2018-061 NOT APPROVED BY VOTERS - Repealing Uncertified Housing Element & Adopting 2013-2021 Housing Element Update RESOLUTION NO. 2018-61
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS,
CALIFORNIA, REPEALING IN ITS ENTIRETY THE UNCERTIFIED
HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND ADOPTING IN
FULL NEW TEXT COMPRISING THE 2013-2021 HOUSING ELEMENT
UPDATE TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND ADOPTING CONFORMING
AND ANCILLARY AMENDMENTS TO THE LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM, LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN, AND
THE VOTER'S RIGHTS INITIATIVE PORTION OF THE LAND USE
ELEMENT.
(CASE NO. 17-128 GPA/SPA/LCPA; CITYWIDE)
WHEREAS, there is a statutory recognition that the availability of housing is a matter of
statewide importance and that cooperation between government and the private sector is critical
to attainment of the State's housing goals;
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65588(b) requires the City of Encinitas
to periodically prepare an update to the Housing Element of its General Plan;
WHEREAS, the City Council directed the City Manager to cause the Development
Services Department to proceed with this update to the City's Housing Element for the 2013-
2021 planning period, which affects properties citywide;
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 65350 et seq., and Public
Resources Code Section 30514 and Section 13551 of the California Code of Regulations Title
14, Division 5.5, said verified application in its entirety constitutes a General Plan Amendment,
Specific Plan Amendments, Zoning Code Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Municipal
Code Amendment, and Local Coastal Program Amendment ("Project");
WHEREAS, the City of Encinitas prepared the draft 2013-2021 Housing Element in
accordance with California Housing Element law (Government Code section 65580 et seq.);
WHEREAS, the 2013-2021 Housing Element Update project, Case Number 17-128
GPA/SPA/LCPA, is popularly known as "Housing Plan Update 2018";
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65583 requires that the Housing
Element Update contain: (i) an assessment of the City's housing needs and an analysis of the
resources and constraints, both governmental and non-governmental, relevant to the meeting of
these needs; (ii) an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development and an
analysis of the development potential of such sites; (iii) a statement of the community's goals,
quantified objectives, and policies relative to the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and
development of housing; and (iv) programs that set forth a schedule of actions the local
government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the
goals and objectives of the Housing Element Update;
WHEREAS, the City's share of the regional housing need was established in the
Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) prepared and adopted by the San Diego Association of
Governments (SANDAG) on October 28, 2011. The allocation establishes the number of new
units needed, by income category, to accommodate expected population growth over the
planning period of the Housing Element;
WHEREAS, Housing Element law (Government Code section 65580 et seq.) requires
local governments to be accountable for ensuring projected housing needs reflected by the
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation can be accommodated;
WHEREAS, the State Department of Housing and Community Development issued a
letter to the City dated June 12, 2018, which found that the City's 2018 draft Housing Element,
inclusive of all revisions submitted through June 8, 2018, will meet all State Housing Element
Law requirements if the Housing Element and proposed development standards are approved
in their current form by the City Council, the Encinitas voters, and the California Coastal
Commission;
WHEREAS, on July 14, 2015, the City and the Building Industry Association of San
Diego County (BIA) entered into a Settlement Agreement to resolve litigation filed by the BIA
and on June 24, 2016, the City and DCM Properties Inc. (DCM) entered into a Settlement
Agreement to resolve litigation filed by DCM. The Settlement Agreements provide, in part, that
the City must adopt: (1) an updated Housing Element; (2) conforming amendments to other
General Plan elements; and (3) zoning ordinance amendments needed to implement the
Housing Element. The Settlement Agreements were incorporated into two Judgments Pursuant
to Stipulation entered into by the San Diego County Superior Court on July 22, 2015 (BIA) and
August 11, 2016 (DCM), respectively;
WHEREAS, the July 22, 2015 and August 11, 2016 Judgments provide in part that the
environmental review for the Housing Element update and all discretionary actions necessary to
bring the Housing Element in compliance with State Law will be conducted in accordance with
the terms of Government Code Section 65759;
WHEREAS, the City has prepared an environmental assessment, the content of which
substantially conforms to the required content of a draft environmental impact report, as
required under Government Code Section 65759(a)(1) and (2) to analyze, and mitigate where
feasible, the potential environmental effects of the project;
WHEREAS, the Housing Plan Update 2018 incorporates the environmental assessment
by reference, and the environmental assessment shall be deemed to be part of the General
Plan upon adoption of the Housing Plan Update 2018 as required by Government Code Section
65759(a)(3);
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a duly noticed public hearing as
prescribed by law to consider CASE NO. 17-128 GPA/SPA/LCPA on June 7, 2018, to consider
said request;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No.
2018-19 recommending approval of said Project, on file with the Office of the City Clerk and
incorporated by this reference;
WHEREAS, the 2013-2021 Housing Element Update attached as Exhibit 2018-61-A to
this Resolution is the final, adopted 2013-2021 Housing Element of the General Plan, the
entirety of which is new text and graphics in the General Plan;
WHEREAS, the City Council did on June 20, 2018, hold a duly noticed public hearing as
prescribed by law. Evidence was submitted to and considered by the City Council, including,
without limitation:
a. Written information including written and graphical information posted on the Project
website, including without limitation public comments submitted to HCD and City
responses, all of which are incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth
herein.
b. Materials created for public engagement and study session agenda reports.
c. Oral testimony from City staff, interested parties, and the public.
d. The staff report, dated June 20, 2018, which along with attachments, is incorporated
herein by reference as though fully set forth herein, as are staff reports and
presentations prepared for related study sessions, which occurred during the life of
the Project, as well as Planning Commission's recommendation on the Project.
e. Additional information submitted during the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, based on the totality of the record and evidence described and referenced
in this Resolution, the City Council finds that the proposed text amendments and map changes
are consistent with the purposes of the General Plan, Municipal Code, and adopted Local
Coastal Program in that the amendments support a variety of objectives including increasing
housing choice by accommodating a variety of housing types to meet the needs of all Encinitas
residents, providing adequate sites with corresponding density to meet the City's RHNA
allocation, adopting State mandated and locally desired programs to implement the Project
effectively, maintaining community character through project design requirements, and
distributing attached and multi-family housing to the City's five communities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council will consider adopting Ordinance No. 2018-07 to amend
three Specific Plans, amendments to the Encinitas Municipal Code and implementation
programs of the City's Local Coastal Program to ensure internal consistency of the City's policy
and regulatory framework following adoption of these General Plan Amendments and
amendments to the land use policy of the Local Coastal Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Encinitas, in its
independent judgment and after fully considering all alternatives, hereby declares that:
SECTION 1. The foregoing recitations are true and correct.
SECTION 2. The General Plan Housing Element update complies with State Housing
Element law, as provided in Government Code 65580 et. seq. Under Government Code
Section 65300.5, no policy conflicts can exist either textual or diagrammatic, between the
components of an otherwise complete and adequate General Plan. Different policies must be
balanced and reconciled within the plan. Adoption of new housing policies that increase
residential densities require conforming amendments to the City of Encinitas Land Use Element,
Zoning Code regulations, Zoning Map, Municipal Code regulations, Specific Plans, and Local
Coastal Program. Said amendments and text/map changes are necessary to provide
consistency between the goals and polices of the various elements of the General Plan and
between the General Plan and Zoning. The proposed amendments shown in Exhibit 2018-61-
6 (Amendments to the Land Use Element) and Exhibit 2018-61-C (Amendments to the
Voter's Rights Initiative Portion of the Land Use Element) are required to bring the General
Plan and Local Coastal Program into consistency with the Project. In addition, the
Environmental Assessment for the Project, which analyzes the potential environmental effects
of the Project and includes mitigation measures to reduce the Project's impacts where feasible,
shall be deemed to be part of the General Plan upon adoption of the Housing Plan Update 2018
as required by Government Code Section 65759(a)(3). Proposition A, called the Encinitas Right
to Vote Amendment, became a new part of the Encinitas General Plan's Land Use Element and
the Encinitas Zoning Code (Title 30 of the Encinitas Municipal Code) when approved by the
voters in 2013. The proposed amendments shown in Exhibit 2018-61-C amend the Land Use
Element to address Project consistency. City Council will consider adopting Ordinance No.
2018-07 to ensure continued, internal consistency. The proposed amendments are consistent
with sound planning principles in that the proposed policies and proposed implementing
regulations are compatible and ensure that the goals and policies of the General Plan can be
adequately implemented to achieve the community's vision.
SECTION 3. There is a real and substantial relationship of the Encinitas Housing
Element to the general welfare of the City and the entire region. Encinitas has adequately
researched and considered the numerous competing interests in the region and, in view of the
demonstrated need for new housing, the approval constituted a reasonable accommodation of
those interests.
SECTION 4. The State-mandated six-week review period for the Local Coastal Program
Amendment started on May 25, 2018 and concluded on July 9, 2018.
SECTION 5. The proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment meets the requirements
of, and is in conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and do not conflict with
any coastal zone policies or regulations with which future development must comply.
SECTION 6. The uncertified Housing Element (known as the 1992 Housing Element) is
hereby repealed in its entirety and the 2013-2021 Housing Element (Exhibit 2018-61-A), along
with conforming amendments to the Land Use Element (Exhibit 2018-61-13), and amendments
to the Voter's Rights Initiative Portion of the Land Use Element (Exhibit 2018-61-C) are
adopted, subject to approval by the voters.
SECTION 7. An implementation program associated with the actions and approvals
included in this Resolution is required to ensure consistency with the General Plan. The Zoning
Code Amendments, amendments to three Specific Plans, Municipal Code Amendments, Local
Coastal Program implementation program amendments and amendments to the Encinitas Right
to Vote Amendment (EMC Chapter 30.00), all of which are more particularly described in
Ordinance 2018-07, shall be adopted to ensure consistency with the General Plan, as revised
by this Resolution No. 2018-61.
SECTION 8. Some policy amendments in this Resolution require a vote of the people
per Encinitas Municipal Code (EMC) Chapter 30.00 (popularly known as Proposition A). The
City Council declares, subject to approval of the voters of Encinitas, that the amendments to the
Voter's Rights Initiative portion of the Land Use Element, the repeal of the uncertified 1992
Housing Element, the General Plan Land Use Element land use map re-designations to the
Housing Plan Update 2018 land use designation and the amendments to the policies of the
Local Coastal Program directly associated with these aforementioned amendments exclusively
constitute "Major Amendments" as defined by EMC Chapter 30.00. All other amendments
contained in this Resolution are to ensure a complete and internally consistent adoption of
General Plan amendments and are declared to be "Regular Amendments" as defined by EMC
Chapter 30.00.
SECTION 9. This Resolution shall not become effective unless and until it is approved
by the voters of Encinitas.
SECTION 10. If this Resolution takes effect pursuant to Section 9 above, the Director of
Development Services or designee is hereby directed to file all necessary material to the
Department of Housing and Community Development to certify the 2013-2021 Housing Element
and to the State of California Coastal Commission to amend the Encinitas Local Coastal
Program.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of June, 2018 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Kranz, Mosca, Muir
NAYS: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor
City of Encinitas
ATTEST:
Kathy Hollywood, Fity Clerk
Exhibit Index
Exhibit Index
Exhibit 2018-61-A 2013-2021 Housing Element, dated June, 2018 as all new text
Exhibit 2018-61-B Conforming amendments to the Land Use Element
Exhibit 2018-61-C Amendments to the Voter's Rights Initiative Portion of the Land Use
Element
Exhibit 2018-61-A
2013-2021 Housing Element
The 1992 Housing Element is hereby repealed in its entirety and is removed from the General
Plan. Because of the length of the 1992 Housing Element, it is not presented with deleted text.
It is simply being repealed in its entirety. In its place, the new 2013-2021 Housing Element,
which includes all Appendices and incorporates the Environmental Assessment by reference, is
adopted in its entirety to the General Plan. Because the entirety of it is new replacement text, it
is not underscored, but it should be viewed as new text. This is done because of the length and
breadth of the 2013-2021 Housing Element and underscoring all of it would be confusing and
difficult to read.
i
City of Encinitas
1 . Introduction
The Housing Element provides the City with a coordinated and comprehensive strategy for promoting the
production of safe, decent, and affordable housing for all within the Encinitas community.
1 .1 Role of Housing Element
The Housing Element as part of the Encinitas General Plan is developed to ensure that the City establishes
policies, procedures, and incentives in its land use planning and development activities that result in the
maintenance and expansion of the housing supply to adequately accommodate households currently
living and expected to live in Encinitas. The Housing Element institutes policies that will guide City
decision-making and establishes an implementation program to achieve housing goals through the year
2021.
1 .2 Local Need
The City is facing some significant challenges when it comes to meeting its housing needs---housing
costs in Encinitas continue to climb, while the availability and variety of housing is lacking. According to
HomeDex,in February 2018,the median sales price in Encinitas was 43 percent higher than the median
sales price for the North County region. At the same time, the City has a growing population, and its
existing residents have changing needs.
• Baby Boomers are aging, and the City's senior citizen population (over 60 years in age) is
projected to nearly double by 2035. Many seniors will seek to downsize and move into smaller
homes in areas with easy access to services,transportation and amenities.
• Millennials have been slower to buy single-family homes than earlier generations. Rising student
debt, the cost of housing, and challenges in securing mortgages have contributed to this, but
they often want different kinds of housing and neighborhoods than are available today. They are
looking for pedestrian and bike-friendly communities with services and amenities nearby.
• According to SANDAG's regional growth forecast, Encinitas can expect an anticipated 11 percent
population growth through 2050.
It is important to note that,while accommodating new residential development and providing housing
for all economic segments of the community, Encinitas must also plan to provide the infrastructure
needed to maintain existing levels of service and to ensure that residential development will not degrade
the local environment, including the hillside areas, natural stream channels, and wetlands. All of these
areas are viewed by residents as resources worth preserving,and the sites selected for housing preserve
these amenities.Another important goal of this element is to ensure that the City embraces the distinct
identity and character of its five communities and becomes a place where one can live their entire life
with housing for all ages, incomes and abilities. The City envisions itself as a sustainable community
that embraces its quality of life through environment, fiscal health,community health and equity. This
Housing Element provides policies and programs to address these issues.
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-1
City of Encinitas r `'
1 .3 Housing Element and State Law
1 .1.1 Background
The Housing Element of the General Plan identifies and analyzes the City's existing and projected housing
needs and contains a detailed outline and work program of the City's goals,policies,quantified objectives,
and programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing for a sustainable future.
The Housing Element is one of the seven mandatory General Plan elements. The Housing Element
identifies ways in which housing needs of current and future residents can be met.
1.1 .2 State Requirements
California State Housing Element Law (California Government Code Article 10.6) establishes the
requirements for the Housing Element of the General Plan.Specifically, Government Code Section 65588
requires that local governments review and revise the Housing Element of their comprehensive General
Plans not less than once every eight years.
The California Legislature has determined that a primary housing goal for the State is ensuring every
resident has a decent home and suitable living environment. Section 655880 of the Government Code
describes the goal in detail:
a. The availability of housing is of vital statewide importance, and the early attainment of decent
housing and a suitable living environment for every Californian,including farm workers,is a priority
of the highest order.
b. The early attainment of this goal requires cooperative participation of government and the private
sector in an effort to expand housing opportunities and accommodate the housing needs of
Californians in all economic levels.
c. The provision of housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households requires the
cooperation of all levels of the government.
d. Local and State governments have a responsibility to use the powers vested in them to facilitate
the improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for housing needs of
all economic segments of the community. The Legislature recognizes that in carrying out this
responsibility, each local government also has the responsibility to consider economic,
environmental, and fiscal factors and community goals set forth in the general plan and to
cooperate with other local governments and the state in addressing regional housing needs.
This Housing Element addresses the 2013-2021 planning period,which extends from April 30,2013 to April
30,2021. Because the City did not adopt the 2013-2021 Housing Element within 120 days of the due date,
Government Code Section 65588(e) requires the City to adopt the 2021—2029 Housing Element by April
30, 2021, an updated Housing Element by April 30, 2025, and the 2029—2037 Housing Element at the
end of the eight-year planning period.
The Housing Element identifies housing programs aimed at new housing construction, rehabilitation,
and conservation of the existing affordable housing stock. This Housing Element builds upon the land
use goals and policies which are primarily concerned with where new housing is to be located and at
what density it will be constructed. Other concerns of the Housing Element include the identification
1-2 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas —` °°`'
of strategies and programs that focus on housing affordability, rehabilitation of substandard housing,
meeting the existing demand for new housing, eliminating constraints on housing development, and
maintaining an adequate supply of rental housing. The Housing Element includes Appendix A, Public
Participation,Appendix B,the Housing Profile Report,and Appendix C,the Adequate Sites Inventory,which
contain certain required Housing Element components.
As required by Government Code Section 64759, the City of Encinitas has completed an Environmental
Assessment to analyze, and mitigate where feasible,the potential environmental effects of the Housing
Element. The Environmental Assessment is incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth
as part of the Encinitas General Plan.
1.1.3 Regional Housing Needs Assessment
Section 65583 of the Government Code sets forth the specific components of a jurisdiction's housing
element. Included in these requirements is an obligation on the part of local jurisdictions to provide their
"fair share" of regional housing needs. Local governments and Councils of Governments (COGS) are
required to determine existing and future housing need and the allocation of said need must be approved
by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Encinitas is a member of
the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) and SANDAG is responsible for preparing the
Regional Housing Needs Assessment for the territory that it represents. This Housing Element provides
sites adequate to accommodate the City fair share, as determined by SANDAG.
1 .4 General Plan Consistency
The Housing Element is one of seven elements of the Encinitas General Plan and must be consistent with
all of those elements. The Land Use Element, for instance, establishes the location, type, intensity and
distribution of land uses throughout the City, and the presence and potential for jobs affects the current
and future demand for housing at the various income levels in the City. The Circulation Element is
designed to provide transportation facilities that can accommodate all planned development in the City.
As part of the adoption of the Housing Element,the City will modify policies in other elements as needed
to achieve internal General Plan consistency.
1 .5 Public Participation
Section 65583(c)(8) of the Government Code states that, "The local government shall make a diligent
effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of
the housing element, and the program shall describe this effort." A discussion of citizen participation is
provided below and in Appendix A.
The City of Encinitas conducted an extensive public outreach process beginning in 2014 to prepare a
2013-2021 Housing Element.Outreach efforts included 45 presentations, numerous mailers and ads,and
community dialogue sessions attended by 479 persons. That effort culminated in the adoption of a
2013-2021 Housing Element by the City Council in June 2016 and its placement on the November 2016
ballot as Measure T. However;the voters did not approve Measure T.
The City immediately began an effort to adopt a revised 2013-2021 Housing Element to be submitted to
the voters in the November 2018 election. On November 16, 2016, even before the certification of the
Measure T election results on December 13, 2016, the City Council approved the formation of a Housing
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-3
City of Encinitas
Element Subcommittee to work with all groups to adopt a Housing Element.The City Council held as pecia I
community workshop on February 1, 2017, attended by well over 100 people,to discuss adoption of an
adequate Housing Element and also held a special meeting on February 6, 2017, at which it appointed a
Housing Element Update Task Force, comprised of the Council Subcommittee and two public members,
including one supporter and one opponent of Measure T. Eleven public meetings were held by the Task
Force in 2017,two of which were joint meetings with the City Council, in addition to regular updates to
the City Council. Prior to submittal of the draft Housing Element to HCD in April 2018,additional joint Task
Force-City Council meetings were held, and Planning Commission and City Council public hearings were
held prior to adoption of the Element and related zoning provisions. Additionally, two stakeholder
meetings were held. All meetings were advertised to an extensive mailing list (hard copy and email/e-
alert) and the City maintained a web site with all information submitted to the Task Force. The meetings
were attended by, among others, representatives of the San Diego Housing Federation, Building Industry
Association, affordable housing and market-rate developers, and many community members. Refer to
Appendix A for the public notice mailing list, public comments,Council meeting minutes,and stakeholder
meeting notes.
As required by Government Code Section 65585(b)(2), all written comments regarding the Housing
Element made by the public have previously been provided to each member of the City Council.
Appendix A contains a summary of oral public comments regarding the Housing Element received by the
City at scheduled public meetings, and the Appendix has been provided to the City Council.
1 .6 Element Organization
This Encinitas Housing Element is comprised of the following sections:
• Section 1: Introduction and Housing Element Goals, Policies and Implementation Programs
contains the Housing Element background and the requisite policies and programs to address
housing need in the community.
• Appendix A: Summary of Community Engagement provides a summary of the community
engagement activities that have occurred throughout the development of the Housing Element
document.
• Appendix B: Housing Profile Report provides the required demographic analysis, needs,
constraints, and other analyses required by state law.
• Appendix C:Adequate Sites Inventory provides an inventory of sites to meet the estimated RHNA
need throughout the planning period.
1-4 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas —�
2. Goals, Policies and Implementation Programs
This section of the Housing Element contains the goals and policies the City intends to implement to
address a number of important housing-related issues. The following three major issue areas are
addressed by the goals and policies of the Housing Element: ensure that a broad range of housing types
are provided to meet the needs of both existing and future residents; ensure that housing is both sound
and safe for occupants; and ensure that the existing housing stock is maintained and preserved. Each
issue area and the supporting goals and policies are identified and discussed in the following section.
In addition, housing programs that implement each goal and policy are summarized in a table located
at the end of this section.
2.1 Housing Opportunities
The City wants to encourage the construction of new housing units that offer a wide range of housing
types to ensure that an adequate supply is available to meet existing and future needs.The maintenance
of a balanced inventory of housing in terms of unit type (e.g. single-family, multiple-family, etc.), cost,
and style will ensure that the existing variety is maintained. Each of the five communities have a distinct
character due in large part to the nature of their existing residential neighborhoods. New housing
constructed in the City should reflect the character of the surrounding neighborhood in particular and the
community in general.The diverse make-up of the City with its five distinct communities will continue to
attract a wide variety of people. The City has made a strong and firm commitment that fair housing
practices will continue in Encinitas.
GOAL 1: THE CITY WILL ENCOURAGE THE PROVISION OF A WIDE RANGE OF HOUSING BY
LOCATION,TYPE OF UNIT, AND PRICE TO MEET THE EXISTING AND FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS
IN THE REGION AND CITY.
POLICY 1.1: Strive to maintain a balance of housing types in the City.
POLICY 1.2:Strive to provide a wide variety of housing types so that a range of housing needs and
tastes will be made available to existing and future residents.
POLICY 1.3: When existing residential units are replaced, they should be replaced with units that
are compatible in design with the surrounding residential neighborhood as planned by the City.
POLICY 1.4: Provide opportunities for low and moderate income housing in all five communities in the
City and ensure that its location will not tend to cause racial segregation. Require that such housing
should be high quality in terms of design and construction without sacrificing affordability.
POLICY 1.5: If a diminishing inventory of rental housing creates an imbalance, the City should make
every effortto preserve the existing stock of quality rental housing.
POLICY 1.6: Encourage retention of all existing mobile home parks as permitted by applicable state
law.
POLICY 1.7: Coordinate with local social service providers to address the needs of the City's homeless
population and to provide housing suitable for special needs populations, including seniors, large
families,the disabled, and farmworkers.
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-5
City of Encinitas 1 '
POLICY 1.8: Continue to provide assistance to agencies that ensure that the provisions of the Federal
and State laws that prohibit housing discrimination are enforced.
POLICY 1.9: Support ongoing efforts of the State and Federal agencies and local fair housing agencies
to enforce fair housing laws, as well as regional efforts in promoting fair housing.
2.2 Quality of Housing
New housing opportunities in the City must be made available to all persons.
GOAL 2: SOUND HOUSING WILL BE PROVIDED IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS FOR ALL PERSONS
POLICY 2.1: Encourage developers to provide a balance of housing opportunities.
POLICY 2.2: Continue to assess development fees on new residential units adequate to pay for all
related local and regional impacts on public facilities.
POLICY 2.3: Allow for some cluster-type housing and other innovative housing design that provides
adequate open areas around and within these developments.
POLICY 2.4: Coordinate the provision of open areas in adjoining residential developments to maximize
the benefit of the open space.
POLICY 2.5: Encourage street planting, landscaping, and undergrounding of utilities.
POLICY 2.6 Encourage high standards of design, materials, and workmanship in all construction and
developments.
POLICY 2.7: Discourage residential development of steep slopes, canyons, and floodplains.
POLICY 2.8: Continue to develop and promote an energy efficiency conservation measure consistent
with the strategies outlined in the City's Climate Action Plan.
2.3 Maintenance and Preservation of Housing
Substandard and deteriorating housing units, in addition to the obvious problems of blight, can expose
occupants to a wide range of hazards ranging from electrical fire to exposure to toxic substances used
in construction. Many factors can determine the "life expectancy" of a dwelling including quality of
workmanship, age, type of construction, location, and numerous other factors. A major focus of this
Housing Element is to provide goals and policies which underscore the City's commitment to ensure that
the existing housing stock in the five communities is maintained.
GOAL 3:THE CITY WILL ENCOURAGE THE MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION OF THE EXISTING
HOUSING STOCK AS WELL AS QUALITY DESIGN IN NEW HOUSING.
POLICY 3.1: Where determined to be dangerous to the public health and safety,substandard units in
the City shall be repaired so that they will comply with the applicable building, safety and housing
codes. When compliance through repair is not or cannot be achieved, abatement of substandard
units shall be achieved.
POLICY 3.2: Enforce the building, safety and housing codes through vigorous code enforcement
efforts.
1-6 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas
—t
POLICY 3.3: Continue to apply for and support existing available federal state and local housing
programs which provide housing assistance.These include assistance to property owners that can
demonstrate financial need in the upgrading of their substandard units. Continue existing city
programs for housing rehabilitation, and work to obtain additional external funding.
2.4 Housing Conservation
The City's existing housing stock includes units which are affordable to very low, low, and
moderate-income households.A significant part of the City housing focus is on these existing affordable
units, and how to ensure their continued affordability. Of particular concern are projects which were
government-subsidized when built, in return for units being rent-restricted to be affordable. With
passage of time, many such deed-restricted affordable units may be subject to being converted to market-
rate rental units by the expiration or pre-payment of the government subsidy arrangement. State law
requires that local housing elements address the status of these "units at risk." The City is committed
to doing what it can so that affordable units remain affordable to target-income households.
GOAL 4: THE CITY WILL ATTEMPT TO ENSURE THE CONTINUED AFFORDABILITY OF DEED-
RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE UNITS.
POLICY 4.1: The City will continue to develop necessary actions to attempt to ensure the continued
affordability of affordable"units at risk"of conversion to market rate units due to expiration of use
restrictions, affordability covenants, or funding subsidies.
2.5 Removal of Governmental and Nongovernmental Constraints
GOAL 5: THE CITY WILL DEVELOP STRATEGIES AND ACTIONS TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE
GOVERNMENTAL AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF
HOUSING.
POLICY 5.1: The City periodically evaluate adopted zoning provisions, entitlement procedures, fees
and other city requirements that may create constraints to the development of housing. Should
constraints be identified, actions such as amendments to policies and procedures may be
implemented to reduce or eliminate those constraints
POLICY 5.2: The city will monitor non-governmental constraints, such as interest rates, construction
costs, and others through consultation with developers, lenders and other entities directly involved
in the provision of housing. Should constraints be identified, actions such as amendments to policies
and procedures may be implemented to reduce or eliminate those constraints.
2.6 Related Goals and Policies
The Land Use Element sets forth the amount and type of residential development permitted under the
General Plan, thereby affecting housing opportunity in Encinitas. In addition, the Land Use Element
contains policies directed at maintaining the existing housing stock, as well as ensuring the quality of
new residential development. The Circulation Element contains policies to minimize roadway traffic into
residential neighborhoods, and the Noise Element sets forth policies to minimize the level of noise in
neighborhoods. The Resource Management Element establishes development standards to minimize
the impact of residential development on sensitive resources,such as hillside areas,ecological habitat,and
scenic view sheds. Finally,the Public Safety Element sets forth policies to ensure the safety of the City's
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-7
City of Encinitas '
housing stock through such measures as code enforcement, and mitigation of environmental hazard as
a condition to development.
Table 2-1: Housing Policy Matrix depicts General Plan elements that support the goals of the Housing
Element.
Table 2-1: Housing Policy Matrix
Resource
Issue Area Land Use Circulation' Noise Public Safety
Mgmt.
Housing X X X
Opportunities
Housing X
Quality
Maintenance X X X X X
and
Preservation
Housing X X
Conservation
While each of the elements is independent,the elements are also interrelated.Certain goals and policies
of each element may also address issues that are primary subjects of other elements.This integration
of issues throughout the General Plan creates a strong basis for the implementation of plans and
programs and achievement of community goals.
The City will ensure internal consistency among the various elements in accordance with state planning
law.This Housing Element builds upon other General Plan elements and, with concurrent amendments
to the Land Use Element, is entirely consistent with the policies and proposals set forth by the General
Plan. The City will ensure that future amendments to other elements in the General Plan remain
consistent with the Housing Element.
2.7 Implementation Programs
The programs below identify the actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning
period with appropriate General Plan, Specific Plan, zoning and development standards and with
services/facilities to accommodate the City's share of regional housing need for each income level.
PROGRAM 1:ADEQUATE SITES
PROGRAM 1A: Accommodate the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment Allocation
The City of Encinitas has been assigned a total Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)of 2,606 for the
2013-2021 Housing Element, which includes 2,353 units for the 2013 — 2021 planning period and
'carryover' RHNA allocations of 253 units from the prior planning period. The breakdown of the RHNA is
as follows:
1-8 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas z
—�'001rX
TABLE 2-2:CITY OF ENCINITAS RHNA ALLOCATION 2013-2021
INCOME CATEGORY ' RHNA RHNA CARRYOVER* TOTAL
Very Low 587 144 731**
Low 446 109 555
Moderate 413 0 413
Above Moderate 907 0 907
TOTAL 2,353 253 2,606
*See calculation in Appendix B.Allocated proportionately to very low and low.
**Estimated to include 365 extremely low income units and 366 very low income units.
TABLE 2-3: RHNA PROGRESS TO DECEMBER 31,2017
INCOME CATEGORY RHNA BUILDING PROJECTS REMAINING RHNA
PERMITS ISSUED APPROVED*
Low/Very Low 1,286 61 5 1,220
Moderate 413 4 -- 409
Above Moderate 907 784 108 15
OTAL 2,606 849 113 1,644
1* list of approved projects in Appendix C.
The "projection period" (the period for which the RHNA was calculated) in San Diego County began on
January 1,2010.Table 2-3 shows the City's progress in meeting its RHNA obligations to December 31,2017
in all income categories, including both building permits issued and projects with all discretionary
entitlements.The City has nearly met its total RHNA for above moderate income housing but a significant
gap remains in meeting the need for lower and moderate-income housing.
Appendix C lists sites suitable for meeting the City's remaining need for above moderate and moderate-
income housing. These sites can accommodate the need for housing at these income levels without the
need for rezoning, as shown in Appendix C and summarized as follows:
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-9
City of Encinitas -`
TABLE 2-4: SITES AVAILABLE TO MEET REMAINING MODERATE AND ABOVE MODERATE RHNA
INCOME CATEGORY REMAINING SUITABLE SITE ACCESSORY EXCESS CAPACITY
RHNA CAPACITY DWELLING UNITS
Moderate 409 523 54 168
Bove Moderate 15 177 -- 162
OTAL 424 669 54 299
The City has met a portion of its RHNA allocation for the low/very low income units as reflected below.
TABLE 2-5: REMAINING LOWER INCOME RHNA OBLIGATION
RHNA ADJUSTMENTS RHNA(WVL)
Low/Very Low 1,286
Accessory Unit Production 1 79
New Construction and Approved ProjectS2 66
REMAINING RHNA 1,141
1 Based on survey completed April 30, 2018,current rate of construction,and modifications to the ADU ordinance, projects
that the City will issue an estimated 320 permits total for second dwelling units (of which 79 will be counted as units that
accommodate lower income households).The April 2018 survey effort revealed that 24.6 percent of the second units granted
permits since January 1,2010 were rented at levels affordable to very low and low income households.See additional discussion
in Appendix B.
z Of the 66 units,59 of these units have been issued building permits and are deed-restricted to be affordable to very low or
low income households.Two units have been issued building permits but are not deed-restricted.A survey of actual rents found
that the rent charged was affordable to lower income households,using the formula contained in Health&Safety Code Section
50052.5.Five units have been approved as lower income housing under the City's density bonus or inclusionary ordinance and
are required by conditions of approval to be deed-restricted.The developers of these five units are not permitted to pay an in-
lieu fee or otherwise avoid the obligation to provide the lower income units.
The City is committed to providing adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate the
remaining RHNA and to accommodate the need for groups of all income levels as required by State
Housing Element Law. The City has identified those sites listed in Table 2-6 and shown on Figure 2-1,the
Housing Strategy Map; and further described in Appendix C as those sites to be rezoned to accommodate
the development of lower income housing.
1-10 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas
TABLE 2-6:SITES AVAILABLE TO MEET REMAINING VERY LOW AND LOW INCOME RHNA
Site
Number Site Name Gross Acreage Net Acreage Unit Yield
Vacant'
02 Cannon Property(Piraeus) 6.93 6.93 173
05 Encinitas Blvd &Quail Gardens Sites 4.91 4.78 119
06a Armstrong Parcels 1.92 1.06 26
08a Rancho Santa Fe Parcels(Gaffney/Goodsen) 1.75 1.45 36
D1 Sage Canyon Parcel 5.23 2.40 60
D2a Baldwin &Sons Properties 3.14 2.98 74
D2b Baldwin &Sons Properties 6.66 4.86 121
Subtotal 30.54 24.46 609
Non-vacant
01 Greek Church Parcel 2.50 2.00 50
06b Armstrong Parcels 1.32 1.16 29
07 Jackel Properties 2.97 2.97 331
08b Rancho Santa Fe Parcels(Gaffney/Goodsen) 4.88 4.57 113
09 Echter Property 21.49 9.85 246
12 Sunshine Gardens Parcels 3.39 3.39 84
D2c Baldwin&Sons Properties 1.79 1.21 30
D8 Vulcan &La Costa 2.00 2.00 50
D9 Seacoast Church 4.45 1.41 35
D11 Manchester Avenue West Sites 1.67 1.67 41
D14 Harrison Sites 1.91 1.91 211
D31 Meyer Proposal 6.62 6.52 163
Subtotal 54.99 38.66 895
Total 85.53 63.12 1,504
Notes:
1.HCD has stated to the City that vacant parcels must be entirely unimproved and separately subdivided parcels,and Table 2-6 reflects this
direction.However,the City believes that the following sites should also be considered to be vacant:Site 01(50 units)consists entirely of
unimproved land, but has not been subdivided from the improved part of the site.Site 07 (33 units) consists of unimproved land and an
abandoned,vacant structure. Site AD2c(30 units)has utility lines on a portion of the site which have been deducted from net acreage,but the
parcel is otherwise entirely unimproved,and the utility lines would not prevent an owner from developing the site for residential units. In the
City's view,these sites should be considered vacant,adding 118 additional units to the Unit Yield on vacant property,for a sub-total of 727 units
on vacant sites,far above 50%of the unmet RHNA need for the planning period.
2.Unit Yield anticipates that this site will be developed for mixed-use.
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-11
City of Encinitas '
FIGURE 2-1: HOUSING STRATEGY MAP—VERY LOW AND LOW INCOME SITES
t1
09
Leucadia -
-- AD2a .. ... -
" t •— AD2b Oliyenhain .
-
AD74 .._New Encinitas ' .
os
Old Encinitas o8a
` AND LOW-INCOME
'"086".."
�4 VERY LOW-A
- 4)1 CANDIDATE SITES INVENTORY•
t FoiSitesBeing.Rezonedto25-30 DU/AC -UNITS_
-
01.Greek Church Site -50
02:Cannon Property(Piraeus Site) 173'-
'cdrdiff=By,The-Sea 05.Encinitas Blvd&Quail Gardens Sites li9
_= { 06(a,b).Armstrong Parcels _ 55
ADl 07.Jackel Property 33
_ OS(a,b).Rancbo Santa Fe Sites(Gaffney/Goodsen) 149
09.Echter Property =F.
'eti•., 01 J 12:Sunshlne Gardens 84
>AD7.Sage Canyon Parcel ,; 60.
--. --•AD2(a,b,cl•Baldwin&Sons Properties '225
ADS.Vulcan&La Costa Site - '50
ADII -^`'•, AD9.Seacoast Church 35
ADl 1.Manchester Avenue West Sites Al
LEGEND AD14.Harrison'Sites 21 "'
OCity Boundary - _ :AD31.Meyer Proposal 163
.TOTAL: 1,504
='Neighborhood Boundaries
®Housing Element Update Sites NOTE:
These sites,were approved by the Encinitas City CoundI on June 20,;2018.
This rezoning program will create an opportunity for 1,504 units that may be constructed during the
planning period pursuant to Section 65583.2. This exceeds the remaining RHNA lower income obligation
of 1,141 units by 363 units (31 percent), providing an adequate buffer in consideration of the no net loss
requirement underSB 166;requirements of AB 1397 for determining site capacity;and desireto providesome
flexibility for future development to property owners.The capacity of vacant sites is 609 units,53 percent of
the City's total lower income RHNA.1
This program also includes a provision to make all necessary changes in other General Plan elements
and in specific plans to ensure consistency. Since the City has adequate capacity to accommodate the
moderate and higher income RHNA categories of housing units, no zoning changes associated with this
Housing Element update will occur on properties that are already zoned for those types of housing units,
except that replacement housing will be required for non-vacant sites as required by State law.
In November 2018, the voters will be presented with the Housing Element, rezoning of sites on the
Housing Strategy Map, Zoning Code text amendments allowing increased height, and required General
Plan and specific plan amendments. This approach will be taken because voter approval is required when
major amendments are made to certain land use planning policy documents pursuant to Encinitas
1 Including Sites 01,07, and AD2c,the capacity of vacant sites is 727 units,or approximately 64%of the City's total
lower income RHNA. See Table 2-6 for additional discussion.
1-12 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas ZJ f
General Plan Land Use Policies and Municipal Code Chapter 30, a voter-adopted initiative(Proposition A).
Since accommodating the RHNA necessitates major changes to the General Plan Land Use Element,
Housing Element, Zoning Map, Zoning Code, and certain specific plans, a vote of the people is required.
Presenting all of the required changes concurrently provides maximum transparency to the voters.
Funding: Development Services Department budget
• City Clerk Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• Planning Commission
• City Council
• Voters of Encinitas
• California Coastal Commission
Objectives: • Adopt the above-described General Plan,specific plan,and zoning
amendments by July 2018 and place on the November 2018 ballot for voter
approval. If approved,submit changes to the California Coastal Commission.
• Ensure internal consistency with.all General Plan elements
• Make available the sites inventory to interested developers
Timeframe: November 2018 General Election
• November 2019 Coastal Commission certification of Local Coastal Program
Amendments
PROGRAM 16: Adopt Amendments to the Zoning Code to Accommodate Lower Income Housing
The City of Encinitas will adopt amendments to the zoning code to accommodate lower income housing.
These amendments will provide the necessary development standards and entitlement procedures to
ensure that sites have development standards appropriate for units affordable to lower income residents.
The rezoning program will permit for-sale and rental multifamily residential uses as permitted uses. Fifty
percent of the remaining lower income RHNA need will be accommodated on sites permitting residential
as the only permitted use. Density will range from a minimum of 25 dwelling units per net acre to a
maximum of 30 dwelling units per net acre. 'By right'approval will be specified for projects containing at
least 20 percent lower income housing and not including a subdivision, as required by Government Code
Section 65583.2(h), and replacement affordable housing will be mandated on all sites identified in the
Housing Element as required by Government Code Section 65583.2(g)(3).
All sites designated can accommodate 16 units or more. Some of the sites consist of several individual
parcels that are in common ownership.Although onlytwo of the individual parcels are too small to contain
16 units, the rezoning will apply only to projects containing at least 16 units to ensure that lots are
consolidated as needed.
Changes to development standards will be necessary to accommodate a density of 30 units per acre.
These changes include increasingthe allowable building height to three stories,with elements of two stories
to create appropriate transitions, but only for residential developments meeting at least the minimum
density of 25 units per net acre on sites rezoned for lower income housing. Development standards will
also be revised to address other zoning issues to ensure that new standards will accommodate the
minimum density required in the zone. Appendix B contains a description of the proposed development
standards.
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-13
City of Encinitas zJ ^
Environmental review will still apply to future development projects on the Housing Strategy Map unless,
as required by State law, the project includes 20 percent low income units and does not include a
subdivision. Residential projects throughout the City may tier from the Measure T Housing Element's
Program EIR or the environmental assessment completed for this Housing Element.
Funding: Development Services Department budget
• City Clerk Department budget
Responsible Development Services Department
Agencies: Planning Commission
• City Council
• Voters of Encinitas
• California Coastal Commission
Objectives: • Adopt the above-described zoning,amendments by July 2018 and place on the
November 2018 ballot for voter approval. If approved,submit changes to the
California Coastal Commission.
Timeframe: November 2018 General Election
• November 2019 Coastal Commission certification of Local Coastal Program
Amendments
PROGRAM 1C: Promote the development of accessory housing units
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) help meet the City's affordable housing needs by providing a housing
resource for seniors and low and moderate income households.The City will continue to apply Zoning Code
regulations that allow accessory units (also known as second units or granny flats) by right in all residential
zones allowing single-family homes, in accordance with State law.
Between January 1,2010 and December 31,2017,the City's ADU ordinance has resulted in the construction
of 203 new units.Of these units, 16 have been restricted forvery-low and low-income households. In April
2018,the City conducted additional survey efforts to determine affordability levels of second units built
during the planning period.The results of that survey effort revealed that 24.6 percent of the second units
were rented at levels affordable to very low and low income households and 17 percent were rented at
levels affordable to moderate income households. In the past three years, permits have averaged 35 per
year.The City projects that within the projection period, about 320 ADUs will be constructed,of which 79
will be affordable to lower income households and 54 will be affordable to moderate income households.
After passage of new State ADU laws effective January 1, 2017, the City applied State standards in
evaluating ministerial applications for ADUs.The City adopted its own ADU and junior accessory dwelling
unit (JADU) ordinances in March 2018 which contain numerous provisions to encourage ADU and JADU
construction:
• An owner may construct both an ADU and a JADU on one lot;
• Setbacks are reduced to five feet in many cases;
• ADUs may have a maximum size of 1,200 sf so long as they do not exceed the floor area of the
primary dwelling unit.
• Floor area ratios and lot coverage may be increased on lots less than 10,000 sq.ft.
1-14 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas z
• Development fees are waived.
In addition,the City is currently completing implementation of two programs to further ADU production:
• 'Permit ready' program. Staff is preparing packages of pre-approved designs for ADUs that may
be used by owners and will provide expedited processing
• Tiny homes and micro-units. The City is exploring the availability of prefabricated tiny homes and
micro-units that may be suitable for ADUs,with the intent of providing additional information to
interested homeowners.
The City will continue to monitor the extent of ADU production to ensure that the ordinance modifications
are successful and that its goals can be met.
Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Development Services Department
Agencies: Planning Commission
• City Council
• California Coastal Commission
Objectives: • Continue to administer the accessory unit ordinance
• Develop permit-ready packets to market accessory-unit production;explore .
tiny homes and micro-units.
Achieve an average of 40 accessory units annually.'
Timeframe: November 2018 permit-ready packets
PROGRAM 1D:Ensure that adequate sites remain available throughout the planning period
The City will monitor the consumption of residential acreage to ensure an adequate inventory is available
to meet the City's RHNA obligations. The City will develop and implement an evaluation procedure
pursuant to Government Code Section 65863 and will make the findings required by that code section
if a site is proposed for development with fewer units or at a different income level than shown in the
Housing Element. Should an approval of development result in a reduction of capacity below the
residential capacity needed to accommodate the remaining need for lower income, moderate, or above
moderate income households,the City will identify and, if necessary, rezone sufficient sites within 180
days to accommodate the shortfall and ensure"no net loss"in capacity to accommodate the RHNA.
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-15
City of Encinitas 1 ~
Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• City Council
Objectives: Review each housing approval on sites listed in the Housing Element and
make findings required by'Government Code Section 65863 if site is
proposed with fewer,units or different income Level than shown in the
Housing Element. If insufficient suitable sites remain, identify and, if
necessary, rezone sufficient sites within 180 days:
Report as required through the HCD annual report process
Timeframe: Ongoing
• Aril annual report
PROGRAM 1E:Energy conservation and energy efficiency opportunities
In January 2018, the City adopted an update to its Climate Action Plan. To further advance community
energy and water conservation goals, the City will implement the following actions listed in its Climate
Action Plan to achieve residential-focused greenhouse gas emission reductions.
• Reduce citywide potable water consumption.
• Require energy audits of existing residential units.
• Require new single-family homes to install solar photovoltaic systems and solar water heaters.
• Require residential electric vehicle charging stations
• Educate homeowners about water efficiency rebate and incentive programs offered to San Diego
Water District and OMWD customers.
In addition, the City will continue to promote regional water conservation incentive programs and
encourage broader participation in the City's Green Building Incentive Program.
Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
Objectives: • Implement the residential strategy measures listed in the City of Encinitas
Climate Action Plan
Timeframe: • Ongoing
PROGRAM 2:AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The programs below identify the actions that will be taken to promote affordable housing.
PROGRAM 2A: Continue and improve inclusionary housing policies
The City's inclusionary housing program requires that subdivisions of at least 10 units set aside or pay a
fee in lieu equivalent to one in 10 units for low income households. As a condition of approval of any
tentative subdivision map for residential dwellings, community apartments, stock cooperatives or
conversions of 10 units or more, the subdivider is required to reserve the unit(s) for very low income
1-16 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas __7
households. All required affordable units are required to be constructed concurrently with market rate
units to ensure completion. Through December 31, 2017 the ordinance has created approximately 146
units for very low and low income households.
The City has received recommendations from affordable and market-rate developers for updates to the
ordinance. The City is in the process of updating its current Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to more
effectively meet the City's affordable housing goals and to grant developers greater flexibility in how
they fulfill their inclusionary housing requirement. The adoption of AB 1505 in 2017 allows the City to
require inclusionary units in rental projects as well as for-sale projects.
Additional alternatives to on-site development of affordable housing are being considered, such as
payment of an in-lieu fee(except on sites designated to accommodate housing forvery low and low income
households), site construction, use of alternative housing types for the affordable units, preservation of
'at-risk' units, and impact fees for projects with one to six units.
Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• City Council
• California Coastal Commission
Objectives: Continue the inclusionary housing program
• Update the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to be more effective and.
provide greater flexibility in meeting the inclusionary housing requirements
while ensuring that the projects will create affordable units
Timeframe: November 2018 updated inclusionary housing program
• July 2019 Coastal Commission certification of Local Coastal Program amendments
PROGRAM 2B: Facilitate affordable housing for all income levels
The City will continue to proactively support housing for low income, extremely low income, and
moderate income households and persons with disabilities (including developmental disabilities). State
and federal funding is available only for lower income housing. The City has used a wide variety of
financing programs to create 119 deed-restricted affordable units,all but three affordable to very low and
low-income households, using federal Community Development Block Grants and HOME Investment
Partnership funds,City affordable housing funds,tax credits,other HUD financing,and legalization of units
constructed illegally.
As opportunities arise, new funding sources for lower income housing will be sought from available non-
profit, local, state, and federal programs, and the City will seek to partner with other agencies that own
property in Encinitas, including San Diego County and North County Transit.The City will also continue to
utilize its existing CDBG and other funds. Planning and entitlements should consider how to position an
affordable project to qualify for future grant applications.The City will attempt to subsidize off-site public
improvement costs by coordinating its CIP with affordable housing sites and is considering the waiver,
deferral or reduction of development fees. For any City-owned housing sites, land cost write-downs will
be used to make possible affordable housing.
The City will also work with developers to facilitate affordable housing development. Specifically, as
funding permits,the City will provide gap financing to leverage State,federal, and other public affordable
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-17
City of Encinitas 1
funding sources. Gap financing will focus on rental housing units affordable to lower income households
and households with special needs(such as seniors and disabled).To the extent feasible,the City will also
ensure a portion of the affordable housing units created will be available to extremely low income
households.
As of fall 2017, rents for studios and one-bedroom apartments were affordable to moderate-income
households, but larger units were not affordable. The City has encouraged development of moderate-
income housing by adopting specific plans permitting moderate densities. Because no funding is available
to support moderate-income housing, the City intends to consider measures that will encourage
'affordability by design,'especially for units of two-bedrooms or more.This can be accomplished through
strategies such as limiting the maximum size of units with a given number of bedrooms on sites zoned to
accommodate lower and moderate income housing. Employing such strategies will help ensure that units
identified on the housing strategy map as affordable to moderate-income households are not designed
as luxury homes and provide opportunity for moderate-income households.
Additionally, the City is hiring a housing coordinator to facilitate opportunities for affordable housing;
work with the development community to identify locations and opportunities to construct new
affordable housing; preserve existing affordability restrictions; and acquire or rehabilitate units for
affordable housing purposes.
1-18 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas
Funding: Development Services Department budget,CDBG and HOME funds,
Affordable Housing Fund, LIHTC, Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds;Cap
and Trade Affordable Housing Program_, National,Housing Trust Fund and
other resources,as available
Responsible Development Services Department
Agencies: Planning Commission
• City Council
Objectives: • Annually allocate designated Affordable Housing Funds and CDBG funds to
increase the supply of affordable housing for lower income households, „
including seniors,extremely-low and lower income disabled, homeless and
those at,risk,of homelessness:Seek to leverage these funds with federal,"
state, and County HOME funds to increase the amount of affordable
housing on housing strategy sites.`
• Work with.developers of housing strategy sites and nonprofit developers,to
identify opportunities to increase the percentage of affordable housing
above-that required by the.City's,inclusionary ordinance by encouraging=
developers to apply for available funds and utilize other creative
mechanisms,with the goal of developing 250 affordable units.
• Analyze sites owned by the City and other public agencies (including San
Diego County and the Transit.District)to identify those that could be suitable
to support affordable housing development and determine whether housing
development would be feasible and what actions would be needed to
develop housing on those sites. -
• Encourage the development of sites designated for moderate-income,
housing by continuing to implement the City's adopted specific plans:To
achieve'affordability by design,'consider adoption of maximum size limits by
number of bedrooms(limits on size of studios,one bedroom units,two
bedroom units,etc.)
Timeframe: November 2018 for review of size standards
• Ongoing during planning period.
PROGRAM 2C: Utilize Section 8 housing choice vouchers
This program provides rental assistance to eligible very low income households (with incomes not
exceeding 50 percent of the area median). The subsidy represents the difference between the rent that
exceeds 30 percent of a household's monthly income and the actual rent charged. To cover the cost of
the program, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD) provides funds to allow the City
of Encinitas Housing Authority to make housing assistance payments on behalf of the families. HUD also
pays the Housing Authority a fee for the costs of administering the program. HUD has not issued any
new vouchers to the City of Encinitas for the past five years.
In January 2004 and January 2005, HUD capped the Section 8 budget, which required the City to
reduce program operating costs. The City responded in part by increasing the payment standards and
enhancing occupancy standards which provides for more rental unit opportunity. On March 1, 2013,
around $85 billion in federal budget cuts, known as sequestration,took effect. The cuts are part of a 10-
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-19
City of Encinitas °
year plan of catastrophic funding reductions to our nation's discretionary domestic programs, including
the HUD and the military. The impact of sequestration on the City's Housing Authority has resulted in
the loss of annual funding for rental subsidy payments and program administration.
Although the City will continue to administer its 136 housing vouchers, due to high market rents,
especially considering the recent implementation of Small Area Fair Market Rents it currently has funding
to subsidize only 104 households,and the City has allocated general fund dollars to pay for administrative
costs to replace in part declining federal support. The City's ability to expand or even maintain this program
at its current level is derived from the annual Federal budget process. Recent indications from HUD are
that Federal support for Section 8 will not be expanded. However, when additional funds become
available to assist new families,the City will provide additional housing vouchers.
Funding: HUD Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Allocations
Responsible Agencies: Encinitas Housing Authority
Objectives: • Continue to administer and fund the housing choices vouchers based on
HUD funding availability
• Promote the Housing Choice Voucher program to rental property owners
Timeframe: • Ongoing
PROGRAM 2D: Ensure that the density bonus ordinance continues to be consistent with State law
Government Code Section 65915 requires that a jurisdiction adopt a local Density Bonus Ordinance
consistent with State law. State Density Bonus Law requires a local jurisdiction to grant an increase in
density, if requested by a developer, for providing affordable housing as part of a development project.
Key provisions of the law include incremental density bonuses that correspond to the percentage of
housing set aside as affordable units. State law caps the maximum density bonus at 35 percent and
allows the developer to request up to three incentives or concessions, if required to provide the
affordable units. The law also provides reduced parking requirements and allows requests for waivers
of development standards, such as increased height limits and reduced setback requirements. The
developer must provide reasonable documentation demonstrating that incentives reduce costs to provide
for affordable units; and that waivers are required because the usual standards physically preclude the
project from achieving the allowed density and incentives.
Many developers in the City utilize State Density Bonus Law, and the City has a standard procedure for
routinely processing density bonus applications as part of housing development applications. Projects that
meet the City's inclusionary requirements are eligible for density bonuses. As of December 31, 2017, the
City had approved 27 density bonus projects that included 49 lower income units.The City's implementing
ordinance is consistent with the current Government Code and has been updated to be consistent with
the most recent amendments to State Density Bonus Law enacted in 2016.The City will review any future
amendments to State Density Bonus law to ensure that its local ordinance remains consistent with State
law.
1-20 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas
Funding: Development Services Department Budget
Responsible Development Services Department
Agencies: Planning Commission
• City Council
• Coastal Commission
,Objectives: • Ensure the City's density bonus ordinance is consistent with future
amendments to State density bonus law
Timeframe: Within one year after amendments are passed to State Density Bonus Law
PROGRAM 2E:Accommodate specialized housing types
Special needs groups often spend a disproportionate amount of their income to secure safe and decent
housing and are sometimes subject to discrimination based on their specific circumstances. The
development of affordable and accessible homes is critical to expand opportunities for persons with
special needs. Many special needs persons, especially those in emergency shelters, transitional and
supportive housing, and single-room occupancy units, may be extremely low income individuals, and
implementation of the zoning changes below will enable development of housing serving their needs.
Agricultural Worker Housing:
Pursuant to the State Employee Housing Act (Section 17000 et seq. of the Health and Safety Code),
employee housing for agricultural workers consisting of no more than 36 beds in a group quarters or 12
units or spaces designed for use by a single family or household is permitted by right in a zoning district
that permits agricultural uses by right. Therefore, for properties that permit agricultural uses by right,
a local jurisdiction may not treat employee housing that meets the above criteria any differently than
an agricultural use. The Act also requires that any employee housing providing accommodations for six
or fewer employees be treated as a single-family structure, with no conditional or special use permit or
variance required.
The City will amend its Zoning Code to be consistent with State law regarding agricultural worker housing
and employee housing.
Emergency Shelters:
Senate Bill 2 requires local governments to identify one or more zoning categories that allow emergency
shelters (year-round shelters for the homeless) without discretionary review. The statute permits the
City to apply limited conditions to the approval of ministerial permits for emergency shelters. Pursuant
to State law, the City may establish only objective standards for the location, siting, operations and
maintenance of emergency shelters.
The City will amend the Zoning Code to permit emergency shelters by right without a discretionary review
process in the Light Industrial (LI) and Business Park (BP) zones (28 acres total), subject to the same
development and management standards that apply to residential or commercial development in those
zones,with the addition of the above standards.
Transitional and Supportive Housing:
State Housing Element Law mandates that local jurisdictions shall address zoning for transitional and
supportive housing. Transitional housing is included in the Encinitas Zoning Code as a residential care
facility. Supportive housing is not specifically addressed in the Zoning Code. The City will amend its Zoning
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-21
City of Encinitas �J .•.
z�
Code to identify transitional/supportive housing meeting the Government Code Section 65582 (g-j)
definitions as a residential use of a property in a dwelling to be allowed under the same conditions as apply
to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zones.
Single-Room Occupancy(SRO) Housing:
SRO units are typically one-room units intended for occupancy by a single individual.They are distinct
from a studio or efficiency unit, in that a studio is a one-room unit that must contain a kitchen and
bathroom. Although SRO units are not required to have a kitchen or bathroom, many SROs have one
or the other and could be equivalent to an efficiency unit. State law requires that the City accommodate
this housing type, and they provide smaller, less expensive housing units The City will permit SROs in its
multifamily zones to encourage units that are cheaper by design.
Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• Planning Commission
• City Council
• Coastal Commission
Objectives: • Amend the Zoning Code to accommodate special needs housing.consistent
with State law
Timeframe: November 2018 adoption of all code amendments
• July 2019 Coastal Commission certification of Local Coastal Program Amendments
PROGRAM 2F:Continue programs to reduce homelessness
The City has provided financial assistance to nonprofit service agencies such as the Community
Resource Center, YMCA-Oz North Coast, Fraternity House, Catholic Charities, and Interfaith Shelter
Network to provide shelter and supportive services forthe homeless.The City also provides funding to the
Community Resource Center to operate the Opening Doors program,which matches homeless households
with housing navigators and housing resources, to ultimately be placed into permanent housing. The
Community Resource Center established an Advisory Committee on Homelessness in Encinitas,comprised
of public agency staff, law enforcement, community members, homeless activists, and others. The group
meets on a quarterly basis to provide the opportunity for all parties to share their experiences,thoughts,
and ideas related to homelessness in Encinitas and the Opening Doors pilot project. After an outbreak of
Hepatitis A among homeless persons in the County of San Diego, the County provided handwashing
stations on a temporary basis, and the City installed temporary toilets for use by the public.The City will
evaluate the short and long-term needs and locations for access to 24/7 bathroom and handwashing
facilities.
To the extent that funds are available, the City will continue to sponsor or assist emergency shelter
facilities, inside City limits or outside within a reasonable proximity to the City, as well as encourage
or support facilities by providing grants, or low cost loans, to operating agencies.
1-22 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas 1J °
Funding: • City General Fund
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• City Manager
• City Council
Objectives: • Continue to support programs to prevent homelessness and serve homeless
persons to the extent funds are available
Timeframe: Ongoing
PROGRAM 3: MITIGATION OF CONSTRAINTS
The City reviews and updates development standards and processing procedures that constrain housing
development, particularly for lower and moderate-income households. The programs below list steps to
be taken to remove governmental constraints that limit the ability to maintain, improve, and develop
housing for all income levels. The City will also attempt to understand and, where possible, modify
nongovernmental constraints that create a gap between the City's approval of housing and construction of
housing.
PROGRAM 3A:Establish parking standards appropriate for different kinds of housing
Basic construction costs for residential developments have rapidly increased, and together with land
prices, have increased the cost of housing. This has made homeownership unattainable for many
households. Parking is more expensive to supply in some places, so parking requirements add a cost to
development and a developer might build fewer housing units or may not develop at all.
The Downtown Encinitas and the North 101 Corridor Specific Plans contain modified parking standards
to encourage mixed-use and affordable housing development. Mixed-use units that are guaranteed to be
affordable to low or very low income households are allowed a reduced, one-space-per-unit parking
requirement. State Density Bonus Law allows even lower parking standards for projects eligible for a
density bonus.
However, how people travel continues to change as more focus is being placed on alternative modes of
transportation such as bikes and rideshares. The City looks to update its housing standards to reflect
current and anticipated parking needs and to adopt parking standards appropriate for affordable,
senior-aged, mixed-use, and transit-oriented housing projects.
Funding: Departmental budgets
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• Public Works Department
• Planning Commission
• City Council
• Coastal Commission
'Objectives: Update the City's parking regulations
Timeframe: • January 2020 adoption of all code amendments
• January 2021 Coastal Commission certification of Local Coastal Program
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-23
City of Encinitas
PROGRAM 313: Modify regulations that constrain the development of housing
Governmental constraints are policies, standards, requirements or actions imposed by the various levels
of government upon land, housing ownership and development. Although federal and state agencies
play a role,the City cannot modify the policies of these agencies and they are therefore not addressed in
this program section.
Ground-Floor Commercial Uses Only:
Portions of the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan and Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan have mixed-use
zones where residences are allowed. However, 1) ground floor uses in a storefront location are limited to
retail-serving uses only;or 2) residential uses are permitted only above or behind a primary use. However,
it may be difficult to market and develop a property with these ground floor commercial requirements
because there is a finite economic market available to support retail uses. Mixed-use thrives when it is
focused in a compact area, not over lengthy corridors,as is currently mandated in these specific plans. For
mixed-use projects,the City will amend zoning regulations to require ground floor commercial uses only at
key locations or preference areas based on context or planning objectives to ensure future projects are
feasible and the desired community character is preserved. Key locations will be determined by the City
Council.
Design Review Findings for Residential Projects:
The City requires design review approval for most proposed developments. Unless exempt, residential
projects need to be consistent with the City's design guidelines and comply with certain findings before
they may be constructed. Among these findings is the requirement that the project "would not tend to
cause the surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in appearance or value (EMC 23.08.080)."
Under the Housing Accountability Act,the inability to make this subjective finding cannot be used by the
City to deny or reduce the density of any residential development. As noted in the Constraints Analysis,
there is no history that a residential project was denied solely on the basis of this finding, and its
effectiveness in assuring high-quality development is minimal. As such, the City will amend the language
for residential projects. The City will also review other findings that may result in denial of a project to
ensure that they are consistent with the Housing Accountability Act.
Separate Lot or Airspace Ownership Requirements in North Highway 101 Specific Plan:
Section 3.1.1(A)(4)of the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan requires that"all [new] residential detached and
attached dwelling units in residential-only developments must be constructed on a legally subdivided lot
or must be subdivided to permit ownership of airspace in the form of a dwelling unit with an undivided
share in common elements." While this requirement is appropriate for single-family homeownership
projects, it is inconsistent with provisions of State law that require that the City not discriminate against
multifamily rental housing.As such, the City will amend the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan to eliminate
the airspace requirement for multi-family housing.
1-24 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas
Funding: Departmental budgets
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• Planning Commission
• City Council
• Coastal Commission
Objectives: Remove the above constraints to residential development
Timeframe: • January 2020 adoption of all code amendments
• June 2020 adopt zoning amendments
• January 2021 Coastal Commission certification of Local Coastal Program
Amendments
• May 2021 Coastal Commission certification of Local Coastal Program
PROGRAM 3C:Right to Vote Amendment
In 2013,a citizen initiative resulted in the Right to Vote Amendment(Proposition A),which requires voter
approval of most land use changes and building heights higher than two stories. Proposition A cannot be
modified except by anothervote of the people.If a proposed Housing Element does not achieve community
support, Proposition A may act as a constraint on the City's ability to comply with state Housing Element
law.Assuming that this Housing Element is approved in November 2018,the City will take actions to ensure
that future Housing Elements can be adopted in a timely fashion and that requirements for a vote of the
people do not constrain the City's compliance with State law.
Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Development Services Department
Agencies:
Objectives: Include a significant buffer when adopting the Housing Element to ensure that
adequate sites will remain throughout the planning period,and that there will be no
need to upzone sites or seek voter approval for actions during the planning period to
comply with the 'no net loss'statute(Gov't Code §65863).This Housing Element
includes a buffer of 54'percent.
•Complete an economic feasibility analysis and amend the City's Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance to require that affordable housing be developed on each
identified site to the maximum amount that is economically feasible,so that
each site is developed at the designated income level to the extent feasible.
• Provide assistance to owners of sites suitable for lower.income housing to
identify subsidy sources that could.support a higher percentage of lower
income housing.
• Take actions in advance of the next Housing Element d'ue date(April 2021)to ensure
that the sixth cycle Housing Element and implementing actions can be adopted in a
timely fashion consistent with State law.These actions will include:
• Begin preparation of the next housing element as soon as the City
receives its RHNA allocation in early 2019. Determine if additional sites
must be designated for lower income housing and rezoned to a higher
density,thus requiring a vote under Proposition A.
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-25
City of Encinitas z
—`�
•If a vote will be required, repeat and build upon the steps to achieve a
successful vote as have been taken since November 2016:"establish a
Housing Element Task Force that includes supporters of Proposition"A;
conduct a transparent process with frequent public meetings to identify
candidate sites; identify the sites most acceptable to the community and
compliant with housing element law.
• Establish a schedule so that any required vote under,Proposition A will be
held sufficiently in advance-of the Housing Element,due date(target of
2020 for the sixth cycle)to ensure that an adequate housing element may
be revised and approved by the voters if the initial vote-is unsuccessful.
• In identifying additional candidate sites,if needed: ,
•Analyze sites owned by public agencies, including the City,County,and
Transit District,and strive to accommodate as much needed development on
public sites as is practical..If any appear suitable for'lower income housing, '
develop a schedule and take"required steps to ensure that they:can be
developed within the planning period.
•Contact nonprofit developers and property owners to identify.sites that are
most feasible for actuaf construction of affordable'housing.
•Work with property owners who have expressed,interest in zoning suitable
for lower income housing t6jdentify and remove potential barriers to site
development during the planning period.
Timeframe: Commence developing the sixth cycle Housing Element in 2019 when the City
receives its RHNA allocation.
• If a vote is required by Proposition A to meet the City's RHNA,target
scheduling the vote for 2020 to ensure that an adequate housing element may
be revised and approved by the voters prior to April 1,2021 if the initial vote is
unsuccessful.
PROGRAM 3D: Rescind Obsolete Growth Management Policies and Programs
The Land Use Element portion of the Encinitas General Plan contains goals and policies that manage new
growth.The measures provide a framework on how the City will ensure that new development does not
outpace the abilityto provide essential services and infrastructure to support it.One measure establishes
a Growth Management Plan which phases development through building permit limitations. In 1999,the
City analyzed the effectiveness of the growth management plan in regulating the pace of residential
growth in Encinitas.The Cityfound that the cumulative number of unallocated permits from year-to-year
was far greater than housing production. As a result the City discontinued calculation of the permit cap
due to the carryover of unallocated permits.As the Growth Management Plan has no impact on the pace
of development,the City will eliminate the requirement and ensure that there are no potential constraints
to meeting its obligation, under California law, to satisfy its current or future Regional Housing Needs
Allocation.
1-26 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas
Funding:, Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
Objectives: Rescind the Growth Management Plan Ordinance,to eliminate the annual,
housing permit allocation process and grant approvals to projects.
• Amend the growth management policies of the Land Use Element
Timeframe: • January 2020 adoption of all code amendments
• January 2021 Coastal Commission certification of Local Coastal Program
PROGRAM 3E: Improve the efficiency of the development review process for housing projects
The City continues to improve the efficiency of the development review process. Recently, the City
improved its permitting process by placing more information on the City's website; implemented an
Internet-based case management system,which is accessible to the public,that tracks permit review and
status; established an interdepartmental team (Project Issue Resolution) that quickly resolves problems
and issues as they arise; and formed a Development Services Department that combines planning and
engineering services to facilitate project review.The City will continue to find opportunities to streamline
the permitting process to remove unnecessary barriers, without compromising public health, safety and
community character and will process projects outside the coastal zone under SB 35 if requested by an
applicant for an eligible project. The City will emphasize working with non-profit and for-profit housing
developers to better utilize an expedited process,which would include priority plan review and inspection
services. Streamlining includes the environmental review already completed for this Housing Element to
address as many environmental issues as possible now to focus future environmental review on project-
specific issues.
'Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
Objectives: Expedite permit processing for projects that exceed the City's inclusionary-
requirements and provide on-site affordable housing.
• To the extent permitted by State law, use existing environmental documents to
limit review of.new developments to impacts not considered in the earlier
document
Timeframe: • Ongoing
PROGRAM 3F: Review nongovernmental constraints impeding development of approved housing
rp oiects
Most housing developments approved by the City have received building permits within a reasonable time
period. However, building permits or final maps have not been obtained for approximately 75 units
approved over one year ago. The City will contact applicants to discover why units have not been
constructed. If due to nongovernmental constraints, such as rapid increases in construction costs,
shortages of labor or materials, or rising interest rates,to the extent appropriate and legally possible,the
City will seek to identify actions that may help to remove these constraints.
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-27
City of Encinitas
Additionally, the City will proactively work with stakeholders to identify constraints or other
considerations that may impede the construction of housing in the Encinitas. The City will work
collaboratively to find strategies and actions that can eliminate or reduce identified constraints.
Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
Objectives: Contact applicants-of projects to discover nongovernmental constraints
preventing construction.
• To the extent appropriate and legally possible,identify actions that may help to
remove these nongovernmental constraints.
Timeframe: • Complete by January 2020
PROGRAM 3G: Seek to create community support for housing at a variety of income levels
The City will work with the community, in conjunction with Program 3C (Proposition A), to achieve
community support for housing at a variety of income levels.The City may pursue this through policy and
regulatory strategies such as ensuring that higher density housing developments are of excellent design
quality. If additional infrastructure improvements are required to accommodate increased housing
development,the City will proactively amend its capital improvement program.
,Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
Objectives: • Provide information to Encinitas residents about,local housing.needs,tstate law
requirements (in-particular, Housing Element Law�.'no net loss,'the.Housing
Accountability Act and SB 35), and other topics related to housing for all
income levels.
• Ensure that any housing developed at higher densities complies with•any.adopted
design guidelines and is of excellent design quality.
• Amend the City's capital improvement program'if additional.infrastructure
improvements are required-to provide for additional housing development ,
Timeframe: Ongoing in conjunction with Program 3C(Proposition A)
Program 3H: Monitor adequacy of development standards
In the course of reviewing new projects on the sites shown on the site inventory in Appendix C,the City
of Encinitas will evaluate the development standards contained in Title 30 of the Encinitas Municipal Code
to determine if any standards create undue burdens, or limit the ability for housing to be developed at
the density designated in the site inventory. The analysis will evaluate standards that could influence the
ability of the City to develop housing for extremely-low,very-low, low and moderate income households
or special needs populations.
The Housing Element Annual Report will include the effects of the development standards to facilitate
development in the R-30 zone. Should the evaluation conclude that any development standard may pose
a constraint to development in the R-30 zone,the City will initiate a Municipal Code amendment.
1-28 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas z °
Funding: • Departmental budgets
Responsible Agencies: • Development Services Department
• Planning Commission
• City Council
Objectives: • Amend Residential Development Standards
Timeframe: • Ongoing Evaluation
• Report to City Council annually,as part of Housing
Element Annual Report
• If needed to address constraints,following the City
Council review of the Annual Report, request
initiation of a zoning amendment.
PROGRAM 4: CONSERVATION OF EXISTING HOUSING STOCK
The programs below demonstrate how the City shall conserve and improve the condition of the
existing affordable housing stock.
PROGRAM 4A: Pursue opportunities to create safe and healthy housing
The City has a number of accessory units that were constructed or converted illegally(without the benefit
of building permits) prior to the City's incorporation and might not meet City codes. Recognizing that
many of these units provide affordable housing that may not otherwise be available,the City adopted an
Affordable Unit Policy (AUP) in 1993 to allow dwelling units built or converted without required permits
to apply for legalization. In the period between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2017, 14 units have
been approved through the AUP program.
The City Council in November 2014 revised the compliance program with less restrictive, more
preferential terms,which are valid through June 2018.A further extension of the program was approved
in May 2018. Here are the key changes:
• The unit must have existed prior to January 1, 2004.This is a change from the current policy that
requires the unit to be in existence prior to incorporation in 1986.
• The unit must be reserved as affordable housing for"low" income households for a period of
twenty (20) years. This is a change from the current policy that requires the affordability
restriction in perpetuity.
• The standard AUP application fee ($900) may be waived for property owners that qualify as
low/very-low income.
The City has sponsored amendments to State law that would permit more flexibility in applying past
building codes to units constructed without permits.Some units constructed without permits may also be
able to be legalized under new State ADU regulations if they can meet current building codes.
The City continues to monitor the program and adjust the policy as needed to maximize participation,
while ensuring the protection of public health and safety, as well as compliance with State law.The City
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-29
City of Encinitas
periodically markets the program to homeowners via City newsletter, website, and/or flyers at public
counters.
Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• City Council
Objectives Healthy and safe housing
Timeframe: Consider extension of the AUP Program by June 2018
PROGRAM 4B:Assist in rehabilitating housing
The City's current Residential Rehabilitation Program provides grants and/or low-interest, deferred,
and/or forgivable loans for building code violations, health and safety issues, essential repairs, upgrades
of major component systems, and modifications to accommodate disabilities.The assistance is available
to low-income homeowners and to owners of rental units that will rent to low income households. The
key funding source available for the rehabilitation program comes from Community Development Block
Grants (CDBG).The City anticipates that funding allocated over an eight-year period,from 2013 to 2021,
will help administer assistance to about 40 households. The estimated funding amounts are not known
until federal appropriations for each fiscal year are finalized and HUD notifies the City of the yearly grant
amount. Subject to federal funding, the City will look to assist an average of five households annually
(ranging from single-family, multi-family, and mobile homes).
Funding: Community Development Block Grants
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• City Council
Objectives: Healthy and safe housing
• Assist 40 households
Timeframe: • Ongoing
PROGRAM 5: EQUAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES
Below identifies the programs that promote housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race,
religion,sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color,family status,or disability.
PROGRAM 5A: Reasonably accommodate housing for the disabled
State law requires jurisdictions to analyze potential and actual governmental constraints on the
development, maintenance and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities and demonstrate
local efforts to remove or mitigate those constraints.
Through its building permit authority,the City enforces State Title 24 accessibility regulations.As needed
on a case-by-case basis,the City has made reasonable accommodations with respect to accessibility in its
application of zoning/development standards.To ensure full compliance with reasonable accommodation
procedures of the Fair Housing Act, the City will adopt a Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance to
establish procedures for the review and approval of requests to modify zoning and development
standards to reasonably accommodate persons with disabilities, including persons with developmental
disabilities.
1-30 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas
Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
Objectives: • Adopt reasonable accommodations ordinance for,persons with disabilities
Timeframe: November 2018 adopt new reasonable accommodations ordinance
•
July 2019 certification of Local Coastal Program Amendments
PROGRAM 56: Promote fair housing
The City of Encinitas receives Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)funds from HUD.As a recipient
of these funds,the City certifies that it will affirmatively further fair housing.
The City currently contracts with Legal Aid Society of San Diego to provide fair housing and
landlord/tenant services to residents and landlords in Encinitas. Legal Aid will help mediate and will assist
with filing fair housing complaints,and the City refers complaints to Legal Aid. Legal Aid also conducts free
educational workshops for housing providers and tenants, as well as conducting fair housing testing to
ascertain if fair housing issues are occurring in the City.
For the past three iterations, the City has partnered with all jurisdictions in the County to conduct a
Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI).The Al identifies specific improvements to
the City's Zoning Code to expand fair housing choices for all.The Al has outlined numerous actions forthe
City and the other cities in the County.Some of the most significant actions are these:
• Promote the Housing Choice Voucher program to rental property owners, in collaboration with
the various housing authorities in the region.
• Increase housing options for special needs populations, including persons with disabilities,senior
households,families with children,farmworkers,the homeless, etc.
• Conduct random testing on a regular basis to identify issues, trends, and problem properties.
Expand testing to investigate emerging trends of suspected discriminatory practices.
• Diversify and expand the housing stock to accommodate the varied housing needs of different
groups.
• Work collaboratively with local housing authorities and affordable housing providers to ensure
affirmative fair marketing plans and de-concentration policies are implemented.
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-31
City of Encinitas 1 '
Funding: Community Development Block Grants
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• City Council
Objectives Continue to contract with Legal Aid Society or other capable organization to review
housing discrimination complaints,attempt to facilitate equitable resolution of
complaints,and,where necessary;refer complainants to the appropriate state or
federal agency for further investigation and action.
• Implement the actions contained in the Al
Update the Al as needed "
• Collaborate with the jurisdictions in the San Diego region to complete the
Timeframe: • Ongoing
PROGRAM 6:AT RISK HOUSING
There are some government-assisted projects or units that are or may be at-risk of conversion to market
rate.At-risk units are occupied by seniors or lower income families who cannot afford to pay market rate
rents and who could be displaced if the project or unit converts. Many of these units typically convert to
market rate as subsidy contracts or regulatory agreements expire.The programs included herein identify
how the City will attempt to preserve assisted housing developments that are at risk of converting to
market-rate.
PROGRAM 6A: Monitor publicly assisted housing projects
The Housing Element is required to include a program to monitor and work to preserve affordable housing
units that are eligible to convert to non-low-income housing uses.All inventoried units eligible to prepay,
opt-out, or terminate long-term use/affordability restrictions during the next 10-years are considered by
HCD as"at-risk".Thus,this Housing Element's"at-risk"housing analysis covers the period from November
2018 through November 2028.
As described in Appendix B, no assisted units in the City are at risk of loss in the next 10 years. However,
the City will continue to monitor and review all assisted units so that it can act in advance of the loss of
any units.
1-32 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas
Funding: Development Services Department budget
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
Objectives: Monitor the status of any Notices of Intent and Plans of Action filed by property
owners to convert to market rate units
• Identify'non-profit organizations as potential purchasers/managers of at-risk
housing units
Explore funding sources available to purchase affordability covenants on at-risk
projects,transfer ownership of at-risk projects to public or non-profit agencies,
purchase existing buildings to replace at-risk units or construct replacement units
Ensure the tenants are properly noticed and informed of their rights that they. are
eligible to obtain special Section'8 vouchers reserved for tenants of converted
properties
Timeframe: • Ongoing
PROGRAM 6B: Explore providing credit under the inclusionary ordinance for preservation of at-risk
housing
As part of its update to the City's inclusionary ordinance described in Program 2A, the City will consider
providing credit for preservation of at-risk housing and for conversion of market-rate units to affordable
units when consistent with Government Code Section 65583.1 and will explore inclusion of preservation
and conversion projects in the 2021—2029 Housing Element.
'Funding: Development Services Department budget -
Responsible Agencies: Development Services Department
• City Council
Objectives: • Consider allowing developers to meet inclusionary requirements by preserving at-
risk housing units or converting market-rate units to affordable when consistent,
with the provisions of Government Code Section 65583.1.
Timeframe: November 2018 updated inclusionary housing program
• July 2019 Coastal Commission certification of Local Coastal Program Amendments
Section 1 2013-2021 Housing Element 1-33
City of Encinitas z '
TABLE 2-7 QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES(2013-2021)
Extremely Very Low Moderate Above
Low Income Income
Low Income Income Moderate TOTALS
Income
New Construction 365 366 555 413 907 2,353
Rehabilitation --- --- 40 --- --- 40
Conservation and'At-Risk' 20 --- --- --- --- 203
Section 8 57 56 --- --- --- 113
1 The City does not have anything'At-Risk'in the current planning period;however,the City will continue to monitor the status
of deed-restricted affordable housing units.Units reported account for AUP units anticipated to be legalized during the
planning period.
1-34 2013-2021 Housing Element Section 1
City of Encinitas _ .°..
Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary
Section 65583 (c) (7) of the Government Code states that, "The local government shall make diligent
effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of
the housing element, and the program shall describe this effort." A discussion of citizen participation is
provided below.
The City of Encinitas conducted an extensive public outreach process beginning in 2014 to prepare a
2013-2021 Housing Element. Outreach efforts included 45 presentations, numerous mailers and ads,
and community dialogue sessions attended by 479 persons. That effort culminated in the adoption of a
2013-2021 Housing Element by the City Council in June 2016 and its placement on the November 2016
ballot as Measure T. However,the voters did not approve Measure T.
The City immediately began an effort to adopt a revised 2013-2021 Housing Element to be submitted to
the voters in the November 2018 election. On November 16, 2016, even before the certification of the
Measure T election results on December 13, 2016,the City Council approved the formation of a Housing
Element Subcommittee to work with all groups to adopt a Housing Element. The City Council held a
special community workshop on February 1, 2017, attended by well over 100 people, to discuss
adoption of an adequate Housing Element and also held a special meeting on February 6, 2017, at which
it appointed a Housing Element Update Task Force, comprised of the Council Subcommittee and two
public members, including one supporter and one opponent of Measure T. Eleven public meetings
were held by the Task Force in 2017,two of which were joint meetings with the City Council, in addition
to regular updates to the City Council. In 2018, five joint Task Force-City Council meetings, two
community meetings, two stakeholder meetings, and public hearings at both the Planning Commission
and City Council were held. All meetings were advertised to an extensive mailing list (hard copy and
email/e-alert) and the City maintained a web site with all information submitted to the Task Force, City
Council, and Planning Commission; public comments; and correspondence with the Department of
Housing and Community Development. The meetings were attended by, among others, representatives
of the San Diego Housing Federation, Building Industry Association, affordable housing and market-rate
developers, and many community members. Refer to Appendix A for the public notice mailing list and
available public oral comments, meeting minutes, and meeting notes.
As required by Government Code Section 65585(b)(2), all written comments regarding the Housing
Element made by the public have previously been provided to each member of the City Council.
Table A-1 shows the date or anticipated date of each meeting for the housing element. Available public
oral comments, meeting minutes and meeting notes for each meeting shown in the table are provided
within Appendix A.
2013-2021 Housing Element Appendix A-1
City of Encinitas
Table A-1: Housing Element Meetings
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE(HETF) NOTES
February 13, 2017 HETF meeting
February 23, 2017 HETF meeting
March 9, 2017 HETF meeting
April 10, 2017 HETF meeting
May 4,2017 HETF meeting
August 10, 2017 HETF meeting
September 5,2017 HETF meeting
September 26, 2017 HETF meeting
October 16,2017 HETF meeting
February 28, 2018 HETF meeting
CITY COUNCIL NOTES
February 6, 2017 Special meeting
November 8,2017 Joint meeting with Task Force
December 16, 2017 Special Joint meeting with Task Force
January 10, 2018 Joint meeting with Task Force
April 4, 2018 Special Joint meeting with Task Force
April 18,2018 Joint meeting with Task Force
May 9, 2018 Joint meeting with Task Force
May 23, 2018 Joint meeting with Task Force
June 20, 2018 Public Hearing
STAKEHOLDER NOTES
February 28, 2018 Stakeholder meeting#1
April 4, 2018 Stakeholder meeting#2
WORKSHOPS/OPEN HOUSE NOTES
February 1, 2017 Special Council Meeting/Housing Element Workshop
May 10, 2018 Community Informational Open House
PLANNING COMMISSION _ NOTES
May 17,2018 Study Session/Briefing
June 7,2018 Public Hearing
A-2 2013-2021 Housing Element
City of Encinitas
GLS
A.1 Housing Element Task Force Public Comments
This section contains a summary of the available public oral comments provided during each of the
Housing Element Task Force (HETF) meetings. Opportunities for public comment were provided at the
beginning and end of each meeting.
2013-2021 Housing Element Appendix A-3
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE PUBLIC COMMENTS—FEBRUARY 13, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Beginning of meeting-
■ Community Member—Short buildings and low density.
• Bob—Supports ADU policy and recommended reading report on ADUs.
• Robin—Concern with parcels in Cardiff. Not appropriate for the plan.Traffic and building height
concerns.
• Richard—Commends the task force for their work.
• Steve—Suggests focusing on the best plan—market will decide.Also suggests hiring staff to get
ADUs built.
• Amy—presented ideas for creating ways to build affordable housing for artists.
• Ron—Suggested putting HCD rules/regulations on website to help the public understand what
HCD is looking for to approve the housing element.
End of meeting-
• Bob—consider more sites than just our shopping centers. Consider long-term study through
HCD to achieve low cost housing.
• Glen—Need feedback mechanism for public comments. Get a good expert for housing element.
Should be able to go more than 2-stories. Mixed use does not work. Preserve historic sites and
community character.
• Mark—You need a process. Establish milestones and due dates. Have structure. Concerned
about density calculations.
• Community Member—Likes the open approach to the meetings.
• Sheila—ADUs are grandfathered. Look at Oceanside bonds. Use the original General Plan, not
overlay. Downtown site should be off the table.Why start with existing sites?
• Glenn—Look at Los Gatos regulations to understand background on thoughts. We never had a
workshop on inclusionary and affordable housing,which had been discussed.
• Russ—Talked about a style of proto-type developments to consider that worked in La Jolla.
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE PUBLIC COMMENTS—FEBRUARY 23, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Beginning of meeting-
• Kathleen—Simply thanked the task force for their work.
• Bob—Provided information regarding ADUs built in the City.
• Damien—Affordable builder. He has an affordable plan for his property and wants it considered.
• Peter—Based on court case (CBA vs San Jose) consider 15% inclusionary housing ordinance.
• Community Member—Suggested affordable housing at the Encinitas Community Park.
• Community Member—Why can't we just take city property and build affordable housing.
End of meeting-
■ Ron—Wants staff to confirm the effort to notify the public of upcoming meetings.
• Bob—Wants to know how the new laws will affect the ADUs regulations.
• Sheila—No RFP until we know what we want in the plan. Wants specifics. Can we have an HCD
rep?
• C.J.—Are the meeting minutes on the website? (Staff explained meetings are recorded and
posted on the Subcommittee's webpage).
• Community Member—Suggested the buffer be doubled to gain HCD's acceptance.
• Glenn—Talked about the housing element consultant's role.
• Cardiff Resident—What is the vision as we grow? Need good planning efforts.
• Glenn—Plan needs to be confined in order to pass.
• Community Member—There needs to be educational materials on the City's homepage.
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE PUBLIC COMMENTS—MARCH 9, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Beginning of meeting-
• Bob—Consider the landfill site as an option for affordable housing.
• Damien—Presented a spreadsheet on sites and options based on land value the 30 DUA.
End of meeting-
• Glenn—Asked various questions about the consultant selection and if they will work with staff
and the task force.
• Community Member—Expressed concerns about affordable housing and that many teachers
can't afford to live in Encinitas.
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE PUBLIC COMMENTS—April 10, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Beginning of meeting-
■ None
End of meeting-
• Citizen—Parking ordinances. Required 2 for 1 bedroom currently. He ran numbers at 1.5 per
bedroom. Reanalyzing the parking
• Glenn- 15 vs. 16 Adopted the environmentally friendly map but there was no option to change
it. Should look at more than one outside site. Give Council the discretion to look at other
outside sites.
• Citizen—16 to 20 sites then add more that were on other maps?
• John Gjata—Looking at cost per square foot. Looking at it financially. Coordinate with the more
elderly population.
• Ron—Map 4 most sustainable. We need a final EIR approved.
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE PUBLIC COMMENTS—May 4, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Beginning of meeting-
■ Citizen -Hearing Encinitas anti-affordable housing in the media...but ironic because we shut
down Measure T. Suggests City should help itself in the process of setting the record straight.
More affordable housing mandated. City should be more vocal.
End of meeting-
■ Damien—Max density could be governed by height.
• Citizen—is there a range the state requires two/three bedrooms? Percentage of types of units?
• Citizen-Any example in communities of affordable units owned by the city? How is the
affordable unit in perpetuity after someone passes away?
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE PUBLIC COMMENTS—AUGUST 10, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Beginning of meeting-
• Brisbane SF—Small City by choice (Baylands Project).
• Community Member—Why sites on Coast Highway 101? Does not support.
• Kevin J. (SELC)—No upzoning near the lagoon.
End of meeting-
• Community Member—Are you tracking legislation related to housing?
• Community Member—Legal definition of"affordable"? Can underground parking be used?Any
mechanisms in place to prevent marketeering?
• Glenn—Measure T tried to change this city by making small sites larger, but the Consultant is
working with small sites and change standards. Does DB give developer opportunity to change
the size of the box?
• Glenn O.—Does HCD give credit from public participation from Measure T?Only certain dates
for elections.
• Jerry—Are we trying to get truly affordable housing, did not hear Consultant talk about that.
• Ron—Share the burden across the community and be aware of AB 72
• Community Member—Why include mixed use? Do we need it?
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE PUBLIC COMMENTS—SEPTEMBER 5, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Beginning of meeting-
■ Damien M.—Discussed his property as an option for consideration and an affordable housing
project for the site.
• Faith—Interested in adding sites west of the 1-5 off Manchester Ave.
• Richard S.—
■ Glenn J.—We need to get going on selecting the sites R25 for small and R30 for larger? Do not
include City Hall.
• Lansing—Interested in adding sites.
• Property Owner of 7-11 on Encinitas Blvd.wanted his site considered
• Community Member—The Kimley Horn analysis will not work with the development stds.
proposed. Need to look closer at what is being proposed.
End of meeting-
■ None
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE PUBLIC COMMENTS—SEPTEMBER 26, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Beginning of meeting-
• Glen J.—Get this Housing Element Plan approved
• Damien M.—Discussed his property as an option for consideration and his partnership with
Community Housing Works
• Angela—Talked about the importance of affordable housing opportunities
End of meeting-
• Louise—Does not want access from County burn site off Shields Avenue
• Kathleen L.—Does not want the Sprouts site or Ralphs site considered
• Property Owner of 7-11 on Encinitas Blvd.—Can't City build the affordable housing?
• Ron—Task Force should use an even hand for the distribution of sites in the 5 communities
• Gerald S.—Made a suggestion on a site to consider(not clear which)
• Nancy N.—Wants affordable housing on City owned vacant properties
• Community Member—Stated that we should want affordable housing
• Angela—repeated the need for affordable housing
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE PUBLIC COMMENTS—OCTOBER 16, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Beginning of meeting-
• Glen J.—Provided a comment letter(in project file) encouraging the Task Force not to get
caught up in the small details and get a plan together.
• Doug G. (SELC)—Encouraged the Task Force to consider protecting the lands around the lagoon.
• Kevin J. (SELC)—Highlighted multiple sections in the General Plan's Resource Mgmt. Element,
which encourage protection of areas around the lagoon.
• Steve H.—Does not support upzoning vacant sites near Sienna Canyon Drive.
• Nikki (Greek Orthodox Church)—Would like to have portion of the church's property included as
one of the sites for consideration.
• Damien M.—Encouraged the Task Force to support projects with true affordable housing.
• Kathleen L.—Stressed the need for affordable housing in the City.
End of meeting-
■ Glen O.—Asked that the Task Force consider the economic viability of the sites.
• Property Owner of 7-11 on Encinitas Blvd.—Had a question related to 30 units per acre.
• Kathleen L.—Requested the Task Force consider the Vons Shopping Center site.
• Glen J.—Can Density Bonus be used as an option?
• Community Member—Requested to have the sites the Task Force selects posted on the City's
website.
• Community Member—Asked if public support of the Task Force process is necessary at the City
Council meeting.
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE PUBLIC COMMENTS—FEBRUARY 28, 2018
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Beginning of meeting
• Peter Stern—This Housing Element process has been the most transparent process. Remember
that zoning is very important and that you need to work beyond selection of sites.
• Lois—Recommends keeping L-7 on the list.
• Richard—L-7 should be rezoned to R-3 and funds from project could be used for affordable
housing project near bus lines.Too much increased density proposed on Quail Gardens Drive.
Use public works site.
• Sylvia—Recommends keeping L-7 on the list.
• Glen—Should be a rational planning process. Concerned about density on Quail Gardens Drive.
• Kevin—Concerned about L-7 site.
• Encinitas Resident—Affordable housing supporter.
• Tom—City needs to have affordable housing available.
• CRC—Affordable housing advocate spoke in support of affordable housing.
• Ron—Could we use the El Camino Real Home Depot open space?
• Angela—Recommends L-7 site and supports affordable housing.
End of meeting
• Sue Reynolds—Suggested keeping L-7 on the list.
• Bob K.—Spoke on behalf of Leichtag and supported keeping the L-7 site on the list,with the
understanding that any housing intensification would include the implementation of the
recommendations of the previously prepared traffic calming plan.
• Peter Curry—Suggested considering the use of an overlay.
• Resident—Spoke of her concerns with low-income development.
City of Encinitas '
—�f
A.2 City Council Meeting Notes
This section contains the available meeting minutes and public oral comments from each of the City
Council meetings related to the Housing Element Update.
A-4 2013-2021 Housing Element
MINUTES OF THE ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
FEBRUARY 6, 2017, 6.-00 P.M., 505 SOUTH VULCANAVENUE
CALL TO ORDERIROLL CALL
Mayor Blakespear called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
Present: Mayor Catherine S. Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Tony Kranz, Council
Members Tasha Boerner Horvath, Joe Mosca and Mark Muir
Absent: None
Also present: City Manager Brust, City Attorney Sabine, Special Counsel Barbara Kautz,
Principal Planner Langager, City Clerk Hollywood and Deputy City Clerk
Bingham
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
AGENDA ITEMS
1. City Council discussion on next steps regarding the development of a legally
compliant Housing Element Update.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide direction to the Council subcommittee of
Mayor Blakespear and Deputy Mayor Kranz and staff regarding next steps for
developing a legally compliant Housing Element Update.
SPEAKERS:
Bob Bonde, Gene Chapo, Eileen Troberman, Nancy DeGhionno, Kathleen Lees,
Richard Boger, Rhonda Graves and Glen Johnson.
Special Counsel Barbara Kautz and Principal Planner Langager responded to
questions and comments from the public and Council.
COUNCIL CONSENSUS:
There was Council Consensus to direct staff to bring back the Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance and In-Lieu Fees for Council consideration.
02/06/17 Spec.Mtg. Page 1 Mtg. #2017- ,M432,Page
02/06/17 Special Meeting
SPEAKERS CONTINUED:
Bruce Ehlers, Gene Chapo, Glen Johnson, Bob Bonde, Glenn O'Grady, Kathleen
Lees, Andrew Matuszeski, Audrey, Tom Cozens and Linda Durham.
ACTION:
Blakespear moved, Boerner Horvath seconded to: 1) Convene a Housing
Element Update Task Force consisting of Mayor Blakespear, Deputy Mayor
Kranz, Bruce Ehlers and Kurt Groseclose to bring forward an alternative
proposal with flexibility to add members as needed; 2) Direct the Task Force
to prepare a time line; 3) Direct staff to place a standing agenda item on the
City Council agenda beginning with the first meeting in March; 4) Authorize
the Task Force to commission studies as necessary; and 5) Include timely
check-ins with the Planning Commission. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear,
Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None.
Mayor Blakespear asked if there was Council Consensus to tie the Strategic
Planning sessions to the budget and to schedule these sessions ahead of the
budget presentations. There was Council Consensus.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Blakespear adjourned the meeting at 8:45 P.M.
Kathy Hollywoo , Ci Cl rk Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor
By: Claudia Bingham
Deputy City Clerk
02/06/17 Spec.Mtg. Page 2 Mtg.#2017- , Bk#32,Page
MINUTES OF THE ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 8, 2017, 6:00 P.M., 505 SOUTH VULCAN AVENUE
i
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Blakespear called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Catherine S. Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Tony Kranz,
Council Members Tasha Boerner Horvath, Joe Mosca and Mark
Muir
Absent: None
Also present: City Manager Brust, City Attorney Sabine, Director of
Development Services Wisneski, City Clerk Hollywood, Principal
Planner Langager, Special Counsel Kautz, consultants Dave
Barquist and Nick Chen of Kimley Horn, consultants Mike
Singleton and John Holloway of KTUA, Special Counsel
Skinnell, consultant Doug Johnson of National Demographics
Corporation, Project Manager O'Grady, Fire Chief Stein
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order. !
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Q. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
There were no presentations or proclamations.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS / POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF `
John Hyde spoke regarding damage to the wetlands along Escondido Creek.
James McDonald spoke regarding bees.
6. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
No Closed Session meeting was held.
7. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
There were no changes to the posted agenda.
1 1/08/2017 Reg. Mtg. Page 1 Mtg.1,42017-___,B1.432,Page
1
11/08/2017 Regular Meeting
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Council Member Mosca stated that he would abstain from voting on Agenda Item
8B due to his employment with SDG&E.
Item 8H was removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the public. j
I
COUNCIL ACTION:
Kranz moved, Muir seconded to close and adopt the amended Consent
Calendar. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz,
Mosca, Muir. Nays: None. Abstain: Mosca (813).
8A. Approval of the Minutes of the October 11 2017 Regular Meeting
October 11, 2017 Special Closed Session October 18 2017 Regular
Meeting and October 30, 2017 Special Closed Session. Contact Person:
City Clerk Hollywood
Recommended Action: Approve the Minutes.
8B. Approval of the Warrants List. Contact Person: Finance Manager
Lundgren
Recommended Action: Approve the Warrants.
Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca,
Muir. Nays: None. Abstain: Mosca.
8C. Amendment 11 to the Agreement with Tyler Technologies, Inc. for the
purchase of licenses and re-configuration of existing Tyler Content
Management JCM) software to enable new functionality. Contact
Persons: IT Supervisor Van Pelt and IT Project Manager Salmon
Recommended Action: Approve Amendment 11, in substantial form, in
consultation with the City Attorney, and authorize the City Manager to
enter into the amended agreement with Tyler Technologies, Inc. for
software licenses and professional services not to exceed $39,250 and
annual software maintenance fees in the amount of $7,290 beginning in
FY 18-19.
8D. Caltrans Adopt-A-Highway northbound Interstate 5 on/off ramps at
Birmingham Drive. Contact Person: Interim Public Works Director Lamb
Recommended Action: Recommend that the City of Encinitas apply to
enter into an agreement with Caltrans for adoption of the northbound
Interstate 5 on/off ramps for litter removal.
11/08/2017 Rea. Mta. Page 2 Mtg.#2017- ,Bk#32,Page
11/0812017 Regular Meeting
*8E. Public Hearing - Request to vacate/abandon an existing biological open
space easement historically consisting of Diegan coastal sage scrub and
non-native grassland. Contact Person: City Planner Sapa'u
Recommended Action: Adopt attached Resolution No. 2017-76
(Attachment CC-1) approving the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration
(Attachment CC-3) for the project, certifying the abandonment fee of
$87,500 the landowner must pay to the County Treasurer, and approving
the request to abandon the existing biological open space easement.
There were no public speakers on this item.
8F. Contract Amendment for Construction Inspection Services. Contact
Person: City Engineer Magdosku
Recommended Action: Authorize the Director of Development Services,
or the Director's designee, in consultation with the City Attorney, to
execute an amendment to an existing agreement with Geopacifica in the
amount of $35,380 plus 15% contingencies, for a total contract amount not
to exceed $220,687. f
8G. Easement Agreement for Use of Rail Right-of-Way and Memorandum of
Understanding for Construction of the Cardiff Coastal Rail Trail
Improvements. Contact Person: Associate Civil Engineer Kellar
Recommended Action: 1) Authorize the City Manager, in consultation
with the City Attorney, to execute the Easement Agreement with North
County Transit District (NCTD) (in substantial form as provided in
Attachment 1) for construction and maintenance of improvements in the
rail right-of-way; and 2) Authorize the City Manager, in consultation with
the City Attorney, to execute the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
with San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) (in substantial
form as provided in Attachment 2) to facilitate the construction of the
Cardiff Coastal Rail Trail improvements by SANDAG and ultimate
maintenance of the improvements by the City.
9. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
8H. Mobility Project Update - Capital Improvement and Traffic
Engineering Divisions. Contact Person: City Engineer Magdosku
Recommended Action: 1) Receive report on the status of Capital
Improvement and Traffic Engineering projects; and 2) Receive report on
the status of the effort to develop a publicly available GIS map of active
projects.
11/08/2017 Reg.Mtg. Page 3 Mtg.92017- Bk,1132,Page
I 1/08/2017 Regular Meeting
Michael von Neumann expressed appreciation to the City for its efforts to
improve bike and pedestrian safety.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Blakespear moved, Boerner Horvath seconded to: 1) Receive report
on the status of Capital Improvement and Traffic Engineering
projects; and 2) Receive report on the status of the effort to develop
a publicly available GIS map of active projects. Motion carried. Ayes:
Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None.
Abstain: None.
10. ACTION ITEMS
10A. Housing Element Task Force/City Council discussion regarding the
Housing Plan Update and associated analysis to achieve a State-certified
Housing Element. Contact Person: Principal Planner Langager
Recommended Action: Staff and the Housing Element Task Force
(HETF) recommend that the Council: 1) Provide comments on the sites
proposed for inclusion as part of the Housing Element Update and give
direction to the HETF regarding their scope of work; and 2) Request that
Kimley-Horn prepare a revised scope of work regarding the tasks required
to complete the Housing Element update, and direct staff to return with a
new contract or contract amendment, for Council review and approval, for
completion of a draft Housing Element.
Principal Planner Langager; Housing Element Task Force Members
Mayor Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Kranz, Bruce Ehlers and Kurt
Groseclose; Special Counsel Barbara Kautz; and consultants Dave
Barquist and Nick Chen from Kimley-Horn provided the report and
responded to questions.
SPEAKERS:
James Kozak, Glen Johnson, Bob Bonde, Bob Echter, Daron Joffe, Lee
Vance, David Gaffney and Randy Goodson
COUNCIL ACTION:
Council consensus to request that Kimley-Horn prepare a revised
scope of work regarding the tasks required to complete the Housing
Element update, and direct staff to return with a new contract or
contract amendment, for Council review and approval, for
completion of a draft Housing Element.
Council consensus to authorize the Housing Element Task Force to
meet with HCD.
11/08/2017 Reg. Mt_. Page 4 Mtg. #2017- ,Bk#32,Page
11/08/2017 Regular Meetinc,
Council consensus to direct the consultant to prepare and provide
more realistic numbers regarding sites and site constraints.
Council consensus to schedule an additional City Council meeting
with the task force to receive and discuss additional information.
Mayor Blakespear called a recess from 8:43 p.m. to 8:56 p.m.
10B. Presentation, review, discussion and direction on the first draft of the
Coastal Mobility & Livability Study (CMLS) related to the Active
Transportation Plan (ATP). Contact Person: Principal Planner Langager
Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the Council: 1) Receive
the report and provide input on the first draft of the CMLS specific to the
ATP; and 2) Provide staff direction, as desired.
Principal Planner Langager and consultants Mike Singleton and John
Holloway from KTUA provided the report and responded to questions.
SPEAKERS:
Marty Benson, Kellie Shay Hinze, Julie Hinze, Judy Berlfein, Elena
Thompson
COUNCIL ACTION:
Council received the report and provided input on the first draft of
the CMLS specific to the ATP.
10C. District-Based Elections / Content of Draft Maps, Sequence of Elections —
Receive input from the community and introduce an ordinance to adopt a
district boundary maps and sequence of elections pursuant to Elections
Code $ 10010. Contact Person: Project Manager O'Grady and Special
Counsel Skinnell
Recommended Action: 1) Receive a report from National Demographics
Corporation, the City's demographic consultant, concerning the maps
proposed to date and potential election sequencing for a district-based
election process pursuant to Elections Code § 10010; 2) Open the public
hearing and invite members of the public to provide feedback on the draft
maps and potential election sequencing presented; 3) Close the public
hearing and select a preferred map and set the sequence of elections; and
4) Introduce Ordinance 2017-15, entitled "An Ordinance of the City of
Encinitas, California, Establishing a By-District Election Process in Four
Council Districts Pursuant to California Elections Code § 10010 &
California Government Code §§ 34871(C) & 34886," incorporating the
adopted map and sequence of elections.
11/08/2017 Reg.141tg. Pa-e.)- Mtg.#2017- , Bk432,Pabe
11/080-017 Regular Meeting
Project Manager O'Grady, Special Counsel Skinnell and consultant Doug
Johnson from National Demographics Corporation provided the agenda
report and responded to questions.
SPEAKERS:
Kevin Dolan, Kevin Doyle, Kathleen Lees
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mosca moved, Blakespear seconded to close the public hearing and
introduce Ordinance 2017-15, entitled "An Ordinance of the City of
Encinitas, California, Establishing a By-District Election Process in
Four Council Districts Pursuant to California Elections Code § 10010
& California Government Code §§ 34871(C) & 34886," incorporating
Citizen 016 map and the sequence of elections - Districts 3 & 4 in
2018 and Districts 1 & 2 in 2020. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear,
Boerner Horvath, Mosca. Nays: Kranz, Muir.
10D. Reduce Fire Department Response Times in the North Leucadia/Saxony
Canyon area by adding a Peak Hour Fast Response Vehicle (Type-6
Engine). Contact Person: Fire Chief Stein
Recommended Action: City Council authorize the City Manager and
Fire Chief to establish a pilot program for a peak hour Fast Response
Vehicle (FRV) program in the North Leucadia/Saxony Canyon area.
This item was continued to a future City Council meeting.
10E. Mariivana-Related Activities and Uses—Consideration and Possible
Adoption of a Draft Ordinance Prohibiting the Same to the Extent
Authorized by California Law. Contact Person: City Attorney Sabine
I
Recommended Action: Take action to introduce draft Ordinance No.
2017-16 entitled, "An Ordinance of the City Council Adding Chapter 9.21
to the Encinitas Municipal Code to Prohibit Commercial and Personal
Marijuana Related Activities and Uses to the Extent Authorized by
California Law, and thereby, Prevent and Invalidate any State License or
Authorization Regarding the Same."
City Attorney Sabine provided the agenda report and responded to
questions.
SPEAKERS:
Randall Sims spoke.
Kelly McCormick and Judi Strang spoke in support of the ordinance.
Jeff Taylor and Sam Humeid spoke in opposition to the ordinance.
11/08/2017 Reg.Mtg. Page 6 Mtg.#2017- .Bk#32,Page j
11/08/2017 Regular Meeting
COUNCIL ACTION:
Muir moved, Mosca seconded to introduce Ordinance No. 2017-16
entitled, "An Ordinance of the City Council Adding Chapter 9.21 to
the Encinitas Municipal Code to Prohibit Commercial and Personal
Marijuana Related Activities and Uses to the Extent Authorized by
California Law, and thereby, Prevent and Invalidate any State License
or Authorization Regarding the Same." Motion carried. Ayes:
Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None.
Abstain: None.
11. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
11A. Housing Element Update Status Report. Contact Person: Council
Subcommittee Members Blakespear and Kranz
This item was discussed as part of Agenda Item 10A.
12. COUNCIL MEMBER INITIATED AGENDA ITEM
There were no Council Member Initiated items.
13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADDED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS
No future agenda items were added.
14. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS PURSUANT TO AB1234 (GC
53232.3(d)) / POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF
No reports were given.
15. CITY MANAGER REPORTS / PENDING POSSIBLE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
No report was given.
1 16. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
No report was given.
17. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Blakespear adjourned the meeting at 11:32 P.M.
t:5)"OkAj- C
Kathy Hollywood, City Clerk Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor
I
11/08/2017 Reg.Mtg. Page 7 Mtg.#2017- Bk#32,Page
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE/CITY COUNCIL MEETING
PUBLIC COMMENTS—NOVEMBER 8, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
• James C. (Lansing Companies) requested to include the 10.4 acre site off Manchester and
Encinitas Blvd.—the site is shown in the Council Agenda Report on page 35 (Attachment 3)of
the report.
• Glen Johnson expressed that a reasonable compromise has been proposed and full disclosure of
sites considered.
• Bob Bonde emphasized the reliance of the ADU program to meet our housing needs as well as
counting all existing assisted living units in the City.
• Darin Joffe stated he was an agrihood expert and advocate of Bob E. project.
• Lee Vance suggested keeping all 16 sites that were in Measure T.We need affordable housing
for seniors.
• David Gaffney recommended keeping Randy Goodson's site as part of the Housing Element.
MINUTES OF THE ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
DECEMBER 16, 2017, 8:30 A.M., ENCINITAS COMMUNITY CENTER,
9 940 OAKCREST PARK DRIVE
CALL TO ORDERIROLL CALL
Mayor Blakespear called the meeting to order at 8:33 A.M.
Present: City Council: Mayor Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Kranz, Council Members
Boerner Horvath, Mosca, and Muir
Housing Element Task Force: Mayor Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Kranz,
Bruce Ehlers, and Kurt Groseclose
Absent: None
Also present: City Manager Brust, City Attorney Sabine, City Clerk Hollywood, Director of
Development Services Wisneski, City Planner Sapa'u, Principal Planner
Langager, Special Counsel Barbara Kautz, and consultants Dave Barquist
and Nick Chen of Kimley Horn.
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order.
AGENDA ITEM
1. Housing Element Task Force/City Council continued discussion regarding the
Housing Plan Update and associated analysis to achieve a State-certified
Housing Element. Contact Person: Principal Planner Langager
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff and the Housing Element Task Force
(HETF) recommend that the Council: 1) Discuss and provide comments on the
sites proposed for inclusion as part of the Housing Element Update and give
direction to the HETF regarding their work efforts; and 2) Direct staff to return
with a new contract or contract amendment with Kimley-Horn, and a budget
adjustment for Council review and approval for completion of the a draft Housing
Element.
SPEAKERS:
• Richard Boger, Jim Gillie, Kathleen Gillie, spoke in opposition to the city-
owned Quail Gardens site (L-7).
• Glen Johnson spoke regarding sites on Quail Gardens Drive and in
opposition to the city-owned site (L-7).
• Helmut Kiffman spoke about process and community engagement.
12/16/17 Spec.Mtg. Page 1 Mtg.#2017- Bk#32,Page
12/16/17 Special Meeting
• Damien Mavis spoke in support of including the Cannon Family/Piraeus
site plus adding two additional parcels.
• Ruben Flores spoke regarding equal distribution of housing throughout
the five communities of Encinitas.
• Alicia Bazzano, Bob Echter, and Jackie Kim spoke regarding the Echter
property.
• Peter Stern spoke regarding the need for housing and preserving
community character.
• Mike Andreen spoke regarding the dump site.
• Dennis Cook spoke regarding the burn site and dump site.
• Sheila Cameron spoke regarding the Sunshine Gardens site and the
dump site.
Special Counsel Kautz provided a summary of the meeting with HCD and
reviewed changes to State Housing Law that will impact and govern the City's
Housing Element.
Housing Element Task Force Members Blakespear, Kranz, Ehlers, and
Groseclose provided a summary of their meeting with HCD.
Sue Reynolds of Community Housing Works provided a presentation on
affordable housing.
Mayor Blakespear called a recess from 10:30 a.m. to 10:40 a.m.
The City Council and Housing Element Task Force reviewed the list of properties
and determined which properties would move forward with further analysis and
consideration and which properties would be removed from further analysis and
consideration.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Council and Task Force consensus to move forward the following
properties for further analysis and consideration:
Cardiff by the Sea:
• Manchester Avenue Sites
• Greek Church Site
• Strawberry Fields Site
12/16/17 Spec.Mtg. Page 2 Mtg.42017-_____,Bk 432,Page
12/16/17 Special Meeting
Leucadia:
• Cannon Property (Piraeus) Site
• Highway 101 Sites
New Encinitas:
• Armstrong Site
Old Encinitas:
• Encinitas Boulevard & Quail Gardens Sites
• Sunshine Gardens Sites
Olivenhain•
• 7-11 Center and Surrounding Sites
• Rancho Santa Fe Sites (Gaffney/Goodson)
COUNCIL ACTION:
Council and Task Force consensus to remove the following properties
from further analysis and consideration:
Leucadia•
• Echter Property
• L-7 Site
• Additional Cannon parcels (property owner presented at the
meeting)
New Encinitas:
• County Burn Site
Olivenhain:
• Coassin/Lansing Site
• 103 Rancho Santa Fe Site (letter received and staff presented at the
meeting)
COUNCIL ACTION:
Direction to staff to: 1) schedule a meeting in January to bring back the
sites identified for further analysis and consideration; and 2) suggestions
for vacant or developed land citywide that have owner interest with
emphasis on New Encinitas and bring back for City Council/Task Force
review.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Blakespear a 'ourned the meeting at 12:40 P.M.
Kathy Hollywood, ity Clerk Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor
12/16/17 Spec.Mtg. Page 3 Mtg.#20]7- , Bk#32, Page
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE/CITY COUNCIL MEETING
PUBLIC COMMENTS—DECEMBER 16, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
• Richard—Spoke about L-7 site. Concerned with traffic and other impacts to the neighborhood.
• Jim—Resident of Quail Gardens Drive. Spoke about L-7 site and the need for Council to be
responsible with their decision.
• Kathleen—Upset with all the different uses that have been proposed for the L-7 site.
• Glen J-Stated that L-7 and Ecther properties are not appropriate sites. Consider Sunshine
Gardens site and sites across from CVS.
• Helmet—Resident. Focus on accessory dwelling units and greenhouse sites.
• Damien M—Suggested the Council add sites for Cannon property owner.
• Ruben F—Sites should be distributed evenly across all communities.
• Peter S—Anyone who has a site proposed near them will be a "NIMBY". Santa Fe Plaza must be
removed because it was mandated by the State.
• Bob E—Explained that his proposed agrihood would not build more than 250 units.
• Fox Point Resident—Supports the agrihood concept with conditions related to the surrounding
neighborhood.
• Mike A—Expressed concern about the County burn site.
• Dennis C—Explained that BMW and Ford need the space leased at the County burn site.
• Sheila C—Look at other sites,tax credits,change NCTD routes if needed. She further went on to
comment on all the other sites being considered.
• Sue R—Community Housing Works. Provided a presentation on the importance of affordable
housing.
MINUTES OF THE ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 10, 2098, 6:00 P.M., 505 SOUTH VULCAN AVENUE
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Blakespear called the meeting to order at 6:10 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Catherine S. Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Joe Mosca,
Council Members Tasha Boerner Horvath, Tony Kranz and Mark
Muir
Absent: None
Also present:City Manager Brust, City Attorney Sabine, Development Services
Director Wisneski, Principal Planner Langager, City Engineer
Magdosku, Special Counsel Kautz, Dave Barquist with
Kimley/Horn, City Clerk Hollywood and Deputy City Clerk
Bingham
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
There were no presentations or proclamations.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS / POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF
Susan Hagen spoke regarding Starlight Drive.
Leslie Schneider and Judi Strang spoke regarding the Rohrabacher/Leahy
amendment.
There was Council consensus to direct Senior Management Analyst McSeveney
to prepare a report on the Rohrbacher/Leahy amendment for Council
consideration.
Glen Johnson spoke regarding the Pledge of Allegiance.
01/10/18 Reg. Mtg. Page I Mtg.#32018- , BK#34, Page
01/10/18 Regular Meeting
6. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Blakespear reported the following from the 4:30 P.M. Closed Session
meeting:
Regarding Agenda Item 1, on a 3-2 vote (Kranz, Muir voted no), Council authorized
payment of fees to Shenkman & Hughes.
Regarding Agenda Item 2, there was Council consensus to direct staff to meet with
the residents of Starlight Drive.
Regarding Agenda Items 3, 4 & 5 there was no reportable action and reported that
the February 8th court hearing regarding these items had been rescheduled to April
30th.
Regarding Agenda Item 6, there was Council consensus to continue negotiations.
7. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
There were no changes to the posted agenda.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
City Clerk Hollywood announced that Agenda Item 8D was removed from the
Consent Calendar by members of the public and Deputy Mayor Mosca
announced that he would abstain from voting on Agenda Item 8B due to his
employment with SDG&E.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Muir moved, Boerner Horvath seconded to close and adopt the amended
Consent Calendar. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath,
Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None. Abstain: Mosca (813).
8A. Approval of the Minutes of the December 16, 2017 Special Meeting and
December 20 2017 Regular Meeting. Contact Person: City Clerk
Hollywood
Recommended Action: Approve the Minutes.
8B. Approval of the Warrants List. Contact Person: Finance Manager
Lundgren
Recommended Action: Approve the Warrants.
Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Muir.
Nays: None. Abstain: Mosca.
01/10/18 Reg. Mtg. Page 2 Mtg. #2018- ,BK#34,Page
01/10/18 Regular Meeting
8C. Proposals for Public Art. Contact Person: Arts Program Administrator
Gilliam
Recommended Action: That the City Council approve: 1) Three (3)
proposals for public art to be donated to the City and added to the
Encinitas Public Art Collection; and 2) One (1) proposal for a sculpture
pedestal to be donated to the City, and the loan of a sculpture by artist
Jeffrey Laudenslager for one (1) year.
8E. Adoption of Resolution 2018-06 approving an off-cycle budget
appropriation of $546,027 to provide additional funding to the Housing
Plan Update protect budget, and authorization for the City Manager to sign
contract Amendment #1 with Kimley-Horn for additional costs and a
revised scope of work to complete the Housing Plan Update. Contact
Person: Principal Planner Langager
Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the Council: 1) Adopt
Resolution 2018-06 approving an off-cycle budget appropriation of
$546,027 to the Housing Plan Update (VVC14B) project budget; and 2)
Authorize the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, to sign
contract amendment #1 (in substantial form) with Kimley-Horn for
additional costs and a revised scope of work for the completion of the
Housing Plan Update.
9. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
8D. Mobility Project Update - Capital Improvement and Traffic Engineering
Divisions. Contact Person: City Engineer Magdosku
Recommended Action: Receive the report on the status of Capital
Improvement and Traffic Engineering projects.
City Engineer Magdosku presented the staff report.
SPEAKERS:
Kellie Hinze, Elena Thompson, Peter Curry and Marty Benson spoke in
support of the recommended action.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mosca moved, Muir seconded to receive the report on the status of
Capital Improvement and Traffic Engineering projects. Motion
carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir.
Nays: None.
01/10/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 3 Mtg. B2018-____,BK#34,Page
01/10/18 Regular Meeting
10. ACTION ITEMS
10A. Resolution 2018-12 Establishing a No Parking Zone on Seeman Drive
between the Hours of 10 PM and 6 AM. Contact Person: City Engineer
Magdosku
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution 2018-12, entitled "Establishing
a No Parking Zone on Seeman Drive between the Hours of 10 PM and 6
AM, daily."
City Engineer Magdosku presented the staff report.
SPEAKERS:
Joe Weber, Larry Saker, Russ Wilson and Marty Benson spoke in support
of the recommended action.
Lee Vance was in support of the. recommended action, but chose not to
speak.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Muir moved, Mosca seconded to adopt Resolution 2018-12, entitled
Establishing a No Parking Zone on Seeman Drive between the Hours
of 12:00 A.M and 6:00 a.m. daily, and to direct staff to work with the
community regarding fire lanes. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear,
Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None.
10B. Housing Element Task Force (HETF)/City Council continued discussion
regarding the Housing Plan Update and associated analysis to achieve a
State-certified Housing Element. Contact Person: Principal Planner
Langager
Recommended Action: Discuss and finalize the sites proposed for
inclusion as part of the Housing Element Update and give direction to the
HETF regarding their work efforts.
Consultants Dave Barquist and Nick Chen with Kimley/Horn presented the
report.
Special Counsel Kautz reviewed changes to State Housing Law that
would impact the City's Housing Element.
SPEAKERS:
Glenn Johnson spoke regarding El Camino Real sites.
Nicki Cometa requested Council to consider adding the Greek Church
site.
01/10/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 4 Mtg. #2018- ,BK#34, Page
01/10/18 Regular Meeting
Austin Delana, Bob Echter, Carris Rhodes, Tashi MacMiilen, Melina
Domingues and Brian Grover spoke in support of including the
Dram/Echter (Fox Point Farms) site.
Sue Reynolds, Doug Gibson and Damien Mavis spoke in support of
including the L-7 property.
Susan Turney spoke.
Robert Dyer and Stephen Lord spoke in support of including the Rancho
Santa Fe (Gaffney/Goodsen) site.
Barry Pedler, Angelica Pedler, Christine Hawes and Jackie Kim spoke in
opposition to the Dram/Echter property.
Greg Lansing spoke in support of including the Coassin/Lansing site.
Sheila Cameron spoke in opposition to the recommended action.
Mayor Blakespear called a recess from 8:51 P.M. to 9:04 P.M.
Council, along with Housing Element Task Force Members Bruce Ehlers
and Kurt Groseclose, reviewed the list of properties to determine which
properties would move forward with further analysis and consideration,
and which properties would be removed from further consideration.
COUNCIL CONSENSUS:
There was Council Consensus to use the density of 25-30 units per
acre for planning purposes.
COUNCIL CONSENSUS:
There was Council Consensus to move forward with the following
properties for further analysis and consideration:
Swartz Property
Armstrong Nursery 11 Site
Credit Union Site
El Camino Real South Sites
Village Square Drive Parcels
Jackel Property
Harrison Site
Greek Church Site
Strawberry Fields Site
Cannon Property (Piraeus Site)
Armstrong Site
01/10/18 Reg. Mtg. Page 5 Mtg.#2018- ,BK#34,Page
01/10/18 Regular Meeting
Encinitas Blvd & Quail Gardens Site
Sunshine Gardens Site
7-11 Center and Surrounding Sites
Rancho Santa Fe Sites (Gaffney/Goodson)
Echter Property
L-7 site
11. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
There were no informational items.
12. COUNCIL MEMBER INITIATED AGENDA ITEM
There were no Council Member initiated items.
13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADDED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS
No future agenda items were added.
14. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS PURSUANT TO AB1234 (GC
53232.3(d)) / POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF
No reports were given.
15. CITY MANAGER REPORTS / PENDING POSSIBLE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
No reports were given.
16. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
No reports were given.
17. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Blakespear adjourned the meeting at 10:47 P.M.
Kathy Hollywood Ci Clerk Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor
By: Claudia Bingham
Deputy City Clerk
01/10118 Reg. Mtg. Page 6 Mtg. 42018- ,13K #34,Page
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE/CITY COUNCIL MEETING
PUBLIC COMMENTS—JANUARY 10, 2018
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
• Glenn J.—Does not support sites on El Camino Real. Concern with loss of commercial amenities.
• Nikki C.—Requested Council keep the Greek Church site as a Housing Element site.
• Austin D.—Explained a number of reasons to support the Fox Point agri-hood site.
• Damien M.—Proposed use of L-7 site, has funding and Community Housing Works on board.
• Doug G.—Supports Damien M. proposal,which includes easement over Damien's site on Manchester Ave.
• Sue(Community Housing Works)—Explained the benefit of a project at L-7 site.
• Susan T.—Asked for an explanation for why 1600 units was being considered.
• Robert D.—Peppertree Ln. resident concerned with proposed sites above the 7-11 sites.Too much density.
• Barry—Wants to ensure if Bob E. site is selected, no cannabis cultivation would be permitted.
• Bob E.—Recommended his site and project be included in the Housing Element.
• Steven—Olivenhain resident that does not support the proposed density in Olivenhain.
• Greg Lansing—Requested his clients site be reconsidered for inclusion in the Housing Element.
• Carris R.—Stated reasons for supporting the Fox Point site as Housing Element site.
• Tosh—Supporter of the Fox Point site.
• Sandra H.—No show to speak.
• Molina—Supporter of the Fox Point site.
• Brian G.—Explained the rationale and support for the Fox Point site. Stated it meets HCD requirements.
• Shelia C.—Support Fox Point site and suggested all long lease sites should be off the table.
• Angelica—Does not support Fox Point site. Concerned about impacts and cannabis
• Christina—Not in support of Fox Point site.
• Jackie—Asked what is perpetuity? No access to Sidona for Fox Point agri-hood project.
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE
ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL AND HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE
APRIL 4, 2018, 6:00 P.M., 505 S. VULCAN AVENUE, ENCINITAS DRIVE
CALL TO ORDERIROLL CALL
Mayor Blakespear called the meeting to order at 6:05 P.M.
Present: City Council: Mayor Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Kranz, Council Members
Boerner Horvath, Mosca, and Muir
Housing Element Task Force: Mayor Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Kranz,
Bruce Ehlers, and Kurt Groseclose
Absent: None
Also present: City Manager Brust, City Attorney Sabine, City Clerk Hollywood, Director of
Development Services Wisneski, Principal Planner Langager, Special
Counsel Barbara Kautz, and consultants Dave Barquist and Nick Chen of
Kimley Horn. '
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order.
AGENDA ITEM
1. Presentation by Stephen Russell, Executive Director, San Diego Housing
Federation on Affordable Housing in the San Diego Region.
SPEAKER:
Susan Turney expressed concerns regarding a stakeholder meeting that was held
on February 28, 2018.
2. Housing Element Task Force (HETF)/City Council continued discussion regarding
the Housing Plan Update and associated analysis to achieve a State-certified
Housing Element. Contact Person: Principal Planner Langager
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review, discuss and finalize the goals, policies,
programs and sites to be included in the draft Housing .Element Update and
authorize submittal of the draft Housing Element to California Department of
Housing and Community Development.
Principal Planner Langager and Consultant Barquist presented the staff report
and responded to questions.
SPEAKERS:
The following individuals spoke in opposition to site 031-7 Site on Quail Gardens
Drive being included as a candidate site: Jack Charney, Richard Boger, Bill
04/04/18 Spec.Mtg. Page 1 Mtg.#2018-_____,Bk#32,Page
04/04/18 Special Meeting
Hartsock, Robert Sterling, Jean Marie Cinotto, Surin Mitruka, Kay Dempsey,
Adam Fiori, Sharelle Fiori, Jeanne Saier, Alec Weinstein, Kevin Gaddy, Jim Gille,
Kathleen Gille, Jonathan D'Augusta, Hugh Christensen, Bob Hall, Pat Davis,
Glen Johnson, Tricia Majors, Joan Wapner, Justin Hagert, Reid Matthews,
Steven Amster, Leslie Smith, Carol McIver, Cheryl Konn and Summer Boger.
Pam Ferris spoke in support of senior and affordable housing.
Mayor Blakespear called a recess form 8:07 p.m. to 8:17 p.m.
SPEAKERS (continued):
The following individuals spoke in opposition to site 031-7 Site on Quail Gardens
Drive being included as a candidate site: Glen Johnson, Tricia Majors, Joan
Wapner, Justin Hagert, Reid Matthews, Steven Amster, Leslie Smith, Carol
McIver, Cheryl Konn, Summer Boger
Kathleen Lindemann spoke in opposition to the selling of City land.
Lois Sunrich and Rebecca Palmer spoke in support of affordable housing.
Steven Gerken spoke in opposition to the inclusion of the AD2:Baldwin & Sons
property as a candidate site.
Mark Faulkner spoke regarding site 10:Strawberry Fields.
Keith Pittsford, representing Seacoast Church, spoke regarding adding 1050
Regal Road to the list of candidate sites.
Patricia Sinay and Damien Mavis spoke in support of keeping site 031-7 on the
list of candidate sites.
The following individuals spoke in support of Fox Point Farms: Sander Harth,
Tashi MacMillen and Brian Grover.
Charlene Seidle spoke in support of keeping site 031-7 on the list of candidate
sites with the implementation of the E3 Cluster Traffic Calming Plan.
The following individuals spoke in support of affordable housing: Sue Reynolds,
Patty Stottlemyer.
Paula MacKintosh spoke regarding traffic on Quail Gardens Drive.
Ronald Ridenour spoke regarding placing affordable units near transit.
The City Council and Housing Element Task Force reviewed the prioritization
table of candidate sites focusing on the strong and medium candidates as shown
on page 51 of the agenda report.
04/04/18 Spec.Mtg. Page 2 Mtg.#2018-___,Bk#32,Page
04/04/18 Special Meeting
COUNCIL ACTION:
Kranz moved to not include 031-7 Site during this planning cycle, upzone the
site to R-3 and pursue a land swap. Motion failed due to lack of a second.
Muir moved, Kranz seconded to remove 031-7 Site from the list of candidate
sites. Motion failed. Ayes: Kranz, Muir; Nays: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath,
Mosca. Absent: None.
Muir moved to remove 09:Echter Property from the candidate sites list. Motion
failed for lack of a second.
There was City Council consensus to remove 16:Harrison Properties from
the candidate sites list as requested by the property owner.
For those sites not discussed above, there was City Council consensus to
approve the sites listed as strong and medium candidates as shown on
page 51 of the agenda report.
Based on Council action above, the following sites will be included in the draft
Housing Element Update:
Strong Candidates
• 01: Greek Church Parcel
• 02: Cannon Property (Piraeus)
• 03: L-7 Site 190 Vacant
• 05: Encinitas Blvd & Quail Gardens Parcels
07: Jackel Properties
• AD1: Sage Canyon
• AD2: Baldwin & Sons
• 08: Rancho Santa Fe Parcels (Gaffney/Goodsen)
• 09: Echter Property
• 11: El Camino Real South Parcel
• 12: Sunshine Gardens Parcels
AD7: Dewitt Property
Medium Candidates
• 10: Strawberry Fields 246 Vacant
• 06B: Armstrong Parcel (Armstrong Nursery Site)
AD6: Michael's/Big Lots 163 Non-vacant
• AD8 Vulcan & La Costa
There was City Council consensus to direct staff to research the Seacoast
Church proposal.
There was City Council consensus for a future agenda item to discuss
policies regarding assisted living facilities in the City.
04104118 Spec.Mtg. Page 3 Mtg.#2018-____,W32,Page
04/04/18 Special Meeting
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Blakespear adjourned the meeting at 11:25 P.M. in honor of Martin Luther King
Jr. who was assassinated on this day 50 years ago.
-Y�a�Aal A V/"�- J,?.--�
Kathy Hollywood, City Clerk Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor
04/04/18 Spec.Mtg. Page 4 Mtg.#2018-___,Bk#32,Page
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL/ HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE MEETING—APRIL 4, 2018
Public Comments:
Susan T—Not happy that a Stakeholder meeting was held on February 28th and was not public.
Glenn—Stated that when he sat in on the Stakeholder meeting, something seemed funny.
Jack—Concerned about L-7 site and potential traffic impacts.
Richard —Representing 519 community members in Quail Gardens area. Concerned about all the sites
proposed along Quail Gardens area.
Bill —Concern with L-7. Look at Strawberry Fields. Changing from one type of litigation to another. Remove L-7.
Rob—Concern with L-7 as a site.
Community Member—L-7 is not a suitable site. It's not close to transit or other amenities.
Community Member—L-7 is not a smart way to achieve affordable housing.
Kay—Concerned that her life will be affected. Traffic. No on L-7.
Adam—Explained all the issues along Quail Gardens Drive. No on L-7 and remove from map.
Sherill—Presented video on surrounding area of L-7 site.
Jean—Longtime resident of Quail Gardens. Concern about L-7 site.
Alec—Talked about the negative change that high density could do to Quail Gardens area.
Kevin —L-7 is not appropriate for the type of traffic that would occur from 198 units.
Jim—Lives adjacent to L-7. Provided graphic to Council showing the number of units per community area. How
is that fair?
Wife of Jim—Adjacent to L-7. Wants City to sell L-7 and build affordable somewhere else.
Pam—Seacrest Village. Advocating for seniors and consider for affordable housing.
John—Concerned about safety on Quail Gardens Drive and crossing street.
Hugh —Favors affordable housing; however, placing all on QGD is a big impact. Traffic impacts are high
already.
Bob—Supports all points that have been made. Concerned with distance to services.
Pat—L-7 is a bad fit for affordable housing.
Glen—L-7 was rejected by the EIR. We do need affordable, but plan is short-sighted. Consider mixed use.
Kathleen—Don't sell city owned land. Add Vons shopping center and the burn site. City and County can work
to make it happen this cycle.
Trisha—Thanked Council for their work. But must make smart decisions around smart growth.
QGD is not appropriate as well as L-7.
Joan—Provided an example of a good affordable housing project. Must provide transit close by.
Shared the book of joy. Not have L-7.
Justin—Understands the concerns. Wants to be able to safely walk to parks. Concerned with traffic.
Reed—L-7 is a poor choice and there are better solutions.
Lois—Introduced the audience to people who cannot afford to live in Encinitas. Need diversity and should
keep L-7 on the list.
Rebecca—Demystify who needs affordable housing. Does not need to be all or nothing. Balance.
Community Member—Disturbed by what he sees. Discussed Baldwin site and said many reasons why not
good. We need more service too and will need to retain them. Why 50%of traffic on QGD?
Mark—Greystar—wants Strawberry Fields removed from the map. Building a senior housing project.
Steve—Traffic on QGD and Encinitas Blvd is very bad.
Keith—Seacoast Community Church would like to help support affordable housing on a site on Regal Road.
Leslie—Need to look at infrastructure. L-7 would bring too many cars. Cars speeding. Not appropriate site on
this street.
Carol—Report on affordable housing—place in low income areas. Over-polluting our one street.
Patricia—Provided a definition for what affordable housing can be. Should be throughout the City. Legally, we
need to do this now. L-7 is a winner.
Sander—Supports Foxpoint Farm project.
Charleen—Leichtag supports L-7.Traffic and safety is a concern. Consider their traffic plan as part of L-7 as a
site.
Community Member—Supports Foxpoint Farms.
Sue—Community Housing Works—Explained the importance of affordable housing.
Ron —Traffic concerns in Quail Gardens area. Think about the character that we want.
Development should have been along El Camino Real.
Cheryl—Does not think 190 units are possible. Fire hazards?
Patty—L-7 supporter. How about half the number of units?
Damien—Proposing affordable housing project on L-7.
Community Member—Need to understand the traffic concerns on QGD.
Brian —Rep for Foxpoint Farms,justified the project and site location.
Community Member—L-7 needs to be addressed.Traffic is bad on QGD, but if you put in the right
transportation, it can be done.
MINUTES OF THE ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 18, 2018, 6:00 P.M., 505 SOUTH VULCAN AVENUE
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Blakespear called the meeting to order at 6:06 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Catherine S. Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Joe Mosca,
Council.Members Tasha Boerner Horvath, Tony Kranz and Mark
Muir
Absent: None
Also present:City Manager Brust, City Attorney Sabine, Development Services
Director Wisneski, Associate Planner Plagemann, Management
Analyst Ruess, City Engineer Magdosku, Parks and Recreation
Director Campbell, Public Works Director Quiram, Principal
Planner Langager, Housing Element Task Force Members Bruce
Ehlers and Kurk Groseclose, Deputy City Clerk Bingham and
Records Coordinator Columbo
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
4A. Presentation of Proclamation to the Community Resource Center
Mayor Blakespear presented a Proclamation to members of the
Community Resource Center.
4B. Arbor Day Proclamation to be presented to Department of Public Works
and Department of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Arts
Mayor Blakespear presented a Proclamation to Public Works Director
Quiram, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Arts Director Campbell and City
Arborist Chris Callstrand.
4C. Tree City USA—7t" year presented by City Arborist
City Arborist Chris Callstrand and Lynette Short, representing the
Department of Forestry, presented the Tree City USA award to the City.
04/18/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 1 Mtg.#2018-_____,Bk#33,Page
04/18/18 Regular Meeting
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS / POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF
Richard Risner requested Council adopt the month of April as World Landscape
Architecture Month.
There was Council consensus to direct staff to prepare a proclamation.
Pat Wright requested Council to consider legalizing ferrets.
Christine Wagner spoke about a Notice of Appeal which she submitted to the
Coastal Commission regarding the North Highway 101 Streetscape project.
David Smith spoke regarding fire department response times for the North
Leucadia area.
Kelle Hinze spoke in support of the North Highway 101 Streetscape project.
6. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Blakespear announced at the 4:00 P.M. Special Closed Session meeting
that regarding Agenda Item 1, on a 4-1 vote (Muir voted no), direction was given to
the City's negotiator to move forward with the negotiations and regarding Agenda
Item 2, there was no reportable action.
7. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
Deputy City Clerk Bingham announced that Agenda Item #10C had been
withdrawn by both appellants and only appeared on the agenda because it was
continued from a prior meeting to a date certain.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Deputy City Clerk Bingham announced that Agenda Items 8N and 8S were
removed from the Consent Calendar by members of the public.
Mayor Blakespear announced that she was removing Agenda Item 81.
Deputy Mayor Mosca announced that he would abstain from voting on Agenda
Item 8B due to his employment with SDG&E.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Muir moved, Boerner Horvath seconded to close and adopt the amended
Consent Calendar. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath,
Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None. Abstain: Mosca (on 813).
04/18/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 2 Mtg.#2018-___,Bk#33,Page
04/18/18 Regular Meeting
8A. Approval of the Minutes of the March 7 2018 Special Meeting March 14
2018 Special Meeting Closed-Session March 14 2018 Regular Meeting
March 21, 2018 Special Meeting Closed-Session March 21 2018 Regular
Meetinq, and March 28, 2018 Special Meeting Planning Session Contact
Person: City Clerk Hollywood
Recommended Action:Approve the Minutes.
8B. Approval of the Warrants List. Contact Person: Finance Manager
Lundgren
Recommended Action:Approve the Warrants.
Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Muir.
Nays: None. Abstain: Mosca.
8C. Legislative Position Letters. Contact Person: Senior Management Analyst
McSevgney
Recommended Action: Approve the legislative position letters
sponsoring SB 1226 (Bates), and supporting AB 1884 (Calderon), AB
2369 (Gonzalez Fletcher) and AB 2779 (Stone).
8D. Cancelation of the May 16, 2018 Regular City Council meeting. Contact
Person: City Clerk Hollywood
Recommended Action: Council approve canceling the May 16, 2018
Regular City Council meeting in order to hold a follow-up goal setting
planning session.
8E. Notice of Completion for the Mackinnon Avenue Sidewalk Improvements,
CS17C. Contact Person: Associate Civil Engineer Widelski
Recommended Action: 1) Accept the public improvements as complete;
2) Authorize release of the performance bond and initiate the warranty
bond; and 3) Authorize the filing of a Notice of Completion.
8F. Execute a Memorandum of Understanding with SANDAG regarding the
Regional Shoreline Monitoring Program. Contact Person: Program
Administrator Weldon
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution 2018-40 Approving a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Between the San Diego
Association of Governments and the City of Encinitas regarding Regional
Shoreline Monitoring Program, and authorizing the City Manager, or her
designee, to execute the agreement.
04/18/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 3 Mtg.#2018- ,Bk#33,Page
04/18/18 Regular Meeting
8G. Storm Drain Inventory Consulting Services. Contact Person:
Superintendent Ugrob
Recommended Action: City Council authorize the City Manager, in
conjunction with the City Attorney, to execute an agreement for Inventory
Consulting Services with Hoch Consulting for an initial (1) one-year term,
and authorize the City Manager to extend the agreement if needed for
three (1) one-year renewal options not exceeding (4) four years in total.
The original agreement and renewal options for these services are not to
exceed the annual budgeted amount of$73,000.
8H. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 2018-04 Amending Encinitas
Municipal Code Chapter 6.11 Operations Permit: Special Events Contact
Person: Management Analyst Roff
Recommended Action:Adopt Ordinance 2018-04 entitled "An Ordinance
of the City Council of the City of Encinitas, California Amending Chapter
6.11 to the Encinitas Municipal Code Operations Permit: Special Events."
8J. Contingent general vacation of public road right-of-way at the cul-de-sac
bulb of Pacific View Lane. Contact Person: City Planner Sapa'u
Recommended Action: Adopt City Council Resolution 2018-22
approving the contingent general vacation of public road right-of-way at
the former terminus of Pacific View Lane and authorize staff to record the
street vacation with the .San Diego County Recorder upon completion of
the required road improvements.
8K. Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Encinitas and Cardiff
101 Main Street for a Community Special Event. Contact Person: Special
Events and Projects Supervisor Buck
Recommended Action: Approve a one-year Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between the City of Encinitas and Cardiff 101 Main
Street to host the 13th Annual Cardiff Dog Days of Summer on Sunday,
August 12, 2018, at Encinitas Community Park.
8L. A Substantial Amendment to the City's FY 2015-19 Consolidated Plan for
the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. Contact
Person: Management Analyst Piano-Jones
Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt
Resolution 2018-38 approving a Substantial Amendment to the FY 2015-
19 Consolidated Plan, changing from the FY 2015-19 Consolidated Plan
to the FY 2015-20 Consolidated Plan and authorizing submission of the
04/18/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 4 Mtg.#2018-____,Bk#33,Page
04/18/18 Regular Meeting
Substantial Amendment to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD).
8M. Notice of Completion for the Leucadia Flooding Issues Sump Areas Phase
I (CD 17A). Contact Person: Associate Civil Engineer Widelski
Recommended Action: 1) Accept the public improvements as complete;
2) Authorize release of the performance bond and initiate the warranty
bond; and 3) Authorize the filing of a Notice of Completion.
80. TransNet Local Street Improvement Program of Projects for Fiscal Years
2018/19 Through 2022/23. Contact Person: Senior Management Analyst
Ruess
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council take the
following actions: 1) Conduct a Public Hearing related to the proposed
projects; and 2) Adopt City Council Resolution 2018-20 entitled,
"Resolution of the City of Encinitas Adopting the TransNet Local Street
Improvement Program of Projects for Fiscal Years 2018119 through
2022/23."
8P. Continued public hearing from March 21, 2018 to consider and approve
Resolution 2018-37 approving the Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19 Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) program budget and the FY 2018-19
Annual Action Plan. Contact Person: Management Analyst Piano-Jones
Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council take the
following action: 1) Adopt Resolution 2018-37 approving the proposed FY
2018-19 CDBG budget and FY 2018-19 Action Plan; 2) Authorize the City
Manager to transmit the FY 2018-19 Action Plan and execute required
certifications to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD); and 3) Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute all
funding agreements and documents consistent with the FY 2018-19
Action Plan.
8Q. Mobility Project Update - Capital Improvement and Traffic Engineering
Divisions. Contact Person: City Engineer Magdosku
Recommended Action: Receive the report on the status of Capital
Improvement and Traffic Engineering projects.
8R. Update to vehicle purchases authorized by Council at the March 14, 2018
meeting. Contact Person: Director Quiram
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council take the
following action: 1) Ratify the purchase of a 2018 Ford Fusion from
Encinitas Ford instead of National Joint Powers Alliance.
04/18/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 5 Mtg.#2018- ,Bk#33,Page
04/18/18 Regular Meeting
8T. Notice of Completion for the Moonlight State Beach Marine Safety Center
Project, CPI 4C. Contact Person: City Engineer Magdosku
Recommended Action:That City Council: 1) Accept the improvements at
the Moonlight State Beach Marine Safety Center, CP14C, as complete; 2)
Authorize the Development Services Director to approve expenditures of
$65,000 to finalize all payments to the contractor, up to the total project
budget of $3,896,465; 3) Authorize release of the performance bond and
initiate the warranty bond; and 4) Authorize the filing of a Notice of
Completion.
8U. Legislative position letter in support of SB 1151 (Bates): Neighborhood
Electric Vehicles. Contact Person: Executive Assistant to City Council
Goodsell
Recommended Action: Approve the legislative position letter in support
of SB 1151: Neighborhood Electric Vehicles.
8V. Approve Locations for Artistic Elements for the Interchanges at Santa Fe
Drive and Encinitas Boulevard. Contact Person: Arts Program
Administrator Gilliam
Recommended Action:Approve the recommendation of the Commission
for the Arts for the location of the artistic elements on the redesigned
interchanges at Santa Fe Drive and Encinitas Boulevard.
9. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
81. List of Projects funded by SB1 (The Road Repair and Accountability Act of
2017) for Fiscal Year 2018-19. Contact Person: Senior Management
Analyst Ruess
Recommended Action: Adopt City Council Resolution 2018-42 entitled,
"Resolution of the City of Encinitas Adopting a List of Projects for Fiscal
Year 2018-19 Funded by SB1: The Road Repair and Accountability Act of
2017."
Mayor Blakespear removed this item for further clarification.
Management Analyst Ruess presented the staff report.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Blakespear moved, Mosca seconded to adopt Resolution 2018-42
entitled, "Resolution of the City of Encinitas Adopting a List of
Projects for Fiscal Year 2018-19 Funded by S131: The Road Repair
and Accountability Act of 2017." Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear,
Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None.
04/18/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 6 Mtg.#2018-__,l3k#33,Page
04/18/18 Regular Meeting
8N. Construction Contract for the Requeza Street Sidewalk Improvements
Project, CS17D. Contact Person: Associate Civil Engineer Widelski
Recommended Action: 1) Authorize the Development Services Director
or her designee to execute a contract in consultation with the City
Attorney, and any necessary amendments and time extensions with Pal
General Engineering Inc. in the amount $123,171 plus 15% contingencies
of $18,476 to construct the Requeza Street Sidewalk Improvements
Project, for a total contract amount of $141,647; 2) Authorize the
Development Services Director or her designee to execute a contract, in
consultation with the City Attorney, and any necessary amendments and
time extensions with Latitude 33 Planning and Engineering, in the amount
of $7,470 for construction staking for the Requeza Street Sidewalk
Improvements Project; and 3) Authorize the Development Services
Director or her designee to execute a contract in consultation with the City
Attorney, and any necessary amendments and time extensions with
Kleinfelder in the amount of $29,951 for construction inspection services
for the Requeza Street Sidewalk Improvements Project.
No staff report was given.
Speaker:
Steven Gerken spoke in support of the recommended action.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Kranz moved, Boerner Horvath seconded to: 1) Authorize the
Development Services Director or her designee to execute a contract
in consultation with the City Attorney, and any necessary
amendments and time extensions with Pal General Engineering Inc.
in the amount $123,171 plus 15% contingencies of $18,476 to
construct the Requeza Street Sidewalk Improvements Project, for a
total contract amount of $141,647; 2) Authorize the Development
Services Director or her designee to execute a contract, in
consultation with the City Attorney, and any necessary amendments
and time extensions with Latitude 33 Planning and Engineering, in
the amount of $7,470 for construction staking for the Requeza Street
Sidewalk Improvements Project; and 3) Authorize the Development
Services Director or her designee to execute a contract in
consultation with the City Attorney, and any necessary amendments
and time extensions with Kleinfelder in the amount of $29,951 for
construction inspection services for the Requeza Street Sidewalk
Improvements Project. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner
Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None.
04/18/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 7 Mtg.#2018- ,Bk#33,Page
04/18/18 Regular Meeting
8S. Second reading and adoption of City Council Ordinance 2018-05,
amending the General Plan, North 101 Corridor Specific Plan, and the
Local Coastal Plan to clarify provisions for roadway improvements on
North Coast Highway 101. CASE NO: 10-036 GPA/SPA/LCPA
LOCATION: North Coast Highway 101 between La Costa Avenue and A .
Street. Contact Person: Associate Planner Plagemann
Recommended Action:Adopt City Council Ordinance 2018-05 titled, "An
Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Encinitas, California, adopting
the amendments to the Local Coastal Plan, North 101 Corridor Specific
Plan and the General Plan to clarify provisions for roadway improvements
on North Coast Highway 101."
Development Services Director Wisneski presented the staff report.
SPEAKERS:
Jim Mosher spoke regarding the rail trail segment.
Leah Bissonette, Robert Hemphill, Christine Wagner, Brenda Humphreys,
Doug Fiske, Spenser Mosher and David Smith spoke in opposition to the
recommended action.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Kranz moved, Blakespear seconded to adopt City Council Ordinance
2018-05 titled, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Encinitas, California, adopting the amendments to the Local Coastal
Plan, North 101 Corridor Specific Plan and the General Plan to clarify
provisions for roadway improvements on North Coast Highway 101."
Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca.
Nays: Muir.
Mayor Blakespear called a recess from 7:28 P.M. to 7:37 P.M.
10. ACTION ITEMS
10A. Housinq Element Task Force (HETF)/City Council continued discussion
regarding the Housing Plan Update and associated analysis to achieve a
State-certified Housing Element Contact Person: Principal Planner
Langager
Recommended Action: Review, discuss and provide comment on the
proposed development standards for the sites to be up-zoned in conjunction
with the Housing Plan Update.
Housing Element Task Force members Bruce Ehlers and Kurk Groseclose
joined Council on the dais.
04/18/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 8 Mtg.#2018- Bk#33,Page
04/18/18 Regular Meeting
Development Services Director Wisneski and Principal Planner Langager,
along with Consultants Nick Chen and Martie Allen with Kimley Horn,
presented the staff report.
SPEAKERS:
Glenn Johnson, Susan Turney and Steven Gerken spoke.
Ed Richardson, Surin Mitruka, Kevin Gaddy, Joan Wapner, Jim Gillie and
Richard Boger spoke in opposition to the inclusion of 031-7 Site on Quail
Gardens Drive.
Randy Goodson, Wendy Goad, Stephen Swiecicki, Damien Mavis, Nick
Lee and Bob Kent spoke in support of the recommended action.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mosca moved, Kranz seconded to remove 03:L-7 Site on Quail
Gardens from the list of candidate sites and to direct staff to rezone
it to R3. Motion carried. Ayes: Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: Blakespear,
Boerner Horvath.
10B.
OFdORunan,P �nIo_�3 4mlorl "An Orrlin•+nGn of the (`i+ Cn„nnil of+ha
Title 30 nip 1 of the Enoini+as 114„nioi al /-ode whinh pro n o
cha e
nhap ies +o the City's inGlusionaw hoes na requia+ionc. to had+or address
the.—need-# r i n T fpry vle uni+ ed imnew re�identia l de� TTV � n � e elnnrmiTeCnnt+
proien+�ASE NO; 15 162 7A/1 CPA• LOCATION! Gitywide /men+an+
T['G�'...i�f'f'y'.—-T'�-TO'�Zl 0 COTTI,T �iL�W'TIIG—WTfCRIiZ
person• Ac pia+e Dlann
r-�-r�v n—rav$9�rTr�re{WFnt@F
Council OFdlnanne 2018 03, titled "An Ordlnanne of the City Gounnil of+he
City of Enein'tas, California, adopthq,, amendments to T-Otle 24
(Subdivisions) and Title 30 (Zoning) of the EnGinotas MuniGipal Code,
whi Eh-prop 6SLS-Ch +cTe vGni+yv-"T innl sionani housing regvlutionrs rn
betttteT aLi dFessr the need for affordable Unite resewed in neW reoidential
development o pFojeots and 3) Diren+ staff to prepare the follo wing st urdiec.
a) Nexus Study to evaluate establishing a fee foF pFojeots with less than
7uniits (1 R units and/or frantiS.); b) Gap Analysis to evaluate
establishing aR in lieu fee f9F PF9jen+o of 7 OF mn '+o;__nl_ Gnnnomin_}
F�bility Analysis to evaluate innreaa_sin,g the peFee Rtage Feq.ji�eYtC
for affoFd`7ablje uu`niits (nitywide and „pzoned sites).
��+� �+�����" „"'I"'
Mayor Blakespear announced that because of time constraints, this item
would be continued to a later date.
04/18/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 9 Mtg.#2018- ,Bk 933,Page
04/18/18 Regular Meeting
Mayor Blakespear announced that Council would hear the speakers for
this item.
SPEAKERS:
Michael McSweeney spoke in opposition to the recommended action.
Nick Lee spoke in support of the recommended action.
10C Continued- P blip Hearin W Gennidn� two timely filed appeals of rho
-l�iiG—'iZ4�iTIi'T�—CD�QITJ �ilTTryi'�"f7iGQ�t7GZlTS"QT—'CfTri
Planning Gemmission's appFeval of the Wectn•,ont of I_noinitas assisted
Planning
Li11_ ng fonil�The pFojeGt site is located within the Residential—3 (R 3)
Zone and the Coastal) Zenn i�e nnmmunity of New En�CASE
zv v �cvmn'rurni -vr-��T v�
NUMBER: 16 131 M P1DR/onnkQEin�pj APPLICANT.! RiehaFd
I uxWectmenf Development, LLG�APPEL ANT Alf).
f ' ' 7' 1• I ;da iI Luxi
APPELLANT NO. 2; Ma •.•.''n Duli�b� DenerSh RAn Gemell, K
elli
Gernell, tGt�kell, KFisten Anr ell, Dan Lowe, Dana—Lowe,
Linda
Lux and Bobby Lux w as membeFS of the Encinitas (citizens for Responsible,
RespeE#uiEnsinites Develo p men ! 252�NeFth El Gamine
Real (APN; 262 160 26 and 27). Contact er3+ew Associate Manner
MieFau
This appeal has been withdrawn by both appellants and only appears on
the agenda because it was continued from a prior meeting to a date
certain.
11. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
There were no information items.
12. COUNCIL MEMBER INITIATED AGENDA ITEM
There were no Council Member Initiated Items.
13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADDED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS
No future agenda items were added.
14. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS PURSUANT TO AB1234 (GC
53232.3(d)) I POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF
No reports were given.
15. CITY MANAGER REPORTS I PENDING POSSIBLE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
No reports were given.
04/18/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 10 Mtg.#2018- ,Bk#33,Page
04/18/18 Regular Meeting
16. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
No reports were given.
17. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Blakespear adjourned the meeting at 11:46 P.M.
audia Bingham, Dep ity Clerk Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor
04118/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 11 Mtg.#2018- ,Bk#33,Page
MINUTES OF THE ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MAY 9, 2098, 6:00 P.M., 505 SOUTH VULCAN AVENUE
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Blakespear called the meeting to order at 6:11 P.-M.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Catherine S. Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Joe Mosca, Council
Members Tasha Boerner Horvath, Tony Kranz and Mark Muir
Absent: None
Also Present:City Manager Brust, City Attorney Sabine, Principal Planner
Langager, Developmental Services Director Wisneski, Special
Counsel Barbara Kautz, Housing Element Task Force Members
Bruce Ehlers (via teleconference) and Kurt Groseclose, City
Engineer Magdosku, Parks, Recreation & Cultural Arts Director
Campbell, Recreation Services Manager Karlen, Management
Analyst Ruess, Senior Planner Sapau, City Clerk Hollywood and
Deputy City Clerk Bingham
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
4A. Presentation of Proclamation for Bike Month and Bike to Work Day
Mayor Blakespear presented a proclamation to Climate Action Plan Administrator
Najera.
6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS / POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF
Chris Glascoe spoke regarding a medical marijuana initiative that he is preparing.
Peter Stern spoke regarding building standards in the city.
Suzanne Hagen and Greg Hagen spoke regarding the Starlight Drive gate
access to the Encinitas Community Park.
Nancy Logan spoke regarding signature gatherers for the marijuana initiatives.
05/09/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 1 Mtg.#2018- ,Bk#34,Page
05/09/18 Regular Meeting
Kathleen Lindemann spoke about the Leucadia Boulevard and Orpheus Avenue
intersections.
6. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Blakespear reported the following at the 4:00 P.M. Special Meeting:
Regarding Agenda Item 1, there was unanimous consensus to move forward with a
settlement agreement.
Regarding Agenda Items 2, 3 &4, Council received an update from legal counsel.
Regarding Agenda Item 5, there was no reportable action.
Regarding Agenda Items 6 & 7, there was unanimous consensus to defend the
lawsuits.
7. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
City Clerk Hollywood announced that Agenda Item BE had been removed from
the agenda and was rescheduled for the May 23, 2018 City Council meeting.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
City Clerk Hollywood announced that Agenda Items 8H and 8J had been
removed from the Consent Calendar by members of the public, Agenda Item 8D
was removed by Deputy Mayor Mosca and Agenda Item 81 was removed by
Council Member Muir.
Deputy Mayor Mosca announced that he would abstain from voting on Agenda
Item 8B due to his employment with SDG&E.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Muir moved, Kranz seconded to close and adopt the amended Consent
Calendar. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz,
Mosca, Muir. Nays: None. Abstain: Mosca (813)
8A. Approval of the Minutes of the April 4, 2018 Special Meeting. Contact
Person: City Clerk Hollywood
Recommended Action:Approve the Minutes.
8B. Approval of the Warrants List. Contact Person: Finance Manager
Lundgren
Recommended Action:Approve the Warrants.
05/09/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 2 Mtg.#2018-__,Bk#34,Page
05/09/18 Regular Meeting
Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Muir,
Nays: None. Abstain: Mosca.
8C. Mutual Threat Zone (MTZ) Cooperative Fire Protection Agreement
Contact Person: Battalion Chief Ford and Deputy Chief Blumeyer
Recommended Action:Council to take the following actions: 1) Authorize
the Fire Chief, on behalf of the City, to execute the Mutual Threat Zone
(MTZ) Cooperative Fire Protection Agreement with the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection — San Diego Unit (CAL FIRE)
for the area illustrated in Attachment A of the Agreement; and 2) Adopt
Resolution 2018-41 titled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Encinitas Approving the Cooperative Fire Protection Mutual Threat Zone
Agreement between the Encinitas Fire,Department (Department) and the
State of California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection — San
Diego Unit (CAL FIRE)".
8E Apentments to the Youth Commission Contact Person: Glty GIeFk
_ 7"C IlTG7TC�TC�CTiV�O�U'LTT—G'07TfTffTJrJ701T�G'�TRL'.iGT-7-GTJaiTT-07L�-07liTT The Recommended • 1 ,
I . . it 11 applicants to the Youth Commission with teFffls eRding june
This item was removed from the agenda and was rescheduled for the May
23, 2018 City Council meeting.
8F. Construction Contract for the Montgomery Avenue Sidewalk
Improvements Project, CS17C. Contact Person: Associate Civil Engineer
Widelski
Recommended Action: 1) Authorize the Development Services Director
or her designee to execute a contract in consultation with the City
Attorney, and any necessary amendments and time extensions with L C
Paving & Sealing Inc. in the amount $99,156 plus 15% contingencies to
construct the Montgomery Avenue Sidewalk Improvements Project, for a
total contract amount of$114,030; 2) Authorize the Development Services
Director or her designee to execute a contract in consultation with the City
Attorney, and any necessary amendments, and time extensions with NV5
in the amount of $9,133 for construction staking for the Montgomery
Avenue Sidewalk Improvements Project; 3) Authorize the Development
Services Director or her designee to execute a contract in consultation
with the City Attorney, and any necessary amendments and time
extensions with Michael Baker International in the amount of $12,920 for
construction inspection services for the Montgomery Avenue Sidewalk
Improvements Project; 4) Authorize the Development Services Director or
05/09/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 3 Mtg.#2018-___,Bk#34,Page
05/09/18 Regular Meeting
her designee to execute a contract in consultation with the City Attorney
and any necessary amendments and time extensions with Group Delta in
the amount of $11,927 for material testing services for the Montgomery
Avenue Sidewalk Improvements Project; and 5) Adopt - City Council
Resolution 2018-44 entitled, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Encinitas Amending the Fiscal Year 2017-18 Adopted Budget" to
appropriate an additional $36,675 to the Montgomery Avenue Sidewalk
Improvements Project.
8G. Mobility Project Update - Capital Improvement and Traffic Engineering
Divisions. Contact Person: City Engineer Magdosku
Recommended Action: Receive the report on the status of Capital
Improvement and Traffic Engineering projects.
9. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
8D. Introduction of Ordinance 2018-06 Amending Encinitas Municipal Code
Chapter 4.04 Animal Regulations. Contact Person: Management Analyst
Roff
Recommended Action: First reading and introduction of Ordinance 2018-
06 entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Encinitas,
California Amending Chapter 4.04 of the Encinitas Municipal Code Animal
Regulations."
Deputy Mayor Mosca removed this item for clarification.
No staff report was given.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Kranz moved, Mosca seconded to introduce Ordinance 2018-06
entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Encinitas,
California Amending Chapter 4.04 of the Encinitas Municipal Code
Animal Regulations." Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner
Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None.
8H. Approval of Final Map for Tentative Map 09-200 TMDB. Contact Person:_
Senior Engineer Nowak
Recommended Action: Staff recommends that City Council approve the
recordation of the Final Map for Planning Case No. 09-200 TMDB/DR/EIA,
which has been reviewed and found to be consistent with the Tentative
Map.
This item was removed by members of the public.
05/09/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 4 Mtg.#2018-____,Bk#34,Page
05/09/18 Regular Meeting
No staff report was given.
SPEAKERS:
Bill Butler and Donna Westbrook spoke in opposition to the recommended
action.
Marco Gonzalez spoke in support of the recommended action.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Kranz moved, Blakespear seconded to approve the recordation of
the Final Map for Planning Case No. 09-200 TMDB/DR/EIA, which has
been reviewed and found to be consistent with the Tentative Map.
Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca,
Muir. Ayes: None.
81. Contract award for room and gym improvements on the interior of the
Encinitas Community and Senior Center. Contact Person: Recreation
Services Manager Karlen
Recommended Action: 1) Award bid to GeoTech Construction for: a)
Base Bid: Improvements to rooms 118 and 140 at Encinitas Community
Center - removal of wall material; retexturing and painting to match
existing painted walls; demolition and installation of new flat commercial
wainscoting and chair rails; preparation of floors, installation of new
Interface Modular Resilient Flooring as specified, transitions and base
molding; b) Bid Alternate 1: Improvements to flooring on gym ramp, in gym
office, on gym stairs and in game room — removal and replacement of
rubber coin flooring and nosing with commercial grade product in brown
color and base molding; removal of rubber coin flooring in game room,
cleaning, preparing, staining and sealing concrete; c) Bid Alternate 2:
Remove flooring and base materials in both copy rooms, prepare floor and
install new carpet squares and base molding; prepare and paint walls in
both copy rooms to match existing center paint; d) Bid Alternate 3:
Improvements to rooms 116 and 119 - removal of wallpaper, preparation
and painting to match existing paint; e) Bid Alternate 4: Demolition of three
information centers in common areas, fill, drywall, and paint spaces; and
2) Authorize the City Manager in conjunction with the City Attorney to
execute a contract in substantial form, in the amount of$27,250.
Council Member Muir removed this item for clarification.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Muir moved, Mosca seconded to: 1) Award bid to GeoTech
Construction for: a) Base Bid: Improvements to rooms 118 and 140
at Encinitas Community Center - removal of wall material; retexturing
and painting to match existing painted walls; demolition and
05/09/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 5 Mtg.92018-___,Bk#34,Page
05/09/18 Regular Meeting
installation of new flat commercial wainscoting and chair rails;
preparation of floors, installation of new Interface Modular Resilient
Flooring as specified, transitions and base molding; b) Bid Alternate
1: Improvements to flooring on gym ramp, in gym office, on gym
stairs and in game room — removal and replacement of rubber coin
flooring and nosing with commercial grade product in brown color
and base molding; removal of rubber coin flooring in game room,
cleaning, preparing, staining and sealing concrete; c) Bid Alternate
2: Remove flooring and base materials in both copy rooms, prepare
floor and install new carpet squares and base molding; prepare and
paint walls in both copy rooms to match existing center paint; d) Bid
Alternate 3: Improvements to rooms 116 and 119 - removal of
wallpaper, preparation and painting to match existing paint; e) Bid
Alternate 4: Demolition of three information centers in common
areas, fill, drywall, and paint spaces; and 2) Authorize the City
Manager in conjunction with the City Attorney to execute a contract
in substantial form, in the amount of $27,250. Motion carried. Ayes:
Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None.
8J. The Renewal of the Encinitas Landscape and Lighting District. Contact
Person: Management Analyst Ruess
Recommended Action: 1) Adopt City Council Resolution 2018-09
entitled, "Resolution of Intention to Order the Renewal of the Encinitas
Landscape and Lighting District for FY 2018/19"; and 2) Set the public
hearing for June 13, 2018.
This item was removed by the public.
Management Analyst Ruess presented the staff report.
SPEAKER:
Donna Westbrook spoke in opposition to the recommended action.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Kranz moved, Muir seconded to: 1) Adopt City Council Resolution
2018-09 entitled, "Resolution of Intention to Order the Renewal of the
Encinitas Landscape and Lighting District for FY 2018119", and 2) Set
the public hearing for June 13, 2018. Motion carried. Ayes:
Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Mur. Nays: None.
05/09/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 6 Mtg.#2018-____,Bk#34,Page
05/09/18 Regular Meeting
10. ACTION ITEMS
10A. Housing Element Task Force (HETF)/City Council continued discussion
regarding the Housing Plan Update and specifically the selection of
additional sites that have the potential to be up-zoned and associated
analysis to achieve a State-certified Housing Element. Contact Person:
Principal Planner Langager
Recommended Action: Review, discuss and select additional candidate
sites that have the potential to be up-zoned.
City Clerk Hollywood announced that Housing Element Task Force
Member Bruce Ehlers would be participating via teleconference from 840
Audubon Way, Apartment T15, Lincolnshire, IL 60069.
Housing Element Task Force Member Kurt Groseclose joined Council on
the dais.
Development Services Director Wisniski and Principal Planner Langager,
Special Counsel Barbara Kautz and Consultant David Barquist of Kimley-
Horn, presented the staff report and responded to questions.
SPEAKERS:
Naimeh Woodward, Patricia Sinay, Rebecca Palmer and Carol Skiljan
spoke in support of keeping the L-7 Site on the Highly Viable sites list.
Lois Sunrich, Bob Kent, Gita D St. John, Azucena Acosta, Lea Bush, Patty
Stottlemyer, John Gjata, Donna Westbrook and Joan Gosewisch spoke
regarding the need for affordable housing in the City.
Damien Mavis spoke in support of the Piraeus North site and the
Manchester Avenue East site.
Kathleen Lindemann spoke in support of keeping the L-7 site on the
Highly Viable site list and adding the Manchester Avenue East site to the
list.
Carmen Nospor spoke in opposition to the Baldwin & Sons Properties site.
David Mashayekan spoke in support of adding the Orpheus Avenue sites.
Laura Frisk and Susan Turney spoke in opposition to the Orpheus Avenue
sites.
Richard Boger spoke regarding the L-7 site.
05/09/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 7 Mtg.#2018-___,Bk#34,Page
05/09/18 Regular Meeting
STAFF DIRECTION:
There was direction to staff to negotiate with property owners to obtain the
highest number of affordable units possible.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Blakespear moved, Boerner Horvath seconded to add the L-7 site, at R11
for 60 units, to the Highly Viable site list. Motion failed. Ayes: Blakespear,
Boerner Horvath. Nays: Kranz, Mosca, Muir.
Boerner Horvath moved, Mosca seconded to add AD 22 — Lake Drive
Sites if applicant was interested. Motion carried. Ayes: Boerner
Horvath, Kranz, Mosca. Nays: Blakespear, Muir.
Boerner Horvath moved, Blakespear seconded to remove AD10 —
Orpheus Avenue Sites from the list. Motion carried. Ayes:
Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None.
Mosca moved, Kranz seconded to remove AD 12— Rancho Santa Fe East
site from the list. Motion failed. Ayes: Kranz, Mosca. Nays: Blakespear,
Boerner Horvath, Muir.
Boerner Horvath moved, Blakespear seconded to remove the Meyer
property at Union St/Clark Avenue from the list. Motion failed. Ayes:
Blakespear, Boerner Horvath. Nays: Kranz, Mosca, Muir.
Boerner Horvath moved, Muir seconded to remove AD 11 — Manchester
Avenue West site from the list. Motion failed. Ayes: Boerner Horvath, Muir.
Nays: Blakespear, Kranz, Mosca.
Blakespear moved, Boerner Horvath seconded to approve the
following Highly Viable Sites list with the removal of AD10 - Orpheus
Avenue site:
06 —Armstrong Parcels
11 — El Camino Real South Parcel
AD7— Dewitt Property
AD9 —Seacoast Church
AD11 — Manchester Avenue West Sites
AD12 — Rancho Santa Fe East
AD14— Harrison site
Harrison site
Garden View Court (previously Frog's Gym)
Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Mosca,
Muir. Nays: None.
05/09/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 8 Mtg.#2018-__,Bk#34,Page
05/09/18 Regular Meeting
STAFF DIRECTION:
There was direction to staff to analyze the Lake Drive site as a possible
back-up site.
There was direction to staff, City Manager.and City Attorney to engage a
firm to help evaluate the L-7 site and its selling potential.
11. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
There were no informational items.
12. COUNCIL MEMBER INITIATED AGENDA ITEM
There were no Council Member Initiated agenda items.
13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADDED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS
No future agenda items were added.
14. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS PURSUANT TO AB1234 (GC
53232.3(d)) / POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF
Council Member Kranz reported on a NCTD Policy and Finance Committee
meeting.
Council Member Boerner Horvath reported on a School District Liaison meeting.
Council Member Muir, Deputy Mayor Mosca and Mayor Blakespear had nothing
to report.
15. CITY MANAGER REPORTS / PENDING POSSIBLE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
No reports were given.
16. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
No reports were given.
17. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Blakespear adjourned the meeting at 10:20 P.M.
Kathy Holl oo , City Clerk Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor
By: Claudia Bingham
Deputy City Clerk
05/09118 Reg.Mtg. Page 9 Mtg.#2018-___,Bk#34,Page
MINUTES OF THE ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MAY 23, 2018, 6:00 P.M., 505 SOUTH VULCAN AVENUE
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Blakespear called the meeting to order at 6:03 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Catherine S. Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Joe Mosca,
Council Members Tasha Boerner Horvath, Tony Kranz and Mark
Muir
Absent: None
Also present:City Manager Brust, City Attorney Sabine, Development Services
Director Wisneski, Sheriff's Captain Maryon, Housing Element
Task Force Members Bruce Ehlers and Kurt Groseclose, Special
Counsel Barbara Kautz, City Clerk Hollywood and Deputy City
Clerk Bingham
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
4A. Presentation by Sheriffs Captain Maryon regarding law enforcement
efforts in Encinitas
Sheriff's Captain Maryon presented a report on law enforcement efforts in
Encinitas.
SPEAKER:
Donna Westbrook
4B. Presentation of Senior Citizen of the Year Award and Service to Seniors
Award
Mayor Blakespear presented awards to Judy Thum, Senior Citizen of the
Year and to Pam Walker, Service to Seniors award.
4C. Presentation of Proclamation for National Public Works Week
Mayor Blakespear presented a proclamation to employees of the Public
05/23/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 1 Mtg.#2018-____,Bk#34,Page
05/23/18 Regular Meeting
Works Department.
4D. Presentation by Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Interns
from San Dleguito Academy and Paul Ecke Central
The following SWPPP interns presented the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan:
Paul Ecke Central: Keiko Hoiles, Mate Boerner Horvath, Robbie Mair,
Cole Brink, Hope Hacker, Philip Theiss and Sofia Mena.
San Dieguito Academy: Dylan Lee, Jack Severson, Vanessa Machin,
Jenna Weinhofer and Amber Tse.
4E. Presentation of Marine Safety bike donation from Electra Bicycle
Company
Kevin Cox, with Electra Bicycle Company, presented two donated bikes to
Lifeguard Captain Larry Giles and Climate Action Plan Administrator
Crystal Najera for use by City lifeguards.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS / POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF
Isiah Titus spoke about the Mira Costa College Rugby Team.
Chris Rogers, Jim Dudnick, Tiffany Rogers, Kim Dudnick, Shay Barnes and
Chiara Tripodi spoke about sober living homes in Leucadia.
Debbie Inada spoke regarding the petition for marijuana cultivation,
manufacturing and distribution.
Kathleen Lees spoke regarding parking on City streets.
6. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
No Closed Session meeting was held.
7. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
Agenda Item 8G was removed by Staff from the agenda.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
City Clerk Hollywood announced that staff had made minor corrections to
Agenda Item 8E agenda report.
05/23/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 2 Mtg.#2018-____,Bk#34,Page
05/23/18 Regular Meeting
Council Member Muir removed Agenda Item 8C from the Consent Calendar.
Deputy Mayor Mosca announced that he would abstain from voting on Agenda
Item 813 due to his employment with SDG&E.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Kranz moved, Blakespear seconded to close and adopt the amended
Consent Calendar. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath,
Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None. Abstain: Mosca (813).
8A. Approval of the Minutes of the April 18, 2018 Regular Meeting, and April
18, 2018 Special Meeting Closed Session. Contact Person: City Clerk
Hollywood
Recommended Action:Approve the Minutes.
8B. Approval of the Warrants List. Contact Person: Finance Manager
Lundgren
Recommended Action:Approve the Warrants.
Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath, Kranz, Muir.
Nays: None. Abstain: Mosca.
8D. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 2018-06 Amending Encinitas
Municipal Code Chapter 4.04 Animal Regulations. Contact Person:
Management Analyst Roff
Recommended Action: Second reading and adoption of Ordinance
2018-06 entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Encinitas,
California Amending Chapter 4.04 of the Encinitas Municipal Code Animal
Regulations."
8E. Changes in the purchase of vehicles already approved for FY 2016/17 and
FY 2017/18. Contact Person: Public Works Director Quiram
Recommended Action: Council authorize the recommended changes to
the two Parks and Recreation vehicles that were already authorized in
prior Council actions.
8F. American Contract Bridge League (ACBL) Duplicate Bridge Independent
Contractor Agreement Contact Person: Recreation Supervisor
Rubenstein
Recommended Action: The City Council authorizes the City Manager to
execute a one-year contract, in consultation with the City Attorney, in
05/23/18 Reg.Mtg, Page 3 Mtg.#2018-____,Bk#34,Page
05/23/18 Regular Meeting
substantial form, with up to three (3) one-year renewal options, upon
mutual consent between the City of Encinitas and ida Burcham dba ACBL
Duplicate Bridge, commencing upon the date of its execution by both
parties for independent contract services to instruct the City's ACBL
Duplicate Bridge program.
8G 2019 11 Aejer Soenie�l Event flBemeFanedums of I Indercteenrllnr� contact
OT.7'-fViL[��T�7ri GILTf-CV GTIT�91GTI�iLiTiG'Q7T1�'-VT-C'TTQ WrCCC(leZ
Per on• Mancreement Analyst Pe#
Recoommc°ni7Ctl-Y'tritieni- Gity Council takes the4Cllewing •'ntieeRs:4)
r to
execute-a MeFneFandufn of I IndeFstendinn between the
and Surfing Madenno Oceans Project for the 2019 Ene�initaS�if
unarm-� rmQ the ';'�. y�,
n/irviaFatr�'enr-anrrc�-Lhe-s Madonna-cceaer'rY'Run; 2) rAc'v'thWize the
City r with the exen..te a
��--rvrarraQe�-�R e6Rf�FfFEt16R--dvrcrr-crre--� 6ffl2�, �9 cnv-v-an—u
Memorandum of Understanding between the City of__Enninitas and ( aFdifF
Kook Run 1 I G for the 2019 r aFdiff Kee Run; .ten 3) A.hhOdze the Gjfie
c-rccn-r�r r �...'r�r.
Mncoer jn nnnjmetion with the City Attorneys to execute a Memorandum
-Af een the City of n-rtimnas and Dental Club One, Inn
fcr the 2019 Encinitas Turkey Trnt
This Agenda Item was removed from the Agenda by staff.
8H. Contract award for Graffiti Abatement and Property Clean-up Assistance
Program (PPCAP) services. Contact Person: Management Analyst Noel
Recommended Action: 1) Award contract for graffiti abatement and
property clean-up assistance services to Can-Do Maintenance, Inc.; and
2) Authorize the City Manager, in conjunction with the City Attorney, to
execute a contract for Graffiti Abatement and Private Property Clean-up
Assistance Program services in substantial form in an amount not-to-
exceed $142,100 annually, for an initial three-year term with options to
extend, upon mutual consent, for two additional one-year terms not to
exceed five years total.
81. Agreement for Animal Control Services with the San Diego Humane
Society. Contact Person: Management Analyst Roff
Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager, in conjunction with
the City Attorney, to execute an Animal Control Services Agreement, in
substantial form with San Diego Humane Society for three years,
commencing on July 1, 2018, with an option to extend, upon mutual
agreement, for two additional one-year terms.
8J. Design services and construction support contract for Trail 82 — Rancho
Santa Fe Road (CPOOF2) Contact Person: Engineer Milligan
05/23/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 4 Mtg.#2018-____,Bk#34,Page
05/23/18 Regular Meeting
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council
authorize the City Manager, or her designee, to execute a contract in
consultation with the City Attorney in substantial form and any necessary
amendments and time extensions, with Onward Engineering in the
amount of $168,125 plus 10% contingency to design and provide
construction management and construction inspection engineering
support for Trail 82 — Rancho Santa Fe Road.
8K. General Public Works Repair Services Agreement. Contact Person:
Superintendent Ugrob
Recommended Action: City Council authorize the City Manager, in
conjunction with the City Attorney to execute an agreement in substantial
form as attached Request for Bid (RFB) 2018-01 for General Repair
Services with LC Paving & Sealing, Inc. for an initial (3) three year term,
and authorizes the City Manager to extend the agreement if needed for a
(2) two year renewal option, not exceeding (5) five years in total. The
original agreement and renewal options for these services are not to
exceed the annual budgeted amounts.
8L. Cardiff Living Shoreline Project - Additional Grant Funds and Budget
Amendment Contact Person: Program Administrator Weldon
Recommended Action: It is recommended that City Council take the
following action: 1) Adopt Resolution 2018-53 entitled, "A Resolution of the
City Council for the City of Encinitas, California Accepting Additional
Construction Grant funds under the State Coastal Conservancy grant";
and 2) Adopt Resolution 2018-54 entitled, "A Resolution of the City
Council of the City of Encinitas, California Amending the Fiscal Year 2017-
18 Adopted Budget" authorizing an additional grant fund of $594,435 to
CP16A.
8M. Extension of the Affordable Unit Policy(AUP) program for three years.
Contact Person: Associate Planner Plagemann
Recommended Action: Receive the report and direct staff to continue
the AUP program with its current provisions for three years, allowing time
for state legislation and an unpermitted dwelling unit ordinance to be
adopted, then re-evaluate the AUP program in light of the adopted
provisions and return to Council with recommendations to continue,
revise, or end the program.
8N. Amendment to Agreement with HDR Engineering. Inc. for the Verdi
Pedestrian Rail Undercrossing Protect (CS16E). Contact Person: Senior
Engineer Kellar
05/23/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 5 Mtg.#2018-____,Bk#34,Page
05/23/18 Regular Meeting
Recommended Action: 1) Authorize the Director of Development
Services, or designee, in consultation with the City Attorney, to execute
Amendment 9 to the existing agreement with HDR Engineering, Inc.
(HDR) in the amount of $50,000, plus 10% contingencies, to prepare the
ATP grant application for the Verdi Pedestrian Rail Undercrossing Project
(CS16E), for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,839,019; and 2)
Adopt City Council Resolution 2018-51 entitled, "A Resolution of the City
Council of the City of Encinitas Amending the Fiscal Year 2017-18
Adopted Budget" authorizing an additional appropriation of $55,000 to
project CS16E to fund the additional scope of work.
80. Agreements with Hoch Consulting for Grant Preparation Services for the
North Coast Highway 101 Streetscape Project (CSO4D). Contact Person:
Senior Engineer Kellar
Recommended Action: Authorize the Director of Development Services,
or designee, in consultation with the City Attorney, to execute agreements
with Hoch Consulting to: a) Complete a Cycle 4 Active Transportation
Grant application for Segment A of the Streetscape project in an amount
of $25,000; and b) Complete a Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage
Development (BUILD) Grant application in an amount of$35,000.
9. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
8C. Appointments to the Youth Commission and Proposed Changes to
Membership. Contact Person: City Clerk Hollywood
Recommended Action: The Mayor, with the approval of City Council,
appoint 11 applicants to the Youth Commission with terms ending June
2018. The Mayor also recommends directing staff to bring back the
necessary code changes to reduce the Youth Commission membership
from 11 members to 9 members beginning with the 2019 recruitment.
Council Member Muir removed the item for clarification and stated he
supported the appointments but was opposed to decreasing the
membership from 11 to 9.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Blakespear moved, Boerner Horvath seconded to: 1) Appoint the
following applicants to the Youth Commission with terms ending
June 2019: Grade 7: Allegra Gilligan; Grade 8: Valentina Schneider;
Grade 10: Chris Kulick, Evelyn Sakai; Grade 12: Dane Bruhahn, Julia
Drewelow, Grace Galloway, Scotland Muir, Alexander Vitenson,
Tommy Yarbrough, Tyler Yarbrough; and 2) Direct staff to bring back
the necessary code changes to reduce the Youth Commission
membership from 11 members to 9 members beginning with the 2019
recruitment. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner Horvath,
05/23/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 6 Mtg.#2018-___,Blc#34,Page
05/23/18 Regular Meeting
Kranz, Mosca. Nays: Muir.
Mayor Blakespear declared a recess from 7:28 P.M. to 7:35 P.M.
10. ACTION ITEMS
10A. Housinq Element Task Force (HETF)/City Council continued discussion
regarding the Housing Plan Update and specifically the development
standards proposed for the up-zone sites and associated analysis to
achieve a State-certified Housing Element. Contact Person: Principal
Planner Langager
Recommended Action: Review, discuss and provide comment on the
proposed development standards for the sites to be up-zoned in
conjunction with the Housing Plan Update.
Housing Element Task Force Members Bruce Ehlers and Kurt Groseclose
joined Council on the dais.
Development Services Director Wisneski, Special Counsel Barbara Kautz
and Consultant Dave Barquist with Kimley-Horn, presented the proposed
development standards for the sites to be up-zoned in conjunction with the
Housing Plan Update.
SPEAKERS:
Peter Stern, Donna Westbrook, Joan Wapner, Kevin Gaddy, Richard
Boger, Susan Turney, Dean Turney, Nick Lee, Damien Mavis and Simione
Messier spoke.
Mayor Blakespear declared a recess from 9:45 P.M. to 10:00 P.M.
Council discussed the information provided by staff and consultants and
provided feedback and comments.
COUNCIL ACTION:
There was Council Consensus to direct the Council Subcommittee to
work with staff and the consultants regarding the contents of the
ballot measure.
10B. Publie Heerin +e reyiew and ens'der the in+redH8tien of _i, �e nnil
QFdinasee No. 2019 03, titled Q31V
"An
and Title 30 7enin ) of +he Eneinotas M mini
the �yen,t
the-'ne esen.ed in J�c.G� rtial—yCY�'�neTCrnrt
oranegt�is iteri' �o..n n�en}ri6r__ .r ...+ne April 18 2018 Gi1y Co uncil
05/23/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 7 Mtg.#2018---,Bk#34,Page
05/23/18 Regular Meeting
roendac--and—rareCn�9ticed.- C ASE NO! 10-;C�GPA• LOCATION:
GirPV ° wrtC �e-e- Asseeiate
PlaRnep loiter
^'
Council OFd'nnn^a 2018 03, titled "An QFdonanee of the City Co p 'I f the
Gity of Encinitas Galifemia adopt' men�ents to Title 24
(SubdiViSiGRs) and Title 30 (Zoning) of the Encinitas MunGipal Code,
`_''�.�-7J `_' V�TTiLA.7, oTRiTp1TTT�'e'17LTT'i9�aTT7'c71'f CJ7T' Title
Prepee a Ghanges-te theC' inelusienary housing regulations YYI�nr��1 !V tiJ y �,, f GTLfJTO TR'Cf�T7�LV
hoertteF address the Reed f0F affo Fd u ale Units-res"enved in nCW resridcnfi^t
development pFejeetsi" and 3) i et staff to pTp]"re the tu�+.
a. Nexus-Study_+oevaluate establishing a fee fr)rnrpieets
with less than
7--unTiite, (1-6 units aTnrd!OF fractio ° b.Gap Analysis to ate
t
establis ing a^n-irT-llieu fee-f9F prejeGtS eff 7 O Orr-rmr eFe/�-URit^G'G. EGG r^GMiG
Feasibility rs��_eyal`�evaluate inGF acing the peFGentage requirement
far afferrlahle units (eitywide and U mZened sites).ice—P
Mayor Blakespear announced that due to time constraints, this item would
be continued to a future meeting.
11. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
12. COUNCIL MEMBER INITIATED AGENDA ITEM
12A. Residential Care Facilities. Contact Person: Council Member Kranz
Recommended Action: Direct Staff to prepare an agenda item for the
Planning Commission to consider a change to the zoning code which
would only allow a "Residential Care, General" facility in the "Public/Semi
Public" zone with the same conditional use permitting requirement.
Council Member Kranz presented his report.
SPEAKER:
Mark Faulkner spoke in opposition to the recommended action.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mosca moved, Blakespear seconded to direct staff to prepare an
agenda item for the Planning Commission (on a high priority time
frame) to consider a change to the zoning code which would only
allow a "Residential Care, General" facility in the "Public/Semi
Public" zone (or a zone more suitable) with the same conditional use
permitting requirement. Motion carried. Ayes: Blakespear, Boerner
Horvath, Kranz, Mosca, Muir. Nays: None.
05/23/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 8 Mtg.#2018-___,Bk#34,Page
05/23/18 Regular Meeting
13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS,ADDED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS
There was Council Consensus to have staff provide Council with a monthly
matrix of the grants that the City was applying for and the status of each grant.
14. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS PURSUANT TO AB1234 (GC
53232.3(d)) / POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF
Council Member Kranz reported on a NCTD Safety and Security meeting.
Council Member Boerner Horvath reported on a San Elijo JPA meeting.
Council Member Muir reported on an Encina Wastewater Authority Board of
Directors meeting.
Deputy Mayor Mosca reported on a San Elijo JPA meeting
Mayor Blakespear reported on a SANDAG Transportation Committee meeting
and an Encina Wastewater Authority Board of Directors meeting.
15. CITY MANAGER REPORTS / PENDING POSSIBLE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
No reports were given.
16. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
No reports were given.
17. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Blakespear adjourned the meeting at 11:17 P.M.
Kathy ollyw od, City Clerk Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor
By: Claudia Bingham
Deputy City Clerk
05/23/18 Reg.Mtg. Page 9 Mtg.#2018-___,Bk#34,Page
City of Encinitas
A.3 Stakeholder Workshop Notes
This section contains summary notes of the two stakeholder workshops held as a part of the Housing
Element Update process. Stakeholder workshops were open to the public and attendees included
members of the local development community, low-income housing experts, members of local
educational institutions, and non-profit organizations.
2013-2021 Housing Element Appendix A-5
City of Encinitas Housing Element Update
Stakeholder Meeting #1
Date: February 28, 2018
Time:3:30 pm—S:OOpm
Attendees:
City of Encinitas Stakeholders
Brenda Wisneski Adam Gutteridge—Chelsea Investment
Diane Langager Corporation
Laurie Winter Keith Harrison
Nicole Piano Moyria Miller—Baldwin &Sons
Norm Miller—USD BMC Real Estate Center
Consultants Michael McSweeney—Building Industry
Dave Barquist Association (BIA)
Nick Chen Sarah Morrell—Shea Homes
Barbara Kautz Laura Nunn—San Diego Housing Federation
Lori Pfeiler—Habitat for Humanity
Sue Reynolds—Community Housing Works
Meeting Notes
Meeting Overview
The City of Encinitas held the first Stakeholder Meeting as a part of the community outreach effort
associated with the current Housing Element Update on Wednesday, February 28, 2018 from 3:30—
5:00pm in the Poinsettia Room at City Hall. The purpose of the meeting was to gather feedback from
people who understand the current development environment in Encinitas on what types of policy and
programmatic changes could help encourage development,specifically of low-income housing,within
the city.
The meeting consisted of a short presentation by Kimley-Horn,followed by a facilitated discussion
amongst all meeting attendees. Major topics discussed at the meeting included development standards,
entitlement processing, and fees and exactions. The following is a detailed summary of the information
provided by meeting attendees throughout the discussion.
Development Standards
• Reference the City of San Diego Affordable Housing Parking Study
o Focus on the proximity of sites to transit
o Occupancy guidelines
o Study shows that affordable housing can require less cars than market-rate housing
• Planning for autonomous vehicles
• Should explore different standards for affordable housing vs. market rate
• Two stories is extremely limiting to potential development
• Senior living includes additional costs (EG elevators)that make development harder
• Rental versus for sale development
1
City of Encinitas Housing Element Update
• It is not possible for the affordable units of a development to be the same size as the market-
rate
o Can this be changed?
o Potentially mesh with tax credit unit size
• Grouping of low-income units as opposed to interspersed—Iris example
o Private management is a potential option for low-income developments
• What gets in the way of developing more units?
• Zoning density
• Height
■ Differences in how it is calculated make a big difference
• The type of product (detached/attached/mixed-use)
• Minimum of three stories needed to accommodate parking on affordable units
o Ideal height is 37' measure from the pad level
• Common and private usable open space
o Limiting factor
• Density bonus numbers for parking
o Can encourage smaller units through parking requirement changes
Entitlement Processing
• "Not late hits" policy—both by the City and the developer
o Increases efficiency
o Counter-level approval for by-right
• Implement a phased submittal process with a first phase that doesn't require as much detail
• Custom lot process
• Pre-application mandatory meeting
• What processes can be done concurrently?
• Add flexibility to mitigate influencing factors
• "Cities are afraid of design"—too many constraints
Fees and Exactions
• Fees are comparable to other cities
• Not as important as the type of product(look at S.F.v Per Unit fees)
• Need to look at all fees and ask, "Do current fees encourage development of affordable units?"
• Fee structure limits
• Fee is the same amount regardless of the size of the project,which can create high fees for
smaller projects
• Difference between an incentive and an offset
• Incentives need to give the developer something of value
• Setback example given
• Avoid creating penalties that can limit development
• Gap financing
o Low Income tax credit needed
o Gap(amount of time) is growing
2
City of Encinitas Housing Element Update
• Fee waivers
• Land donation often needed
• Deferral of fees until occupancy(current City protocol) is extremely helpful
• Impact fees paid overtime instead of front loading
• Potential to create a mechanism to allow developers the ability to transfer low-income units
from one development to another
o Require more low-income units if done
Conclusion
Meeting attendees expressed that the three most important factors that influence the ability to develop
low-income housing in Encinitas are height restrictions, parking requirements, and open space
requirements. Attendees also emphasized that a high level of certainty and time are more important
than a lowering of the fees associated with development.
3
City of Encinitas Housing Element Update
Stakeholder Meeting #2
Date:April 4, 2018
Time:3:30pm—S:OOpm
Attendees:
City of Encinitas
• Brenda Wisneski, City of Encinitas
• Diane Langager, City of Encinitas
• Nicole Piano-Jones, City of Encinitas
• Laurie Winter,City of Encinitas
Consultants
• Barbara Kautz,Goldfarb& Lipman
• Dave Barquist, Kimley-Horn
• Nick Chen, Kimley-Horn
Stakeholders
• Ron Brockhoff, Development Manager—Chelsea Investment Corporation
• Nick Lee, Baldwin @ Sons/Heritage Building
• Michael McSweeney, BIA San Diego
• Lori Pfeiler,San Diego Habitat for Humanity
Stakeholder Comments on Proposed Development Standards:
Development Standards Table
• Difference between offset (city pays for increased costs)vs incentive (city lowers costs)
• Proposed 25—30 du/ac
• Potential impact of density bonus after 11%affordability
• Could potentially apply for a waiver for additional height
• Lot Area
o 10,000 SF allows for potential subdivision of a portion of the site (sometimes financing
requires separate lots and different owners)
o Noted that at least 16 units must be achieved on every site
o Comfortable with keeping 10,000 sf minimum lot sizes
• Lot width and depth (75' min for both)
• OK if for exterior site dimensions only
• Building separation standards can govern internal lot lines
• Financing and other reasons could impact the actual development and how subdivision
of parcels impacts lot lines
• Setbacks
o Along Highway 101—move front setbacks closer to the lot line
o Existing standards and policies regarding irregular lots or other situations should still
apply
1
City of Encinitas Housing Element Update
o Interior lot setbacks at 10'with a subdivision project creates a potential 20'setback
between buildings
■ Consider reducing interior lot setbacks and require a larger project perimeter
(exterior boundaries)setback similar to how PRDs are handled (20'or 25')
• Lot coverage
o 80% lot coverage probably OK; 60-65%would be a problem
• Assumes uncovered parking is not counted in lot coverage calculation (current
policy)
• Specific plan area sites may permit>80%
o Setbacks,amenity space, and undulation will dictate building size,so may not need lot
coverage
o Nick Lee noted he would provide example projects he has seen in Long Beach
• Parking
• Reduced parking is critical to achieve 30 du/ac in non-structured parking with three-
story height limit.
• 3 stories, non-structured parking generally can yield 25 du/ac assuming 1.8 spaces/unit
average across all units
• Tough to structure parking for 30 DU/AC unless project is large enough to spread costs
• Affordable housing parking standards (City of San Diego example)—lowered parking
standards to fit the actual need
• Otay Ranch (Chula Vista) parking example
■ Smaller standards that are inclusive of guest parking
• City's existing parking rates are too high
• Don't work for an affordable project
• Density bonus law will limit parking that can be required
• The market will tell how much parking is needed
• Typical costs for structured parking is$35,000/stall with$15,000/stall for surface
parking
• Example jurisdictions for parking
■ City of San Diego (Affordable standard)
• Provides different standards for affordable housing(reduced parking
ordinance)
• Below are sample standards that attendees offered as examples they
have seen in other jurisdictions
o Studio: 1 space (inclusive of guest)
o 1 bdrm: between 1.5 spaces (inclusive of guest)
o 2 bdrm: 2 spaces (inclusive of guest)
o 3+ bdrm:2.25 spaces (inclusive of guest)
• Reduced parking standards are an incentive to do more inclusionary housing units
• Location (proximity to transit facilities)should factor into standards
• Require that people park in garages, can't be used for storage only
■ Parking is more likely to be used for parking if it is uncovered (can only be used
for one thing—parking)
2
City of Encinitas Housing Element Update
• Open parking is most cost effective for maximum flexibility
• City of San Diego requires 240 cubic feet of storage per unit
• Height standard
o Existing point of measure—Prop A
• Lower of natural or finished grade
• Prop A took away standard allowing measurement from pad
o Want to be able to measure from post-grading pad
• Fill is often required to achieve adequate drainage
• Some properties are much lower than street level, and this would have little
impact
o Almost all sites will likely lose at least a couple feet due to existing methodology,37 feet
is a necessity from finish grade
o Note that the 37-foot limit will not allow pitched roofs
o Note that density bonus law would allow greater height
• Private space and onsite amenity space
o Apartment balconies should count as private open space
o Only specify per unit total open space—300 sf
o Provide flexibility when site is in close proximity to open space, parks, beaches
o Have incentives for creating internal (usable) amenity spaces—give some sort of credit
for higher quality spaces
o Depending on the project, it may be beneficial to have a mix of on-site and off-site open
space
• Wall plane and Stepback standards
o How far does remaining 25%of wall not on single wall plane need to beset back?
o Step back—be clear on language of where the line is drawn for outdoor space
o Focus on alleviating the impacts of a third story
o Simplify step back text
• Private storage
o With uncovered parking,storage is provided as a closet on the balcony
Fees and Exactions
• Compression of approval time is more important than the fees
• Incentive: Certain timeline(exact timeline)for inclusionary projects
• Quality of the plan check is an important factor
• Ideally would like fees to be paid even after issuance of certificate of occupancy; recognized
security problems
3
City of Encinitas 1�y —1
—��CAC"Ut7"
AA Workshop/Open House Summary Notes
This section contains the available meeting minutes and public comments from the February 1, 2017
Housing Element Workshop and the May 10, 2018 Community Informational Open House.
A-6 2013-2021 Housing Element
MINUTES OF THE ENCINITAS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
FEBRUARY 1, 2017, 6:00 P.M., 1 140 OAKCREST PARK DRIVE
CALL TO ORDERIROLL CALL
Mayor Blakespear called the meeting to order at 6:08 p.m.
Present: Mayor Catherine S. Blakespear, Deputy Mayor Tony Kranz, Council
Members Tasha Boerner Horvath, Joe Mosca and Mark Muir
Absent: None
Also present: City Manager Brust, City Attorney Sabine, Special Counsel Barbara Kautz,
City Clerk Hollywood, and Principal Planner Langager.
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
AGENDA ITEMS
1. City Council discussion with the community regarding the development of a
legally compliant Housing Element Update.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss the development of a legally compliant
Housing Element Update and provide direction to staff as needed.
Mayor Blakespear welcomed everyone to the meeting and introduced Jerry Harmon who
was selected by the No on T Committee to serve as the moderator for tonight's meeting.
Mayor Blakespear stated that the purpose of the meeting was to allow the Council and
the community to discuss the key components for developing a legally compliant Housing
Element that was acceptable to the community.
Sheila Cameron and Bruce Ehlers, representing the No on T Committee, presented their
plan for"A Better Plan for Encinitas' Housing Element Update."
Public Seeakers:
John Carlson, Bob Bonde, Glen Johnson, Maria Lindley, Steve Boyette, Olivier Canler,
John Elmore, Brian Burke, Victoria Balentine, Peter Stern, Peter Zovanyi, Bill Butler,
Marco Gonzalez, Erika Chamberlin, Torgen Johnson, Gene Chappo, Nancy DeGhionno,
Andrew Matuszeski, Marie Latif, Susan Turney, Kathleen Lindemann, Heather Creider,
David Hovis, Jennifer Hewitson, Kurt Groseclose, Damien Mavis, Kathy Roth, Mike
Andreen, Eric Gilmer, Kathleen Lees, Dean Turney, Andrew Yancey, Dennis Holtz, Kevin
Doyle and Linda Newbert.
02/01/17 Spec. Mtg. Page 1 Mtg. #2017- , Bktt32, Page__
02/01/17 Special Meeting
The Mayor, Council, Special Counsel and staff responded to questions and comments
from the public. Themes discussed and identified by the public are included as
Attachment 1 to these minutes.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Blakespear thanked everyone for attending and adjourned the meeting at 9:10
p.m.
Kathy Hollywo d, City Clerk Catherine S. Blakespear, Mayor
02 101/17 Spec.Mtg. Page 2 Mtg.42017-----,Bk 432, Page
ATTACHMENT 1 TO THE FEBRUARY 1, 2017 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Housing Element
Special City Council Workshop
City of Encinitas - Community Center
February 1, 2017
THEMES
• UNIT TYPE
• STATE—COUNCIL—COMMUNITY
• MAXIMIZE USE OF ACCESSORY UNITS
• FIND COMMON GROUND
• DENSITY 20-25 DU/AC
• INCREASE INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENT
• TRAFFIC MINIMIZE IMPACTS
• CITY PARTICIPATION —FUNDING AND CITY SITES
• STAFF LIAISON—MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC INPUT COALITION TASK FORCE
• PARKING STANDARDS—MAINTAIN
• TWO STORIES VS. THREE STORIES/MAXIMUM HEIGHT 30 FT. VS. ?
SHEET NO. 1
• CONTEST RHNA NUMBERS
• MAXIMIZE ACCESSORY UNITS
• DEFINE"AFFORDABILITY"
• FLOOR AREA LIMITATION
• "TINY HOUSES"/COTTAGES OPPORTUNITIES 444
• TIME FRAME FOR ALTERNATE PLAN?
SHEET No.1A
• CONTEST RHNA
• PLAN NAME (NO AT HOME IN ENCINITAS)
• ZONE WITH CONSENT OF OWNERS
• NO INFILL DEVELOPMENT
• NEW ACCESSORY UNITS BY-RIGHT
o DO MORE IN THIS AREA
• SANTA BARBARA EXAMPLE: BEDROOMS PER ACRE VS. UNITS
• PARTNER WITH NON-PROFIT AFFORDABLE DEVELOPERS
SHEET NO. 2
• WHAT IS THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX?
• BAN IN-LIEU FEES- BUILD THE AFFORDABLE UNITS
• MAINTAIN 30 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT
02/01/17 Spec. Mtg Page 1 Mtg.#2017-__, Bk#32, Page
ATTACHMENT 1 TO THE FEBRUARY 1, 2017 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
• "50%"OF ALL HOMES IN ENCINITAS RESTRICTED AT'LOW'/'MODERATE' AFFORDABILITY
LEVELS
• CITY TO PURCHASE LAND AND BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING- PARTNER WITH PRIVATE
DEVELOPER
SHEET No.2A
• HOME DEPOT AREA?
• TINY HOMES = SHIPPING CONTAINER
• MORE FREQUENT COMMUNITY MEETINGS(QUARTERLY)?
• THOUGHTFUL PLACEMENT OF DENSITY
• DEDICATED STAFF LIAISON
• RENEWABLE ENERGY/SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
• AFFORDABLE BY DESIGN
SHEET No.3
• CHARGE MORE IN-LIEU FEES
• 50%AFFORDABILITY NOT FEASIBLE
• START WITH COMMUNITY-BASED IDEAS(I.E. ACCESSORY UNITS)
• "LOW IMPACT"PLAN
• DO NOT EXACERBATE EXISTING PARKING PROBLEMS
• CREATE A LANDMARK/HISTORIC COMMITTEE
• 1,900-UNIT BUFFER IN MEASURE"T" NOT CONSISTENT WITH RHNA NUMBER
SHEET N0.3A
• ACCESSORY UNIT OWNERS; HELP TO WORK WITH THEM
• VONS SHOPPING CENTER A GOOD SITE
• LA FITNESS CENTER A GOOD SITE
• MORE AUTHORITY FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
• ACCESSORY UNITS A PRIVACY ISSUE
• WHAT COMES AFTER COMPLIANCE?
• PREFERENCE TO OWNERS WHO WILL EXCEED MINIMUM AFFORDABILITY
• NOT CONCENTRATE ALL REDEVELOPMENT IN SHOPPING CENTERS
SHEET N0.4
• SPROUTS CENTER NOT A GOOD SITE
• No. 3 OR 4 STORIES
• TOWNCENTER SITE HAS POTENTIAL
• IN FAVOR OF TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT
• RE-DEVELOP EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR WITH CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO TRAFFIC
CALMING
• PRESERVATION OF QUALITY LIFE AND OPEN SPACE
• CONSIDER TINY HOUSES ON THE PACIFIC VIEW SITE
• MAINTAIN TWO-STORY LIMIT
NoAA
• AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS
02/01/17 Spec. Mtg Page 2 Mtg.#2017-_, Bk#32, Page
ATTACHMENT 1 TO THE FEBRUARY 1, 2017 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
• 33 FT AND 3 STORIES: SOME DEVELOPMENTS DONE WELL
• REACH OUT AND ENGAGE MORE OF THE COMMUNITY
• PUBLIC TRANSIT NOT THERE YET
• MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING MONITORING
• PRESERVE TRAILER PARKS
• NO MIXED USE EVERYWHERE: EL CAMINO REAL A GOOD LOCATION
• DEVELOPER HELP PAY FOR TRAFFIC AND INFRASTRUCTURE ON EL CAMINO REAL
• ISSUES WITH MIXED USE: TYPE OF USE CAN CAUSE CONFLICT WITH RESIDENTS
SHEET NO.5
• START WITH COMMONALITIES
• TASKFORCE TO REVIEW MEASURE T AND IDENTIFY AGREEABLE POSITIVE ELEMENTS AND
MODIFY CONTROVERSIAL ELEMENTS
• CONSIDER GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS
• "CREATIVE LIVING"CONCEPT
• DO NOT REDUCE PARKING STANDARDS
• LOW INCOME UNITS SHOULD NOT BE FOR SALE
SHEET NO.5A
• EXISTING ZONING DOES NOT SUPPORT TINY HOMES
• BUILDING HEIGHT MAXIMUM OF 30 FEET
SHEET N0.6
• PRESERVE EXISTING TRAILER PARKS
• INVITE HCD TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC FORUMS
02/01/17 Spec. Mtg Page 3 Mtg.#2017-___, 13032, Page
City of Encinitas
A.5 Housing Element Task Force Public Notice Mailing List
2013-2021 Housing Element Appendix A-7
Chelsea Investment Corporation Shea Homes Bridge Housing
6339 Paseo Del Lago 9990 Mesa Rim Rd 2202 30th St
Carlsbad, CA 92011 San Diego, CA 92121 San Diego, CA 92104
Wakeland Housing Mercy Housing California Hitzke Development Corporation
1230 Columbia Street,Suite 950 1500 South Grand Ave,Suite 100 PO Box 1700
San Diego, CA 92101 Los Angeles,CA 90015 Temecula,CA 92953
Solutions for Change Century Housing Corporation New Urban West Development
722 West California Ave 1000 Corporate Pointe 1733 Ocean Avenue,Suite 350
Vista,CA 92083 Culver City, CA 90230 Santa Monica, CA 90401
Community Housing Works Corporation for Supportive Housing Sun Country Builders
2815 Camino del Rio South,Suite 350 328 Maple Street,4th Floor 138 Civic Center Dr
San Diego, CA 92108 San Diego, CA 92103 Vista, CA 92084
Habitat for Humanity Encinitas Preservation Association San Diego Housing Federation
8128 Mercury Rd. 818 S. Coast Hwy. 101 3939 Iowa Street,Suite 1
San Diego, CA 92111 Encinitas,CA 92024 San Diego, CA 92104
Downtown Encinitas Mai nstreet Cardiff 101 Main Street Encinitas Chamber of Commerce
Association PO Box 552 535 Encinitas Blvd
818 S Coast Hwy 101 Cardiff, CA 92007 Encinitas, CA 92024
Encinitas, CA 92024
Leucadia 101 Main Street Association North County Lifeline Fraternity House Inc
386 N Coast Highway 101 200 Michigan Ave 20702 Elfin Forest Rd
Encinitas, CA 92024 Vista, CA 92084 Escondido, CA 92029
San Dieguito Alliance Community Resource Center Meals on Wheels
P.O.2448 650 Second St 930 Boardwalk Street, Unit C
Del Mar,CA 92014 Encinitas,CA 92024 San Marcos, CA 92078
YMCA Oz North County Casa de Amparo Catholic Charities-La Posada
215 Barnes Street 325 Buena Creek Road 2476 Impala Dr
Oceanside,CA 92054 San Marcos, CA 92069 Carlsbad, CA 92010
Bread of Life Rescue Mission United Way of San Diego North County Community Services
1919 Apple Street,Suite 1 4699 Murphy Canyon Road 1557 Grand Avenue,Ste. C
Oceanside,CA 92049 San Diego, CA 92123 San Marcos, CA 92008
Easter Seals Regional Task Force on the Homeless Alliance for Regional Solutions
1035 E.Valley Parkway 4699 Murphy Canyon Road 1557-C Grand Ave
Escondido, CA 92025 San Diego, CA 92123 San Marcos,CA 92067
Interfaith Shelter Network Interfaith Community Services TERI, Inc.
3530 Camino del Rio North, Suite 301 4770 North River Road 251 Airport Rd
San Diego, CA 92108 Oceanside,CA 92057 Oceanside, CA 92058
101 Artists Colony Jonathan Tarr Foundation Seacoast Community Church
1106 Second St,Suite 125 560 North Highway 101#1 1050 Regal Rd
Encinitas,CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024
St John's Catholic Church St.John's Catholic Church Affirmed Housing Group
1001 Encinitas Blvd Mexican American Apostolate 13520 Evening Creek Dr N,Suite 160
Encinitas,CA 92024 1001 Encinitas Blvd San Diego, CA 92128
Encinitas, CA 92024
San Dieguito United Methodist Church Jehovah's Witnesses-Kingdom North Coast Presbyterian Church
170 Calle Magdalena 1821 S El Camino Real 1831 S El Camino Real
Encinitas,CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024 Encinitas,CA 92024
The Vine Church Self-Realization Fellowship: Hermitage Jehovah's Witnesses
208 Camino De Las Flores 215 W K St 267 Quail Gardens Dr
Encinitas,CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024 Encinitas,CA 92024
Seaside Presbyterian Church Ranch View Baptist Church El Camino Christian Fellowship
367 La Veta Ave 416 Rancho Santa Fe Rd 510 S El Camino Real
Encinitas,CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024
House of Praise Evangelical Church Christian Science Society of Encinitas Christian Science Churches& Reading
511 Encinitas Blvd 912 S. Coast Highway 101 Rooms
Encinitas,CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024 520 Balour Dr
Encinitas, CA 92024
St Mark Lutheran Church Chapel of Awareness Coastal Christian Center .
552 S El Camino Real 560 3rd St 777 Santa Fe Dr
Encinitas,CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024
New Life Christian Fellowship Pacific View Baptist Church St Andrew's Episcopal Church
831 3rd St 845 Santa Fe Dr 890 Balour Dr
Encinitas,CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024 Encinitas,CA 92024
Bethlehem Lutheran Church Church of Christ Self-Realization Fellowship
925 Balour Dr 926 2nd St 939 2nd St
Encinitas, CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024 Encinitas, CA 92024
Encinitas Rotary Club Encinitas Lions Club Kiwanis Club
P.O. Box 230223 168 Del Mar Shores Terrace P.O. Box 230635
Encinitas, CA 92023 Solana Beach, CA 92075 Encinitas, CA 92023
Jewish Family Service Zephyr Melia Homes
8804 Balboa Ave 700 Second St 8951 Research Dr. #100
San Diego, CA 92123 Encinitas, CA 92024 Irvine, CA 92618
Hallmark Communities City Ventures John DeWald &Associates
964 Urania Ave 3121 Michelson Dr Ste 150 1855 Freda Lane
Leucadia, CA 92024 Irvine, CA 92612
Cardiff, CA 92007
National Core CityMark Development Stefan LaCasse
9421 Haven Ave 3818 Park Blvd 364 Second Street,#5
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 San Diego, CA 92103 Encinitas, CA 92024
Dianna Nunnez Dave Meyer Michael McSweeney
399 Hillcrest Dr DCM Properties Building Industry Association
Encinitas, CA 92024 P.O.Box 232280 9201 Spectrum Center Blvd.,Suite 110
Encinitas,CA 92023 San Diego, CA 92123-1407
Lennar Homes Nick Lee Keith Harrison
25 Enterprise Suite 300 Baldwin &Sons Harrison Properties
Aliso Viejo,CA 92656 610 West Ash,Suite 1500 3642 n1 St.#6
San Diego, CA 92101 Encinitas, CA 92024
Norm Miller Debbie Fountain Alex Plishner
5374 Linda Vista Rd. Carlsbad Housing&Neighborhood Services
San Diego,CA 92024 1200 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
'P
City of Encinitas -`
APPENDIX B
Table of Contents
APPENDIXB....................................................................................................................................... i
Tableof Contents............................................................................................................................... i
AppendixB: Housing Profile Report....................................................................................................1
1 Population Characteristics..........................................................................................................1
1.1 Population Growth........................................................................................................................1
1.2 Age Characteristics........................................................................................................................2
1.3 Race/Ethnicity Characteristics 3
1.4 Employment..................................................................................................................................4
1.5 Commuting Patterns.....................................................................................................................5
2 Household Characteristics...........................................................................................................6
2.1 Household Type and Size..............................................................................................................7
2.2 Household Income........................................................................................................................9
3 Housing Problems.....................................................................................................................11
3.1 Overcrowding..............................................................................................................................12
3.2 Overpayment(Cost Burden).......................................................................................................13
4 Special Needs Groups...............................................................................................................15
4.1 Elderly.........................................................................................................................................18
4.2 Persons with Disabilities.............................................................................................................20
4.3 Large Households........................................................................................................................22
4.4 Single-Parent Households...........................................................................................................23
4.5 Residents Living in Poverty.........................................................................................................24
4.6 Homeless.....................................................................................................................................24
4.7 Agricultural Workers...................................................................................................................25
4.8 Migrant Day Laborers .................................................................................................................26
4.9 Students......................................................................................................................................27
5 Housing Stock Characteristics....................................................................................................28
5.1 Housing Growth..........................................................................................................................28
5.2 Projected Housing Units..............................................................................................................28
5.3 Housing Type...............................................................................................................................29
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-i
City of Encinitas
5.4 Housing Availability and Tenure .................................................................................................30
5.5 Housing Age and Condition.........................................................................................................32
5.5.1 Lacking Plumbing and Kitchen Facilities .............................................................................33
5.5.2 Value of Housing.................................................................................................................33
5.5.3 Pre-1940 Housing................................................................................................................33
5.5.4 Substandard Housing..........................................................................................................33
5.6 Housing Costs and Affordability..................................................................................................34
5.6.1 Homeownership Market.....................................................................................................34
5.7 Rental Market.............................................................................................................................34
5.8 Affordability by Income Level .....................................................................................................34
6 Affordable Housing...................................................................................................................36
6.1 Publicly Assisted Housing............................................................................................................37
6.2 Resources for Preserving Affordable Units.................................................................................37
6.3 Tenant Based Rental Assistance .................................................................................................37
6.4 Constraints to the Provision of Housing.....................................................................................38
7 Non-Governmental Constraints.........................................................:.......................................38
7.1 Economic Factors........................................................................................................................38
7.2 Land and Construction Costs ......................................................................................................39
7.3 Availability of Financing..............................................................................................................39
7.3.1 Home Purchase Loans.........................................................................................................40
7.3.2 Refinance Loans..................................................................................................................40
7.3.3 Foreclosures........................................................................................................................40
7.4 Requests to Develop at Densities Below Those Permitted.........................................................40
7.5 Length of Time between Application Approval and Building Permit Issuance...........................41
7.6 Community Opposition to Housing Development......................................................................41
7.7 Local Efforts to Remove Nongovernmental Constraints. ...........................................................42
8 Governmental Constraints........................................................................................................42
8.1 Land Use Controls.......................................................................................................................43
8.1.1 Local Coastal Program.........................................................................................................43
8.1.2 Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone..................................................................................................44
8.1.3 Hillside/Inland Bluff Overlay Zone.......................................................................................44
8.1.4 Floodplain Overlay Zone.....................................................................................................45
8.1.5 Agricultural Overlay Zone....................................................................................................45
B-ii 2013-2021 Housing Element -Appendix B
City of Encinitas -`
8.1.6 Scenic/Visual Corridor Overlay Zone...................................................................................45
8.1.7 Planned Residential Development(PRD)............................................................................46
8.1.8 Inclusionary Housing...........................................................................................................46
8.1.9 State Density Bonus Law.........................:...........................................................................46
8.1.10 Growth Management Measures.........................................................................................48
8.1.11 Proposition A—Voter's Right Initiative...............................................................................49
8.1.12 Specific Plans.......................................................................................................................50
8.1.13 Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan ......................................................................................51
8.1.14 Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan..............................................................................................52
8.1.15 North 101 Corridor Specific Plan.........................................................................................52
8.1.16 Cardiff-by-the-Sea Specific Plan..........................................................................................53
8.1.17 Home Depot Specific Plan...................................................................................................53
8.2 Residential Development Standards...........................................................................................54
8.2.1 Minimum Lot Sizes..............................................................................................................56
8.2.2 Setbacks..............................................................................................................................57
8.2.3 Lot Coverage and FAR.........................................................................................................57
8.2.4 Building Height....................................................................................................................58
8.2.5 Net Lot Area........................................................................................................................58
8.2.6 Parking Standards ...............................................................................................................59
8.2.7 Flexibility in Development Standards .................................................................................60
8.2.8 Mid-range Density...............................................................................................................60
8.3 Provision for a Variety of Housing Types....................................................................................60
8.3.1 Single-Family Dwelling........................................................................................................61
8.3.2 Accessory Dwelling Unit and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit ............................................61
8.3.3 Multi-Family Dwelling.........................................................................................................61
8.3.4 Mobile Home Parks and Manufactured Housing................................................................62
8.3.5 Residential Care Facilities....................................................................................................62
8.3.6 Emergency Shelters.............................................................................................................62
8.3.7 Transitional Housing............................................................................................................66
8.3.8 Supportive Housing.............................................................................................................66
8.3.9 Single Room Occupancy Units(SROs).................................................................................66
8.3.10 Tiny Homes..........................................................................................................................67
8.3.11 Farmworker Housing...........................................................................................................67
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-iii
City of Encinitas
8.4 Housing for Persons with Disabilities..........................................................................................67
8.4.1 Land Use Controls...............................................................................................................67
8.4.2 Definition of Family.............................................................................................................68
8.4.3 Building Codes.....................................................................................................................68
8.4.4 Encroachment Permit Procedure........................................................................................68
8.4.5 Retrofitting and Barrier Removal........................................................................................68
8.4.6 Permits and Review Procedures .........................................................................................69
8.4.7 Reasonable Accommodation..............................................................................................69
8.5 Development and Planning Fees ................................................................................................69
8.6 On and Off-Site Improvements...................................................................................................71
8.7 Building Codes and Enforcement................................................................................................72
8.8 Local Permits and Processing Times...........................................................................................73
8.8.1 Design Review.....................................................................................................................74
8.8.2 Building Permit....................................................................................................................75
8.8.3 Coastal Development Permit..............................................................................................75
8.8.4 Administrative Review(Director Approval)........................................................................76
8.8.5 Discretionary Review(Planning Commission Approval).....................................................76
9 Environmental and Infrastructure Constraints...........................................................................76
9.1 Geologic and Seismic Hazards.....................................................................................................77
9.2 Flooding.......................................................................................................................................78
9.3 Wastewater Capacity..................................................................................................................78
9.4 Water Supply...............................................................................................................................79
9.5 Stormwater Management ..........................................................................................................80
9.6 Fire and Emergency Services ......................................................................................................81
9.7 Police Services.............................................................................................................................82
10 Housing Resources....................................................................................................................82
10.1 Residential Sites Inventory..........................................................................................................82
10.2 Above Moderate and Moderate Income Sites ...........................................................................82
10.2.1 Analysis of the City's Existing Capacity and Zoning.............................................................83
10.2.2 Reasonable Capacity Assumptions......................................................................................84
10.2.3 Capacity on Mixed-Use Sites...............................................................................................84
10.3 Development of Non-Vacant Sites and Converting to Residential Uses ....................................84
10.3.1 Lease Analysis .....................................................................................................................88
B-iv 2013-2021 Housing Element -Appendix B
City of Encinitas i ..
10.3.2 Regulatory Incentives..........................................................................................................89
10.3.3 Current Market Demand for Existing Uses.........................................................................89
10.3.4 Development Trends...........................................................................................................90
11 Sites Suitable for Lower Income Housing...................................................................................91
11.1 Accessory Dwelling Unit Production...........................................................................................93
11.2 Regional Housing Needs Allocation............................................................................................97
11.2.1 Future Housing Needs.........................................................................................................97
11.3 Credits toward the 2013-2021 RHNA.........................................................................................98
11.4 RHNA Carryover from the Previous Planning Period..................................................................99
11.5 Adequacy of Sites for RHNA......................................................................................................101
11.6 Proposed Development Standards...........................................................................................102
12 Financial Resources ................................................................................................................104
12.1 Affordable Housing Fund..........................................................................................................104
12.2 Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher...........................................................................................104
12.3 Community Development Block Grants (CDBG).......................................................................104
12.4 HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) ....................................................................105
12.5 Administrative Capacity............................................................................................................105
12.6 City of Encinitas Housing Authority...........................................................................................105
12.7 Community Resource Center....................................................................................................105
12.8 Nonprofit and For-Profit Housing Developers..........................................................................106
13 Opportunities for Energy Conservation ...................................................................................106
14 Evaluation of Previous Housing Element Related Work Efforts.................................................107
14.1 Evaluation of Progress towards Meeting Coastal Zone Requirements....................................107
14.2 Evaluation of Adopted Housing Element Goals and Programs.................................................108
14.3 Housing Opportunities..............................................................................................................109
14.4 Homeownership Opportunities................................................................................................116
14.5 Rental Assistance Programs......................................................................................................117
14.6 Quality of Housing.....................................................................................................................119
14.7 Maintenance and Preservation of Housing Programs..............................................................120
14.8 Financing...................................................................................................................................121
14.9 Quantified Objectives in Past Housing Element Cycles ............................................................122
14.9.1 New Construction .............................................................................................................123
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-v
City of Encinitas z
This page intentionally left blank.
13-vi 2013-2021 Housing Element -Appendix B
City of Encinitas zJ
Appendix B: Housing Profile Report
The City strives to achieve a balanced housing stock that meets the varied needs of all income segments
of the community. To understand the City's housing needs, the nature of the existing housing stock
and the housing market are comprehensively evaluated. This section of the Housing Element discusses
the major components of housing needs in Encinitas, including population, household, economic and
housing stock characteristics. Each of these components is presented in a regional context, and, where
relevant, in the context of other nearby communities. This assessment serves as the basis for
identifying the appropriate goals, policies, and programs for the City to implement during the 2010-2021
Housing Element cycle (2013-2021 planning period).
1 Population Characteristics
Understanding the characteristics of a population is vital in the process of planning for the future needs
of a community. Population characteristics affect the type and amount of housing need in a community.
Issues such as population growth, race/ethnicity, age, and employment trends are factors that combine
to influence the type of housing needed and the ability to afford housing.The following section describes
and analyzes the various population characteristics and trends that affect housing need.
1 .1 Population Growth
According to the U.S. Census the population in the region has steadily increased over time. In 1990,the
San Diego regional population was 2,298,016. In 2000, the population of region was 2,813,833. This
represents about a 2.2 percent annual change in the population growth rate.The U.S. Census reported a
population count of 3,095,313 in 2010 showing that the growth rate increased 1.1 percent annually over
the last ten-years.During this same ten-yeartime period, Encinitas'population grew at a slower rate than
the region as a whole, increasing 0.3 percent annually,from 58,014 in 2000 to 59,518 in 2010.Table B-1
shows the actual changes in population for North San Diego County coastal cities and the County, as well
as projected population growth.
Table B-1:Actual and.Projected Population Changes(2000-2050)
City 2010 2020 Projected 2035 2050
Actual Projected Projected
Carlsbad 105,185 118,241 123,634 123,942
Del Mar 4,161 4,412 4,668 4,784
Encinitas 59,518 62,829 64,718 66,178
Oceanside 167,344 177,929 188,865 190,129
Solana Beach 12,867 13,409 14,311 14,941
San Diego County 3,095,313 3,435,713 3,853,698 4,068,759
Source:Bureau of the Census(2000 and 2010)and SANDAG Series 13 Regional Growth Forecast Update(2013).
The purpose of regional growth forecasting is primarily to provide a starting point for regional planning.
It is also one of the first steps in developing a Regional Transportation Plan. For this reason, a
growth forecast is updated every four years.According to the most recently adopted SANDAG forecast
(Series 13)the region will grow to approximately four million people by the year 2050, representing a
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-1
City of Encinitas 1 °
growth of approximately one million residents. This represents an average annual growth of
approximately 0.7%. It is projected that the 2010-2050 population in the San Diego region will increase
by 31.4 percent,while Encinitas' population is expected to increase by 11.2 percent.
It is important to note that the growth forecasts are not prescriptions for thefuture; rather they simply
portray an estimate of potential outcomes. The U.S. Census plays a critical role in estimating future
population and verifying past projections.
SANDAG's Series 13 forecast shows a growth of 6,660 persons between 2010 and 2050 in the City.This
numeric change results in a citywide population growth of about 11.2 percent total, which is about
7 percent less than previously forecasted in the Series 12 forecast. However,since population growth
is projected to continue and to outpace home construction, an imbalance could potentially influence an
increase in household size (the number of persons per household), a decrease in vacancy rates, and
an increase in the amount of interregional commuting.
1 .2 Age Characteristics
Housing demand within the market is often determined by the preferences of certain age groups.
Traditionally, both the young adult population (20 to 34 years of age)and the elderly population tend to
favor apartments, low- to moderate-cost.condominiums, and smaller single family units. Persons
between 35-and 65-years old often provide the major market for moderate to high-cost apartments and
condominiums and larger single family units because they tend to have higher incomes and larger sized
households.
In 2000,the median age in Encinitas was 37.8, approximately four years older than the regional median
age of 33.2. By 2010,the median age in Encinitas increased to 41.5, 6.9 years above the regional average
of 34.6 years. Table B-2 shows that in 2010, the largest proportion of the population in the City was
aged 45 to 59 years, accounting for 25 percent of the population,and followed by those aged zero to 14
and 35 to 44. Table B-2 also compares resident age in Encinitas to that of the region. San Diego
County's age distribution shows a younger population. According to the 2010 Census, 21 percent of the
population was under 18 years of age, similar to the 2000 Census profile.
Table B-2:Age Distribution Comparison (2010)
Area 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60-64 65+
Encinitas 1796 5.4% 4.5% 13.4% 14.5% 25.3% 7.0% 12.8%
San Diego County 19.3% 1 7.3% 8.7% 15.2% 13.6% 19.7% 4.8% 1 11.4%
Source:Bureau of the Census(2010)
California is projected to be one of the fastest growing states in the nation. In 1990,California comprised
12 percent of the nation's population and is expected to have 14 percent of the nation's population by
2020. In California, those persons of retirement age (i.e. 65 years and older) is expected to grow more
than twice as fast as the total population and this growth will vary by region.This means that people are
B-2 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
living longer,and the number of older persons is increasing. This trend is also evident in Encinitas,where
the senior-aged section of the population is expected to double by the year 2035.
1 .3 Race/Ethnicity Characteristics
Table B-3 shows that,according to the 2010 Census, the ethnic distribution of the Encinitas population
was predominantly White (79 percent). Approximately 14 percent of the Encinitas population was of
Hispanic origin and four percent were Asian. San Diego County exhibited more ethnic diversity, with
49 percent of the population being White, 32 percent of Hispanic or Latino origin and 11 percent
Asian. The race/ethnic composition of City residents has remained stable in Encinitas compared to the
2000 Census, with the proportion of Asian residents increasing slightly and the proportion of Hispanic
residents decreasing slightly. Countywide,the Hispanic population of Hispanic or Latino origin increased
from 27 percent to 32 percent and the White population decreased from 55 percent to 49 percent.
Table B-3: Ethnic Distribution (2010)
"
White � � Native Pacific Some Two or Hispanic
Area Black Asian Other or
Only American Islander` More
Race Latino 11
%Encinitas
Population 78.8% 0.50% 3.5% 0.30% 0.10% 0.30% 2.5% 13.7%
%San Diego County
48.5% 4.7% 10.6% 0.50% 0.40% 0.20% 3.1% 32%
Population
Source:Bureau of the Census(2010)
The racial and ethnic composition of a population may affect housing needs because of cultural
preferences associated with different racial/ethnic groups. Cultural influences may reflect preference for
a specific type of housing. Research has shown that some cultures (e.g. Hispanic and Asian) tend to
maintain extended families within a single household. This tendency can lead to overcrowding or an
increased demand for larger housing units. Ethnicity also tends to correlate with other characteristics
such as location choices, mobility,and income,as shown in Table B-4. In Encinitas, residents of American
Indian, Black, Hispanic origin, and Asian and Pacific Islander have the highest levels of poverty.
However, the overall Encinitas poverty level of 7 percent is lower than the San Diego regional total of
14 percent.
Table,B-4: Poverty Status by Race/Ethnicity. "
Encinitas and San'Diego Count
Some Hispanic
White Native Pacific - .Two or: .;
Area Black Asian Other or
Only " American. Islander. More
-,Race Latino,
%Encinitas
Population 7.1% 38.3% 4.6% 0.0% 16.7% 13.8% 9.1% 18.4%
%San Diego County
Population 1 13.2% 20.1% 10.7% 20.2% 15.6% 23.1% 14.3% 19.6%
Source:ACS 5-year estimates(2016)
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-3
City of Encinitas
Employment has an important impact on housing needs. Incomes associated with different jobs and the
number of workers in a household determines the type and size of housing a household can afford. In
some cases,the types of jobs themselves can affect housing needs and demand
with military installations, college campuses, and large amounts of seasonal agriculture). Employment
growth typically leads to strong housing demand,while the reverse is true when employment contracts.
1.4 Employment
To achieve a better balance between jobs and housing, it is important to consider the employment
characteristics of a region. In the San Diego region, employment growth outpaced population growth
between 1990 and 2000. The decade recorded a gain of more than 188,865 jobs, an increase of 16
percent,while population increased by 315,817 people, a growth rate of 13 percent.1
Table B-5 shows that in 2010 there were over 1.42 million jobs in the San Diego region. Regionwide,
growth of 34% is expected between 2010 and 2050. Table B-5 also shows that the number of jobs in
Encinitas are expected to grow by 15%from 2010 to 2050.
Table B-5: Employment Growth (2010-2050)
Jurisdiction 2010 2020 2050 %Change Numeric Change
2010-2050 2010-2050
Carlsbad 64,956 77,431 85,718 32% 20,762
Del Mar 4,431 4,542 4,725 6.6% 294
Encinitas 25,643 27,276 29,542 15.2% 3,899
Oceanside 41,142 48,208 54,091 31.5% 12,949
Solana Beach 7,417 8,156 8,802 18.7% 1,385
San Diego County 1,421,941 1,624,124 1,911,405 34.4% 489,464
Source: SANDAG Series 13 Subregional Growth Forecast(2013)
Table B-5 shows that between 2010 and 2050, Encinitas is projected to gain approximately 3,899 new
employment opportunities (i.e. the number of workers with jobs), which represents an increase of 15
percent. This represents one of the lowest percentage increases in employment in the North County
coastal cities. Regionwide, approximately 489,464 new employment opportunities will be generated,
representing an increase of 34 percent. This projected change in employment is considerably less than
previously forecasted.
Previous forecasts showed that the largest numerical gains in employment in Encinitas between 2000 and
2030 would occur in the services, retail trade, and government sectors. Table B-6 shows the industries
that Encinitas residents were employed in compared with County residents as a whole in 2006-2008, as
well as the mean annual wage in the first quarter of 2010. Encinitas residents were employed by a variety
of industries with 19 percent working in education services, health care and social assistance and 18
percent in professional, scientific, management and waste management services. Approximately ten
percent also worked in the arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodations and food service industries,
as well as ten percent in retail trade and finance.Together these industries account for 67 percent of the
employment of Encinitas residents. Those working in the professional industries were earning
between$72,840 and $113,870 and those in the education services category were earning between
$30,480 and$86,425.These industries employed 38 percent of the labor pool.
B-4 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas �_,0000" at
Table B-6: Number of Workers by Industry(2000-2010)
San Diego Mean Annual Wage in the
Industry Encinitas County Region(San Diego MSA)
Agriculture,Forestry,Fishing,Huntingand Mining 0.3% 0.6% $27,777
Construction 7.2% 7.8% $50,274
Manufacturing 8.4% 9.1% $33,600
Wholesale Trade 3.5% 2.9% $65,599
Retail Trade 9.5% 10.9% $37,650
Transportation,Warehousing and Utilities 2.3% 3.7% $31,976
Information 2.8% 2.7% $79,899
Finance and Insurance,Real Estate,Rental and Leasing 9.5% 7.8% $70,103
Professional,Scientific,Managementand 18.3% 14.1% $72,840-$113,870
Waste Management Services
Education Services,Health Care and Social 19.3% 19.1% $30,481-$86,425
Assistance
Arts,Entertainment and Recreation, 10.5% 10.7% $22,211-$55,851
Accommodations and Food Service
Other Services,Except PublicAdministration 5.3% 5.3% $26,030-$47,927
Public Administration 3.1% 5.3% $94,926
Total Mean Annual Wage 100% 100% $49,439
Source:American Community Survey(2005-2009)and California Employment Development Department(2010).
Compared with County residents as a whole, Encinitas residents benefited from employment in higher
income industries such as finance, professional and management,etc. However,the community has more
employed residents than jobs and remains a bedroom community.
SANDAG's Series 13 shows a regionwide average of 1.2 workers per dwelling unit. In Encinitas this would
result in 30,600 workers available for 25,600 jobs, a 1.19 worker-to-jobs ratio. The 2007-2011 ACS
(Workers) survey similarly found 23,489 employed residents in the City, but only 19,791 jobs, also
representing a 1.19 worker-to-jobs ratio. The 2011 ACS also reported an unemployment rate of 6.5
percent for all persons in the civilian workforce. Nearly 20 percent of all persons between the ages of 16
and 24 were unemployed. In terms of unemployment,Encinitas outperformed both the nation as a whole
and the State of California.The City's unemployment rate was significantly lower than the 2011 national
rate of 8.7 percent and state rate of 10 percent.
1 .5 Commuting Patterns
Commuting patterns demonstrate the relation of housing to employment opportunities and are a
component in the allocation of growth to localities.
Table B-7 shows that in 2010, 76 percent of Encinitas residents drove alone to work, about equal to the
percent region-wide. Just over seven percent of Encinitas residents carpooled, and approximately two
percent walked, and fewer than two percent used a form of public transportation. Eleven percent of
Encinitas residents worked from home.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-5
City of Encinitas
Table B-7: Means of Transportation To Work(208-2012)
Industry Encinitas San Diego Region
#of Workers 16+ %of Total #of Workers 16+ %of Total
Car,Truck,or Van—Drove Alone 21,781 75% 1,083,870 76%
Car,Truck,or Van—Carpooled 2,104 7.5% 141,733 10%
Public Transportation 421 1.5% 42,934 1.5%
Motorcycle 56 0% 4,443 0%
Bicycle 207 1% 7,591 1%
Walked 615 2% 38,116 3%
Other means 640 2% 13,954 1%
Worked at home 3,384 11% 87,862 6%
TOTAL 29,208 100% 1,380,578 100%
Source:2010-2012 ACS and derived"other means"to include bike and motorcycle rates based on precedent data sources including
the 2000 Census.
Table B-8 shows the average travel time for workers age 16 and over in Encinitas and the San Diego region
in 2000. Average travel times for Encinitas residents did not vary greatly from those in the region as a
whole.Approximately 35 percent of Encinitas residents had travel times to work under 20 minutes while
40 percent of San Diego residents faced the same travel time. Please note that the average travel time
segments were not recorded in the 2010 Census and is not available in the most recent three-year ACS
estimates. However, based on the 2010-2012 ACS,the average commute time for Encinitas residents is a
little over 24 minutes.
Table B-8:Travel Time to Work in Minutes(2010)
Less than 90+
Jurisdiction 10 1049 20-29 30-44 45-59 60-89 Minutes
Minutes Minutes' Minutes Minutes Minutes
minutes
Encinitas 10.5% 24.6% 19.8% 24.3% 7% 3.4% 2.7%
San Diego County 10.15% 29.4% 22.6% 20.6% 6.4% 3.9% 4.4%
Source: SANDAG Series 13 Subregional Growth Forecast(2013)
Commuting can be more expensive than people anticipate. Not only do the true costs of commuting
include the most recognized costs such as owning a car(finance payments, insurance, maintenance, etc.)
and driving (gas, etc.), but there are also potential personal costs (i.e. mental and physical health, etc.),
infrastructure improvements and roadway maintenance costs, environmental impacts (i.e. air quality,
greenhouse gas emissions and noise),as well as community impacts(i.e.public safety,visual and aesthetic
impacts,etc.).
2 Household Characteristics
The Census defines a household as all persons who occupy a housing unit, which may include single
persons living alone,families related through marriage or blood and unrelated individuals living together.
Skilled nursing facilities, residential care facilities, dormitories, and other group living situations are not
considered dwelling units, and persons living in them are not considered households; rather, these are
group quarters. Information on household characteristics is important to understand the growth and
changing needs of a community.
B-6 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1 a.
Many household characteristics may contribute to the diverse need for housing, some of which are
described in this section: projected households, household type, household size, and household income.
According to the 2010 Census,there were 1,086,865 households (equal to occupied housing units) in San
Diego County. Of these, 24,062 households, or approximately two percent, were located in Encinitas.
(Please note that the total number of households will vary depending on the source and when the data
was captured.)
Figure B-1 shows that between 2000 and 2010, the number of households in the San Diego region grew
by 92,188, a gain of approximately nine percent. During this time period, the number of households in
Encinitas grew by about six percent. The City will continue to account for approximately two percent of
the region's households. Based on Current Demographic and Socio-Economic Estimates published by
SANDAG (2014),there are about 24,425 households in the City and 1,105,120 households in the region.
Figure B-1:Change in Number of Households(2000-2010)
35.0%
30.0%
25.0% -
20.0% —
15.0% -
10.0%
5.0% — -- --- —
0.0%
-5.0%
Encinitas Carlsbad Del Mar Oceanside Solana San
Beach Diego
%Change from 2000- 5.5% 31.1% -5.2% 4.9% -1.8% 9.3%
2010
Source:Bureau of the Census(2000 and 2010).
2.1 Household Type and Size
Different household types generally have different housing needs. Seniors or young adults usually
comprise the majority of the single-person households and tend to reside in apartments, condominiums
or smaller single-family homes. Families with children often prefer single-family homes.
Household size is a significant factor in housing demand. Often, household size can be used to predict the
unit size that a household will select.For example,small households(one and two persons per household)
traditionally can find suitable housing in units with zero to two bedrooms while larger households (three
or more persons per household) can usually find suitable housing in units with two to four bedrooms.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-7
City of Encinitas z
People's choices, however, also reflect preference and economics. Thus, many small households prefer,
and obtain, large units.
Table B-9 shows that Encinitas households mostly consist of families (63 percent). Approximately one-
third of the City's family-households had children, according to the 2010 Census. The greatest change
from 2000 to 2010 was the 21-percent decrease in other non-families(unrelated persons living together),
and a 16-percent increase in married couples without children.
Table B-9:Changes in Household Types(2000-2010)
2000. 2010 Change
Household Types
Families 14,283 62.6% 15,044 62.5% +761 +5.3%
Married with Children 5,450 23.9% 5,172 21.5% -278 -5.1%
Married without 5,982 26.2% 6,941 28.8% +959 +16.0%
Children
Other Families 2,851 12.5% 2,931 12.2% +80 +2.8%
Non-Families 8,547 37.4% 9,038 37.5% +491 +5.7%
Single 5,864 25.7% 6,303 26.2% +439 +7.5%
Other Non-Families 2,683 11.8% 2,118 8.8% -565 -21.1%
Total Households 22,830 100.0% 24,082 100.0% +1,252 +5.5%
Source:Bureau of the Census(2000 and 2010).
In 2017, the average number of persons per household in the San Diego region ranged from 2.1 to 3.5,
with a region-wide average of 2.9 persons per household. Encinitas had an average of 2.5 persons per
household, representing a small decrease from 2010, when 2.6 persons per household was reported.
Table-B-10 compares household size in Encinitas to household size in the surrounding North County
coastal cities. Household size varied among the cities, with Del Mar having the lowest in the County.
SANDAG estimates that average household size in the region will increase slightly over the next 20 years.
Table B-10:Average Persons per Household North County Coastal Cities and San Diego Region(2017).
Jurisdiction Average Household Size(2017): Projected Average Household Size
Carlsbad 2.60 2.67
Del Mar 2.07 2.24
Encinitas 2.52 2.72
Oceanside 2.88 3.04
Solana Beach 2.34 2.44
San Diego Region 2.95 2.81
Source:Department of Finance(2017)
B-8 2013-2021 Housing Element-Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1
2.2 Household Income
Income levels influence the range of housing prices within a community and the ability of the population
to afford housing.As household income increases,the more likely that household is to be a homeowner.
As household income decreases, households tend to pay a disproportionate amount of their income for
housing and the number of persons occupying unsound and overcrowded housing increases.
Household incomes in Encinitas have consistently been higher than those in the region as a whole. In
1990, the Encinitas median household income was $46,614 - and the regional median income was
$35,028.The reported median income for the City was approximately 33 percent higher than the region.
In 2000,the City's median household income was$64,821, and the San Diego County median household
income was$47,268.The reported median income was approximately 37 percent higherthan the regional
average. The 2010 median household income in Encinitas was $85,350, compared to $44,772 in the
County. This represents a difference of about 90 percent. However, as shown in Table B-11, in 2016
median income in Encinitas was again estimated to be approximately 34 percent higher than the regional
median ($100,698 v.$66,529),consistent with long-term data and suggesting that the 2010 figure was an
anomaly.
Table B-11: Median Household Income Estimates(2016)
Jurisdiction Median Household Income Adjusted Percent Above/Below Regional Median
Inflation$2016
Carlsbad $97,145 +31.7%
Del Mar $108,556 +38.9%
Encinitas $100,698 +34.1%
Oceanside $58,949 -12.4%
Solana Beach $100,352 +33.9%
San Diego Region $66,529 0%
Note:All figures in 2016 inflation-adjusted dollars.
Source:American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-year estimates(2016)
Figure B-2 compares household income in Encinitas and in the San Diego region between 2012 and 2016.
Approximately 61 percent of Encinitas households had incomes over$75,000,about 16 percentage points
more than region-wide. The biggest discrepancy occurred within the highest-income bracket ($100,000
or more). Approximately 50 percent of Encinitas households earned $100,000 or more, compared to 32
percent region-wide.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-9
City of Encinitas ZJ
Figure 13-2: Household Income(2012-2016)
50.0% _ -
45.0%
40.0%
35.0
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
fl
<_ $15,000-1$25,000 $35,000-$50,000-1$75,000-$100,000
$14,999 S24.999 I S34.999 S49.999 S74.999 I S99.999 +
Encinitas 6.8% 6.5% 5.7% 6.3% 13.2% 11.1% 50.3%
San Diego County 9.5% 8.1% 8.4% 11.9% 17.0% 1 12.8%, 32.2%
Source:Bureau of the Census,American Community Survey(2012-2016).
The state and federal government classify household income into several groupings based upon the
relationship to the San Diego Region Area Median Income (AMI), adjusted for household size. The State
of California utilizes the following income groups:
• Extremely Low: 0-30%AMI
• Very Low: 31-50%AMI
• Low:51-80%AMI
• Moderate: 81-120%AMI
• Above Moderate: 120%+AMI
In 2014, a majority of Encinitas households earned moderate or above moderate incomes (Table B-12)
while just under one-third (29 percent) of Encinitas households earned low, very low or extremely low
incomes.
Table B-12: Household Income Levels(2014)
Income Level Renter- Owner- Total Percent of
Households Households Households Households
Extremely Low Income (0-30%AMI) 1,440 1,025 2,465 10.6%
Very Low Income(31-50%AMI) 945 890 1,835 7.9%
Low Income(51-80%AMI) 1,265 1,195 2,460 10.7%
Moderate and Above Moderate (>80%AMI)1 4,370 12,075 16,445 70.8%
Total 8,025 15,185 23,210 100.0%
Source:CHAS,based on 2010-2014 ACS(5-year estimates).
Note 1:HUD programs are available only to households with incomes at or below 80%AMI.Therefore,the CHAS data groups all households
above that income threshold(both moderate and above moderate income)into one incomegroup.HUD CHAS 2010-2014
B-10 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas zJ
3 Housing Problems
The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) developed by the Census for HUD provides
detailed information on housing needs by income level for different types of households in Encinitas.
Detailed CHAS data based on the 2010-2014 ACS is displayed in Table B-13. Housing problems considered
by CHAS include:
• Units with physical defects (lacking complete kitchen or bathroom);
• Overcrowded conditions (housing units with more than one person per room);
• Housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 30 percent of gross income; or
• Severe housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 50 percent of gross income.
The types of problems vary according to household income,type, and tenure.Some highlights include:
• In general, renter-households had a higher level of housing problems (48 percent) compared to
owner-households (41 percent).
• Large renter-families had the highest level of housing problems regardless of income level
(78 percent).
• Very low income(82 percent) and low income households (77 percent) had the highest incidence
of housing problems.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-11
City of Encinitas -� ^•
Table B-13: Median Household Income Estimates(2016)
Household by Renter Owner
Type,Income,
and Housing Small Large Total - Large Total Total
Problem Elderly Families Families Renters 'Elderly Families Owners Households
Extremely Low
Income(0- 200 445 0 1,305 405 25 1,060 2,365
30%AM I)
%with any
housing 82,5% 65.2% -- 0 67,9/ 0 0 0
problem 65.9/0 100.0% 77.4/0 71.0%
%with cost 82.5% 65.2% -- 65.9% 66.7% 80.0% 76.3% 70.6%
burden>30%
%with cost 82.5% 65.2% -- 60.5% 51.9% 80.0% 70.3% 64.9%
burden>50%
Very Low
Income(31- 165 370 60 375
5 985 0 850 1,835
0%AMI)
%with any
housing 81.8% 100.0% 100.0% 93.4% 44.0% -- 67.6% 81.5%
problem
8
78 with cost / 98 % . % . % . %6 1000 924 440 --
burden>30%u o 0 0 0 0 67.1% 80.7%
%with cost 69.7% 63.5% 58.3% 70.1% 28.0% -- 51.8% 61.6%
burden>50%
Low Income 245 535 15 1,415 625 155 1,735 3,150
(51-80%AMI)
%with any
housing 91.8% 86.9% 100.0% 87,3% 44.8% 80.6% 68.0% 76.7%
problem
%with cost 85.7% 86.9% 100.0% 86.2% 44.8% 80.0% 68.0% 76.2%
burden>30%
%with cost 65.3% 33.6% 0.0% 36.0% 24.8% 77.4% 47.3% 42.2%
burden>50%
Total 1,020 3,305 180 8,025 4,070 1,035 15,025 23,050
Households
Source:CHAS,based on 2010-2014 ACS(5-year estimates
3.1 Overcrowding
The combination of low incomes and high housing costs has forced many households to live in
overcrowded housing conditions."Overcrowding"is generally defined as a housing unit occupied by more
than one person per room in house (including living room and dining rooms, but excluding hallways,
kitchen, and bathrooms). Under State law a housing unit is considered overcrowded if there is less than
120 square feet of livable space (all space except the bath, kitchen and hallways)for the first two people
and less than an additional 50 square feet for each additional person. Overcrowding can indicate that a
community does not have an adequate supply of affordable housing, especially for large families.
According to the Census, between 1990 and 2000, overall overcrowding remained the same in Encinitas;
however, severe overcrowding slightly increased from 2.3 percent to 2.8 percent. As Table B-14 shows,
B-12 2013-2021 Housing Element-Appendix B
City of Encinitas
nearly five percent of the households in Encinitas were overcrowded in 2000, inclusive of the three
percent that were severely overcrowded. Overcrowding was more prevalent among renter-households
than owner-households, as rental units are typically smaller in size and renter-households typically have
lower incomes. The greatest increases were among renter-households from nine percent overcrowding
in 1990 to nearly ten percent in 2000 and five percent severe overcrowding to six percent. However,the
2010 census showed that overcrowding had decreased significantly. In 2010,494 households in Encinitas
had overcrowded conditions. Only 2.1 percent of households had more than one occupant per room and
only 0.4 percent had more than 1.5 occupants per room. Persons per household have decreased further
since 2010,from 2.6 to 2.5 persons per household,suggesting that overcrowding has also been reduced.
Table B-14:Overcrowded Housing Units(1990-2010)
Owner Households Renter Households Total Households
Overcrowding =Owners %of
Number Number Number %of Total
Renters
1990
Total Overcrowded(>1.0 252 2.0% 710 9.0% 962 4.6%
persons/room)
Severely Overcrowded
81 0.6% 398 5.0% 479 2.3%
(>1.5 persons/room)
2000
Total Overcrowded(>1.0 297 2.0% 783 9.6% 1,080 4.7%
persons/room)
Severely Overcrowded o 0
(>1.5 persons/room)
164 1.1/ 483 5.9% 647 2.8
2010
Total Overcrowded(>1.0
126 0.8% 368 4.5% 494 2.1%
persons/room)
Severely Overcrowded o 0 0
(>1.5 persons/room) 44 0.3/ 51 0.6/0 95 0.4/
Source:Bureau of the Census(1990,2000,2010).
3.2 Overpayment (Cost Burden)
Measuring the portion of a household's gross income that is spent for housing is an indicator of the
dynamics of demand and supply. This measurement is often expressed in terms of "over payers":
households paying an excessive amount of their income for housing,therefore decreasing the amount of
disposable income available for other needs.This indicator is an important measurement of local housing
market conditions as it reflects the affordability of housing in the community. Federal and state agencies
use overpayment indicators to determine the extent and level of funding and support that should be
allocated to a community.State and federal programs typically define over-payers as those lower income
households paying over 30 percent of household income for housing costs. A household is considered
experiencing a severe cost burden if it spends more than 50 percent of its gross income on housing.
Table B-15 shows that in the 2012-2016 American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 42 percent of
households in the San Diego region were paying over 30 percent of their income toward monthly owner
housing costs.Similarly in Encinitas,nearly 38.9 percent of all households were overpaying monthly owner
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-13
City of Encinitas t
z/
costs. Renters were more likely to overpay than owners; in the region 57.0 percent of renters overpaid,
compared to 51.8 percent in Encinitas.
Table B-15:Overpayment(2012-2016)
Renters Owners
Paying Paying %Paying . Paying Paying %Paying
30%+ 30%+ 30%+ 30%+ 30%+ 30%+
Carlsbad 14,642 7,364 50.3% 20,531 7633 37.2%
Del Mar 1,040 441 42.4% 768 385 50.1%
Encinitas 8,105 4,195 51.8% 10,939 4251 38.9%
Oceanside 24,675 15,247 61.8% 24,176 10600 43.8%
Solana Beach 2,332 1,204 51.6% 2,121 832 39.2%
San Diego Region 494,272 281,913 57.0% 420,723 178,840 42.5%
Note:Households do not equal total presented in other tables because housing costs were not computed for all households.
Source:Fact Finder:2012-2016 American Community Survey
In the region monthly owner costs were$2,341 and the gross rent was$1,395. In Encinitas,the total cost
of housing was higher. Monthly costs were$2,400 for housing units with a mortgage, requiring an annual
income of$96,000 to avoid overpayment. Gross rent was$1,791, requiring an annual income of$71,640.
(Note that this data reflects those occupying homes between 2012 and 2016 and not current costs and
rents.)
The prevalence of overpayment varies significantly by income, tenure, household type, and household
size.Table B-16 provides more overpayment detail by income group for Encinitas.Over 78 percent of the
lower income households were overpaying versus 26 percent for the moderate and above moderate
households.
Table 6=16:Overpayment by Tenure and Income Level, Encinitas(2014),
Household Income Group Total Renters Total Owners Total, .
Extremely Low(<=30%MFI) 1,440 1,025 2,465
Cost Burden>30% 930 665 1595
%Cost Burden>30% 64.6% 64.9% 64.7%
Very Low(>30%to<=50%MFI) 945 890 1,835
Cost Burden>30% 880 615 1495
%Cost Burden>30% 93.1% 69.1% 81.5%
Low(>50%to<=80%MFI) 1,265 1,195 2,460
Cost Burden>30% 1,075 840 1915
%Cost Burden>30% 85.0% 70.3% 77.8%
Moderate&Above Moderate(>80%MFI) 4,370 12,075 16,445
B-14 2013-2021 Housing Element-Appendix B
City of Encinitas z�
Table B-16:Overpayment by Tenure and Income Level, Encinitas(2014)
Household Income Group Total Renters Total Owners Total
Cost Burden>30% 885 3,415 4300
%Cost Burden>30% 20.3% 28.3% 26.1%
Total 8,025 15,180 23,210
Cost Burden>30% 3,770 5,535 9305
%Cost Burden>30% 47.0% 36.5% 40.1%
Note:Totals may not be exact due to rounding.Please note the Census Bureau uses a special rounding scheme for special tabulations
such as these.Therefore,totals may not match other census datasets.
Source:CHAS,based on 2010-2014ACS.
According to the ACS data,between 2010 and 2014,47 percent of renter-occupied households in Encinitas
spent more than 30 percent of their household income on housing. By contrast, a slightly lower
percentage of owner-households (36.5 percent) overpaid for housing.
Housing costs are indicative of housing accessibility.Typically, if housing demand exceeds housing supply,
housing costs will rise. As documented earlier, housing costs in Encinitas tend to be higher than those in
the San Diego region as a whole. Even higher income families in Encinitas spend a higher proportion of
their earnings on housing costs and have proportionally less disposable income for goods and services. In
1990,the City's median household value was$285,891. At the same time,the household median income
was$46,614.As of 2016,the median value of a home in Encinitas was$820,400 and the median income
of a household was$100,698. This change corresponds to a 187 percent increase in home values and a
116 percent increase in household income. The median price had increased to $1,008,500 by 2018.
Depending on the interest rate and/or down-payment and non-mortgage debt, it is reasonably expected
that a household would need to earn between$175,000 and$200,000 in order to purchase a home at the
City's listed median price.
The Center for Policy Initiatives published a 2014 year-end report, "Making Ends Meet" quantifying the
reality that many San Diegans live on incomes above the official poverty measure, but below self-
sufficiency. The analysis is based on the Self- Sufficiency Standard rather than the Federal Poverty
Threshold because it includes county-specific costs such as housing,transportation, child care, food and
taxes,etc.The study found that the cost of a basic lifestyle without public or private assistance is beyond
the reach of 38 percent of all working-age households in San Diego County.While costs vary substantially
by place, in general housing costs put a tremendous strain on a household's most basic expenses.
4 Special Needs Groups
Certain segments of the population may have more difficulty in finding decent,affordable housing due to
their special needs. Special circumstances may be related to one's employment and income, family
characteristics, disability and household characteristics, among other factors. Consequently, certain
residents in Encinitas may experience higher incidences of housing cost burden, overcrowding or other
housing problems. The special needs groups analyzed include the elderly, people with disabilities,
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-15
City of Encinitas z/
homeless people, single parents, farm workers, large households, and students (Table B-17). Many of
these groups overlap, for example, single parents may have large households, and many elderly people
have a disability of some type.The majority of these special needs groups would be assisted by an increase
in affordable housing, especially housing located near public transportation and services. Table B-18
provides a list of services and facilities available to assist households/persons with special needs.Several
of these agencies routinely receive funding from the City of Encinitas Community Development Block
Grant(CDBG) program.
.Table B-17:Special Needs Groups-in Encinitas(2010)
#of People Number of %of Owners Number of %of Renters %of Total
Special-Needs'Group or Owners Renters Households
Households or
Population
Households with Seniors 5,501 - - - 22.8%
Senior Headed 4,902 3,616 73.8% 1,286 26.2% 20.4%
Households
Seniors Living Alone 2,118 1,190 56.2% 928 43.8% 8.8%
Persons with Disabilities' 7,497 - - - - 12.9%
Large Households 1,740 1,153 66.3% 587 33.7% 7.2%
Single-Parent 1,440 - - - - 6.0%
Female Headed 5,503 - 22.9%
Households
Female Headed 974 - - - 4.0%
Households with children
People Living in 4,220 - - - 7.3%
Poverty'
Farmworkers' 103 - - - 0.2%
Homeless 184 - - - - 0.3%
1. 2010 Census does not contain updates to these variables;2000 Census data is used.
Source:Bureau of the Census(2000 and 2010)and Regional Housing Task Force on the Homeless(2010)
Table B-18:Services for Special Needs Populations(2016)
Special Needs Program Details Location
Services
Catholic Charities, La Posada 50 beds for homeless men Carlsbad
de Guadalupe
Community Resource Center 36 beds for women with Encinitas
Libre! children,victims of domestic
violence; motel vouchers
Emergency Encinitas Social Services General Population Encinitas
Shelters
Brother Benno's Foundation, 12 beds for homeless men Oceanside
Good Samaritan Shelter
Brother Benno's Foundation, 6 beds for women with Oceanside
House of Martha Ann Mary children,victims of domestic
violence
B-16 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
Table B-18:Services for Special Needs Populations(2016)
Special Needs
Services Program Details Location
M.I.T.E. North County Detox 6 beds for adults,substance Oceanside
abuse treatment
Women's Resource Center 26 beds for women with Oceanside
children,victims of domestic
violence
CHW—Marisol Apartments 21 beds for HIV/AIDS Undisclosed
patients
CHW-Old Grove 4 beds for HIV/AIDS patients Undisclosed
Permanent CHW-Old Grove 40 beds for farm/day Undisclosed
Supportive laborers
Housing Fraternity House, Inc.— 12 HIV/AIDS patients Vista
Michelle's House
North County Solutions for 40 homeless families with Vista
Change—Solutions Family children
Center
MHS—Family Recovery 90 Women with children and Oceanside
Center substance abuse treatment
Women's Resource Center, 61 Women with children Oceanside
Transitional Transition House
Housing/Shelters Women's Resource Center 26 Women with children, Oceanside
victims of domestic violence
YMCA Oz North Coast 10 Homeless Youth Oceanside
North Coastal Mental Health Homeless severely mentally Regional
ill
North County Lifeline—Hotel General homeless Oceanside
Vouchers
North County Community Food distribution San Marcos
Services for the Services\Food Bank
Homeless and Interfaith Community Services 100 General homeless Escondido
At-Risk Families (Winter Shelter)
Salvation Army Adult Rehab Drug/alcohol abuse San Diego
Center
Second Chance Drug/alcohol abuse San Diego
Stepping Stone Drug/alcohol abuse San Diego
Access Center, Inc. Independent living assistance Vista
Senior/Disabled
Services Serving Seniors-Senior Meals, health and wellness Regional
Community Centers
Source:City of Encinitas
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-17
City of Encinitas z n'
R/
4.1 Elderly
Many senior-headed households have special needs due to their relatively low incomes, disabilities or
limitations, and dependency needs. Specifically, people aged 65 years and older often have four main
concerns:
• Housing: Many seniors live alone and may have difficulty maintaining their homes.
• Income:People aged 65 and over are usually retired and living on a limited income.
• Healthcare:Seniors are more likely to have high health care costs.
• Transportation: Many of the elderly rely on public transportation; especially those with
disabilities.
In 1990,there were 5,074 persons in this age category(9.1 percent of citywide total). In 2000,there were
6,064 persons (10.4 percent).Table B-19 shows that 8,393 persons were age 65 and over in Encinitas in
2010.This accounted for about 14 percent of the City's total residents, higher than the percentage share
in the region as a whole. By the Year 2035, the senior-aged population will be 16,810,which is expected
to be about 22.6 percent of the citywide total.This forecast represents a 200 percent increase from 2010,
and a 2.9 percent annual growth rate. While many in this "age wave" have the financial resources they
need, many do not. For those who have only small pensions,social security and a few assets,the limited
income of many elderly persons often makes it difficult for them to find affordable housing. In the San
Diego region,the elderly spend a higher percentage of their income for food, housing, medical care, and
personal care than non-elderly families. Many single elderly persons need some form of housing
assistance. In 2010, nine percent of the San Diego region's residents aged 65 and over were living in
poverty.At the same time,approximately 6.5 percent of the City's elderly population was living in poverty.
Table B-19:Persons Age 65 and Over(2010)
Jurisdiction Total Age 65+ Percent Age
65+
Carlsbad 105,328 14,798 14.0%
Del Mar 4,161 866 20.8%
Encinitas 59,518 8,393 14.1%
Oceanside 167,086 21,501 12.9%
Solana Beach 12,867 2,404 18.7%
San Diego Region 3,095,313 351,425 11.4%
Source:Bureau of the Census(2010).
B-18 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas °
Table B-20:Elderly Households by Tenure'and Income Level Encinitas(2011)
Renters Owners
Household by Type;
Income and Housing Elderly Total Elderly .Total Total
Problem Renters Renters Owners Owners Households
Household Income<=30%
AMI 200 1440 405 1025 2,465
with any housing
82.5% 64.6% 67.9% 65.9% 65.1%
problems
•Cost Burden>30% 82.5% 64.6% 66.7% 64.9% 64.5%
•Cost Burden>50% 82.5% 63.2% 51.9% 49.8% 57.4%
Household Income>30 to 165 945 375 890 1 835
<=50%AMI '
%with any housing
81.8% 93.1% 44.0% 69.7% 81.7%
problems
Cost Burden>30% 78.8% 93.1% 44.0% 69.1% 81.7%
Cost Burden>50% 69.7% 70.9% 28.0% 49.4% 60.8%
Household Income>50 to
245 1265 625 1195 2,460
<=80%AMI
with any housing
91.8% 86.6% 44.8% 70.3% 78.6%
problems
•Cost Burden>30% 85.7% 85.0% 44.8% 70.3% 77.8%
•Cost Burden>50% 65.3% 43.5% 24.8% 49.0% 46.1%
Household Income>80% 410 4370 2,665 12075 16,445
AMI
with any housing
36.6% 24.8% 24.6% 29.6% 28.3%
problems
Cost Burden>30% 30.5% 20.3% 24.4% 28.3% 26.2%
Cost Burden>50% 12.2% 1.4% 7.7% 10.6% 8.2%
Total Households 1,020 8,025 4,070 15,180 23,210
•with any housing o 0 0 0 0
66.2/0 49.8/0 33.8/0 37.6/0 41.8/0
problems
•Cost Burden>30 61.8% 47.0% 33.5% 36.5% 40.1%
•Cost Burden>50 48.0% 27.3% 16.6% 18.6% 21.6%
Notes:
Any housing problems:cost burden greater than 30%of income and/or overcrowding and/or without complete kitchen or plumbing
facilities.
Other housing problems:overcrowding(1.01 or more persons per room)and/or without complete kitchen or plumbing facilities.
Elderly households:1 or 2 person household,either person 62 years old orolder.Source:CHAS,based on 2010-2014ACS.
Table B-20 shows elderly households in Encinitas broken down by tenure and income level. A higher
proportion of elderly renter-occupied households had housing problems (66 percent) than all renter-
occupied households (50 percent). Housing problems are defined as overpayment (cost burden) greater
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-19
City of Encinitas
_i
than 30 percent of income and/or overcrowding and/or without complete kitchen or plumbing facilities.
Additionally,62 percent of elderly renter-occupied households were paying more than 30 percent of their
income for housing compared with 47 percent of all renter households. Elderly owner-occupied
households,on the other hand,tend to be better off than all owner-occupied households as a group.Just
over one-third (34 percent) had any housing problem compared with 38 percent of all owner-occupied
households. Likewise,just over one-third(34 percent)were paying more than 30 percent of their income
towards housing versus 37percent of all owner-occupied households. Persons with Disabilities
4.2 Persons with Disabilities
According to the Census, a person is considered to have a disability if he or she has difficulty performing
certain functions (seeing, hearing, talking, walking, climbing stairs, and lifting and carrying), or has
difficulty with certain social roles (for example, doing school work for children, working at a job, and
around the house for adults).A person,who is unable to perform one or more activities,uses an assistive
device to get around, or who needs assistance from another person to perform basic activities is
considered to have a severe disability.
According to the 2012-2016 ACS, approximately 8.5 percent of Encinitas residents over five years of age
had a disability. Whereas only 3.2 percent of the population under 18 years of age had a disability, 30.9
percent of the population 65 years and over had a disability–demonstrating that the likelihood of having
a disability increases with age. And among persons with a disability,the likelihood that the disability will
be severe also increases with age.
Among the difficulties tallied, ambulatory difficulties were the most prevalent (52 percent),followed by
independent living difficulties (40 percent), and then hearing and cognitive difficulties (37 percent each)
(Table B-21). Ambulatory difficulties (60 percent) and hearing and independent living difficulties (46
percent each)were most prevalent among residents 65 years and over.
Table B-21: Disabilities Tallied by Age and Type(2016)
Disability Type Age 5 to 17 Age 18 to 64 Age 65+ Total
With a hearing difficulty 51 327 1,425 1,803
With a vision difficulty 62 217 436 715
With a cognitive difficulty 239 713 875 1,827
With an ambulatory 47 651 1,844 2,542
difficulty
With a self-care difficulty 91 236 1,077 1,404
With an independent
-- 569 1,410 1,979
living difficulty
Total 295 1,557 3,067 4,919
Notes:
Persons under 5 years of age are not included in thistable.Persons may have multiple disabilities.
Source:2012-2016 American Community Survey
Four factors—affordability, design, location, and discrimination—significantly limit the supply of housing
available to households of persons with disabilities. The most obvious housing need for persons with
B-20 2013-2021 Housing Element–Appendix B
City of Encinitas --�
disabilities is housing that is adapted to their needs. Most single-family homes are inaccessible to people
with mobility and sensory limitations. Housing may not be adaptable to widened doorways and hallways,
access ramps, larger bathrooms, lowered countertops, and other features necessary for accessibility.
Location of housing is also an important factor for many persons with disabilities, as they often rely upon
public transportation to travel to necessary services and shops. "Barrier free design"housing,accessibility
modifications, proximity to services and transit, and group living opportunities are important in serving
this group.
Incorporating barrier-free design in all new multi-family housing is especially important to provide the
widest range of choices for the disabled. (Please see the section on Constraints for an expanded
discussion.)
Housing advocacy groups report that people with disabilities are often the victims of discrimination in the
home buying market. People with disabilities, whether they work or receive disability income are often
perceived to be a greater financial risk than persons without disabilities with identical income amounts.
The 2000 Census reported that 10.7 percent of persons with disabilities in Encinitas were living below the
poverty level. It also estimated that 48 percent of people with disabilities between the ages of 16 and 64
years in the City were not employed.
The Housing Element is required to discuss the housing needs of persons with developmental disabilities.
As defined by federal law, "developmental disability" means a severe, chronic disability of an individual
that:
• Is attributable to a mental or physical impairment or combination of mental and physical
impairments;
• Is manifested before the individual attains age 18 (Note: State of California has a manifestation
age of 18 years of age, Federal is 22 years);
• Is likely to continue indefinitely;
• Results in substantial functional limitations in three or more of the following areas of major life
activity: a) self-care; b) receptive and expressive language; c) learning; d) mobility; e) self-
direction; f) capacity for independent living; or g) economic self-sufficiency;
• Reflects the individual's need for a combination and sequence of special, interdisciplinary, or
generic services, individualized supports, or other forms of assistance that are of lifelong or
extended duration and are individually planned and coordinated.
The Census does not record developmental disabilities. According to the U.S. Administration on
Developmental Disabilities,an accepted estimate of the percentage of the population that can be defined
as developmentally disabled is 1.5 percent. This equates to 893 persons in the City of Encinitas with
developmental disabilities based on the 2010 Census population. The San Diego Regional Center, which
provides services for persons with developmental disabilities, publishes client statistics for its area offices.
The City of Encinitas is served by the North County office in Carlsbad. As of February 2017, the North
County office served 5,614 persons.The Encinitas population represents about seven percent of the North
County population. Therefore; it can be generally estimated that about 393 clients served by the North
County area office of the Regional Center are Encinitas residents.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-21
City of Encinitas
Many developmentally disabled persons can live and work independently within a conventional housing
environment. More severely disabled individuals require a group living environment where supervision is
provided.The most severely affected individuals may require an institutional environment where medical
attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmental disabilities exist before adulthood,
the first issue in supportive housing for the developmentally disabled is the transition from the person's
living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult.
4.3 Large Households
Large households are identified as a group with special housing needs because of the limited availability
of adequately sized,affordable housing units. Large households often have lower incomes and frequently
live in overcrowded smaller dwelling units,which can result in accelerated unit deterioration.Table B-22
compares the number of large households in Encinitas to that in the county as a whole. In 2010, 7.2
percent of households in Encinitas consisted of five or more persons, compared to almost 14 percent
region-wide.
Table B-22:Large Households Encinitas and San Diego Region (2010) -
Jurisdiction Persons in Household Total .
5 6 7+ Households
Encinitas 1,111 357 272 1,740
Percent of Total 4.6% 1.5% 1.1% 7.2%
San Diego County 80185 36149 32447 148,781
Percent of Total 7.4% 3.3% 3.0% 13.7%
Source: Bureau of the Census(2010).
As shown in Table B-23, a greater percentage of larger households had housing problems (55 percent)
than all households(42 percent)in 2014. Housing problems can be defined as cost burden (overpayment)
greater than 30 percent of income and/or overcrowding and/or without complete kitchen or plumbing
facilities. Renter-occupied large households(as a group)tend to have more housing problems than owner-
occupied large households. The majority of renter-occupied large households (78 percent) had one or
more housing problems, while just over half of the larger owner-occupied households (51 percent) had
one or more housing problem
Table B-23:Large Households by Tenure and Income Level, Encinitas(2014)
Renters Owners
Household by Type,Income, Large Related Large Related Total
&Housing Problem (5 or more' Total Renters (5 or more Total Owners Households
members). members)
Household Income<=30%AMI 0 1,440 25 1,025 2,465
•with any housing problems 64.6% 100.0% 65.9% 65.1%
•Cost Burden>30% 64.6% 80.0% 64.9% 64.5%
•Cost Burden>50% 63.2% 80.0% 49.8% 57.4%
Household Income>30to 1 60 945 0 890 1,835
B-22 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas � ^
Table B-23: Large Households by Tenure'and.Income Level-.'Encinitas(2614)
Renters Owners "
Household by Type, Income, Large Related Large Related' Total
&Housing Problem (5 or more Total Renters (5 or more Total Owners Households
members) members)
<=50%AMI
%with any housing problems 100.0% 93.1% - 69.7% 81.7%
•Cost Burden>30% 100.0% 93.1% -- 69.1% 81.7%
•Cost Burden>50% 58.3% 70.9% -- 49.4% 60.8%
Household Income>50to 80%AM] 15 1,265 155 1,195 2,460
%with any housing problems 100.0% 86.6% 80.6% 70.3% 78.6%
•Cost Burden>30% 100.0% 85.0% 80.0% 70.3% 77.8%
•Cost Burden>50% 46.1%
0.0% 43.5% 77.4% 49.0%
Household Income>80%AM] 105 4,370 855 12,075 16,445
%with any housing problems 61.9% 24.8% 44.4% 29.6% 28.3%
%Cost Burden>30% 47.6% 20.3% 41.5% 28.3% 26.2%
%Cost Burden>50% 0.0% 1.4% 10.5% 10.6% 8.2%
Total Households 180 8,025 1,035 15,180 23,210
Note:Any housing problems:cost burden greater than 30%of income and/or overcrowding and/or withoutcomplete kitchen or plumbing
facilities.
Source:CHAS,based on 2010-2014ACS
4.4 Single-Parent Households
Single parents with dependent children represent another important group with special housing needs.
Single-parent households often require special consideration and assistance because they tend to have
lower incomes and a greater need for daycare, and related facilities. Table B-24 shows that in 2016,
Encinitas had 1,292 single-parent households. Of these, the majority (70 percent) were female-headed
households
Table B-24:Single-Parent Households Encinitas"and San Diego Region(2016)
Female-Headed
Single-Parent Percent Total Percent Female
Total HHs .HHs HHs HHs with Headed HHs
Children
Encinitas 23,695 1,292 5.4% 908 70.3%
San Diego Region 1,103,128 94,202 8.5% 68,465 72.7%
HHs=Households
Source: Bureau of the Census(2016
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-23
City of Encinitas ZJ °
4.5 Residents Living in Poverty
Families, particularly female-headed families, are disproportionately affected by poverty. In 2000, seven
percent of the City's total residents (4,220 persons) were living in poverty. Approximately 14 percent of
female-headed families with children, however,had incomes below the poverty level. The 2011-2013 ACS
reports also reports 8.4 percent of the city population and almost 17.6 percent of the female-headed
families living below the poverty line. Based on the 2011-2013 ACS, 11,416 households were at 200
percent of the poverty level.
4.6 Homeless
Throughout the country and the San Diego region, homelessness has become an increasingly important
issue. Factors contributing to the rise in homelessness include a lack of housing affordable to low and
moderate income persons, increases in the number of persons whose incomes fall below the poverty
level, reductions in public subsidies to the poor, and the de-institutionalization of the mentally ill.
State law mandates that municipalities address the special needs of homeless persons within their
jurisdictional boundaries. "Homelessness" as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, describes an individual (not imprisoned or otherwise detained)who:
• Lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence;and
• Has a primary nighttime residence that is:
• A supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living
accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters,and transitional housing
for the mentally ill);
• An institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be
institutionalized;or
• A public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping
accommodation for human beings.
This definition does not include persons living in substandard housing, (unless it has been officially
condemned); persons living in overcrowded housing(for example,doubled up with others), persons being
discharged from mental health facilities(unless the person was homeless when entering and is considered
to be homeless at discharge), or persons who may be at risk of homelessness (for example, living
temporarily with family or friends.)
The Regional Task Force on the Homeless (RTFH) is San Diego County's leading resource for information
on issues of homelessness. Established in 1985,the Task Force promotes a regional approach as the best
solution to ending homelessness in San Diego County.The Task Force is a public/private effort to build a
base of understanding about the multiple causes and conditions of homelessness. According to the Task
Force, the San Diego region's homeless population can be divided into two general groups: (1) urban
homeless, and (2) rural homeless, including farm workers and day laborers who primarily occupy the
hillsides, canyons and fields of the northern regions of the county. It is important to recognize that
homeless individuals may fall into more than one category (for example, a homeless individual may be a
veteran and a substance abuser), making it difficult to accurately quantify and categorize the homeless.
B-24 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1 . ' 4.
Since the homeless population is very difficult to quantify, Census information on homeless populations
is often unreliable,due to the difficulty of efficiently counting a population without permanent residences.
The Task Force compiles data from a physical Point-In-Time (PIT) count of sheltered (emergency and
transitional) and street homeless persons.The 2011, 2015, and 2017 counts were conducted in January
of each respective calendar year and the results are shown in Table B-25. Counts for 2018 were conducted
in January 2018 and showed that the total homeless population had increased to 125 persons,
approximately equal to the 2015 total. In 2017 Oceanside, Carlsbad, and Encinitas had the largest
homeless populations of the North County Coastal cities. In 2011, of the 184 homeless persons in
Encinitas, 50 were sheltered and 134 were unsheltered. In 2018, 39 were sheltered and 86 were
unsheltered; meaning however, that the total homeless population decreased, although fewer were
sheltered.
There is no data presently available documenting the increased level of demand for shelter in Encinitas
during particular times of year. Due to the mild climate, the only time of year when increased demand
may be a factor is during the winter months (November to March), when homeless persons may be
attracted to the City's mild climate.The homeless count always takes place in the last week of January, a
period when demand for shelter typically is at the highest. Since the year-round need described in this
section is based on that annual count,the need for emergency shelter either year-round or seasonally is
not likely to be greater than that found during the 2018 homeless count.
Table B-25: Homelessness in North County Coastal Cities and the San Diego Region(2011—2017)
Jurisdiction 2011 Total 2015 Total 2017 Total
Carlsbad 83 88 160
Del Mar 11 0 3
Encinitas 184 123 117
Oceanside 452 420 531
Solana Beach 7 3 3
San Diego Region 9,020 8,529 9,116
Source:Regional Housing Task Force on the Homeless(2011,2015 and 2017).
4.7 Agricultural Workers
Due to the high cost of housing and low wages, a significant number of migrant farm workers have
difficulty finding affordable,safe and sanitary housing.According to the State Employment Development
Department, the average farm worker earned between $22,000 and $35,000 annually.2 This limited
income is exacerbated by their tenuous and/or seasonal employment status. It is estimated that there are
between 100 and 150 farm worker camps located throughout the San Diego region, primarily in rural
areas.These encampments range in size from a few people to a few hundred and are frequently found in
fields, hillsides, canyons, ravines, and riverbeds, often on the edge of their employer's property. Some
workers reside in severely overcrowded dwellings, in packing buildings,or in storage sheds.
Farmworkers needs also are difficult to quantify due to the fear of job loss and the fear of authority.Thus,
migrant farm workers, in particular, are given low priority when addressing housing needs, and often
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-25
City of Encinitas � .,..
receive the least hospitable housing. The San Diego County Regional Task Force on the Homeless
estimates that there are at least 2,300 farm workers and migrant day laborers who currently experience
homelessness in the San Diego region.
Table B-26 shows that approximately 368 Encinitas residents were employed in agriculture, accounting
for less than three percent of the region's agricultural workforce and less than two percent of the City's
employment base.
Table B-26:Agricultural Workers(2012-2016)
Jurisdiction Agriculturaland Mining Workers Percent of Total Percent of Regional
Employment Ag.Employment
Carlsbad 407 0.8% 2.9%
Del Mar 0 0 0
Encinitas 368 1.2% 2.7%
Oceanside 1,061 1.3% 7.6%
Solana Beach 84 1.2% 0.6%
San Diego Region 13,855 0.9% 100%
Source:Fact Finder:2012-2016 American Community Survey
Farm employment in Encinitas is almost exclusively related to horticultural operations, and in particular,
the flower growing industry. In general,the employees in the City's horticultural industry are reported to
be skilled to highly skilled, long-term workers with established roots in the community.The City's flower-
growing operations report that they employ a stable,year-round labor force.
For low-income agricultural works who desire to live in Encinitas,their need for affordable housing would
be similar to that of other lower income persons, and affordable housing in the City would serve
farmworkers as well as others employed in low-wage jobs. Provisions required by State law regarding
employee housing and emergency shelters may also assist farmworkers.
4.8 Migrant Day Laborers
In Encinitas and other North County locales, numerous Hispanic immigrants seek work as day laborers.
Because of the City's proximity to the Mexican border and its location along a major transportation route,
Encinitas provides a convenient temporary place to seek work before moving on to industrial or
agricultural jobs further north. The availability of jobs, including temporary day-jobs, and the number of
open spaces which can be utilized as transient campsites, make Encinitas attractive to these workers.
A particular problem in providing funds to farm workers and day laborers is that U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban and Development(HUD)funds cannot be used to assist persons who are not legally in
the United States. While state law does not allow questions of renters regarding legal residency,federal
programs, including Section 8 vouchers, require legal residency.
B-26 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1 '
4.9 Students
The need for student housing is another significant factor affecting housing demand. Although students
may produce only a temporary housing need (but the need is ongoing as long as the educational
institution is in session), the impact upon housing demand is critical in areas that surround universities
and colleges. Typically, students are low income and are, therefore, affected by a lack of affordable
housing, especially within easy commuting distance from campus. They often seek shared housing
situations to decrease expenses, and can be assisted through roommate referral services offered on and
off campus.The lack of affordable housing also influences choices students make after graduation, often
with a detrimental effect upon the region's economy. College graduates provide a specialized pool of
skilled labor that is vital to the economy; however, the lack of affordable housing often leads to their
departure from the region.
Figure B-3 shows that in 2000,approximately eight percent of Encinitas residents were enrolled in college,
a lower percentage than the region as a whole. Although Mira Costa Community College is located in
Encinitas, no housing is designated for students on campus. Community colleges typically do not provide
housing because they are colleges that serve the educational needs of students already residing in the
local community.
Figure B-3: Percent of Residents Enrolled in School(2000)
20.0%
18.4%
18.0% s`
16.8%
16.0% _ I
I
r
14.0% —
I � _
i 9.0%
7.5%
8.0% — —
I i
i
3.2% 3.3%
4.0%
2.0%
I
Pre-Primary Elementary&High School College
■Encinitas 'I San Diego County
Based on the 2008-2012 American Community Survey,5 Year Estimates,the percent of residents enrolled
in college dropped from 7.5 percent to 6.2 percent.The percent of elementary and high school students
dropped quite considerably during this same time period, moving from 16.8 percent in 2000 to 8.0
percent.
Since 2010 the population of those under 18 has stabilized, perhaps due to the excellent local schools. In
2010,there were 12,120 persons in the City that were of school age (i.e. under the age of 18 years).This
represented about 20.3 percent of the total City population. The 2016 estimated school-age population
20.8 percent of the total population.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-27
City of Encinitas 0 '
--��
5 Housing Stock Characteristics
A community's housing stock is defined as the collection of all housing units located within the jurisdiction.
The characteristics of the housing stock, including growth,type,age and condition,tenure,vacancy rates,
housing costs, and affordability are important in determining the housing needs for the community.This
section details the housing stock characteristics of Encinitas to identify how well the current housing stock
meets the needs of current and future residents of the City.
5.1 Housing Growth
Table B-27 shows that between 2000 and 2010, Encinitas' housing stock increased by four and a half
percent. In comparison, the adjacent Carlsbad had the greatest amount of growth with a 29.6 percent
increase in units.
Table B-27:Housing Unit Growth(2000 and 2010)
Jurisdiction 2000 2010; 11 Percent,Change
2000-2010
Carlsbad 33,812 43,844 29.6%
Del Mar 2,557 2,542 0.6%
Encinitas 23,829 24,877 4.4%
Oceanside 59,583 64,758 8.6%
Solana Beach 6,456 6,521 1.0%
San Diego Region 1,040,149 1,149,426 10.5%
Source:Bureau of the Census(2000 and 2010
5.2 Projected Housing Units
Table B-28 shows that, between 2010 and 2050, Encinitas will experience an increase of 8.6 percent in
housing stock and approximately 29 percent more units will be added in the region. All of the North
County coastal cities are projected to have slower rates of housing growth compared to the region
between 2010 and 2050.
-Table B-28: Housing Unit Growth (Forecasted to 2050)
Jurisdiction 2010 2050
' Percent Change 2010-
2050
Carlsbad 44,422 50,212 13%
Del Mar 2,606 2,667 2.3%
Encinitas 25,481 27,667 8.6%
Oceanside 65,014 71,248 9.6%
Solana Beach 6,521 7,118 9.2%
San Diego Region 1,158,076 1,494,804 28.8%
Source:Bureau of the Census(2010)and SANDAG Series 13 Subregional Growth Projections.
B-28 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas I I.
5.3 Housing Type
Figure B-4 shows that in 2010,the largest percentage(57 percent)of housing units in Encinitas was single-
family detached units. Approximately 18 percent were single-family attached units, eight percent were
small multi-family developments with two to four units, 14 percent were large multi-family developments
with five or more units,and three percent were mobile homes/trailers.
Figure B-4:Type of Housing Unit(2010)
60.0%
50.0% — --
f f
40.0% —
� I
i
30.0% — -
20.0% -
' I �j
10.0%
0.0%
Single- Single- Small Multi- Large Multi- Mobile
Family Family
Attached
Detached
%in Encinita 156.8% FI_7.9-/_6__I 1 8.3% 1 14.1% 1.00/
%in San Diego County 50.9% 8.6% 7.3% 29.0% 4.2%
Source:California Department of Finance(2010).
Table B-29 shows that the percentage of both single- and multi-family housing units in Encinitas is
projected to fluctuate slightly, while the percentage of mobile homes slightly decreases. This figure may
be misleading because SANDAG forecasts mobile homes by determining the region's mobile home growth
rate and applying it to each jurisdiction. Also, as noted previously, SANDAG prepared a 2013 update
(Series 13)to its regional forecasting model.The numbers presented in this section rely on data available
through the Series 13 forecast and Department of Finance estimates for 2010.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-29
City of Encinitas z 1 1.
Table B-29:.Projected Housing Unit by Type(2010-2030)
Housing Type %of 2010 Total %of 2020 Total %of 2030 Total
Single-Family 74.6% 74.6% 73.6%
Multi-Family 22.4% 22.4% 23.5%
Mobile Homes 3.0% 3.0% 2.9%
Total Housing 100% 100% 100%
Note:The number of 2010 housing units estimated by the Department of Finance deviates from the 2010 Census slightly.However,the
2010 Census does not contain information on housingtype.
Source:California Department of Finance(2010)and SANDAG Regionwide Forecast(2030).
5.4 Housing Availability and Tenure
Housing tenure and vacancy rates are important indicators of the supply and cost of housing. Housing
tenure refers to whether a unit is owned or rented.Tenure is an important market characteristic because
it is directly related to housing types and turnover rates.The tenure distribution of a community's housing
stock can be an indicator of several aspects of the housing market, including the affordability of units,
household stability and residential mobility among others. In most communities, tenure distribution
generally correlates with household income, composition and age of the householder.
In 2010,59 percent of the housing units in Encinitas were owner-occupied,while 35 percent were renter-
occupied(Table B-30).This represents a decrease in the homeownership rate from 2000.As shown in the
following Table B-30, owner-occupied households had a slightly higher average household size than
renters. Approximately
69 percent of the rental units were occupied by one-and two-person households compared to 58 percent
of owner households.
Please note that in some of these tables, 2010 estimates were utilized,which are consequentially higher
than 2010 U.S. Census counts. The numbers presented in this section rely on Department of Finance
estimates for 2010 (as the best planning data available).
Table B-30: Housing Unit Tenure(2000-2010)
2000 2010 DOF
Tenure
Number Percent Number Percent
Owner-Occupied 14,644 61.4% 15,187 59.0%
Renter-Occupied 8,190 34.3% 8,895 34.6%
Vacant 1,033 4.3% 1,658 6.4%
Total 23,867 100.0% 25,740 100.0%
Source:Bureau of the Census(2000 and 2010)and Department of Finance(DOF)2018.
B-30 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas
Table B-31:Tenure by Household Size(2010)
Tenure
%of Total Owner-Occupied %of Total Renter-Occupied
-
Units Units
1-Person 20.3% 36.3%
2-Person 38.0% 32.9%
3-Person 17.6% 14.7%
4-Person 16.6% 9.5%
5 or more Person 7.5% 6.6%
Total 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Bureau of the Census(2010).
Persons per household in 2017, based on the 2010 Census as the benchmark, are estimated to be 2.52
persons per household according to the State Department of Finance.
Vacancy rates are an important housing indicator because they indicate the degree of choice available.
High vacancy rates usually indicate low demand and/or high supply conditions in the housing market.Too
high of a vacancy rate can be difficult for owners trying to sell or rent. Low vacancy rates usually indicate
high demand and/or low supply conditions in the housing market. Too low of a vacancy rate can force
prices up making it more difficult for low and moderate income households to find housing.Vacancy rates
between two to three percent are usually considered healthy for single-family housing; and five to six
percent for multi-family housing. However,vacancy rates are not the sole indicator of market conditions.
They must be viewed in the context of all the characteristics of the local and regional market.
According to the 2010 Census,the overall vacancy rate in Encinitas was 6.0 percent(Table B-32).However,
almost 40 percent of the vacant units were vacation homes that were seasonally occupied.Vacant rental
units represented about 1.9 percent of all units in the City (or 5.3 percent of all rental units) and vacant
ownership units represented about 0.6 percent of all units(or one percent of all ownership units).Overall,
the vacancy rates reflected a relatively healthy housing market.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-31
City of Encinitas z ° 1 4.
Table B-32:Vacancy Rates in Encinitas(2010),'.
Number., Percent of , Percent of Vacant Number.
Total
Total Housing Units 24,877 100.0% - 24,877
Total Occupied Units 23,295 93.6% - 23,295
Total Vacant Units 1,582 6.0% -- 1,582
Vacant(Available)
For Rent 498 1.9% 30.0% 498
For Sale 161 0.6% 9.7% 161
'Vacant(Unavailable)
Rented or Sold 77 0.3% 4.6% 77
Seasonal 661 2.6% 39.9% 661
Other 261 1.0% 15.7% 261
Source:Bureau of the Census(2010).
According to the State Department of Finance,the 2018 vacancy rate was estimated to be 6.0 percent for
all housing units in the City. The increase in vacancies may well represent additional vacation homes that
are only seasonally occupied.There is no additional information available regarding vacancy rates.
5.5 Housing Age and Condition
Housing age can be an important indicator of housing condition within a community. Like any other
tangible asset, housing is subject to gradual physical or technological deterioration over time. If not
properly and regularly maintained, housing can deteriorate and discourage reinvestment, depress
neighboring property values, and eventually impact the quality of life in a neighborhood. Many federal
and state programs also use the age of housing as one factor in determining housing rehabilitation needs.
Typically, housing over 30 years of age is more likely to have rehabilitation needs that may include new
plumbing, roof repairs,foundation work and other repairs. In Encinitas, approximately 57 percent of the
housing stock may potentially require some improvements based on the age of the structures, as shown
in Figure B-5. Approximately 25 percent of the housing stock is approaching 50 years of age or older and
are more likely to require major rehabilitation. Housing that is not maintained can discourage
reinvestment, depress neighboring property values, and can negatively impact the quality of life in a
neighborhood. Improving housing is an important goal of the City. The age of the City's housing stock
indicates a potential need for continued code enforcement, property maintenance and housing
rehabilitation programs to stem housing deterioration. Overall, however, given the moderate to higher
incomes of residents,deferred maintenance is not a prevalent issue in the City. Property owners typically
take pride in maintaining their homes and many have the financial means to do so.
B-32 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas � .
—1/
Figure B-5:Year Housing Built
35.0%
30.0%
9 I
25.0%
20.0%
15.0% 02010 ff I— J
90- 1980- 1970- 1960- 1950- 1940- 1939 0 00 1989 1979 1969 1959 1949 earlier
■ %in Encinitas 7.6% 10.0% 25.6% 31.6% 11.1% 8.4% 2.5% 3.3%
in San Diego Coun 9.9% 1 12.5% 19.7% 23.7% 13.5% 11.6% 4.4% 4.6%
Source:California Deoartment of Finance(2010).
5.5.1 Lacking Plumbing and Kitchen Facilities
A city can estimate the number of substandard housing units within its jurisdiction using a number of
sources of information,such as data collected by the Census Bureau.The 2005-2009 ACS reports 61 units
in Encinitas were lacking complete plumbing facilities and 160 units lacking complete kitchens.
5.5.2 Value of Housing
The value of housing is another potential indicator of housing stock condition. In 2018,the median housing
value in Encinitas was $1,008,500. Housing values are expected to continue the relative growth trend
since 2011. Those units below $50,000 in value can be assumed to have significant deterioration.
According to Census 2000 data, 28 units, or 0.2 percent of the housing stock, were valued at less than
$50,000. It is unlikely that any homes are valued at less than $50,000 today.
5.5.3 Pre-1940 Housing
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) may consider units substandard if they
were built before 1940. Figure B-5 shows that 835 units in Encinitas were built before 1940,
approximately three percent of the total housing in the City. Regionwide,five percent of units were built
before 1940(see Figure B-5).
5.5.4 Substandard Housing
The City has a minimal number of units in need of repair or rehabilitation, especially given the high
percentage of units that have been recently constructed. Based upon a combination of previous
"windshield surveys", observations and experiences of the code enforcement and planning staff, and
indicators from other surveys,the City has estimated that approximately 50-100 units would fall into this
category, although most, if not all, meet minimum housing and building code requirements.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-33
City of Encinitas z
5.6 Housing Costs and Affordability
Housing costs are indicative of housing accessibility to all economic segments of the community.Typically,
if housing supply exceeds housing demand, housing costs will fall. If housing demand exceeds housing
supply, housing costs will rise. In Encinitas, housing costs tend to be higher than in the San Diego region.
The high cost of housing can be attributed to factors such as higher land costs and coastal location.This
section summarizes the cost and affordability of the housing stock to Encinitas residents.
5.6.1 Homeownership Market
The median household value in 1990 was$285,891.The median household value increased 124 percent
to $353,655 by 2000. The median value increased another 193 percent to $683,000 from 2000 to 2010.
The overall change from 1990 to 2010 was 239 percent. By the summer 2014,the median priced home in
Encinitas was$769,000, 24% higher than the North County Coastal median of$619,000. In 2016, median
home price in Encinitas was estimated at $820,400, and in 2018 median home price is estimated at
$1,008,500.
5.7 Rental Market
The primary source for renter costs in the San Diego region is the San Diego County Apartment Association
(SDCAA). SDCAA conducts two surveys of rental properties per year. In Fall 2017, surveys were sent out
to rental property owners and managers throughout San Diego County.
Table B-33: Encinitas Average Monthly Rent(2017)
Fall 2017 Fall 2017 Fall 2017 Spring 2017 Fall 2016
Zip Code Unit Type Units/Properties Monthly Rent/Sq.
Surveyed Rent Foot Avg Rent Avg.Rent
Encinitas 92023, Studio 11/2 $1414 $4.32 $0 $1000
92024
1 BR 30/3 $1734 $3.83 $1543 $1579
2 BR 26/3 $2819 $3.41 $1454 $1786
3+BR 0/0 $0 $0 $0 $2160
Source:San Diego County Apartment Association(2017)
The table shows that in the fall of 2017 average monthly rents in Encinitas ranged from$1,414 for a studio
apartment to $2,819 for a two-bedroom apartment; no three bedroom apartments were available for
rent. Rents had increased dramatically from Fall 2016,increasing by 41 percent for studio apartments and
by 58 percent for two-bedroom apartments.
5.8 Affordability by Income Level
Although California is expected to experience an expanding economy over the next several years, lower
overall wages associated with the expanding service and information sectors of the economy portend an
increasing affordability problem. Housing affordability can be inferred by comparing the cost of renting
or owning a home in the City with the maximum affordable housing costs for households at different
income levels.Taken together,this information can generally show who can afford what size and type of
housing and indicate the type of households most likely to experience overcrowding and overpayment.
B-34 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas � ..a.�
The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) conducts annual household income
surveys nationwide to determine a household's eligibility for federal housing assistance. Based on this
survey, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) developed income
limits that can be used to determine the maximum price that could be affordable to households in the
upper range of their respective income category. Households in the lower end of each category can afford
less by comparison than those at the upper end. The maximum affordable home and rental prices for
residents in San Diego County, calculated as required by Health & Safety Code Sections 50052.5 and
50053,are shown in Table B-34.
Table B-34 shows the maximum amount that a household can pay for housing each month without
incurring a cost burden (overpayment). This amount can be compared to current housing asking prices
and market rental rates to determine what types of housing opportunities a household can afford.
Extremely Low income Households
Extremely low income households earn up to$19,100 for a one-person household and up to$29,450 for
a five-person household in 2017. Extremely low income households cannot afford market-rate rental or
ownership housing in Encinitas without assuming a cost burden.
Very Low income Households
Very low income households earn up to$31,850 for a one-person household and up to$49,100 for a five-
person household in 2017. A very low income household can generally afford homes offered at prices
between $114,362 and $176,487, adjusting for household size. Given the costs of ownership housing in
Encinitas,very low income households would not be able to afford a home in the City.Similarly,very low
income renters could not afford appropriately-sized market- rate rental units in Encinitas. Including
utilities,a very low income household at the maximum income limit can afford to pay approximately$694
to$1,071 in monthly rent, depending on household size.
Low income Households
Low income households earn up to $50,950 for a one-person household and up to $78,600 for a five-
person household in 2017. The affordable home price for a low income household at the maximum
income limit ranges from $160,008 to $247,015. Including utilities, maximum affordable rent for a one-
person low income household is $833 in rent per month and for a five-person low income household is
$1,285 per month.
Moderate Income Households
Moderate income households earn between up to 120 percent of the County's Area Median Income—up
to$66,600 for a one-person household and$102,750 for a five-person household in 2017. The maximum
affordable home price for a moderate income household is $293,769 for a one-person household and
$452,835 for a five-person family. Even moderate income households in Encinitas will have trouble
purchasing adequately-sized homes. Including utilities, the maximum affordable rent payment for
moderate income households is between $1,526 and $2,355 per month. Appropriately-sized studio and
one-bedroom units are generally affordable to households in this income group, but two-bedroom and
larger rental units are either not affordable or not available.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-35
City of Encinitas
Table B-34: Estimated Affordable Housing Cost(2017)*
Household Size Maximum Annual Income Affordable Monthly Maximum Affordable
Housing Costs Sales Price
Extremely Low Income(30%of Area Median Income)
1-Person $19,100 $416 $68,551
2-Person $21,800 $476 $78,438
3-Person $24,550 $535 $88,161
4-Person $27,250 $595 $98,048
5-Person $29,450 $642 $105,793
Very Low Income(50%of Area Median Income)
1-Person $31,850 $694 $114,362
2-Person $36,400 $793 $130,676
3-Person $40,950 $892 $146,990
4-Person $45,450 $991 $163,304
5-Person $49,100 $1071 $176,487
Low Income(80%Area Median Income)
1-Person $50,950 $833(rent) $160,008
$971(own)
2-Person $58,200 $952(rent) $182,913
$1110(own)
3-Person $65,550 $1070(rent) $205,819
$1249(own)
4-Person $72,750 $1190(rent) $228,724
$1388(own)
5-Person $78,600 $1285(rent) $247,015
$1499(own)
Moderate Income(120%AMI)
1-Person $66,600 $1526(rent) $293,769
$1781(own)
2-Person $76,100 $1745(rent) $335.506
$2036(own)
3-Person $85,650 $1970(rent) $377,197
$2289(own)
4-Person $95,150 $2181(rent) $419,218
$2544(own)
5-Person $102,750 $2355(own) $452,835
$2748(own)
*Source: Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (2017) and Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc.
Assumptions:2017 HCD income limits;10%down payment;and 5.5%interest rate for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage loan. Utilities
based on San Diego County UtilityAllowance based on assumed unit size and number of occupants. All numbers are rounded to the
nearest dollar. Maximum rent includes utility allowance.Maximum monthly costs determined as required by Health&Safety Code
Sections 50052.5 and 50053.Numbers are rounded estimates and not exact dollars.
6 Affordable Housing
State law requires that the City identify, analyze, and propose programs to preserve existing multi-family
rental units that are eligible to convert to non-low-income housing uses due to termination of subsidy
contract, mortgage prepayment, or expiring use restrictions during the next ten years. Thus, this at-risk
housing analysis covers the period until December 31, 2028. Consistent with State law, this section
B-36 2013-2021 Housing Element -Appendix B
City of Encinitas
identifies publicly assisted housing units in Encinitas, analyzes their potential to convert to market rate
housing uses, and analyzes the cost to preserve or replace those units.
6.1 Publicly Assisted Housing
The City maintains programs to provide quality housing affordable to different income groups for a
healthy and sustainable community. Local affordable housing funds have been used to assist in providing
affordable housing. Table B-35 lists those projects in Encinitas that are required to be evaluated in the
Housing Element. No projects are at risk of conversion to market-rate housing within the next ten years.
The Element,therefore, does not contain a detailed analysis of"at risk" units.
Table B-35: Inventory of Assisted Rental Housing Projects (2018)
Development Name Address Funding Source Exp. Date Type Units
Esperanza Garden 920 Regal Rd CDBG,Tax Credit Dec,2049 Family 10
Apartments
Su Casa Apartments 620 Melba Rd HUD 236 June, Family 28
2046
Manchester Apartments 2074 Mpanechester CDBG April,2053 General 4
Cantebria Senior Homes 645 Via Cantebria HUD 202, HOME June, Senior 44
2060
Encinitas Ranch 1100 Garden View HOME Feb,2058 General 22
Apartments Rd.
Pacific Pines
Condominiums S. El Camino Real CDBG/ HOME Perpetuity General 16
2nd Street Apartments 858 2nd St. HOME Jan,2056 General 4
Boathouse Apartments 726-32 Third Street City Funds Perpetuity General 4
City funds, HOME,Tax-
Iris Apartments 639-643 Vulcan Ave Credit Perpetuity General 20
Total 152
Source:City of Encinitas Planning Department(2018)
6.2 Resources for Preserving Affordable Units
Available public and non-profit organizations with the capacityto preserve assisted housing developments
include San Diego County, the City of Encinitas, and various non-profit developers, including Mercy
Housing, North County Housing, Community Housing Works, and Habitat for Humanity. Financial
resources available include bond financing,as well as CDBG and HOME funds,Section 8 rental assistance,
and Affordable Housing Trust funds. However, no units are at risk until 2046.
6.3 Tenant Based Rental Assistance
The Housing Authority of the City of Encinitas has 136 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers allocated,
although HUD funding only allows for approximately 101 to be leased given the local market conditions.
Vouchers are closely split among disabled households, elderly households, and family households. As of
this writing, there are currently 680 households on the City's Housing Choice Vouchers waiting list.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-37
City of Encinitas
Disabled households in Encinitas have the most need of those on the waiting list. Historically, an average
of 6 households are admitted into the Section 8 voucher program each year.
Table B-36: Rental Assistance in Encinitas(2017)
Household Type Households Currently Receiving Household on Waiting List
Section 8 Vouchers for Section 8 Assistance
Family 26 29%
Elderly 50 30%
Disabled 25 41%
Other(Single Households) -- 0%
Total 101 100%
Source:City of Encinitas,2018
Other assistance programs include the HOME Investment Partnership Program. The County of San Diego
administers the HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) within the County of San Diego
Consortium,which includes cities with a population of less than 50,000, as well as the cities of Encinitas,
Santee and Vista. City of Encinitas residents may receive assistance through the County of San Diego's
HOME programs.This includes TRBA programs(Emancipated Foster Youth TBRA and Family Reunification
TBRA). The TBRA programs are developed to provide rental assistance to former foster youth between
the ages of 18 and 24 and those that are attempting to reunify with their children while in substance
abuse recovery.
6.4 Constraints to the Provision of Housing
Actual or potential constraints to the provision of housing affect the development of new housing and the
maintenance of existing units for all income levels. Governmental and non-governmental constraints in
Encinitas are similar to those in other jurisdictions in the region and are discussed below.One of the most,
if not the most,significant and difficult constraints to housing in Encinitas and elsewhere in the San Diego
region is the high cost of land. This section describes various governmental, market, and environmental
constraints on the development of housing that meets the needs of all economic segments of Encinitas
population.
7 Non-Governmental Constraints
Nongovernmental constraints significantly affect the cost of housing in Encinitas,and can pose barriers to
housing production and affordability. These constraints include the availability and cost of land for
residential development, the demand for housing, financing and lending, construction costs, and the
availability of labor, which can make it expensive for developers to build any housing, and especially
affordable housing. The following highlights the primary market factors that affect the production of
housing in Encinitas.
7.1 Economic Factors
Market forces on the economy and the trickle-down effects on the construction industry can act as a
barrier to housing construction and especially to affordable housing construction. California's housing
market peaked in the summer of 2005 when a dramatic increase in the State's housing supply was coupled
with low interest rates. The period between 2006 and 2009, however, reflected a time of significant
B-38 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1�- a
1.
—z 1
change as the lending market collapsed. Double-digit decreases in median sale prices were recorded
throughout the State. These lower-than-normal home prices allowed for a large increase in the number
of homes sold initially until the availability of credit became increasingly limited.
After the post-peaktrough of 2011,building activity and sales for residential structures have been steadily
increasing. Housing values in Encinitas were the lowest in midyear 2011. The number of homes in
California that were bought and sold in the first half of 2013 was the highest since 2005. While housing
affordability hovered near historic highs post-recession, housing has become increasingly unaffordable,
with demand far outpacing supply and construction lagging far behind need.
It is estimated that housing price growth will continue in the city and the region for the foreseeable future.
A January 2018 report by Zillow found that there were 20 percent fewer homes on the market in San
Diego County than one year ago. Almost one-third of homes sold above the asking price.The underlying
reason is a Countywide shortage of supply due to both governmental and nongovernmental factors.
Production Countywide has fallen in recent years from 10,000 units per year to 7,000 units per year.
SANDAG currently estimates that 21,000 units per year must be constructed to meet the demand for
housing.The purpose of this Housing Element is to assist in increasing housing supply.
7.2 Land and Construction Costs
High land costs are a significant constraint to the development of affordable and middle-income housing
in the City. Land cost represents a significant cost component in residential development. There are
significant fluctuations in land costs per square foot. Coastal areas have the most significant costs,with
recent land sales upwards of$9 million per acre. Property located inland (east of 1-5)exhibits significantly
less cost per acre. Land cost in surveyed areas averaged approximately $1 million per acre. Coastal
property is highly desirable and a scarce commodity.
High land costs have a demonstrable effect on the cost of housing in Encinitas, as the price of housing is
directly related to the costs of acquiring land.
Construction costs based upon Type VA construction(wood construction)for multiple family construction
can range in cost from $113 and $124 per square foot, exclusive of land acquisition costs, but labor and
materials account for only about 30%of total costs in San Diego County.
Availability of skilled labor has become a challenge to the development of housing in Encinitas. Many
workers exited the industry during times of recession. Labor shortages in the construction industries are
evident throughout California as evidenced by the Go Build California campaign, which seeks to reduce
what it deems as a profound labor shortage in California and provides assistance to potential new workers.
San Diego County builders have reported construction labor shortages as a barrier to home construction.
7.3 Availability of Financing
The availability of financing affects a person's ability to purchase or improve a home. Under the Home
Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), lending institutions are required to disclose information on the
disposition of loan applications by the income,gender, and race of the applicants.This applies to all loan
applications for home purchases, improvements and refinancing,whetherfinanced at market rate orwith
government assistance. The data for Encinitas was compiled by census tract and aggregated to the area
that generally approximates the City's boundaries.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-39
City of Encinitas 1 °
Table B-37 summarizes the disposition of loan applications submitted to financial institutions in 2016 for
home purchase or refinance or loans in Encinitas. Included is information on loan applications that were
approved and originated, approved but not accepted by the applicant, denied, withdrawn by the
applicant, or incomplete.
Table B-37:Disposition of Home Loans(2016)
Loan Type Total Applicants Percent Approved Percent Denied
Government-Backed 110 63.6% 10.9%
Conventional 1,571 61.5% 10.3%
Refinance 4,229 63.5% 16.9%
Total 5,910 62.9% 15
Source:Home Mortgage Disclosure Act(2017)
7.3.1 Home Purchase Loans
In 2016, a total of 1571 Encinitas households applied for conventional loans to purchase homes. The
overall loan approval and origination rate was 61.5 percent and only 10 percent of applications were
denied.Approximately 110 home purchase applications were submitted in Encinitas through government-
backed loans (for example, FHA, VA) in 2016; 63.6 percent of these applications were approved and
originated.To be eligible for such loans,residents must meet the established income standards,maximum
home values, and other requirements. It appears that home purchase loans are generally available, and
most applicants are eligible for the requested loans.
7.3.2 Refinance Loans
The majority of loan applications submitted by Encinitas residents in 2016 were for refinancing their
existing home loans (4,229 applications). 63.5 percent of these applications were approved, while 16.9
percent(about one sixth)were denied,indicating a higher rate of denial for refinancing.This could be due
to either the applicants' inability to pay or to inadequate home equity; no data is available on the reasons
for denial of applications.
7.3.3 Foreclosures
Regionally, the number of foreclosures in 2017 has declined substantially from its peak in 2008, where
38,308 notices of default were issued in San Diego County. In 2017, a total of 3,494 Notices of Default
(NODS) were recorded in San Diego County, a decrease from the 2008 peak. In December 2010, close to
the peak of the foreclosure crisis, 189 homes in Encinitas were listed as foreclosures. These homes were
listed at various stages of foreclosure (from pre-foreclosures to auctions) and ranged in price,with some
properties listed as high as$1.3 million,indicating the depth of the crisis. In January 2018,31 homes were
at some stage of foreclosure(default,auction or bank owned). That is an approximate 40%decrease since
January 2017, and less than one-sixth of peak foreclosure activity. With the recent rapid increases in
housing costs, owners threatened with foreclosure are likely to be able to avoid a foreclosure sale by
selling their property.
7.4 Requests to Develop at Densities Below Those Permitted.
The City of Encinitas receives request for various development types throughout the community. For
residential uses,the City views single-family development differently than multiple family development.
B-40 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas z�r
For single-Family development, it is typically built on one housing unit per lot and most lots are of a size
that is conducive to one unit per lot.
For single-family subdivisions, the majority of new development applicants over the past few years have
developed at maximum density with a state density bonus. This has resulted in average densities above
that permitted in the zoning code for new multiple-family and subdivision development.
While development could be proposed at lower densities than the maximum permitted on a parcel, it
would be very unusual for this to occur due to the cost of land and overall cost to build in the community.
The City does not see this as a constraint to development at this time.
7.5 Length of Time between Application Approval and Building Permit
Issuance.
The time between application approval and building permit issuance in most cases is determined by the
individual applicant. There is nothing to stop an immediate transition from application approval to permit
processing. However, applicants must complete a number of actions which do not involve the City but
that may influence the length of time between an approved application and the issuance of a building
permit. These include:
• Technical/Engineering Studies
• Completion of Construction Drawings
• Construction-Level Landscaping/Site Design
• Construction and Permanent Financing
• Retention of Contractor and Subcontractors
• Obtaining required easements and rights of entry
In Encinitas, most approved projects are constructed in a reasonable time period. As of
December 31, 2017 only 41 units approved over one year ago had not yet been constructed. Few project
approvals had expired.
Because no development project will be the same and development pro formas will differ considerably
based upon locational and other site factors, it will be instructive to proactively outreach to developers
and investors in the community who have received approvals but not constructed their projects in a
reasonable time period. Program 3F proposes to contact applicants to identify nongovernmental
constraints preventing construction.
7.6 Community Opposition to Housing Development
Community members may oppose specific housing developments for various reasons: incompatibility
with the established community; poor design quality; lack of adequate infrastructure, especially related
to traffic and transportation; overcrowded schools. Residents may have located in a community and
invested their life savings based in part on the community's established development standards, and
proposals to change the community may be contrary to their reasonable expectations of the community's
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-41
City of Encinitas
—�'erl
character. Litigation filed by residents, especially under the California Environmental Quality Act, may
significantly delay and increase the cost of housing developments.
While in many communities this has resulted in reduced densities and project denials, this has not been
the case in Encinitas. As discussed in Section 7.4 above, most housing developments use state density
bonus provisions and develop above the zoning standard.
There has been expressed community concern regarding the upzoning required by state housing element
law. Residents have generally stated their desire to meet state requirements in the way most compatible
with the City's existing character. The proposed Measure T Housing Element did not gain community
support and was defeated. As described in detail in Appendix A,the City has taken numerous steps since
its defeat to achieve public support for this Housing Element.
7.7 Local Efforts to Remove Nongovernmental Constraints.
Nongovernmental constraints are defined as constraints on housing development that are not under the
control of the City or another governmental agency. Nongovernmental constraints are generally market-
driven and outside the control of local government.
During the course of this Housing Element update, a number of comments from the development
community and private citizens addressed potential nongovernmental constraints. In particular,the cost
of land in Encinitas has outpaced that in adjacent jurisdictions. The limited availability of land also
influences the premium for land in Encinitas.
According to local developers and entities doing business in Encinitas and coastal San Diego County,there
are two major components that directly relate to the feasibility of development. Those are time and
uncertainty. The faster a project applicant can process a project,the lower the holding costs. Therefore,
reducing the approval timeline can be a significant contributor to accessing capital and reducing investor
risk. Secondly, reducing the uncertainty of development approval can influence access to capital and the
risk profile for investors. To summarize, local actions to reduce the timeline for project approval and to
increase the level of certainty in entitlement decisions have been identified as methods to influence
nongovernmental behavior and contribute to housing development.
The City has included several programs in the Housing Element that may assist in removing
nongovernmental constraints. Rezoning of land as proposed by Program 1B will increase the land supply.
Program 3E proposes to improve the efficiency of the development review process, and Program 3F is
specifically focused on identifying nongovernmental constraints outside the control of government.The
City will contact applicants so that potential Encinitas-specific nongovernmental constraints may be
identified along with specific actions that may help to mitigate these governmental constraints. Program
3G proposes additional steps to create public support for housing.
8 Governmental Constraints
Aside from market factors, housing affordability is also affected by factors in the public sector. Local
policies and regulations can impact the price and availability of housing and, in particular, the provision
of affordable housing. Land use controls, site improvement requirements, fees and exactions, permit
processing procedures, among other issues may constrain the maintenance, development and
B-42 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1 n,
_z
improvement of housing. This section discusses potential governmental constraints in Encinitas and
efforts to address them.
8.1 Land Use Controls
The Land Use Element sets forth City policies for guiding local land use development. These policies,
together with existing zoning regulations, establish the amount and distribution of land allocated for
different uses.
8.1.1 Local Coastal Program
Approximately two-thirds of the City is comprised within the City of Encinitas Local Coastal Program(LCP).
Under this program,which is required to be approved by the Coastal Commission, a coastal development
permit is required for all development within the City's Coastal Zone,with the exception of the following:
• Improvements to an existing structure or a public works facility
• Repair and maintenance activities to existing structures or facilities that do not result in an
addition to,or enlargement or expansion of,the structures or facilities
• The installation, testing, and placement in service or the replacement of any necessary utility
connection between an existing service facility and any development which has been approved
under the California Coastal Act
• The replacement of any structure other than a public works facility destroyed by a disaster
• Temporary uses or events
• Signs which are exempted from provisions of the Municipal Code
The reviewing authority for the coastal development permit varies depending on the type of application
submitted. Furthermore, specific findings required for decisions on coastal development permits can
include:
• Project effects on demand for access and recreation
• Shoreline processes
• Historic public use
• Physical obstructions
• Other adverse impacts on access and recreation
The City's decision on a coastal development permit may be appealed to the Coastal Commission. This
could occur for any development project and may pose a constraint to development if the Coastal
Commission denies a project that includes housing development or if the project is significantly delayed.
Most housing development appealed to the Coastal Commission are single-family dwelling units located
on coastal bluffs.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-43
City of Encinitas z
8.1.2 Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone
The Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone regulations apply to all areas of the City where there is the presence of a
coastal bluff. In addition to development and design regulations which otherwise apply, the following
development standards apply to properties within the Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone to protect public health
and safety given coastal bluff recession,shoreline erosion, and sea level rise:
• No principal structure, accessory structure, facility or improvement shall be constructed, placed
or installed within 40 feet of the top edge of the coastal bluff.
• No structure, facility, improvement or activity shall be allowed on the face or at the base of a
coastal bluff.
• No grading or scraping shall be allowed on a bluff face, nor shall naturally occurring drought-
tolerant vegetation be voluntarily removed from the bluff face.
• Existing legal structures and facilities within 40 ft. of a bluff edge or on the face of a bluff may
remain unchanged.
• All drainage and run-off on the property shall be collected and delivered to approved drainage
facilities.
• Landscaping on beach bluff properties shall avoid the use of ice plant, and emphasize native and
drought-tolerant plants in order to minimize irrigation requirements and reduce potential slide
hazards due to over-watering.
• Buildings and other structures shall be sited,designed and constructed so as not to obstruct views
to and along the ocean and other scenic coastal areas from public vantage points.
• The design and exterior appearance of buildings and other structures visible from public vantage
points shall be compatible with the scale and character of the surrounding development and
protective of the natural scenic qualities of the bluffs.
The City intends develop a comprehensive plan, based on technical reports and studies addressing sea
level rise and its impact on shoreline management practices, to address the coastal bluff recession and
shoreline erosion problems in the City.
8.1.3 Hillside/Inland Bluff Overlay Zone
The Hillside/Inland Bluff Overlay Zone regulations apply to all areas within the Special Study Overlay Zone
where site-specific analysis indicates that 10 percent or more of the area of a parcel of land exceeds 25
percent slope. The Planning Commission is the authorized agency for reviewing and granting discretionary
approvals for proposed development within the Hillside/Inland Bluff Overlay Zone. Where development
is proposed on slopes of greater than 25 percent grade,the following additional standards apply:
• Slopes of greater than 25 percent grade shall be preserved in their natural state.
• A geological reconnaissance report must be submitted.
• Where unstable conditions are indicated, a preliminary engineering geology report is also
required.
B-44 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
• No principal structure or improvement or portion thereof shall be placed or erected, and no
grading shall be undertaken,within 25 feet of any point along an inland bluff edge.
• All slopes over 25 percent grade which remain undisturbed or which are restored or enhanced as
a result of a development approval, shall be conserved as a condition of that approval through a
deed restriction, open space easement, or other suitable device that will preclude any future
development or grading of such slopes.
The City has accounted for deductions due to steep slopes pursuant to objective standards contained in
the Municipal Code in determining site capacity, and the Overlay Zone has not prevented the City from
providing adequate sites.
8.1.4 Floodplain Overlay Zone
The Floodplain Overlay Zone regulations apply to all areas within the Special Study Overlay Zone where
site-specific analysis of the land indicates the presence of a flood channel, floodplain, or wetland. The
zone also applies to all areas identified as flood channels and floodplains on maps published by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency or current City and County maps designating the floodway/floodplain
areas. Any development within this zone is required to incorporate a series of improvements or
modifications in order to ensure the ability of structures to withstand periodic flooding. The additional
standards are also in place to guarantee the preservation of sensitive habitat areas.
The City has accounted for deductions due to sensitive habitat areas in determining site capacity,and this
Overlay Zone has not prevented the City from providing adequate sites.
8.1.5 Agricultural Overlay Zone
The Agricultural Overlay (AGO) Zone regulations apply to all properties presently under a Williamson Act
contract. No development other than that associated with the agricultural operation subject to the
Williamson Act contract may occur within the AGO Zone. Any development that occurs within this zone
shall conform to the setback and height requirements of the Rural Residential Zone. Furthermore,an open
or landscaped buffer of at least 75 feet shall be provided along the boundary between all property subject
to the AGO zone and properties not subject to the AGO zone.
Neither of the agricultural sites designated for upzoning is under a Williamson Act contract.
8.1.6 Scenic/Visual Corridor Overlay Zone
The Scenic/Visual Corridor Overlay Zone regulations apply to all properties within the Scenic View Corridor
along Scenic Highways and adjacent to Significant Viewsheds and Vista Points as described in the Visual
Resource Sensitivity Map of the Resource Management Element of the General Plan. When development
is proposed on any properties triggering design review within the Scenic View Corridor Overlay Zone,
consideration is given to the overall visual impact of the proposed and to the preservation of scenic
corridor viewsheds. While some of the proposed lower income sites are included within this overlay zone,
in the City's experience consideration of these factors does not reduce the density or preclude the
development of properties within these identified areas.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-45
City of Encinitas z °
8.1 .7 Planned Residential Development (PRD)
Planned Residential Development(PRD)regulations are intended to facilitate development of areas zoned
for residential use by permitting greater flexibility and, consequently, more creative and imaginative
designs forthe development of such residential areas than is generally possible under conventional zoning
and subdivision regulations
These regulations are further intended to promote more economical and efficient use of land while
providing a harmonious variety of housing choices, a higher level of residential amenities, and
preservation of natural resources and open space. Affordable housing opportunities are encouraged
through the application of PRD.
8.1.8 Inclusionary Housing
Given the high cost of land in Encinitas, inclusionary housing policy has been one of the most effective
approaches in achieving actual construction of affordable housing in the community. The City's
inclusionary housing program requires housing developers of 10 or more dwelling units to reserve ten
percent of the units for low or very low income households,or to pay an in-lieu fee if approved by the City
Council. Most developers have provided the on-site units. As of December 31, 2017 the ordinance had
created 146 very low and low income units.
The City is currently exploring the inclusionary policy options to amend current code requirements. On
March 7, 2018, a joint working session with the City Council and Planning Commission began discussions
with a panel of experts (for-profit and non-profit developers and city officials) to discuss updates to the
City's inclusionary housing ordinance. They indicated that the City could increase its inclusionary
percentage if it also provided more flexibility to developers. The City is currently considering updates to
the ordinance that are consistent with the panel's recommendations and may extend the ordinance to
rental projects, as permitted by AB 1505, enacted in 2017.
In a high-cost region such as San Diego,the inclusionary"costs"would likely be absorbed as part of market
pricing mechanisms.The impact would be to somewhat diminish the profit margin on a highly profitable
enterprise without much impact on the overall cost. As the City's inclusionary housing policy has a long-
standing history, developers are familiar with the program and factor any associated costs in their
feasibility analysis; many concurrently apply for a density bonus, which the City permits for inclusionary
units that also meet the requirements of State density bonus law. The ordinance provides flexibility by
including provisions for a waiver and allowing alternatives to on-site construction. For instance, the City
approved a development to meet the inclusionary housing requirements through offsite construction and
unit size reduction.
The Housing Element includes a program to continue and broaden inclusionary housing policies by
updating the ordinance to allow additional options to provision of on-site units,more effectively meet the
City's housing goals, and extend the ordinance to rental projects.
8.1.9 State Density Bonus Law
State Density Bonus Law (SDBL), in Government Code Section 65915, is a voluntary program for
developers that requires cities and counties to provide a density bonus and certain other regulatory
incentives "when an applicant for a housing development seeks and agrees to construct a housing
development"that provides for a certain amount of affordable housing(GC 65915(b)(1). Under State law,
B-46 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas z °
a development of five or more units is eligible to receive a density bonus if it meets at least one of the
following:
• Very low income units: Five percent of the total units of the housing development as target units
affordable to very low-income households; or
• Cow Income Units: Ten percent of the total units of the housing development as target units
affordable to low-income households;or
• Moderate Income Units: Ten percent of the total units of a newly constructed condominium
project or planned development as target units affordable to moderate-income households,
provided all the units are offered for purchase;or
• Senior Units:A senior citizen housing development of 35 units or more.
Density bonuses and development incentives are based on a sliding scale, where the amount of density
bonus and number of incentives provided vary according to the amount of affordable housing units
provided.
The City provides a density bonus for inclusionary units when they also meet the requirements of State
density bonus law.
As of December 31, 2017, the City had approved 27 density bonus projects that included 49 affordable
units. Only two projects with two affordable units did not proceed to construction. In the ten-year period
between 2003 and 2013, 68 percent of all units were approved under density bonus subdivisions.
Furthermore,in all cases,the number of density bonus units was at least equal to or exceeded the number
of inclusionary affordable units required for the project.Therefore,the City's inclusionary housing policy
does not serve to constrain housing development.
The City's density bonus ordinance has been amended to be consistent with the amendments to state
density bonus law adopted in 2016. When future amendments are adopted, the City will adopt
conforming amendments, if needed,within one year.
Table B-38:Approved Density Bonus Projects(2003-2017)
Affordable Income Time
Case# Total Units Units Restriction Unit Type Restriction Address Notes
06-111 9 1 50% Single-
Family 30 Years 817 Sandy Court Built-renting
05-169 9 1 50% Single 30 Years 206 Alexander
Family Court Built-Renting
06-005 18 1 50% Single- 30 Years 1007 Scarlet Way Built-Sold
Family
Single- 2323 Edinburg Approved but
06-107 12 1 50% Family Avenue 30 Years Application
withdrawn
06-112 14 1 50% Single- 30 Years 813 Dolphin Lane Built-Renting
Family
08-066 9 1 50% Single 661 Quinten
Family 0 Years Court Built-Rented
Y
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-47
City of Encinitas
'er-A
Table B-38:Approved Density Bonus Projects(2003-2017)
Affordable Income Time
Case# Total Units Units Restriction Unit Type Restriction Address Notes
10-028 12 1 50% Single- 1257 Canton
Family 0 Years Court Built-Rented
Y
2 60%
Single- 30 Years Coral Cove Way Built-Sold 03-090 69 Family
5 60-80% Multi-Family Perpetuity Coral Cove Way Built
03-009 9 1 50% Multi-Family Perpetuity Paxton Way Built
11-115/ Channel Island
09-089 72 6 50% Multi Family Perpetuity Wa Built
Y
04-066 9 1 50% Multi-Family Perpetuity Sheridan Built
Rd./Stewart Way
02-233 20 2 50% Multi-Family Perpetuity 639-643 N.Vulcan Built
Avenue
04-021 10 1 50% Single- 30 Years 634 Quail Project unlikely
Family Gardens Ln to proceed
05-072 10 1 80% Single-
Family 30 Years 685 Calyspo Court Built-Rented
09-135 19 1 50% Single- 30 Years 1507 Halia Court Built-Rented
Family
09-200 16 1 50% Single- 55 Years 1335 Desert Rose Approved
Family
11-063 11 1 50% Single-
Family 30 Years 1085 Primrose Built-renting
Single- 1140/1144 Urania
11-189 28 2 50% Family 0 Years Ave Built renting
Y
98-295 120 10 50% Multi-Family 55 Years 1100 Garden View Built-rented
04-040 9 1 50% Single-
Family 30 Years 1165 Kava Court Built-rented
13-187 9 1 50% Single- Under
Family 55 Years 378 Fulvia St Construction
15-064 13 1 50% Single- 55 Years 710&712 Clark Under
Family Avenue Construction
14-111 8 1 50% Single- 55 Years 1412 Mackinnon Under
Family Avenue Construction
15-008 14 1 50% Single Under
55 Years 560 Requeza St
Family Construction
13-267 9 1 50% Single- Under
Family 55 Years 720 Balour Drive Construction
16-211 13 1 50% Single- 55 Years 710&714 Under
Family Requeza St Construction
Source:City of Encinitas,2018
8.1.10 Growth Management Measures
The City's General Plan, adopted in March 1989, includes an annual residential building limitation along
with growth management policies and guidelines. The building limitation is based on the un-built
B-48 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
7::—`J '
development potential of the City at mid- range density divided by the remaining years of the 25 years
build-out period (January 1989 to January 2014). Low- and moderate-income units are exempted from
the allocation system, as are single family dwellings on lots established prior to adoption of the City's
General Plan.
In 1999, the City analyzed the effectiveness of the growth management plan in regulating the pace of
residential growth in Encinitas. The City found that the measure has had no effect on limiting growth in
Encinitas. There has not been a single year in which the number of building permit applications has
exceeded the number of available permits. This is due primarily to two factors: low housing production
and the cumulative effect of carrying over unallocated permits from year to year. The City stopped
accounting for the permit cap shortly after this discovery was made. By 1999, the last year the City
calculated permit caps, there were more than 1,200 permits available, more than triple the highest
number of new dwelling permits issued in any year since the growth management plan was established.
Given the large surplus of available permits,the growth management plan has not posed a constraint on
housing production,nor impeded the City's ability to accommodate its share of the regional housing need.
Program 3D of this Housing Element calls for rescinding obsolete growth management policies.
8.1.11 Proposition A—Voter's Right Initiative
Proposition A was adopted by voters in June 2013 and requires voter approval of land use changes.
Proposition A requires an affirmative vote of the people when publicly or privately initiated changes are
proposed to increase the currently allowed intensity or density of development (such as increasing the
allowed number of residential units or permitting residences in commercial zones).A vote is also required
to convert residentially zoned properties to commercial or mixed use. Not only does Proposition A affect
how amendments are made to planning policy documents are made, but the ballot measure modified
building height standards in the City. Proposition A restricts the height of any structure to the lower of
two stories or 30 feet, citywide. In cases where the existing codes specify a different maximum height
standard,the more restrictive standard applies.
Thus,voter approval is required for amendments that would increase residential densities. On the other
hand the voter requirement also creates additional challenges to convert residentially zoned properties
to nonresidential, thereby deterring the potential loss of residential land to commercial, office, or
industrial uses.
Each of the City's land use designations specifies a density range that includes the identification of how a
property owner(s)can build or redevelop their land. Based on recent analysis and conversations with local
real estate developers, real estate agents, and property owners; Proposition A has effectively reduced the
holding capacity on some of the sites that formerly allowed three-story construction. This results in a
decreased capacity in the DCM-1, DCM-2, and D-VCM Zones of the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan, as
well as the N-CM1, N-CM2, NCM-3, and N-CRM1 zones of the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan. On an
unconstrained acre, it is estimated that the following averages could be developed under a two-story
envelope:
• 19-24 units total for standalone residential (21.5 average)
15 units average when units are above ground floor retail. Since this zoning will not satisfy the State's
default density standard of 30 units per acre unless this constraint is removed, sites in the DCM-1 Zone
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-49
City of Encinitas
--��
have been assigned to the moderate-income category as viable housing production opportunities at 15
units per acre. Consequently, Proposition A significantly reduced the net residential holding capacity of
sites that formerly would have been suitable for lower income housing.
In November 2016,as required by Proposition A,the City placed a proposed Housing Element and related
General Plan amendments and re-zonings on the ballot as Measure T. Measure T was not approved by
the voters, and Proposition A did act as a constraint on the City's ability to comply with state housing
element law. However, in any community where there is substantial opposition to an adopted housing
element, residents may act to prevent its adoption through litigation, especially under the California
Environmental Quality Act, or by collecting enough signatures to place a referendum on the ballot.
As part of its adoption of this Housing Element,the City intends to submit to the voters in November 2018
a ballot measure that approves this Housing Element,as well as any General Plan,specific plan,and zoning
amendments that may be necessary to permit the necessary densities. If this measure is adopted by the
voters, Proposition A will not present a constraint to housing development in the City during the
remainder of the 2013—2021 planning period.The City will be able to demonstrate adequate capacity to
accommodate the City's full fair share of RHNA.To minimize any future constraints created by Proposition
A, Program 3C in the Housing Element requires the City to continue to review its available sites and to
begin developing the sixth cycle Housing Element as soon as RHNA allocations are made in early 2019,
well in advance of the next Housing Element due date (April 30, 2021) to ensure that future housing
elements can achieve community support and be consistent with State law, while still complying with
Proposition A.
The applicability of Proposition A to the Housing Element and related General Plan and zoning approvals
is the subject of litigation in San Diego County Superior Court.The City will comply with any final judgment
related to a vote on this Housing Element and implementing actions.
Please note that Proposition A did not impact the inventory of lands available in previous planning periods
or the City's AB 1233 "carryover" analysis. The sites identified in the inventory were available at full
capacity throughout the 2005-2013 planning period,which ended on April 30,2013 before Proposition A
was adopted in June 2013.
Consistency with State Density Bonus Law
Proposition A does not interfere with the rights of a developer to obtain density bonuses, parking
reductions, concessions, or waivers of development standards, including height regulations, under state
density bonus law. As stated in the statute, none of these incentives require a general plan or zoning
amendment that would trigger the need for a vote under Proposition A.
8.1.12 Specific Plans
The City of Encinitas has adopted the following specific plans, which offer a range of housing types,
densities,and/or mix of uses:
• Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan (Adopted February 9, 1994)
• Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan (Adopted September 28, 1994)
• North 101 Corridor Specific Plan (Adopted May 21, 1997)
B-50 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
• Cardiff-by-the-Sea Specific Plan (Adopted July 21, 2010)
• Home Depot Specific Plan (Adopted September 8, 1993)
The City anticipates that new residential growth will occur in these Specific Plan areas,especially as mixed-
use developments.Table B-39 summarizes the zones where mixed-use developments are permitted.The
densities permitted in these areas are suitable for moderate-income housing.The adopted specific plans
help encourage housing development, which may be exempt from review under the California
Environmental Quality Act, either under Government Code Section 65457 (residential development
consistent with a specific plan) or Public Resources Code Section 21155.4 (mixed use project consistent
with a specific plan in a transit-priority area).
8.1.13 Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan
The Downtown Encinitas planning area consists of approximately 198.6 acres located within the
community of Old Encinitas.The area is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west, B Street on the north,
Cornish Drive on the east, and K Street on the south. The purpose of this Specific Plan was to treat the
unique aspects, problems, and opportunities of the Downtown Encinitas area, and maintain its identity,
community character, and scale,while fostering rehabilitation and successful economic restructuring.
The Specific Plan outlines housing strategies for increasing housing potential in the following areas:
First Street Mixed-use: The mixed-use zone for First Street (D-CM-1) allows residential units above or to
the rear of primary commercial uses. Standalone residential is not permitted in this sub-district and
residential units are not allowed to exceed 50 percent of the gross floor area of any site. Individual
dwellings are required to be a minimum of 350 square feet in floor area. There is no residential density
specified. Based on development standards and recent development projects when heights of three
stories were allowed, the equivalent of up to 34 dwelling units per acre was constructed, taking into
account the commercial portion of a site's development.
Second Street Mixed-use: The mixed-use zone for Second Street (D-CM-2) allows for residential mixed
with commercial on a site as well as a limited amount of stand-alone residential. This is allowed to a
maximum of 25 dwellings per acre and for no more than 25 percent of the lots (by lot area) along the
street.
Cozen's Site:This sub-district (D-VCM) is another mixed-use zone. This zone is similar to the First Street
zone in terms of residential use allowance, with no specified residential density but an overall limit by
floor area on residential construction. Residential units in this subdistrict will be attached multi-family.
D-OM Zone: The D-OM Zone is another mixed-use zone, which applies to the east side of Third Street
between E and F Streets,and is designed to allow office,residential,or mixed office/residential use. Stand-
alone residential is limited to 15 dwellings per acre,to match the surrounding zoning allowance on Third
Street. Mixed residential also is limited to 15 dwelling units per acre, and there is no proportional limit to
the residential share.
Residential East Subdistrict:This zone does not permit attached apartments of three or more units but
allows duplex units on all lots of at least 5,000 square feet.The broadened duplex allowance increases the
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-51
City of Encinitas -t -1
expected residential build-out potential of this neighborhood and allows for the transition of this
neighborhood from original single-family to predominantly multifamily use.
Residential West Subdistrict: With a few exceptions, most notably the Pacific View School site, the
Residential West subdistrict is zoned D-1315 and D-1125, allowing up to 15 and 25 dwellings per acre
respectively. For the most part these zones carry over the citywide R-15 and R-25 zoning provisions,
allowing attached multi-family development.
Stand-alone residential development is required to meet citywide parking standards. Units in mixed-use
development, however, are subject to a somewhat simplified parking standard, with no more than two
off-street parking spaces required for any dwelling.The Specific Plan also offers a voluntary incentive for
mixed-use units which are guaranteed to be affordable to low orvery low income households.Affordable
units are allowed a reduced, one-space per unit parking requirement.
8.1.14 Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan
The Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan is designed to allow agricultural uses to continue operating as a viable
business, while permitting a mix of residential, commercial, mixed-use, recreation, and open space uses
to develop on the remaining portions of the project site. The Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan provides
residential,commercial,and mixed-use development,in addition to a substantial amount of natural open
space, recreational area, and agricultural uses on a total of 852.8 acres, which includes the 29.8 acre
Magdalena Ecke Park.
The most intense development within Encinitas Ranch occurs in the Green Valley Planning Area, adjacent
to El Camino Real. This area include a 73.8-acre Regional Commercial Center (straddling Leucadia
Boulevard) and approximately 24.8 acres of multi-family housing types including townhomes,
condominiums and apartments in close proximity to the planned commercial and office uses. Residential
densities up to 25 dwelling units per acre are permitted for free-standing residential structures.
Besides the mixed-use development in Green Valley,the West Saxony Planning Area is developed with a
mix of traditional residential and office uses. The Encinitas Ranch project also includes single family
residential development. Single family dwelling units have been constructed in the Quail Hollow East,
North Mesa,South Mesa and Sidonia East Planning Areas.
8.1.15 North 101 Corridor Specific Plan
The North 101 Corridor planning area consists of approximately 231 acres located within the communities
of Leucadia and Old Encinitas. The specific plan allocates 83.1 acres of residential-only zoning which
includes 10.4 acres of Residential 3(N-113),28.4 acres of Residential 8(N-118), 1.4 acres of Residential 11(N-
111), 4.9 acres of Residential 15 (N-1115), 15.8 acres of Residential 20 (N-R20),10.6 acres of Residential 25
(N-1125), and 11.6 acres of Mobile Home Park(NMHP).
The specific plan has also expanded previous commercial zoning in the North Highway 101 Corridor
Specific Plan area to allow residential use. There are five distinct commercial mixed-use zoning
classifications in the Plan area. The N-CM- 1, N-CM-2 and N-CM-3 zones provide for stand-alone
commercial or commercial and residential uses at a maximum density of 25.0 dwelling units per net acre
on the same property or in the same structure,with the intent of providing opportunities for housing and
live/work or artisan loft arrangements. The N-CRM-1 zone provides for a variety of development
opportunities including: 1) stand-alone commercial; 2) stand-alone residential at a maximum density of
B-52 2013-2021 Housing Element-Appendix B
I
City of Encinitas
25 dwelling units per net acre; and 3) mixed-use at a maximum density of 25 dwelling units per net acre.
The N-CRM-2 zone provides for the same development opportunities as the N-CRM-1 zone except that
the maximum density is set at 15 dwelling units per net acre.
8.1.16 Cardiff-by-the-Sea Specific Plan
The Cardiff-by-the-Sea Specific Plan focuses on a small but highly visible and highly valued portion of the
Cardiff community. Generally considered the "business district" or sometimes "Downtown Cardiff," the
area is principally a mix of low rise retail, office, institutional, and residential uses. Boundaries of the
Cardiff-by-the-Sea Specific Plan are irregular but generally include properties between the west side of
San Elijo Avenue and the west side of the alley between Newcastle Avenue and Manchester Avenue;and
from the south side of Mozart Avenue to the north side of Orinda Drive.
Within the Cardiff-by-the-Sea Specific Plan area are four separate Planning Areas, two of which allow
residential uses of up to 11 dwelling units per acre. Planning Area 1 is roughly bound by Mozart Avenue
on the north, Montgomery Avenue on the east, Birmingham Drive on the south, and San Elijo Avenue on
the west.Single-and multi-family housing, professional and administrative offices,and restaurants define
this Planning Area.This Planning Area functions as a transition between the residential area to the south
and the commercial area to the north. More than half the area is developed residentially.
8.1.17 Home Depot Specific Plan
The Home Depot Specific Plan area encompasses a total of approximately 55.5 acres in the north central
part of the City of Encinitas.The Specific Plan has been subdivided into four planning areas, one of which
allows residential uses of up to 5 dwelling units per acre.The Encinitas General Plan allows for a maximum
density of 5 dwelling units per acre and a midrange density of 4 dwelling units per acre in Planning Area
2. Planning Area 2 includes 17 single- family detached homes on approximately 6.5 acres (net) at a net
density of 2.6 dwelling units per acre.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-53
City of Encinitas
Table B-39: Land with Mixed-use Potential
General Description Mixed-use Type Density Allowed(Du/Ac)
Plan Code
Approximately 34 du/acre(realistic limit of 15
D-CM-1 Mixed-use Mixed-use:Commercial with du/acre with two stories);limited to 50%of
Residential site's building floor area;floor area bonus for
affordable housing.
25 du/ac;free-standing limited to
Commercial with Residential(free- 25%of the zone district's total lot acreage;
D-CM-2 Mixed-use standing(single familyor multi- mixed-use is limited to 50%of site's building
family)or mixed-use) floor area;floorarea bonus for affordable
housing.
Mixed-use:Visitor-serving 18 du/ac and limited to 30%of the
D-VCM Mixed-use commercial-with multi-family ground floor area and 50%of the site's
residential building floor area.
Commercial with Residential
D-OM Mixed-use (free-standing single family 15 du/ac;mixed-use limited to 50%of the
(detached or attached)(Duplex;
Senior.or mixed-use) ground floor area.
Mixed-use:Commercial with 25 du/ac and limited to 50%of the site's
N-CM-1 Mixed-use Residential building floor area.
Mixed-use:Commercial with 25 du/ac and limited to 50%of the
N-CM-2 Mixed-use Residential site's building floor area
Mixed-use:Commercial with 25 du/ac and limited to 50%of the
N-CM-3 Mixed-use Residential site's building floor area
Commercial with Residential
N-CRM-1 Mixed-use (free-standing single family 25 du/ac;mixed-use limited to 50%of the site's
(detached or attached) or building floor area
mixed-use)
Commercial with Residential
N-CRM-2 Mixed-use (free-standing single family 15 du/ac;mixed-use limited to 50%of the site's
(detached or attached) or building floor area
mixed-use)
Mixed-use:Commercial with
ER-MU-1 Mixed-use Residential 25 du/ac
Mixed-use:Commercial with
ER-MU-2 Mixed-use Residential 20 du/ac
8.2 Residential Development Standards
Citywide, outside the specific plan areas, the City regulates the type, location, density, and scale of
residential development primarily through the Zoning Code.The following summarizes the City's existing
residential zoning districts. New zones created to implement the adequate lands inventory to
accommodate the RHNA share of lower income households will be discussed separately.
• Rural Residential (RR) — 0.125 to 0.5 du/acre: Rural Residential is intended to provide for
very low density single-family detached residential units on larger lots ranging in size from two to
eight net acres with maximum densities of 0.5 to 0.125 units per net acre for compatibility with
the more rural areas of the City. Parcels located in flood plain areas are designated 0.125 units
per acre (8 net acre lots). One primary dwelling is permitted on each legal lot.
B-54 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
• Rural Residential (RR-1)-1.0 du/acre:Rural Residential 1 is intended to provide for low density
single-family detached residential units with minimum lot sizes of one net acre and maximum
densities of 1.0 unit per net acre for rural area compatibility.One primary dwelling is permitted
on each legal lot.
• Rural Residential (RR-2)-2.0 du/acre:Rural Residential 2 is intended to provide for low density
single-family detached residential units with minimum lot sizes of 21,500 net square feet and
maximum densities of 2.0 units per net acre, as a transition from the rural to the more suburban
areas within the City. One primary dwelling is permitted on each legal lot.
• Residential 3 (R-3)—3.0 du/acre: Residential 3 is intended to provide for single-family detached
residential units with minimum lot sizes of 14,500 net square feet and maximum densities of 3.0
units per net acre, as a rural to suburban transition. One primary dwelling is permitted on each
legal lot.
• Residential 5 (R-5) — 5.0 du/acre: Residential 5 is intended to provide for lower density
suburban development consisting of single-family detached units with minimum lot sizes of
8,700 net square feet and maximum densities of 5.0 units per net acre. One primary dwelling is
permitted on each legal lot.
• Residential 8(R-8)—8.0 du/acre: Residential 8 is intended to provide for suburban single-family
detached residential units with minimum lot sizes of 5,400 net square feet and maximum
densities of 8.0 units per net acre. One primary dwelling is permitted on each legal lot.
• Residential RS-11(RS-11)-11.0du/acre:Residential RS-11 is intended to providefor single family
detached residential units with minimum lot sizes of 3,950 net square feet and maximum
densities of 11.0 units per net acre. One primary dwelling is permitted on each legal lot.
• Residential 11 (R-11) — 11.0 du/acre: Residential 11 is intended to provide for a variety of
residential development types found within the coastal areas, ranging from single-family
detached units to single-family attached units,such as condominiums, townhouses, and senior
housing. The minimum lot size is 3,950 net square feet and the maximum density is 11 units per
net acre.
• Residential 15 (R-15) — 15.0 du/acre: Residential 15 is intended to provide for higher density
residential development within the coastal areas including single- family units (attached and
detached), duplex units, and senior housing, with a maximum density of 15 units per net acre.
• Residential 20 (R-20) —20.0 du/acre: Residential 20 is intended to provide for compatible high
density multiple-family residential development including apartments, condominiums, and
senior housing,with a maximum density of 20 units per net acre.
• Residential 25 (R-25) —25.0 du/acre: Residential 25 is intended to provide for compatible high
density multiple-family residential development including apartments, condominiums, and
senior housing,with a maximum density of 25 units per net acre.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-55
City of Encinitas 1
• Mobile Home Park(MHP)-11.0 du/acre:Mobile Home Park is intended to provide exclusively for
mobile home park development with a maximum density of 11 units per net acre for new or
redeveloped parks.
The City's Zoning Code also regulates the physical development of land by imposing minimum standards
on lot size, lot width and depth, setbacks, and by placing maximum limits on lot coverage and floor-area
ratio(FAR).These development standards are intended to control for unacceptable mass and bulk,ensure
proper scale of development, provide minimum light,air, and open space for every lot, and minimize the
potential for spillover and edge effects between uses. City-wide, the standards vary among zoning
categories and are "fine-tuned" for the specific plan areas. The City's determination of realistic site
capacity reflects these standards.
Table B-40: Residential Development Standards„
Zoning Maximum Setbacks(ft.)
Maximum Minimum Minimum Lot(ft.) 'Maximum
District Density
Building Net Lot Area ._ Lot
Height(ft.) (so.ft.) Width Depth Front Rear Side Coverage
0.125
(8 ac flood plain)
RR 0.25-0.5 26 2acres 110 150 30 25 15-20 35
(2-4 ac,depending
on slope)
RR-1 1 26 1 acre 110 150 30 25 15 35
RR-2 2 22-26 21,500 100 150 30 25 10-15 35
R-3 3 22 14,500 80 100 25 25 10 35
R-5 5 22 8,700 70 100 25 25 10 35
R-8 8 22 5,400 60 90 25 25 5-10 40
R-11/RS-11 11 22 3,950 40 90 20 20 5-10 40
R-15 15 22 20,000 100 150 20 15-20 5-20 40
R-20 20 22 20,000 100 150 20 15-20 5-20 40
R-25 25 22 20,000 100 150 20 15-20 5-20 40
MHP 11 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Source:City of Encinitas Zoning Code,2011.
8.2.1 Minimum Lot Sizes
Minimum lot sizes and dimensions (width and depth) correspond to their residential density categories
such that application of these standards will allow planned density to be achieved. For example,the R-11
zone requires a minimum lot size of 3,950 square feet(sf) per dwelling unit(du)and minimum dimensions
of 40 feet by 90 feet, which is less than the 3,960 sf/du minimum required to achieve a density of 11
du/acre(43,560 sf/11 du=3,960 sf/du).Additionally,City ordinances allow some flexibility for legal non-
conforming lots whose sizes may not meet current minimum standards. For example, a duplex
development is permitted on legal lots as small as 5,000 sf(2,500 sf/du).Therefore, minimum lot size and
lot dimension standards do not constrain the ability to achieve planned densities.
B-56 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas � ~
8.2.2 Setbacks
Minimum setback or yard requirements vary among the residential zones. The primary purposes of
imposing setbacks is to ensure adequate air and light between properties, to ensure adequate on-site
access and circulation,to provide opportunities for private open space areas(yards),and to separate uses
between properties to minimize conflicts and potential life/safety hazards. Generally speaking, setbacks
are tied to lot size, meaning smaller lots have lower minimum setbacks, and larger lots require larger
"yards." As with other development standards, the Zoning Code and specific plans provide flexibility to
minimum requirements under certain circumstances. For example, in the R-15 through R-30 zones, the
minimum side yard requirement can be reduced from 15 feet to five feet for existing legal lots that do not
meet current minimum lot size requirements. Also, the front yard requirement can be reduced from 20
feet to 15 feet in cases where parking access can be taken from an abutting alley.While it is possible that
setback requirements may inhibit maximum density from being realized in some cases, there is enough
flexibility in the current ordinances that setback requirements do not constitute a significant constraint
on residential development. Setback requirements have been considered in the City's calculation of
realistic site capacity.
8.2.3 Lot Coverage and FAR
Lot coverage and floor area ratio (FAR) standards are intended to control bulk, mass, and intensity of a
use. Lot coverage limits a building's footprint and is defined as the percentage between the ground floor
area of building(s) and the net area of a lot. FAR limits the total usable floor area and is expressed as a
ratio between the bulk floor area of building(s) and gross lot area. In most residential-only zones (except
R-30), while maximum lot coverage ranges between 35 to 40 percent, a FAR of 0.6 applies only in the
middle density zones (R-5 to R-11/RS-11). Floor area ratio limits do not apply to the higher density multi-
family zones,nor do they apply to any but three of the specific plan mixed-use zones (D-CM-2, D-OM,and
D-VCM).As applied to residential development,these standards may only limit the size of dwelling units,
and do not limit the number of units, which is an expression of density (that is, zoning). FAR, combined
with height limitations, can potentially prevent maximum density from being achieved in certain cases.
This is most likely to be the case in older, small lot areas, but as discussed under "Residential Height
Limits", the City has adopted more flexible zoning standards to encourage infill and redevelopment in
these areas.
To examine whether the FAR limitation alone or in combination with other development standards has
resulted in development at less than maximum density, the City reviewed records of new construction
between 2000 and 2007 in the R-11 and D-CM-2 zones. During this time period some 85 new units were
constructed in the R-11 zone. Only three properties developed at less than maximum density, none of
which appeared to have been constrained by FAR or other development standards.Two of the properties
developed as single-family homes with an accessory unit and the third developed as a single-family
dwelling only. Also, during this period, five mixed-use projects were constructed in the D-CM-2 zone.
Three of these developed at or near the maximum 0.65 FAR, only one of which achieved maximum
density.The others that did not develop at maximum density could have if the non-residential floor area
was dedicated to residential use (this zone allows standalone residential). Therefore, while it is
conceivable that some combination of development standards may preclude maximum density from
being realized under unique circumstances, the City's analysis has not identified any such constraints in
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-57
City of Encinitas o 1
the multi-family or mixed-use zones. Lot coverage and FAR do not constrain the ability to achieve planned
densities.
8.2.4 Building Height
Residential building height in the rural residential zones (R through RR-1 and RR-2 for standard lots in
Olivenhain) is permitted up to a maximum of 30 feet without discretionary review(26 feet in height if the
structure consists of a flat roof). For most other residential zones, building height is limited to two-stories
and 22 feet (flat roof)/26 feet (pitched roof). These restrictions on height in most cases do not pose a
significant constraint to the provision of housing and reinforces the community's need to protect the
existing character,views and quality of the communities within Encinitas. Higher density housing can be
constructed within these height limits as demonstrated by the City's development history, particularly in
the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan area where there is no density limit.The City has demonstrated that
higher density and affordable housing can be, and is being, constructed within these height parameters.
Relative to Proposition A,the ballot measure established a citywide.height limitation and new method for
establishing where height is measured from (the lower of natural or finished grade). Previously, in some
circumstances (before Proposition A) an approved subdivision may have established the finished pad
elevation from which building height is measured with consideration given to on-site and surrounding
terrain. The purpose of the new method of measuring height is to discourage excessive grading activity
and the building up of pads. This helps minimize impacts to the topography and adjacent views. Some
architectural elements may project up to four feet above the height limit.
As part of the required upzoning of lower income sites, a measure will be placed on the ballot to allow
heights of three stories and 37 feet on lower income sites where developments achieve a minimum
density of 25 units per acre. These exceptions will be applied only to those site-specific parcels as
identified in the rezoning program and will require inclusion of some two-story elements adjacent to
single-family residences. Even without an amendment to the height limit, however,local developers have
confirmed that R-25 sites could develop at densities of 19-24 units per acre underthe Proposition A limits.
The building envelopes resulting from the height limits discussed above, combined with other
development standards such as setbacks, results in sufficient area to realize the density of dwellings as
planned for individual lots. That is, the existing or proposed height limits are intended to allow planned
density to be achieved.While certain lots in the City may be impacted by physical limitations,such as non-
conforming lot areas and/or unusual shapes or topography, such properties can seek relief from
development standards through the variance process. Also, since substandard lot conditions are most
likely to occur in the older parts of the city,flexibility in the zoning regulations has been provided in those
areas through the adoption of specific plans.
8.2.5 Net Lot Area
The City's General Plan and Zoning Code require that certain constrained lands be excluded from net lot
area. The net lot area is then utilized to calculate the project density. For purposes of density,the gross
lot area is reduced by the presence of steep slopes as follows:the density for properties containing slopes
is calculated based on the following:
• Zero to 25 percent slope—no deduction (100 percent density);
• 25-40 percent slope—half of area deducted (50 percent density);and
B-58 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
• Slopes greater than 40 percent, plus or minus area completely excluded (no density
allowance).
Other constrained areas are deducted as well,including floodplains,beaches,permanent bodies of water,
significant wetlands, major utility easements, railroad track beds or rights-of-way, and easements for
streets and roads.According to SANDAG (2030 Forecast, 2005 Inputs), approximately%of the remaining
land otherwise available for residential development in Encinitas (excluding the Downtown and North
Highway 101 specific plan areas) is environmentally-constrained. However, almost 99 percent of the
identified constrained lands occur in the lower residential density categories:1 du/acre through 8 du/acre.
Land at these densities is capable of supporting above-moderate income housing.As demonstrated in the
Housing Resources section of this Housing Element, the City has sufficient land to support the regional
share for all income levels,even with the environmental constraints identified above.
8.2.6 Parking Standards
Adequate off-street parking shall be available to avoid street overcrowding. Parking requirements for
single-family and multi-family residential uses in Encinitas are summarized in Table B-41.
Table B-41: Parking Requirements
Type of Residential Development Required Parking Spaces -
SRO Hotels and Temporary
1 space for every 2 units
Shelters
Single-Family or 2 enclosed parking spaces for each unit up to 2500 square feet of floor area.3
Two-Family Dwelling spaces for dwelling units in excess of 2500 square feet.Any parking space over 2
spaces may be enclosed or unenclosed.
Multiple-Family Apartments(including Mobile Home Parks)
Studio Apartments 1.5 spaces per unit+0.25 spaces per units
1-2 Bedroom Units 2 spaces per unit+0.25 spaces per units
3+Bedroom Units 2.5 spaces per unit+0.25 spaces per units
Accessory Apartments 1 space
Source:City of Encinitas Zoning Code,2010.
The relaxing of parking standards is often used as an incentive to induce the redevelopment of existing
buildings and the creation of affordable dwelling units. The City has provided this incentive within the
Downtown Encinitas and North 101 Corridor Specific Plans.The specific plans require only one space per
unit for units that are guaranteed affordable to low or very low income households. This provides an
incentive for affordable housing construction.Additionally,the majority of residential projects in the City
are eligible for density bonus and can elect to use the lower standards permitted by state density bonus
law(one onsite space per unit for studio to one bedroom units,two onsite spaces per unit fortwo to three
bedroom units, and 2.5 onsite spaces per unit for four or more bedroom units, inclusive of guest and
disabled parking spaces).
Through the conditional use permit process, the City can also consider a less stringent parking
requirement if a site-specific parking study clearly demonstrates that traffic circulation, public safety,
coastal access, and the availability of public on-street parking are not impaired. The Zoning Code also
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-59
City of Encinitas try
provides for case-by-case evaluation of proposed joint-use parking agreements and off-site parking
arrangements.
Not only does the required number of parking spaces affect the development potential of a property, but
the physical design of the required parking can also affect it as well. The Planning Commission has the
authority to establish and amend from time to time parking design guidelines,which govern parking space
layout, minimum dimensions, location, circulation, landscaping,surfacing materials and the like.
While off-street parking standards can affect planned residential density, especially for small lots and in-
fill areas, this potential constraint is mitigated by the incentives and flexible standards described above.
However, the Housing Element includes Program 3A to amend the zoning code parking standards for
affordable, mixed-use and transit-oriented housing projects and to ensure that the parking standards do
not constrain realistic capacity.
8.2.7 Flexibility in Development Standards
In addition to the variability and flexibility in the development standards described above, the Zoning
Code also provides potential for further flexibility through the Lot Area Averaging and Planned Residential
Development (PRD) entitlement processes. Implemented through a conditional use permit, these
provisions encourage more creativity and flexibility in design to minimize grading, preserve significant
natural resources or topographical features, and promote more efficient and economical use of land.
Where the lot averaging and PRD processes are not appropriate but relief from the above standards is still
warranted, the opportunity for a variance approval exists. As such, the above standards collectively do
not pose a significant constraint to residential development overall,and the sites identified in the Housing
Element have adequate capacity to accommodate the City's RHNA.
8.2.8 Mid-range Density
Projects resulting in five or more residential units/lots are limited to the mid-point density of the
applicable zoning category. Project applicants may request to exceed the mid-point if findings can be
made that the proposed project excels in design excellence or provides extraordinary community benefits.
To avoid this midpoint limitation, most developers elect to develop at the maximum permitted density
with a density bonus.Thus the policy has had the actual effect of increasing the number of both market-
rate and affordable units built in the City.
This policy will be eliminated on sites rezoned to accommodate lower income housing.
8.3 Provision for a Variety of Housing Types
Housing Element law specifies that jurisdictions shall identify adequate sites to be made available through
appropriate zoning and development standards to encourage the development of a variety of housing
types for all economic segments of the population. This includes single-family homes, multi-family
housing, accessory dwelling units, mobile homes, emergency shelters, and housing for persons with
disabilities.
B-60 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas z °
Table B-42 below summarizes the various housing types permitted within the City's zoning districts.
Table B-42:Use Regulations for Residential Districts
Use RR,RR-1,RR-2 RS-11,R-3, R-11,R-15 R-20,R-25 MHP
R-5,R-8 .
Single-Family Dwelling P P P P P
Accessory Dwelling Unit P P Pl Pt Pl
Multi-Family Dwelling X X P P X
Mobile Home Park X X C C P
Manufactured Housing P P P P P
Residential Care Facility(6 or fewer) P P P P X
Residential Care Facility(7 or more) C C C C X
Notes:
1-in conjunction with an existing single-family residence or the construction of a new single-family residence on a lot zoned for single-family or
multifamily use
8.3.1 Single-Family Dwelling
A "single-family dwelling" is defined in the Zoning Code as a one-family dwelling, attached or detached,
located on separate lots or parcels exclusively for residential occupancy. Single-family dwellings are
permitted in all residential zones.The City's definition of"family" does not limit the number of unrelated
persons who may be considered a "family," as discussed later in this Appendix.
8.3.2 Accessory Dwelling Unit and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are attached or detached dwelling units that provide complete
independent living facilities for one or more persons including permanent provisions for living, sleeping,
cooking and sanitation.Junior accessory dwelling units(JADUs) have access to the main home, may share
a bath, and have limited kitchen facilities. Accessory dwelling units may be an alternative source of
affordable housing for lower-income households,seniors,family members,and live-in assistants enabling
owners to age in place.
As described in Program 1C, the City has adopted flexible ADU standards to encourage ADU production.
Those standards allow both an ADU and a JADU on one lot, reduce setbacks, and increase floor area.The
City also waives development fees for ADUs.
8.3.3 Multi-Family Dwelling
According to the State Department of Finance, multiple-family housing consisted of approximately 22
percent of the 2010 housing stock in Encinitas. In 2017 that number was approximately the same. The
Zoning Code allows multi-family developments as a permitted use in the higher density residential zones
(R-15, R-20 and R-25). The maximum density for the R-25 zones is 25 units per acre.
Program 1B provides for upzoning the proposed lower income sites to a maximum density of 30 units per
acre.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-61
City of Encinitas z �• I V.
8.3.4 Mobile Home Parks and Manufactured Housing
Manufactured housing and mobile homes can be an affordable housing option for low and moderate
income households.According to the California Department of Finance,there were 770 mobile homes in
the City as of January 2010. In 2017, that number was estimated to be 678 units. A mobile home built
afterJune 15,1976,certified underthe National Manufactured Home Construction and SafetyAct of 1974,
and built on a permanent foundation may be located in any residential zone where a conventional single-
family detached dwelling is permitted subject to the same restrictions on density and to the same property
development regulations.The Encinitas Municipal Code does not define manufactured housing. However,
factory-built modular homes, constructed in compliance with the City's construction codes, and mobile
homes/manufactured housing units that comply with the National Manufactured Housing Construction
and Safety Standards Act of 1974, are considered single-family dwellings and treated as such. Mobile
Home Parks require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the R-11 and the higher density residential zones
(R-15, R-20 and R-25) and are a permitted use in the MHP zone.
8.3.5 Residential Care Facilities
Residential care facilities licensed or supervised by a federal,state,or county agency provide 24-hour non-
medical care of unrelated persons who are handicapped and in need of personal services,supervision,or
assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living or for the protection of the individual in a
family-like environment.Several state laws, including the Community Care Facilities Act(California Health
and Safety Code) and Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (California Welfare and
Institution Code), require that State-licensed residential care facilities serving six or fewer persons
(including foster care) be treated as a regular residential use and therefore shall be permitted by right in
all residential zones allowing residential uses. These facilities cannot be subject to more stringent
development standards,fees,or other standards than the same type of housing in the same district.
In accordance with these provisions,Encinitas allows residential care facilities serving six or fewer persons
within all residential zones. Residential care facilities serving more than six persons are conditionally
permitted in all single-family residential zones when located on a prime arterial roadway, and
conditionally permitted in all multi-family zones. Conditions for approval are similar to those of similar
uses in the same zone.
8.3.6 Emergency Shelters
Senate Bill 2, enacted in October 2007, requires local governments to identify one or more zoning
categories that allow emergency shelters (year-round shelters for the homeless) without discretionary
review.The statute permits the City to apply limited conditions to the approval of ministerial permits for
emergency shelters.The identified zone shall have sufficient capacity to accommodate at least one year-
round shelter and accommodate the City's share of the regional unsheltered homeless population. In
January 2018, the annual Point-in-Time Count found 39 sheltered and 86 unsheltered individuals in the
City of Encinitas.
The City of Encinitas' Zoning Code does not explicitly address emergency shelters. Housing Element
Program 2E provides that the City will amend its Zoning Code by November 2018 to permit homeless
shelters by right,without discretionary review,within the Light Industrial.(LI)and Business Park(BP)zones,
consistent with State law.Areas designated as Light Industrial and BP total approximately 28 acres.
B-62 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas
Access to Public Transit and Services.
In selecting an appropriate location for emergency shelters, access to public transit was an important
consideration, as many individuals and households experiencing homelessness do not have any reliable
means of transportation.This area is well served by public transportation and regional connections.North
County Transit District (NCTD) offers two nearby bus routes the 309 and the 304, both of which operate
frequently and have stops located within 0.15 miles—0.8 miles.The 309 runs along Encinitas Blvd and El
Camino Real and connects with the El Camino Real Sprinter station in Oceanside. The 304 route runs
along Santa Fe Drive and connects to the Sprinter (light rail) station in San Marcos, adjacent to Palomar
College. Both the 304 and 309 bus routes connect at the Encinitas Transit Center(approximately 1 mile),
which is served by the Coaster (train connecting Oceanside to Downtown San Diego), and the 101 bus
route,connecting Oceanside to the Veteran's Administration in La Jolla.
Another important consideration was proximity to jobs.Several nearby businesses, including grocery and
convenience stores, car washes, restaurants,and fast food chains are well established and located within
0.25—0.5 miles of the BP and LI zones.Within the BP and LI zones,there are several employers including
an auto parts store, automotive repair, and light manufacturing and industrial businesses.The BP and LI
zones are located along a major arterial (Encinitas Blvd), which runs east/west and links downtown
Encinitas to the El Camino Real commercial corridor.The Downtown area and the El Camino Corridor both
have ample employment opportunities,with businesses such as restaurants,fast food chains,car washes,
automotive repair,retail,convenience and grocery stores,and drinking establishments.Additionally,close
proximity to the Encinitas Transit Center enables workers to travel farther for employment.
The selected zones are also close to a variety of services. The Community Resource Center (CRC) is an
important local partner to the City in providing housing navigation and supportive services for those
experiencing homelessness and other at-risk populations.CRC's main social service office is located within
1.2 miles of the BP and LI zones, accessible by transit. The City provides funding to CRC to operate the
Opening Doors program, which matches homeless households with housing navigators and housing
resources, to ultimately be placed into permanent housing. The Community Resource Center also
established an Advisory Committee on Homelessness in Encinitas, comprised of public agency staff, law
enforcement, community members, homeless activists, and others. This committee has proven to an
effective communication tool and resource network between all relevant stakeholders. CRC also offers
emergency shelter and transitional housing for domestic violence victims, housing prevention programs,
case management,self-sufficiency planning,tax preparation, and move-in and transit support(gas cards,
transit passes, security deposits, etc.). Proximity to CRC was an important consideration in the selection
of zone(s) appropriate for an emergency shelter.
Many faith-based institutions are also located in close proximity to the BP and LI zones: St Johns (1.1
miles), San Dieguito Methodist Church (0.6 miles), St. Andrews (1.2 miles), Seacoast Church (0.6 miles),
and Bethlehem Lutheran (1.1 miles). All churches are accessible by public transit except Seacoast, which
is within walking distance, and most of these churches have been involved in ending homelessness in
Encinitas. For example, St. Andrews hosts a regular mobile shower event for the homeless, Seacoast
Church voluntarily hosted a mobile handwashing station and portable toilet during a Hepatitis A outbreak
and has expressed interested in building on-site affordable housing, and Bethlehem Lutheran and San
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-63
City of Encinitas -` ,o.1
Dieguito Methodist both participate in the Winter Rotational Shelter program, operated by Interfaith
Shelter Network.
The City's Community and Senior Center is located approximately 1.0 miles from the BP and LI zones and
is accessible by transit. The Senior Center offers daily lunch service for a suggested donation of$4.00,
provides transportation services, and acts as a hub for a host of other resources to seniors. Additionally,
the YMCA Magdalena Center is just 0.8 miles away, also accessible by transit, and offers a number of
programs for families.The YMCA offers subsidized childcare,youth and family services, and membership
scholarships.
The Encinitas Public Library and Encinitas City Hall are approximately 1.0 miles from the BP and LI zones
and accessible by transit. The library offers a computer lab, free internet access, and serves as an
information hub for resources. City Hall is where the City's Development Services Department is located,
which is responsible for administering the City's housing programs, including Section 8 Rental Assistance.
Additionally, North County Health Services, which serves low-income and uninsured populations, is
located in downtown Encinitas, just 1.6 miles from the BP and LI zones. Additionally, Scripps Memorial
Hospital is 1.1 from the BP and LI zones. Each of these health care facilities is accessible by public transit.
The City of Encinitas has partnerships with many other service providers. The City provides Community
Development Block Grant(CDBG) program funds to a number of homeless service providers for homeless
prevention and regional shelter efforts. Having these relationships in place strengthens the potential for
an emergency shelter in the LI and BP zones.To the extent that funds are available,the City will continue
to sponsor or assist emergency shelter facilities,inside City limits or outside within a reasonable proximity
to the City, as well as encourage or support facilities by providing grants, or low cost loans,to operating
agencies.
Other North County facilities and services for those experiencing homelessness include:
• Mental Health Systems (Oceanside—12.2 miles)
• Interfaith Community Services (Vista—16.4 miles)
• La Posada Shelter(Carlsbad—7.8 miles)
• Women's Resource Center(Oceanside—12.2 miles)
• Operation Hope (Vista—15.6 miles)
• Haven House (Escondido—16.4 miles)
• Interfaith Community Services (16.4 miles)
• North County Lifeline(Oceanside 13.1)
• Oceanside Transit Center(Oceanside—13.1 miles)
Opportunity for Creation of Emergency Shelters
Development of emergency shelters would most likely involve the adaptive reuse of existing
nonresidential structures (commercial and industrial uses) in the BP and LI zones. In general, adaptive
reuse of a non-residential structure is the most likely means by which an emergency shelter could be
created in the City. The feasibility of adaptive reuse from a building code standpoint would be similar in
the BP and LI zones as in any other location throughout the City.
B-64 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas ZJ
Consistent with dormitory style living, an average of approximately 75 to 100 square feet would be
required per shelter bed, including space for waiting/intake areas, kitchen and eating areas, common
living space, bathrooms, and storage. Based on this rule of thumb, one or more facilities totaling
approximately 8,500 sf to 10,000 sf would be required to house the City's entire unsheltered homeless
population of 86 individuals. The BP and LI Zones contain adequate capacity to accommodate such a
facility in one or more locations.
The BP and LI zones consist of 28.56 acres; of which 0.32 acres is vacant of any structures.The remaining
area is developed as an industrial park with a variety of business and light industrial uses such as light
manufacturing and warehousing. Of those parcels with existing structures, seven have structures larger
than 10,000 square feet, six have structures between 5,000 — 10,000 square feet, and the remaining
parcels contain structures of less than 5,000 square feet.With an allowable Floor Area Ratio(FAR)of 0.75,
even the smaller parcels would be sufficient to accommodate the needs of the City's unsheltered
homeless population.
As of May 2018,the North Coast Business Park website listed a total of 12 suites available for lease within
the BP zone, totaling 18,218 square feet. A subsequent field visit confirmed the vacancies, and also
revealed additional vacancies within the LI zone, although no for rent or sale signs were noted. This
demonstrates the availability of space within the BP and LI zones suitable to accommodate the City's
unsheltered homeless population need.
Emergency Shelter Development Standards
Development standards for emergency shelters will be adopted by the Planning Commission and City
Council by November 2018.The statute permits the City to apply only limited conditions to the approval
of ministerial permits for emergency shelters. Pursuant to State law, emergency shelters may only be
subject to those development and management standards that apply to residential or commercial
development within the same zone except that the City may apply written, objective standards that
include all of the following:
• The maximum number of beds or persons permitted to be served nightly by the facility.
• Off-street parking based upon demonstrated need, provided that the standards do not require
more parking for emergency shelters than for other residential or commercial uses within the
same zone.
• The size and location of exterior and interior onsite waiting and client intake areas.
• The provision of onsite management.
• The proximity to other emergency shelters provided that emergency shelters are not required to
be more than 300 feet apart.
• The length of stay.
• Lighting.
• Security during hours that the emergency shelter is in operation.
Standards adopted by the City will be consistent with these limitations and will be drafted to facilitate the
provision of emergency shelters in the designated zones.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-65
City of Encinitas ZJ f
z1
8.3.7 Transitional Housing
Government Code Section 65582 defines "transitional housing" as buildings configured as rental housing
developments, but operated under program requirements that call for the termination of assistance and
recirculating of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at some predetermined future point
in time, that shall be no less than six months from the beginning of assistance. Residents of transitional
housing are usually connected to supportive services designed to assist the homeless in achieving greater
economic independence and a permanent, stable living situation. Transitional housing can be located in
single-family homes but is usually located in multi-family apartments and typically offers case
management and support services to help return people to independent living (often six months to two
years).
Currently, transitional housing facilities are included in the Encinitas Zoning Code as residential care
facilities. Program 2E in the Housing Element provides that the City will amend its Zoning Code to allow
transitional housing to be considered a residential use of property,subject only to restrictions that apply
to other residences of the same type (single-family or multi-family) in the same zone.
8.3.8 Supportive Housing
Supportive housing links the provision of housing and social services for the homeless, people with
disabilities, and a variety of other special needs populations. Government Code Section 65582 defines
"supportive housing"as housing with no limit on length of stay,that is occupied by the target population,
and that is linked to on-site or off-site services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the
housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible,
work in the community. "Target population" means persons with lower incomes who have one or more
disabilities, including mental illness, HIV or AIDS, substance abuse, or other chronic health conditions,or
individuals eligible for services provided under the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act
(Division 4.5, commencing with Section 4500, of the Welfare and Institutions Code,who include persons
diagnosed with a developmental disability before age 18) and may, among other populations, adults,
emancipated minors, families with children, elderly persons, young adults aging out of the foster care
system,individuals exiting from institutional settings,veterans,or homeless people.Similar to transitional
housing, supportive housing may be located in single-family homes or multi-family apartments.
Supportive housing includes a service component either on- or off-site to assist the tenants in retaining
the housing,improving his or her health status,and maximizing his or her abilityto live and,when possible,
work in the community.
The Encinitas Zoning Code does not currently address the provision of supportive housing. Program 2E in
the Housing Element contains a program to amend the Zoning Code to allow supportive housing to be
considered a residential use of property,subject only to restrictions that apply to other residences of the
same type (single-family or multi-family) in the same zone.
8.3.9 Single Room Occupancy Units (SROs)
SRO units are one-room units intended for occupancy by a single individual.They are distinct from a studio
or efficiency unit, in that a studio is a one-room unit that must contain a kitchen and bathroom.Although
SRO units are not required to have a kitchen or bathroom, many SROs have one or the other and could be
equivalent to an efficiency unit. The Encinitas Zoning Code does not contain specific provisions for SRO
units.
B-66 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
The City permits SROs in the DCM-1 zone with a major use permit. Additionally,the City will amend the
Zoning Code to permit SROs in multifamily zones.
8.3.10 Tiny Homes
The City has also expressed its interest in exploring the concept of"tiny homes"The tiny house movement
(also known as the "small house movement") is a description for the architectural and social movement
that advocates living simply in small homes. There is currently no set definition as to what constitutes as
tiny home in the City's Zoning Code; however, a residential structure under 500 square feet is generally
accepted to be a tiny home. The City has no minimum unit size that would limit the provision of tiny
homes.
8.3.11 Farmworker Housing
The City of Encinitas has established an agricultural overlay zone and,within the Encinitas Ranch Specific
Plan, an Agricultural (AG) zone. The Specific Plan further specifies that farm employee housing requires
the approval of a minor use permit.
The City will amend the Zoning Code to comply with State laws with regard to agricultural worker housing.
Specifically, pursuant to the State Employee Housing Act (Section 17000 of the Health and Safety Code),
employee housing for agricultural workers consisting of no more than 36 beds in a group quarters or 12
units or spaces designed for use by a single-family or household is permitted by right in an agricultural
land use designation. Therefore, for properties that permit agricultural uses by right, a local jurisdiction
may not treat employee housing that meets the above criteria any differently than an agricultural use.
Furthermore, any employee housing providing accommodations for six or fewer employees shall be
deemed a single-family structure within a residential land use designation, according to the Employee
Housing Act. Employee housing for six or fewer persons is permitted wherever a residence is permitted.
To comply with state law no conditional use permit or variance will be required.
8.4 Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Both the federal Fair Housing Amendment Act (FHAA) and the California Fair Employment and Housing
Act direct local governments to make reasonable accommodations (that is, modifications or exceptions)
in their zoning laws and other land use regulations when such accommodations may be necessary to
afford disabled persons an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.The City conducted an analysis
of the zoning ordinance, permitting procedures, development standards, and building codes to identify
potential constraints for housing for persons with disabilities.The City's policies and regulations regarding
housing for persons with disabilities are described below.
8.4.1 Land Use Controls
Under State law,small licensed residential care facilities for six or fewer persons shall be treated as regular
residential uses and permitted by right in all residential districts. Encinitas allows residential care facilities
serving six or fewer persons within all residential zones. Residential care facilities serving more than six
persons are conditionally permitted.The City has not adopted a spacing requirement for residential care
facilities.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-67
City of Encinitas
—�f
8.4.2 Definition of Family
A restrictive definition of"family"that limits the number of unrelated persons and differentiates between
related and unrelated individuals living together is inconsistent with the right of privacy established by
the California Constitution. The City of Encinitas Zoning Code defines a"family"as"one or more persons,
an individual or two (2) or more persons related by blood, marriage or adoption, or a group including
unrelated individuals bearing the generic character of and living together as a relatively permanent unit
sharing such needs as cooking facilities. Family shall also mean the persons living together including the
licensee, the members of the licensee's family, and persons employed as facility staff in the following
facilities licensed to sere six (6) or fewer persons: A) a licensed "residential facility", as that term is
defined in the California Community Care Facilities Act, California Health & Safety Code Section 1500 et.
Seq; B) a licensed "residential care facility for the elderly", as that term is defined in the Residential Care
Facilities for the Elderly Act,California Health&Safety Act,Section 1569 et.seq.;C)a licensed"congregate
care" or "intermediate care facility, as defined in California Health & Safety Code Section 1250; or D) a
licensed Alcohol and Drug Abuse Recovery Treatment Center, as defined in the Uniform Controlled
Substances Act,California Health&Safety Code Section 11000 et seq."The City's definition of family does
not limit the number of unrelated persons living together and does not need to be amended.
8.4.3 Building Codes
The Building and Safety Division actively enforces Titles 11A and 11B of the California Building Code and
Americans with Disability Act provisions that regulate the access and adaptability of buildings to
accommodate persons with disabilities. No unique restrictions are in place that would constrain the
development of housing for persons with disabilities. Section 233.3.2 of the 2010 ADA Standards for
Accessible Design requires that a percentage of units in a housing development provide mobility
accessibility features and communications features. Other features, such as accessible parking spaces,
accessible route of travel, and accessible baths are also required.
8.4.4 Encroachment Permit Procedure
Encroachment permits for structures within public rights-of-way are handled administratively by the
Engineering Services Department. Improvements designed to improve accessibility(such as a wheelchair
ramp) that encroach on the public right-of-way needs a Permanent Encroachment permit with a
Maintenance and Removal Covenant.The applicant provides a drawing of the proposed improvements in
relation to the public 'right of way, which is then reviewed by the City Engineer. The improvements shall
be completed by a licensed and insured general contractor. There is a nominal permit fee as well as a
small recording fee.The City's permit processes for waivers and encroachments are relatively simple and
expeditious and do not constitute a constraint to reasonable accommodations for persons with
disabilities.
8.4.5 Retrofitting and Barrier Removal
The City also allows residential retrofitting to increase the suitability of homes for persons with disabilities
in compliance with ADA requirements. Such retrofitting is permitted under Chapter 11 of the California
Code. The City works with applicants who need special accommodations in their homes to ensure that
application of building code requirements does not create a constraint.
8-68 2013-2021 Housing Element–Appendix B
City of Encinitas
The City does not impose special permit procedures or requirements that could impede the retrofitting
of homes for accessibility.The City's requirements for building permits and inspections are the same as
for other residential projects. City officials are not aware of any instances in which an applicant
experienced delays or rejection of a retrofitting proposal for accessibility to persons with disabilities.
8.4.6 Permits and Review Procedures
The City does not impose special occupancy permit requirements for the establishment or retrofitting of
structures for residential use by persons with disabilities. Generally, if structural improvements were
required for an existing group home, a building permit would be required. If a new structure were
proposed for a group home use, review would be required as for any other new residential structure.
Many residential projects in the City require some level of design review.The design review and hearing
process is the same for group homes and special needs housing for persons with disabilities as for other
residential projects. The City's design review process has not been used to deny or make infeasible a
housing project for persons with disabilities.
8.4.7 Reasonable Accommodation
Both the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act direct local
governments to make reasonable accommodations (that is, modifications or exceptions) in their zoning
laws and other land use regulations when such accommodations may be necessary to afford disabled
persons an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. For example, it may be reasonable to
accommodate requests from persons with disabilities to waive a setback requirement or other standard
of the Zoning Code to ensure that homes are accessible for the mobility impaired. Whether a particular
modification is reasonable depends on the circumstances.
Encinitas currently provides information to applicants or those inquiring of City regulations regarding
accommodations in zoning, permit processes, and application of building codes for persons with
disabilities.Applicants for development projects may apply for a variance from development standards if
circumstances warrant. Certain minor variances may be granted by the City's zoning administrator,while
other variance requests are approved by the Planning Commission. In either case, rather strict findings
must be made in order to grant a variance. As such, the formal variance procedure may not be the
appropriate vehicle to consider requests for reasonable accommodations. Housing Element Program 5A
states that the City will amend the Zoning Code to adopt a reasonable accommodation ordinance.
8.5 Development and Planning Fees
Residential developers are subject to a variety of fees and exactions to process permits and provide
necessary services and facilities as allowed by State law. In general, these development fees can be a
constraint to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing because the additional cost
borne by developers contributes to overall increased housing unit cost. However,the fees are necessary
to maintain adequate planning services and other public services and facilities in the City.These fees have
not been found to act as a constraint to the development of housing in Encinitas.
Table B-43 summarizes the most common planning and development impact fees for the City of Encinitas
and other North County Coastal cities. In general, the City's fees are comparable to those imposed on
developments in other North San Diego communities.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-69
City of Encinitas -� /
-�1
Development fees vary depending on housing type and the location of the project. However,generally,a
developer can expect to pay approximately$5,000in total planning fees for a typical single-family dwelling
unit. For a small multi-family project (five to ten units), fees total approximately $6,000 per unit (1,200
square feet). Given the high land costs in Encinitas,the City's planning and development fees represent
only a small percentage of the overall development costs and do not serve to constrain housing
development.
Table B-43:Regional Comparison of Planning and Development Fees(2018)
Encinitas' Carlsbac12 Oceanside3 Solana Beach°
Planning Fees
Coastal Development Permit $1,600 $910-$3,774 $3,000-$4,000
Design Review/Development Review $274-$4,800 -- $5,000-$6,435 $3,030-$10,000
Major Use Permit/Conditional Use $6,000 $4,765 $5,000 $9,300
Permit
Minor Use Permit $2,110 798 $3,000 $2.327
Tentative Parcel Map $4,555 $4,044 Deposit Account --
Final Parcel Ma $355 $3,115 -- --
Tentative Subdivision Map $13,000(plus $4,044-$17,501 Deposit $8,674-$10,858
$650 per lot in Account
excess of 5 lots)
Final Subdivision Map $520 $7,964 -- $4,002-$5,777
Variance $1,580-$3,810 $3,005 $4,000 $2,163
Plan Check $70-$1,000 70%of building -- --
permit
Environmental Review-Initial Study $5,055 -- $5,000 Deposit $291 plus cost
Account
General Plan Amendment $13,000-$20,000 $4,537-$6,544 $10,000 $10,000
(Plus staff time
and costs)
Impact/Capacity Fees
Parks and Recreation Fee $5,423- $3,696- $4,431/unit $600/unit
$9,220/unit $7,649/unit
Open Space Land Acquisition $287-$438/unit -- -- --
Trail Development Fee $107-$168 unit -- -- --
Community/Public Facilities Fee $387-$571/unit -- $2,621/unit 1%of
valuation
Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fee -- $2,915- $1,000/project --
$4,515/unit +$100/unit plus
$5.80/sq ft
B-70 2013-2021 Housing Element -Appendix B
City of Encinitas —`
Table B-43:Regional Comparison"of Planning and Development Fees(2018)
Encinitas' Carlsbac12 Oceanside3 Solana Beach4
Sewer Connection Fee $2,680- $934/unit $7,794/unit --
$4,006/unit
Public Art Fee -- -- -- 0.5%of
valuation
Traffic Impact Fee $2,680 to $111-$329 per -- SF:$3,623/unit
$4,006/unit ADT MF:
$2,899/unit
School Facilities Fee -- -- $3.20-$3.48/sq.ft. --
Water Connection Fee DWD: $8,940
$49,608
OMWD: $12,807
-$82,697
Source:Cities of Encinitas,Carlsbad,Oceanside and Solana Beach,2018.
Notes:
(1)effective Jan 1,2018
(2)Effective Jan 1,2018
(3)effective April 1,2017
(4)effective 2011
8.6 On and Off-Site Improvements
Site improvements in the City consist of those typically associated with development for on-site
improvements (fronting streets, curbs, gutters, sewer/water, and sidewalks), and off-site improvements
(drainage, parks,traffic,schools,and sewer/water).Thus,these are costs that will be added to the sale or
rental price of housing. Because residential development cannot take place without the addition of
adequate infrastructure,site improvement requirements are not seen as a constraint to the development
of housing within the City.
Unlike most cities, Encinitas does not impose standardized infrastructure requirements.Adopted policies
in other elements of the General Plan call for street and sidewalk improvement standards adequate to
serve and protect public safety but are tailored to specific community and neighborhood design needs.
This approach is expected to result in requirements less stringent and less costly than the normal type of
citywide engineering requirements imposed by most municipalities. The improvements and exactions
required for residential development are limited to those improvements needed to allow the project
based on its impacts.
For single-family residential development on vacant land,examples of typical on-site improvements might
include stormwater detention facilities, roads, sidewalks, perimeter walls, fire hydrants and emergency
access drives, and recreational trails.The Fire Department may require fire breaks and fuel management
areas if a project is within or near brush areas. Multifamily developments may also include common open
space and recreation areas, as well as lockable storage areas.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-71
City of Encinitas z� °
Typical off-site improvements for both single-family and multi-family developments might include: new
curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, recreational trail facilities, road improvements and traffic control needed
to serve the development,street trees,and landscaping. Utilities may need to be upgraded or installed to
serve the development, including water mains,sewer mains,stormwater pollution prevention measures,
and undergrounding of electric utilities.
Infill residential projects may be required to install any of the example improvements listed above,
depending on site-specific circumstances and neighborhood needs. As mentioned previously, required
site improvements are limited to just those needed to serve the project and offset related impacts.
For residential projects, there is no fixed landscaping requirement as a percentage of the total site.
However, projects subject to design review, such as single-family subdivisions and multi-family projects
are required to submit landscaping plans as part of the overall project. Multifamily projects are required
to maintain a landscape buffer when adjacent to a rural residential or single- family zone. Specific
landscaping requirements may vary from city-wide standards in the various specific plan areas. For
projects not subject to design review (for example, a new single-family home on an individual lot), an
approved landscaping plan is generally not required. Open space requirements apply to residential
projects under certain circumstances such as the presence of steep slopes,floodplains, sensitive habitat,
or other environmentally constrained features.For example,properties subject to the Hillside/Inland Bluff
Overlay Zone shall preserve undisturbed or restored areas that exceed 25 percent in slope in an open
space easement or deed restriction. The purpose of such restrictions is to protect environmentally or
geologically sensitive areas from the adverse effects of development.
Open space requirements can be applied through Lot Area Averaging and Planned Residential
Development (PRD) projects. A primary purpose for lot averaging and PRD projects is to allow design
flexibility to protect sensitive areas and significant topographic features while maintaining the ability to
achieve planned densities. Open space reservations also provide a recreational amenity for the residents
of such developments. For example, the PRD standards require that 40 percent of a development site
contain both developed and undeveloped open space forthe purposes of preserving natural and sensitive
areas while providing common recreational and private use areas.
Public street widths are specified in the City's Municipal Code (23.36.090). The City requires a standard
right-of-way of 30 feet for residential and light collector streets. These improvement requirements are
typical and do not constrain housing development.These are typical standards acceptable to the Encinitas
Fire Protection Department and County Fire.
8.7 Building Codes and Enforcement
The City of Encinitas' construction codes are based upon the California Code of Regulations, Title 24
(Building, Plumbing, Mechanical, Electrical and Housing Codes) and are considered to be the minimum
necessary to protect the public health,safety and welfare of the City's residents.The City has also adopted
the Uniform Fire Code (UFC). Code enforcement is conducted by the City and is based on systematic
enforcement in areas of serious concern and on a complaint basis throughout the City. The Code
Enforcement Division works with property owners and renters to assist in meeting State health and safety
codes.The Code Enforcement Division has not found any structures to be unfit for human occupancy as a
result of its code enforcement efforts.
B-72 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas z
8.8 Local Permits and Processing Times
The processing time needed to obtain development permits and required approvals is commonly cited by
the development community as a prime contributor to the high cost of housing. Depending on the
magnitude and complexity of the development proposal,the time that elapses from application submittal
to project approval may vary considerably. Factors that can affect the length of development review on a
proposed project include: completeness of the development application and responsiveness of
developers to staff comments and requests for information. Approval times are substantially lengthened
for projects that are not exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), require rezoning
or general plan amendments, or encounter community opposition.
Certainty and consistency in permit processing procedures and reasonable processing times is important
to ensure that the development review/approval process does not discourage developers of housing or
add excessive costs (including carrying costs on property) that would make the project economically
infeasible. The City is committed to maintaining comparatively short processing times. Total processing
times vary by project, but most residential projects are approved in three months to one year.Table B-44
provides a detailed summary of the typical estimated processing procedures and timelines of various
types of projects in the City.
Table B-44:Processing Times
Project Type Reviewing Body Public Hearing Appeal Body(if any) Estimated Total
Required Processing Time
Single-Family <4 lots: Yes City Council;Coastal 154 lots:3-6 months
Subdivision Development Services Commission in Coastal z5 lots:6 months to
Director Commission appeal jurisdiction 1 year
z5 lots:Planning
Commission
Multiple-Family Planning Commission Yes City Council;Coastal 6 months to 1 year
Commission in Coastal
Commission appeal jurisdiction
Multiple-Family Planning Commission Yes City Council;Coastal 6 months to 1 year
(with subdivisions) Commission in Coastal
Commission appeal jurisdiction
Mixed-use Planning Commission Yes City Council;Coastal 6 months to 1 year
Commission in Coastal
Commission appeal jurisdiction
At a minimum, building permits are required to construct any new or structurally-remodeled dwellings.
New single-family units and multi-family development proposals are subject to design review. Land
subdivisions require approval of a parcel or subdivision map. Proposed residential development within
the Coastal Zone is also subject to approval of a Coastal Development Permit. In all residential zones
single-family and multi-family development is permitted by right,that is, not subject to a conditional use
permit unless the applicant proposes a Planned Residential Development (PRD) or lot area averaging.
Single-family and multi-family uses also are permitted by right in mixed-use zones.The review procedures
for single-family and multi-family development are similar. The processing time for the most common
residential development applications are summarized in Table B-45. These applications are often
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-73
City of Encinitas
processed concurrently while Coastal Development Permits are usually processed concurrently with other
development permits,they can add approximately two months to the processing time for a single-family
home that would not otherwise be subject to discretionary review.
While the review and permit processing procedures and time frames are comparable to those in other
coastal cities, Encinitas continues to improve its procedures. The City has implemented a number of
improvements to the review process,including upgraded permitting software,improved coordination and
communication among departments, weekly pre-development meetings with prospective developers,
periodic distribution of a newsletter to the development community, and improved access to zoning and
development information via the City's website and informational brochures at City Hall. Housing Element
Program 3E calls for the City to continue to improve the efficiency of the development review process for
housing projects.
Table B-45:Approximate Processing Times
Process/Application Time
Conditional Use Permit 6-18 months
Design Review 6-18 months
General Plan Amendment 1-2 years(if part of Local Coastal Program then an additional 18 months
to several years)
Environmental Impact Reports 1-2 years
Plan Check/Building Permits 2-6 months(varies by type of permit)
Variance 4 months to 1 year
Zone Change 1-2 years(if part of Local Coastal Program then an additional 18 months
to several years)
Source:City of Encinitas Planning Department,2018.
8.8.1 Design Review
The design review process is regulated by Municipal Code Chapter 23.08 and adopted Design Guidelines.
While there are some exceptions to the design review requirement, such as limited additions and
remodels, a single home on a pre-existing legal lot, walls and fences under six feet high, and so forth, all
other new development is subject to the regulations. Design review determinations are either made by
the Planning Director or Planning Commission (see "Administrative Review" and "Discretionary Review"
discussion below). Most new residential developments will be reviewed by the Planning Commission. In
order to gain approval, the design review regulations require that the decision-maker must find that the
project:
• Is consistent with the General Plan, a Specific Plan or the Municipal Code;
• Is substantially consistent with the Design Review Guidelines;
• Would not adversely affect the health,safety, or general welfare of the community;and
• Would not tend to cause the surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in appearance
or value (EM C 23.08.080).
B-74 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1 °
To guide developers in designing their projects and assist staff and the Planning Commission in evaluating
them, the Design Guidelines contain detailed policies covering various aspects project design: site
planning, grading and landform, circulation, parking and streetscape, architecture and signage, lighting,
and landscaping. Some guidelines are mandatory, i.e., the project shall incorporate certain features into
their designs. For example, "barrier-free design amenities for the disabled shall be provided." Most
guidelines, however, are presented in the more suggestive terms "should", "should not", "encouraged"
and "discouraged". The guidelines are intended to articulate community vision about how development
is executed while at the same time provide enough flexibility to encourage creativity and cost-effective
design.However,underthe Housing Accountability Act,a housing development may be denied or reduced
in density only if it violates objective standards.
In addition,each of the adopted Specific Plans has written guidelines tailored to the design and character
issues unique to those areas. The written guidelines enable prospective developers to understand how
their projects will be evaluated and enable them to design accordingly, minimizing costly redesigns and
delays in the review process.
A concern has been expressed that design review finding No. 4 (above) could be used to deny an
affordable housing project (although studies show that affordable housing does not reduce property
values).This would not be permitted by the Housing Accountability Act.However,while there is no known
case in Encinitas that a residential project was denied on the basis that it may "tend to cause the
surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in appearance or value", Housing Element Program
3B states that the City will modify this finding to remove references to "value depreciation" when
considering the character of the surrounding neighborhood.
8.8.2 Building Permit
The construction of one single-family residence outside the Coastal Zone,which meets the requirements
of a custom home and complies with all other City ordinances and regulations generally does not require
any level of discretionary review. The permit process is a building permit application and takes
approximately two to three months for approval.The building permit process follows these steps:
1. Filing a Building Permit application and payment of fees;
2. Submitting Construction Plans for Building and Grading Permits;
3. Resubmit Construction Plans for re-review as needed;and
4. Permits Issued.
All residential projects,whether or not they require design review or a coastal development permit,follow
the building permit process before receiving final building permit approval.
8.8.3 Coastal Development Permit
New development in the City's Coastal Zone requires a Coastal Development Permit. In 1994, Encinitas
assumed permitting authority from the California Coastal Commission through an adopted Local Coastal
Program (LCP). To reduce overlapping requirements, the LCP allows processing of coastal development
permits concurrently with other reviews such as design review and conditional use permits. However, in
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-75
City of Encinitas —` � 9
—��
the case of individual single-family home construction, coastal permit requirements can add two months
to the review process.
The City is seeking to exempt certain types of development in specific locations (including individual
homes)from the Coastal Development Permit process, provided there are no environmental constraints
or coastal access issues.
8.8.4 Administrative Review (Director Approval)
Construction of residential projects may require Administrative Review. The Administrative Review
process involves submitting an application,staff and public review,and finally Planning Director approval.
The Administrative Review process takes between three to six months for approval. Administrative
Review decisions can be appealed to the City Council, which can lengthen the review process. The
following types of projects require Administrative Review:
• Tentative Parcel Map(four lots/units or fewer)
• Boundary Adjustment
• Certificate of Compliance
• Minor Use Permit
• Minor Variance
• Condominium Conversion (four units or fewer)
• Administrative Design Revie
8.8.5 Discretionary Review (Planning Commission Approval)
Residential projects that require Planning Commission review involve submitting a Discretionary Permit
Application, staff and public review, and final approval by the Planning Commission. The Discretionary
Review process generally takes six months up to a yearfor approval.Planning Commission determinations
can be appealed to the City Council, which can lengthen review time. The following types of projects
require Planning Commission approval:
• Tentative Subdivision Map(five or more lots/units)
• Major Use Permit
• Major Variance
• Condominium Conversion (five or more units)
• Design Review
9 Environmental and Infrastructure Constraints
The City of Encinitas is bounded by the Pacific Ocean on the west. Coastal bluffs at the City's northern
boundary overlook the portion of Batiquitos Lagoon that falls within Encinitas, and includes lands south
and southeast of the lagoon,including Indian Head Canyon, Magdalena Ecke Park,the slopes above Green
B-76 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas Zl "TM°
--`�
Valley, and habitat north of Encinitas Boulevard between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road. At
the City's southern perimeter,slopes and bluffs overlook San Elijo Lagoon. Escondido Creek,a major east-
west waterway, traverses the southern boundary of the City and ultimately empties into the San Elijo
Lagoon.
Portions of Encinitas are exposed to a variety of environmental hazards and resources which may
constrain development. These constraints include topography, flooding, landslides and seismic hazards,
and areas with natural and cultural resources. For example, areas of Olivenhain and the Sphere of
Influence area beyond the City's eastern limits include slope areas greater than 25 percent and are
characterized by the presence of biological habitat.A number of residential properties along the coast in
Old Encinitas and Leucadia are affected by the presence of coastal bluffs and erosion. The Zoning Code
has defined a Special Purpose Overlay Zone that recognizes
the need for additional site development considerations in these areas before future development may
proceed. These constraints were taken into account as part of the residential capacity figures that were
generated as part of the site inventory analysis.
In Encinitas those areas planned for higher density are less subject to environmental limits and hazards.
Conversely, those areas that are more constrained are planned for lower density to lessen the potential
for unacceptable impacts on the environment. Approximately 6.1 percent of the land cannot be
developed in Encinitas due to physical or environmental constraints such as steep slopes, floodplains,
wetlands, or public ownership.
The City of Encinitas has evaluated the availability of infrastructure from a Citywide and site-specific
standpoint. In determining the feasibility of sites to accommodate the City's RHNA needs, infrastructure
provision was a determining factor. Based on the site inventory analysis contained in Appendix C of this
Housing Element,the current location of infrastructure facilities, adjacent to, or on the parcels within the
inventory of sites,do not pose a constraint to development. All of the lower income sites are adjacent to
existing public roads that contain infrastructure facilities.
A Final EIR was certified for the Measure T Housing Element. As a complement to this Housing Element
update, an Environmental Assessment under Government Code Section 65759, in the form of a draft
Supplemental EIR, was conducted to evaluate any additional potential impacts to the environment. The
Environmental Assessment will become part of the General Plan when the Housing Element is adopted.
9.1 Geologic and Seismic Hazards
Southern California is considered as one of the most seismically active regions in the United States
because the faulting is dominated by the compression regime associated with the "big bend" of the San
Andreas Fault Zone. The San Diego region is transected by several sub-parallel, pervasive fault zones, as
well as smallerfaults.The City of Encinitas is located in the southern part of the Peninsular Ranges geologic
Province: an area that is exposed to risk from multiple earthquake fault zones. The San Andreas Fault,
which runs from Baja, California to San Francisco, is approximately 100 miles east of the City and poses a
potential risk for much of the San Diego region. However, for the City the highest risks originate from
nearby zones such as the Elsinore Fault zone,the Rose Canyon Fault zone and other offshore faults. Each
zone has the potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes that would cause ground shaking in
Encinitas and nearby communities.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-77
City of Encinitas 1�~°
The major onshore and offshore fault zones present some relative seismic riskto the City,similar to most
Southern California communities. In the early 1990s, the City conducted a survey for unreinforced
masonry buildings in Encinitas and identified structures vulnerable to earthquake forces. The survey
provides 20 site addresses in the City that are subject to risk, as well their estimated occupancy
information and building condition. None of the sites for lower income households identified in the site
inventory analysis are at risk due to the presence of unreinforced masonry buildings.
Although future development constructed under the Housing Element would involve the construction of
new residential structures in a seismically active area,the potential hazards would be less than significant
because of the existing regulatory framework related to seismic safety. Sites containing greater than a 25
percent grade would beat a greater risk for damage during an earthquake. Accordingly,the site inventory
analysis reduced the expected residential production on sites for lower income households with more
than a 25 percent grade, and geologic and seismic hazards do not prevent the City from providing
adequate sites.
9.2 Flooding
Flood zones are geographic areas that the Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) has defined
according to varying levels of flood risk.These zones are depicted on a community's Flood Insurance Rate
Map(FIRM)or Flood Hazard Boundary Map. Each zone reflects the severity or type of flooding in the area.
Portions of the City are located within a FEMA 100-year or 500-year flood zone.The low-lying areas along
the floodplains of Cottonwood Creek, Encinitas Creek and Escondido Creek, as well as their tributaries,
can experience flooding during severe rain seasons.
In addition, portions of the City are also within a dam inundation area. Dam inundation areas are
downstream areas subject to flooding or other effects during large storm events. Dam inundation areas
are also subject to the uncontrolled release of an upstream reservoir as well as events leading to breaks
in levees or dams. The areas of potential dam inundation are generally along the Cottonwood Creek,
Encinitas Creek and Escondido Creek; portions of tributary stream channels;and the low-lying areas near
the coastal portions of the plan area. Based on historical data and the high level of development in
portions of the dam inundation hazard zones, should a dam failure occur, the flood hazard would be
serious. However,the risk of dam failure is considered to be low.
The City does not consider flooding as a constraint to development due to federal requirements. There is
one of the identified lower income housing sites(Strawberry Fields)within the FEMA 100-year flood zone.
The acreage for the portion of the site affected by the 100-year flood zone has been removed from the
net acreage. The net acreage reflects that constraint.
9.3 Wastewater Capacity
The City's wastewater collection division is responsible for maintaining the existing sewer infrastructure
within the City. The City sewer maintenance includes cleaning sewer lines, clearing blockages, repairing
breaks, and responding to emergencies. Sewage is conveyed through pipes to either the Encina
Wastewater Authority(EWA)in Carlsbad,north of Encinitas,or to the San Elijo Water Reclamation Facility
in Cardiff,south of Encinitas.The EWA plant currently treats approximately 43.4 million gallons of sewage
per day from Encinitas, Carlsbad, Vista, Leucadia Sewer District, Vallecitos Water District, and Buena
Sanitation District.Additionally,the EWA also produces recycled water for use in irrigation.The EWA also
B-78 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1 ° I
owns approximately 37 acres adjacent to the existing plant for potential future expansion although no
current plans for expansion are planned at this time.
The San Elijo Water Reclamation Facility currently has a capacity to treat 5.25 million gallons of sewage
per day for the communities of Cardiff,Solana Beach, Rancho Santa Fe and Olivenhain.The facility is also
permitted to discharge up to 2.48 million gallons of recycled water to customers per day. There are no
current plans for plant expansion.
Under the City's 2012 Sewer Master Plan,the City is allocated approximately 3.8 million gallons of sewage
per day by the two sanitary districts that provide sewer service. Wastewater flow projections based on
full build-out of vacant and underdeveloped parcels through 2035, plus assuming that all existing septic
users connect to the City's sewer system would equal approximately 3.24 million gallons of sewage per
day, which is within the capacity allocated to the City for sewage treatment. Therefore, the City of
Encinitas's sewer infrastructure has capacity forthe full buildout of the City,and sewer infrastructure does
not place a constraint on development.
9.4 Water Supply
The City of Encinitas currently has three sources of water: raw water from the San Diego County Water
Authority(SDCWA)through the State Water Project,treated water from the SDCWA,and runoff from the
Lake Hodges watershed east of the City. This treated water is conveyed through pipes to the City's
customers for residential,public,commercial and industrial uses. Fire flow capacity is also provided within
the water system network for the City.
The San Dieguito Water District (SDWD) is a subsidiary of the City of Encinitas and provides water to
approximately 40,000 residents in the communities of Leucadia, Old Encinitas, Cardiff-by-the-Sea and
New Encinitas. The distribution system consists of approximately 170 miles of pipeline, a 2.5 and 7.5
million-gallon reservoir, and over 11,000 water meters. Approximately 30 percent of the District's water
is from local sources, and the remainder(70 percent) is imported. The SDWD receives local runoff water
from Lake Hodges and imported raw water from the San Diego County Water Authority. Both sources are
treated at the R.E. Badger Filtration Plant located in Rancho Santa Fe.The plant is jointly owned with the
Santa Fe Irrigation District. Treated water from the San Diego Water Authority can also be delivered
directly to the District.
The Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD) provides service to the remainder of the City. The
OMWD is an independent public agency addressing the water needs of up to 40 percent of Encinitas
residents. OMWD primarily serves the City's eastern half, including all or a part of the communities of
Olivenhain, New Encinitas, Leucadia and Cardiff-by-the-Sea. OMWD delivers approximately 6.27 million
gallons per day to 9,420 water meters in Encinitas. In addition to portions of Encinitas, OMWD also
includes portions of the cities of Carlsbad, San Diego, Solana Beach, San Marcos, and the County of San
Diego. Overall, OMWD includes over 48 square miles (31,123 acres) and serves a population of 68,000
and has over 26,600 meters in service. Based on OMWD's 2009 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report,
the distribution system also includes a recycled service area of 10,567 acres(including 46 miles of recycled
water main). Approximately 94 percent of the treated water delivered by OMWD is treated at the David
C. McCollom Water Treatment Plant, located within the community of Elfin Forest. Water treated at this
facility is imported raw water from the SDCWA (blend of water from the Colorado River and the State
Water Project).The remaining 6 percent of the treated water treated at SDCWA's Twin Oaks Valley Water
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-79
City of Encinitas z
— 1C&tcuut"
Treatment Plant in San Marcos and at the Skinner Water Treatment Plant located in southwestern
Riverside County.
Water Master Plans for the San Dieguito Water District and Olivenhain Municipal Water District provide
an assessment of the existing water system conditions and demands.The plans concluded that the overall
system is adequately sized to accommodate future 2030 growth demands. In the San Dieguito Water
District, the current average day demand for the district is 6.63 million gallons per day. The projected
average future 2030 demand is 7.74 million gallons per day. In the Olivenhain Municipal Water District,
the average daily water demand was 20.5 million gallons per day and the annual average basis of water
demand in 2030 is 27.9 million gallons per day.The Master Plans identified areas for improvement that
were then included into the future planning horizon CIP. These CIP upgrades include pipeline system
upgrades,valve replacement, meter replacement and treatment plant upgrades.
Taking into account conservation program, maintenance of current adjudicated surface water rights,
recycled water supply, and additional imported water from SDCWA,SDWD and OMWD anticipate having
sufficient water supply to meet current and future customers' needs through at least 2035. Therefore,
water supply does not place a constraint on development.
9.5 Stormwater Management
The City of Encinitas Public Works Department is responsible for maintaining the storm drain
infrastructure through comprehensive programmatic efforts. The Stormwater Management Division
(Clean Water Program) of the Engineering Department is responsible for enforcing regulatory mandates
related to surface water.
The Clean Water Program has two goals: maintain water quality and protect beaches, lagoons and creeks
from illicit discharges, sewage spills and other pollutants. In order to maintain high stormwater quality
(and reduce/eliminate non-storm water discharge to the storm drain system) and to implement controls
to reduce pollutants the City implements several activities including:
• Sewer spill prevention
• Preventing illicit discharges to the storm drain system.
• Litter,trash and debris removal
• Commercial runoff containment at gas stations and restaurants
• Public education
• Restoration of local waterways
• Storm drain system, biofilter,detention basin and channel maintenance
• Construction site runoff reduction
• Ultra Violet Treatment Facility at Moonlight Beach
Future development and redevelopment projects are required to implement the measures outlined in the
City's Stormwater Manual, March 2010, and Best Management Practices Manual Part I and II. The
B-80 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1
Stormwater Manual includes requirements for the control measures to reduce stormwater pollutants to
the maximum extent practicable for new development and redevelopment.
The City of Encinitas has an extensive storm drainage system that consists of:
• 100 miles of storm drain pipe
• Over 2,500 catch basin boxes
• Over 90 miles of channels
These facilities intercept stormwater runoff and convey it from the eastern part of the City to the west
where it discharges into either the San Elijo Lagoon,south of the City Batiquitos Lagoon, north of the City.
The coastal area of the City discharges through several outfalls to the ocean.
Although development of housing to meet the City's RHNA would increase impervious surface coverage
in the City, runoff control under the City's standards would help to ensure that any increased stormwater
flow would not exceed the capacity of the City's storm drain system. Therefore,stormwater management
does not place a constraint on development.
9.6 Fire and Emergency Services
The Encinitas Fire Protection Department serves residents of the coastal, rural and agricultural
communities of Encinitas,Olivenhain, Leucadia and Cardiff-by-the-Sea.The County of San Diego's County
Service Area (CSA) 17 consists of Del Mar, Del Mar Heights,Solana Beach, Encinitas, Rancho Santa Fe and
portions of Elfin Forest. Emergency medical services are provided by the Department and San Diego
Medical Services Enterprise (SDMSE)within CSA 17.
There are six strategically located fire stations in the City of Encinitas, which allow firefighters and
paramedics to provide timely responses to emergencies and to efficiently respond to volume demand.
Five of the six stations house an engine company consisting of three fire suppression personnel, a fire
engine,as well as various other emergency apparatus forspecialized responses.In 2014,the Department's
average response time for the city as a whole was 4 minutes and 35 seconds. The Insurance Services
Organization(which rates fire departments based on the effectiveness of their response capabilities)gave
the Department an ISO rating of 3, which is the third best among North County fire divisions and has
resulted in lower homeowners insurance premiums for Encinitas residents. In addition to fire suppression
and prevention,the Encinitas Fire Department provides safety marine and disaster preparedness services.
City lifeguards provide beach safety for four miles of Encinitas beaches and responds to calls for wild life
rescues, cliff rescues and other accidents in local lagoons and rivers. In 2014, the Encinitas Fire
Department responded to 5,866 service calls within the City limits,from minor incidences and first aid to
rescues. The City's Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) program trains volunteers in skills to
assist in large scale regional disasters.The City now provides volunteer trainings so CERT volunteers are
ready and able to assist in emergency situations. It is not anticipated that any new fire safety or
emergency service facilities would be required as a result of development on the housing sites. Therefore,
this does not place a constraint on development.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element 8-81
City of Encinitas —�
—L
9.7 Police Services
The City of Encinitas contracts with the County of San Diego Sheriff's Department (Sheriff's Department)
to provide police/law enforcement services to the City. In addition to the City of Encinitas, North Coastal
Station provides a wide range of municipal law enforcement services to the cities of Del Mar,Solana Beach
and Rancho Santa Fe. Services include the following:
• Helicopters;
• A bomb/arson squad;
• A Special Enforcement Detail team;
• Canine units;
• Modern crime lab facilities;and
• One of the nation's most modern law enforcement radio communications networks.
There are no current plans for new facilities. There have been discussions of a possible expansion;
however, a formal plan is not in place. As of 2016,the Encinitas Station staffed 42 police officers and 12
additional personnel. It is not anticipated that any new police facilities would be required as a result of
development on the housing sites. Therefore,this does not place a constraint on development.
10 Housing Resources
The extent of housing needs in a community often exceeds the resources available. This section of the
Housing Element provides an overview of resources available to the City.
10.1 Residential Sites Inventory
Appendix C contains a detailed list of vacant and non-vacant properties to meet the City's RHNA reed
through the 2013-2021 planning period.The following discussions summarize the City's site inventory and
discuss the City's experience with the redevelopment of non-vacant sites.
10.2 Above Moderate and Moderate Income Sites
For the 2013-2021 planning period,the City's RHNA allocation is 413 dwelling units for moderate income
sites and 907 dwelling units for above moderate income. As of December 31, 2017, 4 moderate income
dwelling units and 784 above moderate income dwelling units, including accessory dwelling units, had
received building permits during the projection period beginning January 1, 2010. Another 108 above
moderate income units had been approved by the City, for a total of 892 above moderate income units
constructed or permitted. Accounting for the new construction and approved projects and the estimated
accessory dwelling units (ADUs) made available to moderate income households during the planning
period, the City's remaining RHNA allocation is 355 moderate income dwelling units and 15 above
moderate income dwelling units.
New growth is expected primarily in two adopted specific plan areas: Downtown Encinitas and North 101
Corridor, along with other existing residential neighborhoods. Within these preserved communities 624
B-82 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas z� °
additional moderate-income and above moderate income units can be accommodated in mixed-use and
residential-only sites.
10.2.1 Analysis of the City's Existing Capacity and Zoning
The Housing Element must demonstrate the City's ability to accommodate the RHNA either through
production or the availability of properly zoned land that can accommodate additional growth. The
Measure T Housing Element,which was extensively reviewed at numerous public hearings, contained an
inventory of all sites suitable for moderate and above moderate income housing in its Table A-1.Appendix
C in this Housing Element includes those sites listed in Table A-1 which have not been developed in this
planning period;can accommodate at least 2 additional units; and continue to be zoned appropriately to
accommodate moderate or above moderate-income housing. Table B-46 below summarizes the capacity
of the sites listed in Appendix C, which can accommodate 523 moderate-income units (compared with
the need to accommodate 355 units) and 177 above moderate-income units (compared with the need to
accommodate 15 additional units).
Table B-46:Residential-Capacity for Moderate and Above Moderate Income Sites
Minimum or Number of Potential
Max Density Average Density Parcels Acreage .Units
Moderate Income Sites—Mixed Use
D-CM1 n.a. 34(15) 16 12.27 133
D-CM2, N-CM1, N- 25 20(15) 37 17.81 125
CM2, N-CM3, N-CRM1
D-VCM 18 15 1 0.67 5
D-OM,N-CRM2 15 12 4 2.60 14
Subtotal 58 33.35 277
D-1125, N-1125, R25 25 20 10 1.69 31
N-1320 20 15 13 3.66 69
D-1115, N-1115, R15 15 12 6 2.74 30
R-11 11 8.8 38 15.62 116
Subtotal 67 23.71 246
N-138, R8 8 6.4 10 8.86 52
R5 5 4 3 5.52 21
N-113, R3 3 2.4 14 41.23 92
RR2 2 1 2 13.05 12
RR1 1 .5 0 0 0
RR .5 .125 0 0 0
Subtotal 29 68.66 177
Total 154 125.72 700
The following discussion describes how site capacity was determined for the moderate and above
moderate-income sites.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-83
City of Encinitas
10.2.2 Reasonable Capacity Assumptions
Reasonable capacity was calculated for each site based on environmental constraints, site size, zoning
requirements, and average density achieved in projects with similar zoning. Deductions were made as
applicable for site constraints,such as steep slopes and potentially limiting known environmental factors.
10.2.3 Capacity on Mixed-Use Sites.
There are a number of mixed-use commercial districts that permit residential uses as part of a mixed-use
development. Underutilized commercial sites that permit residential development are a key component
of the housing sites inventory.These sites were evaluated by multiplying the parcel size by the minimum
density for that zoning designation. Sites in mixed-use areas (Downtown and North 101 Specific Plan
Areas) where there is no density maximum were assumed to develop at 15 units per acre based on
projections of possible development given Proposition A's height limit. In these zones, a factor was then
applied a factor based on the likelihood that they would redevelop, as explained below. Redevelopment
in these areas is encouraged by available exemptions under the California Environmental Quality Act for
residential and mixed-use projects consistent with specific plans (see Section 10.3.2 below).
While not all underutilized properties in the two Specific Plan areas will redevelop with a residential
component, market studies in the San Diego region have indicated that future growth will most likely be
spearheaded by mixed-use developments.Accordingly,this Housing Element assumes that approximately
50 percent of sites in the DCM-2, D-VSC and D-OM Zones of the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan,as well
as the N-CM1, N-CM2, N-CM3, N-CRM1, and N-CRM2 Zones of the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan, will
be redeveloped as mixed-use projects,with a residential component.This yields a total, realistic capacity
of 144 potential units that can be credited to this planning cycle and applied against the RHNA obligation
for moderate-and above moderate-income household opportunities.
Different methodologies were employed in the DCM-1 Zone. Based on the analysis, it can be reasonably
concluded that 75 percent of the sites listed in the DCM- 1 Zone inventory are reasonably expected to
provide viable,short-term opportunities.This "discounting" methodology yields a total, realistic capacity
of 133 potential units that can be credited to this planning cycle and applied to the moderate-income
category(at 15 units per acre).
10.3 Development of Non-Vacant Sites and Converting to Residential Uses
Some non-vacant sites are designated as sites suitable to meet the City's RHNA. Appendix C includes
detailed discussions of each lower income site,as well as letters from property owners of non-vacant sites
who propose residential development of those sites.For non-vacant moderate-income sites,existing uses
and other information is included.
State law requires that the City analyze the extent to which existing uses may constitute an impediment
to additional residential development,the City's past experience with converting existing uses to higher
density residential use,current market demand for the existing use,analysis of leases that would prevent
redevelopment of the site,development trends, market conditions, and regulatory or other incentives to
encourage redevelopment.This section discusses each of those factors.
There are number or pending and approved projects that illustrate the viability of developing non-vacant
sites in Encinitas. These include subdivision of land and recycling of older uses with standalone residential
B-84 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
and mixed use residential uses. This discussion and the previous section illustrate the extent of market
activity for infill residential development
The City has a large inventory of past development projects and current development applications on infill
properties. Table B-47 is a sample of existing applications under review.
Table B-47: Infill Development Project in Review—Infill Properties .
Case No Project Name Description Zone
15-222 Weston Density Bonus 48-lot subdivision R3
18-074 Lakes Subdivision Nine-lot subdivision RR1
17-280 Vulcan 9 Density Bonus Nine Condominium Unit Subdivision NR20
18-001 735 Santa Fe Drive 14-lot subdivision R8
16-135 Quail Meadows Density Bonus 52-lot subdivision R3/R5
17-114 The Summitt at Lake Drive 3-lot subdivision RR1
17-291 Evergreen TPM 3-lot subdivision R8
16-094 Engert Subdivision 2-lot subdivision R3
18-020 Coastal Pacific Group Subdivision 2-lot subdivision R8
17-032 Osuna Tentative Parcel Map 3-lot subdivision R3
18-055 Rippy Tentative Parcel Map 2-lot subdivision R3
17-296 Colony Terrace Subdivision 2-lot subdivision RR2
17-107 Garrett Tentative Parcel Map 2-lot subdivision RR2
17-206 Massie Parcel Map 2-lot subdivision RR2
17-071 Summitt Condo Map Three Condominium detached single family R11
17-041 Roden Duplex Condo Convert existing duplex to condominium R11
16-250 Ocean View TPM 4-lot subdivision R3
17-183 4th Street Four 4-unit(Two Townhomes on two separate lots) DR-15
17-089 West A Street Duplex Two condominium units R15
17-134 141 Quail Drive 4-lot subdivision R5
14-244 Granite Homes 4-lot subdivision 4-lot subdivision RR1
17-197 Kunzik Mixed Use Five Residential Condominiums NCM1
Source:City of Encinitas,2018
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-85
City of Encinitas z °
Additionally, the City has a number of recently built mixed use and/or residential infill projects that
illustrate the market's willingness and the city's approval of infill mixed use and residential uses. A sample
of these projects includes:
• Pacific Station —a successful mixed use development with rental and ownership opportunities
complimented with commercial uses. Former use was commercial/industrial
• The Lofts — a mixed use project with residential and commercial uses in a vertical mixed use
setting.
• 1200-1212 Coast Highway—Infill mixed use residential with ground floor retail. Former use was
commercial.
• Capri @ 960 South Coast — an infill mixed use development with residential development on
Pacific Coast Highway. Former use was commercial.
• H Street/South Coast Highway—an infill mixed use project with residential commercial and retail.
Former use was commercial.
• Harrison Project(under construction)—mixed use commercial/residential development.
The City of Encinitas has a good track record and history of underutilized sites recycling to accommodate
additional homes. In the DCM zones, at least 12 mixed use projects have been developed involving reuse
of existing commercial sites,with densities as high as 47 units per acre. In terms of trends of underutilized
sites recycling in the City, Encinitas has had on average 99 new housing starts in recent years with a
considerable spike occurring afterthe trough of the market in 2011. Overall,building on previously vacant
or subdivided land demonstrates a high degree of land turn-over or repurposing land in a built-out
community.
Because the City of Encinitas is approaching "built out" conditions, infill development, especially in the
downtown and Highway 101 areas, continues to be the primary method by which land is recycled. One
of the primary concerns is the ability of the market to absorb new residential and mixed use development
on sites with current uses. As stated above, the number of projects occurring on infill sites in the city is
an excellent prognosis of market trends in Encinitas. The City, based on a review of recent development
activity and trends, believes there are a few primary areas by which development on infill sites may
potentially constitute an impediment to additional residential development:
1. Viability of Existing Commercial Uses —The primary areas of infill development are in existing
traditionally established commercial zones. Many of these areas have experienced a general
change from traditional auto-oriented commercial development to activities and uses that can be
considered mixed use in nature. Adoption of specific plans in the Highway 101 Corridor and
Downtown demonstrate the general trend to a mixed use, more urbanized infill environment.
Most of the new development in this corridor can be described as conducive to a mixed use,
residentially-supportive environment.
Based upon local historical observation by City staff, the existing ownership patterns in the City
can be generally described as long-term historical ownership. Many owners of land and property
in the community have been present for many years and in some cases generations. What this
implies is long-term ownership of properties generally feature lower debt service on existing land.
B-86 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas z
Multiple generations of ownership create conditions where, although land values may be at a
premium, individual development viability may be positively influenced by the minimization or
lack of debt service on land.
Because of this observation, the City believes infill development will continue to be the primary
type of development that will occur in the City. Additionally,as the market continues to improve,
redevelopment will continue to play a role in expanding residential opportunities in the City.
2. Land Values—One of the primary considerations for the viability of infill uses on mixed use sites
is the cost of land in the City. There are significant variations in land costs depending on the
geographic location in the City. What this means is that those areas that experience higher land
costs should provide the maximization of development potential on individual sites. The City
understands that coastal communities will always exhibit higher land costs. Therefore, methods
to contribute to higher levels of land utilization with the introduction of housing opportunities as
additional development options will contribute to the heightened viability of development.
Changes in land use development regulations, including the permitting of residential and
residential mixed use development in areas that are traditionally commercial-only is one method
to achieve this. The City has continued to see applications for residential development on infill
sites, as evidenced by the recently approved development applications and permits.
Another aspect to consider in the land use analysis, is land to improvement value. The idea is the
potential for a relatively small amount of land to hold a relatively high number of structures, as
the same piece of land can contain a single-family home with one set of tenants or a multiplex
consisting of two, three or even four units, creating the possibility of doubling, tripling or even
quadrupling the amount of rent that can be collected from the property. Redevelopment is likely
to occur in those instances where an underutilized site has a high land value and relatively low
improvement value. In terms of the basic relationship between "land" as a scarce resource and
"choice", there is a great opportunity cost to the property owner since the potential gain from
the "highest and best use" alternative exceeds the alternative of not redeveloping.
The City has focused its provision of lower income sites on sites that are vacant or highly
underutilized. Those sites considered non-vacant, but highly underutilized have favorable
comparison of existing improved value versus land value. And for those sites exhibiting existing
"uses", many of them are derelict, unused or vacant structures. This means the future
improvement costs will not be complicated by the significant removal, tenant relocation and or
repurposing of existing structures on a site.
The City understands lower income and moderate income unit production is the primary need in
the community and has provided and will provide through the city's rezone program the
establishment of land use standards and provisions that encourage and facilitate the
development of multiple family and other development types affordable to moderate and lower
income households. Much of these opportunities are on land defined as vacant and therefore are
excellent candidates to provide opportunities for housing need in the City.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-87
City of Encinitas �1 '
3. Alternatives to traditional infill development—the City understands that existing land use policy
can be complimented by various strategies to encourage further development on existing built
areas. These include Accessory Dwelling Units and Inclusionary Housing provisions. This is
another method for utilized existing developed land for additional infill opportunities. The City
has recently development a revised Accessory Dwelling Unit policy that furthers the ability of
existing"built out" parcels to accommodate additional residential development that is affordable
to lower and moderate-income households. Additionally, the City is currently studying its
inclusionary housing policy to further encourage residential development on infill properties by
providing inclusionary housing development by providing additional development capacity on a
site. While this analysis is in its early stages,the development community is directly involved in
its development. Therefore,future policies and programs will have considered the needs of the
development community in its future implementation.
4. Height Standards—the current height limitation of 2 stories places a significant constraint on the
feasibility of moderate and lower income units. Because of this height limitation, other
development factors such as setbacks, lot utilization, parking, open space and other factors
reduce the"box"in which development can occur on a site. The city has had extensive discussion
about the height issue at a number of Housing Element Task Force Meetings, City Council Study
Sessions and consultation with stakeholders. The general consensus is that three story heights
would be more appropriate and conducive to the development of affordable housing. This
consideration is part of the planned rezoning to accommodate remaining RHNA need.
10.3.1 Lease Analysis
One of the primary concerns for redevelopment/infill development on non-vacant sites is the existence
of leases that may prevent land development within the planning period.While state law requires the City
to consider lease terms in evaluating the use of non-vacant sites,the City does not have access to private
party lease agreements or other contractual agreements amongst private parties. However, no owner or
tenant has opposed the inclusion of a property based on the existence of a long-term lease. For non-
vacant sites proposed to be upzoned as lower income sites,many property owners have provided a letter,
included in Appendix C, either stating that leases are short term or otherwise stating that development
can be accomplished within the planning period. Owners and developers have also expressed to the City
that in most cases existing leases are not per se a barrier to development. Rather,they are factored into
land costs.
There are currently very favorable market conditions for residential and residential mixed-use infill
development in the City of Encinitas. This is exhibited by the number of development applications for
infill development in recent years. The City believes this pace of activity is very healthy based upon
historical trends. Because of the value of land in the community, mixed-use and higher density residential
products continue to show noticeable activity in the City.The City believes this trend will continue for the
long term.
B-88 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
10.3.2 Regulatory Incentives
Many of the developments of infill residential uses have utilized density bonus provisions, so it is very
common for infill residential projects to take advantage of density bonus provisions to construct units
affordable to lower income families.
The City understands that existing land use policy may not necessarily contribute to the development of
housing.Therefore, regulatory incentives can be helpful in bring housing units to the market.
Infill residential development is largely permitted in areas with adopted specific plans. Adoption of a
specific plan allows residential and mixed-use development projects in the City to utilize two statutory
exemptions under the California Environmental Quality Act: residential projects consistent with a specific
plan (Government Code Section 65457) and mixed use projects in a transit priority area consistent with a
specific plan(Public Resources Code Section 21155.4).This incentive may enable faster review of projects.
The city is limited in its discretionary funding resources, so fee waivers and other monetary concessions
are not a standard practice in the City. The City has evaluated and updated its fees recently to reflect
market considerations and internal cost recovery. While fee deferral,waivers or other modifications are
an option for the city, it will take additional study to determine what is appropriate in Encinitas.
Land use incentives in for infill residential include a 'permit ready' program underdevelopment that will
include pre-approved designs for ADUs with expedited processing.The City has also sponsored legislation
to make it easier to legalize ADUs built without building permits.
Another method for incentivizing new development is the ability to sub-divide land. Creating lots from
subdividing one lot from another creates separate land title for additional housing development activity.
While resources at this time are not conducive to monetary incentives/concessions, the city believes
continue exploration is necessary to identify incentive opportunity. Programs 3A, 3B, 3E and 3F are
expressly written to address these issues.
10.3.3 Current Market Demand for Existing Uses
If current socio and demographic trends continue, the demographic profile of the San Diego region will
change dramatically by the middle of this century. According to draft population forecasts developed by
SANDAG (Series 13),the region's population will rise to 4,068,759 million in 2050,from 3,095,313 million
in 2010.This represents a 31.4 percent increase. Forecast modeling also reveals that the region's fastest-
growing population overall will be its retirement or senior-aged community. Based on the Series 12
modeling (2010), the swell in the 65 years-and-older group will lead to an increase in the proportion of
the population in older age groups,with the share of those 65 years and older rising 143 percent and the
number of people older than 85 projected to increase by 214 percent by year 2050. Nationwide, a lot of
attention has also been paid to the baby boomer generation, those born between 1946 and 1964. This
large group of Americans currently totals 76 million,and as they age,their changing housing demands and
choices create changes in housing markets.
A growing elderly population generates demand for housing near commercial goods and services,
amenities,and where older adults can get what they need without getting in a car.Also,typically, income
decreases with age this reflects a willingness to live in smaller spaces to be able to afford their lifestyle.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-89
City of Encinitas ���'"° •
As boomers start to retire, many more will be seeking more of a senior-friendly lifestyle and housing.
Although many will initially expect to stay in their existing homes and communities, others will choose to
downsize homes and/or seek more service-rich environments. One development association,the Urban
Land Institute (ULI), contends that these demographic factors will lead to a population that will want to
adapt to smaller, more efficient living units in areas more convenient to work, shopping, recreation and
entertainment (ULI, Emerging Trends, 2011). Other documents and publications have also indicated that
smaller units near transit services are expected to be the trend (Sources: Builder Online,American Public
Transportation Association, National Association of Realtors®, Journal for Public Transportation, Real
Estate Economics, etc.) Nationally, America's suburbs are experiencing a shift away from the
development patterns of previous decades, which were almost entirely auto-centric. Evolving
demographics and preferences held by specific demographic groups, or generational cohorts will drive
the change.And it isn't just the baby-boomer generation. A February 2013 article posted on ULI's website,
"How to Make Suburbs Work Like Cities", and discussed at a Housing Opportunity 2013 Conference,
reported that Generation Y(an 80 million-member group that is just entering the housing market),tends
to favor the convenience and choices provided by urban-style environments and apartment- like mixed-
use housing; and not the suburb environments that they grew up in. In response to this growing trend
and demographic swing, local agencies are looking at innovative solutions to create unique places where
people can live and work. This will fundamentally reshape our cities in terms of transport infrastructure
and density to meet everyday shopping and lifestyle needs within a single neighborhood.
Additionally,with the increasing amount of on-line shopping,many retail areas are experiencing increased
vacancies. Self-driving cars may substantially reduce the need for parking. While it is difficult to predict
the extent to which these long-term trends will affect particular sites,given high demand for housing and
less demand for retail, it is likely that many owners over time may desire to construct residences on sites
now used for retail stores.
10.3.4 Development Trends
Land availability and demographic trends are reshaping the location and types of residential development
in urban areas of the San Diego region. Policy direction at the state, regional and local levels coupled with
these trends, created high demand for housing. The revitalization and reuse of existing underdeveloped
areas into multifamily and mixed-use projects at higher densities is the primary way in which housing
needs will be met in the San Diego region.As a coastal community in the northern San Diego region with
little undeveloped and unconstrained land yet in need of more housing, the regional influences pushing
revitalization and reuse for accommodating new housing are expected to be mirrored in Encinitas. Many
of the proposed sites for Encinitas involve revitalization and reuse, consistent with regional policies and
trends backed by market analysis.There is also a practical need to rely in part on these types of sites since
undeveloped and unconstrained sites are largely lacking in the city.
The site assessment methodology for evaluating parcels listed in Appendix C was crafted under realistic
assumptions regarding the potential of each candidate site to develop and recycle with high density
housing. The analysis demonstrated that these inventoried sites are not only ripe for development, but
collectively represent a smart and sustainable housing strategy for both market-rate and affordable
housing opportunities for lower income households.
B-90 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
11 Sites Suitable for Lower Income Housing
The City has identified parcels that can accommodate 1,504 lower income units,compared with the City's
remaining lower income RHNA obligation of 1,141 units. Sites that can accommodate 609 units are
vacant,while the remainder are non-vacant sites accommodating 895 units where owners have expressed
written interest in redeveloping their property for residential development within the planning period.'
The very low and low income sites inventory in Appendix C describes each of these sites in detail,including
site capacity, existing uses (if any), development constraints, and other features. Water and sewer
distribution lines are available in the public right of way adjacent to each site, and the City has adequate
water and sewer capacity to accommodate the RHNA. Appendix C also describes in detail assumptions
made in calculating site capacity.
Housing Element Program 1A identifies these sites. Housing Element Program 1B provides the planned
rezoning program. It states that each of these sites will be rezoned to a minimum density of 25 units per
net acre and maximum density of 30 units per net acre, with 'by right' approval for any project with 20
percent low income housing that does not involve a subdivision.On all sites listed in the Housing Element,
housing occupied by lower income households in the last five years must be replaced.Allowable building
height will be increased to three stories, with two-story elements adjacent to single-family homes, but
only for residential developments achieving 25 units per net acre on the rezoned sites. Lastly,the Land
Use Element, Zoning Regulations and existing Specific Plans will be amended as needed to allow for
residential densities between 25 and 30 units per net acre.
The sites designated as suitable for lower income housing were selected based on their existing vacant or
underutilized character, owner interest in developing residential uses, and suitability for development.
Table B-48 summarizes the residential capacity of these sites. In total, this rezoning program results in
the rezoning of 63.12 net acres of land which creates an opportunity for additional multi-family rental or
ownership housing development during the planning period. 1,504 units can be achieved as realistic
capacity under the new zoning.
' Including Sites 01, 07, and AD2c, the capacity of vacant sites is 727 units, or approximately 64% of the
City's total lower income RHNA. See Table 8-48 for additional discussion.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-91
City of Encinitas --�
- z
Table B-48: Residential Capacity on Sites to be Rezoned
Site Number Site Name Net Acreage Potential Units
Vacant'
02 Cannon Property(Piraeus) 6.93 173
05 Encinitas Blvd &Quail Gardens Sites 4.78 119
06a Armstrong Parcels 1.06 26
08a Rancho Santa Fe Parcels (Gaffney/Goodsen) 1.45 36
AD1 Sage Canyon Parcel 2.40 60
AD2a Baldwin &Sons Properties 2.98 74
AD2b Baldwin &Sons Properties 4.86 121
Subtotal 24.46 609
Non-vacant
01 Greek Church Parcel 2.00 50
06 Armstrong Parcels 1.16 29
07 Jackel Properties 2.97 332
08b Rancho Santa Fe Parcels (Gaffney/Goodsen) 4.57 113
09 Echter Property 9.85 246
12 Sunshine Gardens Parcels 3.39 84
AD2c Baldwin &Sons Properties 1.21 30
AD8 Vulcan & La Costa 2.00 50
AD9 Seacoast Church 1.41 35
AD11 Manchester Avenue West Sites 1.67 41
AD14 Harrison Sites 1.91 212
AD31 Meyer Proposal 6.52 163
Subtotal 38.66 895
Total 63.12 1,504
Notes:
1.HCD has stated to the City that vacant parcels must be entirely unimproved and separately subdivided parcels,and Table 2-6 reflects this
direction.However,the City believes that the following sites should also be considered to be vacant:Site 01(50 units)consists entirely of
unimproved land, but has not been subdivided from the improved part of the site.Site 07(33 units)consists of unimproved land and an
abandoned,vacant structure. Site AD2c(30 units)has utility lines on a portion of the site which have been deducted from net acreage,but
the parcel is otherwise entirely unimproved,and the utility lines would not prevent an owner from developing the site for residential units.
In the City's view,these sites should be considered vacant,adding 118 additional units to the Unit Yield on vacant property,for a sub-total of
727 units on vacant sites,far above 50%of the unmet RHNA need for the planning period.
2.Unit Yield anticipates that this site will be developed for mixed-use.
B-92 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas °
Figure B-6: Map of Rezoned Sites
07 02
09
Leucadia
i
•i AD31'.. 06b
06a _
AD2a i - --
C'
AD 2b 011venhdin --
AD79
-New Encinitas
.. US
Old Encinitas'.
'08 oa
4 VERY LOW-AND LOW-INCOME
lJ+ 6,
CANDIDATE SITES INVENTORY•
FoiSitesBeingRezonedto25-30DUlAC UNITS -
O1.Greek Church Site j -50'--
- 02.Cannon Property(Piraeus Site) 173-,.
Cardiff iiy The-Sea OS.Encinitas Blvd&Qwil Gardens Sites _ li9
06(a,b).Armstrong Parceld _. 55
IADI - 07.JackelProperty / 33°
08 ia,b).Rancho Santa Fe'Vies(Gaffney/Goodsen) 149
09.Echter Property 246
-
01 12.Sunshine Gardens 64
AD1.Sage Canyon Parcel 60•
`q AD2(a,b,c).Baldwin&Sons Properties - 225
/y
ADB.Vulcan&La Costa Site
AD71 J <, , _ AD9.Seacoast Church 35
AD11.Manchester Avenue West Sites ,,41
LEGEND AD14.Harrlson'sites 21
OCity Boundary -- _- _AD31.Meyer Proposal'- 163
Neighborhood Boundaries ?,r _"_- - TOTAL• 1,564
NOTE:
®Housing Element Update Sites . : - ... •- —
These sites�were approved by,the Enci nitas City Council an June 20,,-2016.
11 .1 Accessory Dwelling Unit Production
The City records the number of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) built on an annual basis. Consistently
maintained records help determine trends in accessory unit construction. Between January 1, 2010 and
December 31,2017 203 new accessory dwelling units were constructed. Of these units,16 were restricted
for very-low and low-income households. In the past three years, permits have averaged 35 per year.
Given the City's adoption of a liberal ADU ordinance in 2018, the City expects the number of ADUs built
to increase to 40 per year,for total ADU construction of 320 units. The City projects that 79 ADUs total
will be affordable to lower income households.
Due to limited available land within the City, ADU construction is very important to the City in its efforts
to provide opportunities for affordable housing, and it has created numerous incentives for ADU
construction.
After passage of new state laws effective January 1, 2017,the City applied state standards in evaluating
ministerial applications for ADUs. Those standards eliminated many parking and other requirements,
especially for ADUs contained within existing space. In March 2018, the City adopted its own ADU and
junior accessory dwelling unit(JADU)ordinances which incorporated the loosened state standards,as well
as providing further incentives:
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-93
City of Encinitas —` � '
—Z 1
• Both an ADU and a JADU may be constructed on one lot;
• Setbacks have been reduced to five feet in many cases;
• Floor area ratios have been increased on lots smaller than 10,000 sq.ft.;
• ADUs may have a maximum size of 1,200 sq. ft. so long as they do not exceed the floor area of
the primary residence; and
• Development fees have been waived.
The City is developing a 'permit ready' program that will include pre-approved designs for ADUs with
expedited processing. The City has also sponsored legislation to make it easier to legalize ADUs built
without building permits.
In April 2018, the City conducted an additional survey to determine affordability levels of second units
built during the planning period. The survey was sent to all recipients of building permits within the
planning period, and a copy of the survey form is attached to this Appendix B. The results of that survey
effort revealed that 24.6 percent of the second units were rented at levels affordable to very low and low
income households and 17 percent were affordable to moderate-income households. Because standards
have been so significantly reduced, and JADUs are now permitted,the City anticipates that at least 24.6
percent of the ADUs built during the planning period, or 79 units, will be affordable to lower income
households, and 54 units will be affordable to moderate income households. The actual percentage of
affordable units may be higher if JADU construction becomes common,since these units are smaller with
more limited facilities, and so may be more affordable than ADUs.
B-94 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas z ~~
Figure B-7:April 2018 Accessory Dwelling Unit Survey(Page 1)
ACCESSORY UNIT SURVEY
HOUSING ELEMENT.UPDATE-
An important component of the Housing Element update is planning for future housing needs, including the
provision of affordable housing. In Encinitas, accessory units can provide an opportunity to address
affordable housing needs while maintaining the quality and character of existing neighborhoods. For this
reason,the City of Encinitas is collecting information on existing accessory units to assess their affordability.
Our records show that you obtained a building permit to construct an accessory unit. If this is correct,and
you have an accessory unit, please complete the survey and return in the enclosed self-addressed,
postage-paid envelope. You may also drop the survey off at City of Encinitas, Development Services
Department at, 505 S.Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas,CA,92024. Please return by April 30,2018. If you do not
have an accessory unit, you do not need to complete the survey. However, if you have any thoughts on
accessory units,we welcome your comments on the back of the survey.
Please note that this survey is to be completed anonymously and no identifying information Is
required or requested.Any identifying information will be kept confidential to the extent permitted
under the law.
An accessory unit, as defined by the State,is a self-contained residential dwelling either attached or
detached from the main house or in a separate structure on the property.The unit shall include all
of the following:
• A bedroom
• Afull bathroom
• A separate cooking facility
1.Is the accessory unit: 3.How would you describe the use of the unit?
a) Attached to the main house a) Occupied as living quarters or rented
b) Detached from the main home (Even if no rent is charged)
b) Short-term rental or guest house
2.Does the Accessory unit have an outside entry? (Less than 30 days)
c) Not rented or occupied.Please specify:
a) Yes
b) No
4.Please circle the unit type and circle the corresponding rent:
Unit Type: 0 Bedroom(Studio) 1-Bedroom 2-Bedroom
No rent charged No rent charged No rent charged
Under$700 Under$800 Under$900
Monthly $700-$830 S8004950 $90041,070
Rent:
$830-$1,525 $950-$1,750 $1,070-$1,965
Over$1,525 Over$1,750 Over$1,965
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-95
City of Encinitas
Figure B-8:April 2018 Accessory Dwelling Unit Survey(Page 2)
Additional Comments Regarding Accessory Units:
The City of Encinitas thanks you for your participation in this survey.If you have any questions,
please contact Nicole Piano-Jones,Management Analyst,Development Services Department,at
(760)943-2237 or npiano(&encinitasca.gov.
B-96 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas
The City will continue to monitor accessory unit production and affordability over the Housing Element
planning period. If the rate of accessory unit production falls below anticipated levels, City staff will
consider different regulatory or processing options to facilitate their production.
11 .2 Regional Housing Needs Allocation
11.2.1 Future Housing Needs
Future housing need refers to the share of the regional housing need that has been allocated to the City.
The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) supplies a regional housing goal
number to the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). SANDAG is then mandated to allocate
the housing goal to city and county jurisdictions in the region through a RHNA Plan. In allocating the
region's future housing needs to jurisdictions, SANDAG is required to take the following factors into
consideration pursuant to Section 65584 of the State Government Code:
• Market demand for housing;
• Employment opportunities;
• Availability of suitable sites and public facilities;
• Commuting patterns;
• Type and tenure of housing;
• Loss of units in assisted housing developments;
• Over-concentration of lower income households;and
• Geological and topographical constraints.
SANDAG adopted its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA Plan) in July 2011. This RHNA covers an
11-year planning period (starting in 2010) and addresses housing issues that are related to future growth
in the region.The RHNA allocates to each city and county a "fair share" of the region's projected housing
needs by household income group.The major goal of the RHNA is to assure a fair distribution of housing
among cities and counties within the San Diego region,so that every community provides an opportunity
for a mix of housing for all economic segments.
The RHNA allocation process is primarily legislative rather than adjudicatory in nature and involves the
actions of more than a single entity. Each respective council of governments develops a methodology for
distributing the housing needs to the local governments in its region. By statute,SANDAG consulted with
both the affected municipalities and the public in accomplishing this task. Once adopted, local agencies
must accommodate the full allocated share of units by income category. Please note that the housing
allocation targets are not building requirements or mandates, but goals for each community to
accommodate through appropriate planning policies and land use regulations. Allocation targets are
intended to assure that adequate sites and zoning are made available to address anticipated housing
demand during the planning period.
Encinitas' share of regional future housing needs is a total of 2,353 new units for the current planning
cycle (2013-2021). This allocation is distributed into various income categories, as shown in Table B-49.
The RHNA includes a fair share adjustment which allocates future (construction) need by each income
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-97
City of Encinitas ter,°�' W.
category in a way that meets the State mandate to reduce the over-concentration of lower income
households in one community.
Table B-49:Housing Needs for 2013-2021
Income Category(%of CountyAMI) Number of Units Percent
Extremely Low(30%or less) 293 12.4%
Very Low(31 to 50%)1 294 12.5%
Low(51 to 80%) 446 19.0%
Moderate(81%to 120%) 413 17.5%
Above Moderate(Over 120%) 907 38.5%
Total 2,353 100.0
Note 1:Pursuant to AB 2634,local jurisdictions are also required to project the housing needs of extremely lowincome households(0-30%
AMI).In estimating the number of extremely low income households,a jurisdiction can use 50%of the very low income allocation or
apportion the very low income figure based on Census data.Therefore,the City's RHNA of 587 very low income units was split evenly.
Source:Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation,SANDAG,2011.
11 .3 Credits toward the 2013-2021 RHNA
Since the RHNA uses January 1, 2010 as the baseline for growth projections for the Housing Element
planning period of 2013-2021,jurisdictions may count toward the RHNA any new issued building permits
or approved since January 1, 2010.
Overall, the City has a remaining RHNA of 1,511 units, including 1,141 very low/low-income units, 355
moderate income units, and 15 above moderate income units. Table B-50 shows the breakdown of
existing RHNA, including carryover (discussed in the next section), and a summary of new construction
during the planning period and anticipated accessory unit yield. The City has adequate sites properly
zoned to accommodate its moderate and above moderate income need.Assuming 79 accessory units are
affordable to lower income households and 54 units are affordable to moderate income households,the
City needs to zone sites capable of accommodating 1,141 lower income units and 355 moderate income
units.The sites shown in detail in Appendix C can accommodate 1,504 lower income units.
B-98 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1 °
--z'004
Table B-50:Credits Toward the RHNA(Built and/orApproved)
Extremely Low/Very Low Moderate Above Moderate'
0-50Lo AMI 51-80%AMI 81-120%AMI >120%AMI Total
RHNA 587 446 413 907 2,353
RHNA Carryover 253 -- -- 253
Subtotal RHNA 1,286 413 907 2,606
New Construction
(including ADU) and 66 4 892 962
Approved Projects
Anticipated Accessory
Units and AUP Units 79 54 0 133
Total Remaining
1,141 355 15 1,511
RHNA
11 .4 RHNA Carryover from the Previous Planning Period
If a jurisdiction fails to provide adequate sites in the prior planning period, within one year of the new
cycle, the jurisdiction must rezone/upzone adequate sites to accommodate the shortfall. This
requirement is in addition to rezoning/upzoning that may be needed to address the RHNA for the new
cycle.
This law affects the City of Encinitas' 2013-2021 Housing Element, requiring the City to address its deficit
in sites for the previous housing element cycle (2005-2010). For the 2005-2010 planning period,the City
of Encinitas submitted a Draft Housing Element for review by the State HCD.The 2005-2010 Draft Housing
Element was unable to secure a "substantial compliance status" from HCD and was never adopted. As
such, this 2013-2021 Housing Element must address any deficit in sites incurred during the last Housing
Element RHNA cycle.
In the previous planning period, the regional share and/or total number of housing units by income
category (very low, low, moderate, and above moderate) assigned to the City was 1,712. From 2003
through 2010,the City only produced 1,020 total housing units. The potential AB 1233 carryover will be
equal to the portion of RHNA not accommodated either through actual housing production or land made
available for residential development within each income category.To determine any potential carryover,
this report follows the following approach outlined by HCD:
Step 1: Subtracting the number of housing units constructed, under construction, permitted, or
approved since January 1,2003 to December 31, 2010 by income/affordability level;
Step 2:Subtracting the number of units that could be accommodated on any appropriately zoned
sites available in the City during the RHNA cycle.
The City's RHNA obligations and credits as of December 2010 are summarized in Table B-51. Specifically,
the City constructed a total of 1,020 units, including 62 units that were deed restricted as long-term
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-99
City of Encinitas
affordable housing for very low and low income households based on the City inclusionary housing
requirements or funding subsidies.
Among the remaining 968 non-deed-restricted units, 53 units can be credited as affordable to lower and
moderate income households based on actual sale prices or rents determined as required by Health &
Safety Code Sections 50052.5 and 50053. The City requires the inclusion of rents and sale prices
information in the application for a Certificate of Occupancy. Based on the actual rents and sale prices
reported by the owners/developers and affordable housing costs at the time of completion, 53 (six
percent)of the 958 units were affordable.
Overall, the City met approximately half of its RHNA for the 2005-2010 planning period with actual
production,with a remaining RHNA of 900 units(305 moderate-income units and 595 lower income units)
that the City was required to accommodate on appropriately zoned sites. Zoning existing in 2005—2013
could accommodate additional housing. Specifically, during the previous planning period (2005-2013),
860 units (at a maximum density of 25 units per acre and average density of 20 units per acre prior to the
two-story height limit imposed by Proposition A) could be accommodated on vacant and underutilized
mixed-use and R25 sites in the Downtown Encinitas and North 101 Corridor Specific Plans, more than
double the sites required for the City's remaining moderate income RHNA units.
Furthermore, the D-CM1 districts in the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan area allowed for mixed-use
development with no density limit during the entire previous planning period,extending to April 30,2013.
Based on the development standards established in the Specific Plan in effect at the time,a typical mixed-
use project could achieve 34 units per acre.Up to 684 units could have been accommodated on the vacant
and underutilized D-CM1 sites. Assuming that only half of these mixed-use sites would have been
redeveloped with a residential component,these sites could fulfill 342 units of the City's remaining lower
income RNNA, resulting in a RHNA carryover of 253 lower income units from the previous Housing
Element cycle.
As discussed previously,the two-story limit imposed by Proposition A in June 2013 reduced the effective
density of sites in the D-CM1 zone to 15 units per acre, below the default density of 30 units per acre.
Consequently, none of these sites are being proposed as lower income housing sites in this Housing
Element. However,they are suitable for moderate-income housing.
B-100 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas -� _.
Table B-51:AB 1233 Carryover from Previous Housing Element Cycle
Very Low Low Moderate Above
2003-2010 Income Income Income Moderate Total
Units Deed Restricted 49 13 0 0 62
Constructed Non-Deed Restricted 10 24 19 905 958
RHNA 392 299 324 697 1,712
Remaining RHNA 333 262 305 0 900
Sites Available in Preserved Communities in the Previous Planning Cycle(No Change from Existing General Plan)
Mixed-use:
D-CM1 684* -- -- 684*
D-CM2, N-CM1, N-CM2,N-CM3,N-CRM1, 748* -- 748*
D-VCM
D-OM,N-CRM2 -- -- 30 30
Residential-Only:
D-1125,R25 -- 112 -- 112
D-1115, N-1115,R15 -- -- 62 62
R11,N-118, R8, R5,N-R3, 113,RR2,RR1,RR -- -- 1,160 1,160
Total 684 860 1,252 2,796
Overall Site Capacity(Assuming 50%
Mixed-use with Residential) 342 486 1,237 2,065
Carryover 253 0 0 253
'Proposition A—Voter Right Initiative was passed by Encinitas voters in June 2013,after the end of the 2005—2013 planning period on April
0,2013.
In litigation in San Diego County Superior Court, plaintiffs allege that the City should not receive credit for
eitherthe D-CM1 sites orthe 34 lower income units that are not deed restricted though the plaintiffs have
subsequently acknowledged that the City's RHNA obligation should be reduced to account for anticipated
accessory dwelling units and units constructed and sold or rented at prices affordable to low income
households.This would increase the City's remaining lower income obligation from 1,141 units to 1,483
units.The sites identified as lower income sites would accommodate 1,504 units,so that the City will have
adequate site capacity regardless of the outcome of the litigation.
11 .5 Adequacy of Sites for RHNA
As part of this Housing Element update, the City is proposing an adequate site's rezoning program to
accommodate the shortfall of sites necessary to accommodate the remaining housing need for housing
for all income categories during the planning period. The program ensures that the sites are zoned to
allow residential uses "by- right" for sites with 20 percent low income housing and no subdivision. The
rezoning program will ensure that at least 50 percent of the remaining lower income need is
accommodated on sites designated for residential uses only, where mixed-use and nonresidential use is
not permitted.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-101
City of Encinitas __i__ 9 I
The Housing Element update lists sites that can accommodate approximately 2,443 additional units,
including sites where the zoning will not change. This capacity discounts the development potential in
mixed-use areas, recognizing that not all mixed-use sites will include a residential component, and does
not include many small sites that could be consolidated for a housing development. Overall,the City has
adequate capacity to accommodate both the 2013 -2021 RHNA and the 253-unit carryover.
Table B-52:Adequacy of Sites Inventory
Extremely Low Income Moderate Above Moderate Total
Low/Very Low Income* Income
Income
RHNA(2013-2021) 587 446 413 907 2,353
RHNA Penalty(2003-2010) 253 -- -- 253
Units Built/Approved 33 1 33 4 892 962
Remaining RHNA 1,220 409 15 1,644
Sites Available
Moderate Income-Mixed Use -- 277 -- 277
Areas
Existing Residentially Zoned 0 215 177 392
Properties
Accessory Unit Production 79 54 -- 133
Total Potential Capacity Based
on Existing GP and Zoning -- 492 177 767
Remaining RHNA 1,141 0 0 1,141
Sites Proposed for Rezoning 1,504 -- -- 1,504
Total Capacity Over Lower 363
Income RHNA Categories
*Moderate income category includes the DCM-1,DCM-2, NCM-1, NCM-2, NCM-3, NCRM-1,N-CRM-2,D-OM, D-VCM Zones,R11,R15,N-
R15,D-1115,N-1120,D-1325,N-1325,and R25.Reasonable capacity assumptions for the DCM-1 Zone are based on new information not previously
available for previous planning periods.
11 .6 Proposed Development Standards
The City has initiated the process of amending its Zoning Code, and relevant Specific Plans, to modify
existing development standards that may be constraints to constructing projects at the properties to be
up-zoned to 30 dwelling units per acre. To date,the City has conducted the following public meetings to
prepare and vet the proposed development standard amendments.
February 28, 2018 and April 4, 2018—Discussions with technical advisors and other interested parties to
review the existing standards and to best understand potential impediments to establishing low-income
housing.
April 18,2018—City Council reviewed draft development standards and requested that the establishment
of grade,average unit size and height exceptions for equipment and elevator shafts be evaluated.
B-102 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas
May 2, 2018 — A Community Roundtable discussion was conducted to share the draft development
standards and engage community members and other interested parties.
May 17,2018—The Planning Commission conducted a study session to review the draft Housing Element
and draft development standards
May 23,2018—City Council conducted a study session to review draft development standards and gave
direction on revisions to incorporate prior to adoption.
June 7,2018—The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to review the draft Housing Element
and draft development standards and unanimously recommended approval of both documents to City
Council,with recommendations on further modifications for Council's consideration.
June 20, 2018 — City Council conducted a public hearing and approved the development standards as
summarized below.
Table B-53: Proposed Development Standards
Zone Requirement R-30
Density(Maximum Dwelling units per acre) 30
Net Lot Area (sq.ft.) 30,000
Lot Width (ft.) 75
Lot Depth (ft.) 75
Front Yard Setback(ft.) 10
Building Height(ft.) 37
Maximum Number of Stories 3
Lot Coverage (maximum percentage) 65
Parking—Standards for Affordable Housing Units Studio 1space/unit
Standards are inclusive of guest spaces 1 bedroom 1 space/unit
2 bedrooms 1.5 space/unit
3+ bedrooms 2 spaces/unit
Transitions 30'third floor setback required
from property line when
adjacent to single family&
duplex units.
The City Council also approved provisions to allow the Planning Commission to approve modifications to
the designation of "natural grade" where grading is required to permit development at the minimum
density of 25 to 30 units per net acre due to geotechnical concerns; drainage or flood control
requirements; accessibility requirements;environmental remediation;or other factors.
The above standards will be incorporated in Zoning Code Section 30.16., Residential Zones, and relevant
Specific Plans. 'By right'approval will be specified for projects containing at least 20 percent lower income
housing and not including a subdivision, as required by Government Code Section 65583.2(h), and
replacement affordable housing will be mandated on all sites identified in the Housing Element as required
by Government Code Section 65583.2(g)(3). All sites designated can accommodate 16 units or more.Some
of the sites consist of several individual parcels that are in common ownership.Although only two of the
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-103
City of Encinitas
individual parcels are too small to contain 16 units,the rezoning will apply only to projects containing at
least 16 units to ensure that lots are consolidated as needed.
12 Financial Resources
Providing for an adequate supply of decent and affordable housing requires layering of funding from
various sources. The City has access to the following funding sources:
12.1 Affordable Housing Fund
The City has an Affordable Housing Fund using revenues primarily generated from the City's Inclusionary
Housing program.The City's Inclusionary Ordinance provides the opportunity to a developer to pay a fee
in lieu of providing affordable units on site.The per-unit in-lieu fee is calculated on a case-by-case basis,
depending on the market conditions at the City.The affordable housing funds collected are then applied
and/or leveraged with additional funding sources to create affordable housing in other locations. As of
May 2014,the City has a balance of$1,352,571.00 million in the Affordable Housing Fund.
12.2 Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program is the Federal government's largest program to assist very
low-income families,the elderly,and the disabled by providing rent subsidy payments in privately owned
rental housing units.As the units are market-rate,the program offers households the opportunityto have
an expanded choice in housing.Section 8 participants typically, upon initial approval, pay 30 to 40 percent
of their income for rent and utilities. The Housing Authority of the City of Encinitas administers the
program and pays the difference between the tenant's contribution and the actual rent and utility costs,
up to the payment standard established by the Housing Authority, based on HUD-established Fair Market
Rents.To cover the cost of the program, HUD provides funds to allow the City to make housing assistance
payments on behalf of the families. HUD also provides the Housing Authority with a separate allocation
for administering the program.
12.3 Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program was initiated by the Housing and Community
Development Act (HCDA) of 1974. The primary objective of the program is to develop viable urban
communities by providing decent housing, a suitable living environment, and economic opportunities,
principally for persons of low incomes (up to 80 percent AMI). CDBG funds can be used for a wide array
of activities, including:
• Housing rehabilitation;
• Lead-based paint screening and abatement;
• Acquisition of buildings and land;
• Construction or rehabilitation of public facilities and infrastructure,and:
• Public services for low income households and those with special needs.
8-104 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas z_/r —
The City of Encinitas has been an entitlement jurisdiction for CDBG funding since 1990.Annually,the City
receives approximately$300,000; however, appropriations for many domestic programs, such as CDBG,
have experienced declines over the past few years and future funding allocations are unknown at this
time.Typically,the City expends CDBG funds to public services,fair housing,capital improvement projects,
residential rehabilitation, and administration.
12.4 HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME)
The HOME program provides federal funds for the development and rehabilitation of affordable rental
and ownership housing for households with incomes not exceeding 80 percent of area median income.
The program gives local governments the flexibility to fund a wide range of affordable housing activities
through housing partnerships with private industry and non-profit organizations. HOME funds can be used
for activities that promote affordable rental housing and homeownership by low income households.
Encinitas is not an entitlement jurisdiction, and therefore, does not receive HOME funds directly from
HUD. The City participates in the HOME Consortium administered by the County of San Diego. Until FY
2014-15, HOME funding was allocated to each of the participating members of the HOME Consortium;
however, due to federal changes to the HOME program, Encinitas no longer receives funding from the
County of San Diego to administer HOME programs. As a continued member of the San Diego Regional
Consortium, City of Encinitas residents may receive assistance through the County of San Diego's HOME
programs. These programs include a first-time homebuyer down payment and closing costs assistance
program and a tenant-based rental assistance program. HOME funding was also provided to the
Emancipated Foster Youth TBRA and Family Reunification TBRA.The programs are developed to provide
rental assistance to former foster youth between the ages of 18 and 24 and those that are attempting to
reunify with their children while in substance abuse recovery.Additionally,the County periodically makes
funding available forthe new construction or acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing.Projects
meeting the County's requirements would be eligible to apply for funding,when available.
12.5 Administrative Capacity
12.6 City of Encinitas Housing Authority
The Encinitas Housing Authority offers Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers to very low income households.
Currently,the Housing Authority administers 136 vouchers, although current HUD funding supports 101
households.
12.7 Community Resource Center
The City partners with the Community Resource Center (CRC) located in Encinitas to provide a range of
homeless services, including case management and counseling, services for victims of domestic violence,
homeless prevention and intervention, food distribution, and employment assistance. The CRC is a
501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that has been the primary provider of comprehensive social services to
the North County Coastal region since 1979. The agency has an estimated annual budget of$3.2 million
and employs approximately 44 persons. Annually,the City provides CDBG funding for CRC to support its
homeless services. The City has also provided assistance in the rehabilitation of CRC's social services
facility, and transitional housing facility, located in downtown Encinitas. The City also provides general
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-105
City of Encinitas 1 °
funds to CRC Opening Doors program, which provides housing navigation, case management, landlord
incentives,and move-in support for homeless households.
12.8 Nonprofit and For-Profit Housing Developers
The City partners with a number of nonprofit and for-profit housing developers to provide permanent
affordable housing in the community. These include:
• Habitat for Humanity
• Mercy Housing: Cantebria Senior Apartments (44 units)
• North Coast Housing: Su Casa Family Apartments (28 units)
• Community HousingWorks: Esperanza Garden Apartments (10 units)
• Chelsea Housing, Iris Apartments: recently constructed (20 units)
• Second Street Apartments: Private Developers (4 units)
• Encinitas Preservation Association: Boathouse Apartments (4 units)
• Encinitas Ranch Apartments, LLC: Elan Pacifico (120 units, 22 affordable)
13 Opportunities for Energy Conservation
The primary uses of energy in urban areas are for transportation lighting,water heating,and space heating
and cooling.The high cost of energy demands that efforts be taken to reduce or minimize the overall level
of urban energy consumption. Energy conservation is important in preserving non-renewable fuels to
ensure that these resources are available for use by future generations. There are also a number of
benefits associated with energy conservation including improved air quality and lower energy costs.
The City's energy goals, stated in the Resource Management Element of the General Plan, make every
effort to conserve energy in the City thus reducing dependence on fossil fuels.The City's policies relating
to energy include encouragement of the use of alternate energy systems, urban design that maximizes
opportunities for solar energy use and energy conservation, and promotion of energy conserving
standards and requirements for new construction.
Starting in 2012, the City promoted energy efficiency, environmental stewardship, and sustainability by
eliminating or reducing permit fees for solar photovoltaic home systems, solar water heating home
systems, electric vehicle supply equipment for home charging, clean natural gas systems for home
refueling, etc. What started as a one-year program (launched in July 2012) has evolved into a program
that will be evaluated on a yearly basis with the overall budget. The energy efficiency permit fee waiver
program was recently extended, and is still in existence.
In January 2018, the City adopted an update to its Climate Action Plan. To further advance community
energy goals, the City will implement a number of actions/measures (e.g., require energy audits, solar
photovoltaic systems and solar water heaters) to achieve residential-focused greenhouse gas emission
reductions. Until those actions/measures are adopted,Title 24, Building Energy Standards for Residential
Development, establishes energy budgets or maximum energy use levels. The standards of Title 24
supersede local regulations, and State requirements mandate Title 24 requirements through
implementation by local jurisdictions. The City will continue strict enforcement of local and state energy
B-106 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas t °
regulations for new residential construction,and continue providing residents with information on energy
efficiency.
SDG&E offers an Energy Savings Assistance program that offers income-qualified households assistance
to:
• Install improvements to help make the home more energy efficient;
• Help understand the best ways to save energy around the home;and
• Determine whether some of the appliances are eligible for free repairs or replacement.
Examples of free home improvements offered by SDG&E include:attic insulation; door weather-stripping
and caulking; low-flow showerheads and faucet aerators;water heater blankets;energy-efficient lighting;
and assistance in selecting energy-efficient appliances. The City helps publicize this program on the City
website.
14 Evaluation of Previous Housing Element Related Work
Efforts
To lay the basis for preparing a Housing Element update, the Housing Element must analyze the City's
accomplishments during previous Housing Element planning periods and/or progress in implementing
Housing Element law and/or other statutory mandates. In this section,the City describes and quantifies
the actual progress and effectiveness of previous work efforts to attain the community's housing goals
and objectives. It is important to determine if the housing needs have changed, if the goals and policies
are still relevant, and if the programs were effective. This task was systematically considered as part of
the 2013-2021 Housing Element update.
Typically, a locality will utilize the last adopted Housing Element in order to evaluate progress towards
facilitating a variety of housing types, services, and programs to meet needs within a community. Since
the 2005-2010 and 1999-2004 Encinitas Housing Elements were never adopted by the City, there is no
standardized basis for this assessment. However, draft policies and programs were developed during
these planning periods; therefore, both draft documents serve as the best proxy for benchmark review.
While the draft documents were never officially adopted, the 2005-2010 and 1999-2004 draft Housing
Elements address housing needs and community-specific and housing-related issues of the time period.
This section evaluates the City's progress in two contexts: 1)the City's progress towards meeting Coastal
Zone requirements; and, 2) the City's success in meeting its housing goals and program objectives. This
evaluation is a key component in the determination of goals and programs to be included in the 2013-
2021 Housing Element.
14.1 Evaluation of Progress towards Meeting Coastal Zone Requirements
Section 65588 of the Government Code requires that, in housing element updates, coastal jurisdictions
document the number of low and moderate income units converted or demolished, and the number of
replacement units provided. Section 65588 also requires that revisions of the housing element must
include,for the coastal zone:
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-107
City of Encinitas
• Number of new units approved for construction after January 1,1982
• Number of units for low and moderate income households required to be provided either within
the coastal zone or within three miles of it.
• Number of units occupied by low and moderate income households and authorized to be
demolished or converted since January 1,1982.
• Number of units for low and moderate income households required either within the coastal
zone or within three miles in order to replace those being demolished or converted.
Because the City was incorporated in 1986, information is not available for units produced between 1982
and 1986. The information in Table B-53 was obtained from the County of San Diego Department of
Housing and Community Development and from City records.
Table B-54:Residential Development in Coastal Zone(1986-2012)
Residential Development in the CoastalZone 1986-1999 1999-2004 2005-2017*
New construction 1,021 1,013 1,062
New low-and moderate-income housing 43 48 92
Demolished market rate housing 65 81 213
Demolished/converted low-and moderate-income 4 0 0
housing
Replacement low-and moderate-income housing 4 0 0
*Date range includes 7/1/2005 to 12/31/2017
14.2 Evaluation of Adopted Housing Element Goals and Programs
This section of the Housing Element is intended to describe the City's progress in meeting the goals and
policies of the latest adopted Housing Element. However,the last Housing Element was adopted in 1992
and a lot has changed since then.That is,it is difficult to gauge or infer progress out of evaluating programs
that were developed 20+years ago.Since a considerable amount of effort went into updating the Housing
Element during the fourth and fifth cycles (1999 and 2005), it is reasonably expected that these draft
programs are a more useful source of information.
The programs contained in these draft Housing Elements described specific actions the City of Encinitas
proposed to carry out to satisfy the community's housing needs and meet the requirements of State law.
The evaluation section of these draft documents detailed what happened and described the actual results
or outcomes of the prior planning efforts. For example,for each program the draft documents compared
significant differences to determine where the previous draft housing element met,exceeded,orfell short
of what was anticipated.
The results of this review and assessment were used to revise and update the proposed programs for
2013-2021 as described in the Implementation Plan section.The programs were organized into five major
issue areas:Housing Opportunities,Homeownership Opportunities,Rental Assistance,Quality of Housing,
and Maintenance and Preservation of Housing.
B-108 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1 ~
14.3 Housing Opportunities
1999/2005 HE Program 1: Zoning Code—Existing Provisions
The relationship between housing goals and land use planning is direct. The Land Use Element of the
Encinitas General Plan and its implementing zoning regulations is the City's most important "housing
program," by providing for the number and type of housing units needed. The Housing Needs, Housing
Constraints and Housing Resources sections of the Housing Element establish the relationship between
identified housing needs and the ability to meet those needs through the City's land use planning. The
following existing provisions of the City's Zoning Code are designed to ensure that the City achieves its
housing objectives as a result of zoning implementation. Note that some of the City's zoning provisions
will continue to be implemented on an on-going basis, while others need modification or "fine tuning"
through amendments to the Zoning Code.
1999/2005 HE Program 1A: Overall Land Use Plan Implementation
The City proposed to continue to apply zones through the Zoning Code and Zoning Map to correspond
with the Land Use Element's residential designations that would have provided a range of residential
densities and housing types. These included the single-family residential categories, (RR through RS-11)
the multi-family categories (R-11 through R-25 zones) and the specialty category of Mobile Home Park
(MHP).
Program Accomplishment: This program was an on-going activity. The City initiated a comprehensive
update to its General Plan in 2010. The Comprehensive General Plan Update and subsequent Housing
Element-related work provided additional opportunities to evaluate appropriate locations for high-
density residential and mixed-use development.
Program Evaluation:This program is continued as part of the 2013-2021 Housing Element.
1999/2005 HE Program 16: Accessory Units
The City proposed to apply zoning code provisions that allowed accessory units (also known as second
units or granny flats) by right in all single-family residential zones, in accordance with State law. In
addition, the City allowed developers of single-family subdivisions to meet inclusionary housing
requirements by building accessory units. After conducting an inventory of inclusionary, accessory units
in 2003,the City re-evaluated that accessory unit option. Many owners of the accessory units did not rent
the units out in accordance with the recorded covenant.
Program Accomplishment: The City's accessory unit regulations were amended in the mid-1990s,
permitting their construction by right in single-family neighborhoods. Implementation of the City's
ordinance permitted the construction of at least 163 new accessory units.Over the past several years,the
production on new accessory units has ranged from 14 to 21 units per year, with about 19 new units on
average.
Program Evaluation: This program has been successful in fostering the development of accessory units
throughout the community and is continued in the 2013-2021 Housing Element. Program 1C has been
added to relax development standards and to encourage more accessory unit (second-unit) production.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-109
City of Encinitas 1
1999/2005 HE Program 1C: Agricultural Worker Housing
The City proposed to continue to apply zoning code provisions that would allow agriculture worker
housing as an accessory to agricultural/horticultural land uses.The City proposed to review development
standards/limitations that were in effect for agricultural worker housing to avoid potential disincentives,
and allow for flexibility in the type of structure allowed as accessory agricultural program housing.
Program Accomplishments: The City did not undertake any formal review of its zoning/development
standards for agricultural worker housing. At the same time, there has been no indication that the City's
standards have posed a constraint to the provision of such housing.
Program Evaluation:The City's current Zoning Code requires agricultural worker housing requires a minor
use permit,which is inconsistent with state law.A program is included in the 2013-2021 Housing Element
to amend the Zoning Code to comply with state law. Refer to Program 3D.
1999/2005 HE Program iD: Mobile Home/Trailer Parks
The City proposed to continue to apply zoning provisions that allowed the development of new mobile
home/trailer parks and that recognize and allow the expansion of existing parks. The City will maintain
the exclusive mobile home park zone(MHP),where appropriate,and will continue to provide for parks as
an option under other zones. The 2005 draft Housing Element identified a need to conduct a citywide
assessment of mobile homes/trailer parks to determine their status and ability to continue to provide
affordable housing opportunities.
Program Accomplishments:The City did not receive any applications to expand mobile home parks or to
rezone parks to the MHP zone.The City recently conducted an evaluation of mobile home parks and their
capacity to continue to serve relatively affordable housing. The objective of the study was to develop a
series of strategies and programs to encourage park conservation and sustain long-term, relatively
affordable housing.The City Council considered a number of regulatory and non-regulatory alternatives.
In response to resident-based surveys and community input received at three workshops, the Council
decided not to pursue an alternative that would have expanded the sites that are currently zoned for
exclusive mobile home park use. However, City Council directed staff to implement several different
programs aimed at mobile home park preservation. One particular strategy included a City-administered
residential rehabilitation program for mobile homes and trailers,which has been implemented.
Program Evaluation:Mobile homes continue to be an affordable homeownership option, but space rents
in many parks have remained relatively high. A recent mobile home park inventory, conducted in 2007-
2008, addressed a variety of mobile home park strategies for implementation to provide affordable
housing opportunities.
1999/2005 HE Program 1E: Care Facilities
The City proposed to continue to allow for the development of small scale care facilities, community care
facilities,congregate care facilities,and residential care facilities under zoning to meet the special housing
needs of seniors and persons with disabilities.
Program Accomplishments: In early 2005, the City revised its ordinance and definitions to be consistent
with State standards.
B-110 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas —�
Program Evaluation: This program is continued as part of the 2013-2021 Housing Element. Refer to
Program 3D.
1999/2005 HE Program 1F:Identify and Remove Constraints to the Development of Housing for Persons
with Disabilities
State law requires jurisdictions to analyze potential and actual governmental constraints on the
development of housing for persons with disabilities and describe the City's efforts to remove or mitigate
those constraints. During the 1999 Housing Element cycle, the City proposed to analyze its zoning
ordinance and procedures to ensure that they provided flexibility in, and not constrain,the development
of housing for persons with disabilities. If constraints were found,the City proposed to amend their zoning
ordinances and/or change their procedures in order to remove them. Similarly, in the 2005 Housing
Element planning period, the City proposed the development of a formal reasonable accommodation
procedure.
Program Accomplishments: Through its building permit authority, the City enforces state Title 24
accessibility regulations. As needed on a case-by-case basis, the City has made reasonable
accommodations with respect to accessibility in its application of zoning/development standards.As part
of the City's participation in the Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice study,the City's
processes and ordinances were reviewed.
Program Evaluation:This program is carried over into the 2013-2021 Housing Element programs. Refer to
Program 5A. The City will develop a formal reasonable accommodation procedure for persons with
disabilities as related to zoning/development and building permit processes.
1999/2005 HE Program 1G: Density Bonus
At the time that the 1999 Housing Element was prepared,State law required that if a developer agrees to
construct at least 20 percent of the total units of a housing development for lower income households,or
10 percent of the total units of a housing development for very low income households,or 50 percent of
the total units for elderly households, a city had to grant a density bonus of at least 25 percent over the
otherwise maximum allowable density for the project site.Additionally,the law requires a city to offer at
least one concession or incentive to a developer in exchange for affordable housing. The City's Local
Coastal Program (LCP) restricts density bonuses to a maximum of 25 percent and allows only one
concession or incentive due to the California Coastal Commission's interpretation of State Density Bonus
Law.
New State law (SB 1818) has modified the requirements for the City if a developer requests a density
bonus for providing affordable housing as part of a development proposal. Key provisions of the new law
include lowering minimum density bonuses and affordable housing set-asides, providing a density bonus
range that caps at 35 percent and requiring cities to grant up to three incentives or concessions.The law
also provides for reduced parking requirements if requested by a developer. The program contained in
the 2005 Housing Element cycle sought to bring the City's density bonus provisions into compliance with
the new provisions of State law.
Program Accomplishments:The City's implementing ordinance of density bonus law is inconsistent with
the recent changes.Although the City's density bonus regulations do not comply with State law,they have
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-111
City of Encinitas
not been a barrier to the City approving density bonus projects. Most of the City's approved subdivisions
since 2003 have associated with density bonus projects.
Program Evaluation: The 2013-2021 Housing Element will include a program to bring the City's density
bonus ordinance and LCP into conformance with the new provisions of State law. Refer to Program 3A.
The City updated its density bonus regulations, which related Local Coastal Program amendment was
certified by the Coastal Commission in 2016. Additionally, the City will evaluate how the ordinance may
be applied in conjunction with the City's Inclusionary Housing program to maximize affordable housing
opportunities.
1999/2005 HE Program 1H: Inclusionary Housing Program
The City proposed to establish an inclusionary housing program that required subdivisions of 10 or more
units to set aside at least 10 percent of the units for low income households. As a condition of approval
of any tentative subdivision map for residential dwellings, community apartments, stock cooperatives or
conversions of 10 units or more, it was proposed that the subdivider was to reserve a unit or units to
tenants at or below 50 percent of the area median income.The units either had to be rented at or below
the affordable rent level or sold at a price affordable to eligible households.
Residential subdivisions of 10 or more units could have met the City's 10 percent Inclusionary Housing
Requirement by building an accessory dwelling unit with an affordability deed restriction.Accessory units
also were rent restricted through the City's Affordable Unit Policy.After conducting a citywide survey of
accessory unit owners in October 2003, the City found that many homeowners did not rent out the
accessory units in accordance with the recorded covenant. The 2005 Housing Element sought to
implement changes to the inclusionary program to more effectively meet the City's affordable housing
goals and grant developers greater flexibility in how they fulfill their inclusionary requirements.
Program Accomplishments:The City enacted an ordinance that implemented the above requirements of
the 1999 Housing Element.Since adoption of the inclusionary housing program,125 units were produced,
including 14 for-sale units, 67 rental units, and 44 accessory units.As mentioned above, although at one
time allowing developers to build inclusionary,accessory units has dispersed affordable units throughout
the community, enforcement of rent restrictions has proven to be difficult. The City subsequently re-
evaluated that accessory unit option. Many owners of the accessory units did not rent the units out in
accordance with the recorded covenant. After some discussion,the City changed its policy and no longer
allows developers to meet inclusionary housing requirements by building accessory units.
Program Evaluation: This program was successful in fostering the development of affordable units and
should be continued in the 2013-2021 Housing Element. Refer to Program 2A.The City will evaluate how
this program may be combined with the City's Density Bonus program to maximize affordable housing
opportunities. The City also will evaluate expanding the application of inclusionary housing to increase
homeownership and rental opportunities for moderate-income households, as well as other changes in
the program to more effectively meet the City's affordable housing goals.
1999/2005 HE Program 11: Permit Streamlining Policy
The City proposed to continue its existing policy to streamline permitting procedures for affordable
housing projects.This effort was to address the possible administrative constraints of securing permits to
produce an affordable housing project.
B-112 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1
Program Accomplishments:The City engaged in a program to improve the efficiency of the development
review process. Elements of the program included upgrading the computerized permitting system,
reducing unnecessary paperwork, eliminating certain permit requirements, and establishing an
interdepartmental team to quickly resolve problems as they arise.
The City streamlined permitting for two affordable housing projects,Poinsettia Ridge and Cantebria Senior
Apartments. The non-profit developer of the Cantebria project developed the units under a HUD senior
housing program, and due to a lengthy review process within HUD,was not able to realize any advantage
from the expedited processing.
Program Evaluation: This program is continued in the 2013-2021 Housing Element with an emphasis on
working with non-profit and for-profit housing developers to better utilize the expedited process.
1999/2005 HE Program 1J:Reduced Parking Standards for Mixed-use and Affordable Housing in Specific
Plan Areas
Mixed-use units that were guaranteed to be affordable to low or very-low income households were
allowed a reduced, one-space-per-unit parking requirement. The City proposed to continue to enforce
these zoning provisions and to seek to incorporate reduced parking standards for mixed-use and
affordable housing projects in future Specific Plan Areas.
Program Accomplishments: In the Downtown Specific Plan Area and the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan
Area, no more than two off-street parking spaces required for any unit in a mixed-use development.
In the Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan Area Mixed-use Zones, the Planning and Building Director has the
authority to reduce the above parking requirements for affordable housing projects, provided either that
a parking study was prepared to support the proposed reduction in parking spaces or a baseline parking
study was conducted by the City that was applicable to all affordable housing development in the City.
This authority was exercised in at least one affordable housing development during the last review period.
Program Evaluation:The City reduced parking standards for the Cantebria Senior Apartments to 0.67 per
unit, based on parking studies conducted by the developer of similar senior complexes in Southern
California. However,when the complex began leasing up,the property manager discovered that 75 to 80
percent of applicants had cars.As a result,after the complex was 60 percent leased,the property manager
began selecting only applicants without cars. This program is continued the 2013-2021 Housing Element;
however,in senior complexes the City will require a minimum of one space per unit, plus guest parking.
1999 HE Program 1K: New Zoning Code Provisions for Multi-Family Residential Use
The City proposed to continue to review zoning code development standards to identify and remove
disincentives for the development of multi-family units. The City considered relaxing multi-family off-
street parking requirements for affordable housing projects on a case-by-case basis.
Program Accomplishments: This program was applied to the Second St. mixed-use project (4 units) and
the Cantebria Senior Housing(45 units).
Program Evaluation: The City will continue review of the zoning code for any incentives and/or
disincentives. However, it should be noted that multi-family housing development is eligible for the
density bonus program and under the new density bonus law,incentives and concessions to development
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-113
tole
City of Encinitas
standards are provided for.Thus, any potential disincentives that can be identified may be mitigated if a
developer seeks out concessions or waivers through the density bonus program. This program is not
separately identified in the 2013-2021 Housing Element.
2005 HE Program 1K: Eliminate Separate Lot or Airspace Ownership Requirements in North Highway
101 Specific Plan
The North Highway 101 Corridor Specific Plan requires that all new residential detached dwelling units in
residential-only developments must be constructed on a legally subdivided lot or must be subdivided to
permit ownership of airspace in the form of a dwelling unit with an undivided share in common elements.
While this requirement is appropriate for single-family homeownership projects, it may pose as a
disincentive to the provision of multi-family housing.
Program Accomplishments:The City has not implemented this program.
Program Evaluation:This program was included in the 2013-2021 Housing Element. Refer to Program 3C.
1999/2005 HE Program 1L: Manufactured Housing
The City proposed to continue to permit manufactured housing units by right in single-family zones, as
long as the units meet all zoning and building codes.
Program Accomplishments:This is an on-going program.
Program Evaluation:This program is continued in the 2013-2021 Housing Element.
2005 HE Program 1M: Neighborhood Revitalization Opportunities
The City proposed to designate blighted or declining residential neighborhoods as a "Neighborhood
Revitalization Area" to enable HUD funding allocations and other available resources to implement
housing rehabilitation, new construction, homeownership opportunities, etc.
Program Accomplishments:The City has not implemented this program.
Program Evaluation: HUD expects to approve strategies that will achieve substantial improvements in
the delineated neighborhood area and will create meaningful levels of economic opportunities.
Regardless of Federal appropriation streams or other funding levels,a neighborhood strategy submission
for a delineated geographic area of the City is unlikely to be competitive.This program was not included
in the 2013-2021 Housing Element.
2005 HE Program 1N:Amend Design Review Findings for Residential Projects
The City requires design review approval for most proposed development. Unless exempt, residential
projects need to be consistent with the City's design guidelines and comply with certain regulatory
findings before they may be constructed. Among these findings is the requirement that the project
"would not tend to cause the surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in appearance or value
(EMC 23.08.080)." In response to concerns that such a finding could pose a constraint to housing,the City
will evaluate this design review finding for its potential to be subjectively applied in denying a residential
development.
B-114 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas , I
Program Accomplishments:The City has not implemented this program. However, through the Housing
Element "Restart" process,the community expressed some clear support to create design standards for
future projects so that the community can be confident that they will fit in with existing neighborhoods.
Program Evaluation:This program was included in the 2013-2021 Housing Element. Refer to Program 3C.
1999 HE Program 2, 2005 HE Program 2b: Encourage Mixed-Use Development and Increase
Awareness of Potential for Mixed-Use Development;Assess Feasibility of Expanding Mixed-Use Zoning
in Other Parts of the City
The City proposed to continue to allow for the inclusion of mixed-use development of secondary
residential units with development of principal commercial uses. Mixed-use residential provisions could
have included requirements or incentives to be affordable. In a high-cost area such as Encinitas, this
represented a significant opportunity for the development of multi-family housing.
The City also proposed to assess the feasibility of expanding mixed-use zoning provisions in other areas
of the City(in both the 1999 and 2005 Housing Elements).
Program Accomplishments: Mixed-use was integrated into the City's Zoning Code. The Encinitas Ranch,
Downtown Encinitas, and North 101 Corridor Specific Plans included provisions for mixed-use
development in commercial districts with densities from the residential portion at 15-25 dwelling units
per acre,with certain areas not being limited to a specific density. The City works to increase developer
awareness of the potential for mixed-use development in Encinitas. Additionally, the City continues to
provide technical support to developers proposing mixed-use projects.
Program Evaluation: This program is continued in the 2013-2021 Housing Element and should be made a
high priority for implementation.
2005 HE Program 2A:Affordable Housing Overlay Zone
As part of the 2005-2010 Housing Element,the City conducted an analysis of its land use plan to determine
the potential capacity to meet its regional housing needs allocation.The analysis showed that it would be
beneficial to augment the higher- density capacity of mixed-use zones by establishing an Affordable
Housing Overlay Zone (AHOZ). The AHOZ would designate specific sites for higher residential density,
provided that the affordable housing targets established for each site is met through development. The
City will identify appropriate sites and apply the AHOZ designation through a zoning ordinance, General
Plan,and Local Coastal Program amendment.
Program Accomplishments:The City has not implemented this program.
Program Evaluation:While an AHOZ is a land use tool that the City can utilize to develop RHNA capacity,
an up-to-date sites inventory program was established for the 2013-2021 Housing Element to provide
sufficient sites (appropriately zoned)to meet the City's full, "fair"share of RHNA for the current planning
period. However, depending on how the overlay is created, an AHOZ could be a tool to consider
implementing better design control or more attainable housing units in rezoned areas.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-115
City of Encinitas
2005 HE Program 2C:Coastal Housing Replacement
As part of the 2005 Housing Element,the City proposed a program to identify resources to provide for the
replacement of housing. State law (Government Code Section 65590) requires replacement of low-and
moderate-income housing lost due to conversion or demolition of housing in the Coastal Zone. The
replacement requirement is applied to projects of three or more dwelling units(eleven or more if multiple
structures).
Program Accomplishments:The City has not initiated this program.
Program Evaluation:The range of options that could be considered under this activity could include fees
for condominium conversions and other replacement housing requirements, especially for affordable
housing lost through conversion or removal. This program was included in the 2013-2021 Housing
Element. The City advances Government Code Section 65590 by regulating the applicability of these
provisions on a case-by-case basis. However, the objective of this program may be something that the
City should consider addressing in the next planning cycle.
14.4 Homeownership Opportunities
1999 HE Program 3,2005 HE Program 3a: First-Time Homebuyer Down Payment Program
The City proposed to continue to provide the First-Time Homebuyer Program. This program provided
down payment and/or closing cost assistance to low-income first-time homebuyers.The maximum loan
limit was $10,000 and the appraised value of the property being purchased could not have exceeded
$269,000.The City placed a second trust deed on the property as security for the loan. Repayment of the
loan was deferred until sale,transfer,or non-owner occupancy of the unit. If the buyer resided in the unit
for seven full years,the loan was forgiven.
Program Accomplishments:The program provided one down payment assistance loan which was used in
conjunction with a Section 8 Homeownership Voucher. Due to the steep rise in the price of condominium
properties, which had previously been the most affordable units for first-time homebuyers, the subsidy
provided by the City was found to be inadequate. In response, the City increased its subsidy level to
$40,000 per household and increased the maximum sales price to$421,000.
Program Evaluation: Housing prices have sky-rocketed in recent years making the first-time homebuyer
program all but infeasible even with the increased loan amounts and home valuation. The required
subsidy would be so large as to exceed HOME funding limits and would be an inefficient use of limited
resources.The gap between the affordable sales price and the median sales price for condominium units
is at least
$200,000.Thus, unless condominium prices decline, it will be difficult to assist first-time homebuyers.
Previously allocated funding for down payment assistance can be made available for the rare
circumstance of a qualified buyer purchasing an affordable unit. However,this program should be phased
out in favor of directing the City's limited financial resources to more effective uses such as rental
assistance or affordable housing development.
B-116 2013-2021 Housing Element —Appendix B
City of Encinitas
1999 HE Program 4, 2005 HE Program 3b: San Diego Regional Mortgage Credit Certificate Program
(MCC)
The City proposed to continue to participate in and promote the San Diego Regional Mortgage Credit
Certificate Program. This program entitled qualified first-time homebuyers to take a federal income tax
credit of 15 percent of the interest paid on the mortgage. The credit reduced the buyers' income taxes
and increases net earnings,thereby increasing the buyers' ability to qualify for a mortgage loan.
Qualified applicants had to be first-time homebuyers earning no greater than 120 percent of the area
median income.
Program Accomplishments: This program was more effective when combined with the Downpayment
Assistance program and resulted in the use of six certificates within the City during that time frame. As
mentioned above,the surge in home prices over the first part of the 2000s has rendered this program all
but infeasible as well. One MCC has been issued in the last seven years.
Program Evaluation:The City may continue to participate in the MCC program in the event that a unique
opportunity for such assistance presents itself. Given the extremely high property values in Encinitas,the
City will not rely on this program to achieve its affordable housing goals. However, the program is
ongoing.
1999 HE Program 5: Homebuyer Classes
The City proposed to continue to sponsor homebuyer classes twice a year to educate citizens about the
home buying process and to inform participants of the available home buying assistance programs.
Program Accomplishments: A few classes were held during the first half of the 1999- 2005 Housing
Element cycle but none have been conducted since. Due to the lack of affordable for-sale housing
opportunities in Encinitas,the City decided to discontinue homebuyer classes.Interested persons are now
referred to private organizations that hold classes in the area.
Program Evaluation: Limited staff resources and surging home prices have forced this program to a low
priority activity.This program has not been identified in the 2013-2021 Housing Element.
14.5 Rental Assistance Programs
1999 HE Program 6,2005 HE Program 4A: Section 8 Rental Assistance
The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program is the Federal government's major program for assisting
very low-income families,the elderly,and the disabled to afford decent,safe, and sanitary housing in the
private market.The City proposed to continue to administerthe Section 8 Rental Assistance Program.This
program provided rental assistance to eligible very low and low income households. The subsidy
represented the difference between the rent that exceeds 30 percent of a household's monthly income
and the actual rent charged.
Program Accomplishments:The City added 86 additional vouchers to an existing base of 50 vouchers. Of
these new vouchers, 50 initially were "mainstream" vouchers for persons with disabilities. To cover the
cost of the program, HUD provided,and continued to provide,funds to allow the City's Housing Authority
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-117
City of Encinitas _ _ °
to make housing assistance payments on behalf of the families. HUD also pays the Housing Authority a
fee for the costs of administering the program.
In FY 2008-2009, City Council also approved the use of HOME funds for a tenant-based rental assistance
program (see 1999 HE Program 7, 2005 HE Program 46).The TBRA program replicates the City's Housing
Authority Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. TBRA recipients are selected from the top of the
Section 8 waiting list.The TBRA will assist in shortening the wait times for households priorto receiving a
Section 8 Choice Voucher.
Program Evaluation: This program is continued in the 2013-2021 Housing Element. HUD (the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development)has not issued any new vouchers to the City of Encinitas
for several years. In January 2004 and January 2005, HUD capped the Section 8 budget, which required
the City to reduce program operating costs.The City responded by increasing the payment standards and
enhancing occupancy standards,which provides more opportunity for rental units.Then, more recently,
on March 1, 2013, around $85 billion in Federal budget cuts known as sequestration took effect. The
sequestration cuts are part of a 10-year plan of catastrophic funding reductions to discretionary domestic
programs, including HUD and the military. The impact of sequestration on the City's Housing Authority
has resulted in the more losses. Although the City will continue to administer its Housing Voucher
Program, the City's ability to expand this program or even maintain it at its current level is dependent
upon the Federal budget process. Recent indications from HUD are that Federal support for Section 8 will
not be expanded.The City currently provides assistance to about 111 households. From 2009 to 2015,the
City also administered a TBRA program, subsidizing 7 additional households. When additional funds
become available to assist new families,the City will fund additional Section 8 Housing Vouchers.
1999 HE Program 7,2005 HE Program 413: HOME Housing Vouchers Program
The City proposed to continue to fund this program by using vouchers to target very low income
households mirroring the Section 8 program. The HOME Housing Voucher program provides 24 months
of rental assistance. During this time period, eligible participants could have transferred to the Section 8
program for on-going assistance as vouchers became available.
Program Accomplishments: In early 2009,City Council approved the use of HOME funds for tenant-based
rental assistance (TBRA) program. This provided rent subsidies to lower-income households that are
currently awaiting a voucher on the Section 8 waiting list.The maximum length of assistance is 24 months,
and at the time, the approved HOME funding of $199,356 was going to provide rent subsidies for
approximately over a two-year period.The TBRA program replicated the City's Housing Authority Section
8 Housing Choice Voucher Program.TBRA recipients were selected from the top of the Section 8 waiting
list.The TBRA assisted in shortening the wait times for households prior to receiving a Section 8 voucher.
Program Evaluation: This program was planned to continue in the 2013-2021 Housing Element;however,
due to federal changes to the HOME program, Encinitas will not be receiving funding from the County of
San Diego to administer HOME programs.As a continued member of the San Diego Regional Consortium,
City of Encinitas residents may receive assistance through the County of San Diego's HOME programs.The
County-TBRA programs are developed to provide rental assistance to former foster youth between the
ages of 18 and 24 and those that are attempting to reunify with their children while in substance abuse
recovery.
8-118 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas 1 °
14.6 Quality of Housing
1999 HE Program 8,2005 HE Program 5A: Equal Opportunity Housing Marketing/Fair Housing
The City proposed to continue to require that,as a condition of approval of any new housing development,
units be marketed and sold according to procedures designed to promote equal housing opportunities.
The City also proposed to continue to contract with a non-profit fair housing organization to provide
outreach, counseling, education,testing for discrimination and assistance regarding fair housing issues.
Program Accomplishments:The City disseminated information about fair housing in its housing brochure
and on the City website. Brochures also were distributed at libraries,grocery stores, community centers,
and other public places.The City contracted with North County Lifeline to provide fair housing counseling
and education.The City referred to the Regional Analysis of Impediments (Al)to Fair Housing(completed
in 2004 and updated in 2011) as part of its analysis of potential impediments to affordable housing, and
the Housing Element addresses the recommendations of that study as part of its program to reduce
governmental constraints.
Program Evaluation:The program has been successful and should be continued in the 2013-2021. The
City will address the impediments to fair housing identified in the Al.
1999 HE Program 9,2005 HE Program 56 and 5C:Emergency Shelter/Transitional Housing Development
Assistance
The City proposed to continue to sponsor or assist emergency shelter and transitional housing facilities,
inside City limits or outside within a reasonable proximity.The City encouraged and/or supported facilities
by providing siting opportunities, grants, or low cost loans, to operator agencies, grants. The City also
proposed to provide financial assistance to the Community Resource Center(a nonprofit service agency
based in Encinitas) for case management and the YMCA-Oz North Coast for emergency shelter for
homeless and runaway youth. The City will participate in winter homeless assistance programs, either
through motel voucher funding and a temporary winter shelter.
Program Accomplishments: The City provided funding to several non-profit organizations that provide
shelter and emergency assistance. The Community Resource Center (CRC) expanded and renovated its
transitional housing program for battered women and their children. The group living program was
expanded from 11 to 24 beds. With annual funding from the City, the CRC provides case management,
emergency assistance, food assistance, and employment preparation services. The agency also
administers a motel voucher program.
The City continued to support other agencies that provide services to homeless persons, including YMCA
of North Coast, Fraternity House, and North County Solutions for Change. The latter organization
developed a 32-unit regional transitional housing facility in Vista; all six cities in North San Diego County
and the County of San Diego contributed funding to the$4.5 million project. The Family Solutions Center
opened in October 2004.The Interfaith Shelter Network operated their annual winter shelter program at
area churches. In addition,the City facilitated the use of the Scout Center, located on public property,for
the temporary winter shelter.
Program Evaluation: The City will continue to support efforts to end and prevent homelessness in the
community. SB 2 was passed in 2008 mandating jurisdictions to address housing opportunities for the
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element 8-119
City of Encinitas 1 °�4 1.
—`�
homeless. The 2013-2021 Housing Element includes a program to the Zoning Code to address the
provision of emergency shelters,transitional housing, and supportive housing consistent with SB 2.
1999 HE Program 10,2005 HE Program 513: Enforcement of Accessible Housing Regulations
The City proposed to continue to maintain accessible housing regulations and implement California Title
24 provisions for development review and approval.
Program Accomplishments: Through its building permit and code enforcement programs, the City
enforced the provisions of California Title 24 accessibility requirements.
Program Evaluation: This program is ongoing and continued in the 2013-2021 Housing Element cycle in
accordance with State law.
14.7 Maintenance and Preservation of Housing Programs
1999 HE Program 11,2005 HE Program 6A: Residential Rehabilitation Program
The existing affordable housing stock is a valuable resource to the City.The City proposed to continue to
fund the County of San Diego residential rehabilitation program.This program provided assistance for low
income households to upgrade units to decent, safe and sanitary conditions from a previous below-
standard condition. The assistance was available to low-income homeowners and to owners of rental
units that will rent to low income households.
Program Accomplishments:The County administered a residential rehabilitation program on behalf of the
City of Encinitas for many years. Under the County of San Diego residential rehabilitation program, the
County made two loans to low-income households in Encinitas.
In early 2009,the City Council approved its own City-administered residential rehabilitation program and
opted out of the County program. The City immediately reached out to various community groups and
commenced an aggressive marketing/advertising campaign throughout the City's mobile home parks.
After two-years of implementation,the City rehabilitated nearly 100 mobile homes,and two single-family
residences. The City continues to market/advertise this program to the City's eleven mobile home parks
to advance one of the outcome goals of the mobile home park study (see 1999/2005 HE Program 1D:
Mobile Home/Trailer Parks).
However,traditional funding appropriation streams have been significantly cut at a Federal level–leaving
about $100,000 annually to fund activities under this program. City staff regularly seeks out additional
funding opportunities for rehabilitation of ownership and rental units,including Community Development
Block Grants, HOME,etc.;however,currently CDBG is the only funding administered locally. Encinitas will
not be receiving funding from the County of San Diego to administer HOME programs.
Program Evaluation: As the City's housing stock ages, the need for housing rehabilitation to preserve
neighborhood quality will continue to increase. Therefore, the City will continue to promote the
rehabilitation programs offered through the City in the 2013-2021 Housing Element cycle. The future
effectiveness of this program is derived by available resources and financing. It is estimated that current
program funding levels will provide assistance to about five households on an annual basis.
B-120 2013-2021 Housing Element–Appendix B
City of Encinitas
1999 HE Program 12,2005 HE Program 6B: Affordable Unit Policy
The City has a number of second dwelling units that were constructed or converted illegally (without
required permits) and might not meet City codes. Many of these units provide affordable housing
opportunities that might not otherwise be available. In response to this issue, the City developed a
program for illegal unit conversion. This program allowed homeowners with illegally established second
dwelling units on their property to apply for legalization. It allowed the illegal units to exist in perpetuity
provided that the units:
• Were placed into service prior to City incorporation in 1986 and have been used as rentals since
1986;
• Complied with the current Uniform Building Code and meet City zoning and development
standards to the maximum extent feasible;
• Met the minimum dwelling unit size standards; and
• Were rented to only very low or low-income households.
Program Accomplishments:About 40 units were legalized under this program, providing safe housing for
lower income households.
Program Evaluation: This program will be continued and be made available to property owners in the
2013-2021 Housing Element period. It is anticipated that the number of applications will decrease over
time,however,as it will become increasingly difficult to meet the pre-incorporation occupancy threshold.
City Council recently revised the compliance program with less restrictive, more preferential terms...but
the terms are only valid through 2015.
14.8 Financing
2005 HE Program 7A: Federal and State Financing
The City will facilitate or support the applications of experienced developers and homeless providers for
financing to develop affordable housing.
Program Accomplishments: Under this 2005 Housing Element program, it was anticipated the City would
meet with potential affordable housing developers, provide site information, assist in the entitlement
process,and consider on a case-by-case basis other incentives to include fee waivers and modification of
standards.City staff met with several non-profit and affordable housing developers over the course of the
2005-2012 planning period. In addition,the City partnered with several different groups to help construct
a 20 unit, Iris Apartment complex. Five of the two-bedroom units and three of the three-bedroom units
are at reserved for households at 50 percent of Area Median Income (AMI). Seven of the two-bedroom
units, and five of the three-bedroom units are at reserved for households at 60 percent AMI. Through a
competitive process, the project was awarded tax-credits totaling $4,655,490. The City contributed
$350,000 total in loans from two sources; $194,466 in federal HOME Investment Partnership funds, and
$155,534 in local City Affordable Housing Development funds.The project secured $1,146,759 in private
loans/investments, including land donation. The total cost for the Iris Apartments was$8,332,699.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-121
City of Encinitas —
Program Evaluation:In order to make affordable housing development economically feasible,developers
must layer financing from several State and Federal financing sources.The City will continue to facilitate
this process under several different 2013-2021 Housing Element programs.
2005 HE Program 713: Local Financing
The City will investigate potential local sources that will generate dedicated housing revenue to augment
the City's affordable housing trust fund.
Program Accomplishments: As part of the City activities associated with this program and Program 7A
from the 2005 Housing Element,the City met with potential affordable housing developers.
Program Evaluation:Sources to augment the City's affordable housing fund include a couple of different
funding opportunities. This updated Housing Element contains programmatic provisions to consider the
inclusionary housing program and will consider other tools to achieve the stated purpose of increasing
funding opportunities. While this updated Housing Element does not identify a program to evaluate a
coastal replacement/conversion fee, it is anticipated that this provision will be addressed in the near
future.
14.9 Quantified Objectives in Past Housing Element Cycles
Housing Element law required that quantified objectives be developed with regard to new construction,
rehabilitation, conservation and preservation activities that will occur during the Housing Element cycle.
Table B-54 summarizes the City of Encinitas' quantified objectives for past Housing Elements,Table B-55
summarizes the City's actual accomplishments in construction, and Table B-56 summarizes the City's
accomplishments in housing rehabilitation, preservation, and other assistance.
Table B-55: Historical Quantified Objectives;
Very Low Income Low Income Moderate Income Above Moderate t Totals
Income
1999-2004
New Construction 441 340 366 437 1,584
Rehabilitation 7 n/ai n/ai 7
Conservation
Section 8 100 - - - 100
"At Risk"Units - 40 - - 40
Totals 541 387 366 437 1,731
2005-2010
New Construction 392 299 324 697 1,712
Rehabilitation 25 n/al n/ai 25
Conservation
Section 8 156 - 56
Totals 448 324 324 697 1,793
1.The City only set quantified objectives for very low and low income rehabilitation that occurred with assistance through the rehabilitation
program.Moderate and above moderate income rehabilitation may still have occurred.
B-122 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas -�
14.9.1 New Construction
Two overlapping RHNA cycles occurred within the period of 1999 through 2012. Table B-55 summarizes
the City's housing production during each RHNA cycle. While the RHNA adopted by SANDAG over these
two time periods was consistent with SANDAG's projected growth for the City for the Series 10 and Series
11 Growth Forecasts, actual residential development from 2005-2012 fell below these forecasted levels.
As shown in Table B-55, 1,621 new units were constructed during the 1999-2004 RHNA cycle. While the
total number (1,621) nearly exceeded the City's RHNA (1,584), the production fell in the lower and
moderate-income categories. Housing growth during the 2003-2010 RHNA cycle slowed, largely due to
the severe downturn in the housing market. For this time period,the City did not meet its overall RHNA
(1,712), and it did not meet its goal by income category.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-123
City of Encinitas
Table B-56:Actual Units Constructed (1999-2012)
7/1/99-6/30/04 Regional Share Goal New Construction
Extremely Low n/a --
Very Low 441 21
Low 340 27
Moderate 366 --
Above Moderate 437 1,573
Totals 1,584 1,621
7/1/04-6/30/12 Regional Share Goal New Construction
Extremely Low n/a --
Very Low 392 59
Low 299 37
Moderate 324 19
Above Moderate 697 965
Totals 1,712 1,010
Rehabilitation
Since 2009, the City funded rehabilitation of three single-family units (funding improvements to one
extremely low-income household and two low-income households) and funded the rehabilitation of 96
mobile home/trailers, and one condominium. During the past ten years, low interest rates available on
the market made it less attractive for homeowners to pursue the government-assisted loans due to the
added eligibility,occupancy, and income restrictions. However,as the City's housing stock ages,the need
for housing rehabilitation to preserve neighborhood quality will continue to increase.Therefore,the City
will continue to promote the rehabilitation programs offered through the City during the next Housing
Element cycle. Currently, two additional rehabilitation projects (mobile homes) are under consideration
for funding.
Conservation
The City's quantified conservation objective was 140 households from 1999-2005 and 56 from 2005-2010.
In 1999,this objective included 100 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (rental assistance vouchers) and
the conservation of 40 affordable units. In 2005, this objective included 56 Section 8 Housing Choice
Vouchers.Duringthe reporting period,the City retained all rental assistance budget authority(136 Section
8 and 20. HOME vouchers) and successfully conserved 16 affordable units through acquisition.
Additionally,the City assisted six low income families in purchasing a home. Please note that Table B-56
does not provide rehabilitation information on the mobile homes/trailers that have been assisted over
the same time period.
B-124 2013-2021 Housing Element—Appendix B
City of Encinitas __7� A I
Table.6-57:Actual Rehabilitated and Assisted Units(1999-2013)
7/1/99-12/31/2012 Preservation Homebuyer Rent Assistance Rehabilitation
Extremely Low 6 -- 1
Very Low 156
7 -- --
Low 3 13 -- 2
Moderate -- -- -- --
Above Moderate -- -- -- --
Totals 16 13 156 3*
*The City only identifies quantified objectives for single-family and multi-familyrehabilitation.The City also rehabilitated 96 mobile homes and
railers from 1999 to 2013.Moderateand above moderate income rehabilitation may still haveoccurred.
Appendix B- 2013-2021 Housing Element B-125
City of Encinitas
Appendix C: Adequate Sites Analysis
Appendix C contains the site inventory and analysis for the sites proposed to meet the City of Encinitas'
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation for the 2013-2021 planning period. The sites are
organized to show how the City can meet the need for the four RHNA income categories (Very Low, Low,
Moderate, and Above Moderate). That information is summarized in Table C-1 below.
Table C-1:Adequacy of Sites Inventory
Extremely Above
Low/Very Low Moderate Moderate Total
Low Income Income Income
Income -
RHNA(2013-2021) 587 1 446 413 907 2,353
RH NA Carryover(2003-2013) 253 -- — 253
Units Built/Approved 33 1 33 4 892 962
Accessory Unit Production 79 54 — 133
Remaining RHNA 1,141 355 15 1,511
Candidate Site Unit Yield 1,504 523 177 2,204
Total Capacity Over RHNA Need 363 168 162 693
All sites were reviewed in order to ensure compliance with state law. The sites chosen meet that criteria
and show the highest potential to redevelop for residential use within the planning period.
1 .1 Availability of Water, Sewer, and Dry Utilities
The City of Encinitas has evaluated the availability of infrastructure from a Citywide and site-specific
standpoint. In determining the feasibility of sites to accommodate the City's RHNA needs, infrastructure
provision was a determining factor. As described in Appendix B under 'Environmental Constraints and
Infrastructure,'the City has adequate water and sewer capacity to accommodate the planned increase in
housing development. The City has reviewed the sites designated for development and has determined
that each of the sites designated within each income category is adjacent to a public street that contains
distribution facilities for water, sewer, and dry utilities (including cable and telephone). The availability
and location of water, sewer and dry utilities and their distribution facilities do not pose a constraint to
development.
Appendix C-2013-2021 Housing Element C-1
City of Encinitas
C.1 Very Low and Low-Income Candidate Sites Inventory
C-2 2013-2021 Housing Element -Appendix C
SITES INVENTORY LIST
Very Low/Low Income RHNA Candidate Sites
Vacant
SITE 02:CANNON PROPERTY(PIRAEUS)
SITE 05: ENCINITAS BLVD&QUAIL GARDENS SITES
SITE 06a:ARMSTRONG PARCELS
SITE 08a: RANCHO SANTA FE PARCELS (GAFF NEY/GOODSEN)
SITE AD1:SAGE CANYON
SITE AD2a: BALDWIN &SONS PROPERTIES
SITE AD213: BALDWIN &SONS PROPERTIES
Non-vacant
SITE 01:GREEK CHURCH PARCEL
SITE 06b:ARMSTRONG PARCELS
SITE 07:JACKEL PROPERTIES
SITE 08b:RANCHO SANTA FE PARCELS (GAFFNEY/GOODSEN)
SITE 09: ECHTER PROPERTY
SITE 12:SUNSHINE GARDENS PARCELS
SITE AD2c: BALDWIN &SONS PROPERTIES
SITE AD8:VULCAN &LA COSTA
SITE AD9:SEACOAST CHURCH
SITE AD11: MANCHESTER AVENUE WEST SITES
SITE AD14: HARRISON SITES
SITE AD31:MEYER PROPOSAL
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-3
Table2cfN t'"Acrea eandaUni tYeld Pier Site
Site Site Name Gross Net UnitYield
Number Acreage Acreage (DU)
Vacant'
02 Cannon Property(Piraeus) 6.93 6.93 173
05 Encinitas Blvd&Quail Gardens Sites 4.91 4.78 119
06a Armstrong Parcels 1.92 1.06 26
08a Rancho Santa Fe Parcels(Gaffney/Goodsen) 1.75 1.45 36
AD1 Sage Canyon 5.23 2.40 60
AD2a Baldwin&Sons Properties 3.14 2.98 74
AD2b Baldwin&Sons Properties 6.66 4.86 121
Subtotal 30.54 24.46 609
Non-vacant
01 Greek Church Parcel 2.50 2.00 50
06b Armstrong Parcels 1.32 1.16 29
07 Jackel Properties 2.97 2.97 331
08b Rancho Santa Fe Parcels(Gaffney/Goodsen) 4.88 4.57 113
09 Echter Property 21.49 9.85 246
12 Sunshine Gardens Parcels 3.39 3.39 84
AD2c Baldwin&Sons Properties 1.79 1.21 30
AD8 Vulcan&La Costa 2.00 2.00 50
AD9 Seacoast Church 4.45 1.41 35
AD11 Manchester Avenue West Sites 1.67 1.67 41
AD14 Harrison Sites 1.91 1.91 211
AD31 Meyer Proposal 6.62 6.52 163
Subtotal 54.99 38.66 895
Total 8553 63.1;2 1;;504
Notes:
1.HCD has stated to the City that vacant parcels must be entirely unimproved and separately subdivided parcels,
and Table 2-6 reflects this direction.However,the City believes that the following sites should also be considered
to be vacant:Site 01 (50 units)consists entirely of unimproved land,but has not been subdivided from the
improved part of the site.Site 07(33 units)consists of unimproved land and an abandoned,vacant structure.
Site AD2c(30 units)has utility lines on a portion of the site which have been deducted from net acreage,but
the parcel is otherwise entirely unimproved,and the utility lines would not prevent an owner from developing
the site for residential units. In the City's view,these sites should be considered vacant,adding 118 additional
units to the Unit Yield on vacant property,for a sub-total of 727 units on vacant sites,far above 50%of the unmet
RHNA need for the planning period.
2.Unit Yield anticipates that this site will be developed for mixed-use.
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-4
_ Sit p
�', ,...0 iTable C-3.Percenta e of VL/L Sites b °Site�T e .
Site Type #of Units %of Remaining Lower Income RHNA
Allocation.(1,141)
Vacant 609 53%
Non-vacant 895 78%
Total 1,504 132%
RHNA Allocation (including carryover)forVL/L Income Categories: 1,286
Units Constructed and Estimated ADUs: 145
Remaining RHNA Allocation for VL/L Income Categories: 1,141
, Table 0417
.Net`Acr'ea '`e and Unit'ieId o`n.Residentiall Z ned Sites
Site Site Name Zoning Net Unit Yield
Number Designation. Acreage (DU)
Vacant
02 Cannon Property(Piraeus) RR2 6.93 173
08a Rancho Santa Fe Sites(Gaffney/Goodsen) RR2 1.45 36
AD1 Sage Canyon R3 2.40 60
AD2a Baldwin&Sons Properties R3 2.98 74
AD2b Baldwin&Sons Properties R5 4.86 121
Subtotal 18.62 464
Non-vacant
01 Greek Church Parcel RR1 2.00 50
08b Rancho Santa Fe Parcels(Gaffney/Goodsen) RR2 4.57 113
AD2c Baldwin&Sons Properties R5 1.21 30
AD8 Vulcan&La Costa R3 (N101 SP) 2.00 50
AD9 Seacoast Church R11 1.41 35
AD11 Manchester Avenue West Sites R11 1.67 41
AD31 Meyer Proposal R3/R5 6.52 163
Subtotal 19.38 482
Total �. :' .� � r '4 `... ; 38.00 446;
Notes:
1.Unit Yield anticipates that this site will be developed for mixed-use.
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory: C-5
NET ACREAGE CALCULATIONS
Very Low/Low Income RHNA Candidate Sites
CALCULATION METHOD
The net acreage for each candidate site was calculated based on the gross acreage (for all parcels included
in the site) minus the acreage deemed partially or completely undevelopable based on existing steep
slopes and known environmental constraints. Environmental constraints were determined based on known
site information for the parcels where that information was available and other sources,such as the City's
Local Coastal Program and site observations. The site capacity was determined by applying a 25 du/ac
standard to the net acreage for each candidate site.
The following calculation methods apply to slope constraints (per the City of Encinitas Municipal Code for
purposes of calculating density):
• All land in 0-25%slope of natural grade is allowed to use 100%of acreage.
• All land in 25-40%slope of natural grade is allowed to use 50%of acreage.
• All land in 40%+slope of natural grade is allowed to use 0%of acreage.
All acreages shown on the following sheets include any applicable acreage deductions from the gross
acreage. The informational sheets include a note either stating that there were no known topographic or
environmental constraints or detailing the acreage removed from the gross acreage and the reasoning.
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY
As discussed in Appendix B,each site has been evaluated to ensure there is adequate access to water and
sewer connections. Each site is situated adjacent to a public street that has the appropriate water and sewer
mains and other infrastructure to service the candidate site.
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very.Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-6
DEFINITIONS
Vacant Parcel: HCD has stated to the City that vacant parcels must be unimproved.Sites containing
abandoned, non-habitable,or vacant structures or powerlines are considered to be non-vacant by HCD
unless the owner has applied for,and been issued,a demolition permit. Similarly,vacant portions of parcels
designated for housing development are considered by HCD to be non-vacant unless the vacant portions
of the site have been subdivided from the non-vacant portions.The designations of vacant and non-vacant
parcels in this Appendix C conform to the direction provided to the City by HCD.'
Non-Vacant Parcel: Non-vacant parcels are underutilized or developed parcels and contain existing
development or established uses. These may include temporary structures associated with an active use
(i.e.,agricultural greenhouses) or other uses currently operating on the site.
Mixed-use Site Capacity: For mixed-use sites within the Encinitas North 101 and Downtown Specific
Plan areas,capacity was calculated per Section 3.1.2.D of the5pecific Plan,which states a maximum lot
utilization of 90%and that residential uses shall not exceed 50 percent of the gross building floor area for
the development site. The capacity of other mixed-use sites was determined based on the area available for
housing development, largely determined by the owner.
Site Capacity:All parcels shown with fewer than 16 units are in common ownership with one or more
adjacent parcels or are likely to be consolidated with one or more adjacent parcels based on owner
representations. In these cases,the parcels are considered one site that can accommodate at least 16 units.
Owner-interest:Sites with"owner interest"listed in the description indicate that the City has been directly
contacted by the property owner and received an acknowledgement of their interest in writing,either by
email or by a formal letter.
NOTES:
'The City believes that vacant portions of parcels designated for housing development and sites containing only abandoned,
non-habitable,or vacant structures or powerlines should also be considered to be'vacant'because they contain no existing use
that prevents an owner from developing the site.
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-7
CANNON PROPERTY �
i - j e
[� 9 7 "i �.
(PIRAEUS) s ��� r 4�
SITE NUMBER 02 r 3
s
SITE DESCRIPTION b ��
This site is a vacant property at the corner of Piraeus
Street and Plato Place, both of which are 2-lane ,
local streets. The southern portion of the site is flat
t
due to previous grading,with the majority of the Yr
rest of the site sloping up towards a flat pad on the �� "f � m�, r �' �� °�
northeast corner.The owner has expressed interest -- _ k
r ®9tesSelec�d a ^�
in developing this site for residential uses.
SITE FEATURES
• Vacant, natural landscape
• Partially graded
• Some mature trees/vegetation on the northen
portion of the site
• Slight topography change
PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
There are no known physical constraints
to development due to steep slopes or
environmentally sensitive areas. Therefore,the
parcel's net acreage equals the full gross acreage.
APN(S)• 2541440100 PARCEL' SIZE r(AC�) 6.93/6.93
(Ownership) (CANNON MARIAT) (GROSS/NET)
SITE.STATUS Vacant MAXIMUM 30 DU/AC
DENSE
ADDRESS(ES)' Piraeus Street «MINIMUM 25 DU/AC
DENSITY
.--^,tea rear
'NEIGHBORHOOD Leucadia UNIT`CAPACITY 173
r
GENERAL PLAN Rural Residential 1.01-2.00 CONS,TR/,INTS '�� Slight Topography(less
LAND USE (RR2) than 25%slope,so no
ZONING _ RR2 !' deductions)
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory. C-4]
CANNON PROPERTY(PIREAUS) EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
fv
,
tt1 J£apxi5 ���J�ra���''7AfLr '�: r;,f. `,ter f .?r ,�u',,,,�., .•r'yo'�� `a
t! r:f��!�l rl��s tir1 ������ k*` •rt f' $ -�� ,f v,�yf�� I •► ,. � Z7' - ,+a�"°� _3
v {�1�5 L.C`a td r A+A i r+Sr�a��{C���1�;7r i {_�/� �J{i '��YL�f� a � - — -��� <tJ��l, � •` y� =;-.S� '$y ,r•
G.-v . i r?•.'f 4, r,:�' -r1''e t r�'.'. �r .f.'�2�� ytr _ # �, .-Yr 1 �r
r 1t�'a 4 (} r s a+ ! ♦ .• 7. 1� a.t - r, � r �".•v�r.+sXr '� ,
+ ��^�;'t'+ �*bra �y"✓� n� ,����+ss v�� i n.•+{ �':� � � A:;. '^. . �. .�xv��f� �;i d{ ,�: ,rr•�` `fit»
;�iis
uip1,.yrf'y.�kc+J" (�%,l�T���.�ll,ii�.YY,,*' F�'4Wt '4ro .` '�
8'fT�AhyYA i�r� � ,.Y'
t � is / 411 Yi � 11•: t ";,.r4 - t r �' "� r
_Si +• l y�" Cif G dX �aYiG t�s 47•S,>= 35G1i, 1Ca� 1�
��tfsts'�pY y rJV `' iii "f'�db`.i,c�� a 4.1 ITll
^..,,.,'s rt X�wt
r ii
� .�• 3'F' sr'�. {+• iiy;+t r F 1 `� Y e ;1 ajyi�s,� •�yy� x� ;. ' �•`.�' a'�'"•v't;h }'..e p, ,.
s ,G Y,r•+':r f `>, � ''QP � P fir.:x A, o„ '�i+.; fv - _ ✓ t r ✓� �5,+i�4 t;
f iat: ih, �� r + kr.'•g i.) ��-. '� . chH ��r � �. z • �. .�r,�.3
�d+"+ s"P'-{ tx ' ,sit�y �h aa. L� '+,t. d � mil'• .,6,.
FL�/i z i rrr� lp1 V
�R�,T,,r C,•'��r�.,.j�w.r"rr a"S"�rv`r�iY�f}f.T�'.�t 1 s}1t��7�a-"�,v_'t1!I,1!t L?4 4;Vi�1'a;fi'ya�e'..��7��J+�..�,5f=rn�';�+.f•%'r'4�`t„y�3i,�^{y•=�.�%J �,�+�4�'.�U3.A`.S,t�,j,�;,��;e:`mi'./ri•,l..T{�'ct a,ff3,'` a rin a7'
«.
�•� ,f�yr dt�7 7 c Fd"f`�e� f�,'`;l.Z'�;�'tY'r1;�Y�R �iC.� �{�`� �an"�� I t y 4'
�• � �'��� Y "�+.n++r �i�"��L,��..`s`�Y3a��::��.�ilni �s�• " {-�.'c_,..�___ _�____�._._....,n.:�:,_.__..__..4L_'`. -
_f /_ •� "� _;,rK ��Z:s ,�• �a a,A''�,5�s /� 6t'.,, S r�P cn`tr M,.,�.r'S—_.sic. .1{' t->(y�.r
i i/ �,��f.J/�'nW� `"'Y5.^. q i S�fT'Y�{�_ �� �•' Y`✓'Y+.� ,err j P,�,{ ,,,���1=t S�4�
l�rs]
/24it i. s
vl
t+ �a.ll v - ,`�eF3 ." . ,{ �4 t1 1} j
e+ 'f. ,•. �JG„�°�"'•r �6e i�•yy.::;`�-- rt' t *t'. Z!'. �.. i. �f tf ,,�. �1T''�
'+t� 'rw^L ,y'°�--x�— `-k .rte :^ 'c -3 0 ♦ Er z.,�! &i ,�r 6' I.Ii 7�T�'�, N' _' 1"��.r d G� +t yyw '^.-..ay"'�ya
Y}C.+k T• " "`�,'T-. c t v r s�}-t r li r.,fii+a�w r�y� }�•. s .rr //'^• a
t .r�,i^/• ",L^ "' ,.;,�_- A r u���� �r� �, i.�d✓.iY* "-.•i. r �kS���r
5,,..._ e v .a r � 'f x�e 6�'`. T- .e✓ Y;S,j
w,J.:. .Y may_<�.5.+.1 Y�•�....<�l� J��!*.��_+...L'"' - 'a..,w.:-wr".1
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-9
ENCINITAS BLVD &
QUAIL GARDENS SITES
SITE NUMBER 05
SITE DESCRIPTION '`
Parcel 2581111600 is a vacant parcel adjacent to a
6-lane arterial with bicycle lanes in both directions
and a raised concrete median. The property has an
access road and an existing medical office use to the
west. The site has a moderately steep slope from
the southern portion of the site to the northern
portion and contains existing walking paths and an
unpaved access road. and a raised concrete median. The site contains
vehicular access points from Encinitas Blvd and Quail
Parcel 2581304500 is a narrow vacant property Gardens Dr. The site contains a moderate slope from
adjacent to a 6-lane arterial with bicycle lanes in the western portion up to the eastern portion of the
each direction and a raised concrete median. The site.
site rises steeply from the street.
Parcel 2581303400 is landlocked by vacant parcels
Parcel 2581308100 is a vacant parcel adjacent to a and contains an older,vacant single-family residential
6-lane arterial with bicycle lanes in both directions structure and private access road. The landowner
has stated that the home is uninhabitable,and has
initiated the process to obtain demolition permits to
remove the vacant structure.
APN(S) 2581111600,2581304500, PARCEL SIZE(ACS) 2581111600-2.20/2.20
;(Ownership) 2581308100,2581303400 °(GROSS/NET) 2581 304500-0.38/0.23
(SHOWPROP DOWNEY LLC) 2581308100- 1.31/1.31
2581 303400- 1.02/1.02
Total:4.91/4.78
SITE STATUS Vacant BMAX IMUM 30 DU/AC
DENSITY
A6DRE55(ES) 696&550 Encinitas Blvd,Quail kIVIIN MUNI 25 DU/AC
Gardens Dr DENSITY
`NEIGHBORHOOD Old Encinitas fiff0 AP CITY j 119
GENERAL PLAN Office Professional (OP) CONSTRAINTS Steep topography on
LAN;.,i SE some portions. Acreage
ZONING OP reduced per City code.
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT-UPDATE-Very'Low and Low RHNA Sites-Inventory C- 10
The owner has expressed interest in developing all - -
of these parcels for residential uses. All parcels are a
under one common ownernship.
SITE FEATURES
• One vacant, 1-story single-family house
• Some manufactured slopes that are ' �4^
determined to not be a constraint on future
development
• Primarily vacant,natural land
• Flat,graded area on the eastern portion
PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
There are no known physical constraints '
to development due to steep slopes or
environmentally sensitive areas on the majority of K' "
the site. Therefore,the parcel size reflects the full
gross acreage for the following parcels:
• 2581111600
.L.
• 2581308100 ►
• 2581303400
Parcel 2581304500 contains 0.15 acres with slopes
greater than 40% (Not developable per City of
Encinitas Municipal Code). 0.15 acres was removed
from the overall gross site acreage to get the 4.78
acre parcel size shown in the table on the preceding
page.
CITY OF ENCINITAS 1.HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-11
LENCINITAS BLVD&QUAIL GARDENS PARCELS . EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
Za
tyta
•.t ��• .ate. {. � = � I� r ;ff � ' +�� • 7'`i�}'17°�"}F` x: � 1•.' 9
If. ' y 1 F t� "•'
/ ry .i-Tr�-�•Cr W,. 1?°'(ia`�' �•1"J-�JY^ly'?9 ,.
K�r/_ '- Y�__�. -. _ }. �~ •F� '4C -Ya1a. X13• _�_ _- -- _ _� __...0 f .+.___ -�__. .r_. __ {
Wo
i
r
'
*.^� •� via�
,„t•. s� �I
.. �� #�.. ti� ;?r,.X'�i3r�.{-,�` r`Y+1it• a r -+i`' ,r['.x r E �' n �c�
,t . �l C I�� ► 1 r,.J 2{ 7y aa±f amt �
6.. •.. Y�-+!+ it t�'`� I '8 ?t 16..l, tJ?ti�,`w}.t� +ry, t'r_� r4
?` WA's•` , 4
r '.r 9�� r `� S� -e-+"�'�'! 4.m �P" )}:-t•��"�'€• ty4� �°�tJ y k•} �"Y,�,.�. G. �%�'��• �" 0��ri7'�4,�: r �`�x�.
"'+...c {y S� f' y ,'t' f *rCJ�' Y T a yti�j •� ^Z ti t�, 'd� ;
�/` i iD �, M d. 7 r � 1/ ' a r � +kr ,)1 +�4ir nr••, )a+.'r-'?. �\— 7np ��n��3.£�q�lw�..i 7 ��'
t] + °' tl t t rtat a rp r�'�l► /.., 1 ff -G '� �+ '"�' z., Jf'Y.�i q�� Y':"tf,�.
�� ---•+�...,�_...#!r: I... _.y ly�,t :.g rFi��t�%:a..i�..�� 1'' �'�d.��. - :•?',�_._. ,r: °?t.. �� � Je`
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low, RHNA Sites Inventory C- 12
EXISTING SITE-CONDITIONS
Legend
- - ® >40%Slope
" Existing..:
„pvx7E; Structure-
ti
yes 5lecEed A'.
°t. 14ORTH.',
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE'-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory =C-13
q
RANCHO SANTA FE
v' /
PARCELS GAFFNEY/ x� gar. f
t r-7 >$
GOODSEN # ; s� � p a$bv
SITE NUMBER 08 (a,b) 08�
SITE DESCRIPTION r�' , '`� �:°� .
Q �.
Parcel 2592313200 is a vacant parcel adjacent to a r
2-lane arterial with bicycle lanes in each direction.
The site is surrounded to the north and west by
existing ow density in le-faml residential uses.
g Y g y
There is a moderate slope on the site rising from
the northeast portion of the site to the southern
portion. vacant parcel, and a strip commercial center. The site
contains existing mature vegetation.
Parcel 2592312800 is a developed parcel with
several 1-story residential structures. It contains a Parcel 2592313100 is a developed parcel with a single
private access road that connects to an adjacent 1-story residential structure and is landlocked by low
4-lane major arterial. The site contains existing density single-family residential uses and a vacant
mature vegetation. parcel. The site contains existing mature vegetation.
Parcel 2592313000 is a developed parcel with a Parcels 2592313200,2592312800,and 2592313000
single 2-story residential structure and is landlocked are under one common ownership. (Olivenhain Town
by low density single-family residential uses,a Center 5.6 L P)
SITE NUMBER 08a
APN(5) 2592313200 °PARCEL SIZE(AC) 1.75/1.45
(OLIVENHAIN TOWN CENTER
5.6 L P)
}-SITE STATUS Vacant MAXIMUM 30 DU/AC
DEN51-TAY
ADDRESSES) Rancho Santa Fe Dr �IDENSKTNY INIMUM 25 DU/AC
-:NEIGHBORHOOD Olivenhain UNIT�C`APACITY" 36
GENERALPLAN� Rural Residential 1.01-2.00 CONSTRAINTSi' Slight topography
'LANDU,SE (RR2)
ZONING RR2
CITY OF ENCINITAS (,HOUSING ELEMENTUPDATE-Very Low and.Low- ANNA Sites Inventory 'C-14
Parcel 2592313100 is under a separate ownership 2592313000 and 2592313100. Therefore,the
(Gaffney David R&Rica G Revocable Trust 04-11). parcel's net acreage equals the full gross acreage for
This parcel is landlocked by parcels with separate this parcel.
ownership but could be developed as part of a
larger project. The net acreage shown for Parcel 2592312800
reflects the following deductions from the gross
The owners have expressed interest in developing acreage:
this site(all parcels)for residential uses. 0.61 acres contain slopes between 25-40%
(developable at 50% per the City of Encinitas
SITE FEATURES Municipal Code)
• One vacant, natural parcel
• Moderate slopes on the vacant parcel The net acreage shown for Parcel 2592313200
• Approximately three residential structures reflects the following deductions from the gross
ranging from 1-2 stories and spread across acreage:
multiple parcels 0.59 acres contain slopes between 25-40%
• Existing mature trees and vegetation (developable at 50%per the City of Encinitas
• Paved access road Municipal Code)
PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION 0.60 acres (50%of the overall 1.20 acre reduction
There are no known physical constraints due to slopes)was removed from the overall gross
to development due to steep slopes or acreage to get the parcel size shown in the adjacent
environmentally sensitive areas on Parcels table.
SITE NUMBER 08b
N(5') 2592312800,2592313000 PA#RCEL SIZE AC) 259231 2800-3.88/3.57
(Ownership) One Owner for the above (GROSS/NETS) 259231 3000-0.54/0.54
parcels:(OLIVENHAIN TOWN 2592313100-0.46/0.46
CENTER 5.6 L P) Total:4.88/4.57
2592313100
(GAFFNEY DAVID R& RICA G
REVOCABLE TRUST 04-11)
SITE!STATUS Non-vacant MAXIMUM 30 DU/AC
DENSITY
ADDRESS ES) 2220 Encinitas Boulevard,2230 EMI IN MUM 25 DU/AC
Encinitas Boulevard,2228 ,DENSITY
g _ Encinitas Boulevard
NEIGHBORHOOD Olivenhain UNIT CAPACITiY 1113
G N RAL P.LpAN Rural Residential 1.01-2.000ONSTR N 5 • Multiple owners 02 ND4,USE (RR2) • Some landlocked parcels
.m
Slight topography
°ZONING RR2
CITY-OF ENCINITAS `HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE -Very Low and LowAHNA.Sites Inventory - C 15
RANCHO SANTA FE PARCELS (GAFFNEY/GOODSEN) EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
tj
Ac
---�--•:.ate v-- , ------- - - - -- ---
r •
t �.r•- ��t n `,}`GGGGGG����PP r4 y 1�� � ��i�.}�` ter;• � �j,,�� .
;ir. 'y41 P. � iii � y i��1't\ !�"}�t'f�i° •i 'j",`+
� r�T` � ° 1 i 'r� )�^y^L5fs��y�r�, j + ��'"r•�a° � 1� r
is _ f_ ��' -,< tw .. .� _ .•-i.' .:.r 7'k r{ s�'<``!``�,} � -
. l 4
.y i rf 4.e Lt
P N'
�•', r. - � � `fi°��-.arrf,'}f..;tom '�y'�'•ytx _ �'. ��� i _
F g�n . � ..�} T r Y �`,i, j" �� y } �} h i,.. < Y f ti 9 a�•`r t ::
• "4'+ � t° '��3 � � ..l{ , � v4J w y,„ �r'w ro` + tilt -i
{ r Y„r, z.y. f �tv a�'�r>. r _ s'.Ai}L t <. �� 1��r F tv'',•''�,t .�ir L. °`. '�'�' ."i,r� �� ".t
1�+ r-s,^.'Y�' 4�;. Ky,"r r.uwl2ktf r}h ):��� t l a,3! U }' �� Ai ; C' .`r i J r � �'�k�'Y <{.. � y r��•. i tv�Y� y.
=f 1 Y '_ Yt� sd{ !s.l w ! y t l ll ? yyr 1 .��«: -4 4.t' r%,i`, • :.
r r �;r '�r•N�..<i.�°^�1="4;'".h.+a 't P-�t#'-:..�_ -. ti'_ d(.v�t•.5' i a tY � �.� y., � � �`e't!5 tyy��"' r, '�T 7�'
�sl u.i✓37'e.�.. ..2 s t .�,.,'br }•jt t j�v yt ,Er"1 ,"�' y t;r ; � '° ^a. "a` �''�";.
l:l 4 P h j ip t i L/•( 1 '!�J` ��tiS �!� �'6 I"�b
�,.6'0'�....:k:_.r�� t..y.,. ,J..K'l _"r, rt:;�"1.: �Z:1L•:3;:4���'kA�i�v� ;.��a.�,ri.�•�`� .ff.' '. yR.�s,t�_,9. TTllv*�x.>�'� _ 't Vim=
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C- 16
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
V. �i _, _... .. . - �( Legend
p k ® 25-40% Slope
lu
r
.. f r.
L _
&ES S�BCBEd
! _
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-17'.
SAGE CANYON PARCEL ''f`,
k
SITE NUMBER AD1 f
vy
lei
SITE DESCRIPTION "
1?
The site is a vacant property surrounded by natural �< '
if ,
open space and adjacent to a four-lane major road >
with a striped center turn lane, bicycle lanes going
both directions,and parallel street parking along
the west side of the road. The parcel is currently '`
subject to a purchase and sale agreement. Based on
previous development plans,there are some known a
environmental constraints that shrink the gross
®SUesSelec�d - o'_ w COD
f:
buildable area. _ �•i kO0.iN
SITE FEATURES
• Existing mature trees and natural vegetation
• Some steep slopes adjacent to El Camino Real
• Previously graded,vacant area
• Private access point off a roundabout shared by
a single-family residential neighborhood
PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
Net acreage shown in the table under parcel size
was determined from the net buildable area based
on numerous studies of the topographic and
environmental constraints by the owner.
APN(S) Y 2620618500 Pilid�(AC 5.23/2.40
(Ow#nership} (PACIFIC CANYON LLC) EB)
SITE STATUS Vacant AMAX M M 30 DU/AC
DENSITY
kW RESS(ES) � Sage Canyon Drive MINIMUM 25 DU/AC
DENSITY
:.NEIGHBORHOOD New Encinitas UNITrCA�PACIT�Y 60
GENE ALAN Residential 2.01-3.00 (R3) CONSTRAINTS Steep Topography in
LAE some areas
1.- ONING R3 Environmentally sensitive
areas
• Existing drainage canal
CITY OF ENCINITAS�I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-'Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory- C-:18
SAGE CANYON PARCEL EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
RN\ '.,.j�,- I �. 1.. Rid•' —�_ -� _ -: �_ _�_,-
3 all
�f� �. � � � ' I .III ;' � ••„�',
.,,Ejti,$
:r ..T.,+.:-'i'iz-+# .�tt xP _ - �ti��ifvYf.��t�S'�� �'`2P. ,�. •'a$4a'” ) � �1�1' '�`'��.j>ti ',"°^` a v1 �-•-'.,t.r+..a i.� ,1�"'x' ..•-- `�°
rW �.e i,FyYJ
It
�'�•� �'�. .�� �4� f��7" ��.7�� �, � ,a j `l�,,4��� it ,i �.2�I��rt.a �" t' -^.r.''.
'� �5 r; ` r�`Y?", � ��^ ��� •i` I t r }.�`�f�.�t°"}� , _„ ..r}v���Ra}•jy�]f'yA' �_ric �.f.�•{r�j
•J....p.C��L�� _ t Yt_A d R..: N i� � , J �C��Y�{�,.�„� aJ� � ��`�<
"'t'"� •rif is �y � ���. `� C.�`^�i':--
1 .
T _
-
d
i
CITY OF ENCINITAS 'HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C- 19
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
Legend
25-40% Slope
_ ® >40%Slope
Env. Sensitive Areas
JR 390 MOG &D 16j- 00
J� -
f
: �t NWITH
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE.-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-20
BALDWIN & SONS - r
DD
PROPERTIES _
. '
A 2a f
SITE NUMBER AD2 (a,b,c)
St'
x:
SITE DESCRIPTION
Parcels 2570203600,2570203700,2581308000,
2581308600 are vacant parcels adjacent to Quail
Gardens Drive,a 2-lane arterial with bicycle lanes in
each direction and a center turning lane.
y
�� f
®SeesScleckd yPR,4aTC t , rCv 0':.i96 rm. 'L {psi ,� `
Parcels 2581309300,2581309400 are vacant parcels v�..= A.
surrounded by other vacant parcels under the same
ownership,single-family residential uses to the
east,and commercial uses to the south. The parcels Parcels 2581308200 and 2581309100 are non-vacant
are landlocked with no direct access to a street, parcels with a power line easement running along the
unless developed in conjunction with the adjacent northern portion of each parcel.
parcels as shown. The owner has expressed interest
in developing these parcels for residential uses All parcels associated with this site are under one
in conjunction with the parcels listed in AD2a, common ownership.(Quail Meadows Properties LLC)
AD2b,and AD2c,all of which are under the same The owner has expressed interest in developing sites
ownership. AD2a,AD2b,and AD2c for residential uses as part of
SITE NUMBER AD2a
APN(S) 2570203600,2570203700 �!PARCEMS,IZE(AC) 2570203600- 1.87/1.74
(Ownersh'ip) One Owner for all parcels: (GROSS/NETR) 2570203700- 1.27/1.24
(QUAIL MEADOWS Total:3.14/2.98
PROPERTIES LLC)
SITESTATUS Vacant x30 DU/AC
ADDRES.S(ES)� Mays Hollow Ln,225 Quail �A NIIVIUM 25 DU/AC
Gardens Dr ,
D,ENSITW.
NEIGHBORHOOD Old Encinitas I;UNl T�CAP_ACITY 74
i
G•ENERALfPLAN_ Residential 2.01-3.00 (133) CQNSTRAINTS None
LAND.•,USE R'
ZONING. ' R3
C
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE -Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory -21
one development. All parcels are under the same 50'riparian buffer requirement for off-site wetlands
ownership. that encroaches on Parcel 2570203600. Additionally,
the net acreage was reduced from Site AD2c to reflect
SITE FEATURES a power line easement running through those two
• Mature trees and vegetation parcels.
• Paved concrete pads
• Power lines overhead
PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
Net acreage shown in the table under parcel size
was determined based on numerous studies of the
topographic and environmental constraints and a
SITE NUMBER A1132b
APN(S) 2581308000,2581308600, PARCEL.SIZE(AC)}} 2581 308000- 1.00/1.00
a 2581309300,2581309400 � 2581 308600-2.24/2.24
One Owner for all parcels: 2581 309300-3.15/1.35
(QUAIL MEADOWS r 2581309400-0.27/0.27
PROPERTIES LLC) I Total:6.66/4.86
SITE STATUS "` Vacant MAXIMUM J 30 DU/AC
,b DENSITY r
ADDRESS(ES)"� ' 185, 195 Quail Gardens Drive, MINIMUM':.. `� 25 DU/AC
4 Encinitas Blvd DENSITY ,
NEIGHBORHOOD Old Encinitas UNIT CAPACITY', :°° 121
GENERAl'!PLAN fWr Residential 3.01-5.00 (R5) CONSTRAINTS Some landlocked parcels
LAIVD,USE .,
ZONING':° �r:y. R5 : ; w
SITE NUMBER AD2c
APN(S) 2581308200,2581309100 PARCEL SIZE(AC)-��; 2581308200- 1.28/0.88
k »
One Owner for all parcels: x 2581309100-0.51/0.33
(QUAIL MEADOWS Total: 1.79/1.21
PROPERTIES LLC)
SITE STATUS_ Non-Vacant MAXIMUM: 30 DU/AC
X DENSITY�.
ADDRESS(ES)�` t' Quail Gardens Drive, Mays MINIMUM: ' 25 DU/AC
r Hollow Lane DENSITY_,
NEIGHBORHOOD Old Encinitas UNIT:CAPACITY¢ . 30
GENERAL PLAN - Residential 3.01-5.00 (135) CONSTRAINTS` One landlocked parcel
{ r` � Utilit y LAND USE al y easement
ZONING R5
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory-
-. 1 r. i # �i,�shy i. `. -. �ti ..' Y Y.' �i'S•s �M�` r$c+�'7�f
,-r+' � �. - ate•-*i-F - •.� r, - � � i`«"*'a.a�.. ��r4 � ? .+"' r=e
T� v�el,."4 "� .. �"s,.,v .i }"` *'Mtn'";"� a.,..•+ s 13•�.�_T Y � S !�§J {.�,�
_ tF'Y � .•+tti +1p"��',iyti ,a� ) h �� .r'����7��+'�' N"^ .f^'�r�'�. -:fit' �l a_ e• K' •,:� T* �y
. z � +yy �,�' '�A^ ,�• q,� is�� *'' �•i�r'M" %!t"�{y,} •g",
s.
t.
^ .. ••U. � .. µ^ms'' `
y�'{i �' � `>r .55. � M - •��� :. �•_e'AY y �iti'°',,!t`. w .i r
1r�
,S.Y► 1 y47; �� 7},y ±, , h,.:.5�..�i •fir{,�,� .�._ a 2 * r7Y.�}S) .r_f'ia .��w_- a J �'tlY+,�.��y �,w+.+.
� r
BALDWIN &SONS PROPERTIES ' EXISTING-SITE CONDITIONS -
Legend r
} ® 25-40%Slope
>40% Slope
i • '�' ,' Env. Wetland Buffer
Power Line
25'
Easement
F '
a'
! y ,TORY,
771.a1T *D7' .
S►I�s 3le�ted , :,. :z _ a `
IMRIFH
CITY OF ENCINITAS] HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE'-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-24
GREEK CHURCH PARCEL
SITE NUMBER 01
SITE DESCRIPTION
R
This site is a portion of a property owned by the x
Greek Orthodox Church and part of a larger parcel 3
with existing multi-family residential uses and an ..
existing church. The owner has expressed interest ; Y
in developing the site for affordable senior housing.
Residents will not be required to be of any particularT { {
religious faith or have direct affiliation with the
Church. « .
®Sdes Selected
F raarx `
a...-_tom s'om..�_.�._.e..,.... ....�'......,.. u lz,S:.
SITE FEATURES
• Primarily vacant,open space
• Concrete pad
PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
There are no known physical constraints
to development due to steep slopes or
environmentally sensitive areas. Therefore,the
parcel's net acreage equals the full gross acreage.
Owner has indicated they are interested in
developing 2.00 acres of the 2.50 acre parcel.
APN(S)1 2611506400 PARCELEf(AC) 2.50/2.00
(Ownership) (STS CONSTANTINE&HELEN (GROSS/NET)
GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH)
SITE.STATUS Vacant MAXI M 30 DU/AC
�DEIVSIT;I(
ADDRESS(ES)'$'' 3459 Manchester Avenue ;MINIMUM 25 DU/AC
DENSITY
N Cardiff-by-the-Sea UNIT CAPACITY 50
�,
:GENERAL PLAN Rural Residential .51-1.00 (RR1) CONSTRAINTS None
tA-
NDUSE
Wklfkd RR1
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE -Very Low and Low RHNA.Sites Inventory
GREEK CHURCH PARCEL EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
WE
3
,t
�.' _f �.. ^n•'MC7�° ti. 47';f7`7: � �7i 4 �rR�r .1
' '� L. „ �7` �W .d®at' Yt�.'"u:rRiw•TL �t `uub t .r-. r a �'
y iT -a=. .'ireAly','. v4gr }.,, >:� .,E �`�R,c W -x '"� ,'+';. -5, M " ,ir•3�,-rv"¢.'L '_ .4 A'" "'t. �.1-t••'j '.
cr•b '— . .�+.v iJ`' r t,i k "!'°i3 M� `,�,Y 4+w`i �.ir,.,y. a y {y.� Y £. y „q ;,
-a.r a'.#�r�a.. ,'„r.,�. y,r+r•."$1�' r;!t�r.� '�v r Y��'"�I�. g/�Y+a� }� }�• 4 .�s �!x,S "" •'f �r•�`F� c k.r{'�`"%t«"a" 'rf'r�.
r Y{r', s AMT asr r.'JSy1�
�4ryp "}'nv
"""n'�
t .,r xt•�`i.F.r'.. + . i rs .b .Mi 1.*tY' C.,r, ! ` ja �f ,
i _ 'z-°�" •�' •�,ww _ 1.,���� i{..�.t +Y �t'.�a k1ry�'N y � ay y t��' r.��,1. `��k �,��X.�+,:,4°��q
1 - 1. _ .-- /. k .0 `' 1 n+ c ,4'��r yt rt,''k � c r• ; '`u�.i-.F�a.7 `i r ' 8.5�44}e`�si7�t95��,i 1' r+.r''°"
rr .fit,. � ♦- S_ A JS,� �} e' .� ,1='�' 1\�.�« ��� °I"�7. �,F.��,r�. ,k•,
y - ; f r ° �' ' raw,•t+r' .. r L �'' e'+r.` �•
xizr�c3e3
I `•s �..,- _ ,r �¢�Sti ���''''''TTT r 4'1�- 'f ,� �``i t x 'Y.+�' }. �'- ti r
tiAti���r ♦ 7' ;ra �s.4,Lyf ':'i , 1; a, r' �,yt' 'r--C i` r e-` i+ �. R,,,f,,�ai� ? .f:'*:Y+}/rc� •3. y.tare Sr'A.� Y � "
��� a tuv r x r'
s�`�'"i YbS.i,+.�t .` _: f ,+�',#,..� i r rs'y.tlt' r+•s'C� y u4'+1 r ra��(`i,>•?'G .fi'. r.t�r •j, ` o Y �. tT,:
�,75�--Ks?.1 "��r�,�•�" ;!- ��t> a^� �2��: *4l r t r y fv v3` 1-?`�l r �i�c S o- t< �1. R��� „�i¢'�•,.�;ya'�y�.'t ,a� �,'�
Y!a✓sue /,',l, r Y" x. � �5�,f�a.(s � Q at'S'x �F m Ft �y c. ,y�.y,4,�C 3 r r� .:r tirt �� ir� �, � y �! +Y„$3�titi> �I
�t-!�. `a+' C-i`� ..�-� r ', 2g���r'"':i � ?,i' 'Y r1�y,�>� a' r.,f� �� 7 r S�+K Y.t�.J�,fiib �.ar'i"a't?°'.. "•i!, -�>. �'�• �,'�
;•��� .;-1� e1�,,ai'+ 1� 9 1•�a �.-�. tr,0.•�yl+'ti TA't �si !�y aY+Lr +`sip i .„�}�,��•'`''d 1 `i .� �.�J .16y Y >. _:R
Mr Cy/jR�.+'.�'.r:f��.:L', rp.+l��td�1���a:'{��r-��.����la,:�����5•,a>r..-�v�tta�c'�� ...��rt'k..iai.,.l.,.�`.r'�MSxJ��+_.- �rF'��a��}���.. �:` •_ `t°�
'fir•s�" �"-"°S's ,. �y�+ '�-� � �-^�-- M t
_ n
. �"'�-.:`� �,� !•r:-r� ,r _ - i<,r Mc r. 3�1 ' .. .ram� -w. -�.._� -
AW
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-26
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
11 9 �i
lu .,
- _ � � uj t _ I - _ r HI 'f� �� t 2 '� 1.. It-•
1 1 • ; {
�j AFB rt'mEnt t xi`S't'i' i
Units Church
®ads 3lec( d i 1, v5 yW
� t y .0
�l0RTH
d _ g
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-27
ARMSTRONG PARCELS
a
A� f
SITE NUMBER 06 (a,b)
SITE DESCRIPTION
Parcel 2574702400 is a vacant property adjacent to a�
an 8-lane major arterial.The site is mostly flat due
to previous grading,with several existing retail uses
to the north and existing office uses to the south.
This property has a small area of existing wetland at
vegetation which has been deducted from the site
acreage calculation below and is explained further
in the Parcel Size Calculation section. �91esSdec�d Fares F
Parcel 2574702300 is a developed parcel with an 0.32 acres contain slopes between 25-40%
existing retail garden center, paved surface parking (developable at 50% per the City of Encinitas
lot,and private drive aisles. The site is adjacent to Municipal Code)
an 8-lane major arterial with bicycle lanes in each
direction and a raised concrete median. The net acreage shown for Parcel 2574702400 reflects
the following deductions from the gross acreage:
SITE FEATURES • 0.64 acres of existing wetlands. Calculation
• One vacant, unimproved parcel includes 50'riparian buffer.
• Small area of existing wetland vegetation on • 0.44'acres contain slopes between 25-40%
the vacant parcel (developable at 50% per the City of Encinitas
• Existing Armstrong retail garden center and Municipal Code)
surface parking lot in use
1.02 acres was removed from the overall gross
PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION acreage to get the parcel size shown in the adjacent
The net acreage shown for Parcel 2574702300 table.
reflects the following deductions from the gross
acreage:
SITE NUMBER 06a
APN(S)�, i'�I��' '1; 2574702400 PARCEL IZE� 1.92/1.06
;(;(w ne s hI' (WHITE BYRON F 2001 (GR`OSS/NET)
REVOCABLE TRUST 08-08-01)
'SITE STATUS Vacant MAXIMUM 30 DU/AC
DENSITY
ADDRESS(ES)" N El Camino Real IVIIN1 M 25 DU/AC
±DENSIT,I(
NEI O HOOD New Encinitas UNIT CA
PA 26
GEN AL PLAN General Commercial (GC) CONST INTS Small area of existing
LUSrtE wetland vegetation
ZONING< GC ...• Steep slopes
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-28
ARMSTRONG PARCELS EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
SITE NUMBER 06b
APN(S)' 2574702300 PARCEL SIZE (AC)' 1.32/1.16
(Ownership) (WHITE BYRON F 2001 (GROSS/NET)
REVOCABLE TRUST 08-08-01)
SITE STATUS Non-vacant MAXIMUM 30 DU/AC
DENSITY
ADDRESSES) 701 N El Camino Real MINIMUM 25 DU/AC
DENSITY
NEIGHBORHOOD New Encinitas UNIT CAPACITY 29
GENERAL PLAN General Commercial (GC) CONSTRAINTS• Steep slopes
LAND USE
ZONING GC
t't
rVy ir
a � 1f`lA-� laatil'�iL,
' '•S. 31 Prot'a�aZ'J � ! t r1Yv� +�.�+t*t ,� FS;t fi 9�b.d r i�" �., 1 .'y ,y;a .
&�� t ��3� �fY 1} +,��'yk�ryi�^��rl�fyh l .�b�)lS��, 1 1r 4• y!`iP+�� �a ti�+,�s "�Y r7��i:.7S�. ` 1 < I _
a 't�>;`'¢_„F.t£C�. �M ��' �K,�� � yi`•x �'"$-'��'�:Ut� it. t L 4t �-!ik 'Fif'1 .�" [*) `�r.•FiC Yj?+�•� r�!y':� �1' � j� `•` �, L
��ti� `y� ,� r. .t r � J. � y.3^-�t{ .t�gD+'•r,X,.'h':: ri>�`,}*. � (t�7 Gr t r,.1� .t:.
�•'l (,t ' - "d �, .:4N}; ` -J..�.•:'r•�'"' ZS"!s �r :t- 1 � p 'YY!
'71st ��7�ot r •- �{. �.� 1� K@.`L L � �s ��3T— ,ark' ?`� z' z.-
��j.`S,��E•
� ;r+ ` 4...:y- ,: .#'✓ ♦� a r.. -'.:�. yew-;.y„ '��.- .� �. -=
l ��., fir, -.•.a.�.�=K=�``"`'..+„'�-! _.-r--t'^• ,. -,-.•-�,�„"`
tis,r� q..
�+•'/
4 `• s�t °r :. 1 tH�4a
'ip.'•7`��+yr.���;'4 t'•. r _L�-k+.-�•S 1,�:s��� ..�r�t� t at'�.t v..f�}'fin"'?ti+�',r LIr.°�� '4
] ` NON.
a
y "" �t '■`r. .-. ' 1-•,d. } +�rl P�+4r!Y � ;'r :z'� :4: ,'M*' u. � ^`
'f Z! � _) ,"`'"�,�..-�. � r,..,s€ a.'„+ � � r'�3l�� Eft 'A y, 'r ".y°�'! � r• S^t 7S{+j a�t � 'tt!�� '€' `'R r:^ °;;!'s,.
'�L,���S��� 3Jw��M11�.nc3 "� ,s �"" _ rt +Y�, f f -- t- ;:1 f6sYl r���t •9
t vim �`'x -� -•r. �.".-" _- _.. .._ - - - .�"':'s�"">,•.�-::.�%:�.rep ..e.. �..
_ .. _- `'• .. tit'i7j,tY_}`� -^it ... :. r} .-..�
-- - -' - - - - -- � .. � _ _.._.. �.-�..�•5.�.�4ut..�vssr.`r 4..i6....._�'t?.{.�?eSSi41l-..,r� :S-"�iv r �
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-29
JACKEL PROPERTIES
SITE NUMBER 07
SITE DESCRIPTION
Parcel 2160412100 is a vacant property that sits
between existing commercial uses and attached
residential. The site has an approximately 55'wide
driveway adjacent to North Highway 101,a four-
lane arterial with bike lanes in each direction and a
center median. The site slopes gently up from the
1+100RlWT�
east to the west with a slope of less than 25 percent.
1 1r �J
Parcel 2160412000 is a non-vacant parcel adjacent
to a four-lane arterial with bike lanes in each
direction and a center median. The site contains a SITE FEATURES
vacant restaurant and a large surface parking lot • Partially vacant, natural parcel
with a single ingress/egress point. The owner states • Existing 1-story vacant restaurant with outdoor
that there is no existing lease and he does not plan patio
to re-let the building. • Large surface parking lot
• Moderate slope adjacent to Highway 10 (less
The owner has expressed interest in developing than 25%)
both of these sites for residential and commercial • Existing mature trees and vegetation
uses. Both parcels are under one common
ownership. (F C A Encinitas LLC) The planned PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
multimodal improvements on Highway 101 will not There are no known physical constraints to
impact the area of the site. development due to steep slopes or environmentally
sensitive areas. Therefore,the parcel's net acreage
equals the full gross acreage. However,the unit yield
has been reduced to reflect the owner's interest in
mixed use development.
APN(�S)''� 2160412000,2160412100 PARCESIZE(AG) 2160412000- 1.91/1.91
(Ownership) One Owner for all parcels: (GROSS/NETS) 2160412100- 1.06/1.06
(F C A ENCINITAS LLC) Total:2.97/2.97
SI�;E Non-vacant MAX UM 30 DU/AC
�. {DENSITY
ADDRESSES) 1950 HWY 101 MINIMUM 25 DU/AC
;DENSITWX
N Leucadia UNIT,APAC Y 33 (if developed at mixed-use
ratio)
VAMP. Visitor Serving Commercial CONSTRAINTS None.
ANDUSE. (VSC)
ZONING N-LVSC
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-30
JACKEL PROPERTIES EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
6y fit�,�•� i �� �J �'•`
.... - ��.. ter.. J: 4is_f -. -_ _. - •-__` ,� 43.��r �f,
f �
\" f�d�sx•ys
ttpy
�Y \
_ � 'is°'�i � rte. .•-r _ _ .. `�.�� _...-;.
..i"S
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-31
ECHTER PROPERTY
SITE NUMBER 09
1 �
SITE DESCRIPTION N Fy f 'YI
This site is a large parcel containing mostly ;
temporary greenhouse agricultural structures along '
with an existing single-family residential structure.
The site sits at the junction of a major 4-lane arterial
and a local 2-land road. The owner has expressed
interest in developing 250 residential units in
w ,
conjunction with a working agricultural practice.
The owner has completed conceptual renderings -�� -` ° fr ' ' `
p conce p ren g ®51tesSelected a° % r a 157
A 4 � •�c. . X00.1 .;
and a written description of potential future"Agri-
hood"housing and agricultural concept. See
attached letters. • Large service tanks
• Interior roads
The Agricultural Zone provisions of the Encinitas • Single-family residence in southwest corner
Ranch Specific Plan in which the site is located
encourage the continued agricultural use of PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
portions of the Specific Plan Area and the provision There are no known physical constraints to
of a favorable setting in which to continue development due to steep slopes or environmentally
agricultural operations.The"agri hood"concept sensitive areas.
proposed allows for the continued viability of an
agricultural business on the site. However, only 9.85 acres of the 21.49 gross acres
are designated for housing,with the remaining site
SITE FEATURES intended to remain in agricultural use as an'agrihood.
• Several buildings serving the agricultural This 9.85 is shown as the net acreage of developable
practice on-site area in the table below.
• Temporary covered structures and greenhouses
APILI 40 2546121200 PARCEL SIZE(ACS) 21.49/9.85
(Ownership) (R E L S INC) F(GROSS/NETy)
:SITE.STATUS Non-vacant MAXIMUM 30 DU/AC
DENSITI(
'AD RESS(ES) 1150 Quail Gardens Drive 'MINIM 25 DU/AC
'v,DE,NSITY
NEIGHBORHOOD Leucadia UNIT CAPACITY 246
PENE Specific Plan 3 (SP-3) CON RA I NT Owner has indicated
ND=USE interest in only
developing 250 units
Z('
ER-AG p g
'LANDVALUE $1,180,201TQTAL°NVAL'UE $1,736,450
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory: C-32
ECHTER PROPERTY EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
%N
--- --'- - j -z
i
� i f
x
21 ..�s-7 ;2..p.�t4 ril .r-ti o-,;, i •C 1�. - ,n„
NW
j' i3 I I V7
(, �`.I ii �• + �/, :i i 1 •' �c� 1.14. _
y
'�.•"--.._....�'�,�.--'mot' �_ _... - t y� �as ,�,t
Filt Ei
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-33
SUNSHINE GARDENS AI
PARCELS
SITE NUMBER 12 '
-;QUAIL PQINTE �
SITE DESCRIPTION +
. P
Parcel 2581309700 is an underutilized parcel
comprised primarily of a paved surface parking
lot and a variety of retail uses in both permanent
and temporary structures. The site is adjacent to
a 4-lane major arterial with bicycle lanes in each
direction and a paved center median. The site has r °y
been graded to be mostly flat with moderate slopes _._—. _ `et
directly adjacent to Encinitas Blvd.
SITE FEATURES
Parcel 2581309900 is an underutilized parcel • 1-story commercial building
comprised primarily of a single-story commercial • A variety of retail uses
building,a paved surface parking lot,and a variety • Several temporary agriculture and outdoor sales
of retail uses in both permanent and temporary related structures
structures. The site is at the intersection of a 4-lane • Large paved surface parking lot
major arterial and a 2-lane collector role. • Unpaved dirt areas
The owner has expressed interest in developing PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
these sites for residential uses. Both parcels There are no known physical constraints to
associated with this site are under one common development due to steep slopes or environmentally
ownership. (CAM-MAR Growers) sensitive areas. Therefore,the parcel's net acreage
equals the full gross acreage for this parcel.
APN(S)' � 2581309700,2581309800 `PARCE�LrSIZE(ABC) 2581 309700-2:04/2.04
.(Ownership) One Owner for all parcels: (GROSS/NET) 2581309800- 1.35/1.35
(CAM-MAR GROWERS) Total:3.39/3.39
SITESTAT Non-vacant M4,AMX IMUM 30 DU/AC
:DENSITY
ADDRESSES) 630 Encinitas Boulevard MINIMUM 25 DU/AC
DEN5ITY
NEIGHBORHOOD _ Old Encinitas UNIT,CA M CITY 84
GENERAL P AN Office Professional (OP) CONSTRAINTS None.112
L"ANDUSE'
ZONING, � OP
LAND VALUE $3,448,000 �,T L�VALUE W. $3,575,000
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-34
SUNSHINE GARDENS PARCELS EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
f •s' ' I
- `r4
i
.. e
-
�'r t 4
� ra
I
1
6 gi'tr• PRO-
P11 ^ r �
rx�r.,tom y1 °�1•., �' 2� ■ - ✓ 7 1�,1r1;4I,j�ii '_ ;
r {.,_,�- �y;}f ,� '��:.4+ r'r� � 1� ''d�► ' � t !�5��y,...�?��_ riNl e:ID.tg !'!l'+'.�x - �' 't!t
� � ����:.� .:,i;�r �e,i � ,.-r�k�,';• '7�T�"` 4�:. CIS + ..� � _` >; .�.> i '��+�'Q+.
.,y-� I "� J"i,'' - r .1 r--a ��q 1, .-••-'.�c"'�'_.`'.rr I '!i/�" �. lop
W� :�y,� 1 �^�y14•i SYak ti�4S° 1�.��_'� ,��t t 74-jZ�c
1�• r UI rC lP 3i �'/yr}• f 'ry# ,.e 4 J *u ,,,...r .*`•°tt-�r
°i � � yt'c{, F t l ,l s �,!�,r i +}?t„�11b3��1'�•v���1�J,`�jJ 4��i��r�(3�Air��, !7 w L ti..� >t.'�-mot'�°��#���1� x,'
'pn�"G+.f�. �7
ar �v- Ifun:
•� 7L t, r�1 T� t'3 a.`., t +rt 7� Y/ '}��'� t1f 1. t r fa-..,�a 3 T-rsy -_^ .. }k ti.,,y�, -�.c• -k'X
.kE"d'e.}sa �.#,``. �r � s.•�-. �'lrt �� i4.ti t/1 a.. r.9r.,_ v ��*1.-k.. a w °y a'�"�s..,,,;;.�
! \•b1�7I < <}y I4f. J a t
Mall r t t�.t y '.t n xi ., -�, r<t`;:•. �•,c' x a ``. i 3-'` :v.
y( a>: vc
.1d�, �fr
,r°YC4f,
� �=\. P 1.>'!�l''o'�d� 6.�-•t f� !r kA.is` ri Lr.? L r: rot+ "8}�`,,.#k - .r-r.ro'> il'.S Iwo. 1y �-.`�`+r:W„°""f` �k�d�x��?. }.�/ �r
�' *S �\ � .t r,°. ?i�l .43 f c!. rya x.'-.. �'u• y� �w H .rr `�"� r„�� s. 4 +-�
�frb/ N�',,ll,1,1�L1- �.f�i�`!3 •"�� } r• "j y v �}.{t�t Y. (, 'Z'K�i»"..};� tyy'�,t �t° Y.ev�64. yY''7'y, � ti� n �"
IJ � �.W,I ?Si 1 l S �Jy .✓T i'• 1 rY Y J-. y(� � y :.F
F. l�� r�t� � �`Ysta t r' xi+ >,. ha �'�� t wJ y '' "a'y+,k�•rt w'C x �+„ •,S i:.
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-35
VULCAN & LA :4
1
COSTA
SITE NUMBER AD8 f
SITE DESCRIPTION F
This site is a non-vacant parcel with existing
agricultural uses and several 1-story structures
related to agricultural sales. The property is
adjacent to N Vulcan Avenue,a two-lane local {
arterial. The majority of the site is occupied
by temporary agricultural structures such as "vim
greenhouses. The owner has expressed interest m
in developing this site for residential uses. The PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
low intensity of existing uses makes it a suitable There are no known physical constraints to
candidate for potential residential development. development due to steep slopes or environmentally
The owners has expressed interest in developing sensitive areas. Therefore,the parcel's net acreage
this site for residential uses. equals the full gross acreage for this parcel.
As set forth in many policies of the General Plan
the City favors maintaining agricultural uses in
the City yet does not require the continued use of
agricultural uses.
SITE FEATURES
• Greenhouse structures and frames
• 1-story structures related to agricultural uses
(sales/storage)
• Small paved parking lot
APN(5)'' 2160520100 PARCEL SIZEL(ACj 2.00/2.00
(Ownership) (RONHOLM CRAIG NICHOLS (GROSS/NET)
JOHN F)
SITEmSTATUS Non-vacant "MAXIMUM' 30 DU/AC
DENSITY
;ADDRESS(ES) 1967 N Vulcan Ave MINIM M 25 DU/AC
ida#I
'DENSITY
NEIGHBORHOOD Leucadia UNITCAPACITl( 50
GENE PL N Residential 2.01-3.00 (R3) �CONSTR N S Existing operational
LAND:,USE business
ZONING , Residential 3 (N101 SP)
'CITY OF.ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and.Low'RHNA,Sites Inventory C 36
VULCAN &LA COSTA EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
1 WW > f
ZL
- ,. y?+`iSESDHS ^,to' c rf'9"+v n t''• ..
ntk-.—11
-
¢ ,:+,.�,,..ya �\�3M` _:'gt`.� y Y. C�+'re 3 afi,4•t� � #� � 3 7 tbr,��r Z h i'��#3�a�,r�> f ���.�
r
ROSES
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C 37.
SEACOAST CHURCH
H4 r }
SITE NUMBER AD9
;µ4f`.
t S
SITE DESCRIPTION `\
.i -
Parcel 2582411000 contains four existing 1 and
2-story structures associated with the existing
church facility on-site. There are two paved parking r} s ';;r s'' i " n`; :::=j
lots and community outdoor landscaped areas. The " -'
parcel is bordered by Regal Road to the east,the 1-5
freeway to the southwest,and a mixture of office
and residential uses to the north.
The owner has expressed interest in developing
a portion of this parcel for residential uses. The PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
existing church facilities to remain have been
deducted when considering the net acreage for the The net acreage shown for Parcel 2582411000
site and parking the existing parking lots serving reflects the following deductions from the gross
the church facilities are shown as remaining in the acreage:
calculation in the table below. 3.04 acres contain existing development related
to a church facility that is to remain. This
SITE FEATURES development includes four buildings and two
• Four 1 and 2-story buildings associated with paved surface parking lots.
the Church use
• Two paved parking lots
• Two unimproved portions on the northwest
and south parts of the parcel
APN(S) ` ^ ` 2582411000 PARCELSIZE(ACx) 4.45/1.41
(OWNERSHIP) (SEACOAST COMMUNITY (GROSS/NET)
CHURCH)
SITESTATUS Non-vacant MAXIMUM' 30 DU/AC
DENSITY
rAl � E' 1050 Regal Road :MINIM M 25 DU/AC
'DENSIGHBORHOOD Old EncinitasUNIT,CAPACITY 35
• -��.:: Mme'"• � «=� .;y,�:,�:..
GENERALaP_LAN' Residential 8.01 -11.00 (R11) CONSTRAINTS None.
LANDAUSE
ZONING R11
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-38
SEACOAST -HURCH EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
yi Mci• �iif �:� ,,,ra' I
fa] �
G��
t'
hues JOWL-
�G s - �,l;p�.....�._.,,,. - !! .w I " ,-•mss}
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-39
MANCHESTER AVENUE
WEST SITES
SITE NUMBER AD11 `� r
f - � •' saw
SITE DESCRIPTION '`
Parcel 2612003700 contains one single-story ��sr
single-family residence. There is existing mature ,"s
vegetation on the parcel and a dirt roads "4 ;
Parcel 2612003800 is a vacant parcel that appears
to be graded or partially disturbed. There is little ®ar�Sdu.d
:a PoNb'°87tl,''
existing vegation on the parcel and a portion of a
dirt road. SITE FEATURES
• Two older 1-story single-family residences
Parcel 2612003900 contains one single-story single- • Vacant,open space
family residence. The parcel is accessed off of a dirt . Minimal existing mature vegetation
road. There is some existing mature vegetation on
the parcel. PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
There are no known physical constraints to
All three parcels are relatively flat and bordered to development due to steep slopes or environmentally
the east by an 1-5 freeway off-ramp,to the south by sensitive areas. Therefore,the parcel's net acreage
a one-story commercial development,and to the equals the full gross acreage for this parcel.
north and west by existing residential townhouses.
Access to the site is off a paved private road from
the south that connects to Manchester Avenue.
The owners have expressed interest in developing
these parcels for residential uses.
APN(S.) 2612003700,2612003800 *PARCEL SIZE+(AC) 2612003700:0.54/0.54
(OWNERSHIP) (MARANDINO FAMILYTRUST) (GROSS/NET) 2612003800:0.50/0.50
2612003900 ��' �' 2612003900:0.63/0.63
(MCCONNELL PETER S) Total: 1.67/1.67
SITES TAT TAT US IIIM Non-Vacant MAXIMUM 30 DU/AC
DENSIT,�Y
ADDRESS(ES)' 2951 Manchester Avenue =MINIMUM 25 DU/AC
¢DENSITY
NEIGHBORHOOD Cardiff-by-the-Sea 1. 41
GENE AL I?LANM Residential 11 (1-11 DU/AC) CONf$TR NIT Multiple owners
'LAN,D,xU;S E
ZONING, R-11
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-40
MANCHESTER AVENUE WEST SITES _ EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
AW
3A�r-o�,•�:�� r��' ,»-Y----,---��'1R��xis ,�•,,,� ��� u'
-
Aa "C' ate• - '1, -'� tilt } A yT� ..'
i �Sp ti� � yy fin'. i 1►' '..Y ,�- ....Y.,
r
e.
� !s
,1Ij i
,I
o-* e• r ^Y i �, �'�'` ,c. G�d'+.ia. ;;�� �,� S �s� � y= _�s�+��' '1J' t„"(�,�,r%
-, �' �� ;X_. � �n.n) a9+,+- 7� ��oe�rtl.- 1�r o. of-'•` - •�
'�1°�'�d"v1Y"°'K-.,..aaq,.it � .-warw�9•,��..o. :: �, c .n ...�
-'• VI
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-41
HARRISON PROPERTIES
SITE NUMBER AD14
A..
SITE DESCRIPTION
Parcel 2580521200 is a developed parcel containing
one older 2-story office building and a surface
parking lot.The property is adjacent to a 2-lane local
road in the downtown area.
Parcel 2580350700 is a developed parcel containing
one older 2-story ffice building,one older 2-story " ` " r " "•.
Y 9,
t t`•. P 7 i.tS S 1
residential structure,and a surface parking lot.The ® �5���d ,f � � • ,,,,_ ,�� �;
IXORTN;^
site slopes gently from the western portion up to
the eastern portion.
SITE FEATURES
• Existing commercial/office structures
PARCEL SIZE CALCULATION
There are no known physical constraints
to development due to steep slopes or
environmentally sensitive areas. Therefore,the
parcel's net acreage equals the full gross acreage.
APN(S) 2580521200 (HARRISON KEITH 'rtPARCEL SIZE(AC) 2580521200:0.65/0.65
(OWNERSHIP) B&SARA S HARRISON JAMES E ry(GRO55/,NET) 2580350700: 1.26/1.26
&SHARAN K) Total: 1.91/1.91
2580350700(HARRISON KEITH
B&SARA S HARRISON JAMES
r� `
E) .
SITE STATUS' ?' T` Non-Vacant �MAXIMUIVI 30 DU/AC
DENSITY
ADDRE55;(ES) 2580521200:364 2nd St MINIMUM 25 DU/AC
2580350700:371 2nd St DENSITY a
NEIGHBORHOOD Old Encinitas UNIT-CAPACITY 21 (if developed at mixed-use
ratio)
GENERAL PLAN DESP-VCM CONSTRAINTS Existing operational
w : ;s
LAND USE businesses
ZONINGS VCM-DESP Owner has expressed
interest in developing
mixed-use residential and
,. • commmercial
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-42
HARRISON PROPERTIES EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
pw
i
i
i 1
r..sa a
W I �ru a3 d i A y
A
Mill
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory C-43
MEYER PROPOSAL � P E � ' op
; .
SITE NUMBER AD31
4
SITE DESCRIPTION -
a
Parcels 2561711300 and 2561711400 are developed
y.. t. .''� to drOlNsErna�A 5'
parcels,each containing one older single-story �
residence.The properties are adjacent to the ;: � ,, ' "w' _ ' ezEE r✓m;l
1-5 Freeway to the west,agricultural uses to the
north and south,and a single-family residential
# w l t t
9 Y
subdivision to the east.
Uh10N -
Parcel 2561711500 is a developed parcel containing ~®g�5elecred (GNlon r �'� �
an outdoor storage area associated with agricultural -- '
uses.
Parcels 2561712000,2561712100,2561712400 are SITE FEATURES
developed parcels containing a flower growing • Two single-family residences
business and associated greenhouse and sales • Paved and unpaved parking areas
temporary structures • Agricultural facilities
• Temporary greenhouse structures
A representative of the property owners has
proposed development of these parcels.
APN(S 2561711300 (BEAZ ELEAZA& PARCEL SIZE.(AG) 2561711300:0.75/0.75
(OWNERSHIP) MANCILLA SANTA A B GARCIA- (GROSS/NET) 2561711400:0.63/0.63
GOMEZ FIDEL) 2561711500: 1.41/1.41
2561711400 (RODRIGUEZ 2561712000:0.60/0.60
JUANA) 2561712100:0.38/0.38
2561711500(REED KIRK C 2561712400:2.85/2.65
TRUST) ` h Total: 6.62/6.52
2561712100,2561712400, '
2561712000 (MALDONADO
DAVID&OLIVIA FAMILYTRUST)
SLTE STATUS Non-Vacant 'MAXIMUM' 30 DU/AC
i !i ? _
"DENSITY
ADDRESSES) ; 682 Clark Ave:2561711300 MINIMUM 25 DU/AC
672 Clark Ave: 2561711400 dENSITY
662 Clark Ave: 2561711500
r 4 556 Union St:2561712000,
x -
; 2561712100,2561712400
NEIGHBORHOOD Leucadia UNIT'CAPACITY' _ 163
GENERAE.PLAN Residential 3 (1-3 DU/AC) & CONST,RAINTS Existing agricultural uses
V�MN�
1ANDSUSE Residential 5 (1-5 DU/AC) on site
ZONING._ R-3 &R-5
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Very Low and Low RHNA Sites Inventory
.•- • • •, . 111
w mm r
IL
• • • �-r-" .e:,.w��a�..ice -' •~ .. a ��,�`:
- - •r, jam' i�, �� � � _'� ^�`���:-;--�'t.
} t a
"Now
•y, �i M y
�S�ty,��1�t� «� r`.+ � y- .r`(#�• f ri_ ryy.�� r a y t -�Ry«,• , y.'y'° ♦ •• •.
"N/T�•� p.`l� ray �. :S I, �'�' a.�•
I"�!r ♦ �"" w 'jC " , Y � y jr 44 fpm. _
3�i - ��'4 T "'~'�: "'t.`' �. ..y�`�!'` a��'�4 �:, �"♦r��sJyA.May.. II.. ♦ a k ���'- ' � �
'' * f°"r:-kr.` +�^ .�',r ,y • "lt'..-• �y/ P �4.. 1f r'�•r,`y'c`• +� •3,••+ • ,r
�7b ... ♦f h�t.. s. = iI16.1T` 'r e��.. �'f:•. . � a., .y' ±
lot
A( ,�,► 44jyT. .r- J,.. I � ,fir,�� ;}• � '`` s
ir
J}tT��C� �'�+4 k �r � .F `R �_.>;4 "4. �j, '� ♦1rr�' �j*'+F �T,• ,r ••4_. . •'y'`A 1 ti'
d��'-r`!�� � •' �� JIFF yt,,.aXi .iJ - 1� [ �,**r'zi,+�� i�,I��� r b (t+ +• 's. �,r+?�•� tL#
i"w"` a'rl , � •,w,. A< �' - - 7
ir
__ - - '•f,�•s1 y -I *,� �s f� �A �'� '1�'J •w� ~ y ��1M7�:r.- ��r
J'_
Lt
. �� .l .y.a�t.► .�-��� '�h �ly 134'ti,' ���' �
n � '�•�'�' `��+ �,l � - �?r �'"�a����i'�'>cs e_y-.fit+:#Sft«c.!:�-•o�{ .��r t�,i� Ito
y, � 1� � � t . ry4• t • ,�^ Y +irr r y� �YYt�•J.' ��
�• �'� �.'LT-\_i'� � .rt`�.y+'.N' ��,�a'.�.'''... ,r ���'�,t3 k4. r".�1.•'�lnN+_
' • INITILTAMITURO M1153,M10 A •
City of Encinitas —�
C.2 Moderate and Above Moderate Candidate Sites Inventory
Calculation of Unit Capacity.
The City of Encinitas is a generally "built out" community, with minimal available land for residential
development. The city understands the ability to accommodate future RHNA need is challenged by this
lack of available land for residential development. Therefore, future growth needs must be
accommodated through the recycling of current uses or the higher utilization of existing residential sites.
Encinitas has grown from its agricultural roots to a more modern,suburban community. As development
continues to change throughout the region and demand outpaces supply of housing, Encinitas has begun
to look at the reuse,recycling and intensification of land to accommodate anticipated future growth need.
Once a traditional commercial corridor, Pacific Coast Highway has begun to evolve as a unique coastal
urban infill opportunity area. The city's adoption of the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan and the North
Highway 101 Corridor Specific Plan provide the policy guidance for the transition to residential and mixed
use development along this Corridor.
For properties in Mixed Use zones, unit capacity has been calculated with an assumed mid-range density,
based on the assumption that a portion of the site may permit non-residential development.Therefore,
a midrange density of 15 du/ac has been assumed for calculation purposes. While site development
potential for residential can be much higher,and most projects have used state density bonuses to exceed
planned density, the city assumes a mid-range calculation as a conservative estimate of development
yield.
Process of Site Evaluation
The City conducted a review of sites that have recently converted to residential to accommodate
Moderate and Above Moderate Income Households. Within the Downtown, Highway 101 and adjacent
areas,there are constructed units or permits issued for 63 units in the Downtown and North Highway 101
areas. The 17 separate applications are for the demolition of and/or construction of residential units in
previous commercial properties. Through the adoption of the Specific Plans in these area,the intent is to
expand opportunities for residential and commercial activity in a more urban setting.
The following factors contribute to the evaluation of appropriate sites for moderate market-rate units:
1. Access to Coast Highway—sites with direct access to Coast Highway or directly adjacent it was
deemed the ideal location for infill development
2. Sites exhibiting adjacent changes or significant investment—these including sites adjacent to
major transportation facilities, new developments, mixed use development or major roadway
improvements or planned improvements.
3. Sites exhibiting substantial underutilization — these sites are long term commercial retail,
industrial or antiquated buildings that are deemed highly underutilized. These area typically
smaller sites. These sites include sites zoned R11 and R25. The R11 and R25 sites are prime
candidates of second units and subdivisions as they are substantially underutilized
4. Accessibility to Water, Sewer and Utilities—Adjacent infrastructure should be available and/or
already served on the site.
5. Sites exhibiting lot consolidation potential—site that are perceived with potential to consolidate
with adjacent parcels.
Appendix C-2013-2021 Housing Element C-46
4
City of Encinitas
The recycling or reuse of existing developed sites has been a very successful means to accommodate
growth in areas previously thought to be unavailable for growth. Table C-2 shows the listing of sites that
have transitioned from commercial to residential of mixed use during the planning period.
Table C-5:
Infill Development Examples in RHNA Planning Period
Address Acreage Units, Comments
960 COAST HIGHWAY 101 0.18 ac 4 Condo units over retail
687 COAST HIGHWAY 101 1.39 ac 47 Large scale mixed use development
674 COAST HIGHWAY 101 0.09 ac 1 Small lot infill residential over
commercial
686 COAST HIGHWAY 101 0.18 ac 1 Small lot infill residential over
commercial
402 SECOND STREET 0.11 ac 2 Consolidation of three small lots for
infill residential
207 C STREET 0.43 ac 1 Change from commercial to residential
over retail—Rhino Arts
97 COAST HIGHWAY 101 0.18 ac 4 Four building mixed use development
or commercial and residential
1202 COAST HIGHWAY 101 0.25 ac 3 Consolidation of four parcels into mixed
use live/work units.
Total 2.84 ac 63 units
Source:City of Encinitas Planning Department 2018
C-47 2013-2021 Housing Element -Appendix C
MAP OF MODERATE AND ABOVE MODERATE SITES
No
? OLIVE NHAIN
_�� 4 •ry. � -
1 _ NEVi _
ENCINITA 5
PI ENCINITA 5 +
t ea ,y CARDIFF-BY- I =y
THE-SEA
A ICI I �+1 i '•, -_nti ,! f9c;
lF:ancho
y r..
�:..,C�:. San1aF' '
Legend , ._ I:_:'i.:aca
QCity Boundary I�' .. :- "rl-�,•:,�tn•,
Neighborhood Boundaries
Above Btoderate Sites l+
ldoderate Mixed-Use Sites j -;,:r:•. r 0 0250.5` G
0 LIoderateResidential-Onl Sites I• Fo n_I `,°Mil-' NORTH
Y Lo- :,,.,,e
CITY OFENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE C-48
CALCULATION OF UNIT CAPACITY
The capacity of these sites was initially determined by multiplying the parcel size by the minimum or midrange density for that zoning
designation.
In mixed-use areas(Downtown and North 101 Specific Plan Areas),only sites large enough to accommodate at least four dwelling units
were included to identify those sites most likely to be redeveloped.The site capacity was then further reduced based on the likelihood of
redevelopment,as described in Appendix B.In particular,only 50 percent of the capacity of the sites in the DCM-2,D-VSC and D-OM Zones of
the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan,as well as the N-CM1,N-CM2,N-CM3,N-CRM1,and N-CRM2 Zones of the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan,
has been counted to recognize constraints posed by existing uses.Because redevelopment is most likely in the DCM-1 Zone,
75 percent of the capacity of the DCM-1 Zone has been counted.These deductions have resulted in a very conservative estimate of the
development potential of the mixed use area.
SELECTION OF SITES
The sites contained in this inventory of moderate and above-moderate income sites were previously presented to HCD as part of the Housing
Element placed on the ballot as Measure T.This Appendix C contains a selection of those sites that are most likely to be developed.Sites have
been removed that have already been developed,and those that could accommodate fewer than four units,in mixed use zones,or only one
unit,in residential zones.The City has relied on the detailed analysis contained in the Measure Element regarding the development potential of
these sites.
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY
As discussed in Appendix B,each site has been evaluated to ensure there is adequate access to water and sewer connections. Each site is
situated adjacent to a public street that has the appropriate water and sewer mains and other infrastructure to service the candidate site.
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE C-49
Moderate Income.5ites_Mlxed.Use
Minimumor
GP Land Parcel Maximum Midrange •Unit APN Address Community Use Zoning Ske(Aq Densit Density Capacity Dg Use) ParcelSpedficComments-
2580360900 335 S Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC D-CM1 0.81 n.a. 15 12 Commercial Existing commercial center with 1 and 2-story
structures with multiple tentants and large surface
parking lot._
2580361700 345 S Coast Highway 101 Q Old Encinitas GC D-CM7 033 na. 15 4 Commercial Multiple two-story commercial structures with
multiple tenants.
2580361800 345 S Coast Highway 10102 Old Encinitas GC D{Mt 0.47 na. 15 7 Commercial Parking associated with commercial uses on parcel
2580361800. _
2581901300 1031 S Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC D-CM1 0.82 na. 15 12 Commercial Older 1-5tory commercial building part of a larger
commercial centerwith adjacent surface parking.
Multiple tenants.
2581901400 967 S Coast Highway 101 8102 Old Encinitas GC D-CM1 0.88 n.a. 15 13 Commercial Older 1-story commercial building part ofa larger
commercial center with adjacent surface parking.
Multiple tenants.
2581901500 927 5 Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC D-CM1 1.01 na. 15 15 Commercial Multiple older 1 and 2-story commercial buildings
part ofa larger commercial center.Multiple
tenants.
2581901600 897 5 Coast Highway 101 F103 Old Encinitas GC D-CM1 0.92 n.a. 15 13 Commercial Older 1-story commercial building part of a larger
commercial center with adjacent surface parking.
_ Multiple tenants. _
2581901700 8515 Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC D-CM7 055 n.a. 15 8 Commercial Older 1-story commercial building part ofa larger
commercial centerwith adjacent surface parking.
Multiple tenants.
2581901800 765 S Coast Highway 101 106 Old Encinitas GC DCM1 099 na. 15 13 Commercial Older 1-storycommercial building part ofa larger
commercial center with adjacent surface parking.
Multiple tenants.
2581901900 745 S Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC D-CMl 0.9 na. 15 13 Commercial Older 1-story commercial building part ofa larger
commercial center with adjacent surface parking.
Multiple tenants.
2581902000 725,S Coast Highway 101 C Old Encinitas- GC D{M7 0.66 n.a. 15 15 9 Commercial Y - commercial office building.
2583120900 1057 S Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC D-CM1 0.63 n.a. 15 9 Commercial Multiple 1-story commercial office buildings and
used car sales lot with temporary structures.
2583121500 1205 5 Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC D-CM1 0.95 na. 15 14 Commercial Multiple small 7 and 2-story commercial buildings
and large surface parking lot.
2583121600 11055 Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC D-CMI 1.15 n.a. 15 17 Commercial Multiple renovated l and 2-story commercial
buildings and large surface parking lot. _
2583170500 1055 Second St Old Encinitas GC D-CM7 028 na. _15 4 _Commercial Existing surface,parking lot -
2583170800 10105 Coast Highway 101101 Old Encinitas GC D-CM1 1.02 n.a. 15 15 Commercial Large 2-story commercial/office/restaurant
structure with rear parking and multiple tenants.
2580850500 200 W D St Old Encinitas GC D-CM2 0.46 25 15 6 commercial' Multiple older 1-story commercial(converted
residential)structures and adjacent surface parking
lot.
2580862000 580 Second St Old Encinitas GC D-CM2 035 25 15 5 Commercial 2-story office building with surface lot and small 2-
_story residential structure.
2581631000 757 Second St Old Encinitas GC D-CM2 0.46 25 15 6 Commercial/0'Mce Older 2-story office building with surface parking
lot,singletenant.
2581641700 700 Second St C Old Encinitas GC D-CM2 034 25 15 5 Commercial/Office Older 2-story office building with surface parking
of...
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Moderate"Sites Inventory C-50�
Modeiatelncome SItesnMlxed.Use
Minimum or - -
GP Land Parcel Maximum Midrange Unit
APN Address Communi Use Zonin Size(AC) Denst Density Ca acl Description(Existing the Parcel Specific Comments
2581641900 750 Second St 101 Old Encinitas GC D{M2 059 25 15 8 Commercial/Office 1-story commercial/office structure with
underground parking and rear surface parking raw.`
2581821700 901 Second St Old Encinitas GC D-CM2 034 25 15 5 Recreation/Commercial 2-story residential/office mixed-use structures and
1-story autobody parking garage.
2582941100 1130 Second St Old Encinitas GC D-CM2 034 25 15 5 Commercial 2-story office structurewith adjacent surface
.parking lot.
2583161700 1133 Second St C Old Encinitas GC D-CM2 0.7 25 15 10 Commercial Older 2-story large office building with adjacent
surface parking lot.
2580521200 364 Second St Old Encinitas VSC D-VCM 0.67 na 15 10 Commercial/Office Existing 2-story office building and adjacent
parking row.
2542922300 1076 N Coast Highway 101 101 Leucadia GC N-CM1 0.73 25 15 10 Commercial Existing 2-story hotel structure with on-site surface
parking lot.
2543030300 1002 N Coast Highway 1015 Leucadia GC N{Ml 027 25 15 4 Commercial Existing 1-story buildings in a strip commercial
center.
2543242900 120 Leucadia Blvd Leucadia GC N{M7 0.4 25 15 6 Commercial Existing 1-story buildings In a small commercial
center.
2543243000 102 Leucadia Blvd Leucadia GC N{Ml 0.47 25 15 7 Commercial Existing 1-story buildings in a small commercial
center.
25601.41100 828 N Coast Highway 101 D Leucadia GC N-CM1 035 25 15 5 Commercial Existing 2-story building in a small commercial
center with limited parking.
2560303700 101 Leucadia Blvd Leucadia GC N{M1 0.37 25 15 5 Commercial Existing 1-story building in a small commercial
center. _
2560813600 542 N Coast Highway 101 B Leucadia GC N{M1 032 25 15 4 Commercial/Office Existing 1-story commercial building with rear
surface parking lot.
2560813700 560 N Coast Highway 1018 Leucadia GC N{Ml 037 25 15 5 Commercial/Office Existing l-story commercial center with rear
surface parking lot. -
2560822600 616 N Coast Highway 101 Leucadia GC N-CM1 034 25 15 5 Commercial Existing 2-story school building with small surface
parking lot.
2560831700 510 N Coast Highway 101 Leucadia GC N-CM1 033 25 15 4 Commercial Existing 2-story restaurant/commercial building
with small rear alley and surface parking lot.
2562721100 434 N Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC N{M1 027 25 15 4 Commercial Existing 1-story commercial buildings with surface
parking lot.
2562721400 466 N Coast Highway 1014 Old'Encinitas GC N-CMI 052 25 15 7 Commercial Existing l-story commercial center with surface
_ parking lot.
2562721500 410 N Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC N-CM7 053 25 15 7 Commercial Existing 2-story hotel with small surface parking lot
and ground level pool adjacent to the street.
2562910300 374 N Coast Highway 101 C Old Encinitas GC N-CM7 0.64 25 15 9 Commercial/Office Existing 1-story office building with adjacent
surface parking lot-
2563920300 204 N Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC N{M2 056 25 15 8 Commercial Existing 1-story automobile repair use buildings
with surface parking lot.
2563920400 161 Melrose AveD Old Encinitas GC N{M2 0.68 25 15 10 Commercial Existing-1--s—tor'y commercial ce_nterwith surface
parking lot.
2563920600 158 N Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC N-CM2 0.47 25 15 7 Commercial Older existing 1-story restaurant with adjacent
surface parking lot.
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE -Moderate Sites Inventory, ;A C-.511
Moderateincome SItes-MizeCd Use
Ilnlmum or
GP land .Parcel Maximum Midrange Unit
APN Address Communi Use Zonin Size(AC) Density Density Capacity Description(Existing Use) Parcel Specific Comments -
2563921000 140 Hwy 101 Old Encinitas GC N-CM2 0.55 25 15 8 Commercial Existing 1-story commercial building for auto sales
- and warehouse structures for auto repair with
_ surface parking lot. -
2563921100 186 N Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC N-CM2 0.42 25 15 6 Commercial Existing 2-story hotel with minimal ground level
parking.
2563921200 184 N Coast Highway 101 Old Encinitas GC N-CM2 05 25 15 7- Commercial Existing 1-story commercial buildings with surface
parking lot.
2580320800 140 N Coast Highway 101 C Old Encinitas GC N-CM2 0.51 25 15 7 Commercial Small 1-story commercial building on a large lot
with warehouse structures for auto repair and
surface parking.
2580341900 233 Second St Old Encinitas GC N-CM3 0.37 25 15 5 Commercial 3-story motel structure on a small parcel with steep
slopes and a surface parking lot.
2540545300__1528 N Coast Highway 101 Leucadia GC N-CRM7 0.49 25 15 7 Vacant Commercial Uses _ Vacant lot with temporary agricultural uses.
2540545500 1508 N CoastHighway 101 Leucadia GC N-CRM7 0.72 25 15 10 Commercial_ Multiple 1-story buildings relating to autobody
uses and existing parking/service lot.
2540546400 1542 N Coast Highway 101 Leucadia GC N-CRMI 0.67 25 15 10 Commercial Existing 1-story commercial uses and on-site
_ parking lot.
2540546600 1468 N Coast Highway 101 Leucadia GC N-CRMI 0.37 25 15 5 Commercial Existing 1-story commercial uses and on-site
parking Tot. _
2540547700 1444 N Coast Highway 101 Leucadia GC N-CRM7 0.83 25 15 12 Commercial Existing 2-story hotel structure with on-site surface
parking lot.
2542212300 1410 N Coast Highway 101 C Leucadia GC N-CRMl 0.69 25 15 10 Commercial Small lot with existing 1-story commercial uses and.
on-site parking lot _
2542421300 1114 N Coast Highway 101 1 Leucadia GC N-CRM7 0.49 25 15 7 Commercial Existing 1-story buildings in a strip commercial
center.
2560301900 775 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia GC N-CRM2 0.39 15 15 4 Commercial 2 small 1-story structures and a small surface
parking lot. -
2560302100 807 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia GC N-CRM2 0.81 15 15 9 Commercial Existing 1-story commercial buildings and a single-
family residence adjacent to the street.
2560302200 835 N Vulcan Ave B Leucadia GC N-CRM2 0.66 15 15 7 Commercial Existing 1-story commercial uses and on-site
parking lot. _.
2560303600 847 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia GC N-CRM2 0.74 15 15 8 Commercial Existing 1-story commercial uses and on-site
parking lot.
CITY OF,ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Moderate Sites Inventory C-52
Modeiate Income SIFesmResidentQ'Onl
Minimum or * -
.` GP,Land Parcel Maximum Midrange Unit
APN Address Community Use Zoning Size(AC) Density Density Capacity Lscriptlon(Existing Use) Parcel Specific Comments
2540211900_ 150 Grandview St Leucadia R11 R11 0.29 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family res( en
dce,large lot. _
2540402000 1472 Neptune Ave Leucadia 1171 1111 0.32 11 95 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot,beach adjacent.
2542100200 1448 Neptune Ave Leucadia - R11 R71 0.33 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot,beach adjacent.
2542100300 1444 Neptune Ave Leucadia R11 Fit 0.35 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-famlly residence,large lot,beach adjacent.
2542211800 1415 Coop St Leucadia R11 Rll 0.27 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot _
2542411400 1200 Neptune Ave Leucadia Fit R71 0.37 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot,beach adjacent.
2543020700 180 Jasper St Leucadia Fit Fit 03 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence.
2560120600 819 Neptune Ave Leucadia Fit Fit 0.31 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot.
2580232200 104-Fifth St Old Encinitas R71 R11 0.28 it 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence._
2582710400 1031 Regal Rd Old Encinitas Rl l R71 0.32 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence with rear u_nit.
2582735000 633 Melba Rd Old Encinitas R71 R71 0.33 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Duplex on large lot.
2604141400 471 Chesterfield Or Cardiff-by-the-Sea Fit R11 0.29 11 9.5 2 _Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot.
2606201500 1345 San Elijo Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea R7 l R11 0.27_ 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,narrow long lot.
2606203300 1388 Summit Ave _ Cardiff-by-the-Sea Fill R71 0.27 11 9.5 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,narrow long lot.
2606300600 15115an Elijo Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea fl71 R77 _ 0.29 11 9.5 2 _Single
-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot. _
2606300700 1525 San Elijo Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea Fill R71 _ 03 11 9.5 2 Single-Family.Residential _Single-family residence,large lot.
2540400100 1692 Neptune Ave Leucadia R11 R11 0.4 11 9.5- 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot,beach adjacent.
2540401300 1550 Neptune Ave Leucadia R11 R71 0.44 11 9.5 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot,beach adjacent.
2540402500 1488 Neptune Ave Leucadia R71 fill 0.41 11 9.5 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot,beach adjacent. .
2540546200 167 Edgeburt Or Leucadia R11 R11 0.36 11 9.5 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot
2542100100 1470 Neptune Ave Leucadia R71 RI I 0.31 17 9.5 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot,beach adjacent.
2542103200 1210 Neptune Ave Leucadia R11 Fill 0.34 11 95 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot,beach adjacent.
2542221300 132 W Jason St Leucadia R71 R71 0.41 11 9.5 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot. .
2560120800 168 Europa St Leucadia R71 1171 0.38 11 9.5 3 Single-Family Residential _ Single-family residence,large narrow lot.
2560121600 153 W Leucadia Blvd Leucadia R11 R11 0.35 11 9.5 3 Vacant Large vacant parcel adjacent to parcel 2560120800.
2560511800 652 Neptune Ave Leucadia R17 R17 0.39 11 9.5 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot,beach adjacent.
_2582740100 661 Melba Rd Old Encinitas R71 1111 0.44 11 _ 9.5 _ _ 3 Residential _ _ Single-family residence,large lot. .
2600830600 1535 Summit Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea R11 R71 0.41 11 9.5 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot.
2600831100 1605 Summit Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea 1111 R11 0.41 11 9.5 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot. _
2606202700 1452 Summit Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea R11 Fit 0.43 11 9.5 _ 3 Single-Family Residential _Single-family residence,large lot.
2606300300 14805ummit Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea R71 R71_ 0.45 11 9.5 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large-lot. _.
2540302200 159 Avocado St Leucadia R11 Fit 0.49 11 9.5 4 Single-Family Residential Vacant lot usedfor a community garden with
_ temporary structures.
2542100600 1410 Neptune Ave Leucadia Fit R71 0.46 11 9.5 4 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot,beach adjacent.
2603511300 225 Mozart Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea R11 R71 0.66 11 9.5 5 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,large lot.
CITY OF ENCINITAS I HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Moderate Sites Inventory C-33
Moderate Income Sitas_Re'sidenU61iOn1
Minimum or
GP Land Parcel Maximum 'Midrange Unit -
APN Address Community Use Zoning I' (Aq Density Density Capacity Description.(Existing Use) Parcel specific Comments -
2606200700 1310Summit Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea 1171 1171. _0.65 11 9.5 5 Single-Family Residential 2-storysingle-family home on a large lot.
2612003300 2959 Manchester Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea 1171 R11 0.65 11 9.5 5 Storage Yard 1-story commercial building with temporary
structures and as parking lot.
2560211800 788 Neptune Ave Leucadia 1171 1171 0.69 11 9.5 6 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence on a large lot adjacent to
the beach.
2582742500 1025 Arcadia Rd Old Encinitas 1111 R11 1.2 11 9.5 10 Single-Family Residential Two single-story detached houses on a large lot.
2561004100 625 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R15 N-R75 0.24 15 12 2 Industrial/Residential Single-story commercial office building and surface
parking lot. ,
2561004300 615 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R75 N-R15 0.22 15 12 2 Industrial/Residential Single-story commercial office building and surface
parking lot.
2560900600 571 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R15 N-R15 025 15 12 3 Industrial/Residential Single-story commercial office building and surface
parking lot.
2561000900 607 N Vulcan Ave B Leucadia R15 N-R15 0.36 15 12 4 Industrial/Residential Single-story commercial structure with auto repair
_ garages in rear.
2560900700 555 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R15 WR75 058 15 12 6 IndustrialAesidential Single-story commercial office building and surface
parking lot.
2560901700 577N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R15 WR15 1.09 15 12 13 Industrial/Residential Single-story commercial office uses with large
surface parking lot.
2581720100 906 Third St Old Encinitas R25 D-R25 0.11 25 20 2 Single-Family_Residential Single-family residence,small lot
2581720200 912Third St Old Encinitas _ _ R25 D-R25 0.11 25 20 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,small lot.
2581720500 926 Third St Old Encinitas R25 D-R25 0.12 25 20 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,small lot -
2581831400 917Third5t Old Encinitas R25 D-R25 0.12 25 20 2 Residential/Commercial Single-family residence,small lot
2581831600 225 W H St Old Encinitas R25 D-1125 0.12 25 20 2 Residential/Commercial Single-family residence,small lot
2582920900 1058 Third St Old Encinitas R25 D-R25 0.11 25 20 2 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence,small lot
2582921300 1026 Third St Old Encinitas R25 D-R25 0.11 25 20 2 Single_Family Residential _ Single-family residence,small loL
2582921500 1010 Third St Old Encinitas 1125 D-R25 0.11 25 20 2 Single-Family Residential Single-story single-family residence.
2542533400 1223 NVulcan Ave Leucadia _ R25 N-R20 0.15 25 _15 3 Single-Family Residential Single-family resicence,small lot.
2582941300 1111 Third St Old Encinitas R25 D-1125 0.23 25 20 4 Vacant Vacant besides an old standalone garage located on
the alley.
2542544800 1325 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R25 N-1120 0.2 25 15 4 Single-Family Residential 1-story single-family home with rear detached
_ garage.. _
2543243500 979 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R25 N-R20 0.21 25 15 4 Single-Family Residential 1-story single-family home with rear detached
garage.
2540531700 145 Sanford St Leucadia R25 WR20 0.26 25 15 5 Single-Family Residential__ Single-family residentwith rear garage/unit.
2542532700 1105 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R25 N-R20 0.25 25 15 5 Single-Family Residential Single story residence,small lot.
2542541100 1379 NVulcan Ave Leucadia R25 N-1120 0.25 25 15 5 _ Single-Family Residential Singlestory residence,small lot_ _
2542544100 1305 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R25 N-R20 0.27 25 15 5 Single-Family Residential Single-family home plus additional unit.
2543244600 1077 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R25 N-R20 029 25 15 5 Residential Two single-story detached houses on a small lot.
2543244700 1093 N Vulcan Ave D Leucadia R25 N-1120 0.29 25 15 5 Single-Family Residential Duplex on small lot.
2543245700 961 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R25 N-R20 0.28 25 15 5 Single-Family Residential Single story residence,small lot.
2543243300 951 N Vulcan Ave F Leucadia R25 N-R20 038 25 15 7 Residential Converted single-family residential structure for
commercial uses with rear parking lot
2542540900 1337 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R25 N-1120 0.42 25 15 8 Single-Family Residential Converted single-family residential structure for
commercialuses with rear parking lot.
2543244300 1063 N Vulcan Ave Leucadia R25 N-R20 0.41 25 15 8 Single-Family Residential 2-story duplex on a large lot.
CITY OFENCINITAS I HOUSINGELEMENTUP DATE-Moderate Sites Inventory C-54
Moderate Income Sites-ResidentialOnl e:. .:�. ,^_...., - .,+,,.aSx'+. ,�'a a �,., :.�,�`rr" _ ,.,_.57 .--+.•, '=
Minimum or °
OP Land - Parcel Maximum Midrange Unit
APN Address Communit Use I Zoning Size(AC) Density Density Capacl Description(Existing Use) ParcelSpecific Comments
2582941700 1136 Second St 5 Old Encinitas R25 D-R25 0.55 25 20 11 Commercial Parcel includes three vacant areas,three single-
family homes,and a 12 unit apartment complex
with an alley dividing the parcel.
CITY OF ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE -Moderate Sites Inventory C-55
Above Mudentf I nom me'sit
es
- Minlmumor -
GPLand Parcel Maximum Midrange Unit
APN Nddress Community Use Zoning Size I.I Den3iry Densi Ca acity Lsoription(E)hsting.Use) Parcel Sliecific Comments
2160a01000 SIALa Costa,AveA _ _ Leucadla, R3 _R3 4.99 _ 3 _ 2.5 _11 Nursery/Greenhouse _ Large agrlcultu{alfaimland._ ^_
2160304600 513La Costa Ave" Leucadia R3 R3 8.58 3 2.5 20 Nursery/Greenhouse _Largei grlcultural farmland.
2160530700 241 Andrew Ave Leucadla R3 R3 3A7 3 2.5. 7 Greenhouse/Single-Family Residential .Single storysliigiefamllyhome,greenhouses.
2542700700 695Normandy Rd Leucadia R3 R3 2.66 3 2.5 6 Nursery/Greenhouse Large parcelwllh greenhouse temporary
,fiuqureS, _
2543621400 782 Leucadla Blvd Leucadla `R3 R3 2.07 3 2.5 4 Nursery/Greenhouse Large parcel wllh greenhouse temporary
structures. _
2561712400 S56UNon5t Leucadia R3 R3 2.98 3 2.5 7 Greenhouse/Single-Family Residential Large parcel with agdaimltural uses and
temporary greenhouse structures
2563144800 351 UnlonSt Old Encinitas R3 R3 1.95• 3 2.5 :4 Vacant/Single-Famlly.Resldential Large parcel with agricrtcoltural usesand
_ temporary greenhouse itruclures _
2570203100 749Mays Hollow Ln Old Encinitas R3 R3 1.73 3 2.5 4 Vacant/Single-Family Residential Single-family resldertceonalarge lot
" _ _ _."
2583502800 7548onita DrA_ Old Encinitas R3 R3 29 3 2.5 5 Singte-Family Residential .Singlefamllyresidence on a large lot_
2593111000 690 Balour Dr Old Endnl tas R3 R3 1.87 3 2.5 4 Vacant. Large lot with two smallsingle-family detached
residences. _
2595607400 1083 Crest Dr New Endnitas R3 R3" 1.92 3 2.5 4 Single-Family Residential Multiple single-family residences and potential
commercial-structu re9.
2620621300 3615 Manchester Ave 011venhain R3 R3 2.17 3 2S S Single-Famlly Residential Largelotwith single story SFDwltha fewshed-like
_ _ structures. _
2620621400 1 935 SEICamino Real Olivenhain R3 R3. 2.85 3 2S" 6 Single-Far Residential Smallsingle-famlly residence on a large_lot.
2621602700 19205 El Camino Real New Encinitas R3 R3 2.09 3 2.5 5 Residential/Commerclal Two small single-family residence on a large lot.
2561711500 662(lark Ave Leucadia R5 RS 1.43 5 4 5 Residential Large triangle shiapedparoel with small buildings
_._ -andsuRaceparldnglot.
2581111700 141 Quail Dr Old Encinitas R5 R5 1.07 5 4 4 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence on a large lot. _
2620510960 S15Ceno St New Endnllas 115 R5 3A2. 5 4 12 Greenhouse/Single-Family Residential Largelotwith two singlefamllystruaures and
vacant land
2541020400 299 Hillcrest Dr Leucadia RS R8 0.84 8 6.S 5 Single-Family Residential Single story single-family home,some sheds,three
mobile-home/trailer buildings,one concrete
basketball half-court _
2541126100 'I X75 Hygela Ave Leucadia R8 R8- 0.63 8 6.5 4 SingleFamlly Residential In[etlor lot single story,singie:famlly home with
carria eunlL
2542624700_ 1095 Hygela Ave Leucadla R8 R8 1.69 8 6.5 10 Single-Famlly Residential _ _ Slrgle-famllyresidence on a large lot.
2543250500 1044 Hygela Ave Leucadla R8 R8 0.84 8 6.5 5 Single-Famlly Residential Large mostly emptylot with small single-family
'residence. _
2562513000 505 Hygela Ave Leucadia RB R8 0.69 8 6.5 4 5ingle-Famlly Residential Single-famllyresidence ona largeloL
2600835800 1500 FWbensteln Aye Cardiff-by the-Sea RB R8. 0.76 6 6.5 4 Single-Famlly Residential Single-family residence on a large,lot.
2601310200 735 Santa Fe Dr Cardiff-by-the-Sea R8 R8 1.2 8 6.5 7 Single-Famlly Residential Small commercial structure on a large,mostly
vacant lot wlth temporary parktrg_ -
2602730100 -1745 Ruber-6teln Dr Cardiff-by-the-Sea RB R8 0,87 8 6.5 _ 5 51ngle-Family Residential Singlefamlly'resldence on a large lot. _
2605730700 1005 Hurstdale Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea R8 R8 0.67 8 6.5 4 Single-Family Residential Single-family residence on a large lot.
2605731300 1974 Freda Lq, - Cardiff-by-the-Sea R8 R8 0.65 8 6.5 4 Single¢amlly Residential _ _ Single-family residence onalarge lo[,,
2592215700 IOSSRancho Santa Fe Rd Olivenhain R82 RR2 5.06 2 1.5 5 Residential Large vacant parcel across Rancho Santa Fe Road
one of the low-Income category design ted sites.
2640102700 1335 Desert Rose Way 011venhain RR2 RR2 7.99 2 1:5 - 7 Greenhouse/Single-Family Residential Vacant otwith temporary structures related to
agricultural/farming uses and the raising of '
a'Nmals. ,
CITY OF ENCINITAS I'HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE-Above Moderate Sites Inventory
City of Encinitas
C.3 Approved Units Without Building Permits
Table Cg6_: A roved�lJnits Vlfithout6_uildin P�er►ni_ts
<Single-family
Parcel.. Units (SFR)or
GP Lands Zonl Size Appro, income Multi-family
Case Address APN Use n (AC) ved Cate o (MFR)
13-056 825&837 Orpheus Ave 256-121-03-06 Residential 3 R3 1.88 . 4 Above SFR
Moderate
13-187 348 Fulvia,356 Fulvia, 257-331-24 Residential 3 R3 2.25 9 1-Very SFR
374 Fulvia,378 Fulvia, Low
386 Fulvia 8-Above
Moderate
13-241 1234 Orpheus Ave 254-382-04 Residential 133 9,600 1 Above Accessory
SF Moderate Unit
13-096 432 Sheffield 260-281-29 Residential 8 R8 6,263 1 Above SFR
SF Moderate_
14-172 710 Wood Dr 254-413-18-00 RR2 1.24 2 SFR
TPM/CDP
14-209 1386 Tennis Club Dr 262-080-17-00 Residential 3 R3 1.01 1 SFR
TPM/CDP
14-256 none 262-080-16-00 Residential R3 2.05 2 SFR
TPM/CDP _
14-007 1255 Berryman Cyn 262-080-36-00 Residential 3 R3 1.99 3 SFR
TPM/CDP _
1259 Berryman Cyn 262-080-37-00 Residential 3 R3 SFR
1267 Berryman Cyn 262-080-39-00 Residential 3 R3 SFR
14-069TPM 782 Leucadia Blvd 254-362- Residential 3. R3 3.09 13 1-Very 13 Lot
13/14/45 Low Subdivision
12-Above
Moderate
14-111 1412 Mackinnon 260-580-29-00 Residential 5 R5 1.25 8 1-Very 8 Lot
TM/DR Low Subdivision
7-Above
Moderate
1416 Mackinnon 260-580-28-00 Residential 5 R5 SFR
1420 Mackinnon 260-580-35 Residential 5 R5 SFR
1424 mackinnon 260-580-34 Residential 5 R5 SFR
1428 Mackinnon 260-580-33 Residential 5 R5 SFR
1432 Mackinnon 260-580-32 Residential 5 115 SFR
1436 mackinnon 260-580-31 Residential 5 R5 SFR
1440 mackinnon 260-580 30 Residential 5 R5 SFR
14-168 2176 glasgow av 260-412-19 Residential Rl l 0.34 4 Above 2 Twin
DR/PMW 11 Moderate Homes,1 SFR
2180 glasgow SFR 42
11 ._
2184 glasgow 260-412-19 Residential R11 SFR
2188 glasgow 260-412-17 - Residential R11 SFR
11 .
14-275 444 Neptune ave 256-282-21-00 Residential 8 R8 0.24 1 Above SFR
CDP/PMW Moderate
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 2.65. SFR
15-064 Avenue 48,49,53 1 Very Low _
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 Above SFR
15-06.4_ Avenue 48,49,53 1 Moderate
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential-5 R5 Above SFR
15-064 Avenue 48,49,53 1 Moderate'-
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 Above SFR
15-064 Avenue 48,49,53 1 Moderate
Appendix C-2013-2021 Housing Element C-57
City of Encinitas
Table C�6; A roved Units Without Buildin Permits
Single-family
Parcel Units (SFR)or
FGPULand Zonl Size Appro Income Multi-family
Case Address APN n _(AC)__ ved Category, (MFR)
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 Above SFR
15-064 Avenue 48,49,53 1 Moderate_
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 Above SFR
15-064 Avenue 48,49,53 1 Moderate_
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 Above SFR,
15-064 Avenue 48,49,53 1 Moderate
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 Above SFR
15-064 Avenue 48,49,53 1 Moderate
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 Above SFR
15-064 Avenue 48,49,53 1 Moderate
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 Above SFR
15-064 Avenue 48,49,53 1 Moderate_
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 Above SFR
15-064 Avenue 48,419,53 1 Moderate
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46, Residential 5 R5 Above SFR
15-064 Avenue 48,49,53 1 Moderate
710 and 712 Clark 256-122-45,46 Residential 5 R5 Above SFR
157064 Avenue 48,49,53 1_ _ Moderate__ _
Residential R3 7.08 Above SFR
15-133 1268 Berryman Canyon 260-080-34 1 Moderate_
Residential R3 Above SFR
15-133 1272 Berryman Canyon 260-080-35 2 Moderate
Residential R3 4.23 Above SFR
15-134 1441 Enclave Court 262-081-11 1 Moderate
Residential R3 Above SFR
15-179 1255 Berryman Canyon 260-080-36 2 Moderate
Residential R3 1.99 Above SFR
15-179 1259 Berryman Canyon 260-080-37 2 Moderate
Residential R3 Above SFR
15-179 1267 Berryman Canyon 262-080-39 2 Moderate
16-316 437 Fulvia St. 256-252-08-00 Residential 3 R3 22,50 2 Above SFR W/ADU
7 SF Moderate
16-281 472 Arroyo Dr. 256-420-55-00 Residential 3 R3 19,45 1 Above SFR -
7 SF Moderate
16-235 233/239 Fourth St 258-053-10-00 Residential R15 5,019 2 Above MFR
15 SF Moderate
16-211 710 Requeza St. 258-141-36-00 Residential 3 R3 4.60 13 1 Very Low SFR
12 Above
Moderate
16-184 1229 Rubenstein Av. 260-072-36-00 Residential 3 R3 14,37 2 Above SFR W/ADU
5 SF Moderate
16-164 2549/2551 261-145-16-00 Residential R11 8,062 1 Above SFR
Montgomery Av. 11 SF Moderate _
16-161 2464 Manchester Av. 261-103-27-00 Residential R11 5,007 1 Above SFR
11 SF Moderate
16-156 956/960/964/968 254-363-10-00 Residential R3 N/A 3 Above SFR
Urania Av. Moderate
16-120 1459 Bella Azul Ct. 216-122-48-00 Rural RR1 6.39 1 Above SFR
Residential 1 Moderate
16-62 100/104 Fifth St 258-023-21-00 Residential R11 16,05 1 Above SFR
11 3 SF Moderate
16-09 767 Munevar Rd. 260-141-09-00 Residential 8 R8 7,001 1 Above ADU
SF Moderate
184,185,188,189 Pacific 258-111-42,43, 60,98 Above
17-163 View Lane 44,&45 4S-F 4 Moderate SFR
8,27 Above
17-152 1569 Lorraine Drive 254-030-27 SF 1 Moderate ACCESSORY
535 Fourth St/545 5,029 Above
1.7-14.7_ Fourth St 258_-0.72_-20,19 SF 1 Moderate SFR
889 CHANNEL ISLAND 21,66 Above SFR/ACCESSO
17-121 DR 256-440-71 2 SF 2 Moderate RY
C-58 2013-2021 Housing Element -Appendix C
City of Encinitas -LJ °
Ta p roved Units=WithoutBuildM :Permits
Single-family
Parcel Units (SFR)or
GP Land Zonl Size Appro Income Multi-family
Case Address APN Use n (AC) _ ved Category (MFRj
4,996 Above
17-109 367 LIVERPOOL DR 260-404-26 SF 1 Moderate SFR
2329&2333 2,500 Above
17-081 NEWCASTLE AVE 261-053,06&07 SF 2 Moderate TWINHOME
17-016 630 OCEAN VIEW AVE 256-151-27 32,41 1 SFR(existing
7 SF SFR
converted to
accessory unit .
&one new
SFR being
built-only
counted new
SFR)
Appendix C-2013-2021 Housing Element -C-59
City of Encinitas -` '
CA Letters of Interest From Property Owners for Very Low and Low-Income
Candidate Sites
C-60 2013-2021 Housing Element -Appendix C
ATTACHMENT 7
Brandi Lewis
From: Bo Havlik <bhavlik @lee-associates.com>
Sent: Monday, November 27,2017 5:30 PM
To: Diane Langager
Cc: Bo Havlik; 'mrs.teresacannon @gmail.com'
Subject: CANNON PROPERTY: PIRAEUS/PLATO HOUSING ELEMENT SITE ANALYSIS
Attachments: ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT SITE ANALYSIS.pdf
Diane:
This letter is to advise you that the Cannon Family desires to have their property referenced above considered in the
Encinitas Housing Element Site Analysis for upzoning to 30 DU per the ongoing discussions with the City Planning
Department.
This site is shown in the Leucadia-Vacant portion of the Site Analysis planning and is also known as APN 254-144-01
comprising approximately 6.93 acres.
Thank you for your time last week explaining these efforts/directions by the City of Encinitas.
We shall stay in touch and continue to follow the planning.
Best regards,
Bo Havlik
Real Estate Consultant
Cannon Family Properties
CC: Harrington Cannon
Bo Havlik
Principal
Lee &Associates I North San Diego County
C 858.335.3637
D 760.448.2454
O 760.929.9700
bhavlik(cDlee-associates.com
LEE
Corporate ID 01096996 License ID 00799087
1900 Wright Place I Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
i
2017-12-16 Special Meeting Item 01 143 of 149 C-61
FORGIVENESS..... MAN'S GREATEST NEED AND GOD'S GREATEST DEED.
Confidentiality Notice:The information contained in this electronic e-mail and any accompanying attachment(s)is intended only for the use of the intended
recipient and may be confidential.If any reader of this communication is not the intended recipient,unauthorized use,disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited,
and may be unlawful.If you have received this communication in error,please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail,and delete the original message and
all copies from your system.Thank you.
2
2017-12-16 Special Meeting Item 01 144 of 149 c-62
'" .e :... N`J:. :. :v-c;agr<%:•s'•"+!` 61•i,`1,7'` eyv+ak3T. $.r t .t ,:••,{ s+V,y' t �`,;W£' a
1�}}1vZi, .... rt � .. ..�� •' 4.CIjA`� 'r Yak, ,.
'i` yr.wq.� N'�Yp. h,...- I,.r 7<H•5�1'°ER'"INti,:. {��x y,�t
.. t. .W�=t`R }S I ' i � � �� �"• Q�,� l�(��� "�}1"4&i.�1�'�R ,y�. i, ,_¢fit
�;„� a :.� •� ,c;��a L � �. «��-�: ,f�j��s'i Y4�+�C,a., �i�:rt•, �� ,�� Sa �;��' � �a,l ,�^ � '."�, ete' r�51
et k
� °e•.stmr�y}.c:,'r'ti ;�4y ,.�(;�'I,t� ;Of E�Clhlt�5 .tr�• .'t7'.a��f � � � `a;�' : F ,'x`� ,��`Y`�'�` "Mv _ �'+yfi •`�'''t
°fu, , Si9 t`4 e"'.'< lad7aa`P:7�k�13:>b`rh%d Sr'e3,15+tfr+6t}Cf.✓ciEYFS4tY.7r �l i ' ,t� Kjt.1Gq�.:}x .''"I:i'J�! •:fK x s �' `i4 •-..
.sl�'`�\. 4t.�- �: tyw�y,��{,..M. G ,! •`�'��,�. �'. '�i� u.:-•r'�4 a r� �"" �� �•�'t�+..
... . ...,��,}.. ... taw .,.,. - ,�°������,H017_SIN,G��lEMENTx SIT�S�NAL •SI��fiS s � '�'��" `� - �`,�� � �' ����•��� in,
5
.� a� ��,�� ,.� �cf c-�.�'�t�',t�y `�`���`t tFr�"�./ ��'r '�F �a•�'��i���'t i.� y� �y�y��'t, x w
i
i�.J,-,.,r�� �an;xa.!:.•..�'�A�r`4iwd��."'�it� v.�'.. tk�3,��_>`',<-.`�S�� 4.34ti�: ,.� ��"{ S'b; g�?.k�•+�x�x:,u. �'.,y.`'�'�i,�,at�' '�-c�`J�
x •4''F •4� ,. t'{iAy,,y��x I
� :Y
y fi i 'v€ O „Y"' e Y�Yh t5 j�hxfdgb
ON
NNW
v q u .• YF } "55b %.
� y� ttf .FSriq i
Mkt#�t�i .:+,F" •"S N ,vs;. ; c �- f •
r}.f �,�,5� yy,�kr + y�i'j j9ru4�64'" n,�rytt Aj !
,.'¢`'k•4�..
� � • • • � � �'� �. ut_ �i`�')t�•S��j,��h+��,,;�� �v,,�,,�{-r"+..ts���a"'.,�:. S -,� d r `-•• �
1 'wvx N n' .��`•�t?'�x r •�",uf'^' _ s ( �r� 'Svfk. rr '
1 • • � � � � � � "" xx�h��� !-,fa n aj�l••����P'��.,J� r� -x,Nr� C$"�yt.�5 h� 'v •1"J� o��k}E'�?.t*'�k•+�Arc,
3
sUttI At
• d to ��1��'u��r�.a x
��ad4,`%`'�5'��,�'"�t�^r•..•. 'C�c fi��'wtx�+ttir��M�3!u�P�n�'�A:�a�YtaSi"(m^5'�y$��r�� r'r jsrr �.L.�+e. �,yC�'� '
`v,a r H�tsb1"""' .'t" w'"� } •C`. t S f` i•: tea+ •ar {jro �Ex j�_.
rtk .d+o 1��,rX+�r •. � �1 Yr -t � v M w.n,�e�+-�.�eKItiTr
'C'� tta '• K r'�
c �t a 'U&•�r,`°L.` µ C49 1 t 1 ej
1
GEORGE KRIKORIAN
March 29, 2018
Ms.Diane S. Langager
Principal Planner
City of Encinitas
505 S. Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024
RE: Encinitas Blvd & Quail Gardens 4,92 AC vacant land, for Housing Element Review
Dear Diane,
We wanted to re-express our interest in moving forward with a multi-family residential
development immediately upon a successful rezone from Office Professional Zone to a
Residential Zone of R25-R30. Our interest is contingent upon the City of Encinitas finalizing
development standards that adequately support this level of density. Currently, we do not
believe that the current zoning limitations of two-stories and 30 foot height maximum will_
achieve this.
We would like to retain our right to develop under the current Office Professional Zone, as this
will be the direction we will pursue In the event that acceptable development standards cannot be
approved for the R25-R30 zone.
We believe this property should be moved to the "Vacant Land" category, as the current single
family dwelling is uninhabitable and has been effectively boarded up and vacant for years. If it
helps your cause,we will be willing to demolish the dwelling.
Please also be advised that we will plan on processing plans to develop the property soon
after a successful rezone to Residential.
Please feel free to call me if you would like to set up a meeting to discuss this further or need
further clarification regarding our intentions.
Best regards,
George Krikorian
2275 W. 190th Street,Suite 201 Torrance, CA 90504 C-64
Ph:310.856.1270 www.kptmovies.com Fax:310.856.1299
act I 0 A- HOA-J t-�-4
November 8,2017
City of Encinitas
Attention: Planning Department
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024-3633
Re: Housing Element Update 2017 -APN's (259-231-28, 30,31 &32)
Dear Mayor and Council:
We are the owners of approximately 6.59 acres of land with the potential for 198
affordable senior citizen apartments built if the property is zoned consistent with the City's
2016 Housing Element Update. This property was analyzed by Staff based on extensive
criteria as having the qualities necessary for it to be placed on the Environmentally
Superior Map that was approved by the City Council last year.
These properties are contiguous,have all utilities to site,have gentle topography allowing
maximum development,are mostly vacant (currently with only three homes over forty
years old on 6.63 acres), are adjacent to commercial property,within a short walk to
shopping,restaurants,mass transit and a pharmacy. Equally important is that these
properties have access for ingress and egress to both Encinitas Blvd and Rancho Santa Fe
Road thus minimizing traffic impacts on either of the Major Regional Collector Roads.
This letter is intended to clarify the record provided by City Staff and its consultants at the
recent City Council Housing Element Subcommittee hearings. Our properties have the
street addresses of 2220,2228,and 2230 Encinitas Blvd. These properties should be
classified as either"Almost vacant" or at the very least"Underutilized".
The County's tax assessor has determined that the land value comprises about 75% of the
total property value clearly demonstrating that the property is mostly vacant. The Tax
Assessor has determined that other properties identified in the Kimley Horn reports as
"Almost vacant"have land value percentages as low as 19.76%and some of the properties
identified as "Underutilized" have land value percentages of 77%and 85%. Clearly,the
properties referenced herein should be included in the "Almost vacant" category.
The report prepared by Goldfarb Lipman,a consultant to the City,dated September 21,
2017 on page 4 that the City would have an advantage if it could rezone properties to meet
"Fifty percent of the City's lower income RHNA" or 643 units. The document went on the
j state"Even with the most generous interpretation of site capacity ..."vacant" sites
designated for lower income housing can accommodate only 525 units. It will therefore be
C-65
City of Encinitas
Page 2 of 3
November 8, 2017
presumed that the existing uses on these sites impede additional residential development.
To overcome this presumption,HCD will likely require evidence such as letter from owners
showing an intent to redevelop the site..." This letter is just such a letter and More
Importantly,the inclusion of these properties (excluding the one already included in the
City's calculations) an additional 148 units can be constructed creating 673 housing units
on"Vacant"and"Almost Vacant" sites and with letters from property owners showing
intent,this letter. As a result,with just this one correction to the City's analysis the City will
exceed the 50%threshold of 643 units by 5%.
To confirm, per the above and as we have represented to City Staff many times in the past,
we have an agreement to develop our properties together and are focusing on the
construction of an apartment community for Senior Citizens. Providing our Senior Citizens
a classy place to retire with dignity,amenities and services is good for the Encinitas
Community in many ways, including:a) Reduces the demand on City Services; b) Provides
affordable housing to our longest residents; c)Allows our Senior Citizens and
Grandparents to remain in their community with their loved ones and support network as
they need us most; d) Provides more local affordable housing when the older homes
vacated become available to new families,and e) Satisfies the laws requiring the provision
of housing built at thirty homes per acre.
There is another issue to clear up. The Kimley Horn analysis of various sites for
development presented to the Subcommittee on October 16th on page 38,attached,states
that our sites have"Steep Topography" constraints. This is not accurate. In fact,
topography was analyzed by the City in the adopted 2016 HEU EIR Vialble Housing Site
ALT-4 stating"Some 10-25%slopes in sections of the property with 20%to 40%in
others",attached. In fact,only about 10% of the property exceeds 25% in slope. The EIR
also determined that slope was not factor that would eliminate sites from consideration
even if it was extensive,which again it is not
Please correct this erroneous representation.
Most importantly,the EIR included our property on the Environmentally Superior
Alternative because"it focuses the change in land use to only one of the"four corners"of
Olivenhain and supports the viability of the adjacent new mixed use site, 0-3",which are
the commercial properties between our property and Encinitas Blvd.
Please accept this letter as confirmation that we, the owners of this property,will
redevelop the property immediately upon approval of the zoning necessary for such new
community and that such project will have a minimal impact on views as determined by the
Certified Environmental Impact Report prepared and approved by the City Council in 2016.
Based upon this letter,the City and HCD must agree that these sites:a) are "Almost
Vacant";b) Have minimal slope impacts resulting in the property having a excellent
development potential; and c) Have a realistic and demonstrated potential for
redevelopment during the planning period for this Housing Element Update. Lastly,these
C-66
City of Encinitas
Page 3 of 3
November 8, 2017
properties remain the"Least Environmentally Impactful" alternative for new housing in the
City and allow for a balance of housing throughout the City's five Communities.
Sincerely,
avid R. Gaffney
Randy Goodson
C-67
gold fa rb 1300 Cloy Street,Eleventh Floor
l i p m a n Oakland,California 9.612
attorneys 510836-6336
M David Kroot
Lynn Hutchins
Koren M.Tiedemonn
Thomas H.Webber
Dionne Jackson McLean September 21,2017
Michelle D.Brewer
Jennifer K.Bell
Robert C.Mills
Isobel L.Brown
Jomes T.Diamond,Jr. To
Margaret F-Jung Encinitas City Council Housing Element Subcommittee
Heother.l.Gould From
William F.DiCamillo
Amy DeVcudreuil Barbara E.Kautz
Barbaro E. Kautz RE
Erica Williams Orchortan
IMPACT OF STATE LEGISLATION ON ENCINITAS HOUSING ELEMENT
Luis A.Rodriguez
Rafael Yoqui6n
Celia W.Lee In this year's session of the California Legislature, a package of fifteen bills related to .
Dolores Bastion Dalton housing were passed and sent to Governor Jerry Brown for signature.The Governor has
Joshua J.Mason stated publicly that he will sign all fifteen bills. Two of the bills (AB 1397 and AB 879)
L.Katrine Shelton directly affect the contents of local housing elements. A third bill (SB 166) may affect
Eric S.Phillips how many `surplus' sites the City of Encinitas wishes to include in its Housing
Elizabelh Klueck Element.
Daniel S.Maroon
Justin D.Bigelow The bills will become effective January 1,2018.The housing element requirements will
then apply to Encinitas because the City's Housing Element has still not been adopted;
Nahol Homidi Adler other San Diego County cities must comply when they update their elements in 2020.
Given the need for HCD review and the changes needed in the City's Element even
under current law, the City cannot realistically adopt a Housing Element and place it on
the ballot before January 1.
Son Francisco The major substantive changes will:
415 788-6336
• Make it more difficult to designate non-vacant sites as housing sites; and
Los Angeles
213 627-6336 . Require more justification for the number of units shown as being
Son Diego accommodated on each site.
619 239-6336
Goldfarb&Lipman LLP Because the majority of the sites shown for upzoning in the Measure T Housing
Element were non-vacant sites, the City will likely need to designate additional vacant
1849\05\22111123.1
C-68
September 21, 2017
Page 2
sites for upzoning. Some of the non-vacant sites previously proposed for upzoning may
also not be able to meet the new requirements.
This memo divides the new housing element requirements into: (1) substantive
requirements related to designating adequate sites, and (2) additional required analysis.
A copy of the bills showing the amendments is attached.
A. New Adequate Sites Requirements.
Background. Each city in California is required to identify enough suitable housing
sites to meet its fair share of the region's housing need, which is quantified as the
RHNA_ (Gov't Code §65583(c).1) The RHNA is separated into an allocation for very
low and low income housing, moderate income housing, and above moderate-income
housing.The City's RHNA for the 2013-202I Housing Element is as follows:
Income Category RHNA(Housing Units
Very Low and Low 11286*
Moderate 413
Above Moderate 907
*Includes 253-unit carryover from 1998-2005 when City did not adopt a Housing Element.
The City's Housing Element must designate specific sites that can meet its RHNA in
each of the three income categories: very low and low; moderate; and above moderate.
(§ 65583.2.) In Encinitas, sites suitable for very low or low income housing must be
zoned to allow at least 30 units per acre, unless the City can demonstrate that sites
zoned at lower density are suitable or that affordable units have actually been
constructed. (§§65583.2(c)(3)(A), (c)(3)(B)(iv).).
Measure T Sites. The City's existing zoning can accommodate its share of moderate-
income and above moderate-income housing. Measure T proposed to provide sites
suitable for lower income housing as follows:
Lower Income RHNA 1,286 Units
New Construction 47*
Accessory Dwelling Units ADUs 146**
Rezoned Sites 30 units/acre) 1,987
Total Units Accommodated 2,180 Units
Excess Units "Buffer" 894 Units
*Lower income units constructed or approved through 12/31/12.
**Based on 271 new ADUs and 25 legally converted ADUs in 8-year planning period, 296
total;half assumed to be affordable to lower income households.
Almost all of the 200+ sites designated by Measure T to be rezoned to be suitable for
lower income housing were non-vacant sites. In field work, Kimley-Horn identified
'All future references are to the Government Code unless otherwise stated.
i
1949105t2211123.1
C-69
i
September 21,2017
Page 4
Previously the City was required to justify the use of non-vacant sites by considering
the extent to which existing uses might be an impediment to residential development,
development trends, market conditions, and regulatory incentives. The City must now
additionally analyze:
• The City's past experience with converting existing uses to higher densities:
• Current market demand for the existing use;and
• Any leases or other contracts that would perpetuate the existing use or prevent
redevelopment for additional residential development. (Proposed
§65583.2(g)(1).)
This will require substantial additional analysis of all non-vacant sites, at all income
levels.
Additionally, if the City is relying on non-vacant sites to accommodate 50 percent or
more of its housing need for lower income households, an "existing use shall be
pres:mted to impede additional residential development, absent findings based on
substantial evidence that the use is likely to be discontinued during the planning
period."(Proposed § 65583.2(8)(2).)
Fifty percent of the City's lower income RHNA equals 643 units. Even with the most
4 L generous interpretation of site capacity and "vacant," vacant sites designated for lower
income housing can accommodate only 525 units. It will therefore be presumed that the
1 existing uses on these sites impede additional residential development. To overcome
this presumption, HCD will likely require evidence such as letters from owners showing
an intent to redevelop the site; abandonment of use and a site for sale;etc.
It is our understanding that owners of many of the non-vacant sites are not particularly
interested in residential development. If this is correct, it would be prudent for the City
to ensure that vacant sites can accommodate at least half the lower income housing
need. Even without this additional presumption, it may be difficult for the City to show
that some non-vacant sites designated in Measure T are likely to be redeveloped.
Additional Analysis of Site Capacity. For each site shown as suitable for housing the
City's Housing Element must show the `capacity' of the site: how many units can
actually be built on the site and at what income level. The units shown within each
income category are totaled to demonstrate that the sites designated can accommodate
the City's RHNA.
The determination of site capacity is a two-step process:
• If there is a minimum density for the site, HCD must accept it; or, the City can
demonstrate the capacity of the site(§65583.2(c)(1)).
184M5122 11123.1
C-70
September 21,2017
Page 5
• Then, the City must adjust (i.e., reduce) the number of units based on land use
controls and requirements for site improvements. (§ 65583.2(c)(2).) AB 1397
also requires `adjustment' for.
o `Realistic capacity:'
o Densities of approved projects at a similar affordability level;and
o Availability of utilities. (Proposed §65583.2(c)(2).)
Kimley-Hom has proposed showing the capacity of each site based on 30 units per acre,
which is the niminnim density permitted, not the minimum density. The Measure T
Housing Element showed, for purpose of site capacity, 20 units per acre. It also
contained statements that a height limit of two stories could not accommodate 30 units
per acre.
To maximize the capacity of each site, and minimize the number of sites needed, the
City will need to convince HCD that each site can actually accommodate 30 units per
acre within two stories. If HCD does not agree that this is supportable,despite zoning at
30 units per acre, it will demand that the City reduce the capacity of each site as shown
in the Housing Element, and upzone more sites for lower income housing. Examples of
densities of 30 units per acre accomplished within two stories in other communities may
be most convincing.
Conclusion: Adequate Sites Requirements.The non-vacant sites included in Measure
T should be reviewed to determine if they will be considered feasible for redevelopment
given the additional analysis required. To the extent possible, the City should seek
vacant sites to upzone to be suitable for lower income housing so that these comprise
more than 50 percent of the sites designated for lower income housing. It should also
give preference to non-vacant sites whose owners are willing to represent to HCD that
they desire to develop housing.The City will also need substantial evidence to convince
HCD that 30 units per acre can be accomplished in two stories.
B. Additional Required Analysis.
Requirements for additional analysis will increase the length and cost of the Housing
Element and may result in demands for additional actions by the City,but will have no
direct impact on sites designated for housing. These additional analyses include:
• Constraints posed by "locally adopted ordinances that directly impact the cost
and supply of residences"(Proposed §65583(a)(5));
• Nongovernmental constraints, including requests to develop housing below the
densities shown in the housing element; length of time between project approval
and submittal of applications for building permits; and
1949\05)L2211123.1
C-71
Olivehain Vacant Sites
Analysis of Development Potential
2017 Assessed Value GROSS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER TOTAL LAND ACRES YIELD @ 30 DU/AC
259-231-32 $ 430,000 $ 430,000 1.75 53
259-231-28 $ 11130,000 $ 1,041,000 3.88 116
259-231-30 $ 900,000 $ 595,000 0.54 16
259-231-31 $ 849,841 $ 381,863 0.46 14
TOTAL $ 3,309,841 $ 2,447,863 6.63 199
Land Value as % of Total Value 74%
V
N
Oliven-hain,
ALT-4: Housing site Alt-4 was included in the SIRUP Alternative because it focuses the
change in land use to only one of the "four corners" of Olivenhain and supports the viability
of the adjacent new mixed use site, 0-3.
0-3: Housing site 0-3 was included in the SXWP Alternative because it reduces traffic
trips and provides a mixed use walkable place for Olivenhain.
Ar. i .n. n �t� inni+r' nn» rni+inn» n� +�-.r. ���+ ^^� rhYn+11n1T+n 1,��'ni ►�n+i�.n nr � +J�n TITLIi TT
t'1
V
W
caoSS ACRES s.5s SLOPE ANALYSIS OF NATURAL SLOPES ,
APNS 268-231-28, 30, 31 AND 32
CITY OF ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA t'• ``f:
7.
` \1
r
uwr or
MANUF. SLOPE
t '
SLOPE ANALYSIS
NO. MIN SLOPE MAX SLOPE COLOR AREA (SF) AREA (AC)
1 OX 25X 239,005 SF 5.49
2 259 409 24,021 SF 0.55
3 40X 25OX 5,889 Sr 0.14
L i NDMARK 4 MANUFACTURED SLOPE
C O N Y U L T I N O
Phnenna @n01r�.atnv eN
oson o«+....�..,.+.•owr TOTAL 6.59
a.n a.o..w mm�m,twt ae»oro
P: 103-f COUNA%1STA REPORTS&ANALYSIS SLOPE ANALYSIS 103-1 54 NET ACRCAGEAfYC 10 25 2017 IO:SS AM
n
V
W
•
`� Ht}tlSII�G ELEMENT SATES Atd�4LYS�5
Olivenhain - Vacant
• Address: Rancho • •
• Zoning: Rural Residential 2
• Unit �� �4�'�^'``p �„��k• � •swat,) w '�;i �'��>'f
r � ,
Yield: ,
Notes:•
Topography• Steep a
• Measure T Site
•
th
""x°
Address Location:2220—2230 Encinitas Blvd.
Assessor Parcel Numbers:
259-231-28 and 30 to 32 .s�, r
Study Area Size:4 parcels with 6.49 gross acres (6.3 net) '
and includes Viable Housing Site 0-4 j
15 Topography: Some 10-25% slopes in sections of the
property with 25%to 40%in others
0 Zoning:Rural Residential-2(1113-2),which allows two units
per acre
t.
Site Description:The study area is predominately vacant
with three homes, located along a local collector, two- o a U S6 ,pnd
lane roadway. One home serves as a care facility with six
or fewer persons. cam,
Year Constructed: 1950s and mid-1970s6
* Site amenities and/or proximity:
-More than a 3/4 mile to the nearest public school; °
-One block to commercial goods and services;
-Just over a 3/4 mile to Wiro Park;
-Adjacent to limited transit(bus service route
304 alt to San Marcos)
t t t
j : ae '.Y♦ e w. 'a •e es . .. � z '��4 �'y•.e a �to q�• is
c. E
Keith Harrison
P.O. Box 231594
Encinitas, CA 92023
May 24, 2018
Ms. Diane S. Langager
Principal Planner
Development Services Department
City of Encinitas
500 S.Vulcan Ave.
Encinitas, CA 92024
RE: HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE MAP ID 6(SAGE CANYON DRIVE)
Dear Diane:
As we previously discussed, I have entered into a binding contract to acquire the 5.23 acres of
vacant land located on the southeast corner of Sage Canyon Drive and El Camino Real (APN 262-
061-85-00) from the current owner. I have released all my contractual contingencies and my
earnest money deposit is non-fundable subject to a couple relatively minor updates the seller is
required to provide prior to closing, which is scheduled to occur soon.
The property is currently entitled with a 10-lot tentative map, but a grading plan has not been
submitted to the City. The environmental constraints of this site have already been delineated,
usable acreage determined, and necessary utilities are easily accessible. If the City chooses to
change the zoning of the subject parcel to allow for 25-30 residential units per acre, and adopts
development standards that make it feasible, I am interested in pursuing a development
consistent with the new zoning in lieu of moving forward with'the 10-lot subdivision.
Please let me know if you would like any additional information.
Sincerely,
c
/Keith Harrison
C-76
Quail Meadows Properties, LLC
610 W.Ash Street,Suite 1500
San Diego, CA 92101
May 25,2018
Brenda Wisneski
City of Encinitas
Development Services Department
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas,CA 92024
Dear Ms.Wisneski,
On behalf of Quail Meadows Properties, LLC,and as an authorized signatory, I would like to express our
continued strong interest as a candidate site in the Housing Element update. If approved, it would be
our intention to construct high-density multi-family housing in the allowable density range of 25 to 30
dwelling units per acre, provided the development standards adopted are conducive with this type of
construction.
We still have concerns about whether the development standards that are currently proposed will allow
for cost effective construction at those densities, but will continue working with the City to resolve these
concerns.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 619-234-4050.
Sincerely,
Nick Lee
Vice President
Quail Meadows LLC
C-77
Andrew Kean
-4 ttorner at Law
14710 Beeler Canyon
Poway, CA 92064
(858) 386-8990
Fax 858-777-7044
LoveOakcnbmarl.coin
30 May 2018
Diane Langager, .Principal Planner
City of Encinitas
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024
RE: Housing Element Site Consideration for
105 South Rancho Santa Fe Road (APN 259-221-57)
Dear Diane,
As the owner of the above referenced property, I am writing to express
interest and desire to have this parcel included as part of the City's
Housing Element Update process.
The site is currently unencumbered, 100% vacant, it adjoins public
transportation, major transportation arteries and commercial properties, it
contains no protected biological resources and is characterized by gentle
topography. These characteristics make it very conducive to higher
density development and an ideal candidate for inclusion in the proposed
Housing Element update.
Should the property be rezoned it is my intent to proceedto develop the
property at the new 30 du/ac density that is currently being proposed.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or requests for
additional information. Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
Andrew KeCatesTrust
stee
Olivenhain
C-78
EXHIBIT "All
� i._ ,� K 1 •� s� � ,w�.} ,' _ : tai. �L,�,-f
yt •x � � to t�, ♦ � r .. !r,� � C zflfw�i � •-�t 'f �,. �r'S•�'�.� s
• F �/ .. � mss' r..t;'+ - '°'. 'y � ` .
� .A r F1'f It ^ •• • �"Vb W'� i i sf ,/ � t 'I .'�_♦ .t.
` I�+b~i�s.�t �l' r y. . io7��`x R*� � F{f•. • ` i
4 3 FYI!
S'd '"� t • •� • Y { +
„'riw � r a' .. 1 fa. . .Qy� P I e„ ff�„iY° 2# �7 • � d � 7 5_. \
•�• .yy4�,�1 ', iP..j rN."4��"�'.)���avn.k i '" �/�/�• 2�tS'�h`�N'� L a 11. �4477 �`'nJ
+/�4••4.Y �� � ���.'il�/.,.�t�� �' g� �x 2,Sr 7r�Y./F4� R + r�1 �{�'�) ' •�•r t��.'1.-�•a
i I i4 y�""!l �yr��Fq �p��/' p�k(; .i,� r �P + r. •_. ask' i
p �+ ,�. .�.*�'�� •�"3's�" '� :.� j" ''`t � e�*r •"�P ,{��';._F, M!'.s.Ip 77�1f •
r.►y .� .2 ' � •."'I. to iyir -..,, `, �^ �.
r.. �. S •.} - � a r! •bdt ll+i' �# - �* ear. . �' •"`=• .r
• // y r� •?,.1 j,($i � ,rtY , °�•>`+��'u.l�, ".171 t '� ..,,Q,
� �#•.ii'� ;�• �r.j .' - '� +1' 1, v .FI +' ;��p�; �Y �e 1k,''� /��, ' ' I
,I' 41•.p1 4 kw l{l` 12 ''� .�C� `. I.'
+' ¢ 'I �'` ♦'+tl r _mod '�.h ./J.
My.' �'�l • F.4.y`X ��_,'„�`'r .tom} �-'f� '+LA"y.� � � 1 c _
i'"� >'+•y... mow•^ , A�� [. .� � � � ~sY�i i 11 . ":v�`Tj� �.
�`^��^�.' -�`•� .,l t i � .+ {fit •q �• ,v
AI
Im
� 1$ £� d ���0�� �.9- may '•` �� J� '4_ I ��' s�� � hr + +.
�''y�`- � � '�tI \ a i !,. J � 11�J(f�/ '1'- I �•y�`A v' ti''.F •>
�y lx�f..y.,'
P 1 ' LARET ' 1
PH.858.259.8212 PLSAEN61NEERING i
• •
I
PASCO LARET SU T R
" 101 -Y7 & ASSOCIATES
CIVIL ENGINEERING+ LAND PLANNING + LAND SURVEYING
December 15,2017
Diane Langager,Principal Planner
City of Encinitas
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas,CA 92024
RE:Housing Element Site Consideration for 105 South Rancho Santa Fe Road(APN 259-221-57)
Dear Diane,
I am writing on behalf of the owners.of the above referenced 4.75 gross acre parcel(Exhibit A)to request that
the parcel be included in the Housing Element Task Force analysis of"sites under consideration".
In addition to an owner who is interested in the development of their property,the site is currently 100%
vacant,contains no protected biological resources and is characterized by gentle topography all of which are
conducive to higher density development. We believe that these characteristics make it an ideal candidate for
inclusion into the proposed Housing Element to help insure that the City can achieve State certification.
Although the parcel appears to have been omitted from the Kimley-Horn analysis of vacant parcels,below is a
table with the relevant property information to assist you with your review:
Address 105 South Rancho Santa Fe Road
APN 259-221-57
Zoning RR-2
Gross Size/Net Size' 4.75 AC/3.66 AC
Gross Unit Yield/Net Unit Yield 142 DU/110 DU
Notes Interested Owner
Not Included in EIR
• Net acreage was calculated using"0.77 method"described in Kimley-Horn study.
Thank you for your consideration and please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or requests for
additional information.
Sincerely,
1 '
W.Justin Suiter,PE
President
535 N Highway 101,Ste A Solana Beach,California 92075
27127 Calle Arroyo,Ste 1904 San Juan Capistrano,California 92675
plsaenginecring.com
'
. �� . Constantine ~~.�
- ��ai�lt�� ��&��� Helen
C.
Greek �������
����J� Orthodox �uJ����� `
MEMPOUSOF
Se,Fm*mn,mm R1����"'^
January 11,2018
Ms.Diane Langager
Principal Planner,Housing Element
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas,CA 92024
Dear Ms.Lmngmger;
We are so pleased to be a part of Affordable Housing Element in Encinitas. Saints Constantine and
Helen Greek Orthodox Church has been committed to affordable housing for seniors for more than
threedmcadms. As you are aware we have 30 apartment units an our property,all of which fall under
affordable housing guidelines. (|believe our rents are the lowest in the city). Wmcpnniderthesm
apartments and any future apartments to be a Ministry of our Church and are committed to serving the
senior population of the community.
If the Affordable Housing Element is passed,we plan to build 40tm6D senior housing units,all mfwhich
will be affordable housing. The apartments will bm built ona portion nf the undeveloped land onthe
church property. They will he built across the back portion of the land adjacent tn the existing
apartments and will be architecturally similar to the existing buildings. VVe are planning tm start the
building process as soon ms feasible once the housing element passes.
Thank you for the opportunity to continue to serve the seniors in our community through offering
affordable housing.
Sincerely,
Fr.Michael Sitaras
Pastor
AnnePmnm#akns
Parish Council President
Saints Constantine and Helen 8zoekOrthodux Church, CA,92007
845988unthuaterAve`Oazdiff-6y't6er8ea,CA,S2Q0?^Tel:(760)942-0820^Iax.'(700}942'3606
Enaafl.'uffime@ateconstoudne6alecLcom ^Web:nww.staxonutaudne6elen.com
C-81
• r ,
_"LIZ SAINTS CONSTANTINE AND HELEN GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH
sAN i RANCIWO
May 3,2018
Ms.Diane Langager
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas,CA
Dear Ms.Langager:
We at Saint Constantine and Helen Greek Orthodox Church are pleased to be considered
as part of the City of Encinitas Affordable Housing Program. We have had affordable senior
housing on the church property for over thirty years. Our 30 existing units and the units that we
propose to build are and will be available for tenancy to the general public,there is not and will
not be a religious or church membership requirement for tenancy.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Sincerely,
Anne Panagakos
President
Parish Council
3459 Manchester Avenue, Cardiff-by-the-Sea, CA 92007
Office: (760) 942-0920•Website:www.stsconstantinehelen.com
C-82
From: Bryan Smith
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2018 10:42 AM
To: Larry Jackel<liackel @fenwavca.com>
Subject: Cabo Grill site- 1950 N Coast Hwy 101. Encinitas, CA 92024
Larry,
Today, I did a site visit to the former Cabo Grill site located at 1950 N Coast Hwy 101. Encinitas,CA
92024. As you know,the property is vacant and has not been occupied for nearly 10 years.
Unfortunately,the condition of the building on the property is very poor and is in considerable disrepair.
It cannot be occupied absent a complete renovation down to the framing. Further,the existing structure
does not meet building code, life/safety,or ADA requirements.
While we have taken steps to protect the building, it has been and continues to be broken into by
vagrants.The current condition of the property is shown in the attached photos.There are large
openings in the roof, broken windows, extensive holes in the drywall, missing doors, broken/uneven
floors,and missing light and plumbing fixtures.
I recommend that we take steps to demolish the building.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Bryan
Bryan Smith I Chief Operating Officer and General Counsel I Fenway Capital Advisors
674 Via de la Valle,Suite 310,Solana Beach, CA 92075
direct (858)436-3616 1 fax(858)436-3636 1 cell (858)444-5709
bsmith @fenwayca.com l www.fenwayca.com
This communication may contain information which is privileged and/or confidential under applicable law.Any dissemination,
copy or disclosure,other than by the intended recipient,is strictly prohibited.If you have received this communication in error,
please immediately notify us via return e-mail to bsmith(@fenwayca.com and delete this communication without making any
copies.Thank you for your cooperation.
C-83
' + S
10 �X A
ol
ZI
Al
r
.z e
_,� ,�jGer,i •inn,4 „�r-`C''`am �-t �,.3 a' '4,�° '.A .�#�
in
Do
NOW
u
J
I
i
1
as
6
fe FOX POINT FARMS
CULTIVATING COMMUNITY THROUGH AGRICULTURE
f
April 4, 2018
R
Ms. Diane Langager
City of Encinitas
505 S. Vulcan Avenue t
Encinitas, CA 92024
Subject: Fox Point Farnrs—Letter of.Intent
Dear Ms. Langager:
d
We are providing this letter as formal confirmation regarding our intent to develop the property k
at 1150 Quail Gardens Drive (referred to as the "Echter Property"). We originally expressed our
interest at the November 8, 2017 City Council meeting, at which time we introduced the
"agrihood" concept plan, which respects the current use of the site while simultaneously
providing an innovative, high-density development in compliance with State requirements. We
have reinforced our interest at subsequent City Council meetings (December 2017 and January
2018), and have been coordinating with City staff to provide additional requested specifics
regarding our proposal.
We have reviewed the April 4, 2018 staff report and appreciate the ranking of the Echter
Property as a "Strong Candidate" in the Prioritization Table for Candidate Sites. As you know
based on our meetings with you and your staff, our team is committed to malting this vision a
reality, and we are eager to submit a project application as soon as possible. We have a
development team ready and waiting to move forward.
Thank you for working with us as we continue to refine the vision for Fox Point Farms. In an era
Y g ,
where traditional high-density housing tends to lack open space, amenities, and overall livability,
we believe our proposal serves as an innovative example that will become a gem for the City of
Encinitas and a model for other cities to follow. I
Sincerely, i
-a--7-
3
Brian P. Grover Sean F. Kilkenny Robert J. Echter
Fox Point Farms, LLC Fox Point Farms,LLC Fox Point Farms,LLC
C-86
i
CAM-MAR. GROWERS
SUNSHINE GARDENS
155 QUAIL GARDENS DR.
ENCINITAS, CA 92025
760-436-3244
760-436-8612 FAX
March 29,2018
Ms.Diane S. Langager
Principal Planner
City of Encinitas
505 S.Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024
RE: Sunshine Gardens Site at Encinitas Blvd& Quail Gardens, approximately 3
AC vacant land for Housing Element Review
Dear Diane:
We wanted to express once again our interest and commitment in moving forward with a multi-
family residential development immediately upon a successful rezone from Office Professional
Zone to a Residential Zone of R25-R30.
Our commitment is contingent upon the City of Encinitas finalizing development standards that
adequately support this level of density and we are concerned and do not believe that the current
zoning limitations of two-stories and 30-foot height maximum will achieve the required results.
We want to insure the City of Encinitas that development can begin as soon as the zoning is
approved by the Coastal Commission and plans are processed and approved. We own the Sunshine
Gardens business and have short term leases with the other tenants that will all expire prior to the
rezoning and entitlement process.
We would also like to stress that the structures on the property are temporary and can be
demolished very easily.
C-87
Please feel free to call if you would like to set up a meeting to discuss this further or need further
clarification regarding our intentions. Thank you.
Best regards,
)�q#aL
Ron Martin
CAM-MAR GROWERS
C-88
DocuSign Envelope ID:CEECA80A-73AB-4D1 D-A3A5-45D4E4951 F54
May, 8th 2018
To Ms. Diane S. Langager
Principal Planner City of Encinitas
505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024
RE: 1967 N Vulcan Ave.
We would like to submit our land, 1967 N Vulcan Ave, Encinitas CA 92024, for consideration,
from the Housing Element Task Force, to be included in the proposed increased maximum
zoning density of R-30.
The subject property is 2 Acres and is currently under used, flower field, shop, old residence,
etc...
We are currently in the process of a tentative map process, but prefer to wait for the zoning
change and then commence developing and building under the new proposed zoning plan.
We have no intention of keeping the flower field and/or any of the old structures on the land,
they will be demolished to make way of development and building on the entire 2 acre site.
We want the City of Encinitas to be sure of our intentions of developing, demolishing, and
building under the new proposed zoning, once entitlements are secured.
Please call us if you need anything else.
Sincerely,
DocuSlgned11••by'':..AA
(619) 885-7361
crai uonholmghotmai l.com
C-89
On Apr 4, 2018, at 2:57 PM, Keith Pittsford <kpittsford@sgpaxom>wrote:
Hello Diane,
Thank you for speaking with me today. Enclosed, please find a preliminary Feasability study for Seacoast
Church at 1050 Regal Road. I am requesting on behalf of the church to have the entire site be
considered for the housing element task force up zone for affordable housing that goes before the City
Council tonight.
We are currently looking at a 29,000sf parcel on the south and/or an acre or more site on the north for
possible affordable housing in order to provide affordable housing for the church staff and the
community.
I look forward to seeing you there tonight and finding a way to get Seacoast Church added the list.
Best Regards, Keith
I will plan on attending and sharing our plans
Keith A. Pittsford,Architect
Principal
SGPA ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
1545 Hotel Circle South,Studio 200
San Diego,California 92108
P.619.297.0131 1 kkpittsford(cDsgpa.com
C.619.884.6025 1 www.sgpa.com
�1 Join our commitment to sustainability.
C-90
Diane Langager
City of Encinitas
Development Services Department
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024
May 16, 2018
Re: Letter of Intent to Up-zone and Build,Assessor Parcel Numbers 261-200-37, 38 and 39
Dear Ms. Langager:
The two property owners, Peter McConnell and the Marandino Family Trust, of the Manchester Avenue
West Sites of 1.67-acre parcels (APNs 261-200-37, 38 and 39)are very interested in up-zoning from R11
to R25-R30 designation. This up-zone would allow for more efficient use of these properties that would
better serve the community.
Currently,the property has two single family residences and a single-story structure that upon
agreement with the City of Encinitas to rezone and develop the land will be demolished.To the property
owners, knowledge there are no known property constraints (ex. environmental, utility,flood zone,
steep slopes, etc.).This is a non-binding letter of intent, as both property owners would have to find
agreeable price and terms.
We are excited about being included in the Housing Element Updater and the opportunity to explore
building this property to its potential. If you have further questions please contact our representative,
Faith Picking at(619) 704-0180 or faith@ bartellassociates.corn.
Sinc ,
Peter McConnell Marandino Family Trust
Property Owner Property Owner
�9L
Y
I.
C-91
Keith Harrison
P.O. Box 231594
Encinitas, CA 92023
May 24, 2018
Ms. Diane S. Langager
Principal Planner
Development Services Department
City of Encinitas
500 S. Vulcan Ave.
Encinitas, CA 92024
RE: HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE MAP ID 18(364&371 2nd Street)
Dear Diane:
I am a resident of Encinitas and the owner of the real property located at 364 and 371 2nd
Street in Encinitas. It has long been my intention to redevelop the subject property with a
mixture of commercial and residential uses consistent with the underlying D-VCM zone. This
desire is born out of the gross underutilization of the property by uses that no longer meet the
intention of the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan ("DESP".) In preparation for redevelopment,
I have limited my tenant lease terms to the amount of time normally required to procure the
City's discretionary approval. As of now, almost all my tenants are month-to-month.
The DESP provides a 3-story, 33-foot(flat)/37-foot(pitched) building height limit for my parcels.
However, these limitations were reduced to 2-stories and 30-feet, respectively, with the
passage of Proposition A. The current development standards severely limit the feasibility of
redeveloping my parcels to accommodate uses consistent with those articulated in the DESP for
the D-VCM zone.
Should the zoning for my parcels change to allow 25-30 unit residential density on my parcels,
and the development standards restored to what the DESP provides, I would proceed in the
near term with plans to redevelop my property accordingly.
7 Si cerely,
Keith Harrison
C-92
From: David Meyer [dcmeyerl @earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2018 5:29 PM
To: Council Members
Cc: athome
Subject: New site possibility for Housing Element Update
Please accept this email as proposing the following adjacent parcels (see below),totaling approximately
6.6 acres,to be considered as a possible replacement for the L-7 site. Our company is working with the
owners of these parcels to file a Density Bonus Tentative Map application, however,they have given
permission to express their interest in either a swap for L-7 or a rezoning of the subject parcels to 30
units to the acre. We are open to discussing this possibility in short order, as we know time is short for
the city to complete its review process to get a draft Housing Element Update(HEU) approved by HCD
and on the November ballot.
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
Approximately 6.62 gross acres as follows:
APN:256-171-13 (Approx. 32,819 s.f.—Zoned 115)
APN:256-171-14(Approx. 27,714 s.f.—Zoned 115)
APN: 256-171-15 (Approx. 61,477 s.f.—Zoned 115)
APN: 256-171-20 (Approx. 25,932 s.f.—Zoned 113)
APN: 256-171-21 (Approx. 16,514 s.f.—Zoned 113)
APN: 256-171-24(Approx. 123,967 s.f.—Zoned 133)
Please find attached the plat map of these parcels, along with an aerial map from the City's E-Zone
website. In planning this site for a TM application,we have identified few, if any, known impediments to
the development of this site during the current HEU planning period at a density up to 30 dwelling units
to the acre,which will make it a good candidate for inclusion in the current HEU.
I am available to meet with representatives of the City to discuss this site in further detail and its
viability for inclusion in the HEU.
Sincerely,
-David Meyer
760-310-8836
C-93
35
LETTER OF INTENT
RE: Entitlement of Approximately 6.62 Acres
Encinitas, California
The parties hereto are willing to work cooperatively in an effort to enter into a formal agreement
("Agreement") for the entitlement of the subject properties as a residential subdivision under the
following basic terms and conditions:
PROPERTY: Approximately 6.62 gross acres located in Encinitas, California as
follows:
APN: 256-171-13 (Approx. 32,819 s.f.)
Eleaza Beaz and Santa Ana Benavides Mancilla,
and Fidel Garcia-Gomez
APN: 256-171-14 (Approx. 27,714 s.£)
Pablo Quiroz Sanchez and Juana Rodriguez
APN: 256-171-15 (Approx. 61,477 s.£)
Kirk C. Reed, As Trustee of The Kirk C. Reed Trust, and
Paul M. Huiras and Sandra K. Huiras
APN: 256-171-20 (Approx. 25,932 s.f.)
David Maldonado and Olivia Maldonado, Trustees of the David
and Olivia Maldonado Family Trust
APN: 256-171-21 (Approx. 16,514 s.f.)
David Maldonado and Olivia Maldonado, Trustees of the David
and Olivia Maldonado Family Trust
APN: 256-171-24 (Approx. 123,967 s.£)
David Maldonado and Olivia Maldonado, Trustees of the David
and Olivia Maldonado Family Trust
Herein, collectively referred to as "Property Owners".
Clarke Ave LOI.doc Page 1 of 4
C-94
36
ME
PROPERTY TRADE: Property Owners understand that DCM has presented a potential
opportunity to trade or rezonezone the subject ,'Propeity and hereby
authorize DCM to additionally pursue such opportunity on their
behalf.
[SIGNATURES CONTAINED ON NEXT PAGE]
Clarke Ave LOI.doc Page 3 of 4
C-95
AGREED AND ACCEPTED:
PROPERTY OWNERS:
APN: 256-171-13
Eleaza Beaz and Santa Ana Benavides Mancilla,and Fidel Garcia-Gomez
Date: S 0
4 Z Date: d I
� Date:
APN:256-171-14
Pablo Quiroz Sanchez and Juana Rodriguez
Date:
Date:
APN: 256-171-15
Kirk C. Reed,As Trustee of The Kirk C. Reed Trust, and Paul M. Huiras and Sandra K. Huiras
Date:
Date:
Date:
APN:25_6-171-20: 256-171-21: 256-171-24
David Maldonado and Olivia Maldonado,Trustees of the David and Olivia Maldonado Family Trust
Date:
Date:
DCM PROPERTIES, INC.(DCM):
Date:
David C.Meyer, President
Clarke Ave LOLdoc Page 4 of 4
C-96
AGREED AND ACCEPTED:
PROPERTY OWNERS:
APN: 256-171-13
Eleaza Beaz and Santa Ana Benavides Manilla, and Fidel Garcia-Gomez
Date:
Date:
Date:
APN: 256-171-14
Pablo Quiroz Sanchez and Juana Rodriguez
!'j C
� Date: • � - l
Date•• �9- 7.
T-
APN: 256-171-15
Kirk C. Reed,As Trustee of The Kirk C. Reed Trust,and Paul M. Huiras and Sandra K. Huiras
Date:
Date:
Date:
APN: 256-171-20,256-171-21: 256-171-24
David Maldonado and Olivia Maldonado,Trustees of the David and Olivia Maldonado Family Trust
Date:
Date:
DCM PROPERTIES, INC. (DCM):
Date:
David C.Meyer, President
Clarke Ave LOI,doc Page 4 of 4
C-97
AGREED AND ACCEPTED:
PROPERTY OWNERS:
APN: 256-171-13
Clcaza Beaz and Santa Ana Benavides Manilla,and Fidel Garcia-Gomez
Date:
Date:
Date:
APN: 256-171-14
Pablo Quiroz Sanchez and Juana Rodriguez
Date:
Date:
APN: 256-171-15
Kirk C. Reed,As Trus of The Kirk . Reed Trust,and Paul M. Huiras and Sandra K.Huiras
Date:
Date:
Date:
APN:256-171-20,256-171-21:256-171-24
David Maldonado and Olivia Maldonado,Trustees of the David and Olivia Maldonado Family Trust
Date:
Date:
DCM PROPERTIES,INC. (DCM):
Date:
David C. Meyer, President
Clarke Ave I.Ol.doc Page 4 of 4
C-98
AGREED AND ACCEPTED:
PROPERTY OWNERS:
APN: 256-171-13
Eleaza Beaz and Santa Ana Benavides Mancilla, and Fidel Garcia-Gomez
Date:
Date:
Date:
APN: 256-171-14
Pablo Quiroz Sanchez and Juana Rodriguez
Date:
Date:
APN: 256-171-15
Kirk C. Reed, As Trustee of The Kirk C. Reed Trust, and Paul M. Huiras and Sandra K. Huiras
Date:
P Date:
Date:
APN: 256-171-20: 256-171-21: 256-171-24
David Maldonado and Olivia Maldonado, Trustees of the David and Olivia Maldonado Family Trust
Date:
Date:
DCM PROPERTIES, INC. (DCM):
Date:
David C. Meyer, President
Clarke Ave LBLdoc Page 4 of 4
C-99
AGREED AND ACCEPTED:
PROPERTY OWNERS:
APN: 256-171-13
Eleaza Beaz and Santa Ana Benavides Mancilla, and Fidel Garcia-Gomez
Date:
Date:
Date:
APN: 256-171-14
Pablo Quiroz Sanchez and Juana Rodriguez
Date:
d
Date:
APN: 256-171-15
Kirk C. Reed, As Trustee of The Kirk C. Reed Trust, and Paul M. Huiras and Sandra K. Huiras
Date:
Date:
Date:
APN: 256-171-20; 256-171-21; 256-171-24
David Maldonado and Olivia Maldonado,Trustees of the David and Olivia Maldonado Family Trust
Date: `"_
Date: = ys 1
DCM PROPERTIES,INC. (DCM):
Date:
David C. Meyer, President
Clarke Ave LOI.doc Page 4 of 4
C-100
From: Keith Harrison<keithharrison @sbcglobal.net>
Date: May 9, 2018 at 1:32:11 PM PDT
To:<DLangaser @encinitasca.eov>
Cc: 'Brenda Wisneski' <Bwisneski @encinitasca.sov>
Subject: May 9,2018 City Council Agenda Item 10A
Diane,
Since my email to you on April 4th requesting that my property at 364 2nd Street and 3712 nd Street (Site
AD14) be withdrawn from inclusion in the housing element update, I have heard the City Council and
HEU Task Force members repeatedly voice their commitment to HEU zoning changes being in the form
of an "overlay"to existing zoning whereby property owners will not lose their existing zoning rights. I
therefore have no objection to site AD14's inclusion in the HEU update.
If you are still looking for additional sites that are good candidates to accommodate multi-family housing
at 25 to 30 units per acre,you may want to consider the 4.13 gross acres (2.25 net) of OP (office
professional) land I own at 780 Garden View Court(APN's 257-470-25, 09& 10). The property consists
of three lots, of which one is improved with a 18,897 tilt-up concrete building constructed in 1995 for
Frog's Gym. The remaining two lots are improved with 191 concrete asphalt parking spaces for the
gym. The existing parking equates to more than ten (10)spaces per 1,000/s.f. of building area which is
far in excess of what the gym really needs (approximately five(5)spaces per 1,000 s.f.which can be
demonstrated with a parking study. The existing parking is also 251% more than what is required for
professional office use which the gym could be converted to easily. Therefore, a significant portion of
the parking lot could be developed as multi-family without any need to raise the existing building. The
2.25 acres is at an elevation approximately five(5)feet above Garden View Court which would allow a
subterranean parking garage to be constructed efficiently and without significant ramping. This would
further expand the developable area. In terms of impact to neighbors,the property is bordered on the
north and west by native open space, professional office to the south, and two (2) residential homes to
the east. The two residential homes are oriented away from the subject property(significant rear-yard
setbacks between the homes and the subject) and are on pads approximately 17 f.t. above the subject
parking lot. I have attached a site plan and elevations for your review. Please let me know if you would
like any additional information.
Regards,
Keith Harrison
C-101
Exhibit 2018-61-B
Conforming amendments to the Land Use Element (stFikeeut is used to denote existing text
being deleted; underline is used to denote new text being added):
POLICY 2.1: Establish : 9FO th management plan Whieh phases ,d.,.•. l8p nt thFE)U.h h 'l.d' peFfflit.
limitations, ublie faeility availability,eFathermetheds. Prepare, maintain, and periodically update public
facility master plans that are based on adopted growth projections through coordination of appropriate citv
departments and agencies to anticipate the demand for services.
POLICY 3.1: For purposes of growth management,to ensure that existing desirable community character is
maintained and to ensure that facilities planning is economical and comprehensive, the ultimate buildout
figure for residential dwelling units will be determined by the utilizing the total mid .- nge density figure of
the Land Use Element, which shall be derived from the total of all land use acreage devoted to residential
categories, , ^iid ^ builddout density^,•^.all
POLICY 3.1& With the e)(Eeptians deSEFibed in Pe"ey 3.12, onee ael(nowledged as being eensistent with the
redesignate #HE)ned to allow MGM non Fesidential uses eF a gFeateF intensity of use except by the
POLICY 3.10-1: In determining whether to approve a proposed residential or commercial project and when to
allow proposed projects to be constructed, the City shall consider the extent to which the proposed project
complies with the goals and policies of this Element and the implementing zoning regulations.
POLICY 3.11-2: The following may be considered as exceptions to the requirements for voter approval for
specified general plan land use map amendments, provided these exceptions do not conflict with Chapter
30.00 Encinitas Right to Vote Amendment:
10 Minor adjustments in land use boundaries to correctly reflect property or development site
boundaries, which adjustments do not substantially change intended area development potential - as
approved by Council by unanimous vote.
2. Changes to land use designations to correct(a) map omissions and (b) mapping errors which are
clearly demonstrated to be errors contrary to the intent of the General Plan-as approved by a unanimous
Council vote.
3. A change from any land use designation to the Ecological Resource/Open Space/Parks designation,
when property has been purchased or land development rights have been secured for land for open space or
parks purposes-as approved by a unanimous Council vote.
4. MiROF land use designatiOR ehanges when appFeved by affiffnative vote Of fE)UF OF FHGFe City COUREil
significant negative ntal impacts, and„ of the follewing ply.-
The change is to a c:ategE)Fy ef leweF Iand use intensity E)F density than the exist ng eategeFy that Fesults on a
11, Mobilehome PaF!(, Residential 8, ResideRtial 5, Residential 3, RUFal Residential 2, RuFal Residential 1, RUFal
Residential, �,,..Ecelegieal o„ . a/nn.,n Spat,/PaFI,S
/h1 C.,e„ntiOR fQF Residential DensobF
The change applies te 5 acFes of land aFea OF less, and is a ehange frem a ROR Fesidential te a Fesidential
allowance of tep A-.r fp-,.A.xp-F additional dwelling units (pFiE)F tO consideFation ef any density bonus) fGF the 5
aGFe site. The change shall -he dleteffniRed to be compatible with, and geneFally not exeeeding the
densi+.,.,f S n.ding planned land USe si.deRtial densities.
1.-1 Exeen+iGR f.,.Change Within 1 ,n.d Use!I
The change applies to 5 affes of land aFea eF less, and is a change fFeFA one land use EategE)Fy W aRGthL-F
i RUFal Residential RuFal Residential 1 RUFa1 Residential 7
7 Residential � Residential C Residential 4
. �zc�rvcrrrror��tc�rvrn crar�� Residential dart-,
3 Residential 11, Resi.dential 15, Residential 75
5 \licit...Carving/'.,.w me al,Gen. Fal!`.,.,•...,r,FeW
POLICY 3.13: The followiRg establish exeeptions to the fixed aRRual allotment Of Fesidential building peFfflitS
established h..+hic Cle., eF
1. Vested-R404s
The fixed annual allotment as established *n the Land Use Element shall apply to all pFepeFties and PFOjee
eaveFed by ts teFFns except it shall net apply to any develepment PFE)ject which has ebtained a vested Fight
as of the effect;ve date of this Plan. FOF PUFpE)ses of this PFOViSi9n, a vested Fight shall have been obtain
nl.,if each and all of the f011GWiRg eciteFia a met:.
b. Substantial expenditWes OF documented, nGR canc:ellable liabilities have been inGUFFed
good faith Felianee on the peFFnit OF final diSEFetionary appFeval.
G. Substantial EGRAFUGtiOn has been peFfOFFned in good faith Feliance en the peFFnit OF fina4
whetheF OF net sueh expenditures, liabilities and EORStFUEt;OR weFe in good faith aFe questions of faet to - -
deteRnined AA a case by case basis by the City following application by the developeF. Actions taken by-a
developeF tO speed up Ew expedite a development pFE)jec:t with knowledge ef the pendency of this pFevision
shall not be deemed to be in good faith and shall not qualify fOF a vested Fight. Phased pFojects shall be
consedeFed IOF exemption on a phase by phase basis te the exteRt peffnitted by California law.
2. Vestin-13 Tentative Maps OF OtheF A1313Feval Given Vested
in additioR to the fOFegaing, vesting tentative maps (and E)theF appFOvals given vested Fights) Feceiving
appFeval pFiE)F tO the effective date of this Plan shall be exempt fFeFn the Fesidential allocation systeFn,--se
lang as the numbeF of units allthGF*zed by such an appFaval shall be counted against the annual limits of the
foxed annual allotment u. of building permits. Sueh vesting appFE)val shall not by allthOFized by
the City afteF the effeetive date, URless expressly conditioned to a5SUFe c-empliance with thiS .
vacant,3. SinRle Family Han+es
The GE)RStFUGtieR of one individual dwelling unit canfoFming to z i e existing legal lot of
addition,FeGGFd which was established as legal lat as of the effeetive date this Plan was filed with the City e!eF!(, sha4
be exempt fFaFn the 6UFFent fixed anRual allotment. The UR;tS so exempted shall be counted against the
4. Existing Build*nR-Pe FM it-S
in / Plan, shali be exempt fFOFR the fix
annual alletment.
S. Oae IntPeeAgre3
A PFOpeFty awneF pFePGSing tO constmet rneFe thaR one dwelling unit, already appFaved by city preeess, but
unable to qualify fer the GUFFent yeaF's alleeatien (undeF Fesidential allocation system) Fnay be allewed to
EanStFUGt RO FnE)Fe than ane dwelling unit peF five aGFes. The numbeF of units so exempted shall not be
eaunted against the annual alleeatian figUFe; however-,they shall be counted against the City's total build out.
POLICY 3.124: A public vote shall be required on all City Council approved General Plan updates that are
comprehensive in nature, and shall become effective only when a majority of those voters who cast ballots
vote for the change. A comprehensive General Plan update shall be a City-sponsored work program titled as
such that substantially changes and/or re-adopts the text and maps of the existing elements.
GOAL 4: The City of Encinitas will ensure that the rate of residential growth: (a) does not create a demand
which exceeds the capability of available services and facilities; (b) does not destroy the quality of life and
small town character of the individual communities; (c) does not exceed a rate which excludes the public
from meaningful participation in all aspects of land use decision making regarding proposed projects; and (d)
provides the City with the ability to plan ahead for the location,timing and financing of required services and
facilities; and (e) does net e)(Eeed an annual allotment of dwelling units based an the pFejected ultimate
buuIdeut of.dwellings in the City of Encinitas assuming a 25 yeaF h •ld t peFied.
POLICY 44: A figure will be established annually which will deteffnine the FnaxifflUffl RUFnbeF Of dwelling
UR;tS fE)F which building peFM*tS will be issued dUFing the caming yeaF. The annual numeFical figWe shall be
based on a 25 yeaF buildeut beginning on januaFy 1, 1989 and ending januaFy 1, 2014. The annual alletment
shall be deteffnined by dividing the ultimate buildout figuFe fOF dwelling units, deteRnined by Fnid Fange
POLICY 4.1-2:The City will plan to provide services and facilities concurrent with projected need
allow ;ss,,._nce of the Fnax;mum annual .,umbeF of dwelling unit building .,^...,i+.. To guard against an
unforeseen shortfall of services or facilities, the City will determine adequacy of services and facilities for
each residential development at the discretionary review stage. For dwellings not subject to discretionary
review, such determination shall be made with the earliest development permit submittal. No unit shall be
approved or permitted for which inadequate services or facilities are available.
POLICY 4.23:The City will plan to provide processing procedures for proposed development projects that will
maximize citizen participation and that ll operate at a—pase sufficient to allow the maximum annual
.,•,h^r of dwelling unit building p nitS +^ be is . Citizen notice of development projects and the
opportunity to participate through written and oral testimony and public hearings will be provided at the
discretionary and environmental review stages of development, pFi^r t^the applieation of eaGh y annual
dwelling unit alleeation limit. Alp-it-hp-F the speed Of PFE)jeet PFE)eessing nE)F the volume of units OF PFE)jeet
pFeeessed shall exceed that which will allow meaningful citiz.,.. participation
POLICY 4.4! WhateveF the allowable Fate Of gFoMh is dUFing any paFtieulaF year-, the City's intent is to see
heusing affeFdable to leweF ineeme households is not eenstFained. To this end, building peFFnits fOF dwelliftg
units guaFanteed OF aSSUFed of being affOFdable to vep�lew and low ineeme households, in amounts equal to
shall be exempt fFem the annual allecatien "mit. The numbeF of dwellings peFfflotted undeF this exemption on
any yeaF shall be inEluded in the tabulation of tetal dwelling units peRnitted W date On the eakulatien ef the
POLICY 4.5: Develepment ffejeets involving the EeMtFUEVE)n Of 20 OF FReFe single I Fesidential
dwellings may be FequiFed to phase the building of the pFejeet E)veF seveFal years using ne FnGFe than 20
building its n yeaF to achieve the al d I' f+h Element.
POLICY 4.316: Any land which is annexed to the City will be pre-designated for a land use(s) as a condition
of annexation, to a density and use that will be consistent with the small-town quality and character of
the City.
POLICY 4.7� TheFe Will be no eaFFy E)veF of unissued Fesidential dwelling unit peFMitS (fFOFA the FnaxiFnUFA
annual nuFnbeF) inte the following yeaF. However-, if the allotted numbei:aFe not issued dUFing the EUFFent.
yeaF, they will eentinue to be eounted in the ultimate buildeut figUFe and well be Fefleeted in the fix
POLICY 7.1& 139th Fesidential and non Fesidential development shall be limited t height of twe
str)ries and 30 feet. Limited—exceptions;E)F ne„-Fesident al development , be allowed, bUt GAIY fGF
designated specific sites as developed and adopted thFOugh aFea speeifie plans. Exeeptiens may also be
peFmit applications as previded by the Zening Code, to allow building heights Up W a Fna)EoFnUFH height Of
thFee steFies.An exception is also alltheFuzed feF a publie high school with a FninifflUffi 10 aGFe Site.
POLICY 83: Residential development on land that has physical constraints shall exclude or discount areas
subject to specified constraints from density allowance. Portions of development sites subject to the
following constraints shall be excluded from the net lot area used to figure density: floodplains, beaches,
permanent bodies of water, significant wetlands, major utility easements, railroad track beds or
rights-of-way, and rights-of-way and easements for public/private streets and roads. The remaining net lot
area shall then be calculated for density allowance, based on the assigned land use category density range,
subject to the following discounts based on site slope:
• Portions of site 0-25%slope-100%density;
• Portions of site 25-40%slope-approximately 50%density allowance;
• Portions of site 40%+slope-no density allowance.
These density allowance calculations apply to all land use categories that permit residential development.
With the exception of residential development on sites with a land use designation of R-30 OL, density
allowance shall be limited to the mid-point of the land use category range, as specified by the zoning code,
unless findings can be made that the proposed project excels in design excellence and/or provides
extraordinary community benefits. Upon such findings, up to the maximum density level of the range may
be allowed. In no case shall less than one dwelling per legal lot be allowed. Notwithstanding the mid-point
reference above, future development on sites with a land use designation of R-30 OL is permitted to
develop up to 30 dwelling units per net acre in compliance with the zoning regulations included in Chapter
30.16 of the Zoning Code, which allows a maximum density "by-right:" as well as in the D-VCM R-30 OL
Zone of the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan,the N-133 (R-30 OL) and N-L-VSC(R-30 OL)Zones of the North
101 Corridor Specific Plan,and the ER-R-30 Zone of the Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan.
Page LU-36
R-30 Overlay(R-30 OL)General Plan Land Use Designation
This category of residential land use is an overlay land use designation that offers property owners an
incentive to develop attached or detached multi-family housing in connection with the Housing Element.
The underlying land use designation remains in place; however,to give property owners more flexibility
for future development of their property,the R-30 OL designation also permits property owners to
develop housing at a minimum density of 25 dwelling units per net acre and a maximum density of 30
dwelling units per net acre.
To use the provisions of the R-30 OL land use designation a proiect must meet a minimum density of 25
dwelling units per net acre. Development is permitted up to a maximum density of 30 dwelling units per
net acre as a permitted primary use. Projects meeting at least the minimum density threshold are
eligible to develop up to 37 feet to permit three stories A project is also permitted to develop based on
the development standards applicable in the underlying land use designation category; however,the
underlying density and height restriction of two stories and 30 feet would apply to such a project
Specific development standards, including increased density and height limits are further defined in the
R-30-OL Zone in the Zoning Code. However, only those sites shown with the R-30 OL Land Use
Designation on the General Plan Land Use Map are eligible to use the R-30 OL Zone
Page LU-38A
Housing Plan Update 2018 R-30 OL Implementing Zone
City land use policy calls for the need to accommodate future housing development and meet RHNA's
state housing law compliance for affordability.To reinforce and expand on the City's commitment to
encouraging affordable housing, developing more complete neighborhoods and enhancing and
preserving the community's character, the R-30 OL Zone was created to implement the R-30 OL General
Plan land use designation. Like the R-30 OL land use designation,the R-30 OL Zone is an overlay zone
that retains the underlying zoning standards for applicable properties. However, if an attached or
detached multifamily residential project is proposed, a property owner may develop under special
provisions of the R-30 OL Zone that include new incentive land use and development standards to
create more housing for the community.
The R-30 OL Zone is intended to:
I. Implement the R-30 OL General Plan land use designation, which creates an incentive to develop
housing by offering property owners the opportunity to build homes with increased height and
density;
2. Allow for a moderate increase in residential density and to accommodate a mixture of resi-
dential building types and unit sizes;
3. Enhance the feasibility of developing higher density housing to increase the supply of available
housing options within the City's five communities;
4. Meet the state's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) rezoning requirements;
5. Ensure that the vision set forth in the Housing Plan is implemented;
6. Respect neighborhood character, be compatible with community specific settings and provide
reasonable transitions between existing residences and potential development sites;
7. Contribute to the economic and fiscal well-being of the City.
Residential proiects in the R-30 OL Zone may include residential and limited ancillary or auxiliary uses,
with a minimum of 25 dwelling units per net acre and a maximum of 30 dwelling units per net acre.
The R-30 OL Zone's development standards also apply to sites in the DVCM R-30 OL Zone of the Downtown
Encinitas Specific Plan, the N-R3 and N-L-VSC Zones of the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan and the ER-R-30
Zone of the Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan.
Land Use Designations Map
The General Plan Land Use Map is amended to add, as required, the R-30 Overlay Land Use
Designation on each candidate site as depicted on the attached map. The sites shown will be
designated with either the R-30 Overlay Zone, DVCM R-30 OL Zone of the Downtown Specific
Plan, the N-R3, N-CRM-1, and N-L-VSC Zones of the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan; and the
ER-R-30 Zone of the Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan to permit higher-density residential
development in addition to, or instead of, the uses permitted by the underlying land use
designation The entire, existing General Plan land use map is on file with the Office of the City
Clerk.
The map amends the following in the General Plan Land Use Element (an entire copy of the
existing General Plan is on file with the Office of the City Clerk):
• Figure 2, page LU-59
• Figure 3, page LU-64
• Figure 4, page LU-67
• Figure 5, page LU-73
• Figure 6, page LU-77
The General Plan Land Use Map is also amended to change the land use designation of APN
257-01-117 (Site L7) from Rural Residential (RR1) to Residential 3 (R3).
APN 257-01-117 (Site L7)
�a
Exhibit 2018-61-C
Amendments to the Voter's Rights Initiative Portion of the Land Use Element (S*F�;t is
used to denote existing text being deleted; underline is used to denote new text being added):
5.2. No Major Amendment and no Regular Amendment of any of the Planning Policy Documents shall be
effective unless and until it is approved by an ordinance or resolution adopted by the City Council, but
no such amendment shall be considered until a public hearing is conducted on the proposed
amendment at both the Planning Commission and at the City Council in the manner provided by state
law and advance notice is given as required by section 54.3 below.
6.1. Maximum Height. On and after the date this initiative measure becomes effective no building or
structure shall exceed a maximum height of two stories or 30 feet.
6.2. Height shall be measured from the lower of the natural or finished grade adjacent to the structure,
to the highest portion of the roof immediately above; except for projects on sites with the R-30 Overlay
land use designation, which shall be measured as provided by Chapter 30.16 of the Encinitas Zoning
Code.
6_3�,Exemptions to Height Limit.The following structures are exempted from this height limit:
a. Medical Complex development projects as provided in Section 30.28.010(C);a-Rd
b. sSpecified buildings associated with a public high school on a minimum 10 acre site, as Ely
provided in Section 30.28.010(C) and (D); and
c. Residential structures proposed on sites designated with the R-30 Overlay land use designation
that meet the requirements of the R-30 OL Zone as provided in Chapter 30.16 of the Encinitas
Zoning Code, as well as in the DVCM R-30 OL Zone of the Downtown Specific Plan, the N-R3 (R-
30 OL) and N-L-VSC (R-30 OL) Zones of the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan, and the ER-R-30
Zone of the Encinitas Ranch Specific Plan.