. From the plant the treated effluent is pumped to the San Marcos Interceptor line. This sewer line travels by gravity through the Encinas Canyon to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. Service Demand Existing, committed and future sewer service collection demands are shown on Exhibit 66 "Zone 6: Buildout Projections" on Page 164. This chart can be used as a planninq tool to determine necessary sewer improvements in the individual districts based on buildout projections. Sewer demands are categorized by sewer district to facilitate this analysis. B. 1 ) Facility Analysis City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District For purposes of analysis, the City's sewer service area within Zone 6 is divided into the two sewer sub-basins, the northerly basin and the westerly basin. The North Batiquitos Interceptor and pump station are adequate for the complete buildout of the westerly basin. Analysis of the capacity of the North Batiquitos Interceptor is shown in the following Table "North Batlqultos Interceptor." 159 North Batiquitos Interceptor Pipe Carlsbad t>emand Capacity Capacity Existing Approved Buildout Reach (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) NB 1 1. 47 1. 47 .25 .34 .52 NB 2 1. 96 1. 96 .25 .34 1.04 NB 3 2.95 2.95 .25 .34 1. 99 NB 4 4.22 4.22 .25 .34 2.85 NB 5 5.54 5.54 .75 .84 3.58 NB 6 5.54 5.54 .75 .84 3.58 NB 7 4.18 4.18 .89 1.15 3.88' NB 8 7.30 7.30 1.10 1.52 4.87 NB 9 19.47 7.78 2.56 2.92 6.01 NB 10 25.40 10.16 2.93 3.30 6.35 Notes: 1) Capacity in reaches NB 9 and NB 10 is shared on a percentage basis with the following sewer districts: 40% City of Carlsbad Sewer District 40.3% Leucadia County Water District 19.7% Encinitas Sanitation District 2) Analysis of reach NB 5 includes the north Batiquitos Pump Station and force main 3) 1 E.D.U. = 246 gallons per day 4) MGD = million gallons per day 5) Analysis of the north Batiquitos Interceptor includes projected flows from Growth Management Zones 4, 6, 9, 19, 20, 21 and 22. EN CINA WATER POLLUTION ,.i. CONTROL FACILITY 180 - 2) Critical ·There will be a need at some point to upgrade the pump station at the south end of Batiquitos Lane. This most likely will be due to development in Zone 19. The Zone 19 plan will include provisions for upgrading of the pump station and force main. Should the westerly basin of Zone 6 proceed at a slower buildout rate than projected, then any undeveloped properties in this basin of Zone 6 will be subject to the provisions for up~rading the pump station required of Zone 19. As noted above the City lacks trunkline facilities to handle the 111 dwelling units in the Carrillo Estates housing development. At the present, there is no time table for construction of a trunkline facility to serve these units. Since there is no undeveloped property in this northerly sewer basin of Zone 6, the lack of a facility does not create a problem which· requires mitigation under the prov1s1ons of this Local Facilities Management Plan. This trunkline facility issue will be addressed with the review of LFMP Zone 17 and 18. Leucadia County Water District The Sewer Master Plan for the LCWD entitled "Planning Study, Leucadia County Water District" September 1985 identifies areas within Zone 6 where the existing sewer system is inadequate. The September '85 Planning Study Report analyzed the major trunk sewers, pump stations and force mains for available capacity based on ultimate peak flow conditions. The table below summarizes the deficiencies identified by that report. The table lists the existing peak capacity, ultimate peak capacity and additional peak capacity required for each critical point. Critical points refer to the plat titled "Conveyance Facilities Recommended Improvements" from a September of 1985 planning study. A copy of that plat is provided as Exhibit 67 on Page 165. The term "Critical Point" is used in the Leucadia Sewer District Master Sewer Plan to designate sewer trunk lines which may need upgrading to handle sewer flows through buildout of their sewer district. Additional Type of Existing Peak Ultimate Peak Peak Capacity Point No. Facility Capacity (MDG) Capacity (MGD) Required (MGD) 21 Trunk Sewer 6.37 7.85 1. 48 22 Pump Station 5.19 11. 96 6. 77 (Leucadia) 23 Force Main 10.56 11.96 1.40 24 Trunk Sewer 0.25 0.57 0.32 25 Trunk Sewer 0.41 1.34 0.93 26 Trunk Sewer 0.43 1.34 0.91 27 Trunk Sewer 0.68 1.34 0.66 28 Trunk Sewer 0.68 1.34 0.66 161 3) C. As can be seen from the table there are numerous identified deficiencies which will occur as Zone 6 and the surrounding Zones within this sewer service district (Zones 10, 11, 12, and 23) at build out. The analysis was undertaken by the Leucadia County Water District in 1985 and does not reflect the reduction in residential density which has occurred in Carlsbad over the past two years. In any case the determination of adequacy of trunkline capacity will be the responsibility of each of the special districts. San Marcos County Water District The portion of Zone 6 that is served by SMCWD has all of the major gravity sewer lines in place. The SMCWO does not anticipate a need for any additional major sewer lines to serve this area at this time. A / / letter from SMCWD confirmed that position. A copy of this letter is provided in Appendix Adequacy Findinqs Within Zone 6 the sewer collection systems for each sewer service district currently meets the adopted performance standard. The City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District and SMCWD have indicated that the existing sewer system will conform to the performance standard through buildout. Analysis of the LCWD sewer system identifies certain facilities which require upgrading so that adequate sewer service could be provided. III. 1 ) MITIGATION SMCWD and City of Carlsbad Sewer Service District Based on the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6, the sewer collection system for Zone 6 will conform to the adopted performance standard through the buildout of the zone. 2) LCWD The table below identifies a mitigation program to alleviate deficiencies in the LCWD sewer system. These recommended sewer improvements will ensure Zone 6's conformance with the adopted sewer performance standard 162 through buildout. The following table represents the best guess estimate on timing of the needed improvements. The actual timing and construction of these facilities will be as determined by the Leucadia County Water District. Critical Type of Construction Estimated Project Point No.* Facilit~ Date Cost (1985 Dollars) 21 Trunk Sewer 2000 -Ult 16,500 22 Pump Station Phase III 1985 -1990 449,000 Phase IV 2000 -Ult 404,000 23 Force Main 1985 1990 1,454,000 24 Trunk Sewer 1985 -1990 18,000 25 Trunk Sewer 1990 -1995 11,000 · 26 Trunk Sewer 1990 -1995 17,000 27 Trunk Sewer 1985 -1990 14,500 28 Trunk Sewer 1985 -1990 9,500 *Critical Points refer to Exhibit 67: "Conveyance Facilities Recommended Improvements Leucadia County Water District" on Page 165. A. Special Condition for Zone 6 Pursuant to Chapter 21.90.1109(d)(4) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, no special conditions on future development are required at this time other than: B. 1) Payment of normal connection fees; and 2) Each individual development within Zone 6 shall provide a letter of availability from the appropriate sewer district addressinq the adequacy of sewer treatment and collection capacity so their project conforms with the adopted performance standard. Financing No special financing program is needed for the portions of Zone 6 located within the City of Carlsbad Sewer District or the San Marcos County Water District. Financing for the improvements listed in the mitigation section for the LCWD facilities will be derived through the collection of sewer connection fees. 163 ... en ,I= EXHIBIT 66: ZONE 6 BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS Carlsbad~ Service District Gross fxistir1J tfvelop~ lhdeveloped Fbtential Acres llJ or SF/A.C. BlJ llJ or SF /A.C. BlJ llJ or SF/A.C. Eili Residentidl 234.70 765/168.48 765 161/00.30 161 31/5.92 31 Ccmoorcial 23.10 55816 SF/ 1u.xm SF/ 9.30 N:. 31 13.00 N:. 56 Utility Scrool RH/0 LaJCadia Cot.ntl Water District Residential 1710.38 51(6/ 1348.50 5100 834/153.00 834 1192/10:l.88 1192 Canrercial 105.10 72'x!YJ SF/ 105.10 403 713360 SF/ 114.40 m Utllityil" 4.80 400l SF/4.00 3 58726 '!F/4.8 33 Scrool 23.80 14.00 24 RH/0 2.3 0/0 .30056 '!F or 61 ru 17 or 2.3 N.: 61 San Maroos Co.nty Water District Residential 163.55. 553/68.14 553 504/95.41 504 C(llllffcial Utility RH/0 * Leucadia Coulty W:lter L>istrict EllJ = EQJivalent IA\ellirg lhit = 246 Gallons ~ Day Generation: ~idential = 1 illJ per IA\elliffJ Ccmrercial = 1 IDJ per 1tro SF LO.timat.e Mloout llJorSF BlJ 'F.,7 'F.>7 155,816 SF 87 7134 7134 1439162 SF 00) 58726 '!F 33 23.00 IC 24 .30057 '!F or 17 or 61 ru 61 2.3 IC 1057 1057 ... OI u, ,· I ' ,:···, '.' .• I : '. .. . . . .J : . ·-. i------... [J \ ---......... .. !_ '] ___ _ I • --. .. .. :a~ ,.,,.-: ;, , . ., - " ... ... C . z . .. : "' EXHIBIT 67 • © LEGEND COLLECTOR OR TRUNK SEWER MANHOLE PUMP STATION FORCE MAIN LCWD BOUNDARY RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT CRITICAL POINT CONVEYANCE FACILITIES RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS 166 WATER SYSTEM WATER SERVICE DISTRICTS EXHIBIT 88 AD/ A REAL MUNICIPAL WA ER DISTRICT --- •o ·t ZONE 6 en,.,,;...._ • JANUARY 1887 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -187 - CARLSBAD COSTA REAL IIUNI. WATER DISTRICT ZONE 18 -EXISTING WATER LINES -PROPOSED WATER LINES i ZONE 21 , •.•. ,_ . ·-I . I -.. l , ·~ .• ~ -'i.. .... A EXISTING PRESSURE REGULATING STATION A PROPOSED PRESSURE REGULATING STATION _., ZONE BOUNDARY • EXISTING RESERVOIR 8 PROPOSED RESERVOIR -WATER DISTRICT BOUNDARY ZONE 6 ~•---WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM -·--.. -, -. , ., .. ---'I,.-'. ZONE 10 - OLIVENHAIN MUNI. WATER DISTRICT ·I --·-·-·-·n II SAN IIA'llCOS CO. WATER DISTRICT ............ ;• I.IO M.CI. 8TORACIE 1.0 M.CI. 8TORACIE . CLA C08TAI: t Clly ol Carl11Md Growlb Managemenl Progr ... m )C :::c m --I G) (0 JANUARY 1887 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN BUILDOUT EXHIBIT 70 LOCAL . FA C I L IT IE S MA N·A GEM E N T PL A N -Zone e WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM SUMMARY SHEET ADEQUACY PROJECTION DEMAND SUPPLY (CGM 11•a wl9t...,d) MITIGATION FUNDING EXISTING * * YES N/A N/A APPROVED FUTURE (!J * * YES N/A z -U) < :::c Q. ** ** YES N/A * The Costa Real Municipal Water District, Olivenhain Municipal Water District and San Marcos County Water District have capacity to meet the existing demands of Zone 6. N/A N/A ** Because the future demands from Zone 6 will be minimal, each Water District has indicated that it will be able to provide capacity at all times as the Zone builds out. -169 - WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM I. PERFORMANCE STANDARD Line appropriate development. capacity to meet demand as determined by the water district must be provided concurrent with A minimum 10 day average storage capacity must be provided prior to any development. II. FACILITY PLANNING AND ADEQUACY ANALYSIS Water service to Zone 6 is provided by three independent agencies, Costa Real Municipal Water District (CRMWD), Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD), and the San Marcos County Water District (SMCWD). The service area for these three agencies is shown on Exhibit 68 "Zone 6 Water Service Districts" on Page 167. These three agencies have adopted Water Master Plans that identify certain facilities which need to be added, upgraded and improved in order to meet the needs of future growth within their service area. The analysis presented in these Master Plans indicates that the existing water distribution system within Zone 6 has adequate capacity to supply the necessary domestic water and fire flow requirements through buildout of this zone. Therefore, the existing water line network conforms to the adopted performance standard. The Master Plans also address the need for adequate water storage facilities. As shown in the· chart below, each water agency has separate water storage facilities for their service area within Zone 6. Water Storage Name of Water Water District Capacity Storage Facility CRMWD 6.0 M.G. La Costa HI C~MWD 1.5 M.G. La Costa CRMWD (Future) 3.0 M.G. La Costa OMWD 6.0 M.G. La Costa SMCWD 1.25 M.G. Meadowlark SMCWD 2.5 M.G. Meadowlark The Master Plans for each water district indicates that the existing and proposed future water storage facilities will provide adequate storage capacity and therefore, conformance with the adopted performance standard will be satisfied through buildout of this zone. Exhibit 69: "Zone 6 Water Distribution System" on Page 168 shows the major water facilities currently in place and servicing Zone 6. 170 Phasing The following chart entitled "Buildout Projections" determines the ultimate buildout projections from management Zone 6 for each water district service area. BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS COSTA REAL MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Lhdevel.opoo Gross Existirg Cevel.op~ fbtential lJl timate B.ill.oout Acres (DU or S:-/!C,) (DU or S:-/!C,) (llJ or S:-/PC) (DU or S:-) Residential 1,211.38 Cannercial 206. 58 Utility 4.8 School 15.0 RH/0 2.3 3,631/879.3 711/165.06 701,828 sq. ft. 100,00)/13.8 4,00)/4.8 0/0 15.0 ce. 0/0 2.3 ac. 0/0 OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Gross Exist~ [evel.op~ Acres (DU or S:-/PC) (DU or S:-/PC) Residential 733.70 2242/637.7 '2PJ+/IR3.22 .. Cannercial 21.62 79, 7SO sq. ft. 0/0 Utility School 8.00 8.8 a::. RH/0 SAN MARCOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Gross Exist~ Cevelop~ Acres (00/PC) (llJ//C,) Residential 163.55 553/68.14 .504-/95.41 Cannercial Utility School RH/0 -171 - 988/167.0 &!9, 700 sq. ft. 58,72.6/4.8 0/0 30,056/2.3 or 61 llJ l.hdevelopoo fbtential (llJ or S:-/IC,) 235/47.80 83,500 sq. ft. lh.ievelopoo fbtential (rJJ/PC) 0/0 5,330 llJ 1,431,6ffi sq. ft. 62,72.6 sq. ft. 15.0 ac. 30,056 sq. ft. or 61 llJ/2.3 lJl timate E\Jiloout (llJ or S:-) 2,761 163,370 sq. ft. 8.8 acres Ultinate B.Jiloout (00) 1057 Since Zone 6 is primarily developed and only minor improvements are necessary to provide adequate domestic water and fire flow needs dS determined by the appropriate water district, no phasing is necessary. These minor improvements and the upgrading of outdated facilities, such as the replacement of inadequate facilities or the extension of a water service to a specific project will be required at the time of development. The extent of those improvements cannot be determined until development occurs. Adequacy Findings Currently, water service t~ Zone 6 conforms with the adopted performance standards. This is evidenced by letters from the three water districts found in Appendix 28. As indicated in the water master plans for the CRMWD, SMCWD and the OMWD, Zone 6 is served by an existinq water storage and distribution system. As Zone 6 builds out, additional water demands will be minimal and conformance with the adopted performance standard will be maintained to the ultimate buildout of this zone. The performance standard also requires a minimum 10 day average water storage capacity must be provided prior to any development. CRMWD and OMWD have indicated that they have adequate storage capacity to conform to the adopted performance standard to buildout of Zone 6. SMCWD has indicated that they have a 3.2 day storage supply of water for their districts service area. Because the Carlsbad service area of SMCWD is so small, it has been determined that their storage capacity is adequate. III. MITIGATION A. Special Condition for Zone 6 All development within Zone 6 shall pay the required water district connection fees. B. Financing The remaining major water facilities and improvements within Zone 6 will be financed by the appropriate water districts capital improvement fund. Revenue for that budget is funded from developer fees to the district. 172 173 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 -174 - l i 'I I 2 3' 4 5: 6 7 Si 9 · 10 ll 12 13 I l41i 11 II l5i! 1s,I 1111 18 i! ,, '· 19 If Ii 20!! ,, 21. 22 2:;!I I I 24: I i 251: .I 26 ii 27 i: i d 2811 I ()~DINANCE NO. 9808 ----- AN ORDINANCE OF TPE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFnPl''IA AMENDrNG TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD ~UNICIPAL CODE 8Y THE ADDrTION OF CRAPTEP 21. 90 ESTABLISHING A GROWTH MANAGE~1f.NT PROGRAM FOP THE CITY The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: That Title 21 is amended by the addition of Chapter 21.90 to read as follows: Sections: 21.90.010 21.90.020 21.90.030 21.90.031 21.90.032 21.90.033 21.90.040 21.90.050 21.90.060 21.90.070 21.90.080 21.90.090 21.90.100 21.90.110 ,, 21.90.120 21.90.125 21.90.130 21.90.140 21.90.150 21.90.160 21.90.170 21.90.180 21.90.190 "Chapter 21. 90 Growth ~anagement Purnose and intent. Definitions. General prohibition, exceptions. Tolling of ti~e for consideration of applications submitted before the effective date of this chapter. Tollina of expiration of previously issued develop~ent permits. Extensions of ~rior approvals prohibited. Comoliance with this chapter reauired. 1 Establishment of local facilities manaaement: fee. -I Spec:al provisions for buildinq permits issued during te~porary mor~toriu~. Finding of health, safety and welfare necessary for the fees i~posed by sections 21.90.050 and 21.90.060. Perforniance standard. · Citywide facilities and i~orove~ents plan. Local facilities ~anagement zones. Contents ~f local facility ~anagement plans. Facilities management plan ~reoartion. Facilities manaaement plan orocessina. Implementation of facilities and improvements reauirements. Obligation to oay fees or install improve~ents reauired by any other law. Implementing guidelines. Exclusions. Council actions, fees, notice. Expiration of chapter. Severability. 1. -175 - 5 6 7 81 91 10 11 12 13 ., 141 I isl I ' 161 I 171 1, 18i: ,, 19 !; 20!! '1 21;1 22if ! 23! 241 I 25 !1 2611 21 I: ·I " 28 Ii II 21.90.010 Pur~ose and intent. (a) It is the policy of the City of Carlsbad to: (1) Provide auality housina opportunities for all economic sectors of the cc~~unity: (2} Provide a balanced co~~unitv ~ith adecuate commercial, industrial, recreational and open space areas to support the residential areas of the City: (3) Ensure that public facilities and i~prove~ents meeting City standards are available concurrent with the need created by new development: (4) Balance the housina needs of the reaion against the public service needs of C~rlsbad residents· and available fiscal and environmental resources: (5) Encouraae infill development in urbanized areas before allowinq extensions of public facilities and improvements to areas which have yet to be urbanized: (6) Ensure that all development is consistent with the Carlsbad qeneral plan: ( 7) Prevent growth unless adeauate public facilities and improvements are provided in a phased and logical fashion as reaui red by the general plan: . (8) Control of the timing and location of development by tyinq the pace of development to the provision of public facilities and improvements at the times established by the citywide facilities and improvements plan. (b} The City Council of the City of Carlsbad has determined despite previous City Council actions includinq but not lir,,ited to, ainendments to the land use, housing, and oar'<s and recreation elements of the general plan, amendments to City Council Policy No. 17, adoption of traffic i~oact fees, and modification of park dedication and improvement reauirements, that the demand for facilities and improvements has outpaced the supply resulting in shortages in public facilities and improvements, includin9 but not limited to streets, parks, open space, schools, libraries, drainage faoilities and general govern~ental facilities. The City Council has further determine that these shortages are detrimental to the public health, safet and welfare of the citizens of Carlsbad. (c) This chapter is adopted to ensure the implementation of the policies stated in subsection (a), to eliminate the shortages identified in subsection (b), to ensure that no., development occurs without providing for· adeauate facilities and improvements, to regulate the pace of development thereby ensuring a continued supply of housing over a period of years and to continue the auality of life for all economic sectors of the Carlsbad community. (d) This chapter will further the policies, goals and objectives established herein by reauirinq identification of all public facilities and improvements required for development, by prohibiting development until adeauate provisions for the public facilities and improvements are made by developers of projects I within the City, and by giving develop~ent priority to areas of the City where public facilities and i~provements are already in place (infill areas). 2. -176 - .... Q C CII I ID ..J .. a: C .. J III C ... :, z Z O ffi a: 2>>0 CII !:: C ~ . (,J :I~ ~ . ..Ju I-:,,, Ill • z Ill 8 Q 111 ! "'C (,JO -CII ! .. ~ > .. a: C C ,. u !:: (,J 'I I l. 2 :5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16: 171 1, 1s!j I, 19 1! 2011 !I ., 21/1 ii 22' 23 1 I 2411 251: 'I I, ', 26 ii 27 ij ,, 2a :: " \1 !1 ,. ,, !j' '1 I, (e) This chapter replaces the te~porary ~oratorium on processing and approval of develop!"ent projects imposed bv Citv Council Ordinance No. 9791. · 21.90.020 Definitions. Ca) Whenever the following terms are used in this chapter they shall have the meaning established by this section unless from the context it is apparent that another ~eanina is intended: · • ( 1) "Citywide facilities and imorove!"ents plan" means a plan prepared and approved according to Section 21.90.090 identifying those facilities and imorovements reauired on a citywide basis to serve the projected population of the City as established by the general plan and providing an o~tline and budget for financing certain facilities and improve~ents which will be provided by the City. (2) "Development pe·rmit" means any pernit, entitlement or approval whether discretionary or ministerial issued under Title 20 or 21 of this code and any leqislative actions such as zone chanqes, general plan amendments, or master plan approval or amendment. · (3) "Development" means any use to which land is put, building or other alteration of land and construction inciden~ thereto. (4) "Facilities• means ·any schools, c.,arks, open space, or recreational areas or structures providin~ for fire, library, or govern~ental services, identified in a facilities management plan. (S) "Improvement" includes traffic controls, streets and highways, including curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, bridges, overcrossings, street interchanqes, flood control or storm drain facilities, sewer faci'lities, water facilities and lighting facilities. · · · · (6) "Local facilities management plan" means a facilities manaqe~ent plan defined by Section 21.90.120 for a local facilities manage~ent zone which is established accordinq to Section 21.90.100. 21.90.030 General rohibition, exceotions. a Un ess exempted by the provisions o this chapter no application for any building permit or development permit shall be accepted, processed or approved until a citywide facilities and improvements plan has been adopted and a local facilities management plan for the applicable local facilities management zone has been submitted and approved according to this chapter. ( b) No zone change, general plan amendment, master-;,la amendment or specific plan amend~ent which would incease the residential density or development intensity established by the general plan in effect on the effective date of this chaoter shall be approved unless an amend~ent to the citywide facilities ~anage~ent plan and the applicable local f~cilities manaae~ent olan has first been approved. 3. -177 -.,. ·. I i- i l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .Q C =·a 13 rt ~ • i , Ill C 14 .. i i .,; 0 Ill! Si!►>"" 15 ID !:: C -. CJ 2 ~ IA, ' ... (J .,_►Ill • 16 z Ill ~ Q Ill! C <J -ID ! = ~ 17 > = C. C ► CJ !:: 18 I CJ I 19 .I 2oli II 21li II 22j 23 1 24 I 25! i 26! 27 /, I 2aii I! ll ;; /I d (c) The classes of projects or per1t1its listed in this subsection shall be exempt from the provisions of subsection (a). Development permits and building permits for these projects shall be subject to any fees established pursuant to the citywid facilities and improvement plan and any applicable local facilities management plan • . (1) Redevelopment projects. (2) Projects consisting of the construction or alteration of a single dwelling structure for a fa~ily on a lot owned by the family intending to occupy the structure, or not to exceed one nonowner-occupied house per individual for one or more lots owned prior to July 20, 1986. (3) Building permits and final maps for projects identified in Section 2(F) of Ordinance No. 9791 (projects for which construction had coffll'llenced and were designat•d on the map ·marked Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 9791 •as developing•). (4) Building permits for projects for which all required development permits were issued or approved on or befor January 21, 1986. If all required development permits were issued for a portion of the project only, the exemption shall apply to that portion. · ( 5) Building permits for projects for which al 1 required development permits were issued or ap~roved before July 20, 1986 and for which building permits could have been issued under Ordin~nce No. 9791. If all required development permits were issued for a portion of the project only, the exemption shall apply to that portion. (6) Commercial and industrial projects with approved development permits or with a complete application on file with the City prior to June 11, 1986 for such permits. New permits for commercial and industrial projects located within an area that has been previously approved for such uses may also be processed and approved. . (7) Projects by nonprofit entities for structures and uses for youth recreational and guidance programs such as boys and girls clubs. (8) Zone changes or general plan amendments necessary to accomplish consistency between the general plan and zoning, to implement the provisions of the Local Coastal Plan or which the City Council finds will not increase the public facilities or services and which are initiated by the City Council or Planning Commission. (9) Public utility facilities and improvement projects without accommodations for permanent employees are exempt from the provisions of·this chapter unless the City Council determines they are of sufficient size and scale to impact public facilities. (10) Adjustment plats. (11) Development permits for minor subdivisions located in the northwest quadrant of the City as defined in Ordinance No. 9791. Building permits for commercial or industrial construction on lots in such subdivisions may be approved. Residential building permits will not be aor;,c-oved for • lots in such subdivisions unless otherwise exempt under this 4. -178 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ·10 11 12 "Q ~-13 Ill I a! CII 14·1 ~WC i5 ~ i z z w cc o>>o 15 -,_ C ~ =c:s2~ ~ .... (,J isl ... ,. w -z w I C wZ C (,J ~ -= 1... ~ 17 >; ~ ,. (,J I ... 18 I u ii I' 19 !! 2oli ,I 21 1i ii ,. 22: I 23 1 I I 24:1 25 ,: :I 2611 27 \, :1 28 !i 1: I t· ·' n :: chapter except one permit for a nonowner-occupied lot may be approved for each such subdivision. (d) The provisions of this subsection apply t_o final maps and other develop~ent permits for projects with a tentative map approved before July 20, 1986 which are not included in the exemptions listed in subsection (c) • . (l) If a tentative map or tentative parcel map wa approved on or before January 21, 1986 then, after approval of the citywide facilities plan, a final map or parcel map ~ay be processed and approved before the adoption of a local facility management plan.· The expiration period for those tentative maps shall be tolled until the citywide plan is adopted. The expiration of any development permits issued in conjunction with those maps shall be tolled until the applicable local facilities management plan is approved or, two years after the date the citywide plan is approved, whichever occurs first. · (2) If a tentative map or tentative parcel map wa approved after January 21, 1986 and before July 20, 1986, but th approval of final map or parcel map was prohibited by Ordinance No. 9791 then approval of final maps and parcel maps is prohibited until after preparation of the applicable local facilities management plan. The expiration period of those tentative maps and tentative parcel maps, and any other development permits issued in conjunct ion with-the maps shall be tolled unti-l the local facilities management plan is approved, or two years after date the citywide facilities and i.Jnprovements plan is approved, whichever occurs first. (e) The exemption for projects listed in subsection (c (3), (4), (5), and (6) shall expire on July 20, 1988. After tha date all development permits for those projects shall be fully subject to the provisions of this chapter. The exemptions for projects listed in subsection (c) (3}, (4), (5), and (6) shall a pp 1 y only so long as the f ac i 1 it i es and improvements recu ired a a condition to the issuance of -final development permits have been installed or are being installed pursuant to a secured agreement. Any breach of such secured improvement agreement shall subject any remaining building permits for the project to the provisions of subsection (a). (f) Final or parcel maps for projects listed in subsec~ion (c) (3), (4), (5), (6) and (7) which co~ply with all the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and Title 20 of this Code which were filed with the City before July 20, 1986 may be approved by the City Council, or City Engineer as appropriate, af~er July 20, 1986. Upon approval, those projects shall be subject to the exemption of subsection (c). (g) The City Council may authorize the processing of and decision making on building permits and development per~its for a project with a master plan approved before July 20, 1986 subject to the following restrictions: (l) The City Council finds that the facilities an improvements reauired by the master plan are sufficient to meet the needs created by the project and that the master plan developer has agreed to install those facilities and iMprovement · to the satisfaction of the City Council. s. -179 -- l 2 3 4 5 s 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 22;; ii 23 ij 2411 25 j'. . 1! 25 ii I 271: I (2) The master plan developer shall agree in writing that all facilities and improvement requirements, including but not limited to the payment of fees established bv the citywide facilities and mana~ement plan and the applicable· local facilities management plan shall be applicable to development within the master plan area and that the master plan developer shall comply with those plans. ( 3) The master plan establishes .an educational park and all uses within the park comprise an integral part of the educational facility. (4.) Building pernits for the 129 unit residential portion of Phase I of the project may be approved provided the applicant has Qrovided written evidence that an educational entity will occupy Phase I of the project which the City Council finds is satisfactory and consistent with the goals and intent o the approved master plan. ( S) Prior to the approval of the final map for Phase I the master plan developer shall have agreed to participate in the restoration of a significant lagoon and wetland resource area and made any dedications of property necessary to accomplish the restoration. (h) After making the findings in paragraph l the City Council may authorize the processing of and decision making on master plans subject to the requirements of paragraph 2. After the grant of the easement required by·subparagraph (h)(iv) the tentative map for Phase I of the project, the site plan for the commercial development and the local coastal plan amendment may also be processed and approved. If such approvals are granted and, subject to all other provisions of this code, grading and building permits for construction of the golf course and first phase of the commercial portions of the project may be processed and approved. . The processing and approval of_ all other developments and building permits within the master plan shall not occur unti after the citywide facilities plan and the local facilities management plan have been adopted by the City Council. (l)(i) That the master plan will provide all necessary public facilities for the project and will cure any facilities deficits in the area affected by the project. (ii} That the approval will not prejudice the preparation of the citywide facilities plan and will improve the level of public facilities and services in the area. (iii) That by the dedication of land and the construct ion of public improvements the project wi 11 make a . significant contribution to the public facilities needs of the city and provide for the preservation or enhancement of sianificant environmental resources. · (2)(i) The master plan shall include all of the information required by and implementing the provisions of Sections 21.90.090 and 21.90.110 for the area covered by the master plan. (ii) The applicant shall agree in writing that al facilities and improvement reauirements, including but not : . limited to the payment of fees established by the citywide ! 6. -180 - l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10I ll 12 131 l4i/ 151 161 I 17 11 I, 1aii ,I ,1 l9 1i 1, 2011 11 21:; ii 22:1 23[ 24il 25 !i 26 Ii 11 2711 :1 i! 2s 'I I. I I facilities and improvement plan and the applicable local facilities management plan shall be applicable to development within the master plan area and that the master plan developer shall comply with those requirements. (iii) The master plan applicant shall agree to participate in the restoration of a significant lagoon and wetland resource area. ~ (iv) Prior to any processing on the ~aster plan the applicant shall grant an easement over the property necessary for the lagoon restoration and the right-of-way necessary for the widening of La Costa Avenue and its intersection with El Camino Real. 21.90.031 Tolling of time for consideration of applications submitted before the effective date of this chapter. After approval of the citywide facilities and improvement plan and the applicable local facilities management plan applications for development permits which were accepted as complete before the effective date of this chapter shall have processing priority in relationship to the acceptance date. Until the approval of the plans all a?plicable time limits for processing the development permits shall be tolled. 21.90.032 Tolling of expiration of oreviously issued development permits. If a discretionary development permit, ot~er than a development permit issued in conjunction with a subdivision map, issued prior to July 20, 1986 has an expiration period within which building permits ~ust be issued and the issuance of building permits for the project is prohibited by this chapter then the expiration period shall be tolled until t·he aoplicable local facilities management plan is approved, or two years after the date the citywide p~an is approved, whichever occurs first. 21.90.033 Extensions of erior approvals erohibited. After approval of an applicable local facilities management plan an extension of the expiration date of any development permit shall not be granted unless the extension is found to be consistent with the plan. The decision makinq body considering an extension may condition the extension upon compliaace with the citywide plan and applicable local facilities management plan. 21.90.040 Com liance with this cha ter. a No deve oprnent permit shall be approved unless the approving authority finds that the permit is consistent with the citywide facilities and improvements plan and the applicable local facilities management plan. To ensure consistency the approving_ authority may impose any condition to the approval necessary to implement the plans. Cb) No building permit shall be issued unless the fees required by this chapter, and any applicable local facilities management plan fees are first paid, and the oermit is consisten 7. -181 - • 4 5 6 71 I ll 12 13 14ri 11 isl! le ti ii 17!1 18ii 19 20 21 ! 22 :i 23 !/ 24!1 25 !I 'I ,, !• 26 jj 21 ;1 ,I i! 28 il II I I with the applicable local facilities management plan. As a condition to the issuance of any building permit pursuant to Section 2l.90.030(c) the applicant shall aqree to pay the appropriate fees within 30 days of the date each fee is establ i.shed. (c) The requirements of this chapter are imposed as a condition of zoning on the property to ensure implementation of and consistency with the general plan and to protect the public health, safety and welfare by ensuring that public facilities an improvements will be installed to serve new development prior to or concurrently with need. 21.90.050 fee. Establishment of local facilities management (a) A local facilities management fee is hereby established to pay for improvements or facilities· identified in local facilities management plan which are related to new development within the zone and are not otherwise financed by an other fee, charge or tax on development, or are not installed by a developer as a condition of a building permit or development permit. The fee may also be used to pay for that port ion of the facilities or improvements identified in the citywide facilities and improvements plan attributed to development within the local zone which are not financed by other means. The facilities management fee shall be paid before the issuance of a building permit. The amount of the fee shall be determined based upon th estimated cost of the facility or improvement designated as necessary to accommodate additional development within the applicable local facilities management zone plus the estimated cost of facilities and improvements identified in the citywide facilities and improvement plan attributable to the local zone. The fee shall be fairly apportioned among the new development. (b) The fee required by this section is in addition to any other means of fin.?. .. cing facilities or improvements identified by a local facilities management plan or any other tax, fee, charge or improvement requirement which may be imposed on the development of property under the provisions of state law this code or City Council policy. (c) The amount of the fee for a local facilities management zone shall be set by City Council resolution after a public hearing, published notice of which shall be given according to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.54.060(2) and Government Code Section 54992. (d) As a condition of any building or development permit application submitted after the effective date of this chapter the applicant shall agree to pay the fee established by this section at the time a building permit is issued. {e) The fee established by this section shall be levie at the time of issuance of a building permit. 21.90.060 Special provisions for building permits issued during temporary moratorium. (a) Applicants for projects for which building permits were issued after January 21, 1986 and before July 20, 1986 shal 8. -182 - I I i I = 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 'I 1411 I 1sj l6i 171, I' 1811 1! 19 'i 20I/ 21 !j 11 22! 23 24 I 251 2611 27 !1 ·1 I. 281 pay the fee established by Section 21.90.050 within 30 days afte the amount of the fee is determined by the City Council. Paymen shall be made according to the agreement executed by the applicant pursuant to Section 3 of Ordinance No. 9791. 21.90.070 Findin of health, safet and welfare necessary or the fees imposed by Sections 21. and 21.90.060. (a) The City Council hereby declares that payment of the fee established and imposed by Sections 21.90.050 and 21.90.060 and installation of the facilities and improvements identified in a facilities management plan are necessary to achieve the policies established in Section 21.90.010 and to implement the City's general plan. If the fees are not paid or the facilities or improvements are not installed the public health, safety and welfare will suffer because there will be insufficient facilities and improvements to accommodate any new development. This finding is based upon City Council Policy No. 17, City Council Ordinance No. 9791, and the evidence presented at the public hearings on the ordinance adopting this chapter. ( b) If any condition imposed as a cond i ton of a development permit or building permit pursuant to this chapter i protested then the permit shall be suspended during the period o the protest. (c) This section is adopted pursuant to Government Cod Section 65913.5. 21.90.080 Perfornance standard. The City Council shall adopt general performance standards for each facility or improvement listed in Section 21.90.090(b} or 21.90.ll0(c). Specific performance standards fo citywide facilities shall be adopted as part of the citywide facilities and improvement plan. Specific performance standards for each zone shall be ~uopted as part of the local facilities management plan. If at any time after preparation of a local facilities management plan the perfornance standards established by a plan are not met then no development permits or building permits shall b~ issued within the local zone until the performance standard is met or arrangements satisfactory to the City Council guaranteeing the facilities and improvements have been made. ~ 21.90.090 Cit wide facilities and im rovements lan. a To imp ement the City s general plan by securing provision of facilities and improvements, and to ensure that development does not occur unless facilities and improvements ar available the City Council shall adopt by resolution a citywide facilities and improvements plan. The plan shall: Identify all facilities and improvements necessary to accommodate the land uses specified in the general plan and by the zoning; specify size, capacity and service level performance standards for the identified facilities and improvements; establish specific time tables for acquisition, installation and operation of the facilities and improvements correlated to projected population 9. -183 - ' I ll 2 3 4 5i I 61 7 a/ 9 10 ll 12 0 13! < Ill I co ..I I 9; ~ Ot ,..· ·u < 14' 'z 11 . a: • ~ 0 15 :1 ID = C ~ U2~ !! u. . ..I (J ! I-►~ . 1611 z~~o ~z < U ~ -Ill rl !i ~ ~ ~ 1711 > a: < < ► (J ... i3 18 ii 19 !; it 2011 ii 21 i; 22 23 24 25 26 'I ii 27 ,: 1' 281 I growth, facility and improvement performance standards, and projected nonresidential development: identify the financing method or methods for each facility and improvement: and establish a facility and improvement budget for those facilities or improvements which will be constructed or financed by the City. The plan shall encourage infill development and reduce the growth inducing impact of premature extension of facilities or improvements to undeveloped areas by establishing priorities for facility and improvement installation or financing. (b) The citywide facilities and improvement plan shall show how and when the following facilities and improvements will be installed or financed as specified in subsection (c). (1) Major sewage transmission systems and sewage treatment plants: (2) Major water transmission lines; (3) Major area wide drainage facilities; (4) Prime and Major arterials: freeway interchanges, bridges or overcrossings; (5) Fire facilities; (6) Governmental administration facilities; (7) Parks and other recreational facilities; ( 8) Libraries. (c) The plan shall include the following information with regard to each facility and improvement listed in subsectio ( b) : (1) An inventory of present and future requirements for each facility and improvement based upon the performance standard established for each facility and improvement. Cost estimates shall be included. The inventory shall be consistent with the general olan and zoning for the area. ( 2) A phasing schedule establishing the timing fa installation or provisions of facilities or i~orovements in re lat ions hip to the amo 11ut of development activity (e.g. number of dwelling units, nu~ber of square feet of commercial space within the service area of the facility or improvement) and the facility and improvement performance standards. (3) A financing plan establishing various methods of funding the facilities and improvements identified in the plan. The plan shall identify those facilities and improvements which would otherwise be provided as a requirement of processing a devel9pment project (i.e. reauirements imposed as a condition of a development permit) or provided by the developer in order t establish consistency with the general plan or Titles 18, 20 or 21 of this Code, and those facilities and improvements for which new funding methods which shall be sufficient to ensure sufficient funds are available to construct or provide facilitie or improvements when required by the phasing schedule. (d) The City Manager shall prepare and present the pla to the City Council not later than one year from the effective date of this ordinance. 10. -184 - ;i l 2 31 41 I I 5' 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 Q C 51 I 13 ~ !!; ~ Q U w C 14J ~-. z • CZ: . ;o 151 . C ~ . u ::I~ i. . ~ u i-,.. w 16' zWgd' 1M i N C uo .. i:a ; t: ~ 17 > CZ: C C ,.. u i-,, 0 1811 ,I I 19 i: I, ,, 20!: 'I '· 21.! i :1 22·1 2311 24i1 :I 25 :j I, !: 26;i I' 27 ,; ,i i: 28 Ii I (e) Amendments to this citywide facilities and improvements plan shall be initiated by action of the Plannina Commission or City Council. · 21.90.100 Local facilities manaaement zones. (a) The City Council shall divide the City into facilities management zones. (b) The boundaries of the zones shall be established based upon logical facilities and improvements plannina, construction and service relationships to ensure the economically efficient and timely installation of required facilities and improvements. In establishing zone boundaries the City Council shall also be guided by the following considerations: Cl) Service areas or drainage basins: (2) Extent to which facilities or improvements are in place or available: plan areas: (3) Ownership of property: (4) Boundaries of existing zoning master plans: (5) Boundaries of pending zoning master plans: (6) Boundaries of potential future zoning master (7) Boundaries of approved tentative maps: (8) Public facilities relationships, especially the relationship to the City's planned major circulation network: (9) Special district service territories: (10) Approved fire, drainage, sewer, or other facilities or improvement master plans • (c) The zones shall be established by resolution after a public hearing notice of which is given pursuant to Section I 21.54.060(2) of this code~ 21.90.110 Contents of local facilit mana ement olans. a A ocal fa~1l1t1es management plan shall be prepared for each facility zone and shall cover the entire zone. (b) The plan shall consist of maps, graphs, tables, an narrative text and shall be based upon the general plan and zoning applicable within the local zone at the time of plan approval. The local facilities management plan shall be consistent with the citywide facilities and improvements ~lan shall implement the citywide facilities and improvements plan within the zone. · ~ (c) The facilities management plan shall show how and when the following facilities and improvements necessary to accommodate development within the zone will be installed or financed as specified in subsection (d). (1) Sewer systems (2) Water (3) Drainage (4) Circulation (5) Fire facilities (6) Schools (7) -Parks and other recreational facilities (8) Open space 11. -185 -t . - ! - l.l 21 i 3: 41 I 5i 6 7 8' 91 10I 11 12 l3 I 181: !1 I, 19 Ii lj 20:1 " ,. 21:1 :1 22;i I, 23j I 24· 25 26 ,I 271: :, 2a ii 'I 11 !I (d) The plan shall be consistent with and implement the citywide facilities management plan and general plan and shall include the following information with regard to each facility and improvement listed in subsection (c): (l) An inventory of present and future requirements for each facility and improvement based upon the performance standard established for each facility. Because improvement reauirements for certain facilities and improvements may overlap zone boundaries a discussion of the need for coordination and a proposed coordination plan for facilities extending from one zone to another shall be included. Cost estimates shall be included. It must be shown that development in the zone will not reduce the facilities or improvements capabilities or create facilities or improvements shortages in other zones or reduce service capability in any zone below the performance standard which is established pursuant to Section 21.90.080. The growth inducing impact of the out ·of zone · improvements shall be assessed. (2) A phasing schedule establishing the timing for installation or provisions of facilities or improvements in relationship to the amount of development activity {e.g. number of dwelling units, number of square feet of commercial space, etc.) for the facilities management zone. The phasing schedule shall ensure that development of one area of the zone will not utilize more than the area•s prorata share of facility or improvement capacity within that zone unless sufficient capacity is ensured for other areas of the zone at the time of the first development. The phasing schedule shall include a schedule of development within the zone and a market data and cash flow analysis for financing of facilities and improvements for the zone. The phasing schedule shall identify periods where the demand for facilities and improvements may exceed the capacity i and provide a plan for eliminating the shortfall. In those I situ~tions when demand •xceeds capacity and it is not feasible t~ increase the capacity prior to development, no development shall occur unless a time schedule for and a means of increasing the capacity is established in the plan. (3) A financing plan establishing various methods of funding the facilities and improvement~ identified in the pla fairly allocating the cost to the various properties within the zone. The plan shall identify those facilities and mprovements which ws,uld otherwise be provided as a requirement of processing a development project (i.e. requirements imposed as a condition of a development permit) or provided by the developer in order t establish consistency with the general plan or Titles 18, 20 or 21 of this Code, and those facilities and improvements for which new funding methods which shall be sufficient to ensure sufficient funds are available to construct or provide facilities or improvements when required by the phasing schedule Where facilities or improvements are reauired for more than one zone, the phasing plan shall identify those other zones and the plan for each zone shall be coordinated. Coordination, however, shall not require identical funding methods. 12. -186 -i -I l 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 Q C al I 1:5 rn ·iE !!; C •(.)YI C 14 ~ii wll: 2~~~ 15 al G 2 ~ "" • -' (,J ,_>YI • 16· Z"'i0 YI Z <C (,J II: -al z 0 rn > = a! 17 < C ,. (J 1sll .. G I' . 19 n II 20ji 21!! 22.1. 2:51 I 24 ;I i! 2S Ii I; ,. 26 !f 27 :, 28 ii ,, I' I· l (4) A list or schedule of facilities requirements correlated to individual development projects within the zone. (e) Th_e local facilities management plan shall establish the proportionate share of the cost of facilities and improvements identified in the citywide facilities and improvement plan attributable to development of property on the local facilities management zone. 21.90.120 tocal facilities management olan preparation. (a) A local facilities management plan may be prepared by the City or by the property owners within the zone accordina to the procedures established by this section. · (b) The City Council, upon its own initiative, may by resolution direct the City Manager to prepare a facilities management plan for any zone. The City Council may assess the cost of preparing the plan to the owners within the zone after a hearing ten days written notice of which is given to the property owners within the zone. The cost shall be spread prorata according to acreage and development potential. (c) All owners within the zone may jointly submit a facilities management plan. (d) For zones in which joint submission of a facilitie manageme.nt plan is shown to be not feasible any owner or group o cooperating owners within the zone may petition the City Council to allow the owner or group of owners to prepare the plan. Afte a meeting for which ten days prior written notice has been given to the property owners within the zone, the City Council may permit the owner or group of owners to prepare and submit the plan. A limit based on the estimated cost of the plan shall be deterntined at the time of the hearing. The actual cost shall be I determined when the plan is adopted and shall be assessed ~rorat~ based on acreage and development potential to property within th facilities management zone. The assessment shall be collected b the City at the time any application for a development project within the zone is submitted. The owner or owners who prepared the plan shall be reimbursed for the cost of the plan less the owner's or owners' prorata share. No reimbursement shall be mad unless the plan is approved. Cost of preparation shall not include interest. · (e) As an option to preparation by the owner or group of owners as provided in subsection (d) the City Council may decide to direct the City Manager to prepare the facilities management plan. The cost of preparation shall be advanced to the City by the requesting owner or owners, assessed to all the owners and reimbursed as provided in subsection (d). 21.90.125 Facilities mana ement lan rocessina. a Fac1 1t1es management pans sha be reviewed according to the following procedure: (1) A completed facilities management plan complying with this chapter, and accompanied by a processing in an amount established by City Council resolution, ~ay be submitted to the Planning Director for processing. If the 13. -187 - fee ' I • l 2 3; 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 161 17 18 i 19 !l 20![ 21!1 ii 22 ;' 23 1 241 ! I 25 ,: 26!1 I, 27 i: il 28 ij 1, Ii ii ;l Ii Planning Director determines that the plan complies with the provisions of Section 21.90.110 the director shall set a facilities management plan for public hearing before the Planning/ Commission within sixty days of receipt of a complete application. (2) The hearing shal~ be noticed according to the provisions of Section 21.54.060(2). A staff report containing recommendation on the plan shall be prepared and furnished to the public, the applicant, and the Planning Commission prior to the hearing. (3) The Planning Commission shall hear and consider the application for a facilities management plan and shall by resolution prepare recommendations and findings for the City Council. The action of the Commission shall be filed with the City Clerk, and a copy shall be mailed to the owners within the facility zone. (4) When the Planning Commission action is filed with the City Clerk, the Clerk shall set the matter for public hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be noticed according to the provisions of Section 21.54.060(2). (5) The City Council shall hear the matter, .and after considering the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, may approve, conditionally approve or deny facilities management plan. The City Council may include in the resolution adopting the facilities management plan any fees or facilities -improvement requirements which it deems necessary to impose on development projects within the zone in order to implement the citywide facilities and improvement plan and the local facilities management plan. (b) A facilities management plan may be amended following the same procedures for the original adoption. (c) A local facilities management plan shall be considered a project for the purposes of Title 19 of this Code. Environmental documents should be processed concurrently ·with th plan. 21.90.130 Im lementation of facilities and imorove~ent reauirements. . (a) To ensure that the prov is ions of this chaoter and the general plan are met the following shall apply: (1) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter n development permit shall be approved unless the map or J;)ermit is consistent with the local facilities management plan and unless provision for all facilities and improvements related to the development project are provided or funded. (2) No building.permit shall be issued unless all applicable fees, including but not limited to, public facilities fees, bridge and thoroughfare fees, traffic impact fees, facilities management fees, school fees, park-in-lieu fees, sewe fees, water fees, or other development fees identified in the citywide facilities and improvements plan and local facilities management plan and adopted by the City Council have first been paid or provision for their payment has been made to the satisfaction of the City Council. 14. -188 -• l 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 161 171 " 1811 19\l 2oli 2111 22" 2311 24 I 25 ,, ,I 26 ii ,, 27 :; 28 ii I! :I 11 11 ;, (b) · The citywide facilities and improvement plan and the local facility management plan process is part of the City's ongoing planning effort. It is anttcipated that amendments to the plans may be necessary. Adoption of a facilities management plan does not establish any entitlement or right to any particular general plan or zoning designation or any particular development proposal. The citywide facilities and improvements plan and the ·1ocal facilities management plans are guides to ensure that no development occurs unless adequate facilities or improvements will be available to meet demands created by development. Th.e City Council may initiate an amendment to any of the plans at any time if in its discretion it determines that an amendment is necessary to ensure adeauate facilities and improvements. ( c) If at any time it appears to the satisfaction of the City Manager that facilities or i.Dlprovements within a· facilities management zone or zones are inadequate to accommodate any further develop~ent· within that zone or that the performance standards adopted pursuant to Section 21.90.100 are not being met he shall immediately report the deficiency to the Council. If the Council determines that a deficiency exists then no further building or development permits shall be issued within the affected zone or zones and development shall cease until an amendment to the citywide facilities and improvements plan or applicable local facilities management plan which addresses the def icien·cy ·is approved by the City Council and the perfornance standard is met. (d) The Planning Director shall monitor the developmen activity for each local facilities management zone and shall prepare an annual report to the City Council consisting of maps, graphs, charts, tables and text and which includes a developmental activity analysis, a facilities and improvements adequacy analysis, a facility revenue/expenditure analysis and recommendation for any amendments to the facilities management plan. The co~tent of the annual report shall be established by the City Council. (e) The City Council shall annually review the citywid facilities and improvements plan at the time it considers the City's capital improvement budget. 21.90.140 Obligation to pay fees or install improvements reauired by any other law. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as relieving a builder, developer or subdivider from any public improvement requirement, dedication reauirement or fee requirement which is imposed pursuant to Titles 13, 18, 20 or 21 of this code or pursuant to any City Council policy. 21.90.150 Implementina guidelines. The City Council may adopt any guidelines it deems necessary to implement this chapter. 21.90.160 Exclusions. (a) Development proposals which consist of facilities, 15. -1a9 -I . .- l 2 I 3' 4 5 6 7 8' 9 10 11 12 Q ~ I 13 Ill .... -~ I ;· 'II ,C 141 l -.z . a: • ~ 0 • <"' . G 2 i 15! "' . ~ u ... ► 1M • 16i z "' ~ Q 1U Z ,C U ~ _ Ill ! = ~ 17 > a: ,c < ► u ... G 1a!I ., 1911 Ii 201: n 21;1 22 1 I 23 1 241 I 251 26 27 .I I 28 or structures constructed by a city, county, special district, state, or federal government or any agency, department, or subsidiary thereof for governmental purposes are excluded from the provisions of this chapter. This exclusion shall not apply to development proposals to which a possessory interest tax would be applicable. (b) Tentative maps the application for which was accepted before August 6, 1985 ~ay be approved without complying with the plans adopted pursuant to this Chapter but any other development permits or building permits for the project shall be subject to the reauirements of the plans. The tentative map shall be subject to Section 21.90.030. 21.90.170 Council actions, fees, notice. (a} Whenever this chapter requires or permits an action or decision of the City Council, that action or decision shall be accomplished by a resolution. (b) The City Council shall establish application and processing fees for the submission and processing of facilities management plans and for any other request made under Section 21.90.100, 21.90.120 or 21.90.140. . (c) Whenever written notice is required to be given to property owners under this section the notice shall be mailed by first class mail to the owners shown on the last equalized assessment roll. 21.90.180 Expiration of chapter. This chapter shall expire on June 30, 2001 unless it is extended or reenacted on or before that date • 21.90.190 Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of the ordinance codified in this chapter is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any rourt of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance codified in this chapter. The City Council declares that it would have passed the ordinance codified in thi chapter and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phras thereof, irrespective of the fact that any part thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. .,. SECTION 2: The City Council makes the following findings: 1. Since January 1985, the City of Carlsbad has been undertaking a comprehensive review of the Land Use Element of it General Plan. As part of that review a Council appointed Citizens Committee prepared a comprehensive report and recommendation to the City Council. That report was subject to public hearings by both the Planning Commission and City Council Included in the recommendations of the Citizens Committee were recommendations that no new development should occur unless 16. -190 - i I ., 0 < era I II) ..I ~ ~ --'l,j < ,-.z . a: . ~o era= < '= '-'2~ 14. . ..I (.J ... > w . Z W ~ 0 wZ < u ~ -era ~ t:: ~ > a: < < > <J ... i3 ll 21 I 3 4 5 6 7 i 81 9 10 11 12 13 I, 14 1 I 15 I 16i I 171 i! 18i; 11 I' 19 i: ' I• 20 ii 1' 21 !: 11 22:1 I 23' 2411 25 26 27 i I 28 I I, adequate public facilities are available concurrently with need to serve the new development. 2. On August 6, 1985, the City Council adopted Interi~ Ordinance No. 9766, imposing certain temporary land use controls on property within the City, consistent with the recommendation of the Citizens Committee. On September 3, 1985, the City Council adopted Interim Ordinance No. 9771 which extended the restrictions of Ordinance No. 9766 until July 20, 1986. on December 10, 1985, the City Council approved in concept several land use proposals not contained in the Citizens Committee report. On January 21, 1986 the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 9791 imposing a temporary moratorium on development approvals based on the findings contained in that ordinance. On April 22, 1986 the City Council revised City Council Policy No. 17, based on the findings contained therein. On May 6, 19~6 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 8107 establishing a traffic impact fee for the La Costa Area of the City. The City Council finds that all of these actions plus the adoption of Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code are necessary to ensure adequate public facilities are available to serve any new development in the City. Without Chapter 21.90 and the requirements imposed by it, adequate public facilities may not b available to serve new development or building. Development or building without public facilities is contrary to the City General Plan and would be dangerous to the public health and safety. 3. This action of the City Council is consistent with long standing policies and objectives of the City to ensure adequate public facilities wifnin Carlsbad. This action will protect the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Carlsbad by ensuring safe streets, adequate water, sewer and drainage facilities, su~iicient fire protection and recreation facilities. 4. This action is consistent with the City's policy to provide housing opportunities for all economic sectors of the community, because sufficient opportunities for new housing continue to exist within the City and Chapter 21.90 does not affect the number of houses which may be built. In addition, develop~ent of housing for low and moderate income persons and families would most likely occur in areas of the City which are designated for highest development priority. By encouraging development of infill areas first, where the infrastructure is already existing, the cost of housing may be reduced. 5. Because any new development affects public facility availability it is necessary to impose the fees and charges whic will be used to provide public facilities on any new building in the City. The Council finds that failure to impose the fees and charges on any new building in the City will adversely affect th public health and safety by reducing the safety of its City's streets, increasing the burden on water, sewer, drainage and fire 17. -191 - 4 51 6 7 8 9 10 11 I ' l4!i 15! I 16i ii 11jl , . ., ,I Ii 22;: 2:3 ii li 24 ii 25 lj 26 \i 271: ' i: 281; I ! facilities, and by overcrowding existing schools, parks and recreational facilities. 6. Adoption of Chapter 21.90 will not adversely affect the regional welfare. By ensuring that adeauate and safe public facilities and improvements will exist to serve all of the development in Carlsbad and because many of these facilities and improvements are used by persons residing in neighborinq areas and cities the safety and welfare of the whole reg ion is enhanced. SECTION 3: The City Council intends to implement the growth management program contained in Chapter 21.90 by following the work program in Exhibit A which is hereby made. a part of this ordinance. The City Council may adjust the work program without amending this ordinance as they determine necessary to accomplis effective growth management for the City of Carlsbad. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published a least once in the Carlsbad Journal within fifteen days after its adoption. The fees created by Section 21.90.050 of this ordinance shall be effec:;.ive as to building permits for single o multifamily residential projects 60 days after the adoption of this ordinance. INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on the 1986 and thereafter 18. -192 - 24th day of June -------- 3' 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 131 14 15 161 I l7i ,I 18 I! 19 1! 1; 20 \\ " ' 21 ii !I 221! 23 1 241 25 I 261 I 271: ii ,: 2811 I PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 1st day of __ J_u_l~v ____ , 1986, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Casler, Lewis, Kulchin, Chick and Pectine NOES: None ABSENT: None APP~OVED AS V ATTEST: LEGALITY City Attorney :ASLER, Mayor 19. -193 - I I . 1~ .... . "\ CULSBAD C:Xff COUWC:XL GROll'l'B IIA■&GBND'l' Pr.AB •■ana9in9 a Re■poa■ible aad Pro9re■■i•e Carlsbad Putare• IIOU Pr.&11 I. Citywide Pacilities and Improvement Plan A. Growth Control Mapping and Planning Systems 1. The General Plan will be utilized as the overalr base map with a maximum residential utilization i.e. mean density. 2. A citywide map will show all current and future public facilities and improvements. Each public facility and improvement will also be shown separately on a citywide map. 3. A citywide environmental constraints and open space map will be prepared. 4. These maps will also be broken down into quadrants to show greater area detail. a. Management Performance Standards 1. Establish overall performance or adequacy standards for each public facility and improvement. 2. Establish thresholds for each public facility and improvement. c. Citywide Pinancing Options 1. Pinancing options will be identified for each facility and improvement • ., 2. Budgeting for citywide public facility and improvement will be in conjunction with the City's five year capital improvement budget. D. Citywide Plan 1. A Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan will be prepared using growth control maps, performance standards and financing options. -194 - Development of Local Facility Management and Planning Zones. 1. The City shall be dLvided into 25 specific zones. 2. The size of each zone shall depend upon major circulation roads, lagoons, property ownership boundaries, and other identifiable characteristics. ·3. The purpose of zones: a. Requires landowners to work together in order to present development plans in accordance with the City's Growth Management Program. b. Requires landowners to provide development plans which adhere to the citywide facilities plan and to relate development to adjacent zones. c. Zones allow for greater citizen review prior to development approval. 4. Each zone will have a maximum residential utilization i.e. mean density. Specific densities for_ individual development plans within the zone, however, will be controiled through the normal planning process. s. Each zone must conform to the General Plan and the Growth Management Ordinance. II. Facility Management zone Processing A. Landowners submit local facilities management plans for prqcessing concurrently with ·normal environmental analysis. s. Local facilities management plans shall conform to all standards of the Growth Control Mapping and Planning systems aAd other existing City standards. c. The local plan shall provide a detailed financing plan to assure adequate funding of all citywide facilities and improvements identified in the citywide plan. The local plan shall also provide a detailed financial plan for all public facilities and improvements located within the local facilities management zone. All development within the loeal facilities management zone will be phased in accordance with the facility and improvement performance standards. o. A public hearing on the local facilities management plan and environmental analysis will be held concurrently. Notice to all landowners within.the zone as well as surrounding adjacent zone landowners. -195 - 1. After the public hearin9 1s completed on th• local facilities management zone and environmental analysis, then th• specific development plans will be processed in the normal method. p. lacb local facilities mana9e■ent plan will be reviewed annually by th• City to ensure that all performance standard• are bein9 met. If they are not, development will be stopped. S/13/8, ad -196 - APPENDIX 2 -197 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 I 20 21 22 2:3 24 25 26 27 28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2670 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ZONE 6 ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD CASE NO.: LOCAL FACILIITES MANAGEMENT PLAN -ZONE 6 WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planninq Commission, and WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution No. 8797 adopting the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan establishing facility zones and performance standards for public facilities, dnd WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution No. 9808 requiring the processing of a Local Facilities Management Plan, and WH[HEAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 2nd day of September, 1987, and on the 16th ddy of September, 1987, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A) That the above recitations are true and correct. 198 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission APPROVES Local Facilities Management Plan -Zone 6, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: 1 2 3 Findings: 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 ) 2) 3) 4) 5) That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6 is consistent with the Land Use Element, the Public Facilities Element, and the other Elements contained in Carlsbad's General Plan. That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6 is consistent with Section 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Growth Management), and with the adopted Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan. That the Local Facilities Manaqement Plan for Zone 6 and the conditions contained therein will promote the public safety and welfare by ensuring that public facilities will he provided in conformance with the adopted performance stdndards. The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6 will control the timing and locations of growth by tying the pace of development to the provision of public facilities and improvements. The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6 will prevent growth unless public facilities and services are available in conformance with the adopted performance standards. 17 Conditions: 18 1) 19 20 I I I I 21 II I I 22 II II 23 Ill/ 24 Ill/ 25 I I II 26 Approval is granted for Local Facilities Management Plan -Zone 6 as contained in the Pldn titled Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 6, dated September 2, 1987, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 27 PC RESO NO. 2670 -2- 28 199 1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the 2 Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held 3 on the 16th day of September, 1987, by the following vote, to 4 wit: 5 AYES: 6 NOES: 7 ABSENT: 8 ABSTAIN: 9 10 ll MAHY MAHCUS, Chair"1an C ARLSl1AD PL Al~N ING COMMISSION 12 ATTEST: 13 14 MICHAEL :J. HOLZMILLER 15 PLANNING OIHECTOR 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PC HESO NO. 2670 -3- 26 200 27 28 APPENDIX 3 -201 - 1 2 3 4 RESOLUTION NO. 9291 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 6. WHEREAS, a Local Facilities Management Plan has been 5 prepared for Local Facilities Management Zone 6 in accordance 6 with Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and 7 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on September 16 and 8 September 23, 1987 hold duly noticed public hearings as required 9 by law to consider said plan and at the conclusion of the 10 hearing adopted Resolution 'No. 2670 making findings and 11 recommending that the City council adopt a plan; and 12 WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was issued by the 13 Planning Director on July 22, 1987 indicating that the Local 14 Facilities Management Plan is not anticipated to have any 15 significant adverse impact on the environment; and 16 17 1987 WHEREAS, the City Council at their meeting of November 10, held a duly noticed public hearing and considered 18 all testimony and arguments of anyone desiring to be heard; 19 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City 20 council of the City of Carlsbad, California as follows: 21 22 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That the findings of the Planning commission in 23 Resolution No. 2670 also constitute findings of the City 24 council. 25 3. That the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6 26 dated September 2, 1987 on file with the City Clerk and 27 incorporated herein by reference is hereby approved. Any 28 202 development occurring within the boundaries of Zone 6 shall 1 comply with all the terms and conditions of said plan. 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the 3 Carlsbad City council held on the 10th 4 day of November , 1987 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Pettine, Mamaux and Larson NOES: None ABSENT: None CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor ATTEST: ~ ;{ {2_ov 7==~ ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, clty¢1erk (SEAL) 203 2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 I 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 9292 ------- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE COLLECTION OF A LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FEE IN THE AREA DEFINED AS LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE 6. WHEREAS, Section 21. 90. 050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code authorizes the establishment of a local facilities management fee to pay for improvements or facilities identified in a local facilities management plan which are related to new development in a zone and are not otherwise financed by any other fee, charge or tax on development, or are not installed by a developer as a condition of a building or development permit; and WHEREAS, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6 identified a need for facilities which relate to new development in the zone and are not otherwise financed or being provided; and WHEREAS, the City Council on November 10, 1987 adopted Resolution No. 9291 which approved the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6 which identified several public facilities which do not conform with the adopted performance standards; and WHEREAS, the fee required is in addition to any other means of financing these facilities or improvements identified in the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6 and is necessary in order to allow the city to collect this fee from those developers allowed to proceed with development prior to Ill/ Ill/ 204 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 the adoption of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6; and WHEREAS, the establishment of this fee provides the mechanism for development to be allowed in the Local Facility Management Zone 6 provided that all of the identified improvements needed in the Local Facilities Management Plan are made or guaranteed to bring all facilities into conformance with the adopted performance standard prior to allowing any additional development in the zone. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT. RESOLVED by the City Council of the city of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. Effective this date, a Local Facilities Management Fee shall be collected upon all new development within the Local Facility Management Zone 6 as shown on Exhibit "l" which is made a part hereof. 3. The amount of the fee to be collected shall be based on a rate of $ 5,105 per residential dwelling unit to be assessed on all new development in Local Facility Management Zone 6. 4. That all developers within the boundaries of the Local Facility Management Zone 6 who have been issued development permits and have signed the AGREEMENT TO PAY FEES FOR FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS AS REQUIRED BY THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEM shall be required to pay this fee, less Ill/ Ill/ 201Ja 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 those fees previously Bridge & Thoroughfare collected for park-in-lieu and Benefit District, within thirty the (30) days of receipt of the City's invoice in accordance with said agreement. 5. Reimbursement may be made by the City for those fees collected upfront that are utilized to fund improvements where other established fees are currectly ·being collected but are not sufficient enough at this time to fund said improvements. The timing of the reimbursement shall be made in accordance with the City's adopted Capital Improvements Program and will not include costs for operation expenses or interest. 6. That the establishment of this fee does not allow development to begin in the Local Facility Management Zone 6 until all of the facilities are brought into conformance with the adopted performance standard or are guaranteed prior to allowing any additional development. 7. That if an alternative financing mechanism is presented which resolves the facilities deficiencies identified in the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 6, and is approved by the city Council, this Local Facilities Management Fee may be reduced or eliminated altogether. 8. The Local Facilities Management Fee shall be collected as described in Section 21.90.050 (e) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Ill/ /Ill 204b l. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on the 10th by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Pettine, Mamaux and Larson NOES: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Flerk (SEAL) 204c CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor ZONE 6 EXHIBIT 1 Clly of c.,1,n,o Gro•'" MINIO•'"•"' Ptc-or,,,., JANUARY 198 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT BOUNDARIES 204d APPENDIX 4 -205 - SOURCES OF DATA 1. Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, City of Carlsbad, Revised September 29, 1986 2. Master Drainage Plan for the City of Carlsbad, adopted June, 1980 3. Sewer Master Plan, City of Carlsbad November, 1976 June, 1984 April, 1985 4. Costa Real Municipal Water District Master Pl<ln, February, 1985 5. Parks and Recreation Element of the Generdl Plan, City of Carlsbad, Ju11e, 1982 6. Memo to Planning Commission from Parks and Recreation Director, dated March 26, 1987 7. Circulation Element of the General Plan, City of Carlsbad 8. Standard Design Criteria for the Improvements in the City of Carlsbad, Design of Public Works 1984 9. Draft Barton-Aschman Traffic Study, March, 1987 10. Capital Improvement Program Budget, 1986-1987 11. Capital Improvement -Program, 1987-1991 12. General Plan as of 1/1/87 13. Zoning Ordinance as of 1/1/87 14. Zoning Map as of 1/1/87 15. A strategic plan and space needs study of the City of Carlsbad City Hall and Libraries August 26, 1986 206 APPENDIX 5 -207 - ADT Average daily daily vehicle trips associated region. GLOSSARY trips. A guide of average, or estimated generated from a specific project or APN Assessor's Parcel Number. A portion of the legal description which specifically identifies each parcel of land.- Buildout The year when the City of Carlsbad is completely developed with all associate~ public facilities in place. Bridqe and Thoroughfare Benefit District -A district established to fund major thoroughfares and bridge improvements. These bridge improvements are at I-5, Palomar Airport Roarl, Poinsettia Lane, and La Costa Avenue. See Exhibit S, Page 125. CIP -Abbreviation for Capital Improvement Program. Community Park 20 -50 acres in size; designed to serve the broad recreational needs of several neighborhoods; located adjacent to secondary artefial or greater; publicly ownerl. Demand -The amount of needed facility generated within the zone, quadrant, or City based upon the adopted performance standard. DU -Abbreviation for dwelling unit. EDU Equivalent dwelling unit. The average amount of sewage generated by a single family household per day. Commercial and industrial developments are also converted into EDU's to assess their direct impact upon facilities. Environmentally Constrained Lands -Beaches, wetlands, floodways, other water bodies, riparian and woodland habitats, slopes greater than 25%, major roadways, railroad tracks, and major powerline easements. -208 - General Plan Density Ranges Residential Land Use Allowed Dwelling Units Per Acre RL -Residential Low RLM -Residential Low-Medium RM -Residential Medium RMH -Residential Medium-High RH -Residential High Growth Management Control Point 0 -1.5 0 -4.0 4.0 -8.0 8.0 -15.0 15.0 -23.0 Residential Land Use Allowed.Dwelling Units Per Acre RL RLM RM RMH RH 1.0 3.2 6.0 11. 5 19.0 Established based upon the overall averaqe land use yield in each designation at the midpoint of the density range. ICU -Abbreviation for Intersection Capacity Unit. The ratio of traffic demands to be placerl on an intersection in relation to the capacity of an intersection. Level of Service The relative level of operation of an intersection or traffic signal. Level of Service (LOS) A B Description Free flow (relatively). If signalized, conditions are such that no approach phase is fully utilized by traffic and no vehicle waits through more than one red indication. Very slight or no delay. Stable flow. If signalized, an occa- sional approach phase is fully utilized; vehicle platoons are formed. This level is suitable operation for rural desi9n purposes. Slight delay. -209 - ICU Value 0.00-C.60 0.61-0.70 Level of Service (LOS) C D E F Description Stable flow of operation. If signalized, drivers occasionally may have to wait through more than one red indication. Acceptable delay. Approaching unstable flow or operation; queues develop, but are periodically cleared. Tolerable delay. Unstable flow or operation; the inter- section has reached ultimate capacity; this condition is not uncommon in peak hours. Congestion and intolerable delay. Forced flow or operation. operates below capacity. Intersection ICIJ Value 0.71-0.80 0.81-0.90 0.91-1.00 1. 00+ Derived from: Highway Capacity Manual, HRB Special Report 87. MGD Million gallons a day. A term used to descrihe flow of water or sewage. Net Vacant Acres Obtained by subtractinq all of the 100% ----,----,---,------constrained acres and one-half of the areas shown as 25-40% slopes. Industrial and commercial development were then multiplied by .4 to determine net acreage (this allows for all regulations which affect overall lot coveraqe). Open Space Pocket parks, homeowner ball fielrls, planned residential development (PRO), common areas, tennis courts, or other areas containing passive or active recreational facilities, such as major power line easements. PIL Park-in-Lieu Fee. A fee paid prior to the issuance of building permits in lieu of land dedication for park purposes. PFF -Public Facility Fee. As of 1987 a 2.5% fee paid prior to the issuance of building permits. All proceeds from this fund are used for the purpose of acquiring, building, improving, expanding and equipping public property, improvements, and facilities. -210 - Special Use Area -1-5 of orily one or two swimming pool, etc. acres in size; a activity type local recreation facility uses, i.e., tennis court, TIF Trdffic Impact Fee. A fee pdid at issuance of buildinq permits for vdrious traffic circulation improvPrnents. The City is divided into two fee categories: 1) The La Costa area and 2) the remainder of the City. See Exhibit 71, on Page 211a. 2 11 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE OLIVENHAIN 1111111 AREA BOUNDARY ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN 211a EXHIBIT 7 1 __ ,,_ MELROSE AVE Cily of C•ltbad Growtl'I M.,,.gem..,. Pto,gam -JANUARY 198 BRIDGE & THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT POINSETTIA LN ♦ ~ DISTRICT BOUNDARY ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN 211b EXHIBIT 72 Clly otC•hbed Gro•r" Maneve,n.,,, Progra,- ~ JANUARY 1987 APPENDIX 6 -212 - GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ZONE 6: LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN PUBLIC FACILITY AGENCIES SERVING ZONE 6 Facility City Administrative Facilities Library Wastewater Treatment Parks Circulation Drainage Fire Open Space Schools Sewer Water 213 Agency City of Carlsbad City of Carlsbad A. City of Carlsbad B. Leucadia County Water District c. San Marcos County Yiater District City of Carlshad City of Carl shad City of Carlsbad City of Carlsharl City of Carlsbad A. Carsbad Unified School District B.1 Encinitas Union School District B.2 San DieQuito Union High School District C. San Marcos Unified School District A. City of Carlshad B. Leucadia County Water District C. San Marcos. County Water District A. Costa Real Municipal Water District B. Olivehan Municipal Water District C. San Marcos County Water District APPENDIX 7 -214 - ZONE 6 ZON~ 1'J -I -I -·-.. ' .. I .. • ' # ..... ~, \ ----~--<:.-_,,,,,.-11/ ---(1 Ballqultoa Lagoon --=...:~:-:::::_--=-~~~.:. -~=~~~·:·_----· \ DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Sheet I of 9 ;" •! A P P E N D I X 7 32 -I 54 , ' EXHIBIT 73 -I ZONE JU -I 30 -I -I -30 i .. I .. LONI: 11 ~I~ •~ r "f I,,. 1-?====-s~' ,-~\. --- r.~ ~ ZONI 12 I ea - ·-·-84 ---·-·-·-·11 Cuv 01 c1,11b1a Glowrn Manag•ment Program JANUARY 1887 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN Sheet 2 of, ZONE 6: DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AS OF JANUARY 1. 1987 ZONE 6 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS MAP INDEX NUMBER 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 1 0. 11 . 1 2. 1 3. 14. 1 5. 1 6. 1 7. 1 8. 19. 2 0. 21. 22. 2 3. 2 4. 25. (See inset) 2 5. 1 2 5. 2 2 5. 3 2 5. 4 2 5. 5 2 5. 6 2 5. 7 2 5. 8 2 5. 9 PROJECT NUMBER CITY OF CARLSBAD CT 85-34 CT 82-23 SDP 82-4 SDP 86-11 CT 79-28 CT 81-3 CP 149 CT 77-8(A) CP 45 CT 77-8 CP 45 SOP 77-1 CT 83-33 CP 257 CT 72-34 CT 79-4 CT 79-4 CT 81-24 CP 6(A) MP-555 CT 77-3 CT 82-26 CP 223 CT 84-24; CP 295 CT 85-28; CP 321 -216 - DEVELOPMENT NAME View Point Mola Von der Ahe West Bluff North West Bluff Hills Paseo de La Costa Mola Mola Retail Shops Seaport Rancho La Cuesta Rancho La Cuesta resub 76-4 Casita de La Costa La Costa Second Casita de La Costa La Costa Condns La Costa Valley La Costa Village Colina de La Costa Stoneleigh Heights Greenview Tara, Ltd. La Costa Valley Condos Jockey Club Casa del Rey Banko Condos Sea View Condos La Costa Del Sol La Costa Pacific La Costa Valley La Costa Terrace La Costa Valley Condor La Costa View ZONE 6 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS MAP INDEX NUMBER 2 5. 10 2 5. 11 25.12 2 5. 1 3 2 6. 2 7. 2 8. 2 9. 30. 3 1 • 32. 3 3. 3 4. 3 5. 3 6. 3 7. 38. 3 9. 40. 41. 42. 4 3. 44. 4 5. 46. 4 7. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 5 5. 5 6. 5 7. 58. 5 9. PROJECT NUMBER CITY OF CARLSBAD CT 79-23 CT 84-41; PUD 77; zc 342 CT 84-10; CP 277 CT 81-29 PUD 33 CT 75-4 CT 85-16; Pl.ID 85 CT 73-29 CT 83-22; CP 245 CT 79-16 CT 84-29 CT 81-36 CP 183 CT 80-17 CP 83 CT 79-21 PCO 78 CT 84-43 CP 302 PCD-84 CT 85-1 CP 307 CT 79-12 CT 80-4 CP 52 CT 79-8 CT 79-7(A) CP 138 CUP 139 CT 85-7 CP 312 CT 81-·12 CP 159 SOP 81-1 CT 80-25 Cl-' 104. CT 85-19; PUO P,7 CT 85-8; PUD 82 CT 84-23; SOP 84-8 SDP 84-8(A) CUP 258 -217 - Sheet 3 of, DEVELOPMENT NAME Majorca West Castas De La Costa La Costa Golf View Terras Condo Arroyo Villas Alga Hills Spy Glass Point Alicante Hills Estates North La Costa Mearlows Carrillo Estates Robin Glenn El Oasis La Costa Village Patio Homes Hescort Hei')hts Tradewincis Pierrel Stabile Meadow Villas 24 TM Buena Vista Apts. La Costa Townhomes La Costa Hills Apt. 18 TM Hamseyen Valley View La Costa Meadows St. El i.zabeth Catholic Church La Costa Alta La Costa Ridgeview La Costa Meadowbrook The Mearlowlands Meadow crest The Meadows La Costa Apt. La Costa Hotel La Costa Condo 113 . ZONE 6 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS MAP HWEX NUMBER 60. 61. a. b • C • d. e • f. g. h. 62. 6 3. 64. 65. 66. 6 7. 68 69. 70. 71. 72. 7 3. 74. (See inset) 7 4. 1 74.2 74.3 74.4 74.5 74.6 74.7 74.8 74.9 74.10 74.11 74.12 74.13 74.14 74.15 74.16 74.17 PROJECT NUMBER CITY OF CARLSBAD Sheet 4 of, DEVELOPMENT NAME La Costa Condo /!4 Neighborhood Commercial Area Grocery Store Office Warehousing Office SOP 78-3(6) CT 83-1 CP 226 SP 171(C) MP 149(K) CT 75-7 CT 73-5 CT 79-5 Resub CT 78-1 CT 73-22 CT 79-20 CT 73-7 CT 72-24 County Subdivision CT 72-33 CT 84-4 CP 275 CT 81-11 CP 156 CT 73-32 CT 80-26; CP 107 CT 79-13 CT 73-6 CT 73-19 -218 - Daycare Retail, Bank & Restaurant Gas Station Bank Burnett Shapelly Monalem Villas Green Valley Knolls La Costa Greens Villa La Cost.-1 La Costa Greens La Costa Greens La Costa de Marbella Spanish Village La Costa South Navarra La Costa Riviera La Costa South La Costa Fairways La Costa Greens El Caledon Fairway South Fave La Costa La Costa South Orleans East La Costa South Sabrina Terrace La Costa South Tiffany Place Townhomes Costa Verde La Costa South La Costa Fairview ZONE 6 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS MAP INDEX NUMBER 74.18 75 (See Inset) 7 5. 1 7 5. 2 7 5. 3 7 5. 4 75.5 75.6 75.7 75.8 7 5. 10 7 5. 11 7 5. 12 7 5. 1 3 75.14 7 5. 1 5 7 5. 16 7 5. 1 7 7 5. 18 7 5. 19 75.20 75.21 75.22 7 5. 2 3 75.24 7 5. 2 5 75.26 7 5. 2 7 7 5. 2 8 75.2~ 75.30 75.31 75.32 7 6. 77. 78. 7 9. 80. PROJECT NUMBER CITY OF CARLSBAD CT 73-31 CT 73-15 CT 80-7 CT 79-15 CT 79-17 CT 75-3 CT 73-S1 CT 79-19 CT 79-11 CT 80-8 CP-58 CT 83-38 CT 73-18 PCU 69 CT 73-35 CT 79-26 PCU 81 CT 77-14 CT 73-33 15 Apts. CT 73-12 CP 57 C T 8 2 -3 C P 2-0 3 CT 76-17 PC 80-922; PC 79-477 CT 72-20 CP 36(A) CT 72-20 CT 76-3 -219 - Sheet 5 of, DEVELOPMENT 1-;AME Navarra Gardens Golfview Villa La Costa South Jerez Villas La Costa South Courtyard Town homes Sandtrap Villas Silverwood Townhomes La Costa Nuev"' outh La Costa Vista 13odjanac La Costa South Par Five La Costa South Xanadu La Costa South Villa Rameria La Costa South Golfcrest Gibralter Lado de Loma La Costa South Morrow/Goodman Gi a t Apt. La Costa South Roundtree La Costa South Gibralter Villas Jerez Court La Costa South Unit 5 Fairbrook Villas Cannon Park La Costa Vale Unit 2 Sea point Tennis Club La Costa Vale Unit 3 La Costa Vale Unit 4 ZONE 6 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS MAP INDEX NUMBER 8 1 • 82. 8 3. 84. 8 5. A. la Costa Golf Course PROJECT NUMBER CITY OF CARLSBAD CUP 229 CT 73-2 B. Alicante Hills Parcel 2 (undeveloped) WJO 7/20/87 -220 - Sheet fi of, DEVELOPMEMT NAME Sh ad y Ho 11 ow La Costa Vale Unit 1 Christ United Presbyterian Church Santa Fe Glens La Costa Canada 74.2 74..3 74.4 74.5 74.8 .Na\181'1'8Drwe I 74..18 I Fl'' I 74.7 N ~ 74.15 I '74.8 N I N t 74.13 I I I 74..9 I 74..10 74.12 I (I) ::r mr X CD :c ... -Q) m -0 -t - ..... (0 (JI N N ... 26.3 2 6.5 • 21.11 215.13 2&.8 WAY 26.8 / "' m ::r X • X • --m -.... -I 0 .... -.si,. (0 ZONE 6 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS MAP INDEX NUMBER 8 1 • 82. 8 3. 84. 8 5. A. La Costa Golf Course PROJECT NUMBER CITY OF CARLSBAD CUP 229 CT 73-2 8. Alicante Hills Parcel 2 (undeveloped) WJD 7/20/87 -220 - Sheet & of, DEVELOPMEMT NAME Sh ad y Ho 11 ow La Costa Vale Unit 1 Christ United Preshyterian Church Santa Fe Glens La Costa Canada APPENDIX 8 224 --------------- N N u, ZONE 1'J ----~~/=---------- Batlqultoe Laggon ~-=-----/~---------- MAJOR LAND OWNERS LJ OAON CORPORATION D) CrTY OF CARLSBAD II LA COSTA RESORT & SPA IIIll] SMALLER INDIVIDUAL LAND OWNERS ZONE 6 ZONE 1{) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -I -I I -I I -I LAND OWNERSHIP .... , .... ::_.(:/?; Major ~APPENDIX 8 ZONE 11 IT 7 7 C11y of Carlsbaa Growth Mana~emanl Program JANUARY 1987 Major Land Owners APPENDIX 8 ZONE 6 LAND OWNERSHIP Source of data: April 1986 Redl Estate Register 226 Page 2 of 7 Page 3 of 7 Net Assessor's Acres Parcel No. La Costa Resort Hotel & Spa 3.50 216-130-59 2.97 215-210-10 2.45 -11 5.83 -12 .85 -18 25.64 -22 12.98 215-480-01 • 1 2 216-123-3 109.17 -4 1. 15 -5 2. 18 216-124-1 5.34 -2 .45 -3 2.92 -4 2.96 -6 1 . 07 -11 .30 -13 1. 43 216-130-36 32.50 -45 4.48 -64 96.63 -67 . 4 5 215-220-23 .69 -30 • 6 215-110-32 2.09 216-210-4 TOTAL 318.75 25 227 Oaon Corporation Net Acres .R7 6.33 8.67 12.43 2.09 7. 1 5 3.68 9.54 1 3. 21 6.42 4.67 10.36 7.95 1 • 61 1 3, 3 0 1 7. 3 8 2 • 1 2 1. 2 5 1 • 9 3 .90 13.08 5 •. 5 3 1. 47 3.67 TOTAL 155.81 228 Page 4 of 7 Assessor's Parcel No. 216-130-51 -58 215-491-46 -47 -48 215-430-15 215-480-22 -15 126-'124-7 223-020-16 -21 -41 -42 2;,2-150-16 223-010-28 -32 -31 ~23-293-20 223-240-23 223-230-11 2?.3-050-049 223-050-051 223-050-052 223-050-053 24 Page 5 of 7 City of Carlsbad Uet Assessor's Acres Parcel No. 3.45 223-271-25 .64 -26 12.34 223-180-08 2. 51 -25 7. 1 8 223-120-33 5.05 -35 3.67 2'15-410015 19.53 223-050-0343 TOTAL 54.37 8 229 Smaller Individual Landowners Ponderosd County Homeowners Corond La Costa Homeowners Association Goshtasb Hamsdyeh Westwood Savings & lorld Hugo Hanson Deverly Rowen Bevery Griffiths Walter Frandsen North Bonitd Partners Calso Ltd. CRFC Partnership #101 The San Diego City Employees Retirement System Alicante Hills Joint Venture Altiva Place Ltd. #1 Altiva Place Ltd. #2 Carlsbad Enterprises Lincoln La Costa 230 Net Acres 4.69 14.58 11. 65 30.92 .66 1. 45 .67 2.78 3.90 7.26 4.46 4.82 16.54 20 10 10 40 9 50.45 4.29 54.74 8. 1 8 1. 58 8.69 6.51 1 5. 2 41.09 4.66 .55 5.21 2.04 10.55 9.95 Page 6 of 7 Assessor's Parcel No. 215-561-49 215-031-07 215-030-13 3 223-230-01 -291-28 -29 3 215-370-28 215-050-65 -64 -63 3 215-050-05 -03 -04 3 215-050-61 215-480-19 215-480-21 2 216-160-17 216-160-22 2'16-124-16 -17 2 216-130-61 215-480-17 -18 2 215-480-20 222-150-15 223-010-36 Encinitas School District San Marcos School District Newport Shores Builders 231 Net Acres 9.55 7.93 10.22 Page 7 of 7 Assessor's Parcel No. 223-1h0-24 215-410-14 216-121-1[1- APPENDIX 9 232 Page 1 of 5 APPENDIX 9 ZONE 6: GENERAL PLAN LAND USE SUB-AREAS ACREAGE SUMMARY AS OF 1-1-87 General Plan land Use Designation Gross Acres Residential RL -Low (0-1.5 du/ac) !·forth South RL-1 RL-1 TOTAL RL RLM -Low/Mediu ■ (0-4 du/ac) North South RLM-1 (SW Quad) R L M -2 (SW Qua rl) RLM-3 RLM-4 HLM-5 RLM-6 RLM-7 Sub-total RLM-1 RLM-2 RLM-3 RLM-4 Rli-1-5 Sub-total TOTAL RLM RM -Mediu ■ (fl.-8 du/ac) North RM -1 (SW Quad ) RM-2 (SW Quad) RM -3 (SW Quad ) RM-4 RM-5 RM-6 RM -7 (SW Uu ad) Sub-total 233 199 17.7 45.5 73.0 52.0 33.7 2.7 19,'l. 4 25.2 430.5 380.3 144. 1 26.8 1 7. 5 4.25 572.95 14.8 4.7 36.6 68.2 86.4 15 3. 5 7.4 371.6 21&.7 1003.45 General Plan Land Use Desiqnation South Rt1 -2 RM-3 Sub-total TOTAL RM RMH -Medium/High (8-15 du/ac) North South RMH-1 Rt1H-3 RMH-4 RMH-5 RMH-6 Sub-total RMi-1-1 Rt1H-2 RMH-3 RMH-4 R~H-5 RHH-6 Sub-total TOTAL RMH RH -High (15-23 (du/ac) South Combination RH-1 RH-2 RH-3 Rl-1-4 TOTAL RH Page Z of 5 Gross Acres 1. 7 38.5 40.2 62.0 31. 0 27.0 18.4 1 0. 0 148~4 4. 9 1 4. 7 11. 3 97.25 127.4 15.7 271.25 3. 3 2 6. 1 2 9. 5 8. 7 RH/O -Residential High (15-23 du/ac)/office South RH/0-1 TOTAL RH/0 TOTAL ALL RESIDENTIAL Southwest Quadrant Southeast Quadrant 234 2.3 411.8 419.65 67.6 2.3 2112.z 182.0 1930.Z General Plan Land Use Oesigriation Commercial C -Co ■■unity North C -1 ( SW Qu ad ) TOTAL C N -Neighborhood North South N-1 N-1 TOTAL N RC -Recreation South RC-1 TOTAL RC TOTAL ALL COMMERCIAL Page 3 of .5 Gross Acres 13.8 6.3 34.3 73.8 13.8 40.6 73.8 130.5 (Includes RH/0 Designated Area, does not include 9,3 acres of north RMH-1 desig11ated area developed as commercial land use) Utility U -Public Utility South U-1 TOTAL School E -Ele ■entary North South E-1 E-1 TOTAL 235 4.8 15.0 8.8 4.8 23.8 General Plan Land Use Designation Open Space OS -Open Space North South OS-1 05-2 OS-3 OS-4 Sub-total OS-1 OS-2 OS-3 05-4 OS-5 (SW Quad) Sub-totdl TOTAL OS Page -of 5 Gross Acres 41. 5 27.0 4.8 19.1 92.4 261.4 14. 3 4. 1 12.0 11 • 6 303.4 395.8 The above identifies the type anrl acreage of General Plan Land Use by Zone 6 subdrea as of May, 1987. 236 \ -·-·- I ..... , 0S-3-fA' I I -\ JRMH-1 t I -I ZONE 10 I -I -I I N w -..J I i RLM-1 .. • ' -ZONE 19 I -~.;.. NORTH 1, •-80UTH---~.---.,J/ ll,1li<f.-ill>S lag0<,n ZONE 6 I a: • "" .... lf v"l,Nif RLM-1 -I I ,.. ,, ,·-·-· ____ .. f ZONE 12 GENERAL PLAN- Sub Areas ·-·-·-· ·-·-·-· EXHIBIT 77a RM-8 ZONE 11 J"i .... RLM-2 .,· ,,-1 ~ RLM-1 -I --·-·-·-·11 .,, ID Cll CD (JI 0 City of CarlllMO .... G,owtll Manag1m1nl Pr09am (JI JANUARY 1887 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN APPENDIX 10 238 N w I.O APPENDIX 10 Page 1 of 8 ZONE 6 ESTIMATED ULTIMATE BUILDOUT: SUMMARY Of EXISTING, DEVELOPING AND POTENTIAL LAND USE UNDER THE GENERAL PLAN BY ZONE 6 SUB-AREA Zone 6 Total Southwest Quadrant Total Southeast Quadrant Total General Plan Land Use Designation Residential RL -Low (0 -1.5 du/tlc) North South HL-1 RL-1 TOTAL RLM -Low/Medium (0-4 du/ac) North RLM-1 (SW Quad) RLM-2 (SW Quad) RLM-3 HLM-4 RLM-5 RLM-6 HLM-7 Subtotal As of January 1, 1987 Gross Acres 2674. 1 207.4 24f6.7 199 17. 7 216.7 45.5 73.0 52.0 33.7 2.7 198.4 25.2 430.5 Exist i11g DU/AC 86 I 132. 82 15 / 12.17 101 / 144. 99 o I 0 2% I 73 87 / 52 56 / 29.83 o I 0 530 / 186. 73 68 I 23.12 1037 I 364.68 Developi11q DU/AC o I o o l o o I o 101 / 45.5 o I 0 o I 0 o I 0 o I 0 0 / 0 o I o 101 / 45.5 Undeveloped Potential DU/AC 82 I 66.18 5 / 5.53 87 / 71. 71 o I 0 o I 0 o I 0 8 I 3.87 4 / 2.7 35 I 11.67 9 I 2.08 56 I 203.2 Potential Ultimate Buildout 168 20 188 101 296 87 64 4 565 77 1194 APPENDIX 10. Page 2 of 8 Potential Existing Developing Undeveloped Ultimate Gross Acres DU/AC DU/AC Potential DU/AC Buildout South RU'1-1 380.3 1113 I 370.93 o I 0 35 I 9.37 1'148 RLM-2 144. 1 288 I 128.02 o I 0 16 / 16. 08 304 RLM-3 26.8 41 I 20.58 o I 0 21 I 6.22 62 RLM-4 17.5 0 I 7.81 38 I 9.69 0 / () 38 HLM-5 4.25 10 I 3.78 o I 0 2 I .47 12 ----- Subtotal 572. 9'> 1452 I '>31.12 38 I 9.69 74 I 32. 14 1564 TOTAL 1003.4, 2489 I 895.8 139 I 55.19 130 I 235.34 2758 RM -Medium (4-8 du/ac) N ,,,,. North RM-1 (SW Quad) 14.8 o I 0 60 I 14.8 o I 0 60 0 RM-2 (SW Quad) 4.7 36 I 4.7 0 / 0 u / 0 36 RM-3 (SW Quucl) 36.6 75 I 36.6 o / 0 0 / 0 75 Rl/4-4 68.2 0 I 4.2 229 I 64 0 / 0 229 R11-5 86.4 218 I 78. 1 '> 14 / 2.9 28 / 5.35 260 HM-6 153.) '>53 I 6b.14 368 I 85.36 0 / 0 921 HH-7 (SW Quad) 7.4 () I 1.48 0 I 0 31 I 5.92 31 Subtotal 37'1.6 882 I 193.27 67'1 /167.06 59 I '11.27 1612 South f·Ut-2 1. 7 0 I . 12 0 / (J 9 I 1. 58 9 Hll-3 38. '> 200 I 35. 16 o I 0 26 I 3.34 226 --- Subtotal 40.2 200 I 35. 28 () I () 35 I 4.92 235 TOTAL 411.8 '1082 I 228. '>5 67'1 /167.06 94 I 16.19 1847 APPENDIX 10, Page 3 of 8 Potential Ger,eral Plan Land Existing Developing Undeveloped Ultimate Use Designation Gross Acres DU/AC DU/AC Potential DU/AC Buildout RHH -Medium/High (8-15 du/ac) North RHH -1 62.0 * * * * Dwell in<J Uni ts 52.7 358 / 52.7 u I 0 u I 358 Commercial Sq. Ft. 9.3 55,616 sq. ft/ 9.3 u I 0 u I 55,816 sq. ft. RMH-3 31.0 372 I 28. 73 34 I 2. 27 0 I 406 RMH-4 27.0 145 / 20.09 0 I 0 73 I 6.91 21A RMH-5 18.4 118 / 11.68 64 / 4.08 28 I 2.64 210 RMH-6 10.05 o I o 136 /10 0 I 136 ---------- Subtotal 148.4 I 122.5 /16.35 I 9.55 Dwelling Units 139. 1 993 I 113. 2 234 /16.35 101 I 9.55 1,328 Commercial Sq. Ft. 9.3 55,816 sq. ft/ 9.3 u I o 0 I 0 55,816 sq. ft. South RMH-1 4.9 7 I 3.49 0 I 0 51 I 4.9 58 RHH-2 14.7 58 I 6.52 0 I 0 46 I 8. 18 104 N HMH-3 11. 3 0 I 3. ':> 120 I 7.8 0 I 0 120 ,I'> I-' RMH-4 97.25 260 I 48.32 154 /21.37 320 I 27.56 734 HMH-5 127 .4 '>64 I 86.98 164 /1+0;42 0 I 0 728 RMH-6 15.7 19 I 6.45 0 I o 103 I 9.25 122 Subtotal 271.25 906 I 155.26 438 /69.59 520 I 49.89 1,866 Dv.el ling Units 271.25 908 I 155.26 431-3 /69.59 520 I 49.89 1,866 Commercial Sq. Ft. 0 0 I 0 0 /0 0 I 0 0 TOTAL 419.65 I 277. 76 /85.94 I 59.44 Dwelling Uni ts 410.35 1, 901 I 268.46 672 /85.94 621 I 59.44 3,194 Commercial Sq. Ft. 9.3 55,816 sq. ft/9.3 0 I o 0 I 0 55,816 sq. ft. *The blocked calculations are detailed itemizatio11s of existing, developing, undeveloped potential and potential ultimate buildout development withir, the North l<HH-1 sub-area. These blocked calculations are added to this otner sub-areas in the sub-totals a11d totals. IJwell ing uni ts and commercial sq. ft. are totaled separately in blocks. lJo not add into column. N ,i:,. N APPENDIX 10 9 Page -of 8 General Plan Land Existing Developing Undeveloped Use Designation Gross Acres DU/AC DU/AC Potential DU/AC RH -Hiyh (15-23 du/de) South RH-1 3.3 96 I 3.3 o I 0 I 0 HH-2 26.1 447 I 22.62 o I 64 I 3.48 HH-3 29.5 239 I 22.11 17 / .52 123 I 6.87 RH-4 6.7 71 I 6.35 o I 43 I 2.35 TOTAL 67.6 853 I 54.38 17 I • 52 230 I 12.7 Existing Developing Undeveloped* DU or DU or Potential Sq. Ft. /AC _Sq. Ft. /AC DU or Sq. Ft/AC Combination Rl1/0 -Hesidential High (15-23 du/dc)/Office South RH/u -1 2.3 U / 0 0 I 0 61 du/2.3 30,056 sq ft/2.3 TOTAL 2.3 o I o 0 I 0 61 du/2.3 0 / 0 0 I 0 30,056 sq ft/2.3 -------- TOTAL ALL HESIIJE.NTlAL 2121.5 64 2 6 / 1 5 92 . 1 b 1499/308. 71 '1223/214. 8 SOUTHWEST QUALJHANT 182.0 407/ 115.78 161/ 60.3 31/ 5.92 SOUTHEAST QUADRANT 1939.5 60 ·1 9 I 1 4 7 6 . 4 '1338/248. 41 1192/208.8 ( Includes HH/0 Designated Areu, does not ir,clude 9. 3 acres of Rt1H designated area develoµed as commercial land use.) Potential Ultimate Buildout 96 511 379 114 1100 Estimatecl Ultimate Buildout DU or Sg. Ft. 61 du 30,056 sq. ft. 61 du 30,056 sq. ft. 9,148 599 8,549 APPENDIX 10, Page 5 of 8 Undeveloped* Estimated Gross Existing Developinq Potential Ultimate Buildout Acres Sq. Ft. /AC Sq. Ft./AC Sq. Ft. /AC Sq. Ft Commercial C -Community North C-1 (SW Uuad) 13. 8 u 100, 000 / 13 • 8 0 100,000 (approx) (approx) TOTAL 1J. 8 0 100, 000/ 13. 8 0 100,000 (approx) (approx) N -Neighborhood North N-1 6.3 4,800/ 6.3 0 I 0 35,651 (church) N (church) or 82,328 / 6.3 82,328 "'" w South N-1 34.3 2c3,380/34.3 0 I 0 224,,952 / 34.3 448,232 TOTAL 40.n 223,180740:6 o7o 307,180 I 40.6 530,560 + 4,800 or (church) 224,S52 +35,651 (church) RC -Recreation South RC-1 73.8 558, 238/73. 8 U / 0 406,180/73.8 964,418 TOTAL TJ:s -558,238173--:e, o-ro 0406, 180/73. 8 964,418 APPENDIX 10, Page 6 of 8 Estimated Undeveloped* Ultimate Gross Existing Developinq Potential Buildout Acres Sq. Ft./AC Sq. Ft./ AC Sq. Ft./AC Sq. Ft A. ruTAL ALL DESIGNATED COMMERCIAL 128.2 781,618/114.4 100, 000 / 13. 8 713, 360/ 114. 4 1,594,978 B. TOTAL COMMERCIAL & COMBINATION** 130.5 781,618/'114.4 100,000/13.8 743,416/116.7 1,625,034 c. TOTAL COMMERCIAL*** 139. 8 837,43£~/123. 7 100,000/13.8 743,416/116.7 1,680,850 D. TOTAL Moti-RESIOHiT IAL**** 144.6 841,434/128.5 100, OOu/ 1J. 8 802,142/121.5 1,743,576 Utility N U -Public Utility .i,. .i,. South U-1 4.8 4,000/ 4.8 u / 0 58,726/ 4.8 62,726 TOTAL 4.8 4,000/ 4.8 0 / 0 58, 726/ 4.8 62,726 School E -Elementary North E-1 1 ':>. 0 South E-1 8.8 TOTAL 23.8 I\J ,I'- V1 APPENDIX 10, Page 7 of 8 General Plan Land Use Designation Gross Acres Exist ir1g DU/AC lJeveloping DU/AC Undeveloped Potential DU/AC Open Space OS -Open Space North OS-1 OS-2 OS-3 OS-4 Subtotal South OS-1': OS-2 OS-3 OS-4 OS-5 (SW Subtotal TOTAL (Juad) 41. 5 27 .o 4.6 19. 1 92. 4 261. 4 14.3 4. 1 12.0 11.6 303.4 395.8 * This is a theoretical maximum deternii11ed by multiplying the gross acreage by .3. Exact square fooL1~1e ,.1r1d type of non-reside11t ial Ldnd use, Is determined by Planriing analysis and approval. ** Includes calculations for HH/0 designated Area. *** Area includes calculations for RH/0 and KIIH Designated Commercial ***IE-Includes calculations for HH/0, 1111H Designated Commercial, and U Designated Areas 1/87 Potential Ultimate Buildout N ,f>. °' \ ZONE 21 ··-·--.. ) RMH-l I I•__, :---..:..._ 1...,.,...,__' 08-3-¥' ✓ I -I -I -I ··-·-·-I I ZONE 19 -I . . I -I -RLM-t I -I - _J,t 1 5 --'Z..-f I .. • \ _, ZONE 19 I HORTH "., I ~ ...... __ ------'""' -----~-;;;.---,. aour1:1 --~ 8a1lq,.i1os t.lgou> RH/0-1 • ia« \r' , . 08-1 ~---~~ ~,RM-1•- RlM-1 ;'I , , -•-• •-••' I I'" ., •-ZONE 12 ·-·-·-·-·-·-·-· RM-e ' ;• .... , ...... _ -.. -·-·-·-·11 '\. \ ,~ .. ; ~ ' ZONE 11 ', •o~ ........ ,. "t e , ou,."t ', APPENDIX 11 247 N ,i,. CX) Page 1 of 5 APPENDIX 11 ZONE 6: DEVELOPING LAND USES BY ZONE 6 SUB-AREAS As of January 1, 1987 OC\rHPOC STA1L6 ,Affi{)\f]) Grckiirg/ Existirg Generctl Plan IJ.J or Application Tentative Final filildirg as of Land Use IJesi~tion Cwd Acres File No. Sq. ft. Slbnittal* Approval Approval Pennit 1/1/87** RESUUffIAL: ll.Jvl Low-Med (0-4) SE 9.69 CT 81-29 38 38 SW 40.0 CT 85-34 101 101 49.69 -2--139 ·101 38 HM 1-'e::iiun (4-8) St 2.9 CT 85-16 14 14 SE 28.0 CT 85-19 112 112 S£ 41.0 CT 84-23 220 86 134 Sf-_ 12.0 CT 85-6 70 70 St 01-.0 CT 84--41 ?.29 22.9 SW 7.26 CT 82-23 m (jJ SE 4.36 SLP 84-8(A) IW 100 ----( d lot in CT 84-23-) - 159.52 7 005 14 41·1 186 134 Page 2 of 5 APPENDIX 11 U\,fl_CPOC STATL6 1'Fffi()\f]) GraHr.j7 Existi~ General Plan [)J or ,Application Tentative Final fi.Jildi~ as of Land Use CJesigkltion lj.Jad Acres File No. Sq. ft. Sl.Omittal* Approval f\wroval Pennit 1/1/87** Klh t1:xJ-Hi ( 8-15) '.£ 2.27 CT 85-28 ¼ 34 sr 10.0 CT 85-7 1.36 1.36 St:: 1.1 CT 79-12 11:l 18 St: 1.5 CT 85-1 22 SE 1.48 CT 84-43 24 24 N ~ SE 1.22 CT 81-24 10 8 2 ~ SL S.2 CT 84-10 so 00 S[ 7.8 CT &3-1 120 120 SE ':>.26 CT t:!2-26 70 66 4 SI: 40.42 CP-36(A) 336 81 83 172 76.25 10 350 22 212 281 '157 178 HH High(15-23) .52 CT 7':l-26 17 17 APPENDIX 11 1£neral Plan Land lJse Desigiation HH/0 Hesidential: High (15-23) Conrercial: Prof. & Related N ~ 0141..RCIAJ...: C Camwity N Neigtt>orhood RC Hecreatio11 Ac.res File No. 18.28 S1):186-11 (Approx.) Page 3 of 5 Wor Sq. ft. OC\fl..CPilG STA Tl6 Nff{()\ffi Application Tentative Final Sli:lmittal* Approval Approval 100, (1X) 100, (XX) (Approx.) Gra:ii~/ fi.Jildirg Pennit Existirg as of 1/1/87** Page 'I-of 5 APPENDIX 11 rE\fl.CPil'-C STATI.6 --AFffi()\,£0 Gradirq/ -[xistirq Lerieral Plan LtJ or Apµlication Tentative Final B..iildirq as of Laud Use Designation C)Jad kres File ~b. Sq. ft. SJ-mittal* 1\,pproval Approval Permit 1/1/87** Olt-E}{: E Umentary xhool lJ 1-ti.Jlic Utilities (6 4:>ei1 Space ------ 10TAL 1£Sil.£NT1AL 28.'.>.98 20 18'11 Ill 137 llJ 623 l:U 484 flJ 255 llJ 312 N U1 I-' 161 ·101 0 0 60 0 16)() 36 623 484 195 312 ------ TOT AL CTJHJ lelAL 18.28 1 100,(U) 100,(X:X.) u 0 0 0 (i\pprox.) (Approx.) (A.pprox.) 18.28 1 100,O'.Xl 1CX),(XX) 0 0 () 0 (Approx.) (Aµprox.) (r\pprox.) 0 () 0 () 0 0 0 0 * Calculations uider applicdtion sulJTiittal are subjc~::t to cha11qe based m Plaminq c1kllysis and discretionary "'J(Jroval • ** Calc.'Uldtions identified iJ, Uiis mlum have txx::n c.ecou,ted for dS existirl(J land use in Exhibit 9, on Pdge 27. I I -_J, RLM .... I .. I ... RLM ' -ZON[ 1'J I N Vl N I,•--., RH/0 IUIDINTIAl RL lO'A"OfNSln·(o•l'I) R.l.M LOW-MtlHt'M 0F.NSIITf0-0 RM Mf:IJll"M l>ENS1nc-1 8) R.\111 Mfl>lt'M IIH,11 l)ENSIH(8 I'\' RH ltl(~II l>FN~I rv ( I'S-l_i) COMMIICIAl RRI INIFN\l\'f RH;l(>NAI. RFrAII RRE EXlfN,l\f Rft;H>Ni\l.llErAll RS REtolONAI SERVKE t: 0 lMMl'NI fY COMMEJK IAL N NEl<.flRORHOOD C.OMMFR( UL rs Tll,\\'EL sf.RVICES COMMERUAL 0 PRl >HSSU )NAL RELATED L80 t.fNTRAI Bl 'SINESS u1sn1cT Pl PI.ANNED INl>l 'STRl.\L G <,CJ\"fRNMFNT FA<"IUTIES ll P1'8LK l'TlllrlfS II.<: RE<-RfAIU >N O)MMEIKIAL SCHOOLS E El fMENl.o\llY J f(.'NIOR 111<;11 1-1 IIIGII S( 11001 P PRIVAl'E OS OPEN "'Plt.<"E NU NON RESIUfN TIAI. RESERVE ZONE 6 I a: •' 'i .,,.-" ZONE 10 ----- . RLM OS I RLM I I I I I ,.,.. ,, , •• ---•-"' r ZONI I.' LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN , 11' ; -' I o> - I, I ~ .!C>Nl II Clty ol Ca,l1ba1J Grnwlh Man.gemeot Proo,am JANUARY 1987 APPENDIX 12 253 North South APPENDIX 12 ZONE 6: PARCEL BREAKDOWN OF LAND IN THE DEVELOPING PROCESS Residential File Ii A.P.N. HLM-1 CT 85-34 215-050-03 CT 85-34 215-050-04 CT 85-34 215-050-05 RM-1 CT 82-23 215-050-65 RM-4 CT 84-41 215-480-15 CT 84-41 215-480-19 RM-5 CT 85-16 215-250-40 RM-6 CT 85-8 222-150-15 222-150-16 CT b':>-19 222-160-41 27-2-160-42 223-020-16 223-020-21 CT 84-23 223-351-Jll 223-352-all 223-353-all 223-354-,11 l Rt-'IH-3 CT 85-28 215-240-12 215-240-13 RMH-5 CT 84-43 215-330-1h 215-330-17 CT 85-1 215-340-40 RMH-6 CT 85-7 223-010-36 HMH-3 CT 83-1 255-02-024 HMH-4 CT 81-24 215-230-68 CT 81-24 215-230-69 CT 82-26 216-370-02 216-370-03 CT 81-2';1 216-470-01 216-470-02 216-470-03 216-470-04 216-470-05 216-470-06 216-470-07 216-470-08 216-470-09 CT 84-10 216-480-17 RMH-5 CT 72-20/CP-36 223-190-all RH-3 CT 79-26 216-290-31 216-290-32 254 Paqe 1 of 2 Acres 10 10 20 7. 26 9, 54 50.49 2.9 10.55 1. 61 10. 36 7.95 6.42 4J,7 41 1. 02 2,2) • 72 .76 1. 10 10 7,M 1. 22 3. 11 2.58 1. 45 I. 09 1. 21 1.33 1.64 1. 92 1. 68 1.81 2.56 5.2 40.42 • 52 North Commercial File II C-1 SOP 86-11 255 Page 2 of 2 A.P.N. 215-050-61 215-050-63 215-050-64 Acres 9.00 4.82 4.46 APPENDIX 13 256 Page 1 of 2 APPENDIX: 13 ZONE 6: UNDEVELOPED VACANT LAND DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL Gross Potential Lots Acres DU RL N -Rl -1 82 66.18 82 s -RL -1 5 5.53 5 TOTAL 87 71. 71 87 RLM N -RLM-4 8 3.87 8 RLM-5 1 2.7 4 HLM-6-24 11.67 35 HLM-7 9 2.08 9 SUBTOTAL 42 20.32 56 s -HLM-1 35 9.37 35 RLM-2 16 16.08 16 RU1-3 21 6.22 21 RUl-5 2 .47 2 SUBTOTAL 74 32. 14 74 TOTAL 11 6 52.46 130 RM N -RM-5 14* 5.35 28 RM-7 1 5.92 31 SUBTOTAL 15 11 . 2 7 59 s RM-2 ·1 1. 58 9** RM-3 13* 3.34 26 SUBTUTAL 24 4.92 35 TOTAL 39 16. 19 94 257 Page 2 of 2 RMH N -RMH-4 12 6.91 73 RMH-5 4 2.64 28 SUBTOTAL 16 9.55 101 s -HMH-1 12 4.9 51 RMH-2 1 8. 18 46 RMH-4 17 27.56 320 RMH-6 7 9.25 103 SUBTOTAL }7 49.89 520 TOTAL 53 59.44 621 RH s -RH-2 7 3.48 64 RH-3 19 6.87 123 RH-4 4 2.35 43 TOTAL 30 12.7 230 RH/0 5-RH/0 1 2.3 61 GRANO TOTAL 326 214.8 1223 * These dre R-2 Zoned Lots. ** A complete dnd detailed constraints analysis will identify exact develpoment potential. 258 APPENDIX 14 259 APPENDIX 14 ZONE 6: THEORETICAL DWELLING UNIT YEILD AT BUILDOUT ACRES General Plan GROWTH Land Use (,!l I AO RANT TOTAL CONTROL POIIIT Designation SW SE ZONE 6 YIELO OU/ACRE DWELLING UNITS kl 216.7 216.7 1.0 217 HLM 118.5 884.95 1003. 45 3.2 3211 HM 63.5 348.3 411.8 h.0 2471 HMH 419.65 419.65 11. 5 4826 RH 67.6 67.6 19.0 1284 Hh/0 2.3 2.3 19.0 44 12,053 260 APPENDIX 15 261 APPENDIX 15 ZONE 6: DETAILED EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE BREAKDOWNS AS Of 1-1-87 Zone 6 Planning GenercU. General Plan File Plan Sl.b Area Acres tlllber Office Retail Bank Restaurant Misc SJ:>total Total kl·t-1 55,816 North ll-'1-1-1 9.3 CT 77-8 13,040 24,640 7,(XX) 5,6ffi 36 50,316 (9.3 ~res) CP-45 (Fotanat) SIF 77-1 5,500 5,500 N 223,380 (+ 4,8(}) Church) South N-1 9.P-78-3(0) 35,610 &J,526 9,670 125,806 34.3 1-brie 17,78+ 17,78+ Nore 1,650 1,650 Iv (C'.as Station) Cl\ None 8,100 8,100 Iv I-lone 4,800 4,800 1-lorie 24,3(X) 17,440 6,lXX) 14,()() 61,740 ~lone 1,COO -1 ,(XX) (D<lycare) North N-1 6.3 GJ) 139 4,SCO 4,8(X) (01urch) RC &:>ut:11 RC-1 73.8 O.f> 258 558,238 558,238 558,238 (la Costa Resort) u South U-1 4.8 l'brie 2,mo 2,000 4,00) 4,00) (War&.ou~) 841,4_3!~ (+ 4,800 Cturch) 1/87 APPENDIX 16 263 APPENDIX 16 PROPOSED ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN MONITORING PROGRAM According to the Growth Manaqemnt Ordinance (CHC 21.90.130(d}} the Planning Director is required to monitor the development activity within the Local Facilities Management Zones. From this monitoring Program a yearly Growth Management Status Report is to be prepared. To efficiently accomplish this task the City Council has authorized the creation of an automated permit tracking system that will monitor permitted development within the City. This system is not yet operational. While that system is being created staff is proposing a manual "System" that is linked to any and all development pPrmits currently issued by the City. This proposed manual "System" is subject to refinement and change and is not to be formally adopted, but is enclosed as an information item for review and discussior1 purposes only. The System consists of several forms that will follow a land use proposal through the City's administrative and discretionary review process. These forms attempt to summarize a land use proposal's impact on public facilities demands and suppliess. These impacts can then be more effectively compared with the adopted Citywide and Local Facilities Plans durino review process. Number 1. 2. 3. 4. following are brief descriptions of the forms: Form Cover sheet for Planning Dept. project review Building Permit GMP Form I GMP Form II Function -Identifies which LFH Zone the project is in. -Identifies which LFM Zone the project is in. -Allows the applicant to indicate a project's proposed land use and phasing. This form is used in initial planning review. -Provides a summary of land use, and public facilities impacts associated with a project. This form is use in the discretionary and administrative decision making process. This form will also be be used to monitor approved land use and public facilities impacts within a zone. 264 City of Carlsbad i075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 (619) 438-1161 N 0. 1 Fee PLANNING DEPARTMENT :::omplete Description of Project (attach additional sheets if necessary) -ocation of Project -egal Description (complete) -ocal Facility Management Zone Assessors Parcel Number Zone General Plan Existing Land Use Proposed Zone Proposed General Plan Site Acreage Owner Applicant Name ( Print or Type) Name ( Print or Type) \i1ailing Address Mailing Address :ity and State Zip Telephone City and State Zip Telephone I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL OWNER I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE OWNER'S AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION REPRESENTATIVE AND THAT ALL IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE MY KNOWLEDGE. AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE DATE Date Application Rec'd Received By Fees Received Receipt No. ·--- PROJECT NUMBER (S} 265 N O'I O'I ~ .: C fl> z "' .. ~ 0 u fl> ir "' " "' 0 'ii 0 I ~.-by affirm that I am llcenMd i,nder p,o.lalOna ot Chap,., i (commencing •ith s.cuon 7000) of 01,1,1on 3 of Iha Bus.ness and Prole■-k>na Code, ana my lie.ans. 1:1 in tull fo,ce and ellecl. I hlfeoy 1flirm lhil I 1111 llm,pl tum :nt Contr,c• tor·s Lice-nw: L.i• lor lbt 1oi1ow,ng •uson IS.. nm 5 Buitnen ana Proteu,ons Coot Any c,1, o, toul'lt)-_,., ,, qu,1napet'1"1111kltons11uct 1Urr niorowt ~ ar ,ciw, Illy $11UCluft. ptlOf IOIIS •SSIJlntt 11so,1Qll"fl ~ ,ip- pl.Unt lor Suell per11111 ID ltle I s,oneo SUic-me«. IT,11 flt IS 1,censed 1)<11!,!alll ID ltle prcP,UIOOS ol 11\t (..(ll'l!"'i(l()f S Lictnse ll• !Cl'lol:>11'1 9 cornmenc,rig "''"" Set1u 1lXAl Ill O,w1so0n l ol 111e 81,11.,ness ano ProleSS$'1S Cooe1or r-~ 11u empt 1111:r1t1om ,na the n,;i,,, to, 1t1t 111t-ge0 torm.r.o-Anr VtOl.ihon ol ~I.on 1□31 5 by ,II\ ,1ppi..c.1n1 IOI I oe"llnll louD· ,rtls lflt .IIJD'II 1n1 lo a l•v•I Pt<l,lllv ol nol more Uwr "" nun drldOOl~•SII~) I I I_ H IIWIWf ol lhl PIOf»rly or my emi,10ytt1. ..... ••S as. lllelf sole compens..illO<l w,I! oo 11\it .. oo lrlll l'lt SJru< lure ,s nol 1111enard II' t1llt1rd 10< "Ult (Ser 100 6..\llleSS .od Pl'oltH>Qll~ Coot ltlf l,Q111r.t1.lllf \ l1U111',t U• OOH not •pply 10 111 OWotf DI l)IO(Jeflf wflo OU1kh or rg-i,,,n 111e1eon ano .no ooes suc:11 -~ ri .. ~, 01 '"'lllf9" "'1 c,w11 -,nplo1ets p11ww:l$d th.II ,...;n ,mpro,,,emtm~ ~t tlUI .nit"'°· ~ Of Olltftd IOI ~ II IICP#n'tl Irle bmllll'l,\l II' r.'O'owt ment 1s SOICI w1lh,n -~• OI comp1tt100 inc --ou,.oer wotr hii\'t IN our~n ot p,0,,1119 Ill.it ne lh(I ll(lt DuoC or ,m ptlM:klf ltltpu1pose al UltJ n 1. as c,w,-, Ill Ille piotJerly am taclusivety wmilttmg ,ri1n1teenw,aconc,ac1ors1nc011s11ue11neo•oiec11Se: 10'4 Bus111HS ilnd PrDltUIDflS Codi The Con11am»-S lie.tnst liw dots l'lOI aooly lo an owr.er ol pnJPC11y wllo bu-I':\ u im· p,oves lhlllOl'I. and wl\O c0fll,,c1s to, ucn o,-o,eos •In a COlllf~IOfh) lltcnst pursu.1n1 ID the Conlfac\111 s uanw , .. , [] A11riun-11t1llffll!llpf0¥tl1Qfflyhame l!'ICIITWIIIIOW IAgCOfl<IIIIOltSl••Sl I TllewD1k!lbl1ngpcr1Dl'meclptlOIID~ 2 I 11,~e lived III my homt !Of lwtll'II -111\!, (NIDIIOCDmp1ehMD1111,s.o,k J I nnc no! cl.timea lh,s U«f'IPhOR .... me IIS1ll'lree1urs [J I llt•tby ,11,,m tt,;it I 11.Jvt • Ct•t.t,l•1r <JI conwnt I0 se1!-1nsu1t o< 1 c,,,,l,,:;;ue ,;it Wo••t,c Corr,~nMIOQn In w,ance Of 4c.,1ohet1 COP) ine,wt 15e-c l&)) ll:101 C.00.1 POLICY NO COMPANY D Copy '" Meo w1111 1he c11w 0 Ctr11t1eo coor 1$ lle,eby lum,stteO CERTIFICATE OF E:\EMPTION FAOt,1 WOAKEAS CQMPEN:!>A TION IN SURAN::£ ~Tn,s w1;11on neesl not De comp1co1l!O 11 1hf' "'"m,t ts !or onto nuno1e-o 001+••1 <SHlOI 01 icon• 0 I cen11y lll•I on me p,etlOfm&nce or 11\e .. on Y.l' •l"l•Cti lti1s Pt•m•l 1$ 1,~ue<J. 1 ~hill 1101 employ.,,.,, p,e•~· ,,, •"r manne• so., 10 oe,:;orne sub1e<.I to lht Wo,~,e,, C,.;,mp,en s,11,on l&•s ol Cahlou11e NOTICE TO 11.f'PUCANT 11 ,1,!Utt m.-.~,ng 111•1 ~,!,c,ie or E•emp1,o" yov ,noull:I t>e<:ome sutip11<:110 1~ lflliO<~t•I Compans&l,on pu.,.,,,,0111 ot Ille L•llu< CO<le ,.0... m .. 11 to,111,.,.,1n coml)I~ wllh such p,u~,:.,ons o• th•\~'"'·: Ill.ill be a.emea 1e-..01<ed [] 11\erll>tly alh,m lh,d Ille•• 1s ,1 c:on1truc1...,~ ~,.<J,nu ,gen(.y lo, tl>t! perfo,m.t.n,:;e ot the •Ort. lo, -.11,c-ti>,5 Pel mot 11 ,n....a 1Sec 3097. C1~,1 Cooef I LenOe• I AdOress _ --·~-__ ---I USE BALL POINT PEN ONLY , PRESS HAID CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 (619) 438-1161 AV.ST.AO. NEAREST CROSS ST. ......... , . .· OWNER'S ... AII..ING A00RfSS ., .. ;,. :tt/-✓-.~~,;.·_:;;fi_-'J:·~.~s~}t/t;.. .. , < I , ..... NG SPACE CONTAACTOf! CONT .. ACTOFl"S AOOFIE$S GRADING PERMIT ISSuEO IR[OfV{LQP<Jllr...T AFIE A .'.:) ... o APPLICANT TO FILL IN INFORMATION WITHIN SHADED AREA ANO DECLARATIONS. APPLICATION & PERMIT NO STORIES TYflE CONST BUSINESS LICENSE # CONTRACTOR$ PtiONE f ZONE STATE LICENSE NO. DESl(iNE R"S PHONE STATE LICENSE NO. OCC GP EDU OCC LOAD VALUATION PERMIT NUM8UI BUILDING SO FOOTAGE Nor V,J,d Unlffs luch,nt Crrt,l,«J QTY. PLUMBING PERMIT · ISSUE '7 9 QTY. MECHANICAL PERMIT . ISSUE /<oJ ' --+-,.-S-l_A_ll_fu_R_N_O_u_C_TS_u_P_TO_IO_O_O_OO_B_IU---+--'""'~=:::_-1-~B-ul-LO~,~NG=PE=R-... ~,r----o=a-,.-a~,o--o=o~-o=o,=s=22=0~-------~ SUMMARY/ACCOUNT NUMBER EACH FIXTURE TRAP _ 1----EACH BUILOING S.E:WE R I [MP UlLUPANCY !JO UA YSt ___ ~ _ I lfllAl [llLIHJlAL l(j!Al PAAK-!N-LIEU tAAEA T!F 134·810·00·00-883~ _______ ,,_ ___________ _ LA COSTA Tif 1JJ.B1000·00BBJS FMF LICENSE TAX Mff 001810·00 00·8162 880 519 92-57 It----------------+------~ -- CREDIT DEPOSIT TOTAL FEES PAYABLE I BY PHONE 0 * AN 06HA PEAM:T IS RECIUIREO FOIi EXCAVATIONS OYER s· o·· DEEP ANO OfMOUTION Oft CONSTRUCTION OF STAUCT\JRE$ OVER J $TORIE$ IN HEIGHT APPROVED BY I !! u: >-., 0 C. E a, .... u 0 <!) c .. ,!,! 0. C. <( I "' C: a: 0 ~ ~ <( I ~ .2 .; ,.. Q) 0 C: .. C: u: - C: Q) Q) a 0 ;:; Q) C. "' E ~ E 3: z 0 I\) N (j\ -.J L<lnd Use/Development Name: Local Facility Management Zone: General Plan: Zoning: CITY OF CARLSBAD (NAME) GMP FOKM I (TO BE ~lLLED OUT HY THE APPLICANT) Applica11t Initials: Date: I I I Local Codstal Program Segment: Zoning Overlays: Applicable Hdster/Specific Plan, etc.: Land Use Oesiunation 1. 2. 3. Land Use/ Development ~ Quar1tity of Land Use/Development AC, SQ FT, DU Estimated Phasing of Land Use/Dev (Expected Building Permit) Month Year z 0 N O'I File l~a me: File Mumbers: GMP FOHM II ( 'fO BE FILLED OUT Al~lJ VERIFIED BY THE PkOJECT PLAt~NEH) PHOJECT PLAIHIEH IIHTIAL: S EN I OR PL A 1111 E H I IH T [ A L : DATE ~/ '~ ------- Applicable Local Facility Management Zone: General Plan: Local Coastal Proqram Segment: ------------ Zoning: Zo rd ng Overlays: Applicable Master/Specific Plan: Zone Plan General Plan Sub-Area La11d Use/ Development ~ Quantity of Land use/Development AC, SQ FT, DU POP (JJ 1 • 2. 3. 4. Estimated Facility Demand City Administrative (1.5 sq ft/pop) Library (.8 sq ft/pop) Wastewater Treatme11t ([UU formulas) Parks (130.68/pop) Drainage (To be determined IJy staff) Circulation (ADT) Age11cy & Service District Impacted Fire (DU's outside of Fire Station 5 mi11. response) Open Space (To be determined by staff) Schools (OU' s) Sewer (Gal/!Jay) Water (Gal/Day from 1U day storage Y/N) Documentation of Agency OK z 0 APPENDIX 17 269 ,...._ (J) .-i "M <11 .u QJ -0 ,... 0 .... (J) QJ .u ::, C "M E QJ QJ C/l ___, en C 0 "M .u <11 -0 C QJ ~ 0 u QJ ,... .... .... <11 .u en QJ ..i::: .u -0 QJ > 0 ,... 0.. 0.. <11 .-i "M u i:: ::, 0 u ,...._ co I ,...._ I ,...._ z 0 i= (.) c( ..I 0 z ~ 0 (.) CIT OF CARLSBAD -AGEND 31LL AB# £/$?--.,r/ MTG. 7 /7 /87 DEPT. LIB TITLE: LIBRARY SITE DATION FOR A CARLSBAD AND FUNDING RECOMMEN- NEW LIBRARY IN SOUTH DEPT. HO} __ CITY ATTYV~ CITY MG~\ ' RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Approve the recommended library site and direct the City Manager to negotiate a purchase agreement with the owner. 2. Direct the City Manager to include funds in the CIP for land acquisition and construction of a library . 3. Direct the City Manager to evaluate alternative methods of financing and constructing the library (developer build vs. City build) . ITEM EXPLANATION: On January 27, 1987 the City Council directed staff to negotiate the acquisition of a library site and/or a developer proposal to build and lease back a library facility. Council action was based upon the library site selection committee report which listed five sites for consideration. All five sites met the selection criteria recommended in the Library Strategic Plan. Subsequent investigation and negotiations with Carlsbad Retail Associates has resulted in the selection of a preferred site. At its meeting of April 16, 1987 the site selection committee endorsed Site E as the best site for a new library. The library board also has endorsed the site. The asking price for the property appears to be consistent with other property in the area. Design funds of $650,000 are already budgeted in the CIP. Design of the building will occur upon purchase of the site. Purchase is anticipated during 1988 • FISCAL IMPACT: The City has several alternatives available for funding the acquisition of a new library. All options depend on the City pledging public facilities fee funds, both existing and future, to this project. The ultimate decision on exactly how to finance the construction will determine the extent of public facilities fees committed to the project in future years and the effect the library will have on the timing of other improvements. The library project costs are summarized in the following table: Fiscal Approximate DescriEtion Year Amount Received Land Acquisition 1988-89 $1.1 million Grading 88-89 0.9 million Design 88-89 0.6 million Construction 89-90 to 90-91 8.4 million Total Project Cost $11.0 million Operations 90-91 and $0.5 to O. 9 million thereafter Purchse of the library site and funding grading costs prior to 1989-90 may require dedication of all available public facilities fee revenues for 1987-88 and delay of certain existing PFF projects. The list of projects to be delayed includes Palomar Airport Road improvements, park improvements in the northeast and southwest quadrants, the Public Safety Center phase II and III and many smaller projects. 270 Page 2 AB NO. ef~2-.¢./ This delay in funding other improvements is brought on by reduced PFF revenue due to the slowing of development activity. Existing resources must be allocated to only top priority projects. Staff is recommending that Council reserve funds for the acquisition of land and grading costs from 1987-88 revenue (assuming 87-88 revenues are sufficient to cover these and other committed costs). Actual purchase of the property would not occur until 1988-89. The long term financing of the building construction costs could be done in one of three ways: 1. Building construction funded by site developer with lease back ag-reement -under this concept the City would enter into a lease back agreement with the site developer to build the library to City specifications. The City would then enter into a long term lease back agreement with the developer pledging up to $1 million per year of public facilities fee revenue to lease payments over a 20 year period. The actual lease payments will depend on construction costs and interest rates during this 20 year period. By allowing the site developer to build the build- ing, the City may be able to lower total construction costs by taking advantage of certain economies of scale. 2. Certificates of Participation -The City may issue Certificates of Participation for the construction of the building. The public facilities fee fund would be pledged, along with City general fund revenues, to the repayment of the debt, as in the above approach the library debt would have first claim of PFF revenues. This alternative offers the City a lower interest rate due to our ability to issue tax exempt debt. Repayment would require up to $1 million per year for 20 years; however, due to lower interest rates, the actual cost to the City could be slightly less than alternative #1. 3. Mello-Roos District Reimbursement -Under this alternative the City must put together a series of financing steps. First, the building could be constructed by the site developer or by the City through the use of Mello-Roos tax exempt debt. In either case the ultimate cost of the building would be supported by the Mello-Roos district. The developers supporting the district could have the annual assessment placed upon their district reduced by the amount of public facilities fees payed by that developer. The cost to the City is limited to the amount of public facilities fees paid by developers within the district. Any shortfall could be assessed against property with the district. Council is not required to select a funding alternative at this time. However, an understanding of the alternatives is necessary before the City moves forward with the project. Two important points found in all financing methods are 1) Public facilities fees are pledged to repay the 271 Page 3 AB NO. ,.fl62 ·.a'/ cost of the building and, 2) The City will be delaying many public facilities fee projects to make way for library funding. The CIP which will be presented to Council in the next few months will detail the fiscal impact of this project. The City will require development of 400 to 600 dwelling units per year to fund the library construction. The operating costs for the new library will run from $500,000 to $900,000 per year depending on the level of operations. The City presently is unable to support this additional cost. Preliminary projections of General Fund revenue show that an operating deficit of about $1.5 million will exist in 1990-91, the first year of operations for this facility. The City must consider revenue enhancements or zone fees assessed against development to cover operating costs for the first year or two of operations. EXHIBITS: 1. Memo from Library Director to Site Selection Committee dated April 16, 1987. 2. Site plan. 3. Letter from Johnson Wax Development Corporation to Frank Mannen date June 26, 1987. 4. Site map. 272 APRIL 16, 1987 TO: FROM: SITE SELECTION COMMITTEE Library Director LIBRARY SITE SELECTION PROGRESS REPORT Library and city staff have had six meetings with the developers who plan to build a shopping center on El Camino Real between Alga Road and Dove Lane. The result of those meetings has been the development of a tentative site plan for a library building. The next step will be to develop a final site plan. The addition of the new post office to this general site plan has caused some of the revisions we have developed. That has also required the developers to purchase an auditional seven acres of land to accommodate both the library and the post office. The developers are in the process of purchasing the prooerty at this time. We have also been working with some preliminary financial data to purchase the site and the building. The follow- ing options appear to be possible: 1. Purchase the land from the developer and lease back the build- ing. . 2. Lease back the land and the building. 3. Purchase outright the land and the building from the developer after the building is built. Any one or a combination of these options may be feasible. More work needs to be done on various financing alternatives. This proposed site appears to be the best possible site for the library in the southern half of the city. The combination of a shopping center, post office and library will make for an ideal mix and should provide a convenient source of services to the public. The site satisfies all the major criteria we have used to evaluate various potential library sites. E. LANGE PAB Di stri buti on: Geoff Armour John Cahi 11 Bebe Grosse Michael Holzmiller Ann Kulchin Sharon Schramm Seena Trigas Frank Mannen 273 7 ' SOUTH CARLSBAD ' LnlBRARY SllTES · , / DO,.'E ~ .. ... , -,. -. -✓---/-. ,-, ' '' I I/, , . _! , I/ "' ' ,/~'// • / , , /~.✓,. '. , I / ._• I , / 1; , 'I. \ ',' ... :, / .' /; \ /:·,· /_!// 11> , ',,-'·/,. ,' / / / / ,· \ / /, /' / \ ' /:; _. : G I I , I I I / \ I 1/./ 1-1/, ~ : ALGA 274 CARLSBAD RETAIL ASSOCIATES 1601 Dove street, Suite 242 Newport Beach, CA 92660 June 26, 1987 Mr. Frank Mannan Assistant City Manager city or Carlsbad 1250 Elm Street Carlsbad, California 92008 RE: South Carlsbad Libr.ary Site NWC Alga & El Camino Real Carlsbad, Cali!ornia Dear Frank: This letter is to set forth the terms; and conditions upon whic-:h Carlsbad Retail Associates would be prepared to proceed with negotiations for the City or Carlsbad to purchase a portion of the above site for a City of Carlsbad Library. l. Building Size The subject site shall accommodate a fifty eight thousand (58,000) square foot library facility with adequate parking and on-site amenities. The location of the Purchaser's building on the site wi.11 ba 'basically as shown on the attached site plan. 2. Parcel Oize ----------~- The subject site shall contain approximately six acres, 3. Purchase Price _ .... ______________ _ The price to be paid by Purchaser to Seller for the land before grading and installation of site utilities will be One Million Thirty Two Thousand Dollars ($ l,032,000) based upon a $ J.95 per square foot purchase price. The purchase price shall be adjusted by $3.95 par square foot if the actual parcel is · more or less than six acres. This purchase price shall be effective until September 30, 1987. Beyond September 30, 1987, the purchase price will increase by Seller's cost of carry, including but not limited to interest on the land, taxes and insurance. Purchaser shall pay for its share of escrow fees and closing costs. Seller shall pay for Purchaser's CLTA standard policy of title insurance (excepting any special endorsements required by Purchaser), transfer taxes and documentary stamps. 275 --:. --·--: -=: •-..:. --, -·- 4. Transaction Schedule & Conditions a. City Council approval ot a mutually acceptable purchase agreement no later than September 30, 1987. b. Seller's purchase of approximately 9 acres from Walter J. and Wanda L. Frandsen together with approximately 7,26 acres from Westwood Savings and Loan Association (parcels Band C, Exhibit A). c. Seller's demonstration of its ability to provide Purchaser with a developable library site. This ability will be demonstrated by Seller's implementation of its development plan for the Master Plan area according to a mutually acceptable schedule. The present schedule anticipates completion of grading and installation of utilities and services for the Master Plan area by September l, 1988. This date will become the close of escrow unless extended by mutual consent. d. Prior to close of escrow, the parties shall enter into an agreement for the development of the property. This agreement shall survive the close of escrow and provide for, among other things, the timing and cost ot all grading and site improvements for the property, and the timely construction of a library facility in accordance with plans and specifications approved by both PUrchaser and Seller. e. The Purchaser's interest in the property shall be subject to covenants, conditions and restrictions providing for, among other things, a non-exclusive reciprocal easement tor ingress, egress and parking as well as provisions for maintenance ot common drives and parking areas. Purchaser shall approve said dOCUlllenta, prior to close of escrow and within thirty (30) days of receipt of same. t. PUrchasar is aware that sale of this property is physically and financially linked with the overall Master Plan to be developed by Seller. subject Master Plan will be submitted to tha City of Carlsbad tor revie~ and approval. Saller, with PUrchaaer•s assistance, shall pursue all governmental approvals including approvals by the City of Carlsbad and the California coastal Commission for the proposed Master Plan. 276 = -:: --·--= -• ·---• 4 -• --= : -. .. ----. ,.----. ----=-!::.:-• -...:.-..:.. -. __ -.... -..... -..:.-·--. -- g. Seller shall supply soils tests to the reasonable satisfaction of Purchaser at the approximate time Purchaser commences its ~lans a~d specifications for its building. The closing of escrow shall be contingent upon approval of the soils conditions, which shall be within fifteen (15) days of receipt of same. h. Seller shall provide Buyer with a cultural resou·rce study indicating the status of known or potential archaeological or pAleontol~gical resources on subject parcel. · s. Selection of Escrow and Title Company shall be at Seller's discretion. 6. Purchaser shall deposit Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($ 75,000) into escrow within fifteen (15) days ot execution of the purchase documents described herein. Said$ 75,000 shall apply to the purchase price and shall be forfeitable to Seller it Purchaser terminates the agreement for any reason other than the non-satisfaction ot the conditions and contingencies outlined herein. In the event PUrchasar meets all conditions outlined herein and Seller is unable to deliver subject property in the condition outlined in the agreement for development of the property, Seller shall return the full $75,ooo to Purchaser. 7. The balance ot the purchase price shall be paid by Purchaser to Seller upon the close of escrow. a. Seller shall provide Purchaser with a preliminary title report covering the entire center and a topographic and boundary survey. Th• title report ahall be accompanied with copies of all items as exceptions thereto and a plat map with the location of the easements sketched thereon. Purchaser shall approve title within thirty (30) daya of receipt of the above report and exceptions. The closing of escrow shall be contingent upon title being in the same condition as approved by Purchaser. This latter is not intended to be contractual in nature, is not an offer, and is to be taken only as an expression of the general tenn• and conditions upon which we would be willing to enter into purchase negotiations. The proposed agreement shall be eftective only upon final approval by the City ot Carlsbad, the Board ot Directors of Johnson wax Development corporation and final execution of documents. Please verify receipt of this letter and your acceptance of all terms and conditions contained herein by execution of the original where provided and returning to the undersigned. 277 ..:..-·--. = - -4- We look forward to working with you with respect to this purchase and are hopetul we will be able to consummate a mutually acceptable transaction with the City or Carlsbad as a library would be a most welcome addition to the proposed La Costa Center. Sincerely, Carlsbad Retail Associates, a California General Partnership / t ( A_ • ( ,, I _• ,_ Frederick T. Von der Ahe £~d. ~---- /Eugene r..;-~indler II The terms and conditions indicated herein are hereby acknowledged, agreed and accepted on this ____ day or June, 1987. city of Carlsbad By: Its: 278 .. , ' -:---. . -. -·- .. . : 4 . . f . • .• : . . • : . • { . ~ (J) ----,.: : i, . ,_. .. .. ... .:-_. __ _ -' -.. '·--. ,,..._ .. :,:,.... . -.., EXHIBIT A i.u.-:.0= 0 a -· '•"-'< ,I ,. ~ : • .... t I t • r: • iJ .. ~ ~ 'I I ~ l fCALE I I ,,.,.u POA I rr~u,,,._.fN u,, .• , ••• , ..,. SH&.• ~ Parc.111 B •.ooAC • 279 .. Parc:el A ,..,. .... - ..:.-.:. • ! I .., ~ !_ i Honorable Mayor Lewis and City Council Members 1200 Elm Street Carlsbad, California 92008 July 7, 1987 Honorable Mayor & Council Members: Re: Library/South Carlsbad We have reviewed the staff report on the proposed library for Carlsbad. Conceptually we agree on the future needs of a library for south Carlsbad, however, we are concerned about the size of library, the timing of construction.and the selection of the funding mechanism at this time. We would recommend that the size of the library be commensurate with projected population through 1991 with the ability to expand the facility at a later date. (It is our understanding that people using the facility and checking out books come from outside City limits and represent approximately 40%). Since we view that a higher priority in preserving the "health, safety and welfare" of the citizens of Carlsbad is the widening of Palomar Airport Road, and the addition of a fire station at the Safety Center, we recommend that further consideration be given to alter- native financing vehicles rather than utilizing public facilities fees. We suggest that this issue be held open until the review of Capital Improvement Program. 280 We the undersigned are in accord with the conceptual recommendations listed above. Thank you in advance for your consideration to our recommendations. CARLSBAD RESEARCH CENTER Bill Miller President CENTRE DEVELOPMENT ~~ President BEDFORD PROPERTIES Ann Shannon Project Manager T & G INVESTMENTS Ted Tchang Owner Representative LAUREL TREE INVESTMENTS Henthorn ner Representative 281 RLSBAD July 7, 1987 Mayor Bud Lewis City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 Dear Buddy: The Chamber of Commerce is pleased that the City Council is moving forward on the funding of a site and design of n new South Carlsbad library facility for our community. This is ·a project which will be extremely beneficial for all citizens, and will maintain our excellent level of library service which we can all be proud of. We would like to take this opportunity to share a few com- ments with you which we hope you will consider while determining your funding and construction plans. The proposal before you calls for a 58,000 square foot facility, not including any ex- pansion of the existing library. In light of the fiscal posture of the City, specifically recent five-year budget deficit projections and belt tightening, it is of concern to the business community that the City plans to expend $11 million for this project. City figures indicate that the projected population in the year 1995 is 80,000. In or- der to meet the City library standard of 800 square feet per 1000 population, the total library square footage must be 64,000 in the year. 1995. Taking into account the present 25,000 square foot facility, this wou-ld suggest that an additional 39,000 square foot facility is needed in order to meet the standard in 1995. A plan which includes the expansion of the existing facility and reduces the initial capital outlay for this project might be a prudent way to meet this demand. Good fiscal management and business practices may dictate that the City avoid building a facility which will not be fully utilized until approximately the year 2004, according to present City population projections. Another concern is the possible "dedication of all available public facilities fee revenues for 1987-88 and delay of certain existing PFF projects", according to the agenda bill before you. Projects such as Palomar Airport Road improvements arc essential to the enhanced safety and circulation efforts you already have underway. In addition, the "many smaller projects" have not yet been discussed publicly to our know-ledge, and we would appreciate the opportunity to review those which may be withdrawn from the CIP. In the event the City were to build the entire 58,000 square foot facility and lease out the portion not in use, we would have sever~l concerns. First, in our estimation the City should not get involved in leasing office space. 5411 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100 • P.O. Box 1650 • Carlsbad, California 92008 • (619) 729-5924 282 Second, where would the revenues generated from the lease, should this option be exercised, be allocated to in the City? Would it be for payment of the City's debt service or would it be plugged right back into the fund from which it was taken, the CIP? Finally, our recommendation is that the City consider a well planned, phased in project which would provide the needed library space, not unduly bu.rden the City's already strained budg,ato.ry situation, and maintain the projects in the capital improvement plan which the entire community has demanded and expects. This strategy might call for the land acquisition, grading, design and construction of a 40,000 square foot facility by 1991 at the proposed site, with the expansion of the existing facility and a simultaneous completion of another phnse of the new facility in the mid to lat~ 1990's, These are just a few ideas and concerns which have surfaced in our discussions of the proposal to date. We appreciate your consideration of our input. Sincerely, ~~ng 1937 President 283 APPENDIX 18 284 July 23, 1987 TO: ACTING CITY MANAGER FROM: Assistant City Manager THE 58,000 SQUARE FOOT QUESTION At the Council meeting of July 7, questions were raised regarding the size of the proposed South Carlsbad Library. In order to respond to Council's concerns, the attached July 6 memo was prepared. The information in the memo was derived from a Michael Feerer and Assoc.. report dated February 11, 1987, and from data from the City's Growth Management Program which projects the amount of square footage needed for library space over the next 25 years. The strategy that is being followed in building the South Library will provide that when the building is occupied, there will 10 years growth built into the facility. The entire 58,000 square feet of the building will be built out, however, only 48,000 square feet of the building initially will be improved for library use. It is anticipated that the building will be occupied in 1992 and there will be enough space to meet the growth management standards through the year 1997. Some time between 1997 and the year 2002, the other 10,000 square feet of the building will be improved for library use. Based on the projections of the Growth Management Plan, this approach should provide enough space through the year 2002. The second part of the Library Master Plan provides that an additional 8,000 square feet of space would be added to the existing library, and the balance of the facility would be renovated. The exact timing of the expansion and renovation has not yet been determined. To meet the ultimate build out needs of the city, another 17,000 square feet of library space will be needed beyond what would be provided by the South Carlsbad Library and the expansion of the existing library. This is not a problem that we need to solve today. As technologies; standards and strategies of providing library service change, this ultimately may not be a problem at all. The proposed strategy for meeting the standards imposed for library service in the Growth Management Plan in my opinion is sound. The growth management standard for libraries will provide an excellent level of library service. FRA~EN saf cc: Mayor Council Members Library Director Planning Director Research/ Analysis Group Manager 285 Attach. JULY 9, 1987 TO: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER FROM: Library Director NEW LIBRARY SPACE NEEDS ISSUE The issue raised at last Tuesday's council meeting regarding the size of the new library building needs to be addressed. As you know, staff has spent many hours dealing with the size of the proposed building. Those efforts have been aimed at meeting immediate and long range needs as economically as possible. Attached is Michael Feerer's analysis and recommendation regarding the size of the building in relation to 11move-in 11 day and longer range space needs. I think this information would be useful for city council members and recommend its transmittal to them. I am also sending Mr. Feerer's letter to Paul Schwartz as back- ground information for our meeting with him next week. {/IJ! C~E. LANGE PAB Attachment 286 February l l. 1987 \1r. Cliff Lange Library Director Carlsbad City Library 1250 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Cliff: Michael Feerer & Associates Specialists In Facility Planning & Researc=-' 655 Fourth Aver:.;e San Diego, CA 92 i:: 619 235•9889 This letter addresses further issues regarding the space needs for the new South Carlsbad Library. It supplements our Space ~eeds Study of August 1, 1986. Dick Waters and I were asked to answer the following questions: , .... 3. Would the space needs of the proposed South Carlsbad Library at mtJve-in be less than the 58,000 square foot size we have recommended for the facility? Should the entire 58,000 square foot building be built now, even if all of it is not initially used by the Library? Should the South Carlsbad Library be a one-story facility, or could non-public areas (administrative and support areas) be successfully placed on another level? What Are The New Library's Space Needs At "Move-In"? The proposed 58,000 square foot South Carlsbad Library was sized in our earlier Space Needs Study to serve the City of Carlsbad as it reaches an overall population of 100,000 citizens. With current growth forecasts, this population level would be attained near the year 2010. In the meantime, however, Carlsbad's population will be significantly smaller, which correctly implies that the Library space could be initially smaller and still meet the needs of the community. The key issue is how much smaller. First. we need to consider the "move-in" target. We recommend that sizing the library for "move-in needs" really means providing not less than a 5 year cushion of future growth space beyond the move-in date ---otherwise, the facility will experience congestion and disruption shonly after it opens. Move-in could occur as soon as 1990 with rapid implementation by the City. Therefore, the new Library could be initially targeted to serve community needs through the year 1995 -·-a time in which Carlsbad will have approximately 75,000 citizens. Secondly, we need to assess how this smaller community size at 199S affects each component of the Library. In our earlier Space Needs Study, we identified five key areas of the facility. They were (1) collections space, (2) !eating space, (3) service desk space, (4) staff work areas and (5) support/other spaces. Each of these areas are examined on the following page. 287 Page Two 199S Collections Space. The City Library has historically provided 3 volumes of collections per capita. It has represented an excellent level of library resources that the Carlsbad public has enjoyed for many years. As part of our Space :'-leeds Study, we recommended that this resource level be maintained. Therefore, at the year 1995, 3 volumes per capita for 75.000 citizens would be 225.000 total volumes in the existing :Vfain Library and the new South Carlsbad Library. With the establishment of the new South Carlsbad Library, the existing ~fain library should be "decongesred" to approximately 75.000 volumes. Although the facility now holds more volumes, it has suffered from this. Trying to house too many volumes has resulted rn inadequate reader areas. lack of community meeting room space, and numerous other m~jor problems. At a future date, when the existing library is expanded as we recommended in our Space Needs Study, more collections will once again be able to be successfully accommodated. If the existing library holds 75,000 volumes, then the South Carlsbad Library will need ro contain 150,000 volumes by the year 1995. This is less than the nearly 200.000 volume capacity of the 58,000 square foot facility we recommended through the year 2010. 1995 Seating Space. Unlike collections, the number of seats for library users cannot be reliably forecast according to population levels. However, there is a relationship between the amount of collections and user seating. We recommended in our Space Needs Study a total of 296 scats distributed among four-place tables, carrels, machine stations, lounge seats and a , children's floor space. This would be for a facility housing nearly 200,000 volumes of collections. The Library targeted for 1995 needs and housing 150,000 volumes of collections (75% of the 200,000 volumes) should have approximately 75% of the seating. ' 1995 Service Desk Space. The number of service desks provided at the facility will remain stable, even as collections grow and serve a larger population. In our Space Needs Study, 1,820 net square feet of space for these areas were allocated in the new South Carlsbad Library. A facility targeted for 1995 needs would require the same area. 1995 Staff Work Areas. In our Space Needs Study, we projected that 42 staff stations would be needed for the 58,000 square foot facility in order to maintain the excellent service level of the Library for 100,000 Carlsbad citizens. This number of staff would not be required by the year 1995, however. In working with your staff, we have determined that approximately 32 staff stations "WOUid be tequued foe the new Library five years after move-in. 1995 Support/Other Areas. The remaining areas arc basic spaces that arc essential to the . success of the Library. The entry/lobby area, multi-purpose room, public catalog area, mailroom, storage area, etc. represent a core of suppon spaces that are needed regardless of the size of the Library. The r.quired size of thae areas is the stJIM even if the collections housed by the Library an utiliaJly smalkr. These areas also represent more expensive spaces that are not as easy to incrementally expand. We recommend, therefore, that the Library still provide all of these areas even for the 1995 target date. One exception to our recommendation could be the Friends of the Library space. This space is anticipated as a "bookstore" run by the Friends that would provide revenue for the Library from its sales. We suggested 2,000 square feet for this important function in the 58,000 square foot facility, but initially only 1,000 square feet could be provided and still reasonably accommodate this service. 288 Page Two 1995 Collections Space. The City Library has historically provided 3 volumes of coUect:ons per capita. It has represented an excellent level of library resources that the Carlsbad public has enjoyed for many years. As pan of our Space ~eeds Study, we recommended chat chis resource level be maintained. Therefore. at the year l 995, 3 volumes per capita for 75.000 citizens w~uld be 225.000 rota/ volumes in the existing ~fain Library and the new South Carlsbad Library. With the establishment of the new South Carlsbad Library. the existing ~fain Library should be "decongested" to approximately 75,000 volumes. Although the facility now holds more volumes, it has suffered from this. Trying to house too many volumes has resulted rn inadequate reader areas. lack of community meeting room space, and numerous other m:i.1or problems. At a future date, when the existing library is expanded as we recommended in our Space Needs Study, more collections will once again be able to be successfu!lv accommodated · If the existing library holds 75,000 volumes, then the South Carlsbad Library will need ro contain 150,000 volumes by the year 1995. This is less than the nearly 200.000 volume capacity of the 58,000 square foot facility we recommended through the year 2010. 1995 Seating Space. Unlike collections, the number of seats for library users cannot be reliably forecast according to population levels. However, there is a relationship between the amount of collections and user seating. We recommended in our Space Needs Study a total of 296 seats distributed among four-place tables, carrels, machine stations, lounge seats and I/IA -children's floor space. This would be for a facility housing nearly 200,000 volumes of collections. The Library targeted for 1995 needs and housing 150,000 volumes of collections (75% of the 200,000 volumes) should have approximately 75% of the seating. ~ 199S Senice Desk Space. The number of service desks provided at the facility will remain stable, even as collections grow and serve a larger population. In our Space Needs Study, 1,820 net square feet of space for these areas were allocated in the new South Carlsbad Library. A facility targeted for 1995 needs would require the same area 1995 Staff Work Areas. In our Space Needs Study, we projected that 42 staff stations would be needed for the 58,000 square foot facility in order to maintain the excellent service level of the Library for 100,000 Carlsbad citizens. This number of staff would not be required by the year 1995, however. In working with your staff, we have determined that approximately 32 staff stations would be required for the new Library five years after move-in. 1995 Support/Other Areas. The remaining areas are basic spaces that are essential to the . success of the Library. The entry/lobby area, multi-purpose room, public catalog area. rnailroom, storage area, etc. represent a core of support spaces that are needed regardless of the size of the Library. Tlw ra,uired siz• of rha• artUU is tlw stll'M even if the collecrion.r housed by the Library an Ulilially Sl'l'ldlur. These areas also represent more expensive spaces that are not as easy to incrementally expand. We recommend, therefore, that the Library still provide all of these areas even for the l 99j target date. One exception to our recommendation could be the Friends of the Library space. This space is anticipated as a "bookstore" run by the Friends that would provide revenue for the Library from its sales. We suggested 2,000 square feet for this important function in the 58,000 square foot facility, but initially only 1,000 square feet could be provided and still reasonably accommodate this service. 288 Page Four South Carlsbad Library 1995 2010 Space ~eeds Carlsbad @75,000 Pop. Carlsbad@ 100,000 Pop. 5 Years After "~love-In" Long.Range Target Quantity ~et Space Quantity :\'et Space Collections Books: Adult Reference 16.000 vol. · 1,600 SF :?0.000 vol. 2.000 SF Adult Circulating 100,000 vol. 6,670 SF 127.000 vol. 8.4i0 SF Children's 30.000 vol. 1,500 SF 40.000 vol. 2.000 SF Large Type 4.000 vol. 400 SF 5,000 vol. 500 SF ~fagazines: Current Subscriptions 450 subs. 680 SF 600 subs. 900 SF Back:files 450 vol. 450 SF 600 vol. 600 SF Venical Files 36drawers 140 SF 48 drawers 130 SF Microforms 140drawers 280 SF 190drawers 380 SF ~taps. Other 15drawm 50 SF 20drawers '70 SF Audiovisual Materials 10.500 items 1.050 SF 14.000 items l.400 SF Less 20% of Adult Circulating ... (:0.000 vol.) (1,330 SF) (25,400 vol.) ( 1.690 SF) Less 20% of Children·s in circulation ... (6,000 vol.) (300 SF) (8,000 vol.) (400 SF! Less 20% of Large Type in circulation ... (800 vol.) (80 SF) (1,000 vol.) 000 SF) Collections Space Totals: JJ.JJ0SF 1-UIO SF Seating Four-place Tables 180 sears 4,500 SF 240 sears 6,000 SF Carrels l.S carrels 530 SF 20 carrels 700 SF Machine Stations 10 stations 450 SF 14 stations 630 SF Lounge Seats 9 seacs 360 SF 12 seacs 480 SF Children's Floor IO children 100 SF 10 children 100 SF ,, . Seating Space Totals: l.fi) 5.94()SF ~ 7.910 SF Service Desks Circulation 2 stations 520 SF 2 stations 520 SF Refem1ee l station 260 SF l station 260 SF Periodicals 1 station 260 SF 1 station 260 SF Audiovisual 1 station 260 SF 1 station 260 SF Children's 2 stations 520 SF 2 stations 520 SF Service Desk Space Totals: 7 stalions J.820SF 7 stanons l.820SF Staff Work Areas 32 statioM 3.200SF 42 Slllli,ons 4.200SF Support/Other Spaces Encry1Lobby Area allowance 1,400 SF allowance 1.400 SF !vfulti-Purpose Room 100 seacs 1,200 SF 100 seacs 1.200 SF Small Meeting Rooms 30 seacs 450 SF 30 seacs 450 SF StudytT~ing Area 2 areas 60 SF 2areas 60 SF Program pace allowance 500 SF allowance 500 SF Public Cawoa Area allowance 600 SF allowance 600 SF Staff Room allowance 600 SF allowance 600 SF Local History Area allowance 1,200 SF allowance I.200 SF Friends of the Libruy allowance 1,000 SP allowance 2,000 SF An/Display Space allowance 1,200 SP allowance 1.200 SF Mailroom. Storage Area allowance 3,700 SF allowance 3,700 SF SupponlOth4r Spa&e Totals: Jl.9J0SF 12.910 SF Total Asmgnable Space (Net SF) 33,980 SF 41,150 SF Unaaignable Space (Corridors. Structure. Etc.> 14,020 SF 16.850 SF Total Space Need <Gross sF> *48,000 SF 58,000 SF • It should be noted that space should be added to the 48,000 SF if the Ciry desires to include the following programs in the Library: Genealogy (2,300 gross SF), Literacy Program (900 gross SF). Cultural ArtS Program (800 gross SF). 290 Page Five facility that has approximately 12,000 square feet of administrative and support areas on a lower level. With the high cost of land a two-story approach seems, on the surface, to be cost~ffecti ve. However, there are three major disadvantages to the two-story Library concept: l. Flexibility and expansion of the Library would be constrained. A second level for administrative and support space would be difficult to expand as space needs eventually increase. In the long-term future. as the community grows beyond 100,000 people. administrative and support space needs will gradually increase beyond what would have been initially provided in the project. Expanding a second level to accommodate this need would be very expensive. What could alternately occur is that some portion of administrative· or support areas would begin to migrate to an expanded public user level, leading to a "split" staff situation that would decrease staff communication and productivity. 2. A second level for administrative and support space will never be feasible for public uses. If administrative and support spaces are moved to an expanded public level, then the second level space would be difficult to convert to public use. To try to convert the level to public use space would require additional library staff than the equivalent space provided on a single level. The extra staff costs would quickly dwarf any initial site cost savings from a two-story approach. 3. A two-level structure will be more expensive per square foot and will require more square feet to provide an equivalent area. Due to the need for elevators and stairwells, approximately 750 square feet of additional area would need to be added to the 58,000 square feet in order to provide an equivalent usable area for the Library. In addition, a partial two-level structure would be somewhat more expensive to build than an equivalent one-story project. Additional structural and exterior "skin" costs would contribute to this factor as well as the cost of elevators. We conservatively estimate that it would add 3% to the overall cost of the building. Together, these factors represent a cost penalty of approximately $300,000 to the City. Conclusion & Recommendation An appropriately located and sized site for the new Library is a top priority. Few factors can have such a dramatic influence on the long-term success of the project. The selected site should be larp enough for 350 parking spaces for Library users and staff' (as recommended in our Space Needs Study), a one-story 58,000 square foot Library, and site area for long-term facility expamion as the community grows beyond 100,000 citiuns. We strongly sugpst that the City will receive the best long-term flexibility and value from the new Library if it is a orl4Htory project. Splitting non-public areas to another level should be pursued only as a last resort if there are no other reasonable site options for the City. To provide an equivalent facility, a two-level project will need to have 750 square feet added to the project as well as approximately $300,000 added to the project budget. If potential sites are somewhat small for the required need,, a subtemnean level for staff and volunteer parkin1 (while keeping all Library space on one level at grade) may offer a more flexible (but more expensive) strategy for the project. If 60 of the 350 spaces were below the 291 Page Six Library, then approximately 21,000 square feet of subterranean space would be required. In general, with normal site and soil conditions, this space would cost $35 per square foot. It would also create approximately 2% additional costs (mostly structural) for the rest of the project. And expensive elevators and stairwells would be required. Inducting fees and other related costs, we estimate an additional $1,000,000 would need to be added to the project budget in this scenario. Please call us if you have any questions. Sincerely, Michael Feerer Michael Feerer & Associates 292 July 6, 1987 TO: ACTING CITY MANAGER FROM: Assistant City Manager LIBRARY SPACE NEEDS ANALYSIS 1987 1992 1997 2002 Amount of space 46,154 sq. ft. 58,509 sq. ft. 70,864 sq. ft. 83,219 sq. needed CD ® ® Space available 31,500 sq. ft. 72,600 sq. ft. 72,600 sq. ft. 82,600 sq. (Deficit)/ Excess (14,654) 14,091 Includes 6,900 square feet of leased space Assumes completion of new south library 1,736 (619) Only 48,000 square feet of 58,000 square feet of space in building will be improved for library use @ All 58,000 square feet of building will be used for library ,;;:;, .I -' J FRANK MANNEN saf cc: Mayor Council Members Library Director 293 I LIBRARY Growth Management Performance Standard 800 square feet per 1,000 residents must exist, or be scheduled for construction within a five-year period. Population Existing Sq.Ft. Standard (Non) Conformance Jan. 1987 55,282 31,500 44,226 (12,726) Buildout 134,914 31,500 107,931 (76,431) (Existing square feet includes 6,900 sq.ft. of leased space which wirl eventualty be replaced by future library. That is why the square footage detailed below exceeds the square footage needed to meet the standard at buildout.) Library 1986 Estimated Facility Cost South Carlsbad Library 1 South Carlsbad Library Land Purchase Remodel & Expand North Library Additional Library Space Needs to Buildout Total: Public Facility Fee Funding Sq. Ft. 58,000 8,000 17,331 83,331 Approved PFF 1986 $10,593,000 $10,593,000 *$650, 000 appropriated previously for design Proposed PFF 1987 $ 8,615,000* 1,132,000 1,974,000 2,530,000 $ 14,251,000 1 Reference "A Strategic Plan & Space Needs Study of City Hall & Library" 8/1/86. ... ----------. -..... -·-· ... --· .. ------------•-- -6- 294 APPENDIX 19 295 APPENDIX 20 297 ~ qj ~ "O qj i:: p... (I/ ea i:: qj .,.. :3 (I/ ~ ..c: qj ... ,-J i:: 0. .,.. 0 '"'" "O (I/ (l) > ..c (I/ .,.. "O • ~ p... CJ OH C/l ... u (I) "O C/l (I/ i:: ..c: N qj ._, '"'" -o o. e i:: 0 qj :>, ~ ~ .... '"'" qj i:: i:: C/l .,.. 0 i:: e .,.. 0 ....... . ,.. '"'".,.. ... (I/ C/l qj ~ .,.. "O 0. ::, i:: O" (I/ C/l CJ e -qj e .... 0 .... i:: CJ qj 0 (I/ ... C/l ~ C/l ... ~ .... "O (I/ .... (I/ ..c qj > 0 ... 0 c,:: C/l ~ r::i.. (l) "O o...c: (I/ qj ... > 0 0 (II ~ C/l > 0. ~ 0 o. qj e qj (IJ "Cl ~ ~ i:: .... qj 0 CJ ... i:: ~ ::, ~ "O 0 -,,-1 i:: u ..c qj r--.. co I '"'" ~ I co . . z 0 .:: CJ c( ..J u z :::, 0 CJ CIT' )F CARLSBAD -AGEND/ , APPENDIX 20 .ILL AB# 9 I :29 MTG. ~ / 11 / 8 7 TITLE: PARKS INVENTORY DEPT. HD. 1B CITY A TTY\· i f:J,._ r :..o DEPT._P_&R __ _ CITY MGR~ RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Parks and Recreation Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council direct staff to do the following: 1. To implement the new inventory as an informational base for preparation and review of the Local Facilities Management Plans, and 2. Use this new inventory as the basis for beginning the update to the City's Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan. ITEM EXPLANATION: On April 20, the Parks and Recreation Commission appointed a three member sub-committee charged with the following four tasks: 1. Review the current Park Inventory. 2. Determine the classification of the new Hosp Grove acquisition. 3. Discuss the classification of Larwin Park. 4. Discuss the need to acquire additional land on the Robertson Property. The sub-committee met several times before developing their recommen- dations for the Parks and Recreation Commission consideration. On May 20, the Parks and Recreation Commission received the sub-commit- tees report and took the following actions which are explained in more detailed in the attached memorandum dated June 1, 1987 to the City Manager. Commission Actions: 1. Accepted new park definitions as developed by the sub-committee . 2. 3 • 4. These are attached as Exhibit #1 to the memo to the City Manager. Revised the Park Inventory to comply with the new park cate- gories. The revised inventory is attached as Exhibit #2 to the memo to the City Manager. Classified the new voter mandated purchase of Hosp Grove into the Miscellaneous Landscaped/Open Space category. Delayed the decision on Larwin Park and Robertson acquisition pending the Larwin development feasibility study. FISCAL IMPACT: None. EXHIBITS: 1. Memo to the City Manager dated June 1, 1987 298 June 1, 1987 TO: CITY MANAGER FROM: David Bradstreet, Parks and Recreation Director __ ---r? REVISED PARKS INVENTORY OVERVIEW The purpose of this memorandum is to detail the actions taken by the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding the current park inventory, the classification of the voter approved acquisition of Hosp Grove, the classification of Larwin Park, and the need to acquire additional land on the Robertson property. BACKGROUND On April 20, 1987, the Parks and Recreation Commission appointed Commissioners Regan, Dahlquist, and Lawson to serve on a subcommittee charged with analyzing and making recommendations to the entire Commission on the following four items: 1. Review of the current Park Inventory. 2. Determine the classification of new Hosp Grove acquisition. 3. The classification of Larwin Park. 4. The need to acquire the Robertson Property. The sub-committee met several times before developing their recommendations for the entire Parks and Recreation Commission to consider. On May 20, 1987, the Parks and Recreation Commission received the sub-committees report and took the following actions which are detailed below. Review of the current Park Inventory Prior to recommending changes to the current park inventory, the sub-committee reviewed and revised the definitions used to classify all park acreage. The Commission reviewed and supported these revised definitions. The new definitions used to classify park acreage is attached as Exhibit #1. With these new definitions, the Commission supported the recommended changes to the current park inventory and included the reference that all park acreage which was being "grandfathered" in to a particular classification should be noted in the revised inventory. This special note was added to the revised inventory to assure that in the future it will be understood why certain park sites are classified in a particular category. Exhibit #2 is a listing of the revised inventory. 299 2 June 1, 1987 City Manager Page Two This new inventory included several changes of which the major ones are briefly described as follows: * * The elimination of all previously counted developed parkland in the Southwest Quadrant (Spinnaker -4.0 acres was deleted and Alta Mira -12.0 acres was moved from existing into the future category). This change will increase the shortage of developed park acreage in this quadrant from approximately 10 acres to 26 acres. In the Northeast Quadrant, Larwin -18.3 acres was moved from existing to future parkland pending the feasibility study which is being done to determine its ultimate developability as a park site. This change will cause the conformance of park supply to park demand in this quadrant to fall below the adopted performance standard. · There are several smaller changes which were made to the inventory and these are shown on Exhibit #2. Determine the classification of new Hosp Grove acquisition. Based on the recommendation of the sub-committee which was made following a discussion of the park classifications, existing park facilities, the revised park category definitions, and current park development trends, the Commission voted 5 to 1 to classify the voter mandated purchase of Hosp Grove into the Miscellaneous Landscape/Open Space category. The dissenting Commissioner felt that the Special Resource Area was the classification which should have been used to classify Hosp Grove. The classification of Larwin Park. The Commission voted unanimously to hold off making a decision as to the classification of Larwin Park until the feasibility study to determine its ultimate developability is completed. The need to acquire the Robertson Property. Because the need to purchase this property is contingent upon the outcome of the feasibility study of Larwin Park, the Commission will be making a decision following the completion of that study. Attachments DB:POC:pksrpt 300 3 EXHIBIT #1 (Page 1 of 4) P&aK I•VB ■TOaY DBSCRIPTIO• Presently the City of Carlsbad's Parkland Inventory is composed of three primary park classifications: • • • Community Parks Special use Areas Special Resource Areas These classifications are the basis for the City's standards to assure optimum park and recreational facilities. The standards for each park classification are as follows: Community Parks Special Use Areas Special Resource Areas 2.5 acres/1,000 population .5 acres/1 ,000 population 2.5 acres/1,000 population The pre-1982 Parks and Recreation Element emphasized more passive use concepts with the acquisition and development of smaller neighborhood, mini, and vest pocket parks. Additionally, natural open space areas, meant to serve as connective corridors and greenbelts throughout the City, were accepted as park-in-lieu dedicated under the Quimby Ordinance. Due to the characteristics of these natural open space areas, many of the sites once accepted for park purposes are considered undevelopable by today's standards. The revised 1982 Parks and Recreation Element indicated a shift in recreational trends toward those uses which are more active in nature. In order to accommodate these current trends, parkland dedication requirements became geared toward the acquisition of developable parkland which could provide both active and passive use. Today, current and future parkland dedicated under the Quimby Ordinance is subject to more stringent conditions than were once required. Noting the shift in acquisition policy, developable parkland is considered to be buildable acreage similar to acreage associated with the subdivision for which dedication is required. Typically, it has slopes of less than 101 and is located in other than an area on which building is excluded due to environmental and geographical constraints, flooding, easements, liens, or other encumbrances and/or restrictions. 301 EXHIBIT #1 (Page 2 of 4) Miscellaneous landscape/open space areas is a secondary classification within the park inventory. This cateqory has been established to provide accountability for additional acreage currently under maintenance responsibility of the Park operations division, however, is not usable to meet the City's park standards~ In addition, accountability is provided for the natural open space areas once considered as parkland; however, by today's standards, they are not considered to be conducive to park use and/or development. The following are definitions of the aforementioned classifications and descriptions of active and passive use. COMMUNITY PARK Co ■■unity Parks are leisure facilities, approximately 20 to 50 acres in size; however, due to a 1982 revision of the Park and Recreation Element to the General Plan, pre-1982 neighborhood parks of less than 20 acres have been reclassified to the community park classification. This reclassification was approved by the Park and Recreation Commission in May 1987. Typically, community parks are designed to serve the recreational needs of several neighborhoods. The nature of this type of facility encourages and attracts family unit populations from a nearby vicinity on a daily frequency. Community parks generally provide active and passive use amenities; however, they are not limited to the exclusive use of either. Minimum facilities should include: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Family-oriented picnic areas Group picnic areas Turfed open space areas for free play Multi-purpose lighted playfield(s) Tot areas Structures for lectures, meetings, skills instruction, etc. Buffer areas Special use facilities as per specific community demand Tennis courts Special use facilities, such as swimming pools, tennis courts, horsehoes, handball and racquetball courts, etc. may be located within these parks if appropriate to the interest and need of the community in which the park is located. The service radius for community park sites is approximately two miles. The primary access orientation is vehicular. It is therefore established that community parks should be located adjacent to a secondary arterial or circulation route of greater heirarchy as defined within the Circulation Element. 302 SPECIAL USE AREAS EXHIBIT #1 (Page 3 of 4) Special Use Areas are typically local facilities that meet the needs of only one or two activity type uses, either passive or active in nature. They are between one to five acres in size and generally do not provide the basic universally accepted facilities found in a community park site. Facilities of this type are, but not limited to, swim, tennis or racquetball complexes, meeting halls, athletic complexes, play lots, picnic and interpretive walk areas. Pre-1982 Parks and Recreation Element included mini and vest pocket parks. The revised 1982 Parks and Recredtion Element has incorporated these parks into the special use category which typically defines the nature of these areas. · Location of special use area sites should be based upon adequate access to its supportinq community population. SPECIAL RESOURCE AREAS Special Resource Areas are local amenities that have either city- wide or potential regional significance. The significance is in the quality of the site that makes it unique as either a passive and/or active recreation area; this quality may be of a natural (water, geological, ecological, etc.), historical (architectural, etc.), or a combination thereof. Consequently, the special resource area as defined has a visitor attraction or drawing power to users locally and beyond. Typically, special resource areas provide a unique character and/or use not found in community parks or special use areas. In general, they are larger than community parks. They are a recreational site characterized by the existence of a special or unusual feature, natural or man-made, i.e., a water body, earth formation, historical amenity, ecological reserve, etc. MISCELLANEOUS LANDSCAPED/OPEN SPACE AREAS Landscaped Areas are acreage presently maintained by the Park operation division. The degree of landscape maintenance performed varies from high to minimum depending upon public exposure, desired aesthetics, safety and/or liability concerns. Maintenance areas typically include land adjacent to public buildings such as City Hall, Libraries, Fire Stations, Administration Buildings, Safety Center, street medians, and public right-of-ways. 303 EXHIBIT #1 ( Page 4 of 4) Open Space Areas typically are unimproved and require minumum or no maintenance. These areas are generally considered to be undevelopable by today's park standards due to environmental and/or geographic constraints or the prohibitive cost to rectify those constraints. Some open space areas in this classification were accepted for park purposes under the Quimby Ordinance prior to 1 9 8 2. ACTIVB OSB Act i ,re Parle Areas typically provide a form of organized, supervised, often extra-curricular recreation. Park amenities denoting active use may include gymnasiums, swim complexes, multi-use ballfields, tot lots, hard court play surfaces, volleyball, horseshoe areas or a combination thereof. PASSIVB USB Paasi,re Parle Areas often provide minimal or no amenities associated with active use. The vary nature of passive use implies undemonstrative, nonparticipating, complacent, subdued activity. Park amenities generally associated with passive use include nature trails, walkways, picnic tables, benches, and small turf and/or landscaped areas. 304 Quad-1982 Recom-owner-Devel- rant Class. mendation Site Acreage ship oped ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- NW N COM Holiday 5.4 City A NW N COM Laguna Riviera 6.8 City A NW N COM Magee 3.0 City A NW N COM Hosp 27.0 City p Total Community Park 42.2 NW N/A SUA Pio Pico 0.8 City p NW N/A SUA Oak 0.4 City p NW M SUA Maxton Brown 1.4 City p NW M SUA Rotary 1.0 City p NW SUA SUA Buena Vista 2.3 CUSD A NW SUA SUA CHS Tennis cts 3.0 CUSD A NW SUA SUA Swim Complex 3.0 City A w NW SUA SUA Chase Field 2.3 City A 0 t.n NW SUA SUA HSCC 1.0 City A NW SUA SUA Jefferson Elem 2.6 CUSD A NW SUA SUA Kelly Elem 2.8 CUSD A NW SUA SUA Magnolia 4.2 CUSD A NW SUA SUA Pine Elem 2.0 CUSD A NW SUA SUA Valley Jr. HS 7.5 CUSD A NW N/A SUA Car Country 1.0 City p NW M SUA Cannon 1.7 SDGE A Total Special Use Area 37.0 FUTURE/ANTICIPATED NW N/A SUA Cannon Lake 6.7 City A NW N/A SUA Pine School 7.0 CUSD A NW SRA COM Macario 25.0 City A NW N/A SUA Pine Sr. ctr. 3.0 CUSD A Total 41.7 EXISTING PLUS FUTURE 120.9 ARCES REQUIRED BY GROWTH MANAGEMENT AT BUILDOUT 118.4 "'\) EXHIBIT #2 (Page 1 of 6) KEY NW Northwest NE Northeast SW Southwest SE Southeast COM Community SUA Special Use Area SRA Special Resource Area N Neighborhood N/A II "Act~ ~ M Mini A Active p Passive w 0 O'I Quad-1982 rant Class. NE COM Recom- mendation COM Total Community Park NE NE COM N/A SUA SUA Total Special Use Area FUTURE/ANTICIPATED NE N/A COM NE SRA COM NE COM COM EXISTING PLUS FUTURE Site Calavera Hills Larwin Safety Center Ballfield* Total Calavera Hills Phase II Macario Larwin Total ARCES REQUIRED BY GROWTH MANAGEMENT AT BUILDOUT * This is a temporary facility. Acreage a.a a.a 4.0 2.0 6.0 14.0 10.0 25.0 18.3 53.3 67.3 62.5 Owner- ship City City City City City City Devel- oped A p p A A ** EXHIBIT #2 (Page 2 of 6) ** Pending the outcome of the feasibility of Larwin, none of this acreage should count in the inventory. Following the determination of the study only that acreage which is developable should be added to the parks inventory when it is scheduled for construction. w 0 --.J 0 Quad-1982 rant Class. Recom- mendation Site Acreage owner- ship Devel- oped ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- SW COM Total Community Park Total Special Use Area FUTURE/ANTICIPATED SW N/A COM SW N/A COM SW N/A COM SW N/A COM SW N/A SUA SW N/A COM EXISTING PLUS FUTURE HPI Sammis/Alta Mira Macario City Acq./Alta Mira School Dist. SUA Altamira * Total ARCES REQUIRED BY GROWTH MANAGEMENT AT BUILDOUT o.o o.o 28.0 HPI A 10.0 Sammis A 25.0 City A 10.0 City A 6.0 CUSD A 12.0 City p 91.0 91. 0 95.3 EXHIBIT #2 (Page 3 of 6) * This site should be grandfathered into the park inventory provided that another 10 acres or more can be purchased adjacent to this site which will allow the entire site to be developable park land. Until this additional acreage is purchased and scheduled for construction it should not be counted in the existing inventory. w 0 00 Quad- rant SE SE SE SE SE SE N 1982 Class. COM N N N SUA Recom- mendation COM COM SUA SUA SUA SUA FUTURE/ANTICIPATED SE COM COM SE SRA SUA SE SRA COM EXISTING PLUS FUTURE Site La Costa Canyon Stagecoach Total Fuerte Fuerte Elem Cadencia Levante Total Alga Norte Carrillo Macario Total ARCES REQUIRED BY GROWTH MANAGEMENT AT BUILDOUT Acreage 9.0 28.0 37.0 3.6 2.0 2.0 5.4 13.0 21. 0 10.0 25.0 56.0 106.0 128.5 Owner- ship City City SMUSD SMUSD City EUSD Lacosta Ranch City City Devel- oped A A A A A A A A A EXHIBIT #2 (Page 4 of 6) EXHIBIT #2 (Page 5 of 6) Quad-1982 Recom-Owner-Devel- rant Class. mendation site Acreage ship oped ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- SPECIAL RESOURCE AREA INVENTORY LIST NW SRA SRA Auga Hedionda Lagoon 254.0 SDG&E A/P NW SRA SRA Buena Vista Lagoon 202.0 state p NW N/A SRA Beaches (credit) 28.3 state A/P NW SRA SRA Macario (credit) 47.0 City A/P NW SRA SRA Hub 92 SDG&E A/P Total 623.3 NE N/A SRA Beaches (credit) 28.3 State A/P NE SRA SRA Macario (credit) 47.0 city A/P Total 75.3 SW N/A SRA Beaches (credit) 28.3 State A/P w SW SRA SRA Macario (credit) 47.0 City A/P 0 I.O SW SRA SRA Batiquitos 484.0 City p Total 559.3 SE N/A SRA Beaches (credit) 28.3 state A/P SE SRA SRA Macario (credit) 47.0 City A/P Total 75.3 SRA TOTAL 1,333.1 PARKS INVENTORY SUMMARY SHEET COMMUNITY PARKS EXISTING FUTURE TOTAL SPECIAL USE AREAS EXISTING FUTURE TOTAL 87.2 209.3 296.5 56.0 32.7 88.7 TOTAL COMMUNITY PARKS AND SPECIAL USE AREAS TOTAL EXISTING FUTURE SPECIAL RESOURCE AREAS TOTAL ACREAGE GRAND TOTAL 310 143.2 242.0 385.2 1333.1 1718.3 EXHIBIT ~2 (Page 6 of 6) APPENDIX 21 311 APPENDIX 21 Page 1 of 4 ZONE 6 TRAFFIC VOLUME ESTIMATES AS OF 1-1-87 Averaqe Daily Trips (AOT) Trip Gen. Estimated(2) Rate Un de loped Ultimate Gross AC QUAD (ADT)(1)Existing(2)Developing(2)Potential(2)Buildout Zone 6 2674. 1 SW Quad 207.4 SE <.}Jad 2466.7 Hesidential RL 10/DU N-RL-1 199 860 0 820 1680 S-RL-1 17.7 150 0 50 200 TOTAL 216.7 1010 0 870 1880 RLM 10/0U N-RLM-1 45.5 SW u 1010 0 1010 -2 73.0 SW 2960 () 0 2960 -3 52 870 0 0 820 -4 33.7 560 0 80 640 -5 2.7 0 0 40 40 -6 198.4 5300 0 350 5650 -7 25.22 660 0 90 770 Sl.JBTOTAL 430.5 10370 1()10 560 1'1940 S-RLM-1 3~0.3 11130 0 350 111+80 -2 144. 1 2880 0 160 3040 -3 26.8 410 0 210 620 -4 17.5 0 380 0 380 -5 4.25 100 0 20 120 surnuTAL 572.95 14520 380 740 15640 TOTAL 1003.45 24890 1390 1300 27580 RM 8/DU M-HM-1 14.8 SW 0 480 0 480 -2 4.7 SW 2S8 0 0 288 -3 36.6 SW 600 0 0 600 -4 68.2 0 1832 0 1832 -5 86.4 1744 112 224 2080 -6 153.5 4424 2944 0 7368 -7 7.4 SW 0 0 248 248 SUBTOTAL 371.6 7056 5368' 472 12896 S-HM-2 1. 7 0 0 72 72 -3 38.5 1600 0 208 1808 SUBTOTAL 40.2 1600 --0 280 1880 TOTAL 411.8 8656 5368 752 Hi:276 ADT = Average Daily Trips Notes: (1) SANDAG traffic generation rates, June 1986 ( 2) Dwelling unit and square footage Zone 6 buildout assumptions calculations to determine ADT are fro111 312 RMH N-RMH-1 Residential Commercial -3 -4 -5 -6 SUBTOTAL Residential Commercial S-RMH-1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 Residential Church Subtotal Hesiderit i.11 Church TOTAL Residential Commercial Church RH S-RM-1 -2 -3 -4 TOTAL Page 2 of 4 Trips (ADT) Trip Gen. Rate Gross AC QUAD (ADT) Existing Undeloped Developing Potential Estimated Ultimate Buildout 62.0 52. 7 9.3 31 27 18.4 10.0 148.4 139.1 ~.3 4.9 14.7 11.3 97.25 127.4 15.7 12. 13 3.57 271. 25 267 .68 3.57 419.65 406.78 9.3 3.57 3.3 26.1 29.5 8.7 67.6 8/DU 120/1000 sq. ft. 1200/AC 2864 6698 or 11160 Daily 15/1000 sq. ft. 2976 1160 944 0 7944 669,'3 or 11160 56 464 0 2080 4~12 152 508=Daily 1523=Sun. 3 x on Sun. 8/DU 7264 508:0aily 1523=Sun. 15208 6698 or 11160 508=Daily 1523:Sun. 768 3576 1912 568 6824 313 0 0 272 0 512 1088 1872 0 0 0 9GO 1232 1312 0 0 3504 () 5376 0 0 0 0 136 0 136 0 0 0 584 224 0 808 0 408 368 0 2560 0 824 192=Daily 576=Sun. 4160 '192=Daily 576=Sun. 4968 0 192=Daily 576:Sun. 0 512 984 344 1840 2864 6698 or 11160 3248 1744 1680 1088 10624 6698 or 11160 lJ-64 832 960 5B72 5824 976 700=Daily 2099:Sun. 1492.S 700=Dai ly 2099:Sun. 25552 6698 or 11160 700=Daily 2099:Sun 768 4088 3032 912 8800 Page 3 of 4 Trips (ADT) Trip Gen. Estimated Rate Undeloped Ultimate Gross AC QUAD (ATD) Existing Developing Potential Buildout RH/0 8/DU or 300/AC.Ofc S-HH/0-1 2.3 Residential 0 0 488 488 Office 0 0 690 690 TOTAL 2.3 0 0 1178 1178 C SW 70/1000 sq.ft. 700/AC N-C-1 13. 8 0 7000 or 0 7000 or 9000 9000 TOTAL 13.8 0 7000 or 0 7000 or 9000 9000 N N-N-1 6.3 15/1000 Church 6.3 sq. ft. 72=Dai ly 0 535=Daily Daily, 216=5un. 1605=Sun. 45/1000 sq.ft. Sun. S-14-1 34.3 26806 0 ---- TOTAL 40.6 0 Commercial 34.3 26806 0 535=Daily ? Church 6.3 72=0aily 0 1605:Sun. ? 216=Sun. RC 100/AC S-RC-1 73.8 7380 0 0 7380 --- TOTAL 73.8 7380 0 0 7380 u 300/AC S-U-1 4.8 1440 0 0 1440 ----- TOTAL 4.8 1440 0 0 1440 School E 60/AC N-E-1 15.0 900 0 0 900 S-E-1 8.8 528 0 0 528 - TOTAL 1428 0 0 1428 314 OS N-05-1 -2 -3 -4 TOTAL 5-0S-1 Gross AC 41.5 27.0 4.8 19. 1 92.4 261.4 18 Hole Golf Course Cadencia Park (4.1ac) Trip Gen. Rate QUAD (AOT) 600/course 50/AC LaCosta Canyon Park (9ac) 50/AC S-05-2 14.3 -3 4.1 -4 12.0 -5 11.6 Subtotal 304.4 TOTAL 396.8 TOTAL ZONE 6 RESHJENTIAL NOM-RESIDEtHIAL TOTAL NORTH ZOME 6 RESWENT!t\L NON-RESil)ENTIAL TOTAL 50UHI ZONE 6 RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL 315 Page 4 of 4 Trips (ADT) Estimated Undeloped Ultimate Existing Develoein~ Potential Buildout ( see 5-0S-1 ) 0 0 (see 5-05-1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- (see 5-0S-1) 0 0 (see 5-05-1) 600 0 0 600 205 0 0 205 450 0 0 450 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1255 -0 0 1255 1255 0 0 1255 APPENDIX 22 316 Paqe 1 of 7 APPENDIX 22 ZONE 6 BUILDOUT CIRCULATION ELEMENT ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS This appendix lists and maps the improve~ents neede~ to completely develop all Circulation Element Roads in Zone 6 to their ultimate riqht-of-way width and design. Many Circulation Element Roadways serve as the boundary between Local Facilities Manaqement Zones. For puqrnses of this study these roadways were divided in half when assiqninq development requirements to a Zone. For example, half the cost of providing the median on El Camino Real between La Costa Avenue and Levante Street has been assigned to Zone 23 and half has been assigned to Zone 6. This is not to suqqest that only half the median be constructed at any one tiJTie. Whe11 this improvernent is constructed it would be logical as well as economical to construct the entire median at one time. Some of the needed improvements will he constructe~ by the developers of adjacent property. Other needed improvements are adjacent to properties that have little or no development pote11tial or have already been developed with sinqle family homes. Alternatives for financing these improvements are shown at the end of this section. All of the Circulation Element Roads have been constructed to their full length within Zone 6. However, some of these roads have sections that have riot been built out at their ultimate right-of-way width. It should be noted that many of the arterial streets within Zone 6 were constructed before La Costa was annexed to Carlsbad. Some of these arterials are not developed to their full right-of-way width per Carlsbad's standards. These streets often are missing the required five foot sidewalk. To install this sidewalk in some cases would require massive amounts of grading and/or the consturction of a retaining wall. In other cases it would require the removal of existing mature landscaping in front of single family homes. These improvements woulrl have to be provided by the City or an assessment district since the adjacent property was fully developed years ago. In addition many of the residents have lived without a sidewalk for years and may strongly object to the removal of their lanrlscaping to facilitate the construciton of a sidewalk. 317 Page 2 of 7 Each of the Circulation Element Roadways within Zone 6 has been broken into segments, as shown on the map "Existing and Proposed Street Improvements", which follows. This exhibit distinguishes between fully improved and partially improved segments of the roads. Partially improved segments have been assigned a letter. Underneath this letter is a series of numbers and letters which lists the needed improvements on each unimproved section. The legend on this exhihit explains what each of these letters signifies. The needed improvements, the approximate length of the needed improvements, the approximate cost of the improvements anrl the possible source, or sources, of the improvements is shown on "Needed Arterial Improvements within Zone 6" which follows. This information was obtained from a number of sources. A field investigation determined what improvements were needed on each partially improved roadway segment. The approximate lenath of the needed improvements was determined by the use of maps, recent aerial photos, or actually measuring the length in the field. Financing Alternatives The City has several options for improvements along the roadway segments funding source has been identified: financinq the needed for which no clear 1. Add them to the list of projects which will be funded through Public Facilities Fees. 2. Require future development within Zone 6 and outside Zone· 6 which contributes traffic to these roadway segments to f~nd part or all of the cost of the needed improvements. 3. Establish Assessment Districts to pay for the needed improvements. 4. Establish traffic impact fees for all projects contributing traffic to the impacted roadway sections or intersections. 318 ZONE 21 \ !,•-•-I (A)-L,C0,8,9l Y~i ST on weal aide ZONE 10 ZONE 19 .... CD -·-·-·-·11 ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN Proposed (P)2L,CO,S,SL ST on ••at ••d• ZONE 11 CIRCULATION Existing and Improvements APPENDIX EXHIBIT 22 79 CUy of C•l•bad G,owlh Managem■nl Progr,1m JANUARY 1 9 8 7 A. B. C. D. E. Page 4 of 7 NEEDED ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN ZONE 6 El Camino Real (from northerly boundary of Zone 6 to approximately 420 feet south) lane, curb and gutter, sidewalk, streetlight, street tree for approximately 420 feet on the west side. Approximate cost: $38,300 Source -Future development of the property. El Camino Real (from approximately 420 feet south of the noitherly boundary of Zone 6 to Alga Roarl) median, sidewlk, streetlight, street tree for approximately 750 feet on the west side. Approximate Cost: $116,200 Source -Future development of the property. El Camino Real (from Algrt Road to La Costa Avenue) sidewalk on the east sirle for approximately 6500 feet). Approximate Cost: $1U7,3UO Source -See Financing Alterndtives tlotc: Construction of the needed sirlew<1lk would require removal of existing landscapinq and some possible encroachment or,to existinq development. Hancho Santa Fe Road (from La Costa Avenue to approximately 650 feet south) median, lane, curb, gutter, sidewalk, street tree, streetlight on the east side for approximately 651l feet. Approximate Cost: $141,500 Source -Future development of adjacent property. Rancho Santa Fe Road (from La Costa Avenue to northerly boundary of Zone 6) 1/2 median, sidewalk for approximately 4600 feet on west side). Approximate Cost: $333,500 Source -Future development of adjacent property tn Zone 11 • Note: This section of Rancho Santa Fe Road may be realigned to the east. 320 F. G. H. I. J. Page 5 of 7 Alga Road (from El Fuerte Street to Santa Isabel Street) sidewalk for approximately 560 feet on the south side. Approximate Cost: $8,400 Source -See Financing Alternatives Alga Road (from Santa Isabel to approximately 700 feet from the boundary with Zone 10) sidewalk on both sides for approximately 10,000 feet. Approximate Cost: $300,000 Source -See Financing Alternatives Note: Construction of sidewalk in this area would require extensive grading in some cases as well as removal of a number of street trees. A few short sections of sidewalk do exist on the easterly portion of this section. Alga Road (from Alicante Road to approximately 2070 feet edst) sidewalk, streetlights for dpproximat~ly 2070 feet on both sides. Approximate Cost: $109,300 Source -Future development of approved projects on the south side and future development of property in Zone 10 on the north side. Alga Road (from Alicante Road to El Camino Real) sidewalk for approximately 310G feet on the south side. Approximate Cost: $51,200 Source -See Financing Alternatives lfo t e : Const r u ct ion of side w a 1 k i II th i s a r ea w o u l d require extensive removal of existiritJ landscaping of single family homes. Alga Road (from El Camino Real t0 Mimosa Street) median, sidewalk, streetlight, street trees on north side for approximately 1,350 feet. Approximate Cost: $209,200 Source -Future development of property to the north. 321 K. L • M. N. 0. P. Paae 6 of 7 Alga Road (from Minosa Drive to approximately 500 feet east) median, curb and gutter, sidewalk, streetlight and street tree on north side for approximately 500 feet. Approximate Cost: $83,000 Source -Future development of adjacent property. Alga Road (from approximately 500 feet east of Mimosa Drive to the westerly boundary of Zone 6) full road improvements for approximately 1300 feet. Approximate Cost: $767,000 Source -Future development of adjacent property. Alicante Road (from Alga Hoad to Pamplona Way) on both sides for approximately 1700 feet. Approximate Cost: $56,100 Source -Future development on the east side. sidewalk Note: Construction of sidewalk on the west side would necessitate the removal of extensive landsc..tpinq i11stdlled by property owners. !\l icar1te Hoad (from Zamora Way to Al tisma Way) sidewalk, streetlights, street trees for dpproximately 800 feet. Approximate Cost: $22,800 Source -Future development of adjdcent property. El Fuerte Street (from Corte de la Vista to S.D.G.&E. easement) sidewalk 011 the north side, streetlights and replacement of asphalt sidewalk on the south side for approximately 3,106 feet. Approximate Cost: $133,200 Source -See Financing Alternatives Note: This area has been developed with estate lots. A sidewalk would encroach into some existing landscaping. El Fuerte Street (from S.O.G. & E easement to CT 85-7) two lanes, curb and gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, street trees for approximately 400 feet. Approximate Cost: $67,700 Source -Future development in Zone 11. 322 Q. Page 7 of 7 La Costa Avenue (from El Camino Real to Romeria Street) 8,188 feet streetlights for south side of La Costa Avenue, 7,388 feet sidewalk for the south side of La Costa Avenue from El Camino Real to Marabella Condominiums and from the Marabella Condominiums to Romeria Street. Sidewalks are needed on the north side of La Costa Avenue for 5,236 feet, adjdcent to undeveloped lots. Approximate Cost: $264,000 Source -South sirle of La Costa Avenue -See Financinn A l t er r1 at i v es North side of La Costa Avenue -Future development of the property 323 APPENDIX 23 324 SIONAUZED IN'l'US2CTIOPII · APPENDIX 23 PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET Project N,,, T. .r , .. SB'IOTAL N-SSTREET I 'Z-I ::j I .... -, -~ ~ {, '6 2 1( i I ~ ~ _) ..... > · .. ;.·---►-......, ________ .......... ~\ S-WSTREET I ···~-~I NB101'Al. EBil' -{() NBU" -~~ V/C AVE.DELAY RANGE PER VEH. L.0.3. ., -· .. ;.: % SEC. WBTH -... SBTH -~', □· o-60 &5..0 A . 61-70 5.1-15.0 a WBil' -13"7 I SBU" --. I 71-80 1S.1-25.0 C >OR )QR EBTH -:,Zj I NBTH -i.:. . I 81-90 25.1--10.D D ... _; 1.1 ) lro,'"LI I . 91-100 40.1-60.0 E -· ·/Off + 118 • IS44 1844/11,co _ l.t~ !-W CR[TICAL .-~ .. firS CRITICAL ·· . SUM OF CRIT. VOL & SUM/CAP. __ V/C ~ . : .· ::-: .: ~ .. :._ -. ;.·.. . ·_ --~.:~ .. ----------------....-----.... -. . ..... ,,•: . .:.-~. . . -•. ,.-. . . ·. . ....... ,. . .. ,.. . . . ;,.-. \'::>,.;.· ~.;:•;.:'-:,:-;:,~-.,JJ:t:¥,.·.~ -·:<: ·; -a,.;..·•." · ... ·:-• •-•• . • ••. ~ .... T·•,•:~.-••• •• • • ·, .,; •u• • •·.• ... •,: • •. ""t:•-:;_·. :-. •' .. - -· .-i.. .,· . •·. "'.;-. -.. ·-·· _ .. _,. '. . ,. . .. ... . •..... .. .,,. ·. :· . . -· -~-.. ··-· ---·•······· I••• 325 ------------------ I I ) SIONA I IZED l'N"l'DSECTION 9"'1 PLANNING APPtlCATION WORKSHEET lntemectian· e , c... C Br I 4 l-&A; . K OA 'J> J • Date· E;/; 2: /g Z ; Analrt RTJ" Tune Period Analyzed· " · /~ , f' = ,L). K -C... --:v, ".; r !) . r' Project .'flJo . -. I . N-SSTREET . - 1 /' ~/--~ . ' '~ ;_ ,I • _) I ~4 s I-_Jdi EB10TAL \ EBil' -btJ.. WBTii -2~1 Gil' WBIJ' -~5~ I )QR EBTH -iq, l [iiJJ NBIJ' SBTH SBIJ' NBTH r i -- -- -....... H'i i I 1 i, "--.. t : ,-; .;- ,_ -:-~ Clli]' -.,. . I • c:: i >OR .., -~ I .,/ ~. 1·>~-~J) ":~\_ tt --.. -I i~s I WB'IOTAL \... "'----------4 .-,~"» -:.: .; i V/C RANG! % o-60 . 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 ~, f r ...:i.i:..8 I 2,. ~ 77 I NB'IOTAl. AVE. 09-AY P5R vet. LOS. SEC. o-5.0 A 5.1-15.0 B 15.1-25.0 C 2S.1-40.0 D «>.1-60.D E V ~k/ + /0~111 -,->:-1100! {(:,o,s I:.: ~ w CRITICAL -~ ·. *S CRITICAL .. -SUM OF CRIT. VOL. & suMicAP. -= VIC L.O.S • . : -~-:--; ... -.· __ -. . ·_-·-----~------------.-------- ' ._ .. _ ... ~ .. ·}~:~;-~ -;.::.r :'~: .. :~·.1 .. _-.-~f .. ~/-:_:· .. -.·.;· .. ~-: • .. ·.· ~~--·-• •• ----, •• ··-•. :. 326 -----------------· 111111,u mn 1NTDSECT10N1 NI • .. Sor LO 0"7 m,nb~-r~P 4,.., I PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET ' . I ' hm-=ti,vt.. e, C.. R, / A:Lb>,; i~1'!;:> Date: 7/~1(~1 I J Analyst f);T..j" T:ane Period Ana.lyzed· A-' :::Y\ ' ?et\K -8 ... ,ii,," r I -ProjectNo T,..J:. r CtyjState: '--......_'RL<..~ .... .> G:L c:.. ,,._ .._.., N.O ~l=,,...L. SBlOl'AI. N-SSTREET * I "2--11 l.. I -I• .iLL \._ l£_ .JI '-----1i. '-:, ··~ t.S I a-z.. (,&'? };" > <.. 2:8,-I no«:> I .A. J J (~ 111. ( WllOW. lcz..S ~ 2-: 311 • -z. S' z. - _) 5'0J . -...<."i 031.'f l-03-.. /';> /::, ~·~ \ t t tfr AL6).. l<OA'D C,& c.,,t r,n 'S'l7 Z'SI s-wsrmr _J~ I'-1 I ~~' f (' -z,t;J 1 -,01 I-z..03 EBlOTAL \ A-I 1'\ssl ±L I I NBlOW. EBll' -· 5'0 NBll' -q~ VIC AVE.DELAY RANGE. PER VeH. LOS. WBTH -z ', '2-SBTH -~ s z. y, SEC. ~'1 [iii]' 0-60 0-5.D A . 81-70 5.1-15.0 a WBll' -s~~ I SBll' -~~ >OR >QR 71-80 15.1-25.0 C EBffl -z..o ~ I NBTH -5'1'7 I 81-90 25.~ D ~J Is 11 P 91-100 ~1-60.0 E -===::?7·Z + '"?7~ • /~5"0 1'1;5'0/1~ O.S4 b e=w '"'"''A.Al.. ... '. . ~ CRITICAL sUM c5F CRtt. voL. & suwc». = v,c rn ·----:.·. --~ .-.---. -----· . ··••··-.: ----~. -. ,_ ... ----.,~: :.: . ···-: .. . . ··--~ . ,·;;· .· .... . .. -. ·_) _) ) IIDN♦IJDD IHl'DSIICTIONI NI .. · Rv,,_n,,,_ H, -;--. PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET ' . ' ~.-14! t:,. I<.~/_ ~~A-·/J..oAb , Date: z/~1/a1 Analy,t: RT.::r nme Period Ana)yffd· 'P · M , P f A--!\ --:-~ .... ·, ,l ::t"i PmjectNa T, I, ~ Oty /9at£ C. A-f'U..S ~ ~ e; '-C..k-M t ~ 0 ~€AL- SB'IOTAL N-SSTREET I -Z.I c;\ I ~'-* 1,2,...11"-~,, ~ "a) "oo 11< r, (.. ~-1 I Ii 3'S ~tL i l ~~ ~ o ( WBltJTAL -~ Z,2-0 ,. -z..,, ,-=.Z,1..f ~+__,I ,U-S" 1,18 ► /f,3~ ) 11 f((r Al-6,~ ~~~ is~ ,;i S~ Of 528 5-WSIIEEI' _) <,+ !~~£\- 1,',',, 1 r n.& I 1-l.!.!.. EB10TAL \ I I lil. NBlOW. EBll' -· &,+ NBll' --z..c; :i VIC AVE.CEI.AY. RANGE PER'lat. L.O.S.. WBnf -"2. dt s SBTH -(e,00 s SEC. J 3~ z I', ~' o-60 HD A . 81-70 5.1-15.0 a WBll' -2.2. s j SBll' -/7(.. I >OR >QR 71-80 15.1-25.0 C EBni -2. I i, I NBTH -., ~'-I 81-90 25.~ D G:ii]} ~} 91-100 ,4(1.1-60,D E ... ,4-.1r3, ~.,.:.; I ,..., -!-W cMic + ~~==~---1 G.-9 g, . & r, .. c:,s Jhoo o, s, ~ AL -: · 1-rS CRITICAL . SUM OF CRrT. VOL. SUWCAP. : V/C LAS. -·-. . : . -. ::·;. ~---· ·-···--. -----.-----=---. ... ........----------------------• ... ·. · --. ·j2s=· ·: .. -.. .. IICINAUDD DffDDCTl0NI .·) PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET lntenec.tkP!' Et-~~l~O ~~'-/3?,vt L-4Alt. ~ J/;~/~ 7 I -"""i,,--i.,,i...;;;-"------ Anaiylt R-r.:::r-l1me Period Analyzed~ ,4. . ,., , p I A-J< -13,.,, ldtlt,1 Project No T. ~ c F SB'IOTAL N-SSTREET 1 19-z..3 I .£_.JI'--0 :,,'I ~~, (fl 0 ------ 1 ~ ~-3 ___,tl i ! l I) _) ) --· . -.. .-: _} __::_ -I -,-oa--1-2... EBlOTAL \ /o{g - EBIJ' -· Q WBnl -~! I 2., I', WBll' -~~ I >OR EBTH -fO~ I· ,,.a 1.I .· . .-·. NBC' -I:::,"' SBni -0-A-I [iii]', SBll' -,.._ I >OR NBni --'I~ ' GiJ.1 · .... · .·:-329 VIC RANGE Yt 0-60 . 81-70 71-10 81-90 91-100 J;.WSTREEI' l'E,~o/ ~, l r 2.g I 1113 I NBlOW. AVE.DELAY Pf:AVEH. L.O.S. SEC. 0-S.0 A 5.1-1SJJ a 15.1-25.D C 25.1-.co.o D C,HQ,O E lmNAUDD llffDSK'TIOla Ml ") PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET t • . ~--€t-~Ill.JO ,e~ d;.'-Lll. p VI:-~ z Date: 7/31/€ 7 j Ana1y,t R -r.::r Tune Pmod Analyzed· f. ti/, Pf A-K , 9 j, /J,." + ProjectNo T, -:z::. C. Oty fState: ~i< w e,.s.h e,.1--C-A. H,\ IA/(2. _R-r,k._ SBlOl'AI. N-SSTREET I 2.-0<..o I /i r\ 2:L \._ T _g_.J,~ t,81.. £,&1 1,91 0 ..1!._-I "' I z.o"-o u J J ( _±£ ( WllOrAL LI "- 0 l·el.o 4;;-7,7 .. ) ~4D - l __I 5~=-t"o lttLt1 ""I s 2. ~v L U.,A/ ti: 5-WSIREI' _} .i. JS-11. ~, 1 r ....l..!22 I ~15 1-_.e.. EB10TAL \ I 1s,j I ~ NBTOrAI. EBI:f --3 NBtl' -2-0~ VIC AVE. CELAY RANGE PSIVat. L.O.S. WBTH -'1:.1 SBnl -,. ~ 1 % sec. CiJ'1 I~ i'i 1· ~ 0-S.0 A . 81·70 5.1-15.0 a WBI:f --~I SBtl' -Q >OR >OR 71-80 15.1-25.D C EBTH -~~ I NBnl -S"-z...t-l 81-90 25.~ D [wJ I s~1J . 91-100 40.HO.o E °' 2, ~W1 . I a:w c .. +~":'""!:=~~----re, . & ,~1/{,.. _YJ J... . ~~~f!~~-~-· · trS CRITICAL SUM OF CRIT.·VOL. SUWCAP. -VIC Ul.S. : ~-.-~ --:.·. .· ...... ·-··----. ---------------. . . -.. ~ 330 ~ : · ... .-... -- -------- SIGNAUZl'D JN'IDDC1'10NI .. £X1ST1N, MJTIGA-Te, /An,) PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET · ' -' . l:nterHction· t-/t COSTA . AV~-vuf... @c~ Date: ~l2.!J/G7 I Analyst R.r.~. TnnePeriodAnalyzed·@Sr1,..1b ,4,1)1. PEAK Hvv/. ProjectNa 'eO;A./§ ~ OtyfState: C. /lo R...L...~~ A, !':I,, et-C. Av\,! J.J 0 +:6/lL SBlOTAL N-SSTREET I 9 {,,,(.. I {J l\_ 17...(. \_ ~ ~..JI'-35' - :-i ~ l..Q'-z_c;~ 4-n -I (, 54-1 4, 41 ( ,~ i ; l~ WB10TAL 37 2.. t _il - ~j~ .. ·~oz.. /IS~ .... ~o 3 --t,.1 ',.., / l-CI ~ ' i-01~ )~ 1 n ~ . t Lit ~5-r A AV ~;,J Ve ~ -, ~* •:-' ;!»~ If.) &wsrmr ---29, _) .. 2 ~ ~ 4~"r, f ,~ - I c,~7 1-~ EBIDTAL \ I ~+c I ...ll.. NB'IOW. EBU' -II$ NBII -z.-z..s V/C AVE.OB.AV RANGE PER vet. LOS. j WBTH --~o ~ SBTH -?_C, ~ ~ SEC. I ~ ~ d'1 Li' o-m 0-S.0 A . 61•70 S.1-15.D B WBtr -~~ I SB tr ... --~, )QR )QR 71-80 15.1-25.D C EBTH -z.01 j NBTH -' '.. A. I 81-90 25.~ D I ·2so I/ B' 91-100 .co.~ E • . . . . • ,· . ~.·:'.'_: .... ;.: ~.:_:.'" :·~,.::-, .. -_:r~-~:_.:\,.> ·: :: .. : .. .·•. _________________________ __,,;__ ...... :::: . . ... Y; •• _:.. •. _. • •• ••• ; ~ •• •• /." • i.•• .. ,. . ... '... . .. -·~ ·.. .... . .-.... •.· 331 --------· ,. ··;. · .. ·. SIGNA1lZED JNtDSECTlONS 9-11 .. f!y,JSTrNI. Ir\ rn ,lf-'T e11 ,-PM) PLANNING APPIJCATION WORKSHEET · ' 1 -. lntersectlan· 4 G,e,S"M4-1':-v £ "" u t. 1~G~ O,ate: eal2o/i7 I Analyn: ,_,,.::r, Tune Pmod Analyzect·•e)(/ ~.,.-/Al~ I, 111, ~ A-N Hr>_~ Project Na ;l.CIV~ t'.p Oty/State: ~A-f..J.-S~ ~ ti: £.-C ,3,-, ~, / ,V 0 -PEAL.- SB'IOTAL N-SSTREET ' ''-4-$ I 1J ~ ~\_ ~ .,, .JJ'---..: -'H ..sp; +6,S 'li ) 7 ~!-C ---I s--,, I I l l~ &,;-( ~ =-~ ...... ) l WBlOTAL 1-.!~ '- ~ .:-.,:...>-C 24':, _) .. .z.+s-'-532 ~s,; '2..5 l A.Ir ► 411. ~ "'\ ,., 'I 0 t t n ,,_,. «&$Tl+ AUi,<JU£ ,3~ 13L '2...D7 2.~? i,o 7 S.W STREET _j 5'05 :::°3! ~,r,~ 11"3,2, I-S35 . EB'IOTAL \ I &r 3 I ~ NBTOrAl. EB1l' -7-;" 3 NBll' -,sG. VIC AVe.OELAY RANGE P:RVBi. LOS. WBTH -2-~~ SBnt -4~~ .,. SEC. 0-60 C>-5.D A -·I 41 ~1, lii!]'. . 61-70 5.1-15.0 8 WB1l' -~~ I SBll' -97 >OR >OR 71-80 15.1-25.D C EBTii -a-11 I NBnt -u-, I 81-90 25.~ D I ·s "z. L1 LJJ 91•100 -40.1-60.0 E --··----------------------."':,. · __ .. --· .-..... -. ---------__ 332 __ _ ..... ·--------. --·. -- ,._ .. _) ) .. IIGNAUZIID IN'n!UEC'l1aNI gvl"-.2>0 v, U/IIMl1'111f1"tp· PLANNING APPLICATION WORICSHEET · c., C. P.; /·t-Jr. ~O~TA" A:Vl:, . . ~ S '" lia1 lntmllldkJn.:..· -----.,"""---------------~-............... 1.11_....,;,.. ____ _ Analyst: RT.::f Project Mo T . ::c I ~ SB'IOTAL I ~s-oo I 1,,;Jj'--we ~iii _) Z,17 ,--,r:r.-:,_s_l -z¼ EB'IOl'AI. ' \ ~ .EBil' -· ?..17 WBTH -f:~ l ~' WBll" -I' I I )QR EBni -4-A-I I I ·"02 I} .... ► Tune Pmad .Analyzed· A , M , ? L ,4\-J< . • C-r ~, S 'Tb .. City/Sadr N-SSTREET ·~· Jf1 ) L t Vr~-t.,-!-:--~-~-.,..-,.,,-M-vl.--1. ~ c., · "11. o i-W SIREE1' 13c:.>3 3~ 7 ' 1 (' 1.-0) I ,~0 , I NBl'OI'AI. NBC" -3<.7 VIC AVE.DB.AV RANGE P5R VEK. LOS. .SBTH -I l '-ti ~ S£C. I ,.1.·-, 'Sr, 0-60 o-5.D A . 81-70 5.1-WI B SBC" -'''2 I )QR 71-80 1S.1-25.D C NBTH -3-:: l I 81-90 25.~ D 1 ->i 1 I-91-100 .co.~ E _________ __,;. _____ ~------·· --·-·•···•··•·· ··--··· ... ----------- ·• SIGNAI.IZED IN'l'DS8CrJONI E'. IL.bOvt .. u UN M I Tl 6 •·T', 'IP PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET · ' .. t ' Jntenectk,n• e, "· ~-. l ~ ~2,....A ' A-Ve,, Date: ro,tsz Analyst: R, I .r Time PmiadAnalyzed· P, MI Pf'4,< -C,7'"'1: ~ ,-;:), . PrujectNa T-r; p Oty/State: ~:i8L-'=>:!::i ~b, ~L c:.;::r..M,~~ -:..~e'- SBTOrAL N-SSTREET I z..+30 I 2.8/ '-ft ~.JI'-;-"<:.t 9 "'qc, re --;:1s-I :7~ I I ~~ r ~ i Wl'IOTAL 11os-o ;./:si ·~-J 2,.~ ,::::,,,- -"i -"32,,.i, _) ~~4-~ ,,--,~ .4-b .j. -. .... ~::'\:"' ' 1,,q t t Vt~ .... A-2-~ L-.r:... Cc::. "1""A ,J,•.~€- t,o, 4.U.. "'4 l>WSl'IEE? ~ _) _g__+ 111o2 '-oz, f ,..!.!d I 15SI I-4', • EBlOTAL \ \ ,z.5 !,"") I ~ NBTOtAL ·- 'EBll' -· t..54 NB1l' -t,07 VIC AVE.ca.AV RANG! Pel VEK. LOS. WBTH -3 2--S SBTH -b.; 1 s SEC. I 1 E>?.1'1 w· D-60 HD A . 61-70 S.1-15.D B WBtr -9~1 SB1l" -~:, 4- >OR >Oll 71-80 15.1-25..0 C ) EBnl -4-<..&-I NBTH -r.,.J-.J.-I 81-90 25..~ D i ~_I l-17t;p . 91-100 -10.~ E . ----------------------· . -.. ·-··-··-•· -... ------------------ IIGl«I TDD IN'IDSIICTIOl9 NI .. · /j ~ 1-DolJi .NI 1116 ~Tai r~,,, 1 ·-PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET ' ' . katenec.tian ;· 4, C., ~ /;,,.,t f:£11?if. .4vE.. Date: 7L3!l'57 I ' Analyst 'KT:r TJme Period Analyzed· A •1,', ?tA~-8~,i~ •. d Project No T . ..,.... ---. r-'", City /State: C ,l ,i%. 1.,. !. (~ A-v e.1--'-~ M I l\l I!) i-"(E:,~l- SB'IOW. N-SSTREET I 3~o0 I ~'-tr t.•3 ~I'-,,,. J)jTlT1tt ~1-I 1~"?J I --;:; ( 2.111 n'lOW.· -.. ~2,,-... }•~ .=.: ae _.) •01~ --30♦ . i'"' IDS 11~ "" p .. ~ ... llL 11. }F" .. ~-: ~ t,,.1t ~S1'~ ,lVtJJV~ s.wsmn J,o _) .J£l.. 13~3 lil.,fr~ -1,cqsl-i4b EB'JOJ'Al. \ Jill: I , so~ I NB'DAL - EBil' --10:, NBll' -1\.t, V/C AVEIJ:l.AY RANGE P5R vet. L0.S. ) WBTH -3'0~ SBTH -&.j~ " SEC. CillJ', [ml' CHO 0-U A . 81-70 S.1-150 a WBil'. -11,I I SBil' -2i I >OR >QR 71-80 15.1-25.D C EBni -, i. ~ I NBTH -3G. I j 81-90 2!.~ D I · z ff>A-I} [iii]) 91-100 40.,..., E . --······--------------..... ------ IIGNAIJZBD IN'l"DSl!C'l'I Ml PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET 1 ' . • '. '!-~. '. •· 6. c... fZ,.. I '-I+ G-O~-r~ At/~. 7/~, /s7 &~· Date: I Analyst ~,:r Tune Pmod Analyzed: p, ,v\, ? f 4-K -J3..,, /dov1 ProjectNo. -Z:.-~.,:, OtyfState: ~A-A1...~~A~ 6-1-G. Ar M.I ~0 ce ~'- SB'IOL\I. N-6STREET I Z..~30 I --' t) .ill '--~j'-m-V:flT17CC 31s--1 1~ &\'?, r WB'IOW. lt.50 -"- ~l&\ '!.; .....,.__,11 -·! -- _) 1-70 ~,,, ,,s } 1.1 "2.-$'0 --+ 1..-t'I~ -4-2-& ~ J 1 ttttt~~~ C:... S~ ffl~~d . ' &-WSTREEI' 171,,,7 _)~ (,07, l r 1~~ I 15'"SI I -4-~~ EBlOTAL \ ~2.S I Z'53C) I NB'IOTAL EBIJ' -· ''>'~ 7 NBJ.l' -3"4-VIC AVE. DEl.AY RANGE PeRvet. LO.S. WBTH -,~~ SBTii -413 s sec. ~-I G;J' 0-60 HJ> A 81•70 5.1-15.0 a WBIJ' -:'.l~ I SBJ.l' -/C.i >OR >OR 71-80 15.1-25.0 C ) EBTII -l-S'o i NBTH -._~~ I 81-90 25.~ D 5:ii].1 D-' ' 91-100 <40.1-60.0 E A t 5,5 + -Ji'"?. • 11.32. -i-z..;"/li,~r> c,;7 ·c,, cRmcAL _. t+-S CRITICAL SUM OF CRFT. VOL-& ~UM/CAP. : V/C m -·------•--· -.. ·-•----·------___ .._ __ -~---------. ~"36'. __ ........,__ ______ , ·• # ••• _.,.., IDD 1IN'l'DIIIC'l'D NI _ ·---V/L-2>0ur fJNM1n,1r1BtJ PLANNJNG APPLICATION WORICSIIEET · ' ' - ' £. c.. , .R-• · t." · L·f._.v ;,.:~:ri:.. .. 6/tz/67 . -~-r-12-u-r Jmmectian" Dw: • . ~7::;c .. lime Pmacl Analyzed: A , M · f:.fr:t,!S -' 0:: ==~-AmJrt: .. ProjectNa -..... -:::-Oty /State: .:..t,P.. ... !-g,4~ ' -· C. '== C.,A.M1A,)O K~~ la SBTOTAL N-SSTREET I '.!. l. ~ ,1 I i\ ~\_ 'eTi7 _;:_.JI~ · 1;,5 7:3£, 73C, r ··~~ ?'~~ I i i 1 ~· ! l 2,....,, .... - -J ... ..:!• -.. ~ 1;A,- :::-0 z1· .... _) . ;rs/ ~ 1 A, I ~1./,,.}JT~ ~T/<£~:Z: s.wsrmr _) ~3() Hu J-.~::, I '2.3, 0 -.£..., f r .!i.L I o 1---IL . EBlOrAL ' I 1z.9ol _Q_ NB'lOL\I. - " 0 VIC AVE.DELAY ' EBll' -· NBil' -RANGE PER vet. LOS. ) WBni -0 ·sBTH -1 ~ 'l s SEC. GJ' Uiil 0-60 0-S.0 A . 81-70 5.1-15.CI B WBll". -'2-lfa I SBil' -" . >OR >QR 71-80 15.1-25.0 C EBni -0 i NBTH -A-~ o I 81-90 . 25.~ D I· ::-,1o U llil' . 91-100 40.1-60.0 E • . ---------------·· . ··•.; .. •· .. _) ) SJOK.u.tzED JNl'EIS2CTIONS .. g_ ,// J.;..J> /JV r f,1,v m, T11.1rre? PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEE1' ' . I , lntm:scti0'1· e, C,, it I l./.. !, t/J4.vf~ i ~TJY;t.:t Date: ~/;-Z/fe z Analyst RT.:r" ProjectNa r.., :i=, e SBlOl'AI. I 150~ I _£_.Jl~ !~3 . _) C -I O 1-0 EB10TAL \ - 0 - -EBll' --0 WBTH -0 c;]' WBil' -4-5 I >OR EBTH -01 I· J..r;, I/ Trme Pmod.Analynid· P. I\'\ . P i.4-t< -'-T'1' Srb. ' Oty /St.ate: C. 7'..f<:_1.,~ •"?,.ci.-t:, 61,,,. c.-e "'~ LN'2. ~EAi- N-SSTREET I I\ ~\._ 'tJ' ),.~ 7 /. ,, -;, AP/b 1? --0-t )"ZA-t \ ' i NBIJ' - SBTH - SBIJ' - NBTH - i l t t 5/1 S/1 O- 4-~~ I 4'?,,r 4-"=> I >QR ~" I I r. ~-eiJ . , ·--• ... .. . ! .. : . .. . ~( WB'lOrAl. -... ~:!.4-r--=._At-S' -,,--~s Vrl,S L. ~I)~ NT'~ !;;~1:;.£,j -, IO &Wsrmt I 2...?C., ...£_' f (' ].~3 V/C RANGE % C>-60 . 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 . . ' '•.~·, .•. ~:~:-~ ,• .. : .-; . · .. I l5"3"J-I NBlOTAL - AVE. OEJ.AY PeRVBi. LOS. SEC. o-5.0 A 5.1-15.D B 15.1-25.f) C 25..~ D ~~ E ---.. --. ' : .. --... :. _ _, --:-~~ : . .--.·:·~-:. ··:~· ..... -~~·-;·:·: ... : .• . ... . .··; .. -·: ._. --------------------------·_ ···-.: ...... ···: _: .... ~ . . ... ·. •.:.-· .. .-•. . . . ··• ' . 338 -------------------------------- .. . ..,,.,, JZID 'NiwnaNI PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET ' ' - Izlimdon·· ~, C, I<.· / I L ·i k' ,;4AJf t... . S?'Jl.t t r Ont: 7/31/sz Analyst 'KT;r: Time Pmad.Analyzw A , hi . P 'iA/1.. -?.~, /J,.11-1 ProjectNa T,:Z:,'F=" City/State: C.r,,2.L-513*.:b 6J-. C.ro,\J>JO f,l...~r\t- SB'IOli\L N-SSTREET I i.i.~d I l\ ~'-., __.e_.Jf ½ 139 i3?J i¥/ ~ _e_? I 3(,ol i * + ~ ~ Wl'IDrAI. '2, -z..,t; I.. ~ 1++ ,og 1/ 108 ·• t t . f ·rr _'-fVl'\,<JTf, ... sm.ter -413 ti~ t-13 1i I s-wsrm:r _)~ I~!, _£_' f r -21 1 o 1-_Q_ EBlOTAL \ I I z.~ 0 I _fl_ . NBlOW. -- EBll' -· 0 NBll' -0 VIC AVE.DB.AV RANGE PeRVBl L0.S.. ) Wini -D SBlH -7Ji s SEC. ~', Gll]\ CHO . HJ> A 81-70 S.1-15.0 a WBI:r -! C2Sl Sill'· -:,, )QR >OR 71-80 11.1-25.0 C EBTH -01 NBllf -A-13 I 81-90 25..~ 0 @.t WV . 91-100 40.~ I t . . . .. "· .. --u.•mm, 'ldWIDd Ml .. · 8 vi Loo,n-"'1IT16~17 /Pm} -·_)' PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET I ' . ' lntwlNC•m /£. c. R •· L. ~f.~4AJI:1i:: 5ifl.l 'c 'f'. n-,.. z/3@7 > . !:, /J'I, hAk .. 8u,//."r R:rx.. . nme PaiadAnalyzed: Analyst: . Project Na -r. r, F City JState: C.M_~~Ab ct-t:,,.fr/#/AJO lt,f,L SB'lOW. N-SSTREEI' * I /Sos I --it\._ _L.Jl~ ~7 481 .fSB ~ _!L-I 11.+ 1 + + t ~ _3Ji ( Wl'IDW. !~~ ~ J+ I? ~ ~ +r-~ _) .LLt rf ... . L..~VA-Nn. 'S~~ · 153 J.WSTIEl' _} _Q_ 12 ,, J2...., fr 2-~3 I l-_i EB10TAL \ I tS'll.l _L NB1tJW. - EBCI' -· 0 Nill' -Q VIC AV!.DB.AY RANG! PER vet. L0.S. ) WBnl -() SBTH -..it &t Y. SEC. I Q ,~, 1 ~ssl' D-60 0-U A . 11.-70 5.1-WI a . WBll". -.t5 SBll' -f~l ►OR >01. 71-80 15.1-25.0 C EBTH -'21 NBTH -.4-2, 11 81-90 25.~ ·D ffi) -~V . 91-100 40.HQD E . · :-~~ CRmcAL.-.-~$ -t:_ N-S ~8~ . • suJei CRrf. vet... & ~.$ .. _~ ~/a rll: / ..• 7~; j,,;"~o:,:#:.i\':::~~;~}:1~'-,. · .. -... , :-:: . :·• :·; _. -~·f'iJ~::·:'?:'1!-:/{.\/- . . . . _ ..... -· ·- . .,, .. .... ··•;: .. .. .. _) ) IIGNAUZED INTDDCTl0NI .. 8v1'"""''°"',.. I.I IV "1 i r, 6 lr-r!:.P PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET -, , . • Intenection· t!.c.~. / ·oi,_j VtNttf;A.I . ~~b D-te: i/1,__1,2 7 AnaJrt Rr.J:. T:ane Pmod Analyvd· J>. . M, PeA-J,( -c.,z:. S,T). . ProjectNa T.r.f OtyfState: C.d;~~-8~ C.,f,;;_ C--A-rH , "'>!.2 D~f£..... SBTOW. N-SSTREET I Z-A5!1 I LJ ~ ~\_ .,. -~.JI~ .. , . ,, l 4i 1-182.-I ~l"~t; I > ---, ; 7:.1 ~!~ ~ ( ... .,, '2.-030 -~ t J l WB'lOrAL iil~ '-"4- ~c,~ ill ~"~ ~'c_/ ~ I~\ l-:' 1 )> ~71 ~ I 55 ~ )♦ ~ 1 1 .... n CJ../ /J~H,\ ;,J ;;c,4r- 2-., 5-Wstmr 53,: n., 52,~ ':. ·~ _) ..:J:L ..:::1., f ,. ~ , ... I z-os~ 1-71,/,, EBlOTAL \ I lt..J1 I ~ NB1UTAL ... - EBil" --~i NBCT --, 1 VIC AVE.OELAY :., RANGE P5R veL LOS. WBTH -<.,05 SBTii -74:i % SEC. ~'. I 1 q -z. r, 0-60 0-S.0 A . 61-70 5.1-15.0 B WBtr -> ~l I SBll' -zA,; I >OR >OR 71-80 15.1-25.0 C :EBTH -q,9 I NBTii -~ ::, .. I 81-90 25.~ D . ~-- ~} □' . 91-100 ~1-60.0 E . I' ·. ~-... . ;)) .. ;.: :,_;:,, :•s;i.;:( .. :_/t:::')/;•. C °;·., .. :; ·:-•:•":_.::·.'·· . '. ,. . . . •. .. "!. ·. ·ttl • -~ .... -.. . . ...... 341 --------------------·- •-----·-------·---------- IIONAIJZZDIHrU.SEC'tlONI 13 &,,J/~b OU I Vflf'II 1Ti1--1r1~- PLANNING APPLICATIONWORKSHEET ' -' " ' lntenectian· ~. c.,IL / 0 ~I«· >,I /tit I~ l<O!'tt? 0.-te: et,-,_,lflz I . .. Analrt R-r::r Trme Period Analyzed· p · r\11 ' P * ed< -~Tr SH:. Project Na T. -r:. . 'r. Cty/State: C4fl.J/48~ 6L-C...A-w-INO "D(, Al,,:;. SB'lOfAL N-SSTREET I -Z..!>4-2 I Ii I\ ~ \_ 'tfil m.JJ~ no ;(~ )'50 to12.-I l-103, I ?,-1., 3t.z ( .~ t ~ ~ WB'lOTAL I} -Z..,O .., .., ; ..,~ ... "' •.;.:,~-14-" ;,--;o .,1.0 3•o__j _.t. -444. _) ... 4t~I:, ~ s, 'Z. ~?(,,S 5'H~H:,- j t t ... <rG. Vi CLJI/VJH-tl,N -iu'"l:> i;.wsrm:r $),., 53; '5 ;9 / O,S Z. _J ~Ot> ftJO , l r s-," j 14-83 1, JW -EB'IOTAL I 1(.75 I ~ NB10TAL -- EBil' --j, e, 0 NBil" -1,.0· V/C AVc. ca.AV RANGE PER vet. 1..0.S. WBTH -4--+~ SBTH -!:"S:, % SEC. I ,~I'. W' 0-60 o-5.0 A . 81-70 S.1-15.D 8 WBt:r -~G:>:j j SBU" -H~ l >OR >OR 71-SO 15.1-25.D C El31H -r:.•:--'.'.. I NBTH -2~ I 81-90 25.~ D llli].I I q .3.s p . 91-100 -10.1-69,D E -. . · ~ .. .-·:) .. ;·: ~.:_:.: ;·~;:.::,~,,;_'!t<I\' -:: :: ------------------------- + ...... , .. · .... _) . ! l ! I I I I I ! ! l . . •..:, _..,, mn IN'l'Dm .. !JIJIL;/JOUT /itn,'1,~I) /A,,,, J .. -PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET ' . ' -· ... z. OL/ll~.ll:41~ ~~ ~ ·. E., c.., ll., Dair 21~, I AmJrt R-rl" Tll:nePmad.ANJyzed: ct. t\.l I ?cA-t( -;Jv, IJo.,+ P!OjectNa -,-, ~. p OtyJState: ~hA.t.-l '3~b SB10J'AI. N-SSTREEI' I ~~~, I /, r\ ~'-., ~ .. .Jr--~, lSS 1..1t.'l.1'1 L11 11.l 17,."L-.!.ill -I l.oos f ~U i l J l ~-_Jj.L_ r Wl'lOW. ~•10 I i.. ~ ,+1"2. ·• -~o -<! ... ~~ ... 41-1 • ~, p,i~ 1~~ .. '3&~ ... 114'-i.~ I t t f rif ' &WS'l'IEEl' 1. , -405 40', ~ ... /1./+ _) _:a_ .!L' l '..J2!r I:.. c?<$(A, I-,~ EB 10TAL \ I /Cfz_ I I(./ 7 I N810W. - EBil' -· 4:ci NBtl' -2,,'.j VIC AW.DELAY· RANGE PSI VEK. L0.S. WBTH -j~' SITH -1,; i s SEC. ~'1 Gu]' o-eo. o-5.0 A 81-70 1.1-15.D a WBll' .,, j SBtl' 1-i.Jr.1 -··~ - 353 !>OR >OR 71-80 11.1-25.D C EBnl -NBTH -,+,t; l 81-90 25,,~ D l*1c:rl) I ? 1--d.l . 91-100 «l.~ E . . -. . . .•• .. ---·--------------------·--··· .. -. . . . . " .. ·•· ... . .. ...,...,, mo~ Ml PLANNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET ' -' . ·." /cuvtz....,~i.o 12.cl'f-b z/31/sz ~-· ·~, c;;, ·~. Pate: t Amfyst R:r r Time Period Analyvd· f,fl/. ;'JfA-1<'-2 . /. .,, "'I I, ,,.,,.; ProjectNa T. -:r IF Qty/State: ~A-(2.J,.Sld.+-J> E../; C ~ ""',..., o fl-'-c.. Qi.L_ SB1.0W. N-SSTREET I ..,,,.q.,, I ~\_ t} ~Jl~ 101 .. -I 11"1 I rrrr rec 3,s ( WBtoW. 13u, ' ~ J 1,.(., h,- _) 1,0_, .. --";l 7 -_ lJ7 l':,O .q -;JS .. f't.1,~ if I 8,"L s,,~ ~ 183 -it,~ 1L!ig ~ ' OL./ II £,,,/#fl-/lV ~o+i> &WSTREET _) -1!!!. IO~~ ~, f ,.s1.1. I lH~I -, ..ill.2 EBlOW. +<, I 1~ 7 a I NB'lOTAL -. EBll" -· /5'0 NBC' -(,Q V/C AVE.De.AV RANGE PeR vet. LC.S. WBTH -?, 3 S . SBTH -+~ .,. SEC. Gii)· I 5oor o-60 0-S.0 A i . 61-70 5.1-15.0 a " WBll" I !13 SBC' l:!& I -->OR >OR 71-80 15.1-25Jl C EBn! -, '-j I NBTH -?~LI 81-90 25.~ D GiiV ~.I 91-100 C.1-60,0 E -----------------------=-==-=-==-==-==-==-===------· . . .. .. . •• .... • t ., --~-.: ··-:.• • ... , .... lmNALIDDDft'DacnaNI & . . • .. 01&..>..t>v-Y-(NI kl1n,ti-reo .. .. --· •· .. ··•· .. .. . . PLANNING AP.PLICATION WORKSHEET · I -' .. ' . ' . ... ·, 'f?.5,Ec. I t:;-+ . ~:)z:.4 .ilVt.A.JV~ e1tte·1_ Jntlmer:llap• . Dar ' 1 .. ~ Bu·· 1'ime Pmad Analyzed· 4 . ,({, p Cd I< -~z 5.,-~. .. ProjectNa 1:,: :r, F. OtyfState: C.A-R L,$ -!.A-~ ~ "' .,. ...., ~P...~c~i" ..;,~p...-·i:.--~ ..,. .-4::. _) SB'l'OTAL N-SSTREET I lqc,~ I Ii [\ .L!2. '-'iW . ~..)1~ &,~· '-1.0 l.l./ "'1 .uz..-I .tog I ; l i l ~( I -/J WBlOrAI. '?"11 - 1;,7~ l ~.,, J 1-1. 17 .-it:-it:+ . I!:~ .. ,1r__J r-2._~~ ·-.;;. 311 :;,,-, ,,,~,, ~ t f q1, '2.SJ' .., 1'-'-:> rF l El ...,5-,-,. ,iv:;.., ~t, .. 3~ i-WSTREI' 110 3+i> .;:~, _J '!.74- 78, ~, r(' 1,~~ 1 "''t 1-+A'.5" EB'IOW. \ I ,,,1..I ~ NBTOTAL - EBil' -· ;7+ NBil' -1~0 V/C AVE. DELAY RANGE PER vet. LO.S. ) Wini -, 2,.5 SB1H -(.. '2..1 s SEC. 1 s s ~ ]' Cw]' (HiQ 0■5.0 A . 61-70 5.1-15.0 B ! Will". -2;.>."' SBll' -~., >OR )QR 71-80 15.1-25.0 C EBni -~;-;: I NBTH -.31,.~ I 81-90 25.~ D QI I 3q ~ 1-1 . 91-100 -io.1-69,0 E I• . __________ .;.,_ ______ _;:3~---· ... ------· ·-···-..... ----------. .. IIONAlJZID Dft'DSJICTJONI 9-11 .... ·---···-·•·.· ..... • ... -... ~1":b, .. UL 0\) 1,//V 1'11 TI i, ,t,'1411 ·-. .. •···· -•--·.' . ., .... .. . .. . ·: .. '.~) : Pl.ANNING APPLICATION WOIUQiHEE'r · I . ' .. ' 'Li1t-·Gos~· .. S,/q{$? lntaledk,n· R ,!>, ,:,· A-Vt,, Om: I .. . .. Analyst Rt.:r Time Pmad Analyzed· p · M , P£.A;k -~r:r ~?1? . ProjectNo T. Z:~E City /State: ~Ml1-S:!3~ ~~c.lli--0 s~ t'-;:. ?,.,...,ti SBlOTAL N-SSTREET it I I 5'i !, I z..2-2 \_ . ~.Jl'-I,(, fo1.,.. . 5oz... fo3 Lt. l,/9 -I .. I u i ~ l 315 r WB'IOl'AL 'lo I i -i.1. " !q€,$: '+(JI. 9 lo fz.o _) ""' 41-a l 'l.&C, ~ ,--"I I ':f' ·. 3 o., ► 1•~~,1• ) 1 1 fFv, j., " ~ I-A-C-o ~ -t-,+ .dlt!1:i · 5'11.-~'" s.wsrm:r )5'3 2,.. _J E:!. 1LS1 ~~;, t (' Vt7 I B'1t,, I -4-Z.8 EBlOTAL \ 1,f2~:il -12:l NBTOTAL - EBll' -· .2-&j NBU' -~~.3 VIC AVE.ca.AV RANGE PER vet. LOS. ) WBni -r '2,, I ·sBTH -5o 3, IJ. SEC. -o-ao 0-5,Q A 0' [iii]' . .. 61-70 5.1-15.11 B WB Il'. -'!> ''£ j SBU' -!ci: 71-80 15.1-25.0 C ~OR >OR EBni: -3 04-1 NBTH -s, z.. I 81-90 25.~ D [ii;].' ffilP . 91-100 40.~ E ------------------------· .... ···-.. .. .... if~-::;·· ) ...,,.,mn 1NDllaCnGNI .. PLANNING APPLICATION WORlCSHEBT · ' -' ' ._--~~:il~~-s. F,· L_i..; 4?s'nf--A-11~ Dala: 1l3I L8.2 .. ·.. , . AnafJ,t: ~ . nm. PmiadAnalyzed• a I /l1 , ff ~t!. -i~ iiel,,.,f .. Pl'OjedNa r. -:&, £:.. Oty/Stat,e: ~A.wa~ £AAJC.~ s~"" fi. ~ samw.. N-SSTREET I I Ii I\ -~'-., ~.J,~ J.1+ 5W 5l-'i 5'•3 't1 ~-r I ~ r Wl1DW. I '5&. 1 ,) i ~ i ~ ... "--101 .... -,1, .. ... ,11 ·-.:; ,,,0 ,ya, ~ ,,, +4-5 ► 300 ~ ~) 1 f 1 (r ~ t,,,t. ~~ AflUllti. . " ,s 243 U2,. U2. z.'5" &-WSIIEEI' .. ?f2 _) .1J± /Jo , f,. vr1" _ I I-#5" EBlCTAL l > I I DO -NB'lOW. Eltl" -,,, NBtl' -~) V/C AYI.CELAY RANG! P&I vet. L.O.S. WB"IH -!l I SBTii -51,. 'l. s SEC. wil' [w]' o-eo HD A ". . 11-70 5.1-15.D a WBtr -II~ I SBtl' -£21 . >Oil >OR 71-10 15.1-25.0 C EllH · -+A:5 l NBTH -z.<. !> I 81-90 25.~ ·D Eu;]) cu:~v . 91-100 40.~ E . t . . . ;: . ..~ ... ' . . .: . ~·-. •· i-i ..... ,. ! •• 1! ·. -. . ..,,,mn~ N1 .. . . · D~~,1.DOrJT Mir,~•~-' (P,., . . .. PLANNING APPLICATION WOIUCSBEBT · t . ' . --~~ _. __ ' ... -.;~=l;s,F. '/~~r,. ' +1li & u ts Dltr Zl.31. f 11. 2 I ; . . I, (!1... l'fAJ( • 7J,,,i/,:,uf Analyst: ltr.:r . 'DmePedadAnalywt: -r-, :: I r_ ~-lt~d ~ . . PmjectNa Oty/5tl11C 84J.No~N'rA Fe Rc.o SBTOW. N-SSTREET I I --~l.7-'-<t ~--11''--li .!::ll-I I 4"" J&,"'7 ~, ),7 "(, llS"' ( Wl10rAL no l ,~ I J J ~ -~ ~ 2,J."l. ... .,., _) , .... ~ All ~10 . -~ /? ,s--, : I~ V'~' ~2.S ► J7'f~ ~Jtt3tf u (½n Ael,)/E' . i-WstlEEI' _J .!:!1.. IZ.J2 15"3, f ,...!1..7 I I-~2-1 . EB10TAL \ J..:a I I NllOTAI. Dll' -281 NBil' -Ji7 VIC AVE.DELAY RANG! PSI VEtl · . LO.s.. WB'ffl -} lo . SB'ffl -3'1 s SEC. ~ D-60 0-U A I ~2! I 81-70 5.1-1U a WBtr -,~ SBtl' -'-' OR OR 71-80 15.1-21,D C DTH -.+z.& NBTH -41} 81-90 25.~ D ) 1 ·s: a~ 1 ·wil 91-100 40.~ E .. APPENDIX 24 349 APPENDIX 2-5 350 APPENDIX 25: ZONE 6 OPEN SPACE INVENTORY: DETAILED ITEMIZATION AS Of 1-1-87 General Plan Lam Uses Cross Parcel Desigiation 51...b~igiatim Acres .AfN Acr~ <Mnership Constraints Status N-05-1 215-110-32 .50 LaCosta 1-btel & Spa 215-210-22 25. 64 LaCosta 1-btel & Spa 215-400-01 12.98 Lc£osta 1-btel & Spa Slb-Total 41.5 3 Parcels 39.12 1 G.\nership 1. 23.29 ac. within 100 1. ~eloped: irivate yr. flood plan. g>lf crurse m 39.12 39.12 2. 76 ac. within SOC8E acres. N-05-2 215-030-07 14.58 lmn Corp 215-030-13 11.65 1-brv:ierosa 1-bnoow"lersA.ss:,c. Slb-Total 27.0 2 Parcels 26.23 2 o.wierships 1. Alrrost entire area 1. lhdeveloped: slope within slopes. lcTII left over fron prior Sl.bdivision & w Developrent. 1.11 I-' N-05-3 215-561-49 4.69 Slb-Total 4.8 1 Parcel 4.69 1 OM-lership 1. Alioost entire area 1. lhdeveloped: slope within slopes. lam left over fran prior suxlivision & N-05-4 19.1 223-010-28* 13.30 llion Corp developrent. 223-010-32** 17.33 Daon Corp Slb-Total 19.1 2 Parcels 30.63 1 OM-lership 1. Alioost entire area 1. lhdeveloped: SJ,-. within slopes. Marcos Crrek Canyon S..ffi-1 261.4 216-123-04 47.73 LaCosta 1-btel & Spa 216-130-36 1.43 LaCosta 1-btel & Spa "tJ 216-130-45 32.50 LaCosta 1-btel & Spa > 216-130-51 .87 ilion Corp C) 216-130-53 1.17 LaCosta 1-btel & Spa m -216-130-58 6.33 llion Corp. 216-130-59 3.50 LaCosta 1-btel & Spa 0 .,, 216-130-64 4.48 LaCosta 1-btel & Apa O'I 216-130-64 96.63 Lacosta 1-btel & Spa 223-050-43 19.53 City of Carlsbad 223-050-49 n.re [aon Corp. 223-0~51 5.53 U3on Corp. 223-0~52 1.47 Daon Corp. APPENDIX 25 (Cont.) General Plan Lam &es Q-oss Parcel Desiglation Slb-Desig-.ation Acres ,4fN Acr~ OMiership Cmstraints Status 223-100-00 12.34 City of Carlsbad 223-100-25 2.51 City of Carlsbad 223-100--26 2.70 Daon Corp. 223-271-25 3.45 City of Carlsbad 223-271-26 .0+ City of Carlsbad Sw-Total 261.4 18 Parcels 255.89 3 <.Mnerships 1. O.,er 100 ac. with-1. (htelopffl: 195.69 in 100 yr. flood acres. plain. a) 182.6 ac. in 2. O.,er: 64 acres with-(rivate g:>lf in slopes. course. 3. 2.7 <£5. within b) 9 acs. of La sex:; & E pew.er-Costa Canyon line easarent. Park. 2. Lhdeveloped: 4.00 acs. of San Marcos w Canyon area. u, N S--OS-2 216-124-07 13.21 Daon Corp. Sw-Total 14.3 1 Parcel 13.21 1 CMnership 1. Alrrost entire area 1. lhdeveloped: slope within slopes. lard left 0ver fran prior Sl.b- division & <EV. of N-R-1-3. S-05-3 216-300-02 6.00 Daon Corp. 216-380-10 1.38 Shapell Incustr:ies Sw-Total 4. 1 2 Parcels 7.46 2 OMierships 1. 6.00 ac. within 1. Lhdeveloped: SOCiY: pov.erline vacant lard Lnder easarent. ~ JXW,er-""O )> 2. 1. 38 acres within line easarent. C') slopes. 2. lhdeveloped: m sloped JX)rtion of N a Slb-division 0 ,, with a final map. 0\ S-ffi--4 223-120-33 7.18 City of Carlsbad 223-120-24 5.05 City of Carlsbad Sw-Total 12 2 Parcels 12.23 1 OMlership 1. Alnost· entire area 1. Lhdeveloped: within slopes. sloped JX)rtion of a ,:rior s.b- division & <EV. w lJl w APPENDIX 25 (Cont.) Designated (llert Q-oss Parcel ~ Sw--Oesiglation Acres ,6A,& kr~ Ot.nership S--05-5 216-121-14 10.22 ~rt Shores Bldrs Sw-Total 11.6 1 Parcel 10.22 1 Otwtership TOTAL IISic»\lID <KN s>Aa: 395.8 32 Parrels W. 73 13 Oi\nerships * Portions of these p:ircels are in Local Facility ~t Plan Zone 6. Constraints Status 1. 2.9 acres of Yet- larrls. 2. 1.99 acres of> 4ffi> slope. 3. 1.17 acres of 25-40Xi slope. 4 •• 26 acres of water bodies/detention basin. 1. l.hdeveloped: con.stra.inoo lam left.over frcm a 1,rior sh-division & rev. The deten- sion basin m this i:arcel is a nocessary p.blic facility 1. 123.29 area within 1. 234.81 acs. are within 100 yr flocx:f reveloped as plain. open space. 2. 127. 97 acres within a) 221. 72 acs. slopes. in 1,rivate g:>lf 3. 9.54-acres within OOJrses. pooerline e.aserents. b) 9 acres in 4. 3. 16 acres within LaCosta Canyon 1 ) wetlarrls or Park. 2) riparian or c) 4.00 acs. in 3) water bodies. Ccliencia Park. 263. 96 (66.t) roistrainoo a::res ** A fX)rtion of this i:arcel is in the S-05-1 st..b-designation. 1-t:Mever all a::re.age is oo.nted in the N--05-4 st.b-designation. *** A fX)rtion of i:arcel 216-123-4 is rot designated or used a.s open space tut is RC -Recreation Coomercial. ~ C) m w 0 .,, en APPENDIX 25 (Cont.) General Plan Lajlj lhe Q:-oss Parcel Desicpation Sw-Desig-.ation Acres ~ Acreage CMnershie Constraints Status E M 215-410-15 3.67 Cit~ of Carlsbad Swtotal 3.67 1 Parcel 3.67 1 CMnership 1. 1.85 acres of 1. ~eloped: 1.82 greater than 4<R acrs. of Fuerte slope. Park. 2. 1.85 acrs. in slopes. RL N-R..-1 215-430-15 7.15 llaon Corp 215-491-46 8.87 Daon Corp 215-491-47 12.43 Oaon Corp 215-491-48 2.09 Oaon Corp 215-492-16 1.21 Daon Corp 215-493-21 3.02 Oaon Corp 215-49+--29 1.60 Daon Corp St.btotal 7 Parcels 36.37 1 <Mnership 1. 36.37 acres 1. Lhdeveloped: within S£af Constraina:1 lajlj pooerline ease-left 0ver fran llfflt. plan Sl..b-division & d:!velOf]ffflt. S-RLM-2 223-200-01 .66 C. l.aCosta Ii}\ w 223-200-11 -~ Daon Corp 1.11 ~ 223-240-23 1.93 Oaon Corp 223-283-20 1.25 Daon Corp St.btotal 4.74 4 Parcels 4.74 2 Ot.nerships 1. 4. 74 acres within 1. lhdeveloped: con- Sl:C&E ,:x>Werline str ainoo lajlj left easarent. Over fran irior sl.bdivision & develasxrent. N-ffi..M-1 215-050-03 10.0 2.07 215-050-05 20.0 (i:x>rtion) N-fl.M-3 1.49 215-210-10 2.97 "O (i:x>rtion) )> C') N--Rl.M-4 1.26 215-220-23 m 215-220-30 .69 .,:: N-RI...M-5 .68 215-480-21 0 (i:x>rtion: see N..a4-4 .Aft~ 215-480-21) "11 &btotal 10.24 10 Parcels 33.66 1. SU: ,:x>Werline 1. ~eloped: 1.49 0) easement. acrs. as i:rivate use open space in N..a..M-3. 2. lhdeveloped: con- strainoo lajlj left over fran i:rior 9-.b- div. & d:!veloprent. APPENDIX 25 (Cont.) Desiganted (\)en Cross Parrel Space ~iqtation k:ces AfN ~ <Mnership Constraints Status RM N-ffl-2 2.18 215-503-37 4.97 1. SX;&£ pcMerline 1. 1.04 acres (!X)rtion) easarent. revel.oped as private use qJell sp:ire in N-ff1-2. N..a-1-4 3.56 215-400-21 4.29 1. SX;&£ JXMerline 1. lhdeveloped qJell (ix>rtion) easarent. splre. N--R--1-7 1.61 215-.5m-11 5.92 1. SX;&£ JXMerline 1. lhdeveloped qJell (ix>rtion) easenmt. spare. Stbtotal 7.35 3 PMrels 15.18 grJE JXMerline 1.04 acres is (ix>rtions) easesre:nt. developed as trivate use qJert space. w Rt-ti S-R-fl-3 0 (see 5-ffi-3 AfN 216-300-02) Ul S-Rfl-5 2.11 223-291-28 1.45 Corona LaCosta l-0\ 1. SX;&£ 1. lhdeveloped qJell Ul 223-291-29 .li6 Corona LaCosta ID\ pcMerline spare. N-fH-1-1 .68 215-170-2 3.20 l-0\ easarent 2. C&eloped: .68 215-170-7 6.61 l-0\ acres as rrivate (portions) use spare. Stbtotal 2.79 4 Parcels 11.92 2 l-0\s grJE J)O"Crline -.68 acres is developed (ix>rtions) easmfflt. as trivate use qJell SplCe. N ~-1 .(A 216-124-1 1. ~ E J)O"Crline 1. Lhdeveloped qJert 216-124-2 easement. spare, used as "'O 216-124-4 par~ lots or )> 216-124-16 slopes. C) m 216-124-17 U1 (ix>rtions) 0 Swtotal .(A 5 Parcels Within Sir&: JX)"er-lhtevel~ qJell space .,, (ix>rtions) line easement. space, used as pn-k~ en lots & slopes. w 1.11 Cf\ APPENDIX 25 (Cont.) Desiganted Q:len Space RC Q-oss Sw-Oesi.g,ation Acres -~--- S-RC-1 .'29 216-123-4 -5 (portims) • '29 2 (portions) Parcel Acreage C>Mlership * Portions of these parcels are in Local Facility ~t lore 11. Constraints 1.sm: ixw,erline easerrents • 1. !f.G8£ povier- -line easerrent. Status 1. Larliscaped setback viSJal q:>e11 space ro credit. Larose.aped setback visual q:>e11 space ro crooit. ** A portion of this parcel is in the S-OS-1 sl.b-are.a. 1-tw.ever, all <£reage is oo..ntoo in the N-05-4 sL.b-are.a. *ff A portion of parcel 216-123-4 is rot CESignatoo or used as open space lx.Jt is CESignatoo RC -Recreation Ccmrercial. "'C )> C') m en 0 "Tl en APPENDIX 26 357 -·•·--:-:--... /:'~G'l7 n ;r,. --. APPENDIX 28 ,_..'\~I __.-~.} ::--,. , ,,!':t A. ~-•. , · .. • .. :,. ,r ',~; \ CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Carlsbad, California /f" · ~UB i~~ \:,' ( ~ PLAtlNING DEi'M61Aaff :~ \ \ c,noF. c,J CARLSBMJ t '! ..-. .... i ,,~ .. -/ ~ r,y·.· e ;:,-.-('1 ·/ That portion of Zone 6 of the Local Facilities Management Plan·'·wtti.tti:~fa·11s within Carlsbad Unified School District is quite limited. It lies generally in the vic.inity of the intersection of Alga Road and El Camino Real. It specifically includes all of Zone 6 to the west of El Camino Real and all of those La Costa Zone 6 properties to the west of the District boundary line which runs up the midline ~f the north/south extension of La Costa Golf Course. Zone 6 Approximately 135 students from this area are presently attending school in Carlsbad Unified School District. In the immediate future., there -~re adequate schools facilities to support their needs. Depending upon age and educationa1 level, these students attend: Kelly Elementary School Valley Jr. High School Carlsbad High School Capacities of these schools are as follows: K-6 7-8 9-12 Kelly Elementary School, 4885 Kelly Drive 12 permanent classrooms 360 6 relocatables lease 180 2 trailers 60 TOTAL 600 Valley Jr. High, 1645 Magnolia Avenue 28 permanent classrooms 822 2 Special Ed classrooms 20 TOTAL 842 Carlsbad High School, 38 permanent 3557 Monroe Street 2 Special Ed classrooms 10 overage relocatables 7 trailers -temporary 1,140 20 300 210 TOTAL 1,670 Buildings A, C, J., L, and Q are over 30 years of age. The overage relo's are all over 20 years of age. Buildings should be scheduled for reconstruction and the relo's replaced. Total cost yet to be established. Trailer rentals are approximately $45,000 annually after $5,000 one-time setup costs. 358 Zone 6 Page 2 Future Plans Upon approval of Zone 19 of the Carlsbad Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, anticipated within the next several months, Hunt Properties Incorporated wTIT dedicate a designated school site near the current end of Alga Road. On that site, the Carlsbad Unified School District will construct a proposed K-8 elementary/middle school. Anticipated completion is approximately 2 to 3 years from now. Zone 6 students will attend that school upon completion. 359 ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 189 UNION STREET ENCINITAS. CALIFORNIA 92024 (619) 944-4300 BOARD OF TRUSTEES An1hony J. Branclenl:Jurg, President Van RIiey, Clefk WIiliam Catll, Member Maly Jo Norlman, Member Sandra Sc:hullz, Member OonafCI E. Undmxn, Supetlntandanl and Board Secrat8ly August' 12, 1987 Mr. Lanc.e B. Schulte Associate Planner City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Mr. Schulte: The Encinitas Union School District has reviewed the· packet received in this offic~ on August 6 ,, 1987. The material was reviewed by the District's master plan consultant and appears to be in alignment with the District growth estimates. I hope this is useful to you. Sincerely yours, ~~.hU Donald E. Lindstrom J,"' Superintendent DEL/dl cc: Board of Trustees 360 "Excellence Is Our Goal" 825 North Vulcan Avenue · Leucadia, Callfomla 92024 819/753-8491 Mr. Lance B. Schulte Associate Planner, City of Carlsbad 2075 La Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 Dear Mr. Schulte: August 13, 1987 , . ~ ,\ ·; > ..... Thank you for your Jetter of August 3, 1987. ,...._~OE:' r~, __ You have asked us to re~1ew: 1. Draft buildout and phasing assumptions for zone 6. 2. The adopted performance standard for school facilities section for zone 6. The San Dieguito Union High School District presently operates three schools serving. the students who live in the city of Carlsbad. 1986-87 DATA Regular Augmented Grades caeaciti Caeaciti Oiegueno Jr. High 7-9 887 1003 Oak Crest Jr. High 7-9 988 1139 San Dieguito High 10-12 1835 2039 (1) 116 student capacity in trailers/emergency classroom (2) 151 student capacity in trailers/emergency classroom (3) 204 student capacity in trailers/emergency classroom October 1 86 Enrollment (1) 912 (2) 933 (3) 1922 Oak Crest Jr. High and San Dieguito High School serve zone 6. Both schools are expected to exceed their regular capacity in 1987-88. In order to handle zone 6 and other district students, trailers/emergency classrooms are being utilized at al 1 three sites. The north-south division as shown on the Zone 6 local facilities management plan map does not •fit the boundaries of the school district. Through interpretation it appears that at least 663 residential units will be added between now and buildout in Zone 6. Considering a district generation factor of 0.37 for 9rades 7-12 it 1s probable that an additional 245 students (grades 7-12) will be -present at bui1dout. The Sa,n Dieguito Union High School District Master Plan call~ for the construction of a new high school in zone 11 in-the early 1990 1 s. The district does not own the property at this time; however, efforts to acquire the site are currently underway. 361 Letter to Lance B. Schulte 8/14/87 -Page 2 Although the Board has the pol icy of a high school organized in a 9-12 configura- tion, the specific grade organization will be set at the time of opening. The mas- ter plan calls for an additional junior high site to be located 1n zone 12 of the city of Carlsbad that will serve zones 6, 11 and 12. Construction of the junior high school is scheduled to follow the first phase of the aforementioned high school. Specifically you have asked us to address the adequacy, mitigation and financing of the school facilities. I. ADEQUACY The schools presently serving zone 6 are over capacity. Trailers/emergency classrooms have been added to handle the increased enrollment from zone 6 aad other northern parts of the school district. As stated before, a new senior high school and a new junior high school (both located in the city of Carlsbad) wi 11 be required to accorrrnoda te the growth in zone 6, 11 and 12 plus northern areas of the school district. I I. MITIGATION The city of Carlsbad must work closely with the school district to acquire and develop the senior high site and to identify a junior high site. The district is anxious to cooperate in an effort to .assure that the schools are available for the residents of Carlsbad. III. FINANCING Current developer fees available to the district are $0.85 per square foot of residential growth and $0.14 per square foot of conmercial/industrial space. It is anticipated that this will fund approximately 10% of site and construc- tion costs of a senior high school. The state of California has and does finance needed schools. The San Diegu- 1to District will file applications for funding when eligibility is deter- mined. Experience has shown the di str1 ct that this source of funding is tenuous and the legislature changes the rules and regulations annually. This source of funding may or may not be available when needed. Mello-Roos and other public financing mechanisms are also alternatives that merit investigation. In sunmary, the district has no assurance that funding will be available to finance needed schools to serve zone 6. Present schools are over capacity and additional trailers/emergency classrooms will be used until funding becomes available. Sincerely, _ \)J~Q(~ William A. Berrier bfs Superintendent 362 . I San Marcos Unified School District 270 San Marcos Blud., San Marcos, California 92069-2797 August 19, 1987 Mr. Lance Schulte Associate Planner City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 619-744-4776 RE: ZONE 6 LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN -SCHOOL FACILITIES Dear Mr. Schulte: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft zone 6 local facilities management plan. I have reviewed the school facilities portion of the plan and have the following comments. 1 . The map that shows the district boundaries and school sites contains an error. The map shows a new San Marcos Junior High School across from San Marcos High School. Such a site does not exist and should not be depicted on the map. The district does not currently have plans for a new junior high school. 2. I have enclosed a copy of the approved preliminary master plan for the San Marcos Unified School District. The plan provides future enrollment projections and outlines the need, timing and location of future schools to the year 2000. The preliminary master plan evaluates the facilities needs based upon five different grade configurations. The Governing Board in November will approve the final plan and select the grade alternative. The information in the plan will assist you in updating your map and tables for zone 6. 3. Impact on school facilities is cumulative. It is difficult to make adequacy findings based upon a small portion of the district. All of San Marcos Unified District's permanent facilities are at capacity. Therefore the assumption that the District has the capacity to meet demand for zone 6 needs clarification • 363 La Costa Meadows school in Carlsbad opened in September 1986 is full. Since the school opened we haved added 1our temporary classrooms to the site. Space is very limited and prehaps one more building could be placed on the site. This means that new elementary students generated in zone 6 maybe required to attend an elementary school in San Marcos. In fact this situation occured during the last school year for new kindergarten and 5th grade students. The master plan establishes the need for an additional school site within the City of Carlsbad. This site must either be in zone 6 or zone 11 and should be addressed within this management plan. . . 4. The District judges adequacy based upon meeting the Governing Board's policy on enrollments (page 4-6 of master plan) and the ability of the District to finance needed improvements to existing schools and new school construction. Capacity under thi, criteria does not exist to meet existing demands. 7 5. The District is currently evaluating methods to finance improvements identified in the master plan. Until a finance plan is implemented adequate distict wide school capacity cannot be assured. The successful implementation of a finance plan may involve cooperation of developers within the City of Carlsbad. Therefore it is premature to indicate the performance standard for aedquacy has been met. I would be happy to meet with you to discuss the school facilities portion of the local facilities management plan for zone 6. Sincerely, A.d- Jeffrey A. Okun Facilities Administrator enc. 364 APPENDIX 27 365 APPENDIX 27 REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL FOR CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 73-29 CARRILLO ESTATES UNIT NO. 2 This Agreement is made and entered-into in the Coµnty of San Diego, State of California, by and between the LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT (hereinafter "DISTRICT") and the CIT'X OF CARLSBAD (hereinafter "CITY") with-refer- ence to the following facts: RECITALS A. ~ROSA HCMFS (hereinafter "PONDEROSA") is the owner of that certain real property located in the City of Carlsbad, county of San Diego, State of California, known as Tract No. 73-29, Carrillo Estates Unit No. 2 (hereinafter the "Subject Tract"), said tract to consist of 111 dwelling units. B. DISTRICT is a public entity organized and func- tioning pursuant to the County Water District Law, Cali- fornia Water Code section 30000. C. City is a general Law City (Gov. Code, section 34102), organized and functioning pursuant to the pro- visions of the California Constitution, Art. XI, section 2(a) and Government Code section 36501 et seq. o. PONDEROSA has received tentative map approval from CITY and filed improvement plans, tract map and grading plans with CITY for the development of the Subject Tract. E. PONDEROSA de~ires to develop Subject Tract and proceed with the construction of the 111 dwelling units contained therein, but has been unable to continue with development and construction due to the present lack of wastewater conveyance and treatment facilities in the area. F. DISTRICT has wastewater conveyance facilities from Subject ·Tract to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facili,ty (hereinafter the "Encina WPCF") and is willing to provide PONDEROSA with interim transportation of wastewater to the Encina WPCF through its conveyance facilities until such time that Subject Tract is served by other facilities. 366 • section 7. This Agreement shall inure to the bene- fit and be binding upon all of the parties hereto and their respective successors, heirs and assigns. Section 8. This Agreement and any disputes relat-· ing to this Agreement shall be construed under the laws of th& State of California. Section 9. The terms, conditions and covenants of this Agieement should·be construed wherever poisible, consistent with applicable laws and regulations. To the extent that any provision of this Agreement violates any applicable law or regulation considering an interpreta- tion of this Agreement consistent with that law or··regu- lation, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless be carried into full force and effect and remain enforceable. Section 10. The affective date of this Agreement, executed in duplicate and to be performed in the County of San Diego, State of California, consisting of three pages, is _____________ , 1981. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the respective parties have caused this instrument to be executed by their respective officials and this instrument shall be sealed by the Leucadia County Water District and the City of Carlsbad pursuant to resolutions duly adopted by the government bodies of said public entities. (Seal) Dated: ~ . ~D I 9t I 1 -' (Seal) CITY OF CARLSBAD By~/~ ,, Mayor · By DtTL. ~ R~ City Clerk 367 ••r' .. ,' APPENDIX 28 : 368 APPENDIX 28 Costa Real ,K~~~l YED .... MARO 91987 OTY OF CARLSBAD Municipal Water LJisrncrMEIIT March 5, 1987 5950 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (619) 438-2722 Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 Re: Growth Management Zone Facilities Plans, Zones 1-6 To assist in your preparation of the above referenced plans, the District would report that the District has in place a Master Plan, Capital Improvement Progra..~, and Major Facilities Charge fee structure which allows the District to plan for, assure ~onstruction of, and finance the required water ·facilities. As long as the District is allowed to perform its function and collect appropriate fees we anticipate no capital constraints which would relate to any of the zone plans identified above. Sincerely, Thomas L. Brammell General Manager TLB:fw 369 .. Olivenhain Municipal W~ter District BOARD OF DIRECTORS Ann L Peay. President Howard G. Golem, Vice President Harley L Denk. Treasurer Harold L Gano, Secretary Thelma M. Miller, Director Lloyd B. Hubbs City Engineer City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Dear Mr. Hubbs: 1966 OLIVEN HAIN ROAD ENCINITAS. CALIFORNIA 92024 PHONE (619) 753-6466 March 3, 1987 GENERAL COUNSEL Vernon A. Peltzer ENGINEER Bovie Engineering Corp. MANAGER William H. Hollingsworth RECEIVED: MAR061987 CITY Or Ct'.:LS!UD ENGINEEJm,G D::P~r. iMENt In reference to your letter dated Februaey 9, 1987, in regard to Growth Management Zone Facilities Plans of the first six zones which are being reviewed by you, only a portion of Zone 6 is within the Olivenhain Municipal Water District. As near as I can determine from the map which was fumished, all water facilities which will be required in the future are either now installed or will have to be installed by the developer at the time the project is constructed. If a golf course is constructed or the zoning is upped to more units per acre, a new study will have to be made and more than likely the pipeline will have to be constructed from this area into the District's Denk Reservoir outlet pipeline, and that line will definitely have to be constructed prior to the development of Zone 11 and 12 within the District. All of these facLlities will be paid for by the future developments and those property owners that now exist within that area have been made aware of this requirement. Sincerely, OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT JJJI ~A~ Bill Hollingsworth General Manager BB/lm A. Public A.9ency Incorporated on March 24, 1959; lormed under the Muncipal Water District Law ot 1911 Section 71000 et. seq. or the State ol Callfarnia Water Code 370.