A few days ago, KPBS ran a story entitled “San Diego is building a lot of new homes, but not always in places that need them most” by Jake Gotta, which was picked up by their media partners at Voice of San Diego. Gotta interviewed our good friend Bonnie Kutch, the head of UC Peeps who is also a steering committee member of the San Diego Community Coalition.
However, mainly Gotta quoted Colin Parent extensively, the head of Circulate San Diego, a group that masquerades as pro-envirionment and pro-mass transit advocates but who are mainly paid lobbyists and pro-development shrills. Gotta made Kutch out to be the “bad guy” in his totally uncritical “gotcha” YIMBY piece. Here below, Bonnie responds:
Hi Jake:
In case you’re doing more stories focusing on housing issues, I wanted to make a few points that weren’t covered in your story that aired today. I wasn’t clear on what the focus of today’s story would be, thinking it was housing in general, so I failed to point out a few things:
- First, the City of San Diego spent $2.1 billion of taxpayer money building the Blue Line Trolley Expansion alone so it could supposedly bring people who work in UTC back and forth. Yet, the City has failed to advocate for new affordable housing near all 62 trolley stops to serve that purpose. Building all the housing in UTC or Sorrento Valley alone is a huge waste of the trolley expense and negates its intended purpose.
- Adding tens of thousands of homes in one area alone doesn’t work if you’re not providing the infrastructure to support that added population. In University City, the traffic grid is extremely limited and without more roadways, you get traffic gridlock — something UC already experiences. Not to mention, the City doesn’t intend to add any more parks, recreation centers, libraries, fire and police stations nor amenities when the population is expected to more than double here.
- In south UC, we are completely surrounded by Rose and San Clemente canyons and open space, which puts us in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Yet, we have just one east-west arterial: Governor Drive. Emergency evacuation and access by fire/police vehicles are already stressed given the fact we have more than 4,000 households in south UC and a population of approximately 15,000 people. The two shopping centers in south UC were up-zoned to accommodate up to 400 and 600 new housing units, and we’ve already been hit hard with ADUs. Imagine all those cars trying to evacuate at once! On top of that, the City wants to reduce Governor Drive to a mere two-lane road to accommodate bike lanes, despite the fact we have very few bicycles in this area due to being surrounded by uphill roadways. It doesn’t take a genius to see it’s a recipe for a large disaster similar to Maui and LA.
- The City of San Diego is delusional in thinking people will ever give up their cars in San Diego. Our transit system is deplorable, and it’s impossible to get everywhere you need to without a vehicle. MTS’s budget shortfalls and the City’s $6.5 billion infrastructure shortage make the expansion of transit systems unlikely.
- As your environmental expert pointed out, more cars means more pollution. When more housing units are added to UC, cars will be stuck in traffic longer, which means considerably more pollution and concrete islands that make temperatures rise.
- Despite what Ashley claimed, home prices in UC certainly aren’t up there with La Jolla, Carmel Valley, Crown Point and other affluent neighborhoods. However, the City of San Diego is providing developers loopholes so they can build large apartment buildings with very few affordable units, and in the case of Complete Communities projects, actually offsite the affordable units as far as three miles away. All the while, starter homes and affordable apartment complexes are being torn down to make way for all the more expensive housing.
- Last, and not least, it surprises me that you would interview Colin Parent of Circulate San Diego for this story. I’m sure you’re aware they are a paid lobbyist organization for the development industry that masquerades as a mobility/transportation nonprofit group. Colin and any other representative of that organization will advocate for housing that will increase developer/investor profits, not necessarily housing that is affordable, sensibly planned, the right type of housing (larger homes/units for families), and located where existing infrastructure will support it.
Others and I would welcome fair, balanced reporting by KPBS that doesn’t paint unpaid, volunteer citizens like myself as “NIMBYs” and “the bad guys” that are trying to block housing altogether. We love our city, and merely want the local city officials to plan for new housing in a responsible manner that doesn’t destroy neighborhoods and jeopardize the safety and quality of life for existing residents. Mayor Todd Gloria has gone about his housing initiatives in a way that rewards developers and investment firms handsomely, at the expense of residents.
I and others in our newly formed San Diego Community Coalition welcome the opportunity to talk to you about better solutions to the affordable housing crisis.
Thank you,
Bonnie
It is so terrible to see how many young people today are brainwashed by yimbyism.
I can’t resist commenting on one of the points raised in “A Response to ‘San Diego Is Building a Lot of New Homes…'” The author (Bonnie) characterizes San Diego’s transit system as “deplorable.” As a lifelong, 75-year-old rider of the city’s transit system, and never, ever, having owned a car, that’s ridiculous and untrue. Certainly, some aspects of San Diego’s tranist system can be improved (this is true in every major city), but in my experience, it is entirely possible to live, even thrive, in San Diego without personal transportation. Over my lifetime, I have held several very responsible jobs, all the while “carless.” My fellow transit riders range from blue collar workers to professionals like judges, attorneys, university professors and students, stock brokers, etc. Of course, the trolley is mobbed for major events, especially games at Petco Park, waterfront festivals, and more. Also, using public transit is environmentally friendly. Perhaps the greatest advantages of riding local transit is the exceptionally low cost compared to owning a vehicle: a senior monthly pass is only $23 per month for unlimited trips on the buses and trolleys. In fact, I attribute, in part, my abilty to purchase a historic cottage in Ocean Beach (twenty-five years ago) to the savings I accrued riding public transit! These days, there are more options than ever for augmenting public transit, as needed: Uber, Lyft, taxis, bicycling, walking, or bumming a ride with a friend. Some of my fellow passengers ride their electric scooters to the nearest bus stop. (Yes, they’re allowed on the buses and trolleys.). To reiterate, with a different mindset and proper planning, geting around San Diego without a car is entirely possible for many of us! Where there’s a will, there’s a way! If anything is “deplorable,” it’s our society’s wasteful car culture.
Maybe $23 a month sounds like a deal, but the MTS is heavily in debt and can’t cover their own expenses. But, you’re paying under 50 cents per ride to get to work and back. I’ll bet you support additional taxes to prop up this transit option so you can ride for almost nothing – it sounds like you admit taxpayers have help fund your cottage in OB.
Surely if you depend on transit, it must have a large impact on where you live and where you work as transit in SD doesn’t really get you from point A to point B unless it’s on a bus or trolley line.
Have you figured out how much time you have spent on this slow mode of getting to work, etc.? How much is your time worth per hour?
Did you miss Bonnie’s first point? “…the City of San Diego spent $2.1 billion of taxpayer money building the Blue Line Trolley Expansion alone so it could supposedly bring people who work in UTC back and forth. Yet, the City has failed to advocate for new affordable housing near all 62 trolley stops to serve that purpose. “
Correct, there is no new affordable housing, proposed or built, at the following new $2.2B Mid-Coast Trolley Extension stops:
Tecolote, Clairemont, Balboa, Nobel, VA Medical Center, Pepper Canyon
Voigt, Executive Drive, UTC.
The MTS Blue Line (also known as the UC San Diego Blue Line) has 32 stations.
The Clairemont Dr stop is supposed to service the Bayview Development which Protea sold to Zephyr (Brad Termini/Midway Rising). This property has been a ghost town for over a decade, most recently used as the staging site for the Blue Line.
Spoken like an able-bodied white man with no children.
How about a little more information Mr. Lugo. Are you married? Do you have children? Do you have any pets?
Why isn’t MTS and the City up in arms about SDSU not building any housing at the Qualcomm site. It’s been five years since SDSU took over that property with its multi-million dollar trolley station sitting empty or around the SDSU campus trolley stop that costs tens of millions more?
Neighborhoods have been told that they had to accept the City’s Bonus ADU program in the name of affordable housing. Yet, whenever government entities have the opportunity to build more housing they are nowhere to be found.
Just think, the money the City received from the sale of the Qualcomm stadium site (134 acres) is the same amount it has spent thus far for 101 Ash St.
Amen????