Granny Flats now official in City of SD (rental, house)

[shmoov_groovzsd]

This is some major news for homeowners in SD City. It seems the biggest opposing group to this change are near SDSU like College Area. I dont see the impact hitting now but down the line, neighborhoods will certainly be more dynamic. Obviously this can be good or bad.

If you are in an SD City neighborhood, do you think this will impact your neighborhood? Property Values? It seems like a gold rush for investors to pick up distressed properties and maximize ROI with more units per lot.

Hey! Now Grandma Can Move In! - voiceofsandiego.org: Survival

[MrRational]

The parking, traffic, noise, trash, water, septic and similar "quality of life" issues will absolutely "impact" those neighborhoods.

A sprinkling of these (one house in ten?) in an area can be tolerable before they begin to impact values IF they are actually intended for the owners Granny to live in. A saturation of them as rental units (in any sort of neighborhood) will soon be recognized as intolerable by most.

[earlyretirement]

Originally Posted by shmoov_groovzsd

If you are in an SD City neighborhood, do you think this will impact your neighborhood? Property Values? It seems like a gold rush for investors to pick up distressed properties and maximize ROI with more units per lot.

Hey! Now Grandma Can Move In! - voiceofsandiego.org: Survival

Hey Shmoov. You're right...for investors it will be GREAT news. Personally, I wouldn't want to see them in a neighborhood where I personally live but for investment properties where it will maximize ROI...it would definitely be valuable and welcome news.

I hope it passes (of course in an area where I don't live..ha ha).

[shmoov_groovzsd]

earlyretirement and MrRational,

I agree with the both of you. I am just baffled how the planning commission voted 5-0! That kind of ratio in almost indisputable coming from a board that is supposed to review the pros and cons. Really curious how the Council will react to this when it comes time to vote.

[earlyretirement]

Originally Posted by shmoov_groovzsd

earlyretirement and MrRational,

I agree with the both of you. I am just baffled how the planning commission voted 5-0! That kind of ratio in almost indisputable coming from a board that is supposed to review the pros and cons. Really curious how the Council will react to this when it comes time to vote.

Maybe the planning commission all owns investment properties? LOL. Or maybe they just see a lot of demand from the locals to allow this sort of thing. In this kind of economic environment, you probably have a good amount of people they are hearing from that want to be able to do this.

I'm also surprised it was 5-0.

But I'm not surprised to read, "Several members of the public, including development consultants and architects, told the Planning Commission they supported the law changes Thursday". These "development consultants as well as architects" all stand to make a good bit of money and increased activity if this passes. Lots more work for all of them. Also, maybe the city will charge hefty fees/taxes on these granny flats. And of course they will generate much more tax intake as they will increase property taxes. It might just be a sort of desperate times call for desperate measures sort of thing.

[Anak]

Interesting development.

What I really want to know more about is this line:

The amendments would remove the double lot size requirement, and also allow a granny flat — formally known as a companion unit — to be built at the same time as a primary residence, which is not currently allowed.

It would appear this law change applies to new construction, as in new construction of both units. What about the addition of a granny flat on a property which has an existing primary residence?

[shmoov_groovzsd]

Originally Posted by Anak

Interesting development.

What I really want to know more about is this line:


It would appear this law change applies to new construction, as in new construction of both units. What about the addition of a granny flat on a property which has an existing primary residence?

After reading it, it seems that this will now be easier to build a new granny flat addition to existing lots as well as new construction to both units.

[T. Damon]

Well, the FAR (Floor Area Ratio) still applies which does include garages, and any 3-sided structure (walls and roof) and it isn't the easiest thing in the world to find a minimum of three non tandem off-street parking places while not having larger curb-cuts. It's still a tough cookie to get done.