Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Uptown preservationists sue city
You're exactly right, Founder. I was about to post what you described is precisely what happened. SOHO and MHH have got a very strong case, because the adopted plan was such a sloppy, grasping mess. If the developers could have been satisfied with the almost total giveaway they got in the draft plan, this lawsuit wouldn't stand a chance. Because up until they had the planning commission muck it up, the update process did follow the letter of legal review (even if only to completely ignore the input from the community). But no, they got too greedy, and this snap at their reflection is going to cost them the meal already in their mouth.— January 7, 2017 3:30 p.m.
Working class stiffed in Barrio Logan project?
This article perfectly illustrates how "density bonuses" are the biggest scam running in development today. For the supposedly magnanimous gesture of providing a token few "affordable units," developers get all sorts of exemptions from community plans and zoning (such as extra height and density) that result in projects out of place in the existing neighborhood. And they get to inflict the extra burden of these outsized and unaffordable projects on infrastructure and amenities without providing any offset. Rather than allowing giveaways for the option of including some affordable housing, it should be required that *all* projects include some affordable housing, or else provide for compensating community benefits such as parks and parking.— January 6, 2017 10:10 a.m.
After the Goldsmith, his politics on trial
Amazingly good news! Finally what we all knew to be true but couldn't prove, someone with knowledge and wherewithal is. Ms. Dell'Anno is competent and principled, everything Goldsmith is not, and she is going to kick his pompous pallid ass. And what's more, once she prevails, Mr. Briggs will have all the evidence necessary to pursue a lawsuit of his own. If Mara Elliott had any sense, she'd scrub the city attorney's office of Cordileone, Braun, and all the other crony scum that has built up there. Now, over to iNewsfarce to see how they spin this as a repudiation of Briggs or as the *real* politically motivated attack in this story--if they mention it at all.— January 5, 2017 2:55 p.m.
Stop ticketing the homeless, Mayor Faulconer
Gosh, it almost still feels like Christmas, all the goodwill toward men on here! It was shown last month that half of all homeless in San Diego are [new to the streets][1]; and we've known for years that 40% of all homeless youth are [LGBT][2], and almost twice as many are [veterans][3] as are in the general population. But instead, jnojr and AlexClarke want to make the subset of drug addicts and mentally ill stand for the whole, so that they can dispense with any nuance and indulge in fascist fantasies. Hate to break it to you fellas, but people are not their condition. No matter what, they're still your fellow human beings. (Sorry, that also means your condition doesn't make you superior, either.) We need to address that homelessness is simply the symptom of a sociopolitical system that fails to support its citizens. Far too many of the population are housed by contingency only: a single missed paycheck, job loss, or illness is all it takes to turn someone out of doors. Emergency short-term financial assistance, comprehensive social support services, as well as "housing first" strategies are what's needed. But even though these things would [cost less than mass incarceration][4], that would involve actually solving problems rather than indulging in mean spiritedness for its own sake. God bless us, every one. [1]: http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/nonprofits/… [2]: http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/… [3]: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-0… [4]: https://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/ndny_costef…— January 4, 2017 10:07 a.m.
Even drought-tolerant trees die in San Diego
Sad to say I have to agree. Long ago, I heard that Coronado Police would pick up the homeless and on the drive across the bridge tell them, "This time, we're dropping you off on this side of the island. If we ever see you again, we're dropping you off the other" -- that is, out into the ocean. There's going to be a lot of room for ugly in the Trump Administration. We already see CalTrans and sanitation crews "cleaning up" by trashing homeless people's tents and encampments. It's simply a matter of time before we discover local police and border patrol "cleaning up" by eliminating the homeless themselves.— December 21, 2016 7:30 p.m.
Even drought-tolerant trees die in San Diego
Yet another unfunded mandate for an inadequate proposal to simply make up the deficit for where we should be in relation to the rest of the country. Doesn't seem to matter if it's trees, parks land, water and sewer and road infrastructure, affordable housing, social services, economic opportunities, or accountability by public officials. There are always studies and plans; but if one is impolite enough to ask later about actions and results, politicos offer the arrogance of either hypocrisy or silence. There are only three constituencies with power and influence in San Diego: the military, hoteliers, and developers. And they're all focused on how much they can take without putting anything back. So the slow collapse of our ecology and economy becomes as relentless and inevitable as cliff erosion.— December 21, 2016 1:51 p.m.
Is the Copley estate historic?
“All we have done is taken what was already designated as an area in which a house could be built, and we’ve put a big lawn there and we have made a few (golf) holes....It’s an amenity to our existing estate. It’s not open to the public and we have preserved the open space.” So many questions: Does this a lawn with a few holes encroach on open space? As open space is supposed to open to the public, does this mini-course interfere with public access? When we're in the middle of a housing shortage, how is it acceptable or legal to take a lot zoned for housing and turn it into an empty "amenity"? And since having the biggest serial locus of naked greed and tasteless ostentation in a county isn't a valid criterion for historic designation, I'm wondering what the end game is for looking at getting this status.— December 21, 2016 12:55 p.m.
Civic San Diego commits foul, says group
Don't feel like you have to apologize, Dorian: seeing thinkered's regular trolling of anyone less than fawning to developers on this and other sites, he must get paid more per word than you. Replying just earns him more money to spend on improving his single-family suburban home.— December 14, 2016 2:55 p.m.
Second spouses network
So it's okay if she gets a job and promotion in short order because of her husband's position, so long as he's not getting any loot put directly in his pocket, just their joint bank account? Besides, what married couple tells each other about what they do at work each day? And there's an exception even though they're married, and spouses can't be forced to testify against each other? Clearly the FPPC has definitions of "conflict of interest" and "remote interest" different than those understood in the real world. They should also look up "influence peddling" while they're at it.— December 8, 2016 12:02 p.m.
City Heights planners displeased with bikeway plans
You're absolutely right, bbq: side streets such as Howard/Orange and Robinson are the natural place for locating bike paths, not major thoroughfares. However, this whole pro-bike agenda has never been about providing safe or sensible passage for bicycling--it's about throttling vehicle traffic and creating sham "transit corridors" that will allow developers to build without providing parking. Why else would SANDAG and the city duplicate effort, putting bike paths just a block away from the others' projects? For SANDAG, anti-car projects like this give it carbon offset credits that allow it to expand highways for north county. For the city, expanding the areas that can be defined as accessed by a "transit corridor" allows developers to claim density bonus and other shortcuts that shaft the community of parking and other infrastructure then pocket the difference.— December 8, 2016 10:31 a.m.