San Diego Council and Mayor Clash Over ADU Housing Program
 |
| A single-family home with an ADU complex in the backyard area in the Talmadge neighborhood of San Diego on Nov. 5, 2023. The ADUs were the first constructed under San Diego’s density bonus program. |
The controversial program, which allows property owners to build at least four ADUs on any residential lot and unlimited units near transit stops, has produced 1,226 homes since 2021, including 470 affordable units. However, council members say they've received widespread complaints about neighborhood impacts and overcrowding.
The Council's unexpected vote on Tuesday called for city staff to return within 60 days with an action plan to end the program, despite warnings from the City Attorney's Office that the unscheduled vote could violate California's Brown Act. Councilmember Henry Foster III, who proposed the motion, argued that the program "is destroying community character" and creating unsafe conditions.
Mayor Gloria, who has made the ADU program central to his housing agenda, expressed disappointment with the Council's action. His office stated they are "exploring options" in response, highlighting the program's success in producing affordable housing. The clash sets up a potential showdown between the mayor's office and council over the future of San Diego's housing density policies.
SAN DIEGO (FOX 5/KUSI) — The issue of accessory dwelling units in the city of San Diego has been simmering in the background for years, but has now been pushed front and center as city council members say resident complaints have hit a fevered pitch.
“We are hearing from our constituents in all nine districts that they are really upset about just how much is allowed to be built,” said District 7 city councilman Raul Campillo.
During a meeting Tuesday a discussion sprouted which called into question the city of San Diego’s housing 2.0 plan, which allows for density bonus units to be built with little regard to neighborhood character. For every one ADU that is deed restricted as affordable housing, the property owner is allowed to build another ADU which can be used as market rate housing.
The sweeping change to fast development is running counter to the wants of residents living in the city.
The mayor declined an interview on his signature housing development law, but his administration released this statement:
Councilman Campillo said, “We’ve gotten to a point to see what works and what doesn’t, and how we can curtail this to make it more reasonable.”
The mayor has 60 days from Tuesday to respond to the city council.
Southeast San Diego residents won a fight on housing density, but another one is brewing between council, mayor
Why this matters
Residents say a controversial zoning rule that applies only to parts of southeast San Diego and nowhere else in the city amounts to discrimination.
Southeast San Diego residents who opposed two city policies allowing new housing at a higher density in their neighborhoods scored a worthy ally this week: the City Council.
Councilmembers unanimously voted to remove a controversial footnote in the city’s zoning laws that allows developers to build more single-family homes on less land in certain southeastern neighborhoods than what’s allowed in other parts of San Diego.
But the council also made an unscheduled vote toward further limiting accessory dwelling units — also known as ADUs — despite a warning from legal counsel that the move could prompt a lawsuit against the city.
“The lack of transparency and
engagement in policy-making affecting neighborhoods, especially those
historically discriminated against like District 4, is unacceptable,”
Councilmember Henry Foster III, who represents the area, said about the footnote during Tuesday’s meeting.
“I continue to share in my community’s concern that the process, or lack thereof, regarding (the footnote) was not transparent and inclusive.”
The footnote permits a minimum of 5,000 square feet to build one, single-family home in Encanto. That’s compared to 20,000 square feet elsewhere.
Some residents have claimed the rule amounts to discrimination, pointing to the area’s higher proportions of Black and brown residents and household incomes that are lower than the rest of the county.
Officials still haven’t explained why the footnote was added to the city’s municipal code in 2019. Though they have acknowledged that the footnote should have been “directly discussed with the affected communities” during its approval process, staff have said “there is no evidence to suggest it was intentionally racist or designed with discriminatory intent.”
“They know they’re wrong because if they didn’t know they were wrong, they wouldn’t have removed it, the footnote,” Andrea Hetheru, chair of the Chollas Valley Community Planning Group, told inewsource on Wednesday. The group of volunteer residents spearheaded a campaign against the exclusive zoning rule.
Residents say they learned about the footnote while challenging a developer’s proposal last year to build 25 homes on 5 acres along Klauber Avenue. The city has since upheld the planning group’s appeal against the project, though it’s expected that the developer, Klauber Development Corp., will reapply with plans that would build at a lower density.
Removal of the footnote takes effect 30 days after Mayor Todd Gloria signs the amendment. That could halt another housing project on a radio tower site in the Emerald Hills neighborhood, where D.R. Horton Inc. proposed building more than 100 market-rate, single-family homes on 31 acres along Old Memory Lane, according to a community planning group meeting agenda.
Residents urged the council’s repeal of the footnote to be applied retroactively to stop the housing projects that are already in process. But Seth Litchney, a program manager with the city Planning Department, maintained that “retroactively applying new requirements to development project applications already submitted and in review could be a violation of state law.”
Hetheru said her group will likely attempt to block both housing projects, which would cost them at least $2,000 in appeal fees. Pending approval from her group’s board, they may also hire attorneys to help potentially sue the city, she said.
“Given our low resources, the last thing you should do is force us to take you to court,” she said.
An end to the bonus ADU program?
Councilmembers on Tuesday also asked staff to begin the process of stopping the city’s ADU density bonus program, which allows a developer to build a bonus, market-rate unit for every one unit built as a restricted low-to-moderate income rental. In areas close to public transit, the bonus ADU match is unlimited.
Some residents in southeast San Diego have opposed the program, saying it’s a policy that could contribute to “overcrowding, skyrocketing rents, home prices, traffic congestion, unsafe roads, and a vanishing opportunity to purchase a home.”
Foster proposed the amendment, which requests that staff return to the council within 60 days with an action item. City staffers, however, report to the mayor.
“Given that this city has been recognized as a model for how to produce more homes that everyday residents can afford, the mayor is disappointed in the council’s action,” David Rolland, a spokesperson for Gloria, wrote in a statement to KPBS. “We are exploring options for how to respond.”
Councilmembers voted on the amendment against the advice of assistant city attorney Leslie Fitzgerald, who warned they were potentially violating the state’s Brown Act. The city could be vulnerable for a lawsuit for not providing prior notice to the public, Fitzgerald said.
Councilmember Marni Von Wilpert said the vocal rejection of the program from constituents in her district — which includes northern neighborhoods such as Rancho Bernardo, San Pasqual and Scripps Ranch — warranted the risky vote.
“I understand the concern (that) it wasn’t noticed, but this is merely a request,” she said. “We’re not amending the law today.”
Councilmember Jennifer Campbell shared a similar concern from her district. Campbell represents the beaches and western parts of the city such as Point Loma and Mission Beach.
“When it comes back in 60 days, let’s hope everybody knows about it ahead of time, thinks about it, reads it and digests it because this is very, very important about keeping the quality of our neighborhoods in our city,” she said.
Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera was absent and did not participate in the votes Tuesday.
Type of Content
News: Based on facts, either observed and verified directly by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
# San Diego Rethinks ADU Incentives: What This Means for Homeowners and Renters
San Diego is at a crossroads when it comes to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), and the city’s latest move to reconsider its ADU incentive program has sparked a wave of discussion. Whether you’re a homeowner looking to build an ADU or a renter hoping for more affordable housing options, this decision could have far-reaching implications. Let’s break down what’s happening and why it matters.
---
## What Are ADUs and Why Are They Important?
ADUs, often referred to as granny flats, backyard cottages, or in-law suites, are secondary housing units built on single-family residential lots. They’ve become a popular solution to California’s housing crisis, offering:
- **Affordable Housing Options**: ADUs provide smaller, more affordable living spaces in high-cost areas.
- **Increased Property Value**: Homeowners can boost their property’s worth by adding an ADU.
- **Flexibility**: ADUs can be used for family members, rental income, or even as home offices.
San Diego has been a leader in promoting ADUs, but recent reconsideration of incentives could change the game.
---
## Why Is San Diego Reconsidering ADU Incentives?
The city’s ADU incentive program, which has been in place for several years, offers financial perks like waived fees and expedited permits to encourage homeowners to build ADUs. However, concerns have emerged:
- **Overcrowding and Infrastructure Strain**: Some neighborhoods are struggling with increased density and limited parking.
- **Affordability Concerns**: Critics argue that many ADUs are being rented at market rates, not as affordable housing.
- **Regulatory Challenges**: The city is reevaluating whether the incentives are achieving their intended goals.
These factors have led officials to pause and reassess the program’s effectiveness.
---
## What Could Change?
If San Diego revises its ADU incentive program, here are some potential outcomes:
1. **Reduced Financial Incentives**: Waived fees and other perks might be scaled back or eliminated.
2. **Stricter Regulations**: New rules could address concerns about parking, design, and rental affordability.
3. **Focus on Affordable Housing**: The city may prioritize incentives for ADUs rented at below-market rates.
These changes could impact both homeowners and renters, making it harder to build ADUs while potentially increasing the availability of affordable units.
---
## What Does This Mean for Homeowners?
For homeowners considering an ADU, this is a critical moment:
-
**Act Now**: If you’ve been thinking about building an ADU, doing so
before potential changes take effect could save you money.
- **Plan Carefully**: Stay informed about new regulations and how they might affect your project.
- **Explore Alternatives**: If incentives are reduced, consider other ways to finance your ADU, such as grants or loans.
---
## What Does This Mean for Renters?
Renters could feel the impact of these changes in several ways:
- **More Affordable Units**: If the city prioritizes affordable housing, renters may benefit from lower rents.
- **Fewer ADUs**: Reduced incentives could lead to fewer ADUs being built, limiting housing options.
- **Increased Competition**: With fewer ADUs available, competition for rental units could intensify.
---
## What’s Next for San Diego?
The city is expected to hold public hearings and gather feedback before making any final decisions. This is a chance for residents to voice their opinions and shape the future of ADUs in San Diego.
---
### What Do You Think?
- Should San Diego continue offering incentives for ADUs, or are the current concerns valid?
- Do ADUs truly help solve the affordable housing crisis, or do they mainly benefit property owners?
- Should affordable housing requirements be tied to ADU incentives?
- How should the city balance the need for more housing with neighborhood concerns about density and parking?
- Would stricter ADU regulations discourage homeowners from building them, or is it necessary to address overcrowding?
Join the conversation and share your thoughts below! Breaking Now News (BNN) wants to hear from you.
Gloria 'exploring options' after surprise City Council vote seeking repeal of landmark housing program
Published January 29, 2025 at 6:13 PM PST
San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria said Wednesday he is "disappointed" and "exploring options" after the San Diego City Council moved to repeal a local program aimed at building more housing in low-density neighborhoods.
The council voted Tuesday to request that city staff return within 60 days with an action item to repeal the city's ADU bonus program, which allows property owners to build at least four "accessory dwelling units" on any residential lot in San Diego. If the lot is within walking distance of a major public transit stop, the program allows unlimited ADUs — as long as some are set aside as low- or moderate-income affordable housing. The program also includes regulations on height, floor space and setbacks that can limit how many ADUs can be built.
The vote, which was unanimous with Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera absent, came as a surprise because the ADU bonus program was not on the council's agenda. California's open meetings law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, prohibits city governments from taking action on issues without notifying the public in advance.
The City Attorney's Office advised the council against passing the motion, which was made by Councilmember Henry Foster III. Foster said the ADU bonus program "is destroying community character, impacting for-sale opportunities, and creating unsafe conditions. We must pause this program and address all unintended consequences and negative impacts that are affecting communities citywide."
His remarks came during discussion over the repeal of a footnote in the city's Land Development Code that had the effect of rezoning parts of Southeast San Diego, a historically redlined community, while leaving the rest of the city untouched. Foster declined to amend his motion to focus only on the footnote's repeal, insisting that it be coupled with the request to repeal the ADU bonus program.
City staffers work under the direction of the mayor, and the council's vote does not compel them to do anything. Gloria, who made building more housing central to his re-election campaign, declined to say outright whether he would fulfill or deny the council's request.
"Yesterday, the City Council asked the City Planning Department to bring forward a repeal of the highly successful ADU Density Bonus Program as part of their response to an issue that was completely unrelated to that program, even after the city attorney advised them that they were violating the Brown Act," mayoral spokesman Dave Rolland said in a statement. "Given that this city has been recognized as a model for how to produce more homes that everyday residents can afford, the mayor is disappointed in the council’s action. We are exploring options for how to respond."
Gloria is not the only person with the power to repeal the city's ADU bonus program. City Council President Joe LaCava can also place a repeal on a future council agenda, even if the mayor objects. LaCava declined to say whether he would do so, though his spokesman Chris Chan told KPBS he "is coordinating with council, city attorney and operations" following Tuesday's vote.
Repealing the ADU bonus program could also run afoul of state laws that require the city to remove regulatory obstacles to homebuilding.
Some councilmembers on Tuesday offered a defense of the ADU bonus program, even while voting in favor of the motion that sought to repeal it.
"Seeing a 40-unit building pop up in a single family parcel next to you is alarming for a million reasons," said Councilmember Kent Lee, who chairs the council's Land Use and Housing Committee. "That's not going to be the same, and we should not compare it as the same, as when (the program) is applied in other areas in much smaller capacities."
San Diego's ADU bonus program has permitted 1,226 homes since 2021 — 470 of them with affordable rent restrictions — according to data from the San Diego Housing Commission. Roughly two-thirds of projects approved under the program featured five or fewer units, while 92% of projects featured 10 or fewer. A handful of ADU projects have featured far more units. One in Clairemont featured 36 ADUs, while another in Skyline-Paradise Hills featured 37.
The City Council's vote Tuesday led to swift praise from Neighbors for a Better San Diego, a group that opposes efforts to densify single-family neighborhoods.
"While this was not a vote to remove the Bonus ADU Program from single-family zoned parcels, it is the first step in what has been an extremely unpopular and overreaching program," the group said in an email Tuesday evening. "We want to thank the councilmembers for pushing back against bad planning policies and agreeing that ENOUGH is finally ENOUGH."
The YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County, a Democratic club that supports more home construction, also sent out an email Tuesday evening saying the ADU bonus program is "beautifully simple" and has created hundreds of affordable homes without taxpayer subsidies.
"This program works, and we're not going to let it die without a fight," the group said.
Comments
Post a Comment