Saving Neighborhoods From Developers
The metro neighborhoods of San Diego have been a battlefield for the last few years, with developers and construction companies on one side and homeowners on the other.
In addition to living in one of these areas, I am a real estate agent who works in the neighborhoods--North Park, University Heights, Normal Heights, Hillcrest, Golden Hill--and I find myself listening to both sides and often being asked for an opinion or a solution. An opinion I have; a solution that would be fair or acceptable to each side is not as easy to reach.
The problem, as I see it, is to build or not to build. Are the neighborhoods being redeveloped or are they being destroyed?
I do not remember who first said, “You can’t stop progress,” or if anybody ever really said it. But I have been hearing the phrase used as an answer to all questions by people who feel that in the name of what they see as progress, anything should be accepted and not questioned.
But people do have questions, and are not willing to see their neighborhoods change to suit someone else’s vision.
Why did metro neighborhoods become the focus for development? Here in San Diego, we see the influx of new people daily. This is not a new phenomenon, but it is an increasing one. With new people come the benefits of new ideas, increased productivity and economic activity--a replenishing of the city.
I feel that San Diego was caught off guard and did not update its plans for any large migration. I also feel that developers and construction companies immediately saw the demand for new housing and set out to provide it. That is well and good--new construction is a sign of economic growth, and I am all for that.
So what is the problem? Is it the manner in which the development has taken place? I think so. Houses are being torn down at an amazing rate and being replaced at the same amazing rate by multiple units--all, it seems, without much regard to design, quality or the desires of the neighborhood residents.
To be fair, it should be pointed out that some residents are happy with the new buildings. Some houses being torn down are ready to fall down anyway. Nobody is saying that redevelopment is all bad, but the questions about its direction and consequences remain.
Standing in opposition to the bulldozer’s path are concerned homeowners who want the developing to stop, or at least to slow down. Their neighborhoods are being changed. A real sore spot, I think, is that developers who are buying up the properties do not live in the neighborhoods and are only concerned with profits they can extract from building there.
How right is it for someone who has lived in their neighborhood for years, who has spent time and money to make a comfortable home, to be told “this is how it is going to be and it does not matter what you want” by a developer who bought the property next door a week ago? It does not seem fair.
But what is fair? Is it fair to tell developers they cannot use their property the way they want to? What about those neighbors who want to sell their property and, by selling it to a developer, can get a much higher selling price? What about your property’s value after the apartment building goes up next door? The questions go on, and there do not seem to be good answers.
The city was approached by residents to come up with answers. Talk by residents and council members of a moratorium and “downzoning” caused panic among developers, and they responded by initiating a campaign that included writing letters, handing out flyers, and telephoning and generally harassing homeowners in hopes of obtaining as much land as possible before the pie was all gone. This angered homeowners, including myself and others concerned about the disappearing neighborhoods.
In the last few months, I have seen 14 houses come down in just a very small area. A friend of mine, an older woman who lives in North Park, expressed it well and with grim humor. “It used to be you were at the mercy of the tax man and the undertaker,” she commented. “Now, it is the developer.”
What does the current method of development do? It produces overloads in the community. Look at it.
- Parking is impossible. I had one homeowner contact me about selling his home because, by not having a garage, he is sometimes forced to park four blocks away from his property.
- Going to a local supermarket is a nightmare--every checkout is eight people deep.
- Traffic is coming to a standstill.
- Water and sewer lines that were built for single-family neighborhoods are not being updated for the apartment and condominium developments’ needs.
- Neighborhood schools are overcrowded.
- Crime is increasing.
What could be changed? I would like to see the mindless development stopped until further notice. I question why developers cannot build with some foresight and do as little damage to the neighborhood as possible. Why not put restraints on what can be built and how? Why not build smaller? Instead of a thrown-together eight-unit box of a building, why not build an attractive four-unit structure? Can laws be passed that require builders to provide more off-street parking?
I know that what I propose may not be feasible, and that developers would answer my questions with points about money, time, supply and demand. I might even be asked who I thought I was to be dictating rules and regulations.
I am a resident of San Diego’s metro area, and I do not like what I see happening around me. For myself, I plan to keep in contact with the city Planning Department and see what changes will be taking place. I encourage all homeowners to do likewise.
If no one opposes the developers, they will continue to do as they see fit. I feel that progress is fine, but not at the expense of losing the flavor and character of our older neighborhoods. They are like valued antiques, and worth protecting and holding onto. Once they are gone, they are lost forever. I feel that would be a great loss indeed.
