The YIMBY Alternative Universe: Great Transit, Affordable ADUs, Easy Fixes
By Kate Callen
San Diegans who feel the strain of overdevelopment in older neighborhoods won’t recognize the halcyon city in Wesley Morgan’s May 31 Times of San Diego commentary, “Opinion: Privileged Homeowners Like Me Shouldn’t Resist New Housing.”
Morgan, treasurer of YIMBY Democrats of San Diego, describes how he and his wife bought a Mission Hills home 11 years ago where they “raised our daughters surrounded by great schools, walkable streets, and reliable city services.”
Over time, Morgan writes, “it became painfully clear how few others had that chance and how little our neighborhoods were doing to welcome others.”
The rest is a story of virtue and meanness. Virtuous people like Morgan want to see a lot of new housing bring a lot of new residents into their flourishing communities. Mean people want to keep new residents out because they are selfish and they hate strangers.
Morgan’s essay reads like a fairy tale because it is. Let’s look closely at some of his assertions and see how they square with reality.
“If our communities have the parks, schools, libraries, and transit that make them great, why should only a shrinking group of homeowners get access to them?”
Community infrastructure in San Diego isn’t “great.” It is a crumbling mess.
Our sidewalks are cracked. Our streets are rutted. Our parks and libraries are eroding from growing demand and poor maintenance. Our transit system is anything but reliable. Transit commuters typically take two buses and over an hour to get to work.
As for the “shrinking group of homeowners”: Fewer young people today can buy homes as the Morgan family did because properties that once were affordable are being snapped up by speculators and corporate builders.
“The proposed supportive housing at the former Mission Hills Library, H-Barracks, and Hope @ Vine were rejected.”
Weren’t those projects intended to house the homeless? Why do YIMBYs insist that the affordable housing crisis and the homelessness crisis have the same solution? The first is governed by the market (which, of course, produces market-rate housing). The second can only be addressed through multi-faceted public-private enterprise. (Note: H Barracks is moving forward,)
“Parking is tight. Infrastructure feels stretched. But these are solvable problems when we allow growth in the right places.”
How exactly are these problems solvable? We can’t create more curb space. We don’t have the money to maintain infrastructure. If we “allow more growth in the right places,” we add more residents with more cars clogging surface streets and polluting neighborhood air. And then these “solvable” problems will become even more “unsolvable.” (Question: Where precisely are “the right places”?)
“This isn’t about blame. It’s about fairness and about choosing a better future. … Welcoming new neighbors doesn’t mean losing what we love.”
This is really about the democratic process that we love and the need to hold elected officials accountable to their constituents.
The true villains in the story of predatory development aren’t the YIMBYs (who belittle anyone who disagrees with them) or the builders (who are increasingly national conglomerates). The true villains are the politicians who serve monied interests instead of the public interest.
We have a request for Mr. Morgan. If you haven’t seen it yet, take a look at the “winners” of the OB Rag’s “Worst ADU in San Diego” contest. Then tell us if you would like to live next to any of them. Those monstrosities represent the ugly reality that neighborhoods across San Diego are fighting – and will keep fighting.
Category: Government, Housing, Local News
