Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Print Edition
Classifieds
Stories
Events
Contests
Music
Movies
Theater
Food
Life Events
Cannabis
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
February 21, 2024
February 14, 2024
February 7, 2024
Close
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
February 21, 2024
February 14, 2024
February 7, 2024
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
February 21, 2024
February 14, 2024
February 7, 2024
Close
Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
What lies in Clairemont's future?
Ms. Stalmer’s excellent piece makes it crystal-clear that the development/construction/business communities and their puppets in the San Diego city bureaucracy plan to shove increased congestion and substandard housing down the throats of the residents of San Diego - and not just in Clairemont! Is there any way to stop them from degrading the quality of life in San Diego? Good question. The only practicable option I can think of is a people’s initiative for a City ordinance requiring mitigation of the adverse effects of development. Here’s a very rough draft: “Any proposal for development which includes housing with 100 or more dwelling units can be approved only if the proposal includes provisions for complete mitigation of any significant negative effects on the residents of the City of San Diego. The potential negative effects which must be completely mitigated include but are not limited to effects of increased traffic and congestion, increased demands on the water and sewer systems, and increased demands on other infrastructure.” Anyone want to get involved?— June 27, 2017 7:08 p.m.
Clairemont real estate up for grabs
Transit-oriented development is a priority. So is maintaining or even improving the quality of life for current San Diego residents. Those two priorities obviously can be in conflict. At this point, it appears the Protea proposal represents the best way of positive movement toward satisfying both of those priorities. On a related point, the situation is much more complex than simplistic urban sprawl versus NIMBYism. Development in the area involves issues of traffic, noise, pollution, promises made by the City, and much more. Just one example: An attempt to rescind the Clairemont Mesa Height Limit Overlay Zone would have resulted in expensive litigation and perhaps major financial consequences for the City of San Diego. That is, rescission could be judged to be a taking by the City that would need to be compensated, potentially to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars per household. People should be aware of the actual issues involved before they offer their shoot-from-the-hip comments – lots of luck with that!— December 17, 2016 3:55 p.m.
Red balloon sent up in Bay Park
The flaws in the 250+ page Morena development proposal from the City planners would take another 250 pages to discuss. Just one example here: they proposed building high-density housing on Morena Blvd., which is adjacent to and downwind from the I-5 and a major rail line – with your condo, you get both 70-95 decibel noise and carcinogens to breathe (from diesel exhaust, tire tread wear, etc.). I’ve put my opinions on some of the issues in a Google docs pdf file, which is available at (there may be more detail than anybody wants to read) https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9ZWiktfcO0FR0lB… High-quality high-density smart development which takes advantage of mass transit could be a good thing; high-density dumb development that results in a lower quality of life for both old and new residents is a very, very bad thing.— November 13, 2014 3:51 p.m.