HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Rpts./1999/05/19
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP
6:00 p.m.
Wednesday, May 19, 1999
Conference Rooms 5
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
(Dinner for Commissioners from 5:30 to 6:00 p.m.)
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:00
ROLL CALL
1. Eastern Chula Vista Master Planned Co=unity Update
2. 2020 Forecasts
ADJOURNMENT: To the next Regular Phmning Commi~sionmeeting of May 26, 1999 at 6:00
p.m. in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA.
COMPLIANCE WITH TIIE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests
individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City
meeting, activity, or service. request such accommodations at least forty-eight hours in advance for
meetings, and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact Diana Vargas for specific
infonnation at (619) 691-5101 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDD) at 585-5647.
California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired.
H:\HOME\PLANN1NG\DlANA\WORKSHOP.AGN
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item:
Meeting Date: 05/19/99
ITEM TITLE:
Presentation and discussion ofSANDAG's Preliminary 2020 Cities/County
Forecast (2020 Forecast).
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission accept the Preliminary 2020 Cities/County
Forecast as information, with the provisions noted by staff in the Conclusions section of the report,
and recommend that the City Council do the same and forward any comments to SANDAG.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None.
In March 1999, the SANDAG Board of Directors released the 2020 Forecast for information and
review (Attachment A). The 2020 Forecast is a result of several years of work through SANDAG's
Regional Growth Management Technical Committee which City staff is a part of. The 2020
Forecast covers the period from 1995 to 2020 and contains projections for each jurisdiction for
population, housing, and employment growth. It updates SANDAG's prior Series 8 Forecast which
covered the period from 1990-2015.
The 2020 Forecast continues to call attention to the fact that current general and community plans
in the region do not designate enough land for urban-density residential use, and therefore, cannot
accommodate projected growth. In response, the 2020 Forecast assumes changes to current plans
to add needed urban-density capacity consistent with principles in the adopted Land Use Distribution
Element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy, or what is commonly becoming known as
"smart growth." This report summarizes the 2020 Forecast and its underlying assumptions to
facilitate the Commission's discussion. SANDAG staff will make a presentation and will be
available for questions.
DISCUSSION:
OVERVIEW OF FORECAST NUMBERS
A. AMOUNT/RATE OF GROWTH
Population
. By 2020 the San Diego Region's population is projected to increase by 44% for a
total population of 3,853,297.
. Chula Vista's population is projected to grow 82%, for a total of 275,455 in 2020.
This is the third largest percentage growth rate in the region, with Carlsbad projected
at 97%, followed by San Marcos at 93%. In total population numbers, we will
remain the second largest city in the region, behind San Diego.
Item:
Meeting Date: 05/19/99
. Incrementally, Chula Vista's population is projected to reach 208,107 by 2005, and
233,313 by 2010. Projected overall average, annual population growth to 2020 is
about 4,975 people/year, or about 2.5%/year. By comparison, Chula Vista's average,
annual population growth between 1980 and 1995 was 3,027 people/year, or about
3%/year (excluding the inhabited Montgomery annexation).
Housing Units
. An additional 407,547 housing units (41 % increase) are projected to be constructed
in the San Diego Region by 2020, for a total of 1,404,231 units.
. An additional 42,557 housing units (79% increase) are projected to be constructed
in Chula Vista, for a total of 96,518 units. This equates to an overall, annual average
of about 1,702 units/year. By comparison, Chula Vista's average, annual housing
unit growth between 1980 and 1995 was 955 units/year.
Employment
. Civilian employment for the region is projected to increase by 50%.
. Chula Vista ranks 6th among cities with the highest growth in employment. An
additional 41,537 jobs are projected for the City (an increase of 90%). The City of
Poway leads in employment growth with an increase of 169%, followed by Vista
with 145%, San Marcos with 105%, and Carlsbad with 109%.
B. SHIFT IN REGIONAL GROWTH DISTRIBUTION
Chula Vista's Increased Role In Providing for Regional Housing Demand
As illustrated by the above housing unit figures, Chula Vista is projected to have significant
growth between now and the year 2020. In fact, and as further illustrated in the following
table, annual rates are projected to almost double from an average of 895 units/year since
1980, to 1,890 units/year between now and the year 2020. As shown in the right hand
column of the following table, Chula Vista will absorb 10.3% ofthe region's total housing
unit growth, compared to 5.6% from 1980 to 1998.
Average Annual
Growth
(dwelling units)
Chula Vista
San Diego
Region
Chula Vista asa % of
the Region's Growth
Historic
1980 - 1998
895
15,994
5.6%
Projected
1999-2020
1,890
18,360
10.3%
Item:
Meeting Date: 05/19/99
This clearly illustrates that Chula Vista's past growth levels are not a reflection for the future,
and that a fundamental shift will occur in the distribution of regional growth from
jurisdictions that have reached build out capacity of their land use plans, to jurisdictions like
Chula Vista that have additional land use capacity remaining. Due to the City's large
ownership of vacant land and master planned community format in eastern Chula Vista, and
the annexation of9,500 acres of the Otay Ranch project, Chula Vista has one of the largest
inventories of remaining, developable residential lands in the region.
Once all jurisdictions reach build out of their land use plans, development will shift to
undeveloped lands in the rural and unincorporated areas of the County. The results ofland
consumption in rural areas leads to urban sprawl, an overburdened transportation system, and
a threat to agricultural lands, open space, and environmental resources.
The San Diego region has a total of 636,000 acres of vacant, developable land remaining
(free of any environmental or policy constraints to development). Approximately 606,000
of the 636,000 acres are planned for residential use and almost all, 98 percent, of this land
will be consumed by 2020 under current land use policies. These vacant lands are currently
planned for relatively low densities resulting in a faster consumption of land and the inability
to accommodate the region's projected population increase of over I million persons over
the next 20 years.
Employment Opportunities
The 2020 Forecast shows that next to the City of San Diego, the City of Chula Vista will
have the largest amount of employment land (in the Forecast defined as
retail/industrial/office/school) in the County in 2020. Chula Vista's business community will
employ the third largest number of people (only San Diego and Carlsbad's business
community will employ more). However, City staff continues to review the employment
statistics in the 2020 Forecast in light of several factors:
. The 2020 Forecast appears to indicate civilian employment in Chula Vista growing
faster between 1995 and 2005 than we expect employment land to be developed. A
more gradual growth pattern may be more accurate.
. SANDAG's recent Employment Land Inventory and Market Analysis, March 1999,
(ELI) indicates that Chula Vista has more employment land (in the ELI defined as
Industrial and Office) available than is shown by the 2020Forecast. ChuIa Vista may
be under-represented by as many as 219 acres. This would mean a corresponding
under-representation in civilian employment. SANDAG is aware of the discrepancy
between the two studies and has indicated that they will be reconciling the Forecast
to the ELI information in a second draft of the 2020 Forecast targeted for the end of
this year.
Item:
Meeting Date: 05/19/99
Comparison of Vacant Land Between ELI and 2020 Forecast
Employment Land Inventory Vacant Land 1995
Employment Land Inventory Vacant Land 1998
2020 Forecast Vacant Land 1995*
*lncludes only industrial and office
994 acres
I ,006 acres
787 acres
. Otay Ranch Villages 9 and 10 (the planned University of California - Chula Vista site) do
not appear to be reflected in the 2020 Forecast - either in the industrial land count or the
school land count. Villages 9 and 10 include approximately 450 net acres that will have an
employment component ifUCCV is developed - some reflection of this development should
appear in 2020 Forecast.
LAND USE POLICY IMPLICA nONS (Land Use Distribution Element)
Regional Setting
As noted at the beginning of this report, the 2020 Forecast figures reflect the modeling of land use
policies that are not fully manifested in the City's current General Plan. During the preparation of
SANDAG's prior Series 8 Forecast, it became apparent that the current land use plans of the regions'
19 jurisdictions do not designate enough urban-density residential land to accommodate projected
growth through 2015.
Since the release of the Series 8 Regional Growth Forecast in 1995, local land use plans, except for
several isolated examples, have remained relatively unchanged. Alternatives to current land use
plans continue to be needed in order to balance growth with the need to preserve open space and
environmental resources, provide affordable housing, contain urban sprawl, and reduce traffic
congestion.
The Land Use Distribution Element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy, which was
endorsed by the cities and adopted by the SANDAG Board in 1995, identifies several policies to
counteract these problems. The Land Use Distribution Element recommends that each jurisdiction
should:
I) Place its highest densities within walking distance of transit stations, along bus
corridors and within traditional town centers.
2) Encourage mixed use development and mixed housing types.
3) Incorporate residential uses within large employment areas.
Item:
Meeting Date: 05/19/99
For the preparation of the 2020 Forecast, four Land Use Distribution Alternatives were identified
and evaluated in terms of their relative impacts on land use, environmental, and transportation issues.
These Land Use Distribution Alternatives also compared the continuation of existing policies to the
implementation of the Land Use Distribution Element. After considerable discussion and evaluation
among the region's Planning Directors, SANDAG staff, and the SANDAG Board, the 2020 Forecast
was based upon Land Use Alternative 4.
Chula Vista General Plan
Land Use Alternative 4 is based on the implementation of "smart growth" principles which place
the highest residential densities and mixed uses, for all jurisdictions, within walking distance (1,000
foot radius) of existing and planned transit stations and town centers. Outside those sites, residential
development occurs at the top end of general and community plan density ranges. In the
unincorporated area, town centers are excluded as Land Use Distribution Element sites and a cap is
placed on future residential development based on community plans and sponsor group area
population targets.
The projected 42,557 dwelling units for Chula Vista will be constructed primarily in master planned
communities which currently have approximately 34,000 units remaining to be constructed and/or
occupied. The remaining forecasted units would be infill development and increased density around
transit corridors. Therefore, the 2020 Forecast projects approximately 10,500 units over the City's
current General Plan capacity.
CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDA TIONS
In addition to providing direction for accommodating the region's growth, the 2020 Forecast is
intended as a planning tool for local governments and for use in regional studies and plans.
Acceptance of the 2020 Forecast for use in planning projects does not amend the City's General Plan
or obligate Council to adopt general plan or zoning amendments. However, in order to achieve a
balance between growth and quality of life issues, SANDAG advocates that all jurisdictions in the
region work cooperatively to amend their land use plans to incorporate and implement "smart
growth" principles. Since it will take time for jurisdictions to implement these changes through
future land use plans and zoning updates, the Land Use Alternative 4 model does not "kick-in" until
2005. Additionally, since our jurisdiction has already been implementing "smart growth" principles
in master planned communities, the forecast model does not apply the high end density ranges to
these project areas.
Item:
Meeting Date: 05/19/99
Collective implementation of "smart growth" principles by the region's jurisdictions will result in
the following benefits:
I) Every person in the region will spend on average at least eight fewer hours in a vehicle a
month.
2) The average commuter will on average drive 800 fewer miles each year.
3) The average household will on average need to buy 220 fewer gallons of gas every year.
4) The average household will on average save $600 per year in total travel costs.
Staff concludes that, based upon the "smart growth" principles, the 2020 Forecast accurately
represents the City's development activity over the next 20 years and should be accepted as an
information and planning tool. Staff also recommends that jurisdictions which implement these
"smart growth" principles should receive priority in regional funding opportunities.
However, we have several concerns related to the employment forecasts, including the timing and
amount of civilian employment growth and the amount of Chula Vista employment land indicated.
Staff estimates (based on SANDAG's recent Employment Land Inventory) that the amount of vacant
employment land in Chula Vista currently is approximately 1,006 acres; this is approximately 219
acres more than the 2020 Forecast shows. These 219 acres represent additional land for potential
employment. Additionally, the Forecast may not take into account the employment opportunities
in Villages 9 and 10. Because of these issues, staff would like the opportunity to further analyze and
comment on the accuracy of the 2020 Forecast's civilian employment and employment land use
figures prior to accepting the full report.
Attachments
A. SANDAG 2020 Cities/County Forecast
(H:\home\planning\ed\2020fore.wpd
-,
San Diego Association of Governments
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
February 26, 1999
AGENDA REPORT No.: 99-2- 7
Action Requested: INFORMATION
PRELIMINARY 2020 CITIES/COUNTY FORECAST -
TECHNICAL UPDATE
Introduction
The 2020 Regionwide Forecast, based on the Regional Economic Prosperity Strategy, was
accepted by the Board in July 1998. The allocation of that forecast to jurisdictions and other
geographic areas comprises the 2020 Cities/County Forecast. The attached tables summarize the
population, housing and employment forecasts for the 19 local jurisdictions and for sphere of
influence areas.
The Board directed staff to prepare a preliminary 2020 Cities/County Forecast based on the
recommendations of the November Land Use Alternatives report, and on updated land use inputs
by local jurisdictions. The recommendations of the November report were: I) implement the
Land Use Distribution Element (commonly referred to as "Smart Growth") policies and utilize
the top ends of the planned density ranges in the cities, and 2) employ the County population
targets in the unincorporated area.
Discussion
The Cities/County Forecast is simply a tool. It aids elected officials and planners by simulating
the potential development patterns in the region if certain changes are made to public policy.
These shifts in policy are important because they are the means through which we can help to
ensure a sustainable and prosperous region.
The 2020 Forecast recognizes that population growth in the region will continue, and that a large
portion of it is the result of natural increase, not just migration. And, there is the understanding
that the primary elements of local government's role in growth management are interrelated:
I. Maintaining a prosperous economy.
2. Providing an adequate and equitable transportation system.
3. Preserving open space and habitat.
4. Increasing the rate of home ownership.
5. Reforming the state -local tax system to assist and sustain all of the above.
Attachment A
.~
The 19 jurisdictions are being asked to accept the forecast for use in planning projects. The
forecast illustrates that the growth in each city and community will require changes to many
general and community plans. The Growth Management Public Outreach program (described in
Agenda report 14) is intended to increase public awareness and understanding of managing local
and regional growth.
KENNETH,E. SUL
Executive Director
Attachment
Key Staff Contact: Paul Kavanaugh, (619) 595-5349; e-mail - pka@sandag.cog.ca.us
Funds are Budgeted in Overall Work Program 102.07
2
Table 1
2020 Cities/County Forecast
Total Population
By Jurisdiction and Sphere of Influence
Chanqe 1995-2020
1995 2005 2010 2020 Num. Pet.
Jurisdictions:
Carlsbad 67,167 97,446 109,332 132,232 65,065 97%
Chula Vista 151,093 208,107 233,313 275,455 124,362 82%
Coronado 28,705 29,166 29,209 29,719 1,014 4%
DelMar 5,093 5,543 5,736 6,079 986 19%
EI Cajon 91,464 99,337 101,964 104,563 13,099 14%
Encinitas 56,788 66,564 68,440 70,750 13,962 25%
Escondido 117,525 136,211 140,490 143,228 25,703 22%
Imperial Beach 27,732 29,230 30,180 33,333 5,601 20%
La Mesa 56,254 61,752 63,979 66,828 10,574 19%
Lemon Grove 24,605 27,887 29,342 30,238 5,633 23%
National City 54,120 57,949 58,580 58,977 4,857 9%
Oceanside 145,903 184,138 196,613 202,592 56,689 39%
Poway 45,161 50,904 52,031 53,338 8,177 18%
San Diego 1,174,422 1,403,874 1,499,437 1,693,533 519,111 44%
San Marcos 47,360 67,453 75,356 91,557 44,197 93%
Santee 53,593 68,561 73,607 74,856 21,263 40%
Solana Beach 13,531 14,714 15,103 16,127 2,596 19%
Vista 79,506 95,616 101,364 103,316 23,810 30%
Unincorporated 429,178 519,022 553,621 666,576 237,398 55%
Region 2,669,200 3,223,474 3,437,697 3,853,297 1,184,097 44%
Spheres of Influence:
Chula Vista 164,653 224,393 249,617 291,934 127,281 77%
EI Cajon 108,607 118,256 120,724 123,366 14,759 14%
Encinitas 56,821 66,598 68,470 70,780 13,959 25%
Escondido 136,313 158,668 164,455 170,933 34,620 25%
National City 56,127 60,034 60,747 61,134 5,007 9%
poway 45,334 51,101 52,225 53,532 8,198 18%
San Marcos 52,464 73,193 81,289 98,075 45,611 87%
Vista 92,991 111,351 118,774 124,199 31,208 34%
Note: The forecast may exceed the capacity of current general or community
plans because it incorporates higher residential and employment densities
within walking distance of transit stations and in certain town centers. This
forecast was released for local agency review by the SANDAG Board of
Directors in February, 1999.
Source: San Diego Association of Governments, February, 1999
3
Attachment
.--,
,
Table 2
2020 Cities/County Forecast
Total Housing Units
By Jurisdiction and Sphere of Influence
ChanQe 1995-2020
~ 2005 2010 2020 Num. Pet.
Jurisdictions:
Carlsbad 28,927 40,337 45,789 55,123 26,196 91%
Chula Vista 53,961 70,928 80,775 96,518 42,557 79%
Coronado 9,530 9,661 9,867 10,105 575 6%
Del Mar 2,563 2,627 2,754 2,913 350 14%
EI Cajon 34,703 36,043 37,336 38,534 3,831 11%
Encinitas 22,600 25,227 26,185 27,057 4,457 20%
Escondido 43,742 48,403 50,570 51,764 8,022 18%
Imperial Beach 9,853 9,956 10,363 11,501 1,648 17%
La Mesa 24,787 25,824 26,943 28,259 3,472 14%
Lemon Grove 8,811 9,559 10,133 10,477 1,666 19%
National City 15,443 15,983 16,330 16,548 1,105 7%
Oceanside 55,836 67,048 72,351 74,529 18,693 33%
Poway 15,101 16,377 16,905 17,406 2,305 15%
San Diego 453,515 518,784 559,327 631,237 177,722 39%
San Marcos 16,736 22,921 26,042 31,738 15,002 90%
Santee 18,625 22,842 24,673 25,120 6,495 35%
Solana Beach 6,427 6,585 6,860 7,317 890 14%
Vista 28,890 33,254 35,591 36,256 7,366 25%
Unincorporated 146,634 171,377 186,263 231,829 85,195 58%
Region 996,684 1,153,736 1,245,057 1,404,231 407,547 41%
Spheres of Influence:
Chula Vista 58,459 76,096 85,999 101,851 43,392 74%
EI Cajon 41,205 42,909 44,220 45,458 4,253 10%
Encinitas 22,610 25,237 26,195 27,067 4,457 20%
Escondido 50,006 55,815 58,567 61,314 11,308 23%
National City 16,049 16,588 16,968 17,188 1,139 7%
Poway 15,160 16,438 16,967 17,469 2,309 15%
San Marcos 19,519 25,875 29,108 35,052 15,533 80%
Vista 33,597 38,515 41,459 43,427 9,830 29%
Note: The forecast may exceed the capacity of current general or community
plans because it incorporates higher residential and employment densities
within walking distance of transit stations and in certain town centers. This
forecast was released for local agency review by the SANDAG Board of
Directors in February, 1999.
Source: San Diego Association of Governments, February, 1999
4
Table 3
2020 Cities/County Forecast
Civilian Employment
By Jurisdiction and Sphere of Influence
Chanqe 1995-2020
1995 2005 2010 2020 Num. f!;!.
Jurisdictions:
Carlsbad 41,225 69,592 73,858 86,156 44,931 109%
Chula Vista 45,996 67,643 73,200 87,533 41,537 90%
Coronado 14,900 15,209 15,266 15,331 431 3%
Del Mar 3,183 3,549 3,589 3,589 406 13%
EI Cajon 39,810 46,397 47,650 50,908 11,098 28%
Encinltas 22,645 27,191 27,685 27,779 5,134 23%
Escondido 45,809 57,207 59,079 63,431 17,622 38%
Imperial Beach . 3,291 4,054 4,212 4,354 1,063 32%
La Mesa 23,286 25,417 25,794 27,317 4,031 17%
Lemon Grove 6,991 8,083 8,277 8,450 1,459 21%
National City 21,844 25,356 26,048 28,056 6,212 28%
Oceanside 34,551 54,746 57,876 67,149 32,598 94%
Poway 14,432 33,113 35,236 38,776 24,344 169%
San Diego 606,561 747,084 768,152 836,913 230,352 38%
San Marcos 24,121 40,436 42,837 49,566 25,445 105%
Santee 14,738 20,052 21,043 22,570 7,832 53%
Solana Beach 8,662 9,179 9,279 9,696 1,034 12%
Vista 25,748 50,403 54,068 63,034 37,286 145%
Unincorporated 87,154 114,633 118,785 137,153 49,999 57%
Region 1,084,947 1,419,344 1,471,934 1,627,761 542,814 50%
Spheres of Influence:
Chula Vista 47,590 69,674 75,292 89,803 42,213 89%
EI Cajon 43,292 50,409 51,778 55,154 11,862 27%
Encinitas 22,652 27,198 27,692 27,786 5,134 23%
Escondido 48,279 60,427 62,421 67,581 19,302 40%
National City 22,008 25,554 26,246 28,254 6,246 28%
Poway 14,445 33,126 35,249 38,789 24,344 169%
San Marcos 25,620 41,935 44,336 51,322 25,702 100%
Vista 28,105 53,953 57,775 67,343 39,238 140%
Source: San Diego Association of Governments, February, 1999
5
San Diego
~
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
Note: The forecast may exceed the capacity of current general or community plans because it incorporates higher residential
and employment densities wIthIn waiking dIstance of existing and potentIal transIt statIons and In certain town
centers. This forecast was released for local agency review by the SANDAG Board of Dlrec/ors In February, /999.
2020 0 ~s/County Forecast
City of Chula Vista
Population and Housing
1995 to 2020 Chanae
1995 2005 2010 2020 Numeric Percent
TOTAL POPULATION 151,093 208,107 233,313 275,455 124,362 82%
Household Population 149,610 206,328 231,377 273,303 123,693 83%
Group Quarters Population 1,483 1,779 1,936 2,152 669 45%
Civilian 1,483 1,779 1,936 2,152 669 45%
Military 0 0 0 0 0 0%
TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 53,961 70,928 80,775 96,518 42,557 79%
Single Family 29,525 40,990 46,091 54,180 24,655 84%
Multiple Family 20,704 28,285 31,068 38,607 17,903 86%
Mobile Homes 3,732 3,653 3,616 3,731 -1 0%
OCCUPiED HOUSING UNITS 51,375 67,769 76,973 92,472 41,097 80%
Single Family 28,282 39,460 44,303 52,619 24,337 86%
Multiple Family 19,477 24,758 29,158 36,223 16,746 86%
Mobile Homes 3,616 3,551 3,512 3,630 14 0%
VACANCY RATE 4.8% 4.5% 4.7% 4.2% -0.6% -13%
Single Family 4.2% 3.7% 3.9% 2.9% -1.3% -31%
Multiple Family 5.9% 5.8% 6.1% 6.2% 0.3% 5%
Mobile Homes 3.1% 2.8% 2.9% 2.7% -0.4% -13%
PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD 2.91 3.04 3.01 2.96 0.05 2%
Population and Employment, 1995 to 2020
300,000
250~00--------------------------------_______
200,000 - - - - - - - - - n - - - - _ n _ _
- - - - - --
150,000 - - n
-------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
100000 _--------------------------------_______________________
, C
IJ IJ
50,000 -- - nO-
o
--------------------------------------;------
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
-- Population -Ir- Civilian Employment
Source: SANDAG
Page 1
February 26, 1999
---
San Diego
Q)""
"~']]
',' ~~A ~"i'i'
2020 I ties/County Forecast
City of Chula Vista
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
Note: The forecast may exceed the capactty of current general or communIty plans because It Incorporates hIgher resIdentIal
and employment densities within walking distance of Bxlstlng and potential transit stations and In certain town
centers. This forecast was released for local agency revIew by the SANDAG Board of DIrectors In February, 1999.
Employment and Income
1995 to 2020 Chance
~ 2005 2010 2020 Numeric Percent
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT 45,996 67,643 73,200 87,533 41,537 90%
Civilian Employment 45,996 67,643 73,200 87,533 41,537 90%
Manufacturing 5,534 6,861 6,528 6,301 767 14%
Transp., Comm. & Utilities 1,698 2,463 2,534 2,816 1,118 66%
Wholesale Trade 2,208 4,098 4,779 6,172 3,964 180%
Retail Trade 10,485 13,944 14,638 16,587 6,102 58%
Finance, Ins. & Real Estate 2,318 3,418 4,050 5,541 3,223 139%
Services 11,108 18,653 20,436 25,905 14,797 133%
Government 7,632 10,897 12,331 14,516 6,884 90%
Other1 5,013 7,311 7,904 9,695 4,682 93%
Military Employment 0 0 0 0 0 0%
EMPLOYMENT/HOUSING RATIO 0.85 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.05 6%
HOUSEHOLD INCOME Number of Households 1995 to 2020 Change
(Constant (1995) Dollars) 1995 2005 2Q1Q 2020 Numeric Percent
Less than $10,000 4,253 4,364 4,749 5,178 925 22%
$10,000-$14,999 3,527 3,335 3,378 3,294 -233 .7%
$15,000-$24,999 7,554 7,569 7,858 8,045 491 6%
$25,000-$34,999 7,825 8,821 9,514 10,385 2,560 33%
$35,000-$49,999 9,140 10,847 11,514 12,181 3,041 33%
$50,000-$74,999 10.893 17,822 21,727 28,616 17,723 163%
$75,000-$99,999 4,517 8,364 10,519 14,702 10,185 225%
$100,000 or more 3,666 6,647 7,714 10,071 6,405 175%
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME
Current Dollars $39,150 $69,439 $87,760 $143,684 $104,514 267%
Constant (1995) Dollars $39,150 $48,546 $51,695 $56,249 $17,099 44%
1. Employment In agriculture, mining, and construction Industries, and self-employed and domestic workers.
Source: SANDAG
Page 2
February 26, 1999
----_..._._----~.._.
San Diego 2020 C as/County Forecast
~
City of Chula Vista
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
Note: The forecast may exceed the capacIty of current general or community plans because it Incorporates higher residential
and employment densities within walking distance of existing and potential transit stations and In certain town
centers. This forecast was released for locai agency review by the SANDAG Board of Directors in February, 1999.
Land Use
1995 to 2020 Chanqe
1995 2005 2010 2020 Numeric Percent
TOTAL ACRES 32,065 32,065 32,065 32,065 0 0%
Developed Acres 23,574 25,626 25,873 26,721 3,146 13%
Low Density Single Family 34 34 34 34 0 0%
Single Family 4,997 6,955 7,859 9,484 4,488 90%
Multiple Family 1,098 1,401 1,606 1,984 886 81%
Mobile Homes 254 222 215 191 -63 -25%
Other Residential 13 13 13 13 0 0%
Industrial 1,111 1,551 1,558 1,764 654 59%
Commercial/Services 1,483 1,862 1,922 2,115 631 43%
Office 132 172 186 245 113 86%
Schools 718 782 796 843 125 17%
Roads and Freeways 3,499 3,951 4,471 4,492 993 28%
Agricultural and Extractive 1 6,612 5,057 3,588 1,931 -4,681 -71%
Parks and Military Use 3,624 3,624 3,624 3,624 0 0%
Vacant Developable Acres 3,578 1,526 1,279 431 -3,146 -88%
Low Density Single Family 0 0 0 0 0 0%
Single Family 1,782 659 589 0 .1,782 .100%
Multiple Family 97 33 25 0 -97 .100%
Industrial 758 338 345 213 -545 -72%
Commercial/Services 306 91 73 0 -306 .100%
Office 29 28 24 19 -10 -35%
Schools 245 205 205 200 -45 -18%
Future Roads and Freeways 361 173 19 0 .361 .100%
Constrained Acres 4,913 4,913 4,913 4,913 0 0%
EMPLOYMENT DENSITY' 13.4 15.5 16.4 17.6 4.3 32%
RESIDENTIAL DENSITy3 8.4 8.2 8.3 8.2 .0.2 -2%
,. This is not a forecast of agricultural land, because the 2020 Cities/County Forecast does not account for land that may
become agricultural in the future. Also, some types of development, such as low density single
family, may not preclude the continuation of existing agricultural use.
2. Civilian employment per developed employment acre (industrial, retail, office, and schools).
3. Total housing units per developed residential acre.
Source: SANDAG
Page 3
February 26, 1999
.~
( ,
(-""'
\
2020 Cities/County Forecast
Land Use Alternatives
Summary
Our land use policies, particular! y as they relate to housing, need to be
consistent with our economic, environmental and transportation policies.
The current general and community plans are not. The region is now
committed to a fundamental restructuring both economically and
environmentally, which gives us an excellent opportunity to bring our land
use plans up to date. If left unchanged, those plans will, through sprawl, high
housing costs, excessive land consumption and traffic congestion, prevent us
from reaching our goals, and over time, will degrade our quality of life.
The Land Use Distribution Element provides policy direction that coordinates
with our prosperity strategy, habitat conservation plans and transportation
plans. It puts growth in the cities and urban areas, closer to where the jobs are.
It provides residents with more housing choices and opportunities. It
concentrates the needed infrastructure improvements. It allows more
transportation options. It even cleans the air. Taken as a package, these new
policies can lead to a more sustainable community. They can help to ensure
that the San Diego region of the future will be an even better place than it is
today.
Background
Since the release of the Series 8 Regional Growth Forecast in 1995, SANDAG
has been calling the region's attention to the fact that current general and
community plans do not designate enough land for urban-density residential
use, and cannot accommodate our forecasted growth. Continuing these
policies will only worsen the problems we are now experiencing: rising
housing costs, urban sprawl, loss of open space and habitat, and, especially,
traffic congestion.
All of these problems can be countered by making changes to our plans to
direct the growth to where it belongs - our cities and urban areas. A model
for accomplishing this is found in the policies of the Land Use Distribution
Element. In 1993, SANDAG adopted the Regional Growth Management
Strategy, and the Land Use Distribution Element is the cornerstone of that
plan. It recommends that each jurisdiction should:
. Place its highest densities within walking distance of transit stations,
along bus corridors and within traditional town centers.
. Encourage mixed use development and mixed housing types.
. Incorporate residential uses within large employment areas.
November, 1998
Our land use policies should be
updated to make them
consistent with other
regional plans.
Land Use Distribution
Element actions will improve
our quality of life.
Current plans cannot
accommodate our
forecasted growth.
The Land Use Distribution
Element is the cornerstone of
growth management.
.
San Diego Association of Governments
.
1
It provides homes,
conserves land and reduces
traffic congestion.
It is consistent with
the region's newly
adopted economic and
environmental policies.
Land Use Distribution
Element actions will produce a
sustainable community.
The alternatives compare
the continuation of
existing policies to
imlementing the Land Use
Distribution Element.
~,
'--"
Clear benefits will result from implementing these recommendations. They
will help to provide the homes that we need. They will conserve open space.
They will allow the region a greater return on its investment in public transit
and highways, and they will help to ease traffic congestion.
The Land Use Distribution Element provides housing policies that both
complement and are consistent with our newly adopted economic prosperity
and habitat policies. Our local economy is in the process of restructuring.
The Regional Economic Prosperity Strategy is helping to replace our old
reliance on defense and aerospace with increasing numbers of well-paying
jobs in modern, export-driven industries such as biotech, software,
environmental technology and communications. The people who fill these
jobs all have at least one thing in common: they need homes. If reasonably
priced and reasonably located homes are not available, the region will not be
able to compete for these jobs.
After years of study and consensus building, the region has made the
important decision that we want to preserve our valuable habitat and open
space areas. To do this. we need to reverse the pattern of sprawl, and replace
it with a more compact, efficient and environmentally sensitive pattern of
development - in other words, a more sustainable community. This objective
is exactly what the Land Use Distribution Element is designed to achieve.
The 2020 Forecast Land Use Alternatives
The Regional Growth Management Technical Committee (the region's
planning directors), identified four land use scenarios for producing the
2020 Cities/County Forecast, and staff analyzed their relative impacts on
Jand use, transportation and environmental issues. In effect, these alternatives
compare the continuation of existing policies to implementing the
recommended actions of the Land Use Distribution Element. The four
scenarios are described below.
Existing Policies (Alternative I) is the current general and community plans
and development policies with no changes.
Land Use Distribution Element alternatives:
"L.U.D.E." (Alternative 2) simulates the maximum implementation of the
policies recommended in the Land Use Distribution Element. That is, each
jurisdiction's or community plan area's highest residential densities as well as
mixed uses are located within walking distance (lOOO-foot radius) of the
existing and planned transit stations and town centers identified on Map I at
the end of this report. Outside those sites, residential development occurs as
it currently does, which in most jurisdictions means at the mid-point of the
plans' density ranges.
"L.U.D.E. Plus" (Alternative 3) implements the Land Use Distribution
Element as in Alternative 2, and also assumes that all future residential
development will occur at the top end of the density ranges expressed in the
general and community plans.
2 .
San Diego Association of Governments
.
November, 1998
~
"Targets" (Alternative 4) is identical to Alternative 3 in the cities. In the
unincorporated area, this alternative puts a cap on future residential
development based on County community plan and sponsor group area
population targets. It also deletes the unincorporated town centers as Land
Use Distribution Element sites.
All four scenarios were run through SANDAG's forecasting, transportation
and air pollution computer models, and their relative impacts were studied.
This report presents the results of that analysis.
Facts About Density and a Recommendation
Any density increases implied by the Land Use Distribution Element
alternatives are both modest and appropriate for urban areas. They do not
call for high-rise apartment buildings or extremely dense development.
They do not fill the older sections of our cities with high-density multifamily
structures. They do make more land available for multifamily and mixed use
near transit, but mostly at densities that are already in each plan. The
multifamily densities in our current plans are reasonable.
The problem is the single family densities. The 2020 Forecast indicates that
the majority of future homes will be single family units. Under existing
policies, the average planned single family density on vacant land in the cities
is only 2.4 units per acre. Comparatively, the average density of all existing
single family land in the cities is 5.5 units per acre. In other words, our current
plans call for future residents to live at a density less than half of what we live
in today. Average single family densities in cities in the future should be what
they are today, about 5 or 6 units per acre. Anything less is a wasteful use of
urban land.
Today, overall density (single family and multifamily) on developed residential
land in the cities is 7.7 units per acre. Current plans propose future density
on now-vacant land to be only 3.7 units per acre. The three Land Use
Distribution Element alternatives modestly raise this figure on now-vacant
land to 4.3, 4.8 and 4.9 units per acre respectively.
As a result of this analysis, staff recommends that the region's 18 cities should
adopt the policies expressed in the Land Use Distribution Element, and in
addition, take the necessary steps to ensure that future residential development
occurs at densities appropriate to urban areas.
The County has embarked on what will be a three year effort to update its
general and community plans. At this point, their intention is to use their
2020 population targets as the basis of that update.
The following pages present the full analysis of the land use alternatives.
Complete data tables are found in the Appendix.
Density increases are modest.
Multifamily densities
are not affected.
The problem is that planned
single family densities are
lower than today's existing
densities.
The Land Use Distribution
Element alternatives have
only a small impact on
overall density.
November, 1998
.
San Diego Association of Governments
.
3
Current plans induce sprawl
and consume too much land.
Only seven percent of
vacant residential land is
planned for densities greater
than one unit per acre.
5 Units per Acre
4
~
Land Use Impacts
The most glaring flaw in our current land use plans and policies is that they
induce sprawl, which results in the consumption of huge amountsofland. We
have 636,000 acres of vacant, developable land in the region. (Developable
meaning free of any environmental or policy constraints to development.)
The continuation of our existing policies would result in 98 percent of that
land - 624,000 acres - being consumed by 2020. That figure is reduced
dramatically under any of the three Land Use Distribution Element alternatives.
Figure I compares the potential land consumption of the four scenarios.
Figure 1
CURRENT LAND USE POLICIES
CONSUME TOO MUCH LAND
(Acres of Land Consumed, 1995-2020)
800,000
624.200
600,000 -
..........--.
.............
......................
..............-
400,000 -
........--...
............ ......_____u___u
...........--............
...............
342,700
219,300
200,800
200,000 -
.............
o
,
Existing
Policies
,
L.V.D.E.
,
L.V.D.E.
Plus
,
Targets
Most of our vacant developable land, about 606,000 of the 636,000 acres, is
planned for residential use, and virtually all of that land will be gone by 2020
under existing policies. The real problem, the reason our current plans
consume so much land, is that only 44,000 of these vacant residential acres,
or about seven percent, are planned for densities greater than one housing
unit per acre. In fact, fewer than 9,000 acres of vacant, developable land in
the entire region are planned for densities of 5 units per acre or more, a typical
suburban tract home density.
San Diego Association of Governments
. November, 1998
This lack of appropriate planned densities is most acute in our cities. Today,
the overall density on all developed residential land in the region's 18 cities
is about 7.7 units per acre, a fairly low figure. However, the aggregate
planned density for all currently vacant residential land (single family and
multifamily) in the cities is only 3.7 units per acre. Urban densities need to
be higher than this.
By just slightly increasing overall densities on vacant land, and directing
future development to the urban and suburban areas, the Land Use Distribution
Element alternatives conserve hundreds of thousands of acres. Figure 2
shows this impact and indicates the resulting average density of each scenario.
Figure 2
SMALL INCREASES IN DENSITY
CONSERVE LARGE AMOUNTS OF LAND
(Acres of Residential Land Consumed, 1995.2020)
800,000
600,000 -
............
.....................
.....................
....................
400.000 - .
................ ..................... ......................
i.".'.hii>"::
'":"';';T1""
200,000 -
.............
........--------.......
.....r1
,
o
,
Existing
Policies
3.7 units/acre
L. V.D.E.
Plus
4.8 units/acre
,
L.V.D.E.
4.3 units/acre
,
Targets
4.9 units/acre
o Rural
. Urban
The geographic distribution of future housing units underthe four scenarios
is illustrated in Figure 3 on the next two pages. The contrast in land-
consuming sprawl between Existing Policies and any of the three Land Use
Distribution Element alternatives is immediately apparent.
In cities, planned density,
including multifamily, is only
3.7 units per acre.
Only a small increase in
density on currently vacant
land is needed.
November, 1998
.
San Diego Association of Governments
.
5
~
Figure 3
COMPARED TO EXISTING POLICIES, ALL THREE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT
ALTERNATIVES HELP CONTAIN SPRAWL
(Distribution of New Housing Units, 1995.2020)
Existing Policies
(Alternative 1)
"L. U.D.E."
(Alternative 2)
1 Dot = 50 New Units
~~Iiles
Kilometers
9
,
11.4
.
.
III .'1
.
!"
~ .
t
-.;'" {!(
'p
::110-
"';'"
~. "''-
. ~
tt' .
~. r,
~
'"
.
~~
18
,
,
22.8
6 .
San Diego Association of Governments
.
November, 1998
Figure 3 (Continued)
COMPARED TO EXISTING POLICIES, ALL THREE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT
ALTERNATIVES HELP CONTAIN SPRAWL
(Distribution of New Housing Units, 1995 - 2020)
"L. U.D.E. Plus"
(Alternative 3)
"Targets"
(Alternative 4)
1 Dot = 50 New Units
~Miles
o 9
I .'
I
Kilometers 11.4
.
',,[
"rt"1 ..:
p
,r--~
~"\. -
.
'.
,.~ .-
...
I" "....'-
..
J
.f- ."1-;
.. '.
'II ~
~'.
.
"," .):'.
~/~
,
.,.
". ...
.
r
18
,
I
22.8
November, 1998
San Diego Association of Governments
.
.
7
Different parts of the region
have different characteristics:
Cities and suburbs...
closer in but mostly rural...
and the backcountry.
The Land Use
Distribution Element
alternatives direct growth to
more appropriate places.
8 .
,_ r--
Subregionallmpac~
In addition to their regional implications, the scenarios were studied in terms
of their subregional impacts. Map 2 at the end of this report depicts the three
geographic areas used for this analysis.
The area to the west represents the current city boundaries. All of our urban,
and most of our suburban development is now located within this area. It
contains the majority of our existing infrastructure, such as transportation
corridors and water and sewer lines.
The surrounding western unincorporated area has some infrastructure, but
is mostly rural in nature, including large-lot homes and agricultural uses.
This area also includes several small "country towns" such as Fallbrook,
Ramona, Lakeside and Alpine.
The eastern unincorporated area comprises the five easternmost County
community plan areas: North Mountain, Central Mountain, Mountain
Empire, Julian and Desert. This land is, for the most part, rugged, rural
backcountry. It is remote from most employment, schools and services. And
it includes some of our most important environmentally sensitive areas.
The benefits of the three Land Use Distribution Element alternatives become
even clearer when we look at land consumption in terms of these three
geographic areas.
Figure 4 shows the percent of currently vacant land in each of the three
geographic areas that is consumed by 2020. Land consumption in the cities
is no higher under any of the Land Use Distribution Element alternatives.
Outside the cities, however, it drops by as much as 70 percent in the western
unincorporated area, and as much as 94 percent in the eastern unincorporated
area under those three alternatives.
Figure 4
THE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT REDUCES SPRAWL
(Consumption of Available Vacant Land by 2020)
100%
Targets
80% -...
............hu
......................
60% -
.............
. ...............
....................
40% -
.............
.... ...................".
20% ............
0%
Exi;ting
Policies
L.V.D.E.
L.V.D.E.
Plus
DCities
D \Vest Unincorporated
. East Unincorporated
San Diego Association of Governments
.
November, 1998
Water
The availability of water is another important growth issue. The County
Water Authority's mandate is to provide whatever supplies of water are
needed by its member agencies. The problem, however, is that under existing
policies, as many as 107,000 housing units could be built outside of the
current CWA boundaries. In theory, these areas could be annexed to CWA
member agencies, but serving them would require huge capital expenditures.
There are currently no plans to provide service to these areas.
Agriculture
In 1995, about 210,000 acres were actively being used for agriculture in the
region. About 80,000 of those acres are on land that is constrained from
development for physical, environmental or other reasons. Ofthe remaining
130,000 developable acres, most is planned for rural residential use (one unit
per acre or less). About 20,000 acres are slated for eventual urban uses.
It should be noted that residential development at rural densities does not
necessarily preclude the continuation of agriculture on that land. Many
farms are small. The County Department of Agriculture, Weights and
Measures notes that 65 percent of farms in the region are on nine acres or less.
However, of the 110,000 acres that are currently in agriculture and planned
for rural residential use, 75,000 acres are planned for lot sizes of five acres or
less. Development to lots of this size could impact the viability of some
agricultural uses. The potential for impacts and the degree of impacts would
vary depending on the location and type of agriculture.
Most of the 20,000 acres of developable agricultural land that is planned for
urban uses is consumed by 2020 in all of the scenarios. Figure 5 compares the
relative consumption of agricultural land planned for rural residential use.
It shows that the acreage designated for less than 5-acre lots that is subject to
the most consumption.
Figure 5
AGRICULTURAL LAND CAN BE SPARED FROM DEVELOPMENT
(Acres of Agricultural Land Developed for Rural Residential Use)
120,000
100,000 -
..................... ................. ............ ......h....
80,000 - .
..................... .................... ........................
60,000 - .
..........h..
40,000 -
20,000 -
0%
Existing
Policies
L.V.D.E.
L. V.D.E.
Plus
Targets
0> 5-Acre Lots
. < 5-Acre Lots
100,000 new houses would
have to be supported
by groundwater.
Most land currently in
agriculture is planned for
some other use.
75,000 acres of current
agricultural land is Planned
for less than 5-acre lots.
November, 1998
.
San Diego Association of Governments
.
9
Traffic, along with
population, will
continue to increase.
Long commutes make
congestion worse.
A lack of housing can have
severe economic impacts.
Any of the Land Use
Distribution Element
alternatives would be
an improvement.
10 .
~
Transportation Impacts
It is all but certain that traffic will increase in the region over the next 20
years. The Regionwide Forecast indicates another I million people will be
added by 2020, and that could easily translate to more than 500,000
additional vehicles. Building more and more roads to accommodate them is
neither feasible nor desirable. In fact, the region will soon be nearing the end
of its ability to build new highways as the primary response to demands for
more travel capacity.
One of the best ways to manage the situation is to give people the opportunity
to live reasonably close to where they work. This doesn't necessarily mean
within walking distance, although many would welcome that option. It means
providing housing within an acceptable commuting distance, within the
urban and suburban limits of our own region. Right now, some portion of
the traffic on 1-15 is the result oflocal employees who were forced to Riverside
County to find affordably priced housing.
If people continue to leave the region in search of affordability, companies
may soon follow. If houses in those areas are significantly less expensive, so
too is the office and industrial land, and the workforce is already in place.
Without a supply of reasonably priced housing, the region cannot compete
for the desirable, well-payingjobs we need to maintain our standard ofliving.
The four forecast land use scenarios were evaluated using SANDAG's
transportation and air quality models, and the outputs compared. The three
Land Use Distribution Element alternatives each demonstrated a significant
improvement over our existing land use polices. (See Table I).
Table I
LAND USE DlSTRIBUTlON ELEMENT ALTERNATIVES
RESULT IN TRANSPORTATION BENEFITS
(Percent Reduction of Impacts Compared to Existing Policies)
Transportation Category
Miles of Congestion on Arterials
Miles of Congestion on Freeways
Vehicle Miles Traveled
Vehicle Hours Traveled
Average Trip Length in Time
Average Trip Length in Distance
Total Costs of Travel and Fuel
Total Air Pollutants
L.U.D.E. Plus
-71%
-17%
-14%
-22%
-22%
-14%
-20%
-11%
Targets
-69%
-18%
-13%
-22%
-20%
-12%
-19%
-11%
L.U.D.E.
-71%
-14%
-13%
-21%
-20%
-13%
-19%
-11%
San Diego Association of Governments
.
November, 1998
COMPARED TO EXISTING POLICIES,
THE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT ALTERNATIVES:
I. REDUCE CONGESTION
(Miles of Congestion Per Day, 2020)
300
200-
100-
o
Current
(1995)
Existing
Policies
o Freeways
. Arterials
L.U.D.E. L.U.D.E. Targets
Plus
2. MEAN SPENDING LESS TIME IN A VEHICLE
(Total Vehicle Hours Per Day, 2020)
5.000,000
4,000,000 -..
..............
3,000,000 - .
2,000,000 - .
1,000,000 - .
o
Current Existing
(1995) Policies
............................................
Targets
3. LOWER TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS
(Total Daily Travel Costs, Including Fuel, 2020)
$40,000,000
$30,000,000 - .
................
$20,000,000 -.
..........................
$10,000,000 -..
$0
Current
(1995)
L.U.D.E. L.U.D.E.
Plus
.................-
....................--
Existing L.U.D.E. L.U.D.E.
Policies Plus
.......................
Targets
November, 1998
.
San Diego Association of Governments
11
Benefits would be felt
across the region.
12 .
~
What does all this technical stuff really mean?
How would these regional reductions affect the day-to-day lives of the
region's citizens? Here are some translations:
. Every person in the region will spend at least eight fewer hours in a
vehicle every month.
. The average commuter will drive 800 fewer miles each year
to and from work.
. The average household will need to buy 220 fewer gallons of gas
every year.
. The average household will save $600 per year in total travel costs.
San Diego Association of Governments
November. 1998
LAND USE DISTRIBUTION
ELEMENT SITES
~
TEMECULA
ORANGECOUNn
IIIVIIIIIDlcou"n
CANDIEGOC:OUNn
Wllbrook
Map 1
SOLANA BEACH
DEL MAR
.
Existing or Programmed
Transit Station Focus Area
Potential Transit Station
Focus Area
. Urban Community Center
Rural Communltv Center
~~
~
4 .
, ,
IMPERIAL BEACH
, ,
5.07 10,14
San Diego
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
TUUANA
~
March 1, 1999
v ,......" r~".r.
f
i
,
]
!
\
& C
i w
l- .
f z~ f .
~ t
a:o :".s
~II. i u
Cl)a:
~s
z
Z
~
I
,
~
,
I
i
I
I-
C/)
<(
t,)
w
a:
~C/)
c.....<(
o.......w
.- I- a:
~z<(
a:::::IC/)
00_
O)t,) C/)
<1>-:>-
._C/)....
c!:!:!<(
CI-z
111-....
C/)t,).....
N
c.
..
2
i
!
i
~
~. ~~
~ o~
~ 1:;:g
o<~
~ L~.~g~
oQ",O en
c", en
~<~ en
'~~
. u
i :;
~ :;
"