It’s no secret that some people in University City adamantly oppose high-rise buildings and developments that generate increased density.
But at the University Community Planning Group’s (UCPG) March 13 meeting, residents and board members also voiced concern to city staff about increased project spending and the possibility that the city may revamp UC’s community plan to allow increased development density.
“As we near build-out, our streets are going to be beyond capacity,” UCPG member George Lattimer said to Bill Anderson, the city’s new director of community planning and city investment. “With projects that come in and talk about increasing the average daily trips, you are going to see mass opposition to that by this community.”
Lattimer, joined by UCPG Chairwoman Linda Colley and several residents, told Anderson that an overwhelming majority of the community was against changing the community plan to allow for redevelopment, a measure the board feared could allow excessively tall and dense buildings in University City.
Anderson, who took the position as director about nine months ago, told members that community planning was examining the oldest neighborhoods in San Diego first and that University City would not be up for consideration for several years.
The planning commission and City Council will review the city’s general community plan in late fall this year to determine whether it needs updates. At that point, community planning will immediately address 50 individual community plans, Anderson said.
He also stated that the department would reorganize the department and develop a new vision for the city’s general plan, including an increased focus on open space and recreational park facilities, as well as additional scrutiny of infill development.
“One issue, besides infill development, is what’s the appropriate density for an area,” Anderson said. “UTC is one of the most densely populated mixed-use communities with residences and businesses, but it is not designed as a very walkable community. Every time I drive down La Jolla Village Drive and see all the buildings and the four-foot sidewalks, it just doesn’t equate in my mind.”
The city is trying to condense its build-out to stop the perimeter from expanding outward but is balancing that with state mandates, which require San Diego to provide a certain number of residences with a large percentage of those being affordable housing units, Anderson said.
Colley expressed concern that the city may begin building more high-rise towers to compensate for the recent outward expansion, but Anderson noted that only 3 percent of land within the city’s 330,000 square miles is eligible for high-rise buildings.
A portion of that percentage, however, is located in University City, which already has several high-rise buildings, Anderson said.
One resident warned that Anderson had acknowledged the city’s acceptance of tall buildings in University City, such as the proposed Monte Verde residential buildings, which boasts two 35-story and two 32-story towers. If passed, the project would set a precedent for buildings with increased height, the resident said.
Discussion of increased infill development and high-density buildings led to how such projects are paid for ” another source of contention for the board.
An audit presented by city staff for University City’s facilities benefit assessment (FBA) fees, which is money paid by land owners who propose new permits for land use, was scrutinized by board members, who requested detailed line-by-line accounts of each project manager’s spending.
A community that has no new developments on the horizon will experience increased FBA fees to compensate for current project construction, according to Cheryl Robinson, the city’s facilities financing project manager.
“All the work done by city staff for a particular project, including meetings attended and when we prepare your financing papers, then we charge the time we spend to the community’s FBA account,” Robinson said.
Colley, who said she did not understand why FBA fees were paying city staff’s paychecks, also questioned Robinson about the $6 million appropriated for the Regents Road Bridge project.
The proposed project, which was OK’d by City Council last year, is currently on hold due to a lawsuit filed by several environmental groups that allege the city violated the California Environmental Quality Act by approving the project’s environmental impact report (EIR).
The overall project cost for the Regents Road Bridge is about $30 million ” funds that have already been approved by council and added to the community’s FBA account, Robinson said. The project manager is also requesting that $2 million be added to this year’s fiscal budget as an advance from next year’s budget, she said.
“We spent almost $2 million for an EIR and now we are in a lawsuit,” Colley said. “Now we are going to spend another $2 million for a second EIR from the same consultant who produced a flawed document the first time?”
Colley and board member Charlie Herzfeld emphasized that more information about spending needed to be provided. Robinson agreed to prepare a detailed version of the audit for the committee as soon as possible.
The University Community Planning Group meets the second Tuesday of every month at University Towne Centre’s Forum Hall, above Wells Fargo Bank, 4545 La Jolla Village Drive.
For more information, e-mail chairwoman Linda Colley at [email protected].