From Coastal Caretakers
Senate Bill 79 (SB 79), also known as the Abundant and Affordable Homes Near Transit Act, is a landmark piece of California legislation signed into law in October, 2025. San Diego Mayor and Council members were among the first cities in the State to embrace the bill and create new laws supporting the State mandate. Look out folks, ‘they’ have just begun.
We can expect the City of San Diego Council to have future meetings about SB 79 legislation. With San Diego approving tiny, tiny apartments ministerially into high-rises, declaring they are proponents of equity and affordable housing, Neighbors for a Better San Diego saw otherwise: “SB 79 (Wiener) remains one of the most disruptive state housing bills in recent memory.”
Community Planners Committee discussed it on April 28, 2026 as: ITEM#6 – 7:10 SB 79 CITY IMPLEMENTATION – (ACTION) which included Planning Commission Amendments.
The OB Rag tells us that San Francisco and Los Angeles have delayed their implementation through “Planning” until 2030. [“How Major California Cities Are Trying to Get Around SB79 — One of the Most Undemocratic Housing Bills to Come Out of Sacramento”]
Just so you know that does NOT mean that San Francisco has not begun to implement the State’s intentions to support development. Some of our members know personally residents of a different Ocean Beach – Ocean Beach, San Francisco, living in the Sunset, a mostly Asian community with single-family homes. Three-quarters of a block from them is a new, giant tower, 12 stories high, of course with little parking. It is so tall and boxy that it sheds long shadows over the Sunset homes in Ocean Beach, San Francisco.
SB 79 is the State of California law that declares that cities must plan for compliance, and here are some words from the City of San Diego’s Ordinance scheduled for that May 7, 2026 vote:
“This plan is anticipated to include amendments to the Municipal Code, zoning, affected community plans, and the General Plan.”
We have some clues about what to anticipate based on the April 16th Land Use and Housing Commission meeting:
ORDINANCE PHASING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SENATE BILL 79 INCLUDING EXEMPTIONS – PROCESS FIVE
This is San Diego’s compliance plan The plan presentation shows the following changes:
“ G. Section 65912.157(a)(5) of the Government Code prohibits local governments from imposing any height limit less than 65 feet, a maximum density of less than 100 homes per acre, or a floor area ratio of less than three for a housing development project within one-quarter of a mile of a Tier 2 TOD Stop.
H. Section 65912.157(a)(6) of the Government Code prohibits local governments from imposing any height limit less than 55 feet, a maximum density of less than 80 homes per acre, or a floor area ratio of less than 2.5 for a housing development project further than one-quarter mile but within one-half mile of a Tier 2 TOD Stop.”
Does this mean our Coastal Height Limit of 30 feet goes away (again and again and again)? Sounds like that is the end goal. The city couldn’t wait to spell it out.
Also, “U. Government Code section 65912.161(b)(1)(E) allows for the phased implementation of any site identified as vulnerable to one foot of sea level rise, until prior to one year following adoption of the seventh revision of the Housing Element. “
Whatever this means, plan for a swimming pool in the basement.
Supposedly, SB 79 is about Transit, an ever-moving definition in itself. We have all been pushed into using words differently. The City has varied the use of words like Rapid Transit (not to be confused with slow transit), Affordable Housing, Coastal Zone, and Climate Zone regulations.
Lots of planning planned here! It is complicated. After the planning and the new revised Municipal Code, what are we left with? What does the new “law” mean for the current site of the old Rite Aid Drugstore? The density is for a LARGE lot. FARs (Floor Area Ratio) don’t leave a lot of sky, grass, trees, or flowers (called setback). What about the parking regulations for builders?
SB 79 has added a new word to OUR vocabulary. The state and local governments combine to break established laws, partner with developers, ignore local input, and accelerate construction. Before we can say ‘holy high-rise,’ these buildings are being built. It is a safe guess that OB will not stay the way it is much longer.
SB79 is a horrific alledged housing scam! If it was restricted to 300 feer or less of a major transit stop it could be ok in certain commercial or mixed use areas.
The Jamacha Neighborhood opposes SB79! We are a low resozrce area, that never receives equuty and our infrastructure needs have been ignored for decades!
Due to the Massachusetts Transit Station in Lemon Grove, our residential zone, exclusively has single family homes, on two lane streets and no vacant lots exists.
The develper Impact Fees ( DIF). are often waived which does nothing to help build infrastruture.
The City should complete citywide Undergrounding, pipe upsizing, Storm channel upgrades to stop flooding in Jamacha, epair street lights, add illegal dumping signs, add no Oversized Vehicle parking signs, No Heavy Duty Commercial vehicle parking signs, Wayfinder signs, and road repavement city wide before adding anymore new
There is nowhere to add a new store unless a 3 or 4 bedroom single family house is demolished which defeats the purpose of increasing housing.
These alledged homes, are ADUs tof 430sq ft- 453 Sqft and only fit for a single psrson or a couple not families! I would not want my grandkids living in a micro box without any yard or parking spot.
Average 2 car garage in Jamacha is 520 sq ft, think of the low quality of life living in an area smaller than your garage, without any green space, and no backyard space for gardens. Our Community ethnicities are historically gardeners as a means to supplement costs by growing vegetables and fruits, or due to ethnic edible food varieties that are not sold in grocery stores.
#1 Hispanic
#2 Asian ( Vietnamese).
#3 African American
#4 Caucasion
SB79, does not consider ADA needs! The walking distances do not take steep grades, hilly terrain and speeding on roads due to shortage of traffic cops that only do speed traps during the morning or afternoon, never at night, but none of this is taken into consideration..
SB79 and Sustainable Development Areas assume everyone will start using ebikes, bikes and/or that all residents have the ability to walk one mile!
They assume a fantasy that public transportation is feasible, when it is unrealistic for families to bring theirs kids to school or daycare, then get back on transportation to go to work in a reasonable time. It would often take two hours, or more doing this and another 2 hours at the end of the day!
The Census API states the average driving time to work is 25 minutes by car for Jamacha residents (141.02 track). So who will get rid of a car to increase a 25 minute drive to 2 hours or more!
SD MTS is horrific compared to other Cities like Boston , New York, Chicargo, that I loved to use public transportation because it is so much faster to use subway or the T than driving a car, plus saves parking fees!
San Diego public transportation is inferior and undesirable as it takes longer to get places than it does driving by car!
The people who can afford to pay $2,300 for a studio will have cars!