HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/1/2019 Item Public Comment, Lopes
From:James Lopes <
To:Fowler, Xzandrea; Advisory Bodies
Cc:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Questions about the Jobs-Housing discussion in 2-27-19 PC packet
Attachments:Pages from luce_volume_I_draft_program_eir_2014_06_web_Jobs-Housing_Lopes.pdf;
Pages 20-21 from 2018_GeneralPlanAnnualReport.pdf; PC_2-27-19
_LopesLetter_GP_AnnualReport.pdf; jameslopes.vcf
Xzandrea Fowler, Deputy Planning Director
City of San Luis Obispo
Hi Xzandrea,
I hope you've had time to read my attached letter and accompanying copies discussing the jobs-housing imbalance,
which I am supplementing with additional supporting information. I delivered the letter to the Planning Commission
because the ongoing high growth rate in commercial development is over-whelming our streets and inflicting
incompatible, token "affordable" housing projects on neighborhoods and commercial areas. And, this growth will soon
create an impossibility for the City to obtain the affordable housing needed by even a fraction of the employees of this
development.
We may already be past the juncture where the City can organize an effective housing development program which
reduces this imbalance. We all know that providing only 10 percent of large projects in affordable, small studio units will
not make a significant difference. Job growth has already created a huge housing deficit, and the supply of commercial
service land alone threatens to inundate the City and region with frustrated commuters who cannot afford to live where
they work.
My interest today is about the estimates in the 2018 General Plan Annual Report regarding job growth, in the attached
pages. On the first line in Table 6 on report page 21, the entry, "Estimated jobs in City Limits," identifies 54, 132 jobs. I
am attaching this page for information.
My letter and packet convey SLOCOG projections from the 2014 LUCE Draft EIR that in 2020, the City might have 36,900
jobs. This is a discrepancy of 18,232 jobs, or 50 percent more than projected! I am attaching the four pages from the
Draft EIR for your information. The author stated this projection on page 2-13 and also projected that 42,400 jobs were
anticipated by 2035.
As the current 2018 estimate of 54, 132 jobs is far above these estimates, I would like to determine if the same
methodology and sources were utilized in the General Plan Annual Report as for the Draft and Final EIR's for the
LUCE. Or, were other sources and methods used? In other words, what is the reason for this wide disparity? I would
like to know the annual record of job growth which staff must be keeping, so that some sort of validated projection may
be made for 2020 to 2035, in particular to account for the remaining job capacity in the large acreage of vacant and
under-utilized commercial land. I'm sure the data is easily obtainable from staff's previous work.
I support a full review of the matter at this very important time, with the impending Chamber of Commerce Housing
Summit and work already started on the Housing Element, not to mention the review by the City Council of this General
Plan Annual Report.
1
I am copying the Planning Commission and City Council to continue this information flow about the largest scale issue
within the City, concurrent with the uncertain capacities of our transportation and water supply systems to
accommodate this growth.
Sincerely,
James Lopes
--
James Lopes
Ph. 805-602-1365
2
James Lopes
912 Bluebell Way
San Luis Obispo
California 93401
February 27, 2019
Planning Commission
City of San Luis Obispo
RE: Annual General Plan Report on the Jobs/Housing Imbalance
Dear Chair Fowler and Commissioners:
Please accept my late comments on the very brief description of the jobs-housing imbalance
described in the staff report. I am copying you my analysis of the historic and projected
imbalance, in reference to the Final EIR for the Land Use and Circulation Element update, page 2-
2, attached. The premise of the staff report is incorrect, that only one employee on average
occupies dwelling units. The Final EIR estimated that about 1.5 employed people per household
on average live in San Luis Obispo dwellings.
The balance between jobs and housing is expressed as a ratio of jobs to housing. The City has
used a simple measurement of total jobs to housing units. This is the crudest method of
measuring since it does not estimate the average number of jobs per household. However, it can
be used for internal comparisons over time.
2010 Ratio. The DRAFT EIR for the 2014 Land Use and Circulation Element estimated that in
2010, the City had 33,000 jobs and 20,553 housing units, which was a 1.6 to 1 ratio. The
difference in this simple calculation would be that 12,447 units would be needed to house that
many jobs. The Land Use Element has a capacity for about 4,900 more units.
2012 Ratio. In 2014, the Final EIR for the 2014 Land Use and Circulation Element included an
expanded section on the Jobs/Housing Imbalance, on page 2-2. The Final EIR referred to the
2012 Annual Report on the General Plan, which stated that the ratio of jobs to housing was 1.8 to
1. A ratio of 1:1 would be in balance. This means that the number of jobs is almost twice the
number of houses available.
2020 Ratio. The DRAFT EIR estimated that by 2020, the City could have 21,526 housing units and
36,900 jobs, which would be a 1.7 to 1 ratio. To bring that ratio to a balance or 1 to 1, the City
would need to add 15,374 units. The City could stop commercial growth entirely now and
eventually house 4,900 of the deficit of 15,374 units (in 2020) by “build-out” in 2035. We would
still have a deficit of 10,474 housing units, at a lower ratio of 1.4 to 1 (36,900/26,426).
Build-out Capacity. Projecting to “build-out” in 2035, the Final EIR estimated that the Land Use
Element has a capacity for 11,346 more jobs, and for 4,904 housing units. This would be a ratio
of 2.3 to 1, which is a 27% increase or worsening of the imbalance.
Projected Growth to Build-out. However, the Final EIR also estimated that the projected growth
in jobs may be 9,400 jobs and only 2,429 housing units under residential growth management.
This ratio would be 3.9 to 1. This increase is more than a doubling of the current imbalance of 1.8
to 1; a 116% increase or worsening of the imbalance.
But as first stated above, this measurement is not realistic for translating housing needed for the
number of jobs. Besides needing to know the average number of jobs per household, the City
needs to identify from U.S. Census, the spread of incomes of current job holders within the major
income groups. An estimate could then be made of the number of housing units that would
address the needs of these income groups, which could then be projected to 2035.
This analysis should be reviewed in good faith so that a consistent reporting of the slower growth
of housing units can be associated with the very rapid growth in employment. This widening
disparity has dramatic and compelling impacts and issues with the SLO life and our fragile
regional setting.
Sincerely,
James Lopes
Page 2-2
Final EIR
From the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Land Use and Circulation Element Update:
associated with the Preferred Alternative and the other alternatives, these decision-makers have to balance community
character, social, economic, fiscal, and other concerns against the environmental impacts of the various options.
Master Response #2: Programmatic Nature of the EIR
Several commenters on the Draft EIR provided requests to have detailed impact analysis provided regarding specific
developments that may occur through implementation of the proposed LUCE Update. This master response has been
developed to address those comments. According to the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15168[a]), a local agency may prepare
a program-level EIR to address a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project. For a General Plan
update where policy and programs are related geographically, and related as logical parts of a chain of contemplated
events, through rules, regulations, or plans that govern the conduct of a continuing program, a programmatic EIR is an
appropriate tool to ensure potential environmental impacts are evaluated. Policies and implementation of the General
Plan are carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and have generally similar
environmental effects that can be mitigated in similar ways. This EIR was prepared as a Program EIR. As a Program EIR,
this document serves as a first-tier document that assesses and documents the broad environmental impacts of a
program with the understanding that a more detailed site-specific environmental review may be required to assess future
projects implemented under the program. As individual projects with specific site plans and facilities are planned, the City
will evaluate each project to determine the extent to which this EIR covers the potential impacts of the project and to
what extent additional environmental analysis may be required for each specific future project. (see Public Resources
Code, Sections 21083.3, 21093, 21094; CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15152, 15168, 15183.)
Master Response #3: Jobs/Housing Balance.
The issue of jobs/housing balance was raised in comments on the DEIR both directly and indirectly. The jobs/housing
balance has been an important policy issue because of its implications for transportation systems. Academics and
practitioners argue that achieving and maintaining a healthy balance between jobs in a community and the housing
supply in a community yields benefits in terms of reduced driving and congestion, less air pollution, and lower costs to
businesses and commuters. Defining and measuring a jobs/housing balance raises a series of challenges. For instance,
should the jobs-housing balance be calculated for an incorporated area (defined by its city limits) or for a larger urbanized
planning area? In San Luis Obispo’s case, the calculation for the larger area would include employment at Cal Poly and the
California Men’s Colony. Added to a statistical jobs/housing balance are details related to whether there is a match
between wage levels and housing costs; whether all workers in a house have employment in the community in which they
live; whether preferences are met within the community for either housing or employment; and whether options are
available nearby for either housing or employment. Even if an ideal jobs/housing balance is achieved, it still may mean
the community has a large daily in-commute and out-commute.
According to the City of San Luis Obispo’s 2012 Annual Report on the General Plan, San Luis Obispo had a jobs-to-housing
ratio of 1.6:1 within its city limits and a ratio of 1.8:1 if jobs at Cal Poly and the California Men’s Colony are included in the
calculation. SLOCOG’s projections show a ratio of employment to housing units (within the San Luis Obispo city limits) of
1.5:1 in 2010, rising to 1.8:1 by 2035 (based on revised projections adopted by SLOCOG in April 2014).
The SLOCOG Regional Growth Forecast projects a demand for 4,271 people, 2,429 housing units, and 9,400 jobs between
2010 and 2035. Assuming 550 non-residential square feet per job, there is a demand for 5,170,000 square feet of non-
residential floor area between 2010 and 2035. Potential future development in the Land Use Element Planning Subarea as
envisioned by the proposed Land Use Element Update could result in approximately 4,904 additional dwelling units,
11,229 people, 11, 346 jobs, and 5,081,708 non-residential square feet. Please refer to the table below, Table 2.4-5, from
the Draft EIR.
Final EIR Page 2-3
Table 2.4‐5 Comparison of SLOCOG Projections and Total Future Development Capacity, 2010‐2035
SLOCOG Regional Growth Forecast1 Total Future Development Capacity2
Population3 4,271 11,229
Housing Units 2,429 4,904
Employment 9,400 11,346
Non‐Residential Square Footage4 5,170,000 5,081,708
1 See Table 2.3‐4. 2 See Table 2.4‐3
3 SLOCOG forecast population is based on 1.75 persons/household. Future development population is based on 2010 Census 2.2
persons/household
41Estimated using 550 non‐residential square feet per job
Source: SLOCOG, SLO County 2040 Population, Housing, and Employment Forecast (2011)
The jobs-housing balance analysis is appropriately based on projected demand, not planned capacity since this often
exceeds what will likely be absorbed in the 20-year timeframe of the plan.
2.2 Summary of Comment Letters
The public agencies, organizations, and individuals that submitted comments on the Draft EIR are listed below in
Table 2-1. As shown in the table, each comment letter has been designated by a specific letter and number that will be
used to refer to particular comments and responses.
Each of the comment letters identified in Table 2-1 are provided on the following pages, with individual responses to each
of the comment letters provided immediately following each letter. The content of each letter has been divided into
individual segments that appear to address a distinct subject. To assist in referencing these comments, each comment
letter has been assigned a letter and number combination (i.e. A1, A2, etc.) and each segment within the letter a
corresponding number (i.e. A1-1, A1-2, etc.). Letters received from public agencies have been organized and identified by
the letter “A”, followed by a number. For example, the first agency letter (California Public Utilities Commission) is
identified as “A1”, the second agency letter (Cal Poly) as “A2”, and so forth. Letters from individuals and organizations
have been assigned the letter “P”. This category follows the same numbering assignment as described previously (P1, P2,
P3, etc.). Comments resulting from Public Hearings at the City’s Advisory Bodies have been assigned the letters “PH”,
following the same numbering assignment as described above. The responses provided in this Final EIR are organized in a
similar fashion.
Where changes to the Draft EIR text result from these responses to comments, those changes are presented in Chapter 3
“Minor Edits to Draft Program EIR” of this document, with changes shown by underlining new text (e.g., new text) and
striking out text to be deleted (e.g., deleted text). Reponses that resulted in proposed changes to the Draft EIR text or
another document in the LUCE Update are marked with a blue square () following the comment number.
After careful consideration of all the letters received on the Draft EIR and the responses to the comments in the letters,
City staff has concluded that none of the information received or generated since the publication of the Draft EIR
constitutes “significant new information” within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21092.1 and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15088.5. For this reason, the City need not “recirculate” for additional public comment either a full or a
partial revision to the Draft EIR and the preparation of a Final EIR is appropriate.
Table 2.3‐2. Existing (2012) Land Use San Luis Obispo Land Use and Circulation Planning Subarea
Existing Land Use Acres Percent
Rural Residential 230 1.75%
Single Family Residential 1,756 13.35%
Multifamily Residential 328 2.49%
Mixed Use 15 0.11%
Multiple Use 1,668 12.69%
Commercial Retail 145 1.11%
Commercial Services 212 1.61%
Office 47 0.35%
Industrial 384 2.92%
Public/Quasi Public 832 6.33%
Parks and Recreation 387 2.94%
Agriculture 490 3.72%
Open Space 4,902 37.28%
Vacant 336 2.55%
Other/Right‐of‐Way 1,420 10.79%
Total1 13,152 100%
1: Total acreage is higher than shown on Table 2.2‐1 due to rounding
Sources: City of San Luis Obispo, 2012.
Future Development Capacity from Existing Specific Plans, Planned Projects, and Other Vacant Land. Table 2.3‐3
summarizes possible future housing unit, population, non‐residential square footage, and employment capacity in the
Planning Subarea that may occur under existing conditions. The table describes existing potential development capacity
from previously approved specific plans, previously approved or planned projects, and other vacant land.
Specific Plans. There are three key specific plans that provide future development capacity within the Planning Subarea:
The Margarita Area Specific Plan, the Airport Area Specific Plan, and the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. Assuming full buildout,
the three specific plan areas could provide up to 2,771,832 total square feet of new non‐residential floor area, 5,040 jobs,
and 1,847 new housing units.
Planned Projects. Planned projects include developments with approved land use entitlements, preparing for building
permits, in plan check, or under construction. There are eight planned and approved projects that would result in an
estimated 289 new housing units and 88,000 square feet of non‐residential floor area.
Vacant Land. Vacant land indicates what could realistically be developed on remaining undeveloped or underdeveloped
land in San Luis Obispo based on actual constraints and historical development practice. Table 2.3‐3 shows the breakdown
of vacant and underutilized land by land use designations in 2012, excluding approved projects or vacant land in specific
plan areas. Overall, the city has only 336 acres of vacant land, which makes up about 2.6 percent of the Planning Subarea.
Altogether, about 36 percent of vacant and underutilized land is designated for residential development, 37 percent is
designated for commercial and industrial development, and 24 percent is designated as open space. Services and
Manufacturing and Low Density Residential areas have the greatest number of vacant, developable acres. All vacant and
underutilized land potential is within the Planning Subarea.
Based on allowed density, anticipated infrastructure, and development history, vacant land in San Luis Obispo could
support an additional 452 dwelling units and 1,036 people; and approximately 230,433 square feet of non‐residential
development and 419 employees.
SLOCOG Housing, Population, and Employment Projections. In 2011 the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
(SLOCOG) projected population, housing, and employment for jurisdictions in San Luis Obispo County through 2035. The
following tables provide a summary of the SLOCOG forecast which were developed prior to 2010 census data being
available. As shown in the Table 2.3‐4, SLOCOG developed low, medium, and high projections for population, housing
units, and employment. The demand assumptions use the mid estimates for anticipated demand for population, housing
units, and employment. .
Page 2-10 June 2014
Draft LUCE Program EIR
Table 2.3‐3. Capacity from Specific Plans, Planned Projects, and Other Vacant Land within Planning Subarea, San Luis Obispo 2012 Acres Typical Density Capacity Residential1 (Units/Acre) Non-Residential (FAR)2 Units3 Population4 Non-Residential Square Footage5 Employment6 Specific Plans7 Margarita Area Specific Plan N/A N/A N/A 868 1,988 969,017 3,215 Airport Area Specific Plan N/A N/A N/A 0 ‐ 1,791,815 3,258 Orcutt Area Specific Plan N/A N/A N/A 979 2,242 11,000 20 Subtotal 1,847 4,230 2,771,832 6,778 Planned and Approved Projects8 Chinatown Project N/A N/A N/A 32 73 46,000 124 Pacific Courtyards N/A N/A N/A 12 27 10,000 33 Mission Estates N/A N/A N/A 10 23 N/A 0 Four Creeks (Creekston and Laurel Creek) N/A N/A N/A 166 380 0 0 Garden Street Terrace N/A N/A N/A 8 18 25,000 83 313 South Street Apartments N/A N/A N/A 43 98 0 0 Marsh Street Commons N/A N/A N/A 11 25 3,000 5 ICON project (1340 Taft) N/A N/A N/A 7 16 4,000 7 Subtotal 289 660 88,000 252 Other Vacant Land (by General Pan Designation) Suburban Residential4 4.0 1 N/A 4 9 0 0 Low Density Residential 53.4 6 N/A 320 733 0 0 Medium Density Residential 7.1 10 N/A71 163 0 0 Medium‐High Density Residential 0.4 16 N/A6 14 0 0 High Density Residential 2.7 19 N/A 51 117 0 0 Neighborhood Commercial5 0.2 N/A0.30 0 0 2,614 5 Community Commercial5 3.2 N/A0.30 0 0 41,818 76 Tourist Commercial5 1.0 N/A0.35 0 0 15,246 28 Office4 1.3 N/A0.35 0 0 19,820 66 Services and Manufacturing 13.3 N/A0.25 0 0 144,837 193 Public 0.4 N/A0.35 0 0 6,089 20 Subtotal 87 N/AN/A 452 1,036 230,433 388 Total Capacity in These Areas 2,588 5,926 3,090,265 7,418 June 2014 Page 2-11
2.0 Project Description
Table 2.3.3. Notes: 1 Typical density is based on a net acre assumption accounting for necessary infrastructure and facilities (i.e., 90 percent for rural and suburban residential; 80 percent for low, medium, medium‐high, and high density residential; 85 percent for residential neighborhood, general retail, neighborhood commercial, community commercial, tourist commercial, and office. To get the typical density, the maximum density was recalculated based on a development percent assumption on what is average for new development (i.e., 100 percent for rural residential; 60 percent for suburban and low density residential; 70 percent for medium density residential and residential neighborhood; 75 percent for general retail, neighborhood commercial, community commercial, tourist commercial, and office; 80 percent for high density residential and residential neighborhood). 2 Typical FAR is based on a net acre assumption accounting for necessary infrastructure and facilities (i.e., 85 percent). To get the typical FAR, the maximum FAR was recalculated based on a development percent assumption on what is average for new development (i.e., 60 percent general retail and 85 percent general retail downtown, 80 percent for public, 60 percent business park, 47 percent for services and manufacturing, 23 for office, 12.5 percent for neighborhood commercial and community commercial, 10 percent for tourist commercial). 3 Capacity is based on the net acre assumption multiplied by the typical net density. 4 Population for Specific Plan Area and Planned projects based on 2010 Census: 2.29 persons per household. 5Non‐residential square footage for specific plan area and planned projects is based on assumptions in specific plans and Community Development Project Status Report (December 31, 2012). Non‐residential square footage for vacant land is based on the net acre assumption multiplied by the typical FAR. 6 For specific plans and planned projects, employment is estimated using 550 non‐residential square feet per job. For vacant land, employment based on the following assumptions: 500 square feet per employee for general retail and community commercial, 550 square feet per employee for neighborhood, tourist commercial, and business park, 300 square feet per employee for office, 1,000 square feet per employee for services and manufacturing, 1,500 square feet per employee for public. 7Non‐Residential square footage includes land designated neighborhood commercial, services commercial, business park, and manufacturing. 8 Does not include projects that fall within the boundaries of the MASP, AASP, or OASP. Only those projects that provided specific unit/square footage numbers were included. Sources: Community Development Department Project Status Report (December 31, 2012), San Luis Obispo General Plan, Land Use Element, 2010; City of San Luis Obispo, 2012; Mintier Harnish, 2012. Table 2.3‐4. Estimated and Projected Housing Units 2010 2020 2035 2010-2035 Low Mid High Low Mid High Low Mid High Low Mid High Population 43,937 43,937 43,937 45,964 45,969 45,972 48,208 48,550 48,860 4,271 4,613 4,923 Housing Units 20,553 20,553 20,553 21,523 21,526 21,528 22,982 23,204 23,405 2,429 2,651 2,852 Employment 33,000 33,000 33,000 36,900 36,900 36,900 41,600 42,400 44,900 8,600 9,400 11,900 Non‐Residential Development1 18,150,000 20,295,000 23,320,000 5,170,000 1Estimated using 550 non‐residential square feet per job Source: SLO County 2040 Population, Housing, and Employment Forecast (2011) Page 2-12 June 2014
Draft LUCE Program EIR
The city of San Luis Obispo population in 2010 was estimated to be 43,937. The population is anticipated to increase to
45,969 by 2020 and 48,550 by 2035. This means the city will add an additional 4,613 people (10 percent) between 2010
and 2035. SLOCOG estimates that the city of San Luis Obispo had 20,553 housing units in 2010. The number of housing
units in the city is anticipated to increase to 21,526 by 2020 and 23,204 by 2035. This means the city will add an
additional 2,651 housing units (13 percent) between 2010 and 2035, including 1,060 single family and 1,591 multifamily
units. The city of San Luis Obispo had 33,000 jobs in 2010. Employment is anticipated to increase to 36,900 jobs by 2020
and 42,400 jobs by 2035; an increase of 9,400 jobs (30 percent) between 2010 and 2035. The city of San Luis Obispo had a
total of 18,150,000 square feet of non‐residential development in 2010, an estimate based on the number of jobs in San
Luis Obispo in 2010. Non‐residential development is anticipated to increase to 20,295,000 square feet by 2020 and
23,320,000 square feet by 2035. This means the city will add an additional 5,170,000 square feet by 2035.
2.3.2. Circulation Element
Transportation facilities and programs can influence the character of neighborhoods, the location of specific land uses,
and the overall form of the City. Therefore, the vision for San Luis Obispo described by the Land Use Element is
influenced by the layout and capacity of streets and the location of other transportation facilities. The California General
Plan Guidelines (2003) provides the following description of how the provisions of the Circulation Element affect a
community’s physical, social, and economic environment:
Physical. The circulation system is one of the chief generators of physical settlement patterns and its location, design,
and constituent modes have major impacts on air quality, plant and animal habitats, environmental noise, energy use,
community appearance, and other environmental components.
Social. The circulation system is a primary determinant of the pattern of human settlement. It has a major impact on the
areas and activities it serves, on community cohesion, and on the quality of human life. The circulation system should be
accessible to all segments of the population, including the disadvantaged, the young, the poor, the elderly, and the
disabled.
Economic. Economic activities normally require circulation for materials, products, ideas, and employees, thus the
viability of the community’s economy is directly affected by the circulation element. The efficiency of a community’s
circulation system can either contribute to or adversely affect its economy.”
2.4. Updated Land Use Element
The 1994 Land Use Element provides an Introduction and ten chapters pertaining to Growth Management, Conservation
and Development of Residential Neighborhoods, Commercial and Industrial Development, Downtown, Public and Cultural
Facilities, Resource Protection, Airport Area, Optional Use & Special Design Areas, Review and Amendment, and
Implementation. The proposed Land Use Element Update retains the basic structure of the 1994 Land Use Element and
adds three new sections pertaining to Sustainability, Safety by Design, and Healthy Community. The general content of
and proposed revisions to each chapter of the Land Use Element are summarized below. The full text of updated Land
Use Element text, policies and programs is incorporated into the EIR by reference and can be reviewed at the City of San
Luis Obispo Community Development Department, located at 919 Palm Street, during normal business hours. The full text
of the updated Land Use Element may also be obtained at:
http://www.slo2035.com
2.4.1. Introduction Chapter
The Introduction chapter provides background information regarding the other Elements of the City’s General Plan, the
history of the Land Use Element, and how community values have influenced the development of previous versions and
the proposed update of the Land Use Element. The Introduction also provides the Land Use Element goals, which are
organized under the subheadings of Approach to Planning, Environment, Society and Economy, and City Form. The Land
Use Element Update includes the addition of five new goals related to: priority setting and resource allocation, creating a
sustainable community, energy efficiency, enhancing the health and wellbeing of City residents, and neighborhood
design.
June 2014 Page 2-13
2.0 Project Description
General Plan Annual Report 2018
20
Non-Residential Growth
Based on final building permits, 38,338 square feet of net new non-residential floor area was
added to the City in 2018, resulting in an annual growth rate of 0.46 percent.
Figure 2 illustrates the net annual growth rate of non-residential sectors beginning in 2008. Net
annual non-residential growth includes office, services and manufacturing, retail, hotel, and
institutional uses.
Figure 2 - Net Annual Growth Rates of Non-Residential Sectors (2008-2018)
Source: Building Permits Finaled, Community Development Department, 2018
Note: Demolition of nonresidential square footage included in calculations.
Land Use Element Policy 1.11.4 states that each year, the Council will evaluate the actual increase
in non-residential floor area over the preceding five years. The Council shall consider establishing
limits for the rate of non-residential development if the increase in non-residential floor area for
any five-year period exceeds five percent.
The five-year net non-residential growth rate for 2013 through 2018 was 2.72 percent, and the
five-year average annual average growth rate was 0.54 percent.
Each year the Council has considered whether or not to implement limits to new non-residential
floor area and has decided against establishing limits. If limits are established, they would only
0.00%
0.20%
0.40%
0.60%
0.80%
1.00%
1.20%
1.40%
1.60%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018Growth RateYear
Packet Page 27
General Plan Annual Report 2018
21
apply to certain types of new commercial floor area, such as new offices or new retail
establishments outside of the downtown core.
Jobs-Housing Balance
The jobs-housing balance is a planning tool to review whether a community has a healthy balance
between jobs and the housing supply available to potentially house workers for those jobs. This
balance may be impacted by the match between wage levels and housing costs; whether all
workers in a house have employment in the community in which they live; whether preferences
are met within the community for either housing or employment; and whether options are
available nearby for either housing or employment.
The balance of jobs and housing in an area has implications for transportation systems, however
even an ideal balance may not prevent daily in- or out- commute patterns. According to planning
literature, the desired target is a jobs-to-housing unit ratio of 1.5:1, which reflects that there is
more than one worker living in the average household. Table 6 shows that the current jobs-to-
housing ratio inside the City limits is 2.5:1, which was a slight increase from the ratio in 2017 (i.e.
2.4:1). California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) and the California Men’s Colony are two
major employers located in close proximity to San Luis Obispo, thus the jobs-to-housing ratio
including these neighboring employers outside the City limits is 2.7:1 – which remained constant
from 2017. At the current rate of 2.5:1, the City is experiencing a jobs-housing imbalance.
Table 6 - Current Jobs/Housing Balance
Estimated jobs in City limits 54,132
Housing units 21,416
Jobs to housing ratio 2.5:1
Cal Poly jobs (not in City) 3,143
California Men's Colony jobs (not in City) 1,517
Jobs to housing ratio including neighboring
major employers 2.7:1
Sources: San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce Major Employers,
2018; Community Development Department, 2018; Central Coast
Economic Forecast, Beacon Economics, 2018
The increase of the number of estimated jobs inside the City limits, shows the stability and
strength in the City’s economy compared to last year. The number of housing units developed is
also increasing, however more housing is still needed. With housing as a Major City Goal in 2017-
19, the City continues to focus on promoting housing development to keep pace with job creation
in the City.
Implementation strategies in the updated land use and housing elements of the general plan
seek to reduce the jobs/housing ratio through programs targeted at additional housing within
the city limits. Land Use Element Policy 1.5 states that the gap between housing demand (due to
more jobs and college enrollment) and housing supply should not increase.
Packet Page 28