GP2020 hearings to continue; plan under fire

At least two more San Diego County Board of Supervisors hearings will be held on the update to the county’s general plan.

Public testimony began October 20 and was continued to a seven-hour November 10 hearing which saw four requests for group presentations and 91 individuals wishing to speak added to the 145 individuals who had submitted speaker slips October 20 but were not called before the first all-day hearing ended. The 65 speakers who remained to be heard after the November 10 comments concluded will be allowed to provide their input December 8.

County staff will analyze claims of the public speakers and will also respond to questions raised by members of the Board of Supervisors, so yet another hearing is expected in early 2011 although the supervisors have the right to close public testimony if no outstanding speaker slips remain at the end of the December 8 hearing.

“Staff has a lot of work that they’re going to be doing,” said supervisor Dianne Jacob.

Most of the speakers opposed the General Plan 2020 maps either because they did not like provisions of decreased density allowances or because they opposed the corresponding increased density in parts of more developed areas. Those who favor downzoning cited limited groundwater resources, lack of infrastructure, and preservation of biological habitat while those who oppose downzoning cited equity for agricultural loans, the sensibility of family lot splits, and the unwillingness of incorporated cities to take the increased density needed to meet housing demand.

“We don’t have water,” said consultant Nikki Symington. “I really think what we ought to have is a disaster plan, not a general plan.”

Jacob has expressed concern about groundwater constraints in the past. “It is a finite resource,” she said.

“I would like to know what we have available,” said Supervisor Bill Horn.

Horn noted that he has drilled 28 wells and hopes that groundwater-dependent areas will be considered based on specific aquifer conditions.

“One size does not fit all, especially when it comes to groundwater,” he said.

Richard Parker, a professor in San Diego State University’s School of Public Affairs and a principal in Rea and Parker Research, noted that including incorporated cities the countywide housing breakdown is 32 percent single-family detached, 41 percent single-family attached (such as duplexes and townhomes), and 32 percent multi-family. The housing model being used calls for 83 percent of all new housing units, including ones taken by cities, to be multi-family.

“We have no history of doing anything close to that,” Parker said.

Both sides have cited Senate Bill 375, which requires greenhouse gas emission reduction in land use planning. The bill’s requirement to plan for shorter commutes may prohibit San Diego County from relying on Riverside County, Imperial County, or Baja California to meet San Diego County’s housing needs.

Parker cited SB 375 in calling for the housing, as well as jobsites and shopping areas, to be built in San Diego County communities.

“People in the rural areas would drive less,” he said. “There’s a great efficiency in building up these commercial districts.”

Parker asserted that out-of-county residents who work in San Diego County cost the county sales tax dollars from their spending elsewhere as well as jobs from that spending outside the county.

“They’ve got to live someplace, and if the housing isn’t here, they’re gone,” he said. “Losses to the county government are going to be huge.”

Jessica Hanson, a 28-year-old graphical information systems specialist who lives in an incorporated city near her work, calculated that the downzoning would eliminate 33,921 units in rural areas.

“I can’t afford a new house now,” she said. “My rent is going to keep going up because there are a finite number of places to rent.”

Thomas Steinke, who is representing Pardee Homes on their Meadowwood project, requested 1,800 to 2,000 net dwelling units for the northeast quadrant of Interstate 15 and State Route 76. That total number would include Pardee’s project, which has been in the county’s processing stage since 2003.

“This density for the quadrant is consistent with the draft use land map,” Steinke said.

Supervisor Ron Roberts noted that various policy questions were raised. “I want to see these aired thoroughly,” he said.

“It’s going to take some sorting out,” Roberts said. “I’m not happy with a lot of the things I’m seeing.”

One concern involves conservation subdivisions, also known as clustering, which allows for smaller lot sizes with a larger amount of contiguous open space.

“The questions have not been answered who is going to own and maintain that open space,” Jacob said.

Jacob also noted the need to incorporate fire protection into the land use planning. “I’d like to see an updated fire risk map,” she said.

“I have a lot of concerns, and I think we’re going to have to do this by sub-area,” Horn said. “I’m not in a hurry to rush to a conclusion without having these things answered.”

To comment on this story online, visit http://www.thevillagenews.com.