Connect with us

San Diego, CA

San Diego wants hotels and restaurants to pay more for valet stands and on-street dining. It’s not going over well.

Published

on

San Diego wants hotels and restaurants to pay more for valet stands and on-street dining. It’s not going over well.


San Diego hotel and restaurant owners are balking at a city proposal to charge them steeply higher fees for their valet parking spaces and on-street outdoor dining areas.

City officials say the hikes are justified, because San Diego loses revenue when parking spots that could otherwise have meters are devoted to other uses like dining or valet parking drop-off and pickup.

But critics, including the county lodging association and merchant groups, say the hikes could prompt some restaurants to eliminate on-street dining altogether and force hotel guests to clog streets by double parking.

One Mission Beach restaurant owner said Tuesday the city can’t keep raising fees and costs on a struggling industry and not expect a rash of closures. “We are teetering,” said Eric Christiansen, the owner of Guava Beach Bar & Grill.

Advertisement

The proposal, which the City Council is scheduled to consider early next month, is part of a wider city campaign to cope with expected budget deficits by raising parking rates and beginning to charge in new places like Balboa Park.

City officials say it’s costing taxpayers many thousands of dollars per year in potential parking meter revenue — revenue that could fund city services — by allowing on-street dining and valet spots, especially popular downtown because hotels there lack space for self-parking by their guests.

And the amount of potential revenue the city is missing out on rose sharply this year, after hourly meter rates were doubled from $1.25 to $2.50, daily meter operations were extended by two hours and a special event zone with higher rates was created near Petco Park.

In an effort to recover a greater share of that lost revenue, city officials are proposing to raise the fees for street-dining space by more than 30% and to hike valet parking fees even more dramatically. Currently, those fees are nearly $38 per square foot in most areas; they would rise to $50.

Fees for outdoor dining would rise by nearly 32% in most neighborhoods and even more in the special-event zone. Also, a fee exemption would be eliminated for seating that is open to the public, instead of reserved only for restaurant customers.

Advertisement
A parking attendant stands near Filippi’s Pizza Grotto in Little Italy on Oct. 14, 2025. (Ariana Drehsler / For The San Diego Union-Tribune)

For valet spaces, hotels would pay $5,600 per year for the standard allotment of two valet street spots of 22 feet each, up from the current $600 per year. City officials say the $600 is an application fee, and the $5,000 is a new fee that aims to recover part of the city’s costs.

The hotel industry has mostly accepted that change, but it’s objecting to proposed fees for hotels that want more than two valet spots. Each additional valet spot beyond two would cost a hotel $10,000 in areas that have parking meters and $15,000 in the special-event zone.

“That is just too high for guests, as well as the operators, to be able to absorb,” said Fred Tayco, executive director of the San Diego County Lodging Association.

Tayco said some hotels could end up paying close to $100,000 per year if they need several additional valet spots, predicting that scaling back valet spots would lead to dangerous double parking and unloading of luggage.

“While valet parking may appear like a luxury, for downtown it’s a necessity,” said Tayco, noting that 63% of tourists who visited San Diego last year came by car.

Advertisement

Michael Trimble, executive director of the Gaslamp Quarter Association, questioned how the city arrived at the new proposed fee amounts.

“We can’t support arbitrary, unpublished surcharges that punish businesses,” Trimble said.

City officials say the proposed fees were carefully calculated based on the typical revenue a parking meter generates in a year.

Ahmad Erikat, a program manager in the city’s Transportation Department, said a typical meter downtown generates $25 per day, which may rise to $30 per day now that operating hours have been extended by two hours.

Erikat said the city multiplied that rate times the 350 days per year that meters operate — there are 15 holidays per year when they don’t — to get a total expected revenue per downtown meter of $10,500. So the city decided to charge $10,000 for additional valet spots.

Advertisement

“The objective is to be as close as possible to cost recovery,” he said.

In the special-event zone, a similar calculation led the city to propose $15,000 per valet spot, Erikat said.

For restaurants or hotels willing to operate valet spots only from 5 p.m. to midnight, the fee would be $2,500, which is based on how much meter revenue could otherwise be generated during those hours, Erikat said.

He stressed that the first two valet spots would still be heavily subsidized by the city. Instead of charging the $20,000 that cost recovery would dictate — $30,000 in the special-event zone — the city would charge $5,600 for those two spots.

Full cost recovery would kick in only when additional spots beyond the standard two are required by a business.

Advertisement

The proposal was approved 4-0 by the City Council’s Active Transportation and Infrastructure Committee last month. It is scheduled for a vote by the full council on either Nov. 2 or Nov. 3, according to a spokesperson for Mayor Todd Gloria.

Outdoor dining in Little Italy on Oct. 14, 2025. (Ariana Drehsler / For The San Diego Union-Tribune)
Outdoor dining in Little Italy on Oct. 14, 2025. (Ariana Drehsler / For The San Diego Union-Tribune)

Councilmember Stephen Whitburn, who chairs the committee and represents downtown, said he sympathizes with businesses facing higher fees.

But he suggested keeping those fees down is less important than making sure hotels have the ability to claim additional valet spots if they need them.

“The policy enables valet services to remain possible while enabling the city to recover the true cost of lost parking revenue,” Whitburn said.

He said the hotels make enough money to cover the higher costs. “The collection of valet parking revenue results in some pretty significant revenue,” he added.

Christiansen, the Mission Beach restaurant owner, considers the fee hike for street dining a huge mistake.

Advertisement

“It’s a ridiculous increase by a tone-deaf city,” said Christiansen, who has operated Guava Beach Bar & Grill for 23 years.

With the city’s minimum wage still rising incrementally and costs for food and energy going up, he said the city shouldn’t charge more for street dining spots when restaurants are barely surviving.

“We can’t absorb anymore costs — we are teetering,” he added. “It’s going to be a rude awakening for the city when restaurants start to close. Boarded-up buildings are a bad look for tourists.”

The Little Italy Association, whose businesses would be some of those most affected, declined requests for an interview.

Advertisement



Source link

San Diego, CA

Opinion: More apartments eased rents. Townhomes could aid buyers.

Published

on

Opinion: More apartments eased rents. Townhomes could aid buyers.


San Diego’s most beloved neighborhoods, like North Park, Golden Hill and Sherman Heights, were built by people who needed a place to live and found one. But the bungalows, fourplexes and cottages that gave working San Diegans a foothold in those neighborhoods can hardly be built anywhere else in the city.

Rules written decades ago banned them. For 70 years, San Diego has been paying for that mistake in the form of a city its own workforce can no longer afford to live in.

Neighborhood Homes for All of Us is the city’s plan to fix that: family-sized townhomes, rowhouses and small duplexes built in the neighborhoods where San Diegans most want to live.

While San Diego rents are softening as new apartments are built, the cost of buying a home is not moving, and it won’t, because the rental and ownership markets run on entirely separate tracks. Renters benefit when more rentals are built, forcing landlords to compete for them.

Advertisement

However, a family trying to buy a home benefits only if more homes are available for sale. San Diego home prices now exceed nine times the median household income, among the worst ratios in the nation, according to Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. Building rental housing is important, but it does not change the math for a buyer.

The homes that would change it — family-sized, on the ownership track, in the neighborhoods where people most want to raise children — have been illegal to build for decades. San Diego produced roughly 7,000 condos and townhomes a year in 2005. By 2022, that number had collapsed below 500. Part of that drop is because of litigation rules that drove up insurance costs for builders, caps on pre-sales that finance these projects and high fees. Another major reason is that we simply do not allow starter homes on smaller lots. So, instead, builders default to rentals because that’s what current rules allow them to build profitably.

London Moeder Advisors, a San Diego real estate economics firm, finds that eliminating the city’s large-lot-size mandates could produce new townhomes at 42% less cost than surrounding single-family homes without taxpayer subsidies. While this price point is still high for many, it’s more attainable for young families starting out. And importantly, the price could drop further if the state advances reforms to address litigation rules and pre-sale caps that drive up costs.

The city’s program is also focused on adding homes in San Diego’s neighborhoods with the best-performing schools and most accessible jobs. These are also the neighborhoods with the most restrictive regulations on smaller starter homes. A teacher whose classroom is in La Jolla cannot afford to live there. A firefighter stationed in Mission Hills commutes from Santee. The homes that would let them stay are currently illegal to build in much of these areas. Neighborhood Homes changes that.

While critics may say San Diego already has the tools for adding homes to neighborhoods, why add another program? Because each of those tools was for a different purpose. None were designed to add more for-sale housing.

Advertisement

ADUs, the backyard homes now common across the city, typically top out at 750 square feet (because of fee cliffs) and entail intricacies when selling to own. Other tools, like Senate Bill 9, have been layered with requirements that make it far too complicated and expensive for many homeowners to split their lots to add homes. Laws like Senate Bill 79 are important for adding more housing near transit. But none of these tools focuses on family-sized, ownership-track townhomes in an established neighborhood.

The Neighborhood Homes initiative asks a simple question: Where do the families who can’t afford a million-dollar home but don’t want an apartment go? We can continue to say certain neighborhoods are off-limits to the teachers, trades workers and young families who want to live there, or San Diego can set its own terms for how they grow, with local standards in a form the city controls.

San Diego’s most beloved streets were not preserved into existence. They were built — a duplex here, a rowhouse there — by people who needed a place to live in the city they loved and found one. That is what Neighborhood Homes makes possible again.

Asad is a former board member of the YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County. He resides in Mid-City.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

San Diego, CA

Tom Krasovic: Justin Verlander’s announcement recalls Padres’ 2004 draft blunder

Published

on

Tom Krasovic: Justin Verlander’s announcement recalls Padres’ 2004 draft blunder


So Justin Verlander is calling it quits, effective at the season’s end.

There’s Padres-related history to explore with Verlander, 43.

With it comes many groans.

San Diego passed on Verlander as part of the infamous, franchise-rocking decision to draft Mission Bay High School’s Matt Bush with the first overall pick in 2004.

Advertisement

Had the Padres chosen Verlander and tweaked the Old Dominion alum’s delivery, as the Tigers did soon after selecting him No. 2 overall, the best innings-eater of his generation could’ve headed San Diego’s rotation for many years.

As a National Leaguer, Verlander would’ve pitched against pitchers, rather than designated hitters. His annual ERA would’ve fallen by about a half run, per DH and no-DH data of that time.

The Padres would’ve boasted a generational monster atop their rotation as soon as 2006, when Verlander won the American League rookie of the year award with Detroit, while the San Diego rotation featured next year’s NL Cy Young winner, Jake Peavy.

Recall also that Petco Park, from its opening in 2004 until its remodel in 2012, played as big as Yellowstone National Park.

Not that the DH rule greatly impeded Verlander, a nine-time All-Star.

Advertisement

Many times over, the ace rewarded Tigers general manager Dave Dombrowski and scouting director Greg Smith for drafting him one spot after Kevin Towers and Bill Gayton — their options reduced by Padres owner John Moores’ stated opposition to drafting Scott Boras-assisted prospects Jered Weaver and Stephen Drew — selected Bush, the easy-to-sign but troubled shortstop turned pitcher.

Verlander helped Detroit reach its first two World Series in decades. He led the league in innings three times as part of chewing up 200-plus innings in eight consecutive seasons.

Dombrowski had displayed an unwavering faith in betting big on hard throwers.

Unfazed by power-righty Kyle Sleeth breaking down soon after he took him third overall in 2003, Dombrowski and Smith, a former Padres scout, became dead set on taking Verlander if the Padres didn’t.

Why didn’t Towers and Gayton choose Verlander?

Advertisement

Foremost, the Padres generally didn’t like him as much as the Tigers did.

In fact, they preferred Weaver and Drew.

But Moores all but blocked his scouts there. He was openly critical of their adviser, Boras, saying he didn’t trust him. The two had clashed in the Kevin Brown talks that ended with Brown joining the Dodgers, months after Brown had led the Padres to the 1998 World Series.

Moores was subjected to other kinds of pressure, too. Legal complaints had delayed Petco’s construction. Those complaints all failed in court. But in the interim, the price of steel rose. Padres ownership bore that cost.

Even though Moores’ baseball staffers whiffed on Verlander and failed miserably in choosing Bush, Moores put them in a tough spot. He in effect removed two players who would both pan out as big leaguers.

Advertisement

Someone with the Tigers correctly foresaw that shortening Verlander’s stride would sharpen his control. Untroubled by his 21-18 college record and bursts of subpar accuracy, the Tigers’ duo touted the 6-foot-5, 240-pounder’s “electric” combination of size, velocity and a powerful curveball.

Signing Verlander wasn’t easy.

David Verlander, the pitcher’s father and a union organizer with experience in sticky negotiations, said a contractual impasse led him to negotiate directly with Smith, leading to a deal, per CWA-Union.org.

The sides agreed on a $3.12 million signing bonus, which was less than the $3.15 million bonus the Padres paid to Bush, who was advised by Jeff Moorad.

The Boras-advised Weaver and Drew, who went 12th and 15th to the Angels and Diamondbacks, respectively, got $4 million apiece — but they and Verlander each got major league contracts, increasing the value of all three deals.

Advertisement

It wasn’t until close to the 2005 draft that Weaver was signed. He nonetheless returned great value to the Angels.

Verlander went on to pitch for the Astros after GM Jeff Luhnow obtained him at age 34 from Detroit.

Verlander became a better pitcher with Houston, benefiting from the tech-and-data-driven edges the Astros provided him. Verlander embraced high-speed camera data, eventually dropping his two-seam fastball and limiting his rising fastball to high in the zone. Prodded by high-speed imagery, he adjusted his slider grip.

He won his second and third Cy Youngs with the Astros, and now stands 266-159 with a 3.33 career ERA in nearly 3,600 innings.

For baseball’s hungriest fanbase, he represents a case of what might have been.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

San Diego, CA

San Diego Humane Society Releases 4 rare western spotted skunks into the wild

Published

on

San Diego Humane Society Releases 4 rare western spotted skunks into the wild


RAMONA (CNS) – Four rare western spotted skunks were released back in the wild after weeks of rehabilitation and socialization at the San Diego Humane Society’s Ramona Wildlife Center, officials announced Wednesday.

The successful release marks a major milestone for a species rarely seen in wildlife rehabilitation. The group included one orphaned skunk that was flown more than 400 miles by Flying Tails Animal Rescue from Sierra Wildlife Rescue in Northern California to join an orphaned group in Ramona, according to the SDHS.

The four skunks were returned to a carefully selected, remote habitat in Valley Center after reaching the necessary weight and developmental milestones to thrive on their own.

Western spotted skunks are a rare sight for the Humane Society’s Project Wildlife team. While the wildlife center typically handles hundreds of striped skunks each year, admitting six spotted skunks from different litters in one season is unusual. Spotted skunks are generally found in remote forested areas and are not as common in urban neighborhoods, officials said.

Advertisement

“We have never seen this many western spotted skunks in a single season before,” said Autumn Welch, wildlife operations manager at the Ramona Wildlife Center. “Because they are more reclusive than striped skunks, they require very specific care and even more secluded release sites to ensure they can stay wild.”

Socialization is critical for orphaned spotted skunks. During their stay at the Ramona Wildlife Center, the group became a bonded unit — exploring, digging and sleeping together, according to SDHS officials. Experts say these social cues prevent habituation to humans and teach the orphans natural skunk behaviors.

While four members of the group have returned to the wild, two spotted skunks remain in care at the facility. The smallest skunk was moved to an outside pre-release habitat and introduced to a slightly older skunk in late June.

Wildlife officials said by keeping the pair together, the wildlife team ensures the younger skunk will have a companion to learn from until they are both ready to be released, likely within the next month or two.

Anyone who finds an injured, sick or orphaned wild animal is encouraged to visit sdhumane.org/wildlifehelp or call 619-299-7012.

Advertisement

Copyright 2026, City News Service, Inc.





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending