The ‘Back-and-Forth’ of H Barracks

Even though the issue has dropped from the cameras of our local TV stations, H Barracks is still with us. Mayor Gloria has not changed his plans and those in the community of Point Loma have not changed their minds.

Here, is more on the issue, a letter to the mayor from the Peninsula Planning Board and Gloria’s position, as stated by his representative.

First, a report of the “famous” meeting of the PCPB on Nov. 16. from KPBS:

Point Loma community members sent a letter to the city of San Diego opposing a plan to turn the site known as H-Barracks into a homeless shelter. The site would temporarily house 300 to 700 people experiencing homelessness, according to the city.

The site is on North Harbor Drive next to the end of the San Diego International Airport’s runway. It’s separated from Point Loma’s Liberty Station by an inlet of the North San Diego Bay.

Why it matters  The Peninsula Community Planning Board’s letter of opposition points out there are nine schools within a half mile of the planned shelter location.

“There was a lot of concern about the safety of the children in Liberty Station with lots of children there,” said Fred Kosmo, chair of the planning group.

But San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria said H-Barracks is an important part of the city’s Comprehensive Shelter Strategy.

“As much as everyone is frustrated by our homelessness crisis, too often folks are concerned about the solutions that we propose,” Gloria said. “This is a multi-acre site that is in a discrete location. It is next to the airport. It is far from residents, businesses, schools and whatnot. It is separated from the Point Loma community by the channel of water that runs along Liberty Station.”

The city estimates it will cost between $7 and $20 million to operate a temporary shelter on the site that will later be turned into a wastewater treatment site for the city of San Diego’s Pure Water Project.

Closer look Homelessness in San Diego County increased by at least 14% this year, according to the results from the 2023 WeAllCount Point-in-Time Count released in June. The one-night snapshot taken in January found 6,500 people experiencing homelessness in the city of San Diego alone. Of those, 3,285 were unsheltered.

In its letter to the city, the Peninsula Community Planning Board expressed concern about public safety and an increase in crime, as well as what the board described as “insufficient nearby services, grocery stores, and public transportation.”

Gloria responded to the concerns in the Community Planning Board’s letter and said that the facility would have 24/7 security on site, extensive lighting, privacy fencing and no walk-ups will be accepted or outside visitors allowed.

Looking ahead The details for the temporary facility are still being worked out, but the mayor said he hopes to have the shelter up and running by the end of 2024.

Here is the text of the PCPB letter to Mayor Gloria and Campbell:

The PCPB has been approached by several neighbors who have expressed deep concerns regarding the recently enacted San Diego Comprehensive Shelter Strategy, specifically the proposal to establish a 700-bed homeless shelter at the H Barracks in Liberty Station’s east end. While we understand the importance of addressing homelessness in our city, we believe that this plan poses significant challenges and risks to our community. We respectfully request that you reconsider this proposal,
taking into account its potential unintended impacts on the Point Loma and Liberty Station area, and explore alternative locations.

Concerns have been raised over public safety and youth impact and with limited SDPD resources in the area this may lead to a higher need for service within Liberty Station and the surrounding communities.
The proximity of this proposed site to the airport runway increases the risk of danger at this site from airplanes utilizing the runway. Most importantly, having people in a tent that is close to the noise level without noise abatement is not humane and exasperates existing health conditions and poses additional health risks.
1. Public Safety and Youth Impact:
• Nine schools, two playgrounds, and soccer fields within half a mile.
• Limited SDPD resources may lead to higher crime rates.
2. Lack of Services and Health Risks:
• Insufficient nearby services, grocery stores, and public transportation.
• Proximity to the airport without noise abatement may exacerbate health conditions.
3. Negative Impact on Tourism and Local Businesses:
• Negative impressions for visitors encountering homelessness.
• Potential harm to Liberty Station’s identity and local businesses.
4. CEQA Compliance:
• Urgent need for adherence to CEQA guidelines for lead, asbestos, and airplane noise.

In addition to these concerns, there is a vital issue regarding the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance. It is imperative that the city follows all CEQA guidelines when addressing the lead and asbestos abatement and airplane noise at the H Barracks site. This includes a thorough environmental impact assessment to ensure the safety and well-being of both the housed and unhoused populations in the area.

The PCPB urges the city of San Diego to explore alternative locations within the city to support the unhoused with services and a path to permanent housing. This urgent reevaluation, considering community concerns, is crucial due to potential significant impacts on public safety, community well-being, and the city’s overall health. We ask the city for a comprehensive dialogue involving all stakeholders, prioritizing safety and seeking solutions that serve our community’s best interests.

While we recognize the importance of supporting our homeless community, it is essential to balance this with ensuring the safety, dignity, and well-being of all San Diego residents. We request an immediate reevaluation and insist on a dialogue that includes all affected parties.

Let us work together to find a solution that is both compassionate and safe for our community. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and we look forward to a productive dialogue. The letter was approved with a vote of 00-00.

Here is the Report to Point Loma Association Board of Directors Wednesday, November 15, 2023 by Kohta Zaiser, Office of Mayor Gloria (in the format of bullet points):

  • Earlier this year, the City released its Comprehensive Shelter Strategy, which outlines short-, medium-, and long-term solutions to meeting the City’s shelter needs. H-Barracks was identified as a medium-term option.
  • H-Barracks sits immediately west of the San Diego Airport runway, off North Harbor Drive between Kincaid Road and McCain Road.
  • San Diego Fire-Rescue and San Diego Police Department have used portions of this site for training exercises.
  • Long-term, this area will serve as a site for a Purewater facility, making any type of installation or use temporary in nature.
  • Because this City-owned land currently sits unused, and due to long-term permanent plans still several years away, H-Barracks is an ideal option for temporary use as a homeless resource site.
  • For a general timeline, the City is looking at the earliest towards the end of calendar year 2024 for operations to begin. Abatement of the site and demolition of the existing buildings must occur first. Abatement has begun. Demolition will take an additional 6 months at least.
  • What type of services will be provided is yet to be determined. Depending on how the site is configured, the area could provide capacity for several hundred shelter
    beds. These details won’t be finalized until the current site has been abated and demoed.
  • What we do know is the level of activation, services, and security that comes with any homeless resource site. Things such as:
    o Increased security, both stationed on-site and nearby patrols of surrounding areas
    o Fencing, for privacy of clients on-site and the surrounding community
    o Lighting
    o Transit to and from the site and to other services
    o Code of conduct, including no violence, weapons, drug use, or alcohol on-site
    o On-site services, such as mental health resources, substance abuse counseling, case management, housing navigation, healthcare and medical care assistance,
    veterinary care, IDs, assistance with Social Security or Disability payments, and the basics, such as meals and restrooms.
  • Most of the City’s shelters are referral based only, meaning they do not accept walk-ups. Individuals must be referred through SDPD or an identified homeless services provider. Transit is also provided if individuals must go off-site to an appointment.
  • Projects like H-Barracks are crucial in expanding the City’s shelter capacity, which then expands the City’s ability to enforce laws such as the Unsafe Camping Ordinance.
  • The City’s shelter system is a steppingstone, a stop on someone’s pathway to permanent housing. We do not intend for individuals to be there in perpetuity, but
    to stay in a consistent, safe place as they get connected to the necessary services and resources to get them off the streets and into housing.
Source
Author: Source

17 thoughts on “The ‘Back-and-Forth’ of H Barracks

  1. I emailed the mayor’s office and our city council. It really does sound like this homeless shelter is going to happen, despite the wishes of the community. Unbelievable!

    1. Sometimes the people are wrong. This is a good thing and I’m glad it’s going in. Boo hoo for the PL residents who have a problem.

      1. You obviously don’t live in PL nor live near a shelter. Do you even have a clue to the largest homeless shelter size in the state of CA? Approx 300 and it is skid row in LA. You are ignorant and obviously uneducated to the realities of a shelter of this size.

        1. Here’s why it’s not obvious. While I don’t live in PL I live pretty close and have lived there in the past. Also I know plenty of people who DO still live in PL and support this facility going in. If know PL residents who support it, that means you do too. If you say otherwise then you are matter of factly lying. We have a pretty large homeless population where I live and its growing. I would very much support a facility going up in my area. But hey, your precious kids and all lol!!

            1. Sorry J. As I’ve admitted in pervious posts, I can’t type if my life depended on it.

              Here’s why it’s not obvious. While I don’t live in PL I live pretty close to it and have lived there in the past. Also I know plenty of people who DO still live in PL and support this facility going in. If I know PL residents who support it, that means you do too. If you say otherwise then you are matter of factly lying. We have a pretty large homeless population where I live and its growing. I would very much support a facility going up in my area. But hey, your precious kids and all lol!!

  2. “As much as everyone is frustrated by our homelessness crisis, too often folks are concerned about the solutions that we propose,” Gloria said. “This is a multi-acre site that is in a discrete location. It is next to the airport. It is far from residents, businesses, schools and whatnot. It is separated from the Point Loma community by the channel of water that runs along Liberty Station.”

    Is whatnot an actual thing? They’re bound and determined to burn money on temporary attempts. Focus on rectifying it at the ballot box and hold the city to their timeline.

    1. Wouldn’t being that close to a small, busy, single runway airport put people at higher risk for health issues?
      At high concentrations, jet fuel and other hydrocarbons can affect the nervous system, causing headache, dizziness, and lack of coordination. Chemicals may also cause chronic health problems, such as liver and kidney damage.

  3. Consider that Fairbanks Ranch and Rancho Santa Fe are excellent locations to construct a major facility that works to help the unhoused while providing affordable, high density housing opportunities in an area that can likely support the increase in density. Plenty of green space, bounded by the 56, 15 & 5 freeways. An ideal place to put a major transit center linking North, Central and South SD.

        1. For sure, all the tax dollars being spent by the city for litigation. Are the balloons that fly out there made of lead?

          1. Litigation? You mean 101 Ash? Or pedestrian death lawsuits? Or city-owned vehicle lawsuits? Or maybe the guy run over by a car as he was being handcuffed by SDPD?

  4. I think what the residents are saying is that they have lost faith in their city government to protect their rights. They do not doubt the view from their windows could sprout 20 porta-potties in a day, with nothing they could do. Some previously homeless residents who are two wild will be booted outside the chain-link fence because of their behavior will sit there and howl in frustration. Will 20 porta-potties be enough? 50? Who decides? Where do they eat? Who decides?

Leave a Reply to Vern Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *