by Crystal Niebla / Times of San Diego — inewsource /December 26, 2024
San Diego officials are one step closer to eliminating a controversial zoning rule that singles out parts of the city’s southeastern neighborhoods.
The Planning Commission this month voted 5-1 to recommend removing a footnote quietly added to the municipal code in 2019 that allows developers to build single-family homes at a higher density in Encanto.
Some residents supported the removal of the footnote. But others urged the commission to reject the proposal as written because it was not retroactive, raising concerns about whether two projects already under consideration would be able to move forward with higher density.
Robert Campbell, vice chair of the Chollas Valley Community Planning Group, which has been demanding a removal of the footnote for months, said he has mixed feelings about the commission’s vote.
“Happy that the motion’s going forward to repeal (the footnote). Not happy that retroactively, nothing is applying yet.”
After residents vocally rebuked the zoning rule, city Planning Director Heidi Vonblum announced during a council meeting last month that she would push to remove the footnote.
The discovery of the footnote came after the Chollas Valley Community Planning Group — made up of volunteer residents — paid the $1,000 fee to appeal a housing project that would build more than two dozen, single-story homes across more than 5 acres on Klauber Avenue.
For projects such as the one proposed on Klauber, the developer only needs a minimum of 5,000 square feet to build one, single-family house, though it would need a minimum of 20,000 square feet elsewhere.
The footnote applies to the neighborhoods of Encanto along with Alta Vista, Broadway Heights, Chollas View, Emerald Hills, Lincoln Park, O’Farrell, and Valencia Park.
Some residents in the area argue the rule is a form of discrimination, pointing to southeast San Diego’s higher proportions of Black and brown residents and lower household incomes than the rest of the county.
Last month, the planning group successfully halted the project after the City Council approved the appeal.
Residents did not contest the footnote in their appeal but instead challenged the city’s environmental determination.
As the law stands today, with the footnote, the developer for the Klauber project could only build up to 23 homes. Without the footnote, it would be capped at 13 homes.
The removal would drastically decrease the allowed development on existing lots affected by the footnote: from 642 to 177 homes, according to a staff report.
Staff also acknowledged that the footnote should have been “directly discussed with the affected communities” during its approval process, but “there is no evidence to suggest it was intentionally racist or designed with discriminatory intent.”
Councilmembers must vote to amend the city’s zoning law to remove the footnote, which is expected to be heard next month.
“Don’t give up what you have said today, because you have to continue,” Planning Commissioner Dennis Otsuji told the residents in council chambers.
Where did the footnote come from and who had it placed in the municipal code? This is what corruption looks like. Did someone get paid to place it in the code? These words are worth millions of dollars to a developer. They were put there for a reason. How did the developer know about the footnote and its value?
The same shenanigans happened with San Diego bonus ADU program where City staff and the Faulconer administration presented this as being in line with the State’s ADU requirements, which they were not.
Once things like these get put into law, it becomes difficult to get them rectified. First you have to figure out what was done, next you have to come up with money to contest it, then there is a push to look the other way or fight the claim that the people who are pointing out the problem are alarmist.
Heather Ferber, the new City Attorney, should be investigating these kinds of potential crimes. There needs to be more accountability at City Hall.
DiegoK – see earlier articles on the Rag; do a word search for “Encanto” in our search bar for starters.
Aren’t most lots 5,000 SF? Mine was as were most others in Roseville. Who has a 20,000 SF lot? I must be missing something.
The project is in an area zoned R-1-1 which has a minimum lot size of 20,000 SF. Most of the residential zoning in the City of San Diego, however, is R-1-7 which has a minimum lot size of 5,000 SF.
Thank you Heidi