Carlsbad 2020: Executive Summary
A planning year, not a building year. Growth caps remained despite SB 330 concerns while the city laid groundwork for its 6th Cycle Housing Element.
Data note: Council record covers primarily one agenda packet (February 25, 2020) plus the December 2020 Housing Element staff report and public comment record. This summary reflects available data; thin sourcing is noted where relevant. No etrakit filing or building permit data was provided for pipeline analysis.
Carlsbad's 2020 was a planning year, not a building year. The city began laying groundwork for its 6th Cycle Housing Element while continuing to operate under a Growth Management Program (Measure E) that imposes dwelling unit caps the city's own staff acknowledged may violate SB 330. Council committed over $4.3 million to affordable housing and showed no anti-housing voting pattern in the available record, but took no action to remove the structural barriers (density caps, incomplete ADU ordinance, unresolved coastal parcels) that constrain production.
Zoning and Density
The most consequential development of 2020 was the Housing Element Update draft, which proposes significant upzoning across four categories under Program 1.1, all required within three years of adoption:
- Upzone existing residential (R-4 to R-15/R-23/R-30): 875 units across 57 acres on 13 parcels
- Rezone industrial/commercial to residential (PI/O to R-23 through R-40): 1,228 units across 52 acres
- City/agency-owned sites including the Shoppes at Carlsbad (57 acres, up to 993 units at R-40) and the Public Works yard: 1,291 units across 78 acres
- Proposed projects with rezone (North County Plaza, West Oaks): 434 units
Minimum densities would increase: R-15 from 8.0 to 11.5 du/ac, R-23 from 15.0 to 19.0 du/ac, R-30 from 23.0 to 26.5 du/ac. These are meaningful increases that, if adopted and implemented, would expand Carlsbad's housing capacity well beyond its RHNA obligation of 3,873 units (the sites inventory identifies capacity for 6,878).
However, none of this was adopted in 2020. The Housing Element was forwarded to HCD for review, approved unanimously. The proposed rezonings remain proposals. The Growth Management Program's dwelling unit caps remained in effect throughout 2020, despite being flagged as potentially non-compliant with SB 330 by both city staff and the San Diego Housing Federation. Program 2.2 commits to replacing or modifying these caps, but that commitment is forward-looking.
On ADU regulation, City Attorney Brewer acknowledged at a joint special meeting that state ADU laws took effect January 1, 2020, but Carlsbad had not yet drafted a new ordinance, defaulting to state law in the interim. The Zoning Ordinance was amended in September 2020 to comply. Public commenters also raised the issue of HOA CCR restrictions blocking ADU construction on eligible lots, suggesting the city invoke state authority to supersede. No action on that front appears in the record.
The Local Coastal Program Update generated an unresolved conflict over three parcels: Ponto State Beach, Strawberry Fields, and the Encina Power Plant site. The Coastal Commission took the position that residential zoning is "not preferred" on the Power Plant and Strawberry Fields sites. Schumacher moved (seconded by Hall) to defer these parcels from the LCP planning process; the motion failed 2-2, with Hall and Blackburn dissenting. This left the parcels in limbo within the coastal planning process, a potential constraint on future housing capacity depending on eventual resolution.
Development Pipeline
No etrakit filing data or building permit records were provided for 2020, so filing trend analysis is not possible for this year.
The Housing Element staff report lists 1,821 units in pending or approved projects as of late 2020:
| Project | Units | Affordable | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aviara Apartments | 329 | 82 low-income | Pending/approved |
| Marja Acres | 294 | 46 low-income | Pending/approved |
| West Oaks | 192 | 42 lower-income | Pending/approved |
| Poinsettia 61 | 138 | — | Pending/approved |
| Encinas Creek | 127 | 63 low-income | Pending/approved |
| Pacific Wind | 87 | 100% low-income | Pending/approved |
| Carlsbad Veterans Housing | 50 | 100% very-low-income | Pending/approved |
| Other projects | 604 | Various | Pending/approved |
ADU production was projected at 57 units/year over the cycle, based on a historical average of 19/year multiplied by HCD's 3x factor following state ADU law reforms. Whether 2020 ADU production met this pace is not documented in the available record.
Tenant Protections
No rent stabilization, just-cause eviction, relocation assistance, or other tenant protection measures appear anywhere in the 2020 record. This was not discussed at council, in the Housing Element, or in public comment (beyond general affordability concerns). For a city where public commenters documented households earning $100K-$150K unable to purchase homes, a city employee commuting two hours daily, and a nurse unable to afford housing near her workplace, the absence of any tenant-side policy discussion is notable.
State Mandate Compliance
Carlsbad engaged with state mandates in 2020, though compliance was incomplete:
- RHNA: The 6th Cycle obligation of 3,873 units was met on paper with a sites inventory surplus of 3,335 units. Whether this translates to actual permits depends on Program 1.1 rezonings.
- SB 330: Council held a joint special meeting with four commissions to address compliance. The Growth Management Program caps were identified as potentially non-compliant but remained in place.
- ADU laws: Nine-month compliance gap (January to September 2020) before ordinance amendment.
- Density Bonus: Program 2.3 incorporated AB 1763 (80% bonus for 100% affordable) and AB 2345.
- Surplus Land Act: Program 2.5 commits to land banking surplus city-owned parcels per AB 1486.
A significant faction of public commenters urged the city to resist state mandates entirely, with multiple residents calling for copying Encinitas's strategy to "drag things out as long as possible" and advocating lawsuits citing Huntington Beach as a model. One commenter stated: "The state should not be given a free pass to increase Carlsbad's density against residents' will." Council did not act on these appeals in the available record.
Housing Supply Votes
Only one housing project vote appears in the 2020 record:
| Project | Units | Vote | Dissent | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grand Jefferson (786 Grand Ave) | 6 condos + 1 commercial | 3-1 | Schumacher | Pro-density dissent: wanted more units |
| Veteran/homeless housing (Harding St & Oak Ave) | 50 affordable | 4-0 | None | $4,043,392 additional funding |
Schumacher dissented on Grand Jefferson because she wanted the four-story mixed-use project analyzed for studio/one-bedroom configurations to achieve greater density and affordability, and wanted more commercial space along Jefferson Street. This is a pro-density dissent, not an anti-housing vote.
Affordable Housing Finance
Council committed $4.3M+ to affordable housing in the available record:
- $4,043,392 additional financial assistance to Affirmed Housing for 50 units of veteran/homeless housing, funded partly through No Place Like Home Program and Proposition 63. Approved 4-0.
- $235,000 in CDBG funds to acquire an affordable resale unit at 2634 Hancock Circle. Approved 4-0.
- $205,085 to Rincon Consultants for the Housing Element Update. Approved 4-0.
Public commenters flagged the affordable housing in-lieu fee as "so low that it is simply an incentive for developers not to build affordable housing." No action on adjusting the fee appears in the record.
Infrastructure and Budget
No infrastructure or capital budget items relevant to development capacity appear in the available 2020 record beyond the housing investments noted above.
Council Member Patterns
The four-member council (no fifth member documented) showed the following patterns on the limited available votes:
Schumacher was the most housing-focused member. She dissented on Grand Jefferson for not being dense enough, advocated for shelter expansion to women and families, ranked homelessness as her top priority, and pushed to defer contested coastal parcels from the LCP process. Her votes consistently favored more housing, more density, and more affordability.
Bhat-Patel named affordable housing as a top priority alongside traffic, homelessness, and climate. Reliable yes vote on all housing items. Moved most consent calendar items.
Hall asked pointed questions about ADU applicability in the coastal zone and veteran housing screening criteria. Voted against deferring coastal parcels from the LCP process. Supported all housing funding items.
Blackburn voted yes on all housing items. Asked substantive questions about ADU/HOA interactions and mental health support services for veteran housing. Voted against deferring coastal parcels.
No anti-housing votes were recorded from any council member. The only contested vote (Grand Jefferson, 3-1) saw the dissenter arguing for more housing, not less. The 2-2 split on coastal parcel deferral was a procedural disagreement about LCP process, not a housing supply question per se.
Bottom line: Carlsbad in 2020 was planning ambitiously and spending on affordable housing, but had not yet touched the structural barriers. Growth management caps remained in place despite SB 330 concerns. The ADU ordinance lagged state law by nine months. The proposed Housing Element upzoning is substantial on paper but was not adopted in 2020. No tenant protections were discussed. The test of whether Carlsbad's 2020 planning translates to production falls to 2021 and beyond, when Program 1.1 rezonings either happen within the three-year deadline or they don't.
Stay in the loop on housing in North County.