San Diego Smart Growth and Land Use Committee Meeting Summary for May 17, 2017
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
San Diego Smart Growth and Land Use Committee Meeting Summary - May 17, 2017
The Smart Growth and Land Use Committee met on May 17, 2017, with Chair Sherman and Councilmembers Alvarez, Gomez, and Kate present. Staff from the City Attorney's Office and the City's Real Estate Assets division assisted. The committee unanimously approved the April 12, 2017 meeting minutes, approved the consent calendar, and took action on appeal fee and process updates and the fiscal year 2018 Affordable Housing Fund Annual Plan.
Consent Calendar
- The four-item consent calendar was approved unanimously.
- Bay Shore Bikeway maintenance agreement: Councilmember Alvarez raised concerns about overgrown vegetation impeding the bikeway. Nathan Patterson of the Street Division said that location is not related to the brush issue and his office would work with council staff to address abatement.
- Sangu Square property: Martha Welch spoke in opposition, saying she has known the property since it was built under Mayor O'Connor, that it was originally HUD-assisted, and that it looks better outside than inside; she opposed selling it again.
- Wireless telecommunications facility leases: Councilmember Alvarez asked whether surveillance equipment such as ShotSpotter could be installed on these leased facilities. Sabelle Thompson, Director of Real Estate Assets, explained that the item further defines wireless telecommunications facilities and that the city has historically included non-personal uses such as government and broadcast equipment, typically on mountaintops. Alvarez said he wanted more information before the item goes to council.
Public Comments & Testimony
- A non-agenda speaker asked the city to hold off issuing more licenses for marijuana product manufacturing until safety, extraction, sanitary manufacturing, packaging, and labeling standards are established.
- John Stoll, a vacation rental operator in a CC-PDR zone, said his two units are near an SRO hotel with 70 beds and a tattoo parlor open until 3 a.m. He stated he has paid $50,000 in taxes, has had no police complaints, and intentionally bought in a commercial zone where vacation rentals should be permitted; he asked the committee to distinguish between residential-emphasis RE zones and residential-estate RE zones.
- Martha Welch, in non-agenda comment, criticized current downtown building, saying many new projects are empty while affordable housing is scarce, and called for more affordable housing.
- On the appeal fee item, David Modi, representing the Community Planners Committee and San Diego's 42 community planning groups, asked the committee to maintain the current exemption from appeal fees for community planning groups, saying they have used appeals judiciously.
- On the Affordable Housing Fund plan, Martha Welch opposed the item and questioned whether listed projects were truly multifamily and whether the addresses were correct. David Modi, speaking as a Talmadge resident, supported the item and proposed developing an objective standard for measuring neighborhood affordable housing saturation.
Discussion Items
Item 6 - Updates and Expedites to Appeal Fees and Processes
- Staff presented a proposal to update appeal fees and processing for process 4 appeals and environmental determination appeals. Current fees are $100 for individual appellants and $0 for community planning groups, set by a 2000 ordinance.
- For fiscal years 2015 and 2016, there were 32 appeals. The average appeal delay was 104 days, the average cost to the applicant was $9,802, an average of 11 city staff members handled each appeal, and total city staff time exceeded 2,200 hours. Applicants paid over $300,000.
- An analysis of selected California cities found appeal fees ranging from $100 up to $5,479, with San Diego on the low end. A Prop 26 analysis found the average council appeal hearing cost the general fund $1,243, while only $242 was reimbursed, leaving more than $1,000 unrecovered per hearing.
- The committee approved recommendations to: (1) raise the appeal fee to $1,000 for individual appellants; (2) require appeal hearings within 60 days, with tentative-map appeals heard within 30 days under the Subdivision Map Act; and (3) provide that if all appellants withdraw, the last decision becomes final and does not go to the full city council.
- During discussion, Councilmember Alvarez asked about waivers in other jurisdictions and legal support for the fee; staff confirmed most agencies allow waivers for community planning groups and the City Attorney's Office supported the fee. Councilmember Kate supported retaining the community planning group waiver. The motion carried unanimously.
Item 5 - Fiscal Year 2018 Affordable Housing Fund Annual Plan
- The San Diego Housing Commission requested approval of the proposed FY2018 Affordable Housing Fund Annual Plan, allocating $74,244,502 in anticipated funds and authorizing the agency's president/CEO to reallocate funds among model programs in response to market opportunities.
- The plan covers the Inclusionary Housing Fund and Housing Trust Fund. Of the projected $62.6 million fund balance, $27.5 million was already committed, and three pending projects would commit another $23 million, leaving roughly $4 million available.
- Proposed model program changes include updating rental housing production scope and terms, adding an affordable housing transit-oriented development revolving loan fund seed investment, adding a Clean and Green homeowner sustainability loan program under housing rehabilitation, and adding landlord engagement, prevention and diversion assistance, outreach and navigation, and moving on rental assistance under homeless housing initiatives.
- Anticipated outcomes include approximately 480 new rental units, assistance for 10 homebuyers, 625 transitional housing beds, rapid rehousing for 180 households, landlord engagement for 850 households, and diversion of 300 households from homelessness.
- Councilmember Alvarez requested a clearer breakdown of new fee collections versus loan repayments for each fund. Councilmember Kate asked about developer referrals to Civic San Diego and about Promise Zone opportunities; Housing Commission staff said Promise Zone work was underway and reviewed how resources could be targeted there. Councilmember Gomez noted the inclusionary fee is dropping from $9.36 to $7.03; staff said the change may reduce fee revenue but increase the number of affordable units through the density bonus program.
- The motion to approve the annual plan and requested authorization passed unanimously.
Key Outcomes
- Approved the four-item consent calendar unanimously, including the Bay Shore Bikeway maintenance agreement, Sangu Square property action, and wireless facility lease definitions.
- Approved the appeal fee and process updates unanimously, increasing the individual appeal fee to $1,000, setting 60-day hearing deadlines (30 days for tentative-map appeals), and eliminating full council hearings when all appellants withdraw.
- Approved the FY2018 Affordable Housing Fund Annual Plan unanimously, with a request to provide a clearer breakdown of fee collections versus loan repayments.
- The next Smart Growth and Land Use Committee meeting was scheduled for June 14, 2017 at 2 p.m.
Meeting Transcript
Welcome everybody. Thank you for being here for the May 17th, 2017 meeting of the Smart Growth Land Use Committee. Looks like we're still waiting for Councilmember Kate. We have Council Members Alvarez and Gomez here. And looks like we uh miss it. There's Councilmember Kate. We're missing the IBA currently. We have Keely Halsey from the City Attorney's Office and Committee Consultant Sarah Chardsman. Um need to do the approval of minutes from our April twelfth, twenty seventeen meeting, smart growth and land use, uh unanimous consent unless anybody has anything they want to correct or or discuss. See none, that will be approved by unanimous consent. With that, we'll be moving on to non-agenda public comment. We have four non-agenda public comment speakers today. Oh, did I say three? I'm sorry, it's non-agenda, it's two minutes. Um then real quick, just a quick question for you, Christine. It says fire rescue budget. Um does it pertain to land use and the budget? Because this is land use committee, and it's supposed to be for what's under our purview. It does not pertain to um land use. Okay, it's probably the wrong committee then. Well, is this not the budget review committee? No, this is smart growth and land use. Okay. Same place, same room. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Yep, here she comes. And then after that, we'll have John Stall, so if John will be ready. Marijuana products, manufacturing, the establishment of safety standards, and the establishment of minimum standards for packaging and labeling of marijuana products. That would include at a minimum establishing licensing fees, setting minimum standards for extraction prop processes, and especially the volatile solvent extractions that are used to reduce that are typically involved in explosions and fires. I hope that they and they will be setting minimum standards for sanitary manufacturing practices to prevent contamination. Established license licensee responsibilities for operations, including, among others, requirements related to security training, record keeping, disposal to protect the physical safety of employees, and to minimize the potential for diversion. Established quality and safety standards for finished manufacturing, manufactured marijuana products, and established packaging and labeling standards for these products as well. Thank you very much. Thank you. Mr. John Stoll. Welcome. One thing I forgot to say. My whole point was to please hold off on issuing more licenses for these kinds of businesses until these standards come out. Great. That was the most important thing. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Stolly, you have two minutes. Oh, thank you. Yes, I just want to address the committee on uh vacation rentals and it's particularly my zone C C P D R. I think there's a conflicting zone situation going on here where RE in my zone means residential emphasis. However, in in section 13, it means residential estate.
openpublica.com