By Macy Meinhardt, Voice & Viewpoint Staff Writer
Unanimously dressed in bright yellow “say no to Footnote 7” t-shirts, Southeastern residents packed Tuesday’s City Council meeting, determined to uphold their argument against unjust housing developments slated for their neighborhoods.
Lack of clarity on the Klauber Development Project began when residents of Emerald Hills and Encanto discovered the City’s plan to build a high-density housing project on land zoned only for 0-4 dwelling units per acre.
Residents started to question the City on how this is allowed. Southeastern neighborhoods are identified as an environmental justice-affected area in the city.
That’s until footnote 7 was discovered.
Their complaints were met with pro-housing sentiments from city leaders, who justified their case via a footnote from San Diego municipal code that states, “In the Encanto and Southeastern San Diego Community Planning areas, the lot size shall be a minimum of 5,000 square feet.”
However, these are the only two areas in the city this regulation applies to. The rest of the neighborhoods in San Diego are given a minimum lot size of 20,000. Yielding the primary question—why is Southeastern San Diego, a low-income, predominantly Black and Latino area, bearing the brunt of the regional housing crisis?
“We hold that footnote seven perpetuates racial biases in historically segregated communities and limits residents’ access to the same zoning opportunities that predominantly white San Diego neighborhoods enjoy,” said Andrea Hetheru, chair of the Chollas Valley Community Planning Group.
On June 13, the project was deemed exempt under California Environmental Quality Act guidelines. However, the Chollas Valley Community Group appealed this exemption, arguing that the project exceeds the site’s zoning density, conflicts with their certified community plan, and was granted exemption without community input.
“We’re not against development. We’re against development that disregards environmental justice and due process, especially when it disproportionately impacts Black and brown communities,” said Robert Campbell, a resident of Emerald Hills.
While city staff and city council members unanimously upheld the communities appeal, tensions and many unanswered questions still remain over footnote-7, and whether or not the city will continue to rely on it to promote housing in unsuitable areas.
To read the full article visit: sdvoice.info
