HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994/09/06 Item 25
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~>'
Meeting Date 9/6/94
ITEM TITLE: Report on SANDAG Interim Regional Open Space Strategy
~j#
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning 'C
REVIEWED BY: City Manager&\~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX)
SANDAG has released for public reviewlJe -;;ched report entitled "Interim Regional Open
Space Strategy," which was prepared by SANDAG staff in conjunction with a Citizens Advisory
Conunittee. The report addresses some of the major issues pertaining to open space planning
for the San Diego region, and contains reconunendations for both short-term and long-term
strategies dealing with open space planning and acquisition.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize staff to forward conunents contained
in this report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None.
DISCUSSION:
Last year, SANDAG appointed a Citizens Advisory Conunittee to assist in the preparation of
an open space element to the Regional Growth Management Strategy. The Conunittee was
chaired by Mayor Brian Cochran of Lemon Grove, and included representatives of a variety of
organizations (see Attachment 2). The Conunittee worked with SANDAG staff to prepare the
attached interim report.
In transmitting this report to the SANDAG Board of Directors, SANDAG staff has indicated that
the report makes three basic points:
I) The regional open space strategy should emphasize the coordination of (a) efforts to
preserve important habitat and other natural resource lands, (b) shoreline preservation,
(c) agricultural lands protection, (d) visual resources, and (e) parks and recreation.
2) The Strategy will be carried out primarily by existing local, state, and federal agencies
using a combination of plan/policy direction and regulatory action, economic incentives,
and financial support.
3) The cities and County, other local and regional agencies, interested citizens and
organizations should continue with existing consensus-building and public information
programs that would lead to proposals for comprehensive open space implementation.
.2'>'" /
Page 2, Item J..5'
Meeting Date 9/6/94
Staff Comments
With reference to the major points outlined above, staff would offer the following comments:
1) Scope of Regional Open Space Planning
Staff agrees that a coordinated regional open space planning effort is warranted, and that
at least the five major open space components outlined above should be considered in a
regional open space strategy. However, within the San Diego region at this time, the
focus of major local and subregional open space planning efforts is on efforts to preserve
important habitat and other natural resource lands. The emphasis of local and regional
govermnent at both the technical and policy level should be on the completion of these
existing planning efforts (e.g., Natural Community Conservation Plans, Clean Water
Program Multiple Conservation Program, etc.). SANDAG can continue to perform a
valuable coordination role in these efforts; however, a separate regional open space
planning effort appears to be duplicative at this time.
2) Implementation Strategies
a) Short-term Strategy
On Pages 6 and 7 of the report, it is recommended that in the short term, the
strategy for regional open space planning and acquisition should rely on existing
planning and regulatory techniques (such as zoning, transferable development
rights, and subdivision regulations), along with existing funding sources (such as
local and regional land trusts, and State and Federal funding programs.)
Staff comment:
This is essentially the approach being taken by existing local and subregional
open space planning and acquisition programs, such as the Otay River Regional
Park Program, in which the City of Chula Vista, County, and City of San Diego
are involved. However, in addition to consideration of Federal and State funding,
the report should also indicate that utilization of certain Federal and State lands
(e.g., lands owned by the Bureau of Land Management) should be pursued as a
short -term strategy. These lands could be made available either as conservation
lands, or in certain cases could be exchanged for conservation lands.
b. Long-range Strategy
On pages 7 - 10 of the report, it is recommended that "the formulation of a
recommended future financing strategy should proceed, even though the various
elements of regional open space have yet to be finalized." The report then
..25",2.
Page 3, Item .J..5'
Meeting Date 9/6/94
outlines various possible methods of pursuing local regional financing sources for
open space, including a regional assessment district, regional development impact
fee, and utility user charges.
Staff comments:
As stated earlier with regard to regional open space planning efforts, there are
several existing local and subregional habitat conservation planning efforts, such
as MSCP, which are conducting detailed evaluations of financing and
implementation strategies, and in which most of the cities and the County are
already directly involved. While the discussion in this report provides some good
background information regarding various options which could be pursued at a
regional level, it would appear to be more fruitful at this time to continue to
evaluate financing and implementation strategies at the local and subregional level
through the existing habitat conservation programs such as MSCP. If it later
becomes apparent that a regional financing source is needed, the options
contained in this report could be further evaluated.
It should also be emphasized that any regional development impact fee program
should be evaluated in relation to existing local development impact fee programs,
in order to ensure that there is equitable consideration given to those cities such
as Chula Vista which already utilize development impact fees to meet local
quality of life standards pertaining to parks, transportation, and other public
facilities. In addition, as discussed on page 5 of the report, the possible need for
regional development impact fees to support other regional facility needs, such
as transportation and judicial system facilities, and the economic ramifications of
such fees, should also be considered.
3. Institutional Actions
On pages 11 -13 of the report, a set of principles outlining the responsibilities of local
and regional agencies in implementing a regional open space strategy is included.
Principle One: Local and regional agencies should retain their existing open
space-related authorities.
Principle Two: Local and regional agencies must act together to implement the
Open Space Strategy:
a. existing habitat conservation planning efforts should be completed;
b. acting together, local and regional agencies should decide if they need
additional regionally-generated revenue for open space acquisition;
eJ5'J
/
Page 4, Item .25
Meeting Date 9/6/94
c. any new regional revenues should be timed to minimize negative impacts
on the economy.
Principle Three: New authorities and responsibilities, if needed, should be
assigned to existing agencies unless they determine that an alternative arrangement
would better serve the region.
Staff comments:
Staff agrees with the concept behind Principle One, which is that existing open space
authorities should be considered for managing new open space areas before creating
additional entities.
With regard to the recommended actions under Principle Two, staff agrees that existing
habitat conservation planning efforts should be completed prior to further evaluation of
regional revenue sources. Until a better idea of the magnitude of revenue requirements
is obtained, and all other revenue sources and land acquisition methods have been
considered, it will be extremely difficult to achieve consensus on any specific proposal
for regional revenues.
With regard to Principle Three, staff is supportive of the efforts of the State Coastal
Conservancy to assist local and regional agencies in San Diego County in evaluating
various options for establishing open space conservancies. A staff member from the City
of Chula Vista is participating on a technical committee which is assisting Coastal
Conservancy staff on this study, which is expected to be completed by the end of 1994.
Staff will provide the City Council with periodic updates regarding this effort.
SUMMARY
Overall, staff finds that emphasis of the SANDAG Interim Open Space Strategy report is on
continuing current efforts to complete local and subregional open space plans, which is consistent
with the current direction being taken by Chula Vista. However, we would recommend greater
emphasis on the need to complete these local and subregional plans prior to any further effort
being spent on developing regional revenue programs.
FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time.
Attachments:
I) SANDAG Interim Regional Open Space Strategy
2) Citizens Advisory Committee Roster NOT SCANNED
(F6\SANDAGOS.all)
.;s,'I/ ,;{6-6
ATTACHMENT 1
~ San Diego
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
June 30, 1994
''',
Suite 800, First Interstate Plaza
401 B Street
San Diego, California 92101
(619)595-5300 Fax (619)595-5305
JUL 0 5 1994
SUBJECT:
Interim Regional Open Space Strategy
Open space bas been identified by SANDAG as a regional priority, and is an important
element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy. Last year, SANDAG appointed
a Citizens Advisory Committee to assist in the preparation of the open space element. The
enclosed Open Space Strategy is the fIrst phase in the regional open space planning process
in San Diego.
The interim report is being distributed to various local, state, and federal agencies, as well
as different constituencies throughout the San Diego region who have shown an interest
in regional open space planning. SANDAG welcomes your comments on the structure of
the document, as well as the feasibility of the proposals contained in the interim report.
The review and comment period for the interim report will be open until August 31, 1994.
Please forward your comments to the above address (Attn: Mike McLaughlin) for
inclusion in the revision of the document and Phase n of the planning process.
Please forward any questions to Mike McLaughlin, 595-5373 or Kimberly Duran,
595-5342.
MMlKD/ah
Enclosure
,.;$"" ~
MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondida, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove.
National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Sanlee, Solana Beach, Vista, and County of San Diego.
ADVISORY/lIAISON MEMBERS: California Department of Transportation, U.S. Department of Defense, S.D. Unified Port District. and TijuanaIBaja California.
OPEN SPACE STRATEGY
As Accepted for Distribution
By the SANDAG Board
June 24, 1994
SUMMARY
The Open Space Strategy of the Regional Open Space Element is part of the Regional Growth
Management Strategy. It presents the consensus of the region's local governments on open
space preservation, including the types of land that should be protected and preserved, and the
agencies responsible for implementation.
In summary, the Strategy recommends that:
. Open space is a high priority regional need. (SANDAG recently identified it as a high
priority as a part of the regional infrastructure, along with transportation and criminal
justice facilities.)
. The regional Open Space Strategy should emphasize the coordination of efforts to preserve
important habitat and other natural resource lands, including the protection of shoreline,
agricultural lands, visual resources, and parks and recreational areas.
. Overall implementation will be divided into two strategies: the Interim Strategy and the
Long-Range Strategy. The Interim Strategy uses existing policy and funding resources in
the region while the Long-Range Strategy proposes additional resources to preserve open
space.
. Implementation of the Open Space Strategy will be an evolutionary process based primarily
on existing local, regional, and federal agencies continuing and expanding their current
responsibilities.
. The Strategy emphasizes a combination of plan/policy direction and regulatory action;
economic incentives and fmancial support.
. Three potential sources of revenue have been identified for study in the Long-Range
Strategy: property assessment, a development impact fee, and a utility user charge.
. 'As a combined effort, the cities, the County, other local and regional agencies, interested
citizens, and organizations should continue a consensus-building and public information
program that would lead to proposals for additional open space revenues beginning in 1995
or 1996.
~~-1
. The cities and County, along with interested groups and individuals, could use the Coastal
Conservancy's proposed study of a regional open space conservancy to evaluate the
potential role of a conservancy in open space implementation in the San Diego region.
INTRODUCTION
The Open Space Strategy builds upon existing and future regional open space programs and
proposes additional actions that are necessary to more effectively preserve regionally significant
open space. While the Strategy is designed to provide a framework for existing efforts,
especially habitat conservation programs, shoreline preservation, visual resources, agricultural
areas, and regional parks and recreation actions, it also contains a set of recommendations that
emphasize the need for a more coordinated and comprehensive regional open space system.
The Open Space Strategy is organized into three components: implementation actions (including
regulations and fmancing), institutional structure, and determination of regional priorities. This
revised draft of the Strategy contains recommendations regarding implementation and
institutional structure.
Open space in the San Diego region traditionally has been preserved in an incremental manner,
as opportunities for preservation arise. The Strategy proposes to continue to take advantage of
these opportunities and broaden the tools for open space preservation into a more systematic,
long-range approach.
Open space planning responsibilities are shared among a number of sub-regional programs, all
working on different schedules. As a result, the regional planning process has some data
limitations, not the least of which are acquisition needs and attendant public costs. Development
of a fmancing strategy is especially difficult because the provision of regional open space, unlike
other types of public facilities, is without a dedicated or institutiona l17ed funding source. And
while additional money would have to be raised to pay for the full implementation of the
Regional Open Space Element, new proposals at this time would confront recession-weary
taxpayers.
The San Diego region, nevertheless, can take advantage of the 'current situation and convert
these constraints into opportunities. Never in our history has so much effort been devoted to
open space planning. Local agencies, albeit prompted by federal and state mandates, appear to
be more willing to exercise their authority to regulate land use for the purpose of open space
preservation. Also, many of the region's utility providers may fmd it necessary to increase rates
in order to fund habitat conservation programs related to facility upgrades and expansions.
Another local revenue opportunity presents itself in Assembly Bill 2007. If approved by the
voters, the establishment of a regional assessment district as authorized under the bill could give
open space acquisition a major financial boost. Further, private industry is recognizing the need
to resolve open space issues as a prerequisite for project approvals.
2
d. c:; of
PRINCIPLES
The principles used to guide the preparation of the Strategy:
1. Local and regional agencies should retain their existing open space-related authorities and
responsibilities.
2. New authorities and responsibilities, if needed to carry out the Regional Open Space
Element, should be assigned to existing agencies, unless the agencies acting together
determine that an alternative arrangement would better serve the region.
3. Local and regional agencies must act together to set regional open space policies, raise and
allocate money, and implement the Open Space Strategy. Coordination with pertinent
regional, state and federal agencies should be integral parts of the decision-making process.
4. Financing of the open space system should be shared by existing and future development
and by private and public sectors, including local, regional, state, and federal
governments.
5. Where public funding is used to help implement the Regional Open Space Element, it
should be spent on specific programs or projects so that the public can be fully informed
of its use.
6. All legal and reasonable means should be used to implement the Regional Open Space
Element, while protecting private property rights.
7. Public participation should be encouraged throughout the planning and implementation
process.
Economic Benefits of Open Space Preservation
Environmental quality and economic prosperity are inextricably linked in the San Diego region.
As the most recently recognized form of infrastructure, open space and its preservation have a
significant effect on both the local economy and the structure of future development in the
region.
Future developments and business expansions cannot take place without additional infrastructure.
More than ever, the region's economic growth hinges on new private investment in capital and
technology. Private investment in the local economy, however, may be curtailed unless a
regional plan for open space preservation is agreed to by all levels of government.
Under state and federal mandates, the San Diego region must resolve conflicts between land
development and the protection of plants and animals. The region contains about 200 species
that the federal and state governments have listed or propose to list as endangered, threatened,
or rare. Failure to protect these species and their habitats would place severe limitations on the
ability of local agencies to approve employment projects and construct public improvements.
3
"d-c;..q
The habitat conservation plans not only could provide for the mitigation needs of current and
future projects in the region, but also could be designed to protect currently listed endangered
species as well as agriculture, visual resources, shoreline, and other open space. By providing
a regional focus, the habitat conservation plans could be more economically advantageous than
the alternative of resolving conflicts on a project-by-project basis. Also the proposed plans
provide more assurance that thresholds for biological protection could be achieved.
Preservation and enhancement of the region's shoreline is also important for several reasons.
Safe and attractive beaches can be a valued regional economic asset. Economic benefits accrue
to the region due to recreational use values, property protection, and perhaps most importantly,
tourism attraction. The visitor industry is the region's third largest revenue generating industry.
Agriculture, another valuable type of open space, is also important both through indirect and
direct benefits to the regional economy. Agricultural land can provide buffers and corridors to
open space and habitat systems. Less intensive land uses in many ways also contribute to
improving air quality and increasing watershed protection throughout the County. Direct1y
impacting the economy as the region's fourth largest industry, agricultural businesses annually
produce more than $1 billion in sales.
Open space in the form of parks, greenbelts, and corridors is also important to the region's
quality of life. Preservation of open space can serve to reduce adverse effects of urbanization
such as water, air, and noise pollution. Protection of geologically or environmentally sensitive
areas for recreation purposes can also reduce property damage and loss of life. Through scenic
parks and greenbelts, open space preservation also serves to visually enhance the region and
improve the health and physical well-being of community residents.
In the absence of an integrated agreement with emphasis on habitat conservation, businesses and
investors throughout the nation and the world probably would view San Diego as a risky
destination for investment dollars - a place where environmental conflicts remain unresolved and
government regulators stand ready to block or restrict development each time a conflict arises.
Perhaps nothing detracts more from private investment than uncertainty about future business
conditions. The San Diego region cannot afford to ignore this risk, especially now - a time
when capital investment is critical to the successful restructuring of the local economy.
The regional open space plan, once approved and implemented, could facilitate approvals of
business expansion plans, reduce delays in the environmental review process, and reduce
compliance and carrying costs. Federal and state permits for both private projects and public
capital improvements should be easier to obtain as well. Perhaps most importantly, an early
resolution of conflicts between land development and open space could reduce the likelihood of
federal and/or state intervention which could disrupt the local economy. Each of these factors
contributes to a less costly and more secure business environment, thus improving the region's
ability to retain companies and attract investment.
4
~5"/O
SANDAG Board Action on Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan and Economic Criteria
for New Funding Measures
"Now is not the time to raise local taxes in order to pay for regional public facilities. The cost
of government already is rising faster than household incomes. Given the current economic
situation, the region's residents and businesses scarcely can afford more public services, despite
projected unfunded facility needs. Even the specter of higher taxes at this time would contribute
to a more stubborn economic recovery." This is the finding of the Public Finance Subcommittee
of the SANDAG Board of Directors. The Subcommittee recently completed a review of the
Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan, which identifies a regional development fee and a
county-wide tax increase as possible ways to fund projected facility needs, including parks and
open space.
In March, the Board of Directors approved the Subcommittee's recommendations. The Board
voted to postpone action on any tax or fee increase, continue work on the Financing Plan, and
give funding priority to transportation, open space, and justice facilities. While the Board
supported a continuation of the planning effort, it also directed staff to develop economic criteria
for timing the implementation of any future tax or fee increase.
There are hints that the local economy is beginning to recover. But since the recession began
46 months ago, the region has lost over 40,000 wage and salary jobs, many of which paid
relatively high salaries. During the same period, the region's population grew by about
200,000. Fewer employment opportunities coupled with more households is hardly a formula
for public acceptance of higher taxes, fees, service charges, or assessments.
Following the Board's direction, new local measures to raise revenue for regional open space
should be considered for implementation only after the region has experienced a marked
improvement in economic welfare. Criteria for measuring the ability of the region to afford
higher public costs should be defmed, and an economic threshold for recommending new funding
measures should be proposed for the SANDAG Board's approval.
The threshold could be defmed in terms of one or more of the following, interrelated criteria:
. The region's residents experience at least a one-year rise in their standard-of-living,
measured in terms of real income per capita.
. The local economy fully recovers from the current recession; that is, the level of wage
and salary employment exceeds its pre-recession level.
. Total personal income in the region begins to grow faster than total local government
expenditures, reversing the current trend.
5
~"5'1I
IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
A list of open space tools that could be used to implement the Open Space Strategy was prepared
and evaluated. The Implementation Actions recommended focus on opportunities at two levels:
(1) the Interim Strategy (existing plans/policies and current funds) level; and, (2) the Long-
Range Strategy (future funding mechanisms for open space acquisitions) level. The first
alternative combines short term opportunities that currently exist, while the second alternative
has a longer term focus that defIDes the next steps for the Regional Open Space Strategy.
1. Interim Strategy
The Interim Strategy is a minimum cost alternative which could be implemented to
preserve open space regionally in the short term. By using planning regulations and
funding mechanisms which are already in place, the Interim Strategy proposes immediate
open space acquisition and preservation in the region. This alternative is designed to
minimize costs to local public agencies and residents. It also offers the opportunity to
foster regionwide support for future funding mechanisms for open space acquisition.
a. Existinl!: Plans and Policies
The front line actions for implementation of open space protection are the changes
in the local general plans and policies needed to accommodate the Regional Open
Space Strategy. These changes are evolving as part of the regional growth forecasts
and the recommendations contained in the Regional Growth Management Strategy
(RGMS). The Regional Open Space Element will be integrated with the RGMS,
requiring a number of actions at the local level which will include revising plans and
policies. Regulatory tools such as zoning, transferable development rights,
subdivision regulations, conservation easements, exactions, and development
incentives may be incorporated into open space preservation planning in the region.
These local policies, combined with state and federal implementation tools, would
decrease the amount of land which would have to be acquired at the local level for
an open space system. They also entail little or no cost to residents in the area.
Zoning, transferable development rights, and subdivision regulations could be
strengthened to require increased dedications of open space land when redevelopment
and new projects are proposed. Conservation easements are legal agreements
between landowners and conservation organizations designed to preserve land for
purposes such as agriculture, wildlife habitat, scenic views, watershed protection and
recreational purposes. Exactions, which are conceded by developers to local
jurisdictions for permission to build in a particular area, provide open space
preservation within residential communities or mitigate for off-site preservation. Tax
code changes or incentives could change the economics of development patterns by:
reducing the cost of redeveloping existing urban areas; making unused lands in the
uroan core available at a lower cost; or modifying tax codes to create tax breaks for
jurisdictions which would encourage them to preserve open space within their areas.
6
'd-S"Id.-
b. Existine Fundine Sources
Several local, state, and federal funding sources currently exist for the short-tenn
preservation of open space. These sources would add no extra burden on the local
economy but could provide needed funds for open space land which needs to be
acquired immediately. Used in connection with local policies and regulations, these
existing funding sources could make a substantial contribution to the establishment
of a regional open space system in San Diego.
Local and regional land trusts in the San Diego region are involved directly in
protecting land resources for the public benefit. Funds for purchases of land are
solicited from members, individual donors, foundations, corporations, and
government agencies.
As a statewide initiative with a large local impact, the California Parks & Wildlife
Initiative (CalPAW '94) would have provided nearly $2 billion to acquire, protect,
and enhance parkland, wildlife habitat, agricultural lands, coastal areas, river habitat,
and other resources in the region. Since this general obligation bond act failed in
June 1994, money to protect specific important natural resource areas and species
will not be available unless a new proposal is developed.
Federally, the San Diego region has the ability to draw from sources such as the
Land & Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), the Intennodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) , and the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) for
funds. LWCF money is intended for federal recreation and conservation use by the
National Parks, U.S. Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management. This
money can also be used for state parks. The National Policy in ISTEA includes
consideration of the overall environmental context and community values to enhance
the quality of life in, or around, transportation facilities. Funds from this source
could be used for mitigation purposes, wetland banking, scenic byways programs,
and erosion control. RTC lands include property which has been defaulted upon due
to the savings and loan crisis and is sold by the federal government (often for below
market values). In San Diego, some of these parcels could be bought inexpensively
to enhance wildlife corridors and contribute to the open space system in the region.
2. Long-RangeStrat~
The fonnulation of a recommended future fmancing strategy should proceed, even though
the various elements of regional open space have yet to be fin~li7ed. Agreement on and
regional coordination of a long-tenn basic strategy would provide guidance and a
framework for continued fmancial planning, and thereby advance the region's readiness
to implement open space plans once they are completed. Upon further refmement of the
habitat conservation programs (Multiple Species Conservation Program, Multiple Habitat
Conservation Program, and the County program) and improvement of the local economy,
long-tenn planning and funding mechanisms should be designed to enhance and build upon
the Interim Strategy.
7
~s"'\.3
The recommendation for future fmancing tools builds upon two existing opportunities for
the establishment of open space assessment districts: AB 2007 (Regional Open Space and
Park District) and SB 445 (Habitat Maintenance District). Both of these approaches
exclude assessment of agricultural lands until they change to non-agricultural use. The
Long-Range Strategy also should evaluate a regional development impact fee, appropriate
utility user charges, and federal/state resources in order to provide an equitable sharing
of the costs between new and existing residents and among local, state, and federal
governments.
Through the implementation of the funding sources, a total of $30-35 million has been
identified for annual open space preservation purposes in the region. However, the
Committee supports fmancing strategies that involve public votes wherever it is feasible.
a. Re!!ional Assessment District
The Citizens Advisory Committee could promote not only community support for
the timely creation of a regional open space assessment district but also could
recommend a plan for coordinating its implementation. Allocation of potential
assessment revenue should be divided among types of open space including regional
parks and open space, visual resources, habitat conservation areas, shoreline
preservation, and local park and recreation centers. Regional coordination is needed
to establish the structure of the assessment district, and schedule the measure for a
public vote.
Under AB 2007, the County of San Diego would be the governing agency for the
fonnation of a regional park and open space district. Subject to simple majority
approval by the voters, the district fonnation and assessments have the potential to
raise a sizable sum of money for park and recreation facilities, open space land
acquisition, and maintenance.
The County would design the assessment district, including the following features:
. Total amount of assessment revenue to be collected
. list of projects (parks, recreation, open space, and/or habitat acquisitions) and
expenditure plan
. Size of the assessment district or the assessable base
. Method of apportioning assessments among property owners.
While the County is in the preliminary stage of designing the district, a total of about
$225 million has been contemplated for a potential bond program using assessment
district funds.
b. Regional Develooment ImDact Fee
A regional development impact fee could be implemented to help pay for the
acquisition of regionally significant open space.
8
~s ,,'If
Under existing authority, the region's land use agencies jointly could implement a
regional impact fee program. Such a program, including implementation
responsibilities and legal authority, is described in the draft Regional Public Facilities
Financing Plan, prepared by SANDAG.
Project applicants should help pay for regional open space acquisition for several
reasons. New development will diminish open space. Like existing residents,
occupants of new development projects will benefit from publicly acquired open
space. Also, the public resources being devoted to open space planning, especially
habitat conservation, will facilitate project approvals and reduce carrying costs.
The use of an impact fee to defray the cost of providing regional facilities would be
compatible with existing local policy that requires project applicants to be fmancially
responsible for public facilities that benefit their projects. After the facilities are
built, operating and maintenance costs are funded from general taxes or user fees
contributed by both existing and new residents. As an important part of the region's
infrastructure, open space is an important public facility designation to fmance.
In any case, the basic approach to determining the fee might be as follows:
(1) The process would start with an estimate of the total cost of acquiring
regionally significant open space over a defmed time period. The total cost for
the time period then would be allocated between the existing development and
projected development on the basis of population, developed acreage, and land
use.
(2) Anticipated state and federal funding of regional open space would be credited
to both existing and new development in proportion to respective shares of total
cost. Under the MSCP program, for example, state and federal funds are
assumed to provide one-half of all land acquisition costs.
(3) The estimated net cost attributable to new development would be adjusted on
the basis of the new "funding effort" made by existing development. If, for
example, a County-wide assessment or utility charge raised enough revenue to
cover 50 % of existing development's allocated cost, then the cost attributed to
new development would be reduced by 50 %.
(4) The net cost attributed to new development would then be divided among
projected land uses to derive an impact fee per acre or housing unit. Under this
approach, a development impact fee would not be enacted until such time as a
new County-wide funding measure is implemented.
c. Utility User Charies
User charges for water and sewer service are being considered as a candidate
funding source for regional open space. Sewer and water rates are set by local
9
dS: - IS
agencies and increases do not require voter approval. The revenue collection
systems are in place and are efficient.
The rate structure of the Metropolitan Sewerage System, which serves over 70% of
the region's population, already makes allowance for a series of increases. Further,
the Clean Water Act mandates that habitat preservation be an integral part of plans
to upgrade or expand sewerage systems. A proposal that sewer service charges be
used for open space pUIpOses has been discussed in the work of the Multiple Species
Conservation Program (MSCP). According to the program's working draft, the
recommended local fmancing approach combines assessments, a development
mitigation, and a small sewer rate increase in the Metropolitan Sewerage System
service area, to produce the required revenues for land acquisition, operation, and
maintenance. Greater reliance on the sewer rate structure is identified as a backup
measure in the event insufficient revenue is derived from the other two sources.
Water rate increases would affect a larger customer base than sewer charges because
not all developed property receives sewer service.
The concept of using utility user charges, whether sewer or water, for open space
preservation purposes has potential problems. The basic problem is proving the
relationship ("nexus") between the utility service and open space preservation. The
San Diego County Water Authority (CW A) and other local water and sewer special
districts were created to provide utility service, not open space. Furthermore, open
space is a use of land which is a responsibility of local general pUIpOse governments.
In addition, water rate increases may have an adverse impact on an important form
of open space: agriculture. In order to maintain a viable, long-term agricultural
base in the San Diego region, agricultural water users should pay a proportionately
lower share of the potential water rate increases when land is kept in agricultural
production or dedicated as open space.
As a funding source for regional open space, a utility tax on the sale of gas and
electricity offers some of the same attributes as water/sewer charges but it would be
as problematic to implement. Enactment of a regional tax or fee on energy sales
may require state enabling legislation, and, if the revenues were earmarked for
specific purposes, the proposal probably would be classified as a "special tax,"
which requires two-thirds voter approval.
Waste management funding resources also may offer an opportunity, and the
inclusion of a fee for open space as part of the tipping fee at landfills could be
considered.
10
d-S .../~
INSTITUTIONAL ACTIONS
The recommended "institutional actions" describe "who does what" to implement the Open Space
Strategy.
The actions are based on the Principles used to guide the preparation of the Strategy (see above),
particularly Principles 1, 2, and 3, which propose that local and regional agencies should retain
their existing responsibilities; that new responsibilities, whenever possible, should.be assumed
by existing agencies; and that agencies must cooperate to implement the Strategy.
The recommended actions also recognize that open space implementation is continuing and
evolutionary. The Open Space Strategy won't be implemented all at one time or immediately.
It will happen over a period of years. And, as in the past, the attitudes and actions of agencies
and organizations will evolve as they discover new ways to carry out the Strategy, and to
cooperate while doing it.
Principle One: Local and regional agencies should retain their existing open space-related
authorities and responsibilities.
Today, parks, the shoreline, and other open space lands are owned, operated and maintained by
the cities, the County, various special districts and joint powers agencies, and the state and
federal governments. These responsibilities will continue and this Strategy makes no
recommendation to change them.
Indeed, at least several cities, the County, some special districts and joint powers authorities,
and some state and federal agencies will have additional open space ownership and maintenance
responsibilities as a result of the region's various habitat conservation plans and the Shoreline
Preservation Strategy.
Principle Two: Local and regional agencies must act together to...implement the Open
Space Strategy.
Open space is higher on the region's public policy agenda now than it was a year ago. The
expected completion of the region's habitat conservation plans, the adoption of the Shoreline
Strategy, the preparation of this Strategy, and the passage of legislation (AB 2007 and SB 445)
enabling the region to establish open space assessment districts, have all contributed to a growing
expectation that we should somehow preserve more open space.
On the other hand, for gOod and obvious economic reasons, most people agree that now is not
a gOod time to ask local residents to spend more money on local government.
Therefore, the following is a list of recommended actions we should take to implement the Open
Space Strategy:
l. We must complete and adopt habitat conservation plans that are acceptable to the
participants -- local, state, and federal.
11
;}.t;...n
Habitat preservation is one of the keys to regional open space preservation. Consequently,
implementation of an open space strategy depends on knowing how much habitat to save.
2. Acting together, the local and regional agencies will decide if they need additional
regionally-generated revenue for open space acquisition. They also can decide the sources
of money to use and the amount to raise. They can make these decisions at SANDAG,
the forum for these kinds of discussions.
3. New local taxes or fees for fmancing regional open space preservation should be timed so
as to minimize negative impacts on the region's economy. Criteria for measuring the
ability of residents and businesses to afford higher taxes or fees are listed above in the
section on Financing. Proposals to raise taxes or fees should be made only when one or
more of these criteria are met. The region should embark now on a program that will lead
to approval of potential revenue sources for open space preservation.
We should begin now because consensus building often takes time, particularly when it
involves spending money. Local governments and interest groups will have to agree on
the revenue sources, the relative amounts of money to be derived from each, the open
space lands to be acquired, and the appropriate allocation of revenues among the categories
of need.
There are at least two factors which suggest that the region's local agencies should
consider organizing some of their inter-jurisdictional activities, however. One factor is
money; the other is habitat preservation.
If one or more of the three revenue sources described above is approved, the cities and
County will be collecting the most money ever earmarked in this region for open space
and parks. Achieving consensus on how to spend it will require the involvement of every
local jurisdiction.
Also, implementation of the region's habitat conservation and management plans will
create the need for ongoing multi-agency coordination, the kind exemplified by Mission
Trails Regional Park and the San Dieguito River Park. Habitat preserve areas frequently
will cross jurisdictional boundaries. To promote biological effectiveness, local, state and
federal agencies will have to cooperate regularly to ensure that these habitat areas connect.
Over time, we will determine if we need to add something to our existing agencies to help
carry out the inter-jurisdictional aspects of open space implementation. How this should
be done is described below.
Principle Three: New authorities and responsibilities, If needed..., should be assigned to
existing agencies, unless ...[they] determine that an alternative arrangement would better
serve the region.
Some kinds of open space already have well-established implementation arrangements. Existing
local, state and federal agencies will implement most, if not all, of the Open Space Strategy.
12
d.S... If
The cities, the County, special districts and others, including several state and federal agencies,
are well experienced in acquiring, operating and maintaining parks, shoreline and other open
space lands. These same agencies will continue to be responsible for regulating the use of parks
and open space. Roles of existing agencies include functions such as the acquisition,
maintenance, and operational responsibilities of the local parks and recreation departments, tbe
coordination role of SANDAG's Shoreline Erosion Committee, and the implementation
responsibilities of the various regional park joint powers agencies.
The State Coastal Conservancy is contemplating a study analyzing the applicability of an open
space land conservancy to the San Diego region. Local agencies, interested groups, and
individuals should participate in this study through the various existing open space and habitat
advisory committees. The Coastal Conservancy's staff should use selected existing committees
to gain local input.
In reviewing this study, local interests should be concerned primarily with how an open space
land conservancy fits with, or adds to, the existing implementation responsibilities of the cities,
County, and other open space agencies. The advisory committees also should review the other
potential characteristics of a land conservancy, including costs and membership.
As the region prepares to gain approval of additional resources for open space acquisition, the
local agencies can be deciding on the need for an open space conservancy.
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE PRIORITIES
The Committee has initiated a number of steps in its determination of priorities for the regional
open space system. SANDAG's Geographic Information System (GIS) was used to assist in
determining priorities for open space. Existing GIS layers were then used to represent open
space components identified in the Open Space Definition. The overlay of the separate GIS
layers and the resultant composite scores produced the designation of priority areas of low,
moderate, high, or very high preservation need. These alone could be used to identify open
space priority areas (See Table I).
Additionally, using GIS databases on land ownership, planned land use, and limitations to
development (Le., slopes greater than 25%, floodplains, and wetlands), a "gap analysis. was
conducted to gauge the level of protection of open space achieved by current planning practices
and policies. The gap analysis identified areas already afforded protection, as well as areas that
are significant parts of the open space system which may be at a high risk of being lost. While
building upon the existing open space system, the gap analysis helps to defme opportunities and
conflicts between significant open space areas and current planning policies and ownership
patterns.
This marks the completion of Phase I of open space planning in the region. The next step
involves further determination of specific priorities with the completion of the habitat
conservation programs in the region. Inputs for developing a methodology for preservation in
the region will be gathered from many different local agencies such as: MHCP, MSCP, the
13
a.'3../q
County habitat program, local conservancies, the Shoreline Preservation Strategy, and projects
identified in the AB 2007, and CalPA W '94 processes. Other contacts for priority determination
will include: the Cleveland National Forest, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Land
Management, state conservancies, the California Department of Fish & Game, and the State
Park Service. The information gained from interfacing with these agencies will be compared
and specific landscapes for preservation will be identified according to the priorities.
Phase IT of regional open space planning will involve continued local coordination among
jurisdictions and agencies involved in open space planning. This phase will also involve
establishing long-term goals for maintaining an open space system. With regional coordination,
Phase IT of the open space planning process will be able to focus on supporting more innovative
fundraising mechanisms to purchase important land and enhance the region's system by
modifying local policies and regulations to better serve the region in terms of open space
protection.
14
;).. cs;: ~ 0
Table I
DRAFT OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION CRITERIA AND SUPPORTING GIS LAYER
Resource-Based Criteria Supporting GIS Layer(s) Wt.
1) Biodiversity: Biologically rich areas 1) MSCPIMHCP biologically based 25
preserve planning areas (pP As)
2) Uniqueness or outstanding qualities:
Rare, unusual, or outstanding flora, fauna 2) Wetlands east of MSCPIMHCP
(and geologic formations and/or cultural or boundaries
visual resources, to be added later)
3) Very high and high value habitats for
3) Open Space Functional Elements: Buffers, Camp Pendleton
linkages, connectors (and urban delineators,
and potential expansions for other open space, 4) Shoreline
to be added later)
4) Recreation: Accessible, outstanding 1) National Forest 25
recreational opportunities serving a large 2) Open Space Parks & Preserves
population 3) Water
4) Intertidal
5) Shorel ine
5) Agricultural Significance: Intensive, Existing Agricultural land from 20
extensive, or unique agricultural production SANDAG's 1990 Land Use
areas
6) Private Rural Lands and Villages: Large Existing Private Rural Lands * from 5
areas of very low density land use and the SANDAG's 1990 Land Use and
related villages Ownership Inventory
People-Based Criteria Supporting GIS Layer(s)
1) Public Open Space Lands: Public lands with Undeveloped Public Lands from -
multiple uses, including extensive open space SANDAG's 1990 Land Use &
Ownership Inventory
2) Urgency: Areas needing immediate protection Vacant, undeveloped lands within PPAs 25
or management planned for development, shoreline
3) Public Safety: Hazardous areas that require Slopes > 25 % not already developed, -
protective measures to permit development shoreline
(steep slopes only, others to be added later)
* Rural Lands outside the County Water Authority eastern and northern boundaries.
Note: Biodiversity, uniqueness, and open space functional areas are obtained from the same GIS layers. Some
of the data layers are not fully available, as indicated in the criteria above.
IS
~,~I
ATTACHMENT 2
d. c;"H
ATTACHMENT 2
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
SANDAG Board Member, Chair
Alliance or Habitat Conservation
Audubon Society
Construction Industry Federation
Citizen Coordinate for Century m
Developers
Endangered Habitats League
Land/Open Space Conservancies
League of Women Voters
San Diego County Council of Realtors
San Diego County Farm Bureau
San Diego Taxpayers Association
Sierra Club
Ex omcio Members
OS TAC
Honorable Brian Cochran
Jim Whalen
Bill Daugherty (Buena Vista Audubon)
Tom Sheffer, Alternate
Bill Anderson
Craig Adams (Alternate)
Mike Madigan
Pardee Construction Company
Mike Beck
Dan Silver (Alternate)
Wallace Tucker,
Center for Conservation Strategies
Lois Ewen
Victoria Seay (Alternate)
Scott Harvey
Judy Fowler
Mark Nelson
Mike Kelly
Linda Micbacl (Alternate)
Micbacl Hol71ftmer, City of Carlsbad
City of San Diego's Mayor's Office
Karen Scatborough
(originally as C-3 Iqlresentative)
3
d.S"c:f.3