The City Planning Commission on Aug. 3 thwarted an initial attempt to make San Diego the first California city to implement SB 10, unanimously turning thumbs down on the controversial proposal.
SB 10, which seeks to increase housing in transit-oriented areas, is backed by San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria. The bill could allow up to 10 homes on a single-family lot up to three stories tall near existing or planned mass transit.
A transit-oriented area is defined as being within one mile of an existing bus or trolley line, or within one mile of a proposed bus or trolley line. The bill, which cannot be rescinded once passed according to state law, was included as part of a housing package considered by planning commissioners.
“SB 10 is not the right way to go,” said Planning Commission chair William Hofman following lengthy public testimony both for and against the housing measure. “I totally support this housing package without SB 10. We’re going down a wrong path here that we won’t be able to retreat from. My biggest concern is that the adoption of SB 10 is irreversible. Whatever the negative impacts to our communities that occur – cannot be undone.”
The City defended implementing SB 10, contending San Diego is facing a severe home shortage, with growing demand and limited options.“This proposal for missing middle (income) homes allows for a greater array of affordable housing types,” said City staffer Jeff Ryan adding, “Eighty percent of the City’s total land area is zoned only for single-home development.
“A critical strategy is to streamline and encourage the production of smaller, less complicated, and less expensive housing projects in areas that have existing infrastructure and amenities. This (SB 10) provides opportunities to increase the use of transit, pedestrian, and bicycle infrastructure. This also concentrates missing middle homes – townhomes, row homes, triplexes, and fourplexes – in areas that allow for the efficient delivery of additional infrastructure.
“The proposal to permit missing middle-home types in residential neighborhoods, is an approach for allowing housing options that fit into the fabric of existing neighborhoods,” continued Ryan who noted, “Two- and three-story homes can provide more homes while also meeting the scale and context of surrounding neighborhoods. Missing middle homes can also create a more sustainable city by providing housing closer to high-frequency transit, job locations, and amenities, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. Missing middle homes can help provide more lower-cost options for middle-income families.”
But not everyone testifying at the Aug. 3 commission hearing saw SB 10 in the same light.
“I just don’t want to see San Diego become Los Angeles,” argued Amy Reichert, a County District 4 supervisorial candidate. “These claims that more people would be likely to take public transportation if these units are built closer to bus stops simply are not true. I don’t believe SB 10 is the answer to do that. Creating more density, it’s just going to result in more traffic and more congestion. I want to stop this here.”
“We feel this is not good for San Diego,” argued Point Loman Mandy Havlik. “We share the planning commission’s concerns about the flaws in this proposal, and firmly believe that no housing regulation should be irrevocable.”
Claiming lots as small as 1,000 square feet would be eligible for development under SB 10, Havlik concluded: “Existing infrastructure in single-family neighborhoods is ill-equipped to accommodate multi-dwelling units as proposed by SB 10. It is highly unlikely that the overdevelopment resulting from SB 10 will result in more affordable housing. Rather, it will just increase the profits of developers.”
Concluded commission chair Hofman: “We had asked for options for the implementation of the missing middle housing regulations without the use of SB 10. I would like still to have seen those alternatives. The reason for implementing SB 10 versus any other alternatives is the free environmental pass the state has given us (on implementing the bill). To me, that’s not good enough. With all the programs that have been adopted in the last few years, and all the community plan updates that are going to be occurring, we’ve significantly raised the number of potential homes to be built.”
Hofman moved, and his colleagues agreed, that they recommend to city staff and the mayor’s office that “workshops be held to address that middle-income gap, whether it’s looking at SB 10 or other possibilities.”
The housing package of which SB 10 was a part, now goes to the City Land Use and Housing Committee for review, before a final vote of the San Diego City Council at a later date.
