Resolution 1989-17 Adopting General Plan RESOLUTION NO. 89-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITy COUNCIL
CITY OF ENCINITAS, ADOPTING THE
GENERAL PLAN
(FILE 88-001-Gp)
WHEREAS, the City of Encinitas, California, incorporated on
October 1, 1986; and
WHEREAs, the City Council of the City of Encinitas established
as a priority the creation and adoption of a new comprehensive
General Plan for the City; and
WHEREAS, the City pursuant to California Government Code
Section 65300 ~, has executed a comprehensive program to
create a General Plan; and
WHEREAS, said program pursuant to California Government Code
Section 65351 has included substantial involvement and direction
by citizens; local, State and federal public agencies; public
utilities; and community groups, through written correspondence,
meetings, public workshops, meetings of a citizen's general plan
committee, written surveys, and public hearings; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Encinitas for
purposes of the General Plan engaged in joint public workshop
sessions with City council on october 22, October 29, November 5,
and December 3, 1987, and January 28, February 11, February 19, and
February 25, 1988; conducted Commission workshops on May 14 and May
17, 1988; conducted duly advertised public hearings on May 24, May
31, June 6, June 20, and June 29, 1988; and conducted deliberations
for recommendations to City Council on June 14, June 20, June 29,
July 6, August 23, September 20, and October 25, 1988, and February
9, 1989; said recommendations then being transmitted in writing to
the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council for purposes of the General Plan
program conducted joint workshop sessions with the Planning
Commission on October 22, October 29, November 5, and December 3,
1987, and January 28, February 11, February 19 and February 25,
1988; conducted a study session on July 22, 1988; conducted duly
advertised public hearings on July 18, July 26, August 1, August
3, August 9, August 22, and September 7; 1988, and January 28,
January 31, and February 1, 1989; and conducted deliberations on
April 13, April 20, August 29, August 30, September 6, September
10, September 13, September 17, September 27, October 6, October
8, October 11, October 15, October 17, October 20, October 22,
October 29, and November 2, 1988, and February 14, February 16,
February 22, and March 8, 1989; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Sec.
21000 et. seq. and State and local Guidelines for the
implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, an
environmental impact report has been prepared for the adoption of
the proposed General Plan; per City Council Resolution 89-16 the
final envirornnental impact report has been received, reviewed, and
certified as complete and accurate; and the City Council has
considered the information therein as part of the body of
information and public input prior to the adoption of the proposed
General Plan; and
WHEREAS, per the certified final environmental impact report,
measures are incorporated in the proposed General Plan which will
avoid significant negative environmental impacts in all areas of
the environment except air quality; negative air quality impacts
are not mitigable for the proposed General Plan, and therefore,
pursuant to Sections 15091, 15092 and 15093 of the State CEQA
Guidelines, adoption of the proposed plan must be accompanied by
a Statement of Overriding Considerations and associated findings;
and
WHEREAS, per California Governmen~ Code Sec. 65352 the
proposed General Plan has been referred and made available to the
following entities: the County of San Diego; cities abutting and
in the general vicinity of the City of Encinitas planning area; all
school districts, water and sewer districts, public utilities, and
other special districts providing service within the planning area;
the North San Diego County Transit District; the San Diego County
Local Agency Formation Commission; the San Diego Association of
Governments; the California Coastal Commission; the California
Department of Transportation; and other State and federal agencies
with lands or jurisdiction within the planning area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State Government Code Section 65585, the
State Department of Housing and COmmunity Development reviewed a
preliminary draft of the proposed Housing Element; by letter dated
June 10, 1988, the Department provided comments and suggestions for
modification of the Element; and changes pursuant to those
suggestions have been incorporated into the final proposed Housing
Element; and
WHEREAS, based on public testimony and comment, input by
public agencies, environmental analysis, and Planning Commission
and council deliberations, changes have been incorporated into the
final proposed General Plan; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Secs. 65301,
65302, 65303, 65560, 65580, the final proposed City of Encinitas
General Plan, dated March 17, 1989, consists of a Land Use Policy
Map and the following elements: Land Us~, Housing, Circulation,
Public Safety, Resource Management (satisfying Government Code
requirements for Open Space and Conservation elements), Recreation,
and Noise; and
WHEREAS, policies 2.1, 3.1, Goal 4, and Policy 4.1 of the
proposed Land Use Element will operate to limit the number of
housing units which may be constructed on an annual basis; pursuant
to California Government Code Section 65302.8, findings justifying
said policies attached hereto as Attachment A are incorporated
herein; and
WHEREAS, the final proposed General Plan and all of its
constituent parts are found to be integrated, internally consistent
and compatible; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Sec. 65400(b) requires an
annual report to City Council on the status of the General Plan and
progress in its implementation; this annual report will monitor the
mitigation of environmental effects per the analyses of the final
EIR; and
W~.EREAS, the above conclusions are supported by records on
file in the offices of the Community Development Department and the
City Clerk of the City of Encinitas, file 88-001-GP:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the'City Council of the City
of Encinitas, as follows:
1. The findings on Housing Limits pursuant to State Government
Code Section 65302.8 attached hereto as Attachment A are
hereby made, and incorporated into this action of adoption.
2. Per the provisions of the California Government Code, the
documents attached hereto as Attachments C and D are hereby
adopted and effective as the General Plan of the City of
Encinitas.
3. The Statement of Overriding Considerations attached hereto as
Attachment B is hereby incorporated into this action of
adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 29th day of March, 1989, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Gaines, Omsced, Shea, Slacer
NAYS: Hano
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Anne Omsted, Mayor of the
City of Encinitas,
California
ATTEST:
E. JAN~OOL, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT A
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 89-17
FINDINGS ON HOUSING LIMITS
Pursuant to California Government Code Sec. 65302.8, the limit in
the General Plan to the number of residential dwelling units for
which building permits may be issued annually is justified based
on the following:
1. The annual limit is a yearly average of the total build-out
potential for residential dwelling units over the lifetime of
the Plan. The re-calculation of the annual limit each year
based on the remaining undeveloped number of units over the
remaining number of years assures that the full potential
number of units can be achieved. Over the Plan lifetime,
then, there should be no reduction in housing opportunities
based on the total number of housing units built. (Ref. Land
Use Element, policy 4.1, Attachment D).
2. The City's appropriate share of the r~gional need for housing,
as established by the San Diego Association of Governments,
is incorporated and described in the Housing Element of the
General Plan. (Ref. Housing Element, p. H-15 et. seg,,
Attachment D).
3. The specific housing programs and activities which the City
of Encinitas intends to address to fulfill the requirements
of Government Code Section 65302(c), to assure that the City
can provide its appropriate share of regional housing needs,
are also incorporated and described in the Housing Element.
(Ref. Housing Element pp. H-16 through H-18 and H-23 through
H-30). The Land Use and Housing Elements arm designed to be
mutually consistent so that the development potential in the
Land Use Element will satisfy the need for housing
opportunities established in the Housing Element. (Ref. Land
Use Element pp. 26 and 49, Housing Element pp. 10, 11, 12, 22
and 23).
4. The environmental resources available to the City for purposes
of achieving housing goals are as fully described in the
Housing Element, the final Environmental Impact Report
certified by Council Resolution No. 89-16, and the Master
· Environmental Assessment document dated October, 1987. These
resources include remaining vacant or underdeveloped land
planned for residential use under a range of densities; and
an existing affordable housing stock which may be
rehabilitated and maintained. (Ref. Housing Element pp. 22,
23, and 27).
5. Fiscal resources available to the City for purposes of
achieving housing goals are as described in the Housing
Element, the final Environmental Impact Report, and the Fiscal
Analysis Technical Report document dated February, 1988.
These resources include continuing Federal CDBG funding, the
20% housing set-aside from the potential establishment of a
City redevelopment project, housing impact fees which may be
established pursuant to provisions of the California
Government Code for development within the Coastal Zone or
development impacting existing mobilehome and trailer parks,
and available City general funds.
6. The public health, safety, and welfare are promoted in the
application of the annual housing limit as follows:
A. Rapid Population Growth
During the four-year period prior to incorporation of the
City (January 1983 to January 1987) population increased
by approximately 35%. (Ref. Housing Element Technical
Report).
This rapid rate of growth in the Encinitas area created
overcrowded and substandard school facilities (Master
Environmental Assessment, pp. 14-6 and 14-7; final EIR
p. 5.13-4); a severe shortage of parks and recreational
facilities (Recreation Element Technical Report); roads
which are inadequate to serve new population needs
(Circulation Element Traffic Analysis; Master
Environmental Assessment pp. 13-1 through 13-11);
substandard library facilities (final EIR pp. 5.13-5
through 5.13-8); uncertain future water supplies (Master
Environmental Assessment pp. 16-1 through 16-4; final EIR
p. 5.15-1); and inadequate solid waste facilities.
(Master Environmental Assessment p. 16-6).
The City must have the time and breathing space necessary
to plan and implement polices and actions which will
gradually bring these substandard conditions into
conformance with the goals of our General Plan and with
our citizens' expectations of "Quality of Life".
This is not a process which can be accomplished in a few
years but must continue throughout the anticipated 25-
year buildout period and possibly beyond.
B. Continued Growth Likely
It is likely that Encinitas will continue to experience
a rapid rate of population growth, given the development
pressures present in the coastal regions of Southern
California. (Master Environmental Assessment pp. 11-1 and
11-2).
C. D~minished Quality of Life and Community Character
Rapid growth has resulted in significant adverse effects,
some of which are listed below:
1. Overcrowdina of Schools
Most schools serving the Encinitas area are
overcrowded. Class sizes frequently exceed the
desirable teacher-to-pupil ratio. Many students are
housed in temporary facilities· Elementary schools
are on year-round schedules. (Master Environmental
~sessment, pp. 14-6 and 14-7; final EIR p. 5.13-
2. Roads, Highways and FreewayG
Roadways are suffering from increased levels of
traffic and inadequate improvements to accommodate
the demands of recent rapid growth. Traffic
projections for the future continue to escalate and
promise decreasing levels of service. (Circulation
Element Traffic Analysis; Master Environmental
Assessment pp. 13-1 through 13-11).
3. Ware ~
Encinitas depends almost entirely on imported water.
Water supplies are not guaranteed for the future of
Southern California. Residents in the past have
been notified to curtail water use due to rapid
growth and semi-drought conditions.
Water agencies which serve the City are considering
additional storage facilities to serve the rapidly
growing population. (Master Environmental Assessment
Pp. 16-1 through 16-4; final EIR p. 5.15-1).
-Air quality in the San Diego area does not comply
with State and Federal Air Quality standards. San
Diego has failed to comply with Federal standards
since 1971. Continued rapid growth will prevent
standards from being achieved in the future, thereby
continuing to deprive our citizens of the right to
live in a clean, healthful environment. (Master
Environmental Assessment, pp. 3-2 through 3-5; final
EIR pp. 5.2-1 through 5.2-3).
5. Parks and ODen SDacm
The lack of neighborhood and community park acreage
in. t~e City of Encinitas has become critical.
Exlstlng acreage is approximately 39.82. National
Recreation and Park Standards recommend that a city
with a population of 52,000 should have between 52
and 104 acres of neighborhood park land and between
260 and 416 acres of community park land. Using
these nationally recognized standards put the City's
deficit at 312 to 520 park acres.
Open space now consists largely of undeveloped
parcels of land. Continued growth could preclude
the City's ability to acquire open space for the
future enjoyment of the City's residents. (Master
Environmental Assessment, p. 19-1; Recreation
Element Technical Report; Resource Management
Technical Report).
6. Libraries
A study of National Standard for libraries reveals
that the city of Encinitas should have 30,810 square
feet of library space. The city currently has 5,640
square feet. The existing deficit is 25,170 square
feet. (Final EIR pp. 5.13-5 through 5.13-8).
7. Recreational Facilities
As a result of the shortage of park acreage, the
City is also suffering from a lack of recreational
facilities within its park system. The deficiencies
include 10 badminton courts, 9 basketball courts,
2 handball courts, 50 tennis courts, 51 volleyball
courts, 10 baseball diamonds, i football field, 4
soccer fields and 10 softball fields. These
deficiencies were determined by using National
Recreation and Parks Association Standards. There
is also an identified ne~d for a senior citizen
center cultural center and teen-age activity center.
(Recreation Element Technical Report).
8. Sewers and Waste Manaaement
As a result of growth, all three agencies which
provide sewer service to the City are now facing the
necessity of constructing new, larger facilities and
increasing fees to customers. The County has little
landfill space left in the current facilities in
North San Diego County and is searching for new
landfills as well as considering the option of trash
burning facilities, which will increase the air
pollution in the North County area and increase the
costs to residents of the City. (Master
Environmental Assessment pp. 16-5 and 16-6).
D. Rapid Growth Precludes Meaninaful Public Input
Uncontrolled growth may exceed the city's ability to
obtain meaningful public input on proposed projects and
could make it impossible for decision making bodies to
render contemplated decisions.
E. Deterioration of Qualitv of Life in County
Throughout San Diego County, the "quality of life" is
deteriorating as a result of rapid growth. Specifically,
rapid growth is causing:
1. Unmanageable traffic congestion.
2. Permanent loss of open space and environmentally
sensitive lands.
3. Higher taxes, fees and utility rates to subsidize
growth.
4. Increased air, water and noise pollution.
5. Crowding, congestion and increased crime.
6. The overburdening of public services, facilities and
infrastructure such as water, jails, parks,
libraries, schools, sewer facilities, roadways and
waste facilities.
7. A decline in the beauty and open feeling of San
Diego County and a consequent increase in
psychological stress.
By utilizing methods of growth control, cities and the
County may buy the time necessary to develop technologies
and financing to solve these problems before being buried
by them.
F. Need for LonG-Term Planning for'the Futura
A Growth Management Program which includes a projected
buildout figure will allow the City and other service
agencies the ability to plan and implement policies and
actions which will preserve the quality of life and
community character of the City. A projected ultimate
population figure will allow all our services and
facilities t~ be sized and constr~cted to accommodate our
needs of the future while protecting against the costly
overextension of facilities. It will also eliminate the
costs of short-sighted facility expansion.
G. Permanent Damaqe to Character and Oualit¥ of Lif.'
Residents of the City were attracted here and reside in
this City because of the small-town, semi-rural character
of the various communities which make up the City. The
retention of community character and quality of life were
important issues in the incorporation of the City.
Excessive ultimate population in the City will result in
permanent unavoidable damage to the small town character
and quality of life to which the City is committed.
(General Plan Introduction, pp. I-1 through 1-15;
correspondence received and on file; General Plan
community issues survey; issues identification by
Community Advisory Boards; and appendix, community
character statements).
H. Permanent Damaqe to Natural Resources and Wildlif,.
As growth occurs, natural resources are inevitably
impacted and wildlife diminished. Excessive ultimate
population in the City will result in permanent
unavoidable damage and destruction to natural resources
and wildlife within the City and the planning area.
(Resource Management Technical Report).
I. Potential Damaqe to Economic Health
Without a controlled balance of land uses and regulation
of ultimate population, the healthy economic future of
the City cannot be assured. Residential growth which
outstrips the balance of land uses which help to provide
services and facilities can result in a serious shortfall
of funds necessary to deliver services and facilities
needed by the residential areas. (Fiscal Analysis
Technical Report).
J. Potential Damaqe to Health. Safety and Welfare
Excessive ultimate population in the city will result in
permanent unavoidable damage to the health, safety and
welfare of the citizens of Encinitas. (Ref. above
findings).
K. Transportation Problems and Stress
The capacities of transportation systems of the City and
the County have been exceeded, or are reaching capacity,
causing the systems to be neither safe nor efficient.
Traffic congestion which exceeds a reasonable level of
service increases the risk of traffic accidents, hinders
or blocks the passage of public safety vehicles, causes
or contributes to air pollution, wastes, fuel, degrades
the economy, contributes to lost productivity and
promotes stress both on the roadways and off, and
generally degrades the quality of life within the County
and the City. By controlling growth within the City, the
City is contributing directly toward an alleviation of
these problems in the future, both within the City and
in the neighboring communities. (Circulation Element
Traffic Analysis; Master Environmental Assessment pp. 3-
2 and 13-1 through 13-11).
L. Community Preservation
Residential and commercial uses must be balanced during
growth. Without a controlled balance of land uses and
regulation of rate of growth, the healthy economic future
of the City, as well as the quality of life and small-
town characteristics, cannot be assured. (Fiscal
Analysis Technical Report; and note above references to
sources re: quality of life).
ATTACH~4ENT B
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 89-17
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The California Environmental Quality Act requires that decision-
makers balance the benefits of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks. If benefits outweigh unavoidable
adverse effects, the adverse effects may be considered acceptable.
The final Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Encinitas
General Plan finds that policies and measures incorporated in the
Plan and its implementing Zoning Code address environmental
concerns, and when implemented will act to avoid significant
negative impacts for all aspects of the environment except air
quality. In fact, as detailed in the Plan and the EIR, the Plan
is specifically designed to protect significant environmental
resources with development, while insuring an adequate and safely-
functioning infrastructure. Negative air quality impacts are found
to be unmitigable to non-significance, even while Plan provisions
substantially reduce these impacts from a ~reater level of severity
if those Plan provisions did not apply. (Ref. final EIR pages 5.2-
1 through 5.2-3).
The proposed General Plan is analyzed as environmentally preferable
to other possible project alternatives (ref. final EIR pages 6-1
through 6-3), including the San Dieguito Community Plan which was
the previously-effective plan for this area. The "no project"
alternative is theoretically environmentally superior, and would
address the identified air quality impact; however, the no-project
alternative is not feasible in that it would entail broad-based
'condemnation and public acquisition of land, beyond the means and
intent of the City. The lower residential development would not
reduce air quality impacts to non-significance, and could create
negative housing impacts by keeping the City from attaining its
identified housing goals and its appropriate share of regional
housing resources. In sum, the proposed Plan is the
environmentally superior alternative for those alternatives which
are feasible.
Changes have been incorporated in the final proposed General Plan
which address environmental concerns identified in the final EIR.
The selection of roadway network alternative N2 in the final Plan
as discussed in the October 25, 1988 EIR Addendum reduces
circulation, natural resource, land use, and biological impacts
associated with the earlier proposed circulation plan. The
concurrent change in designation of Santa Fe Drive between I-5 and
E1 Camino Real from the Major to the Augmented Local classification
reduces noise, land use and neighborhood character impacts to non-
significance (fEIR page 5.12-2).
The following benefits to be achieved from the adoption of the
General Plan and application of its implementing measures including
the Zoning Code are cited: Housing opportunities which would not
be addressed through either project alternatives will be made
available, as outlined in the Housing Element. The provision and
enjoyment of public parks and open space will be made available,
per the standards and programs outlined in the Recreation Element.
Economic revitalizati
· . . un o~ exls=lng commercial districts of the
City is to be achieved, together with enhancement of City revenues
and fiscal resources, as provided by policies and programs in the
Land Use Element, and demonstrated in the Fiscal Analysis Technical
Report. Protection of desirable community character and qUality
of life available within the City's communities is to be provided,
which other project alternatives do not offer. Protection of
.natural resources and cultural resources is provided by the Plan
and its implementing programs, to an extend exceeding other project
alternatives. The proposed Plan and its implementation will insure
a safe and functional circulation system, in balance with planned
land use.
Regarding the remaining significant air quality effects, then, the
following finding is made:
1. Air Quality - Specific considerations make infeasible the
complete mitigation or avoidance of this impact. Only the
"no-project,, alternative theoretically reduces cumulative
negative air quality impacts to non-significance in this non-
attainment region as defined by Federal air quality standards.
This alternative
No ..... as. found to be impractical and infeasible.
n~ne~ss, provisions of the proposed Plan do reduce
.quall~y impacts by controlli ............. air
· ~ ~uw~n ~nu providing £or a
zunctlogal circulation system balanced with planned land
(Ref. final EIR pp. 5.2-1 through 5.2-3 and 6-1). use.