Moratorium Mirror ...

At their March 17th, 2015 meeting, the City Council considered passing an interim urgency ordinance to prohibit the issuance of conditional use permits (CUPs) for multifamily residential development in commercial land use and zoning districts.  It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the proposal failed - after all, it is the City Council themselves who are ultimately responsible for this most recent development trend.

The City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinances gives guidance as to the types of uses (retail, office, residential, etc) that are intended on particular parcels of land.  Most of our downtown has been designated for one type of commercial use or another.  But some flexibility is desired in the zoning code so many zoning districts allow for uses OTHER than the base use … with the issuance by the Planning Commission of a Conditional Use Permit.  This is how, among other projects, a residential tower was approved on Arroyo Way, a couple of doors down from the DMV, and the 1500 N. California Condo/Apartments were approved at the site of a former bank.

There’s been a glut of multifamily housing approved downtown in the last two years … with more under review at the old McDonald’s and KFC restaurant sites.  Maybe it’s time, some members of the Council believed, to stop and catch our breath.

The proposed interim urgency ordinance would have stopped those wild and crazy Planning Commissioners from issuing any more CUPs.  Of course the City Council ALREADY has a remedy for situations where the Planning Commission goes off the deep end.  Any decision by the Planning Commission to issue or deny a CUP need only be questioned by ONE City Council member at the next Council meeting, and the whole CUP hearing process starts over again at the City Council level.  No one on the Council has chosen to exercise this power.

And far from the seeking to dampen the the rate of conversions, the City Council has been actively encouraging them.

The Landing at Walnut Creek, proposed for the lot at the bottom of the Ygnacio Valley freeway off-ramp, and the 1500 N. California Condo/Apartments are two projects where the Council held a “preliminary review” before any of the customary public hearings were held and City Commission level.  In both cases, the City Council SAID that they weren’t making any formal decisions, but the message to the Commissions was clear – the fact that those projects bore little or no resemblance to the General Plan shouldn’t stand in the way of their approval.

The City is not OBLIGATED to issue CUPs.  They’re discretionary.  And they can ONLY be approved if the Planning Commissioners (or City Council, if a CUP decision is appealed) make a specific finding that the use is consistent with the General Plan.

In issuing a CUP, the Planning Commission found the 1500 N. California Condo/Apartments to be consistent with the General Plan even though the General Plan contains a policy that “discourages residential development in the Traditional Downtown”.  In fact, the General Plan didn’t envision ANY of these huge multi-family complexes, which, on a floor space basis, are often much larger than would have been allowed if the parcels had been developed as commercial projects.  Yet, consistency with the General Plan is certified, CUPs and, if necessary, General Plan Amendments, have been issued, and the project after project has gone forward.  It's not a fluke ... it's Council policy.

If the City Council is looking to find the people responsible for the loss of commercially zoned property downtown and the glut of mega-residential projects, they only need to look in the mirror.