Advertisement

Revised Growth-Management Plan Designed to Bypass Controversy

Share
Times Staff Writer

Hoping to avoid “analysis paralysis” as the San Diego City Council prepares to tackle anew the politically thorny issue of growth-management, two council members and Mayor Maureen O’Connor on Thursday offered a plan to quickly adopt some of the key provisions of a growth-control ballot measure defeated by voters last November.

The proposal, developed by Council members Bob Filner and Judy McCarty and endorsed by O’Connor, encompasses some of the major components of last fall’s Proposition H, a City Council-backed growth-control plan rejected by a 55.5%-44.5% margin. Although sharing goals with Proposition H, the plan differs significantly from the ballot measure in that it eschews annual housing caps as a method of controlling growth.

In so doing, the proposal--dubbed “A City That Works” by its authors--seeks to provide a conceptual guideline on growth policies intended to balance environmental protection against the need for sufficient development to “preserve a climate conducive to economic growth,” the council members said.

Advertisement

Shortcut Through Process

San Diego voters’ rejection of both Proposition H and a more stringent citizen growth-control initiative on last November’s ballot set the stage for a renewal of last year’s protracted debate on the subject. McCarty and Filner described their plan as a shortcut through round two of that potentially lengthy, costly process.

“This is a way to accomplish most of our goals without having to spend millions of dollars and taking months to do it,” Filner said at a news conference in his City Hall office.

McCarty added: “We don’t need more consultants, we don’t need more studies and charts and endless hearings. This is a way to do these things now .”

Filner also argued that it was significant that he and McCarty--”two people perceived to be at opposite ends of this debate”--crafted the three-page memo sent to other council members Thursday. While Filner is regarded as one of the strongest environmentalists on the council, McCarty has compiled a strong pro-development record during her first three years at City Hall.

“We thought that, if we could agree, the council ought to come to an agreement,” Filner said.

The two council members expressed hope that their colleagues could adopt their proposal as early as next week, when the council is scheduled to consider various growth-control proposals.

Although McCarty said the proposal contains “nothing new,” Filner stressed that its value lies in its brevity, which stems from their conscious effort to address the complicated growth issue “in a concise way . . . that people can understand.”

Advertisement

“It tries to come up with a reasonable, sensible protection of sensitive lands while recognizing that there has to be some flexibility,” the councilman said. “This is a pragmatic attempt to balance competing concerns. . . . Nobody’s evil because they’re . . . trying to protect the environment or no one’s evil because they’re trying to develop property.”

The Filner-McCarty plan sets broad goals in four basic areas: neighborhood preservation, the funding and timing of public facilities, protection of sensitive lands and overall environmental goals.

Conform Zoning

With an eye on preserving single-family neighborhoods, the council members recommend that the Planning Department schedule hearings to make zoning conform with all community plans by August. Under the plan, city planners would also identify proposed “single-family preservation areas” in communities throughout the city.

One of the focal points in recent growth debates has involved the provision of public facilities such as streets, parks and libraries necessitated by new developments. McCarty and Filner suggest that the city take steps to accelerate so-called “turnkey development” policies, ensuring that developers build needed roads, parks and other public facilities before buyers move into new homes.

By linking growth and public facilities “very directly, very pragmatically, very clearly,” Filner said, the city will be able to accomplish many of the same goals that last November’s propositions sought to attain through controversial annual caps on housing construction. (As a corollary, the Planning Department is reviewing an O’Connor proposal that would establish stand-by housing limits that could be implemented in the event of runaway growth in a particular area.)

In accord with Proposition H’s goals, the plan unveiled Thursday also would protect environmentally sensitive lands, with individuals or communities having options to propose revisions to which areas would be preserved in a natural state.

Advertisement

The Filner-McCarty plan also would establish broad environmental goals, including adoption by July of a traffic-reduction plan incorporating the provisions of last November’s Proposition K, an advisory measure calling for companies that employ at least 25 workers to offer staggered work hours in an effort to reduce peak-hour traffic.

Their other recommendations include establishing a curb-side recycling program within three years, preparing an open-space bond measure for voter consideration in 1990 and developing a water reclamation program.

Advertisement