The city’s obsession with adding more housing shocks by the day. Cute, historic homes are leveled and replaced by multi-level residential buildings that are typically rentals (no condos for you, Bud) and explicitly turn out to be so-called micro-units (tiny space, big monthly payment). These new builds tower over single-family homes and/or two-story apartments/condos, dramatically obliterating local character and robbing existing homes of airflow and sunlight.
Justification: Housing shortage. That’s a lie. According to Zillow, there are currently 18,499 rentals available across San Diego County. For sale: 8,101 homes. That sure looks like plenty of inventory to me. According to Point2Homes, which business is helping people find places to rent, there are 6,142 “housing units” in my community of University Heights. Zillow says 279 of them are currently for rent; but not all list on the service, so the number should be higher.
By my math, that’s about a 4.5 percent vacancy rate, for my neighborhood, which compares to 7 percent nationwide during second quarter 2025, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Sources somewhat split about what’s “healthy”. Generally, though, looking at the aggregate, vacancy rate of 4 percent or more indicates more rental property supply than consumer demand, with 5 percent to 8 percent being considered optimal (e.g., no rental residence shortage where I live).
While acknowledging slowing population growth, San Diego Assocation of Governments (SANDAG) expects that “the region’s existing housing shortages will continue to drive demand for housing and job opportunities, leading to the addition of approximately 203,000 housing units and about 234,000 jobs by 2050”. My analysis disagrees: There is no overall shortage. Instead, the problem is not enough affordable housing. Rents are too high. Artificially.
Pricing Perplexities
Using my neighborhood as an example, the most-affordable rental is a $1,595 studio of undisclosed size. Another unit in the same building is 300 square feet and $200 more. Generally, a handful of apartments are available for under $2,000 monthly. The majority are priced considerably higher, with 500 to 650 square feet the typical range. At the high end, a spacious 1,693-square foot, 3-bedroom house is $7,900 a month.
The building-frenzy is supposedly about providing housing that is more affordable. Instead, each new residential complex either maintains or, more likely, levitates the market rate. Meaning: The more they build, the more everyone pays. That raises the perplexing question: Why? Capitalism is fundamentally about supply and demand. When supply exceeds demand, prices tend to fall. But in San Diego, landlords instead set rents based on so-called market rate. I have a term for that: Price fixing.
Unsurprisingly, in March 2025, San Diego city council banned software for “algorithmic price-fixing”. Times of San Diego reports: “The ordinance came after investigations revealed that corporate landlords have used software, like RealPage’s YieldStar, to coordinate pricing and suppress competition”.
Something else: Many of the newer, so-called micro-units set the bottom level for rental prices, which pushes higher the monthlies for apartments of meaningful size. Evaluation by market rate isn’t going away; new rentals will continue to drive up prices, by raising the minimums charged.
Futile, but Valiant
All of the content to this point is merely meant to introduce the Featured Image and companions—all taken using Nikon zf and NIKKOR Z 50mm f/1.8 S lens. Vitals: f/4, ISO 2000, 1/160 sec, 50mm; 11:57 a.m. PDT, Sept. 6, 2025.
Let’s talk the principles in the photo. The woman holding the bullhorn is originally from Vermont and she has lived in University Heights for about 10 years in a house that she owns. The gentleman standing behind her is head of the University Heights Community Association, which organized the rally regarding the building behind both. The gentleman wearing blue hat and holding a sign owns the adjacent property, where he has lived for more than 35 years. He only learned that a developer bought the neighboring lot after receiving several phone calls to buy his home.
The developer, Garrett Reuter of MaxItOut ADU, has filed for permits to build a five-story, 19-unit complex in the lot where sits a Queen Anne Free Classic-style house built in 1890. Had my wife and I bought the Schoolhouse in 2017, we would be affected by the looming new structure to be located diagonally across Meade Ave. near Campus.
That leads us to the second photo, and an apology (vitals: f/4, ISO 200, 1/400 sec, 50mm; 11:27 a.m.). Caught up in the mood of the rally, I didn’t manually adjust the aperture. As such, the camera’s choice created narrower depth of field, making most people a little to a lot fuzzy. Moving along, look straight down the center to the pregnant woman. Her husband spoke passionately about buying a home on Campus and raising a family in University Heights. Instead, if the 5-story structure is built, it will butt up to his backyard and overshadow his home. The couple may move.
Third photo: One of the many Nikon Zf benefits is an easy-access switch for shooting black and white. Vitals: f/6.3, ISO 160, 1/2000 sec, 50mm; 11:09 a.m. I believe the two young women showed up separately and someone asked if they would stand together with their signs. The UHCA president asked one of them, if I rightly recall, would she buy the rundown house and renovate to live in. Qualifying if she (and her male partner) could afford it, absolutely yes.
About two-dozen people attended the rally, which likely won’t accomplish much. The permits likely will be approved, and the developer will build what unquestionably will be the tallest structure in the neighborhood. I asked the gentlemen in the blue hat what he plans do. After all, the new building will massively change his quality of life. He doesn’t yet know.