On January 15, 2023, we sent the following letter to Nancy Graham, senior planner with the City of San Diego Planning Department. This is our response to the proposed Land Use Scenarios A and B, which were released at the November 2022 meeting following public feedback on the earlier proposed Scenarios 1 and 2. While these new scenarios did reduce the overall density proposed, they still propose a very significant increase compared to existing use. This letter requests further revisions.
To view Scenarios A and B full-size: Click here and scroll to the bottom of the page.
Dear Ms. Graham:
Thank you to you and the Planning Department for considering revised University Community Plan Update scenarios. We greatly appreciate the adjustments to the Scenarios based on community input.
Help Save UC prefers the Plan Update proposed in Scenario B; however, we are requesting that the following revisions be applied whether Scenario A or B is selected:
1. For the University City Marketplace (located at the northeast corner of Regents Road and Governor Drive), the maximum density should be reduced from 0-73 DU/AC (which is currently proposed in Scenario A) to 0-29 DU/AC. In addition, community/neighborhood retail services, including but not limited to a supermarket, a post office, and restaurants, must be maintained, and the parcel should retain a thirty-foot height limit and reasonable setbacks from adjacent residential properties. If housing is considered as an optional addition: a) new residential should be focused on the west or south sides of the parcel along Regents Road or Governor Drive; and b) sufficient parking must continue to be provided for customers to the commercial businesses as well as for the residents. Help Save UC only supports rezoning of this parcel to include an option to add housing (in addition to the required commercial) if the height limit and parking requirements can be included in the plan update. If these requirements cannot be included, then Help Save UC does not support rezoning this parcel.
2. For the University Square Marketplace (located at the southeast corner of Genesee Avenue and Governor Drive), the maximum density should be reduced from 0-73 DU/AC (which is currently proposed in Scenario A) to 0-29 DU/AC. In addition, community/neighborhood retail services, including but not limited to a supermarket, a pharmacy, and restaurant, must be maintained, and the parcel should retain a forty-five-foot height limit and reasonable setbacks. If housing is considered as an optional addition, sufficient parking must continue to be provided for customers to the commercial businesses as well as for the residents. Help Save UC only supports rezoning of this parcel to include an option to add housing (in addition to the required commercial) if the height limit and parking requirements can be included in the plan update. If these requirements cannot be included, then Help Save UC does not support rezoning this parcel.
3. For the parcels on the northwest and southeast corners of Regents Road and Governor Drive, these parcels should not be rezoned to allow residential at the northwest corner or increased residential density at the southeast corner.
a. The parcel on the northwest corner has one of the very few restaurants that are walkable from west UC.
b. The parcel on the southeast corner has already been redeveloped with condominiums; rezoning and redeveloping this for higher density would lead to displacement.
4. The two parcels on the northwest and southwest corners of Genesee Avenue and Governor Drive should not be rezoned.
a. There is not enough room for an impactful project on the northwest corner.
b. All four gas stations are very busy. While the City and State hope that people will transition to electric vehicles, such transition will not occur in the next 20-30 years. The community will need at least one or two gas stations.
5. If rezoned to allow for housing, the parcel on the northeast corner of Genesee Avenue and Governor Drive should be limited to a density of 12-18 dwelling units/acre. Parking should be required for residents.
6. For the Chase Bank and Carl's Jr properties located on the south side of Governor Drive east of the University Square Marketplace, the maximum density should be reduced from 0-73 DU/AC (which is currently proposed in Scenario A) to 0-29 DU/AC. Reasonable setbacks, and parking for residents must be included.
7. Zoning should not be increased at the parcel(s) located at the southwest corner of Nobel and Genesee. This area is currently zoned for 18-30 DU/AC. Scenario A proposes to change this to 0-218 DU/AC. This is some of the least expensive housing in the area and could cause significant displacement.
Help Save UC also continues to support the items listed below and requests changes to either Scenario A or B, if needed, to incorporate these items:
A. The overall density of the Land Use Scenarios should be reduced because there is no component to address the increased impact on infrastructure. The plan does not propose any additional parks, recreation centers, schools, or libraries. There is no funding for the proposed mobility updates such as improved bike lanes and upgrades to streets to handle increased traffic, nor is there funding or planning for increased emergency services.
B. The plan should minimize displacement of existing homes, condos, and apartments. Many of the homes likely to be replaced are the most affordable.
C. No areas with single-family homes should be rezoned.
D. No open space, MSCP, or parks should be identified as locations for development. Density in parcels adjacent to open spaces should be limited, as native ecosystems are sensitive to light, noise pollution and increased human traffic.
E. No libraries should be rezoned or removed.
F. All new residential projects must incorporate recreational outdoor space proportional to the size of the project as part of the base zoning. This outdoor space should be required in generally, not only as part of a density bonus.
G. Any redevelopment of a parcel located within 1/4 mile of a Trolley stop must include a residential component.
H. Any parcel that currently provides community or neighborhood commercial retail services such as grocery stores, restaurants, banks, post offices, etc., (including those located within 1/4 mile of a Trolley stop), the community-serving retail, with customer parking, must be maintained as part of the new project. The new residential component also must have reasonable setbacks from existing housing.
I. When considering "transit-oriented" housing, the City must limit these areas to locations that are either within 1/4 mile of a Trolley stop, or 1/2 mile as people can actually walk (not as the crow flies) to a major transit stop. The definition of "transit-oriented" housing should not be expanded, as data shows that people will not walk more than 1/2 mile to reach transit.
J. The Community Plan should include a requirement that guarantees that a certain portion of new residential development are affordable and/or work-force housing as part of the base zoning (not as a density bonus). The option for developers to pay in-lieu fees should be eliminated, as this program has not generated the necessary type of housing needed for the City.
Below are the reasons Help Save UC believes that land use densities should be reduced as requested in Scenarios A and B:
* Rezoning commercial shopping centers to allow the option of adding housing must absolutely ensure that commercial uses such as supermarkets, pharmacies, and restaurants remain as part of the ongoing use. Climate goals will not be achieved if these services are removed and residents are required to drive farther for grocery shopping and similar services. Parking at these locations is also required. University City has many senior citizens that are not able to walk or ride bicycles to do their shopping and other errands, and public transportation is not sufficient, particularly in South UC, to support these needs.
* Structures with lower height limits cost less to build and therefore have a greater likelihood of achieving a more reasonable price point.
* The two Land Use Scenarios currently proposed by the City and the goals for housing do not appear to include the increase in housing stock from SB 9 and ADUs that are already being constructed in the community. Given this additional housing stock, such significant density is not necessarily needed. The City should make reasonable forecasts of this form of increased housing to offset proposed increases in Scenario A or B.
* The proposed Land Use Scenarios and goals for housing do not factor in the increased housing that UCSD is currently building, and has indicated that it will continue to build. UCSD is currently building housing for at least several thousand students, with more planned. The City should make reasonable forecasts, in collaboration with UCSD, of this form of increased, on-campus housing to offset proposed increases in Scenario A or B.
* One-bedroom apartments and smaller units that are more likely associated with high-rise housing are not the type of housing that is needed. The city needs housing with multiple bedrooms and living space to accommodate families. The lower-density housing designs are generally more oriented to providing that type of housing.
We appreciate your implementation of an iterative process to foster the development of a Community Plan together. We look forward to a Land Use Scenario based on this input and to having the opportunity to discuss all the Land Use Scenarios at future meetings.
Sincerely,
Help Save UC