The possibility that developers could try to bust the 30-foot height limit in San Diego (and La Jolla) by claiming an “Affordable Housing Density Bonus” has been on my mind lately, especially since participating in Bird Rock’s Form-Based Code (FBC) process. Ultimately, the FBC was rejected. This is turning out to be quite a good thing, too, in light of an unintended effect that never came to light during the process.
San Diego has recently announced a list of “incentives” that developers can get if they offer a certain percentage of units in their condo or housing developments as “affordable” (though these units still can be quite expensive). These incentives encourage developers to build more units by offering them “bonus densities,” increased FAR’s (floor area), decreased set-backs and fewer parking requirements. The result would be much larger, bulkier buildings that do not meet the standards of the local zoning codes and push parking onto the streets and neighborhoods.
This is where we dodged a bullet. The version of the FBC the community was presented with allowed two things. First, it permitted three stories. We were promised it would be tiny and would not be seen from the street ” like the top of a wedding cake. But with the affordable housing bonus incentives, once we allow a third floor at all, it could become a huge third floor ” developers could exploit it to expand and add floor area and extra units, as allowed under the affordable housing incentives. This could translate into a goldmine for developers, who would love to put their most expensive condos on a third floor just about anywhere in La Jolla (and relegate the “affordable” ones to the lower floors).
Additionally, the proposed FBC reduced the PDO’s parking requirement so significantly that more space would be freed up to build on each lot. So what we could have ended up with are big, bulky, 30-foot condo projects built out to the street with a full third story, and a whole lot more cars on the street.
Thankfully, under La Jolla’s PDO there is a strict two-story limit, and parking must be provided on site, based on the size and type of use of the lot. These requirements would make it less likely that developers would use the affordable housing incentives, because in two stories with the required parking, it would be harder to find the space to add more units, and developers would not want to lose any profit they could make off more high-end units.
So, if we had an FBC allowing three stories and reduced parking, as the consultants had proposed, it would allow developers to go to the city and get bonus density, increased FAR and decreased set-backs with their three-story project. Essentially, the FBC with the three-story option would give developers everything they need to build exactly what the Bird Rock community doesn’t want ” three-story, 30-foot condo canyons.
One thing was always clear during the FBC process: the community does not want additional density or intensity. But no one ever revealed the impact that allowing three stories in the FBC could have had. The FBC was billed as something that could not be altered ” the set-backs, the FAR, the density, the size and location of the third story, were all supposedly set in stone. We know that for regular development this is debatable. For affordable housing it is apparently all up for grabs.
Quite an unintended consequence.
” Darcy Ashley is a member of the Bird Rock Community Council and a neighborhood resident.