The Granny Flat Issue in San Diego
                                                                               by Catherine Darragh

Anyone living in San Diego is aware that we have a housing shortage. There are many solutions that could help, but, for now, I am going to target one solution that would alleviate the situation in providing seniors, students, singles, handicapped and service industry people an affordable place to live.

Two decades ago the California Legislature enacted a “second unit” law to encourage development of housing. In San Diego this law has been virtually ignored. One article I found claimed 18 “Granny Flats” have been approved since 1984. The local government has consistently put unnecessary conditions and procedural obstacles in place to discourage second units. Why?  My guess is the fear of the “NIMBY’s”  at community planning groups and council meetings and the clout they hold with politicians. A favorite retort is “ a need to protect the single family neighborhoods”.

Have you been to a community planning meeting?  If not, I suggest you attend one. It can be enlightening and rewarding or it can be brutal.  I admire the courage a citizen has in going before this group with anything controversial—and, as far as the NIMBY’s are concerned, just about everything is controversial. Even the City Planners deserve a reward for attending. These professionals, hired by the city to do their job, present their findings to the group. The Planners follow the rules set forth in the codes and approve or suggest changes required by the codes. The neighbors give valid or self-interested objections and then the board votes. This process can delay decisions month after month. Time is money and this adds to the cost of any project--and to the rife in communities.

In the interest of helping the housing problem, the CA. Legislature enacted  Bill AB 1866 which took effect July 1, 2003.  It includes bonus density and second units.  
 

               Bill AB 1866 (Wright)

                    Provides that: Local governments may not apply development standards (parking,
                    setbacks,  local coverage are some of the most common barriers) to low and moderate
                    income and senior housing that make it impossible to build housing at the established
                    density.

                    If a local government determines that a density bonus is not needed to make a development
                    affordable, this finding must be based on written and objective analysis. (Attorney fees will
                    be awarded if the locality violates the law.)

                   The granting of permits for second units on a residential zoned parcel is ministerial, not
                   discretionary, which obviates the need for time-consuming, costly hearings on proposals
                   that are in compliance with  local zoning and development standards.

                   Developers of moderate income common interest developments (condos) may obtain a
                   density bonus.

The bill had broad support. It was cosponsored by the Realtors, CRLAF and Western Center and is supported by over 100 housing, business, labor, senior and religious groups, including California Housing Council, Carpenters, Building Trades, Congress of California Seniors, CA Legislative Council for Older Americans, Alliance of Retired Americans, Southern California Assn. for Non-Profit Housing, Housing Policy Network, Shelter Partnership and Children Now.

              Local governments will be required to implement a process for second units (like the process for  obtaining a permit
              for a room addition, for example) in which the applicant is entitled to the permit if he or she complies with local
              standards -- obviating the need for time-consuming, contentious costly public hearings.


              How did San Diego City Council comply with this bill?

          As reported by Ray Huard, a Union Tribune staff writer on July 2, 2003

                                       "Regulations on adding granny-flat apartments to single-family homes were tentatively
                                        changed  by the San Diego City Council Monday to bring them into compliance with state
                                        law while keeping the regulations as restrictive as possible".

What were the Objections Stated by Council Members?

Mayor Murphy: "I've never been much of a fan or supporter of companion units because I'm always concerned that we are not protecting single- family neighborhoods the way we should be."

Councilman Jim Madaffer: "The thing that bothered me about the bill is that it's a state mandate on local land use, and I'm opposed to that. If every house on a given street decided to do a granny flat, a neighborhood could be turned into an apartment zone."

"We already have a huge "mini-dorm" problem (in the SDSU area), and if necessary, I'm going to be a strong advocate to change the law so I don't get phone calls from people in my district upset that they have granny flats."

Betsy McCullough, Planning Department's Deputy Director: ( In response to Murphy's comment on "an outright ban on companion units" ) Such a ban would be impossible under state law. To do so, the city would have to declare that granny flats are harmful to public safety, health or welfare."

Councilman Brian Maienschein: "The city should prohibit granny flats in communities where roads, parking, water and sewer lines and other city services are deficient."

Mayor Murphy: "Retain restrictions that require owners at all times live in a home that includes a granny flat to avoid absentee landlords from converting single-family homes into mini-dorms."

The revised regulations were approved in a 7-2 vote with council members Charles Lewis and Brian Maienschein opposed.

What are the new San Diego Regulations?

Under the new regulations, permits for granny flat construction could be issued without requiring a public hearing on units that meet certain guidelines. Proposals that didn't meet the guidelines would require review by a hearing officer or the city Planning Commission, depending on how much they varied from the guidelines, said Betsy McCullough, the Planning Department's deputy director.

The new regulations would limit the size of granny flats to 700 square feet. They would be allowed only on lots at least twice the size required for a single family house. For example, in a community where zoning requires a minimum of 5,000 square feet for a single-family home, granny flats would be allowed only on lots of at least 10,000 square feet.

In addition to the lot size, the Council added another devastating regulation.  A main residence and second unit could not be
built at the same time.  Developers, who were having the success of offering a "granny flat" option for new homes could no longer do this.  It is common knowledge that costs can be cut when one builds 2 units at the same time. It also adds design
integrity to the project.

What did the City Planners Suggest?

City planners suggested restricting granny flats to SFR's with lots of at least 5000 sf and requiring that granny flats be no more than 700 sf. They also recommended at least one off-street parking space be provided for each bedroom in a granny flat.

Will Granny Flats Add Affordable Housing in San Diego?

My guess is NO!  The City Council put "zingers" in their new regulations to prevent second units from being built in San Diego neighborhoods. The big "zinger"  is requiring double the average lot size in the neighborhood.  The City Planners recommendation of 5000 square foot lots was ignored.  That would actually have opened the floodgates to all the communities where city lots average 5000 square feet.

Lots outside the city are often larger and would have no trouble meeting the requirements, but I believe the Council used this lot size "ploy" to block granny flats within the city limits. There were 3 articles in the San Diego Union, little discussion, and the new regulations were passed.

Other regulations were more reasonable: 700 square feet maximum, using the same materials as the main house, off-street parking, etc. It gets murky when one dictates an owner must live in the main house.

These rules were passed quickly and without much discussion to comply with the less-restrictive state-mandated law. The question is: Did the Council consider this as one solution to the housing affordability? Does the Council really promote housing affordability or do they just give "lip service"?

Can a Granny Flat Be Built on a 5000 sq. ft. lot without detriment to the neighbors?

The answer is yes and no.  It depends on the lot configuration and many other factors. The Council's fear is ill-founded for several reasons:
              1. Not everyone will want or need a second unit.
              2. Some houses already take up most of the lot.
              3. The layout of the lot prevents access.
              4. No extra parking available.
              5. Fear of neighbor's wrath.
              6. Construction costs may exceed benefit.

Note: Current city regulations prohibit construction of new granny flats in any year in which the rental apt. vacancy rate is above 5 %. They also allow new construction of flats only in communities where public service such as roads, parks, and water and sewer lines are found to be sufficient.  Granny flats are prohibited in coastal zones. Also, granny flats are allowed at no more than 5 % of the single-family homes in any community. If a garage is converted to a granny flat, regulations require construction of a new garage to replace it.

My comment: If these are still in effect, how can the Council possibly be worried about "mini-dorms" and destruction of single family neighborhoods?  As far as granny flats being prohibited in coastal zones, look around! There may be few legal units but the coastal areas abound with illegal units. Wouldn't it be better to have units built to code?

Are Granny Flats One Solution to San Diego's Housing Problem?

Second units are one of the easier solutions for affordable housing. Seniors can remain in their own homes and have a caretaker or relative on the premises to help them. Widows and widowers can supplement their income with a rental. College students who can not live in a dorm can live close to a campus. Young people in their first jobs can rent a small place until they build a nest egg. Singles employed in a service industry can live close to work. Handicapped can have a place to live independently.

If we, as San Diegans, are truly concerned about housing and affordability, then we need to work to find solutions and make our feelings known to the local government.

                          Find Out How Other California Cities Are Complying
                          Find Out What Other Cities in Nation Are Offering

---