Is San Diego on the right track with its increased density plan for Clairemont? – San Diego Union-Tribune

A new draft plan for the Clairemont neighborhood calls for 17,000 new housing units, mainly in mixed-use villages or next to the trolley.

Many of the new homes would be rent-restricted housing, especially next to the Blue Line. City officials say the proposal would bring a much wider variety of housing to Clairemont, allowing people of all incomes to live in one of the city’s most appealing and prosperous neighborhoods.

The demand for more affordable housing for San Diego workers remains high. A new apartment building opened in Serra Mesa recently with nine rent-restricted units that received more than 200 applications before the online application had to be shut down.

The San Diego City Council aims to vote on the plan by the end of the year. While the blueprint preserves existing single-family housing, it already has received pushback from some residents who argue denser housing near trolley stations will block views of Mission Bay. Other concerns include adding bike lanes and not building in Clairemont’s canyons.

Question: Is San Diego on the right track with its Clairemont plan?

Economists

Kelly Cunningham, San Diego Institute for Economic Research

YES: Adding high-density housing to existing commercial areas, while leaving neighborhoods of single-family homes mostly untouched seems a good remedy for increasing housing. Also, adding much of the new housing down the hill along Clairemont’s western edge near Morena Boulevard will allow additional residents to access the new trolley line helping mitigate overwhelming automobile traffic that would otherwise entail. The plan therefore fulfills state and city incentives that allow significantly more density near transit access.

Alan Gin, University of San Diego

YES: The region desperately needs more housing. With the lack of developable land in the county, one way to get more housing is to have more density in existing communities. Development near transit stations is ideal to mitigate potential increased traffic. That makes the area near the Blue Line station in Clairemont a prime spot for higher density housing. It’s unfortunate that some people will lose their views, but this is one case where the needs of the many outweigh the wants of the few.

James Hamilton, UC San Diego

YES: I like the way the plan has tried to capitalize on existing transportation and commercial infrastructure while still preserving the community’s character. Some wonderful bay views of current residents may be affected, but I see this as an unavoidable consequence of building enough new housing units. I would also encourage prioritizing upgrading roads to mitigate traffic effects. Thinking that public transportation options can handle all the impact is just wishful thinking. Additional park space is also essential.

Norm Miller, University of San Diego

YES: We need housing, mixed-use and affordable housing and we clearly must raise the 30-foot height limit if we are ever going to make market rate housing feasible and affordable. As to bay views, maybe a few households are affected, but for the market as a whole this plan makes sense. Raising the 30-foot limit in more markets to at least 36 feet would have more impact than the ADU entitlements added a few years back.

David Ely, San Diego State University

YES: The addition of 17,000 new homes would make a meaningful contribution toward addressing the serious housing shortage in San Diego. The plan acknowledges the need to balance increased housing density with limiting the impact on the character of existing residential neighborhoods by focusing the development in commercial areas. The plan also seeks to create a variety of housing for people across a range of income levels.

Ray Major, economist

NO: Yet another misguided plan by the city of San Diego to solve the self-inflicted housing crisis. All one needs to do is look at the map of the proposed densification to see that the vast majority of the 17,000 units are nowhere near the trolley line as they should be. This plan will create parking and gridlock problems in all of Clairemont while continuing to underutilize the $2.2 billion investment in the Mid-Coast Trolley Extension.

Executives

Jamie Moraga, Franklin Revere

YES: Focusing on mixed-use villages along trolley lines in commercial areas (rather than residential neighborhoods) is a step in the right direction. However, there must be robust infrastructure and mitigation strategies in place to avoid overdevelopment and protect canyon lands. If new projects proceed, adequate parking, traffic solutions, and investments in schools, roads, utilities and emergency services are essential. Without these, Clairemont risks declining quality of life, falling home values and erosion of community character.

Austin Neudecker, Weave Growth

YES: Clairemont’s plan to add 17,000 homes near the trolley is a move in the right direction. Focus on adding numerous units, not just rent-restricted units that sideline young professionals who don’t qualify and otherwise distort the market. Keep public views open with sensible height restrictions and make it safe to walk and bike to transit stations. Ensure approval of these projects that meet specific rules without drawn-out legal hearings.

Gary London, London Moeder Advisors

YES: Clairemont is the poster child for a planning makeover. The community was initially developed in the mid-20th century to accommodate young families of World War II vets. After an incredibly successful run it is now “long in the tooth” yet remains centrally located relative to employment centers and transportation. While high-rise clusters are certainly warranted, the city should eliminate minimum lot size zones to introduce town homes/row homes and provide more affordable housing choices for this generations’ young families.

Bob Rauch, R.A. Rauch & Associates

YES: The Clairemont Community Plan smartly balances growth and preservation. Adding 17,000 housing units near transit corridors addresses San Diego’s housing shortage while minimizing traffic and infrastructure strain. It protects single-family zones, expands affordable housing, and promotes walkable mixed-use development. The key to the success of this plan is to listen to all concerns, particularly those related to viewshed, and do everything possible to avoid compromising the neighborhood character. The housing units are greatly needed.

Chris Van Gorder, Scripps Health

N/A: Yes, it makes sense to build more housing and affordable housing adjacent to mass transit hubs. But no, it’s not fair to do so in a way that damages property values of current residents by blocking views of Mission Bay with new high-rises.City planners should find a balance to achieve both goals — difficult but doable if that is the goal and instruction by the mayor and City Council.

Not participating this week:Phil Blair, ManpowerCaroline Freund, UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy

Have an idea for an Econometer question? Email me at phillip.molnar@sduniontribune.com. Follow me on Threads: @phillip020