{"id":249609,"date":"2015-12-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2015-12-18T08:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sdnews.com\/letters-to-the-editor-dec-18\/"},"modified":"2015-12-18T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2015-12-18T08:00:00","slug":"letters-to-the-editor-dec-18","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/letters-to-the-editor-dec-18\/","title":{"rendered":"Letters to the editor \u2013 Dec. 18"},"content":{"rendered":"

Debating about Hillcrest<\/strong><\/p>\n

Re: \u201cGuest editorial: A response to Benjamin Nicholls\u201d by Nancy Moors [Volume 7, Issue 25 or bit.ly\/1YibKJq<\/a>]<\/em><\/p>\n

Thank you, Nancy, for setting the record straight. If anyone has taken a walk around Hillcrest lately, you can see that there is plenty of residential development going on and yet businesses are increasingly shutting their doors. Can the Hillcrest Business Association (HBA) tell us why this is happening?<\/p>\n

\u2014<\/em>Sue Sneeringer via Facebook<\/em><\/p>\n

Not sure what Sue is talking about when she said there is plenty of residential development going on around Hillcrest? Looks to me that neighborhood has been frozen in time for the last 15 years or so!<\/p>\n

Why is it that people living outside of Hillcrest can see that the neighborhood is dying a slow death, but those who live\/own businesses there don\u2019t? Hillcrest needs to reinvent itself if it wants to compete with Downtown and every other Uptown neighborhood.<\/p>\n

Until then, I\u2019ll keep watch on the decline of the once envied neighborhood from afar (I sure as heck have no reason to shop or eat there since everything seems to be closing).<\/p>\n

Poor D Bar had to learn the hard way that Hillcrest is no longer the destination it once was. Head east to North Park or Little Italy if you want vibrancy.<\/p>\n

\u2014Justin G. via Facebook<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Ms. Moors said, \u201cA survey by Uptown Planners in 2006 showed that over 80 percent of those surveyed supported the (Interim Height Ordinance).\u201d The respondents of this unscientific survey were likely single-family homeowners who benefit from higher home prices through exclusionary housing policies. Of course they would support the IHO, which effectively blocked any new housing in Hillcrest for years. Yet if you were to survey younger San Diegans who are still living with their parents or planning to leave due to our city\u2019s unaffordability, you\u2019d get a much different result.<\/p>\n

The author illustrates why Uptown\u2019s land-use decisions shouldn\u2019t be made by Uptown residents alone, when state affordable housing laws and the city\u2019s transit-oriented development goals are ignored. Downzoning, reduced height limits and questionable historic districts are all part of an effort to prevent any new housing because of parking and traffic concerns. The result is increased inequality in a neighborhood that was once progressive.<\/p>\n

I agree that we need to preserve Hillcrest\u2019s historic architecture, but other historic districts in San Diego have reduced height limits on commercial strips to just 30 feet. Instead, let\u2019s strengthen existing historical review laws, so Hillcrest businesses can\u2019t continue to tear down affordable housing for parking lots.<\/p>\n

\u2014Paul Jameson via Facebook<\/em>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Hillcrest could be a destination for people who want a nice neighborhood to walk or ride in on a day out. Instead the HBA promotes dangerous streets and wonders why their businesses fail.<\/p>\n

\u2014Robert via Facebook<\/em><\/p>\n

Why do Hillcrest businesses continue to close? Perhaps it\u2019s because the HBA continues to promote events instead of providing needed services to its business members.<\/p>\n

\u2014Oldtimer via Facebook<\/em><\/p>\n

About your poll question<\/strong><\/p>\n

I want to vote on the gun control poll, but I don\u2019t understand the way it\u2019s worded. I AM TOTALLY OPPOSED TO GUN CONTROL so should I vote \u201cyes\u201d or \u201cno?\u201d I don\u2019t know how Congress feels. It would have been better if the question was \u201care you against gun control?\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2014Jean Monfort via Facebook<\/em>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

[Editor\u2019s note: Congress has the authority to make laws regarding gun control, which is why the question was formulated that way. So if you oppose gun control, you would vote \u201cno\u201d in the poll.]\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Leaving out Jesus<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Your holiday issue omitted the central person of Christmas, Jesus Christ, our Lord. The empty chatter about gifts, hedonism and the rest of the hype are of no importance. \u201cChristmas\u201d means \u201cChrist\u2019s Mass\u201d in the ancient English usage in the liturgical calendar. Hopefully, your readers may be interested in Jesus, Christ the Lord, Savior of the world.<\/p>\n

\u2014Michael Suozzi of Mission Hills via letter<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

About Craftsman homes<\/strong><\/p>\n

Re: \u201cThe Craftsman awaits his wake,\u201d [Volume 7, Issue 20 or bit.ly\/1KOwFxh<\/a>]<\/em><\/p>\n

Everyone saying that Mr. [Eric] Domeier is misguided has clearly not the owner of a Craftsman home who has had to deal with the historical review board.<\/p>\n

My growing family and I love our historic (though NOT Mills Act eligible) home. We outgrew the space and spent thousands of dollars designing a second-story addition to accommodate our needs. We hired professionals who are knowledgeable about the board\u2019s requirements for additions to historic homes, and our design met them to the best of our knowledge. Nevertheless, the board refused our design because the addition, while set back from the original structure per the rules, is not set back \u201csignificantly enough.\u201d In subsequent correspondence they\u2019ve refused to define what they mean by \u201csignificant,\u201d leaving us in limbo not knowing what to do.<\/p>\n

Apparently from the historical board\u2019s perspective, our plan makes the addition look too much like it was part of the original structure. How asinine is that? They\u2019ll allow additions to these beautiful homes as long as the addition clearly looks like it was added on after the fact. That\u2019s how we get approved structures like the one on 32nd Street, where there\u2019s an ultra-modern three-story tower stuck onto the back of 1920s Craftsman. That\u2019s not my idea of preservation.<\/p>\n

The historical review board has little common sense and wields their power in an arbitrary and capricious manner. They don\u2019t care about our homes, neighborhoods, or the people they serve. Ask any contractor, designer, or architect in the county and they\u2019ll tell you the same.<\/p>\n

\u2014<\/em>Sean Bornhoeft<\/em> via Facebook<\/em><\/p>\n

Loving the renaissance<\/strong><\/p>\n

Re: \u201cThe Boulevard is back!\u201d [Volume 7, Issue 25 or bit.ly\/1TNVbUm<\/a>]<\/em><\/p>\n

Big kudos to Tootie [Thomas] and everyone at the El Cajon Boulevard BIA! When I was a kid, I was always told to avoid “The Boulevard” but that is so not the case anymore! It gets better everyday and really is a cool street again! Can’t wait to see even more good stuff coming back to this grand street!<\/p>\n

\u2014Benny Cartwright via Facebook<\/em><\/p>\n

Re: \u201cMission Hills debates: \u2018growth vs. no growth\u2019\u201d [Volume 7, Issue 24 or bit.ly\/1I6YeGN<\/a>]<\/em><\/p>\n

The title of the article \u201cgrowth vs. no-growth\u201d is very misleading and mischaracterizes the debate about the Uptown Community Plan update. I didn\u2019t hear any speakers at the Mission Hills Town Council town hall meeting advocating for no growth. Most of the comments focused on concerns that growth and new density are done correctly and don\u2019t wreak havoc on the community.<\/p>\n

My comments for Mission Hills Heritage acknowledge that new development is going to occur; the focus should be on where and how much. The land-use map that Mission Hills Heritage submitted to the city (which was coordinated with the Mission Hills Town Council) is scaled back from the very high limits allowed by the 1988 plan, but still allows plenty of new development along the commercial core area of Mission Hills near Washington and Goldfinch and along Reynard Way. We just need to make sure that new development is done thoughtfully and doesn\u2019t destroy the attributes of our neighborhoods that we cherish.<\/p>\n

\u2014Barry Hager via Facebook<\/em><\/p>\n

[Editor\u2019s note: The headline was taken directly from a quote by Sharon Gehl, a member of the Mission Hills Town Council\u2019s board of trustees, who said during the question-and-answer session: \u201cIt boils down to growth vs. no growth.\u201d I sat in the front row at the meeting and heard a number of speakers advocating against growth and for neighborhood preservation.]<\/em><\/p>\n

\u2014Send letters to the editor to <\/em>ken@sdcnn.com<\/em><\/a> or via the San Diego Uptown News website or our Facebook page.<\/em><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Debating about Hillcrest Re: \u201cGuest editorial: A response to Benjamin Nicholls\u201d by Nancy Moors [Volume 7, Issue 25 or bit.ly\/1YibKJq] Thank you, Nancy, for setting the record straight. If anyone has taken a walk around Hillcrest lately, you can see that there is plenty of residential development going on and yet businesses are increasingly shutting […]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":726,"featured_media":233229,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"11555","_seopress_titles_title":"Letters to the editor \u2013 Dec. 18","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":[],"jnews_primary_category":[],"jnews_social_meta":[],"jnews_override_counter":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[11547,11551,11593,11552,11555],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-249609","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-features","category-news","category-no-images","category-opinion","category-uptown-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249609","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/726"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=249609"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249609\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/233229"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=249609"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=249609"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/test.sdnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=249609"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}