San Diego Land Use and Housing Committee Meeting Summary - January 14, 2026
San Diego Land Use and Housing Committee Meeting Summary - January 14, 2026
The Land Use and Housing Committee of the San Diego City Council convened on January 14, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. Chair Kent Lee presided, joined by Councilmembers Stephen Whitburn and Vivian Moreno (Vice Chair Ila Rivera absent). The agenda included a contract extension for parking management services and a comprehensive first phase of reforms to the city's historic preservation program.
Consent Calendar
- Item 1 (Minutes): The minutes from the November 21, 2025, meeting were approved on a vote of 3–1.
Public Comments & Testimony
Non-Agenda Public Comment:
- Greater Golden Hill Development: Residents from the Preserve Greater Golden Hill nonprofit presented citizen-collected data indicating the planning area exceeded its 6th Housing Cycle goal by over 100 units three years early, which they argued should halt the Complete Communities program in this Community of Concern under municipal code provisions. Concerns included fire evacuation in high-severity zones, infrastructure strain, and a lack of affordability.
- SB 79 Implementation: Manny Rodriguez urged Council President Pro Tem Lee to ensure SANDAG and NCTD do not exempt affluent transit stations from state housing mandates. Jeff Hoyder added that many local bus routes do not meet the strict state definition for major transit stops.
- Planning Groups and Shelter Issues: Dana Gibbett requested the committee restore 15-minute presentation allowances for official community planning groups. Paul Scalin raised concerns about evictions and grievance procedures at the Dreams for Change shelter.
- Signage and Public Health: Virtual speakers Terry Ann Skelly and Becky Rapp pointed to a perceived contradiction in pending code updates that would restrict marijuana imagery on on-site signage but not on larger off-site billboards.
Testimony on Agenda Items (Item 3):
- Proponents of Package A, including the Building Industry Association, Circulate San Diego, and the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce, argued the reforms provide necessary administrative clarity without weakening historic protections. Opponents, led by Save Our Heritage Organisation (SOHO) and Mission Hills Heritage, argued the new appeal standard politicizes expert determinations, violates the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and threatens cultural resources in neighborhoods like Ocean Beach. The Community Planners Committee unanimously and the Historical Resources Board (4–6) previously rejected the package.
Discussion Items
-
Item 2: Ace Parking Contract Extension (1265 First Ave Parkade) The Economic Development Department requested a one-year extension for Ace Parking 3 LLC to manage the downtown parkade at a monthly rate of $21,685 (totaling $260,220) to allow time for a competitive RFP process. Deliberation: Councilmember Moreno expressed strong frustration with the administration's pattern of last-minute contract renewals and the lack of a firm timeline for a new RFP, questioning whether the city was securing best value. Staff could not provide a specific release date. Outcome: The committee voted 2–1 to forward the item to the full City Council without a recommendation, with Councilmember Moreno opposed.
-
Item 3: Preservation and Progress Package A Deputy Director Kelly Stonko presented the first phase of a historic preservation program update, including amendments to the General Plan, Land Development Code, and the Historic Preservation Fund. Key changes include adding a "findings not supported" standard for City Council appeals of historic designations, clarifying that Complete Communities can apply on non-contributing parcels in thematic and emerging historic districts, and focusing the preservation fund on equity and underrepresented groups. Deliberation: Councilmembers Whitburn and Lee expressed strong support, arguing the updates modernize a 20-year-old system and align council authority with other land use decisions. Councilmember Whitburn proposed an amendment directing staff to monitor the implementation of the new appeal standard and report back in the annual HRB report. Councilmember Moreno, while supporting the motion, urged greater stakeholder outreach before the more complex Package B is considered. Outcome: The motion to recommend the package to the full City Council for adoption, including the monitoring directive, passed unanimously (3–0).
Key Outcomes
- Item 1 (Consent Calendar): Approved (3–1).
- Item 2 (Ace Parking): Forwarded to City Council without recommendation (2–1).
- Item 3 (Preservation & Progress Package A): Recommended to City Council with a monitoring amendment (3–0).
- Next Steps: Staff will continue work on the broader Package B. The committee will hold its next hearing on February 5, 2026, at 1:00 p.m.
Meeting Transcript
Good afternoon. I know some folks are still grabbing a seat. We'll go ahead and get started and uh welcome everyone to the land use and housing committee meeting of January 14th, 2026. Our committee liaison Natalie Kessler will go over instructions for today's meeting. This meeting is being televised and live streamed on the city's website. And Council Administration will continue to make arrangements for the public to comment using the Zoom webinar platform. Members of the public who wish to provide virtual testimony must enter the virtual queue by raising their hand before the virtual queue closes. The queue will close when the last virtual speaker finishes speaking or five minutes after in-person testimony ends, whichever occurs first. This will allow for better meeting management between the two platforms and ensure the committee is able to manage and conduct city business. Also attending the meeting today is Coda Zeizer with Mayor Todd Gloria's office. Chief Deputy City Attorney Gren Newfer with the City Attorney's Office. Amy Lee with the Independent Budget Analyst Office, and Angeli Hoyos, committee consultant. If you're in person, please complete a speaker slip located at the entrance of chambers and place it on top of the box indicated at the front of the room next to the public comment microphone. Please submit these slips in a timely manner to ensure proper meeting management. In-person testimony will conclude before virtual testimony begins. Members of the public can join the webinar by computer, tablet, or smartphone by accessing the accessing the link listed online in the preamble language of the agenda on the city's webpage. To join the Zoom webinar by phone, please dial 1669-2545252. The webinar ID is 161751933 pound. This information is also available on the agenda. Please note that if you're watching via City TV 24 or online, there may be a delay. Please participate via the audio on your phone and mute your TV or computer when it is your turn to speak. And if you wish to speak on a particular item, wait for that item to be called and then raise your hand to speak by tapping the raise your hand icon. Or if you're a calling participant, press star nine on your phone. If you raise your hand during a non-comment period, your hand will be lowered. Chair. Thank you, Natalie, for reviewing those instructions for the benefit of the public. A quorum is now present, and we will take up non-agenda public comment. The council members respect and appreciate the public's input and are fully committed to protecting every participant's free speech rights at council and committee meetings. Natalie, will you please proceed with any non-agenda public comment? Perule 2.7 non-agenda public comment is an opportunity for members of the public to comment on items that are not on the agenda but within the subject matter jurisdiction of the committee. Each speaker will have two minutes. And we have received three speaker slips from three individuals in chambers. We will begin with those in chambers before we move to the virtual queue. Mike Tukey, please approach the lectern. You'll be followed by Jennifer James and Manny Rodriguez. Jennifer James, would you like to Okay? Okay. Thank you and good afternoon. My name is Jennifer James. I am a Greater Golden Hill resident and a member of the Preserve Greater Golden Hill nonprofit. As neighbors, we have watched development accelerate rapidly, well beyond our RHA planning area goals. Yet the city's 2025 annual report on homes presented to this committee in October reported that Greater Golden Hill had produced only 576 of its 1,401 units for this housing cycle. That did not match what we were seeing on the ground. So a citizen research team reviewed the city's public DSD permitting dashboard and conducted site visits to verify issued active and completed or in pipeline projects since 2021. We found that as of November, Greater Golden Hill has 1,504 units exceeding its sixth housing cycle goal by more than 100 units three years early. That's a 1,000 unit difference from the city's monitoring. Municipal Code 143.1030 states the complete communities program applies only until a community of concern planning area reaches 80% of its area's adequate sites inventory. However, because the annual report on homes relies on data that is already a year behind, we saw no evidence that this monitoring is occurring. Programs such as Complete Communities and the ADU bonus program are designed to accelerate growth. But without timely data, transparency, and accountability, their unintended consequence is a disproportionate and irreversible burden on vulnerable neighborhoods that those strains are infrastructure and does not produce housing attainable for existing residents, thereby accelerating gentrification.
openpublica.com