Doug Poole, a Mission Hills resident who has joined neighbors in fighting against a high-rise apartment building planned for the the Ft Stockton lot that was the site of the “little red house,” wrote the following open letter to his councilmember, Stephen Whitburn.
Councilmember Whitburn,
The residents of Mission Hills and surrounding neighborhoods are deeply concerned about two high-rise developments – 820 Fort Stockton and the Columbia Street project – both of which threaten to fundamentally alter the character, livability, and infrastructure of our communities.
We now know from City records that 820 Fort Stockton is not a Complete Communities project. That means the City and your office have direct influence, and the oft-repeated claim that “the developers can do what they want under Complete Communities” does not apply here. As our elected representative, you have both the ability and the obligation to engage with your constituents before this project advances further.
Yet, despite repeated written requests, there has been no dedicated community meeting to address this development. Your July 10 “Town Hall” included, by your office’s own account, dozens of topics and only a passing mention of 820 Fort Stockton. For a project of this magnitude – a 12-story, 120-unit factory-built tower across the street from existing homes – that level of attention is unacceptable.
The Columbia Street high-rise, though a Complete Communities project, also remains active at the Development Services Department despite public statements by the developer about redesign. The City has not required a formal withdrawal of the high-rise plans, which means the public is left with conflicting information and no certainty.
The patterns here are clear:
- Developers and their representatives are receiving access and latitude.
- Constituents, even when organized and engaged, are being given minimal opportunity for meaningful input.
- The City’s own adopted community plans are being sidelined.
We are requesting – and expecting – the following:
- A dedicated public meeting within the next 30 days on 820 Fort Stockton, scheduled after 6 PM on a weekday, with notice to all within a ½-mile radius.
- Full disclosure of final site plans, renderings, developer identity, and general contractor for 820 Fort Stockton.
- Clear explanation from your office on what tools and code provisions can be used to address scale, setbacks, design, and compatibility for 820 Fort Stockton given it is not in Complete Communities.
- Status update and written confirmation from the City on whether the Columbia Street high-rise plans remain active, and if so, why no formal withdrawal has been required.
You have often said you value transparency and neighborhood engagement. These projects – and your response to them – will be the clearest test of that commitment. Our neighborhoods deserve more than generic assurances and post-event justifications. We expect leadership that acts before irreversible approvals are granted, not after.We look forward to your confirmation of a date for the requested meeting.
Sincerely,
Doug Poole
“The residents of Mission Hills and surrounding neighborhoods are deeply concerned about two high-rise developments – 820 Fort Stockton and the Columbia Street project – both of which threaten to fundamentally alter the character, livability, and infrastructure of our communities.”
Doug with all due respect, when it comes to development at 820 Fort Stockton, it’s two blocks away from 8 and 13 story apartment complexes plus across Washington is another 8 story building, so actually it’s in line with the character of the neighborhood as currently constituted. In fact the 13 story building, Green Manor, has been there since 1970!
Additionally you live in a massive apartment complex that was built in 2009 and was, per your criteria, completely out of character with the neighborhood when constructed and was also across from existing homes.
I’m glad you love your neighborhood but why is it OK for you to own an apartment home there but not for anyone else?
Doug,
Be serious! There are multiple hi-rise apartments within a few blocks of this new project! Yes, there will be problems with parking with this project, but it will be new, it will be beautiful, and provide much needed customer for the local business’s.
Doug, with all do respect, it’s time for you to move on,
Much Love to you Doug,
Terry Burke
It’s telling that in hundreds of words about new buildings with hundreds of new homes, not a single sentence acknowledges the people who might actually live there. Because once you picture the service workers, nurses, teachers, retirees, and young families who could call Mission Hills home (or stay there), the argument against them starts to sound exactly like what it is: exclusionary. It rings even more hollow when you consider that the project site is surrounded by existing multi-family buildings. Neighborhood character is not defined by keeping others out, but by the people you welcome in.
Fixating on whether this project is or is not under Complete Communities is procedural nitpicking to delay, not a substantive reason to oppose housing. Calls for “more meetings” is your attempt at “let’s drag this out until the developer gives up.” These sites are perfect for new housing in one of San Diego’s highest resource areas, with walkable streets, transit access, and amenities that support thriving local businesses. Excluding positive economic, environmental, health, and educational outcomes for families that you get to benefit from is exclusionary and selfish.
When you say “no” to homes in a high-resource neighborhood, you are pushing people farther away from jobs, schools, and opportunity, forcing longer commutes and higher transportation costs. Have you thought that your energy to preserve inequality could be better spent elsewhere?
The tenor of comments above reflect the same tired YIMBY narrative–that more is always more. Why do you think there is such a huge backlash in San Diego against overdevelopment? Few are suggesting there should be no development. We want responsible development that actually complements a neighborhood, not just makes it more congested and ugly.
The true housing crisis is an affordability crisis. These huge developments offer a laughably small number of ‘affordable’ units. For instance, the Columbia highrise would only include 6 affordable units out of 161. And those can be built offsite and years later–if they ever get built at all. I saw this same thing happen in San Francisco. Developers saying, sure, we’ll build those units-and they never get built.