Did San Diego make the right call with a modest growth plan for Clairemont?

The San Diego City Council recently approved new growth plans for several areas, but scaled back plans for Clairemont.

The new community plan update for Clairemont would potentially increase the population by 50%. Council President Joe LaCava voted against the plan, arguing it was a missed opportunity to grow the neighborhood.

While the council voted to greatly increase College Area density, Clairemont — the city’s largest and oldest neighborhood — gets to largely stay a community of single-family homes.

Councilmember Jennifer Campbell, whose district includes Clairemont, said the new growth blueprint there balances the city’s need for more housing with what she called “the uniqueness of Clairemont.”

Question: Did San Diego make the right call with a more modest growth plan for Clairemont?

Economists

Caroline Freund, UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy

NO: The more modest plan reflects NIMBY opposition, not smart growth. Calling Clairemont “unique” is a way for residents to block change, and the plan largely preserves single-family zoning. But the plan may be mostly symbolic anyway. The 1989 plan projected 38,800 units, yet there are only 33,300 today. The real failure isn’t poor planning; it’s creating a climate that enables follow-through.

Kelly Cunningham, San Diego Institute for Economic Research

YES: While largely retaining zoning for single-family homes in much of Clairemont, the growth plan accommodates the state’s mandate to prioritize needs for transit-oriented development near trolley stations, including higher density and taller buildings. State law SB 79 taking effect July 1 will make it legal to build apartments near transit regardless of local zoning. This allows construction of five- to six-story apartment buildings within a half-mile radius of Clairemont’s trolley and rapid bus stops.

Alan Gin, University of San Diego

NO: More affordable is the biggest need for San Diego. To get that affordable housing, as many units as possible need to be built. All neighborhoods in the city need to contribute to increasing the supply. Clairemont can do more than the growth plan proposes, especially with the new trolley stops that have been built in the community. That allows for greater use of mass transit, which is important in mitigating the increased traffic that comes with needed higher-density development.

James Hamilton, UC San Diego

YES: The top priority of the City Council should always be to serve the people of San Diego. Planners did a good job of balancing the city’s need for growth with the preferences of the residents of Clairemont. I like the vision of focused growth by leveraging existing business and transportation hubs with minimal disruption to the lifestyles of current residents.

Norm Miller, University of San Diego

NO: I think Joe LaCava has several valid points. We should allow much more density around transit nodes and that means taller buildings. Taller buildings can also allow for more green space and parks as part of the plan, just not next to transit nodes. I am not that familiar with the plan details, but it sounds like a plan based mostly on political compromises.

Executives

Bob Rauch, R.A. Rauch & Associates

YES: The updated Clairemont plan significantly increases housing capacity from 38,800 to 52,800 homes while remaining transit‑oriented, focusing density on major corridors and large commercial parcels. This moderate, consensus‑driven expansion rather than a maximalist upzoning aligns with both housing needs and community constraints. The new housing would be built along the new trolley line, which runs along Clairemont’s western edge near Morena Boulevard between Old Town and UC San Diego.

Austin Neudecker, Weave Growth

YES: The new plan allows for a roughly 50% increase in population, anchored near trolley stops and village centers. Clairemont’s infrastructure is becoming stretched. A phased plan enables utilities, schools and transit to catch up to the substantial new demands. We should link development project approvals to related infrastructure improvements and transparent performance from builders. Start with addressing missing sidewalks and safety improvements. Gradual infill should reduce disruption and backlash.

Chris Van Gorder, Scripps Health

YES: I’m a broken record on the issue of community involvement in land-use decisions. In this case, it would appear that the Clairemont community supports the decision made by the San Diego City Council to retain the community’s single-family home character. Therefore, I too support the council’s decision.

Jamie Moraga, Franklin Revere

YES: The Clairemont growth plan reflects measured, thoughtful and balanced planning, allowing for needed growth while preserving community character and quality of life. The revised blueprint passed with local support and should serve as a model for the council when planning for other neighborhoods. Striking the right balance between housing needs, infrastructure, amenities and livability is critical. Without that balance, the city risks overdevelopment, public safety concerns, declining property values and strained infrastructure.

Phil Blair, Manpower

NO: We need to understand their thinking in suggesting such a smaller increase for Clairemont than the College area for example. Of course, one has thousands of students, but there must have been more. Seems when we make presentations, especially from committees, it’s important to be prepared at the same time to present answers to the most obvious questions that will come forward. Maybe they had a great reason, if so share it with us.

Gary London, London Moeder Advisors

NO: I’m a “yes” if a future Clairemont allows gentle density through the gradual replacement of single-family homes with townhomes, which can be sold for far less cost than the homes that they replace. Clairemont’s existing infrastructure, proximity to employment and freeway access make it attractive to the same segment of young families who originally populated Claremont in the 1950s. This is the future segment who are mostly priced out of the current San Diego.

Not participating this week: 

David Ely, San Diego State UniversityRay Major, economist

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