By Michael A. Hernandez
On Thursday, May 21, San Diego-based nonprofit organization ‘Serving Seniors’ and management firm Hyder Property Management, held a resident’s meeting in the campus’ Judith L. Seltz Wellness Center to provide an update on concerns and take questions from the public.
The last-minute resident’s meeting was held two days before a press conference the Senior Residents Council was slated to take place; and comes in the wake of a recent article titled “Clairemont’s Mt. Etna Project: The Affordable Housing Misnomer,” posted on the local community initiative and media platform Explore Clairemont.
In her article, Explore Clairemont writer and publisher Tanja Kropf compiles the growing number of concerns voiced by the senior residents including the lack of parking, a rent hike, and fear for their safety, even though they were promised affordability, ample parking, and safety prior to moving in. Kropf writes before seniors even completed their first year living at the residence, just one day before Thanksgiving of 2025, they were told their rent was going up by 8.8%. The increase would be more than three times the 2.8% they receive annually from the Social Security Cost of Living Adjustment.
Another failed promise is the 465 parking spaces originally proposed for the Mt. Etna project during community planning and outreach stages in late 2018. That number was reportedly pitched by developers and city officials to ease concerns that surrounding streets would not be able to handle the arrival of so many cars. Yet just months later in March of 2019, the San Diego City Council under then mayor Kevin Falconer passed Ordinance 21507, which eliminated minimum parking requirements for multi-family residential developments within “Transit Priority Areas”.
According to the City Planning Department, these parking regulations “allow for more multifamily residential units to be built without parking to lower housing costs and encourage residents to use alternative modes of transportation such as walking, biking and transit.”, adding the regulations align with the goals of the City of San Diego’s Climate Action Plan and Housing SD initiative.
Kropf writes after this change in policy, that records indicate when Chelsea Investment Corporation signed the Disposition and Development Agreement, a legally binding contract between the private developer and the county of San Diego in January of 2020, that their parking obligations were to be in compliance to ‘all applicable parking requirements’.
Chelsea Investment Corporation allegedly later used the 2019 Ordinance requirement reforms along with density-bonus waivers to quietly cut the proposed parking almost in half, down to 240 spaces. On a 404-Unit Campus, that averages out to around 0.59 parking spaces per unit. The lack of parking may also be contributing to a number of on and off-site violations and safety hazards including speeding and daily parking violations in front of fire hydrants and red zones both at the complex and on nearby streets.
Of all the grievances being voiced by the seniors, the concern over their safety might be the most alarming, as the complex’s security is said to consist of just one camera at each entrance. On top of that, residents say not all the cameras are working and none of the ones that are functioning monitor activity in the hallway.
Kropf writes about one resident who reported being frightened by loud aggressive banging at her door early one morning. Without video to pull from the hallways, the identity of the person or persons involved remains unknown. But threats from the outside may not be the only kind residents have to worry about, as they had been living in the same building as registered sex offender. The question still remains as to how an individual like that was rented an apartment in tax-payer subsidized housing a mere 500-feet from the nearest school (he has since deceased). His presence along with a rent increase after her first seven months had been enough to flip resident Georgia Hornback, who has been highlighted as a success story on promotional materials for the project and is now voicing her concern over safety at the complex.
After reaching out to all parties about these issues and receiving answers described as “tepid at best”, Kropf reports a collective of seniors fueled by frustration have come together to form the group known as the Senior Residents Council, hoping their unified voices will bring about a difference. However Kopf says the problem may not be limited to the project at Mount Etna and lists issues at other affordable housing complexes developed by Chelsea suggesting the problem may be systemic.
This highlights the settlement of a lawsuit launched by senior residents at St. Teresa at Calcutta Villa, another Chelsea investment affordable housing complex, over repeatedly broken elevators, and a petition over safety, pest, and maintenance issues going around Chelsea’s Mesa Verde Apartments in San Carlos.
Despite all of the concerns coming from residents since before the project was built, to now roughly one year since move-in, San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria, the San Diego Housing Commission, and other elected officials have repeatedly touted the project as a huge success and have indicated they would like to implement the same model in other areas of San Diego.
This morning, Friday, the Senior Residents Council held a press conference right outside the Terrassini Apartments at the complex on Mount Etna Drive to publicly voice their concerns, issues and complaints.
Sources
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/sdhcd/docs/cd/10-15-18%20Mt%20Etna-Crime%20Lab%20CPA_NOP%20Scoping%20Meeting_FINAL.pdf – Clairemont Mesa Community Plan Amendment / Rezone 5255 Mt. Etna Drive 2nd Notice of Preparation (NOP) Public Scoping Meeting – Slide 15, promises 465 parking spaces
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/sdhcd/docs/cd/DDA-and-all-attachments-Mt-Etna-Combined.pdf – DDA
Michael A. Hernandez is a resident of Clairemont.
Thank you for continuing to share this story. It needs to be heard. I had a typo in my article. The press conference is at 10 am on May 23 (tomorrow). The media will be there, as well as residents of the complex and surrounding neighbors. We’d love the support of others!
Protest tomorrow 10am. Anyone that cares about the way Campbell, Gloria and City Hall continues to deceive the public to exploit our San Diego seniors for their own political expedience and personal gain, should make their voices heard loud and clear tomorrow. This project exemplifies the insidiousness of hyper-gentrification through high density projects and the fraud, the myth and the fallacy, of “affordable” housing construction that never gets built.
It is absolutely shameful the way that those that dedicated their entire lives to make San Diego such a good community are being victimized by despicable corporate landlords with the manipulative blood money blessings of our “elected representatives.”
At yesterday’s “emergency” meeting held by Serving Seniors, Hyder, and ConAm, I watched as seniors nearly broke down in tears. They were exasperated. There are only TWO disabled spaces in front of the senior complex. They are many disabled seniors living there who have to walk long distances to find parking. It’s a shame what the city and what Chelsea have done, not only at this “affordable” housing project, but at many across San Diego.
What’s not being shared about the rent increase is that a $35.5 million federal funding shortfall left the an Diego Housing Commission with one of two choices: Either allow the increase in rents or cut 1,700 households (about 6,000 people) from participating in the rent voucher program. Not a good choice but that’s what they had to work with.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/869797742188359
If you’ve got a problem with this, blame the Trump administration, not the SDHC, County or Chelsea.
Not to dismiss the various complaints of the residents, one must also wonder where would these 404 senior households be living if this development didn’t exist? Let’s get the complaints resolved, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Don—the link you reference is directly related the the voucher program administered by SDHC. It also talks about rent increases in late 2026/early 2027. First, the senior units at Mt. Etna have a limited number of voucher recipients. Second, their rent increase notice came in late 2025. Third, Chelsea is absolutely the driver of this. They are bad actors and the concerns shared by the seniors in my article are happening at Chelsea properties across San Diego. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it’s a duck. Chelsea is an ugly duck. I’m not sure why it’s seems so important for you to defend the indefensible. They are hurting seniors and low-income families with their greed-driven tactics. I encourage you to show up tomorrow and speak directly with the seniors who are affected.
Tanja, I am not “defending the indefensible.” I am adding facts to the conversation.
The financing package for federally supported non-profit housing projects depends, in part, on the sustained commitment of Section 8 rent vouchers. It’s integral to the whole financial package.
When the feds failed to provide sufficient funds to meet the needs of the entire program the San Diego Housing Commission was forced to make a choice – approve a rent increase or cut thousands of recipient households from the program, leaving families out to dry. The SDHC chose the former, rasonable and decision on their part. Facts like these are important to the public’s understanding of the situation and should be included in the reporting.
https://sdhc.org/housing-opportunities/help-with-your-rent/
Again, your link refers to the voucher program, which does not pertain to the majority of these residents. I spoke directly with SDHC. They told me it is up to Chelsea to decide the rent increase amount. Chelsea decided on the maximum. The seniors begged them to keep it within cost of living allowance, but they refused. Chelsea is a morally bankrupt organization. Was it legal? Sure. Was it moral or ethical? No. Which is exactly what I reported.
It’s more complicated than that. Non-profit housing developers like Chelsea operate on very tight margins and must comply with an arcane, sometimes an undecypherable set of federal, state and local rules.
The financial packages underwriting their projects are complex. But without federal support, they would not be in the business of producing lower cost housing. We need developers like Chelsea to build housing that is more affordable than conventional housing.
The question to ask, is where would the occupants at Mt. Etna live if the project didn’t exist? How much would they be paying in rent? Can they find comparable quality housing for the same cost? Before determining their moral stature, I would want to know the answers to questions like these.
I don’t know how many tenant complaints there are. It would be nice to see the specific list and the responses, or lack thereof. But obviously these all need to be tended to, even if it’s just a handful. Hyder needs to take care of these.
But lets not forget, there 404 households now living in apartments that otherwise wouldn’t exist, but for Chelsea.