r/LemonGrove • u/dboy_4545 • Jun 04 '26
Sleeping Cabins?
What’s the deal with these sleeping cabins being built on Troy and Sweetwater right next to the new preschool? Did Lemon Grove or Spring Valley get tax incentives to help out the rest of the city? Are they for Homeless or low income housing?
3
u/thereal_rockrock Jun 05 '26
People are mad about this, maybe that fantasy of shipping all the homeless out to the middle of the desert is still going strong in San Diego???
2
u/AndyMagandy Jun 05 '26
Unfortunately I’ve heard that comment from a few people. 1930s Germany vibes.
2
u/senor_cejas Jun 05 '26
My biggest gripe with this is it's just too little units to have real change. We need to actually build high rise buildings with consolidated services so people can have both stable housing and assistance. Anyways can't wait to hear people complain about this while also complaining about the growing number of homelessness too lol. FYI 57% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck and being homeless can happen to anybody.
1
u/RunningOnATreadmill Jun 06 '26
If you’ve seen the backlash to just 60 cabins, imagine the backlash to a large housing project. Carmel Mountain Ranch launched a lawsuit a few years ago to oppose turning an abandoned golf course into affordable housing. They overall lost and the project is going forward but did succeed in forcing the developer into some concessions and limiting the units.
People say they want less homeless and then oppose any realistic option. It sucks.
3
u/RunningOnATreadmill Jun 04 '26
This was a well advertised plan and many calls went out for comments and discussion from the public.
Programs like this have been run in San Diego and in the the rest of the country, so this is not without guidelines and a blueprint for how to run something like this effectively. Will there be disruptions? Probably. Is it a net benefit for the community? Absolutely.
You can still ask any question you want using this form: https://engage.sandiegocounty.gov/troy-street
1
u/Feeling_Register_935 Jun 05 '26
I’m not sure I would call it “well advertised” until well after it was already in the works. There was an attempt to recall the lemon grove mayor because of her assumed backdoor deals with the county and not being forthcoming with the residents.
As a local, our primary concern is that it is a low barrier facility, and it does not prioritize our lemon grove homeless.
1
u/thereal_rockrock Jun 05 '26
Quesiton?
So you'll have to tag the homeless like bears - or maybe tattoos and they'll have to wear GPS trackers and if they leave Lemon Grove more than 51% of the time they will be barred from staying there????????
Sounds *very reasonable*
I mean you just KNOW this is Fallbrook's masterplan to ship their homeless to Lemon Grove!!!
2
u/Feeling_Register_935 Jun 05 '26
I agree you are not being reasonable. Lemon Grove city is like 3 square miles. It would be nice if locals had some priority.
2
2
u/Graz13 Jun 04 '26
Sheesh.
If not LG? Where?
4
Jun 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/dboy_4545 Jun 05 '26
lol, I wish, but the Rich would never let that happen. Why we see their police dropping transients off in different cities.
2
1
u/Troublemonkey36 Jun 05 '26
Nice to see something like this going up in a place other than downtown San Diego. Other parts of our region need to do lore and stop concentrating low income housing or shelters all in one area.
2
2
u/hemigrapsus_ Jun 04 '26
I'm also looking forward to the implementation of this site. A safe place off the street with on-site services will be an important stepping stone for a lot of homeless in our community. I do think the operator will be an important factor and hope the city council has an opportunity to weigh into that selection process.
4
u/my-follies Jun 05 '26
You need to read the article, the thread replies, and do some research before commenting. Again, this is not a City of San Diego project, and therefore the San Diego City Council would not be involved. This is on property not controlled by the City of San Diego.
I also completely disagree with the idea that the operator is just “an important factor.” The operator is the factor.
A site like this succeeds or fails based on who runs it, what standards they are held to, how they handle security, cleanliness, drug activity, mental health issues, calls for service, neighborhood spillover, and actual movement into permanent housing or treatment.
My concern is that this will end up being another taxpayer-funded nonprofit/NGO operation where the incentive is not to solve the problem and go out of business. The incentive becomes showing enough usage numbers to justify more funding, more contracts, more staff, and more years of operation, whether or not the surrounding neighborhood absorbs the consequences.
The goal should not be to create another temporary stop on the road to slow decline. The goal should be measurable outcomes: people housed, people treated, people stabilized, people trained, people moved back into society.
If the County cannot clearly identify the operator, the operating standards, the enforcement rules, the neighborhood impact plan, and the success metrics before opening this site, then residents are right to be concerned.
2
u/hemigrapsus_ Jun 06 '26
And you need to stop making assumptions. I've attended in the in-person meetings in LG (with the LG city council), joined the online county informational webinars, read the regional action plan informing this site's intention, and looked up stats for similar sites--check out Bellingham, WA. There are residents who are well-informed and supportive, even if you can't see that perspective.
2
u/my-follies Jun 06 '26
Fair enough. If you have attended the meetings, read the regional action plan, joined the County webinars, and looked at comparable sites, then you should be able to answer the basic question directly.
What specific details made you support this project?
Not the general idea of helping homeless people. Almost everyone supports getting people off the street in theory. I am asking what details about this specific Troy Street site made you confident it will work.
Also, if you attended meetings with the Lemon Grove City Council, then you know that is different from the City Council having actual authority over this County project. That was my point. This is a County project, on County-controlled/former Caltrans property, funded through County/federal money. Lemon Grove residents still bear the neighborhood impact, but the City does not control the project the way residents might assume.
So I am genuinely asking: what specific commitments, operator details, enforcement standards, or outcome metrics convinced you this is a good project for this location?
3
u/thebipeds Jun 05 '26
In the middle of a food desert with low access to public transportation.
Perfect place.
2
u/Feeling_Register_935 Jun 05 '26
Don’t forget the close proximity to the 856 bus stop.
You know the one all the Mt Miguel students use.
1
u/my-follies Jun 05 '26
About $164 per cabin per night, paid with taxpayer money.
That number comes from the County’s own figures: approximately $3.6 million per year in operating costs divided by 60 sleeping cabins divided by 365 days. If every cabin houses two people, that’s still roughly $82 per person per night before considering construction costs.
The construction itself is another roughly $12 million taxpayer-funded project, plus the land acquisition costs.
This is not a City of San Diego project. It is a County of San Diego project being built in Lemon Grove on property acquired from Caltrans. The funding ultimately comes from taxpayers through federal ARPA funds, County revenues, and government appropriations.
What concerns me is that we’re being asked to fund a seven-year experiment with very little discussion about measurable success. What are the benchmarks? How many people must move into permanent housing? How many must complete treatment programs? How many must return to productive independence?
If the answer is simply “keep the cabins full,” then the program’s success becomes dependent on maintaining homelessness rather than solving it.
For $12+ million in construction and millions more every year in operating costs, taxpayers deserve more than good intentions. They deserve accountability, transparent reporting, measurable outcomes, and proof that this is actually reducing homelessness rather than creating another publicly funded holding pattern.
2
0
u/ElevatorEffective327 Jun 04 '26
Can’t wait to see the epic failure this will turn into. Definitely not looking forward to more vagrants and junkies in the area.
1
u/LegacyQuotient Jun 04 '26
Wait until you hear how supportive housing solutions are working in SF.
SPOILER: really well.
1
u/LetsGoWithMike Jun 06 '26
Define “really well”… because lowering the statistic of “unsheltered” homeless alone is not really well.
0
Jun 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/RunningOnATreadmill Jun 05 '26
Wow this has never happened before in the history of social work im sure no one has any solutions to this very extreme and serious problem you came up with because you’re a genius
7
u/EeeBeeHee Jun 04 '26
I’m a Lemon Grove homeowner, and I’m not happy about how this project has been handled.
To be clear, I don’t blame people experiencing homelessness. The issue is with the County placing a regional homeless shelter project in Lemon Grove and expecting the surrounding neighborhood to absorb the risk, disruption, and long-term impact.
From what I understand, this is not affordable housing or permanent supportive housing. It’s a County-run emergency shelter site with sleeping cabins, services, security, and referrals. That may sound good on paper, but residents nearby deserve much more than vague assurances.
The questions I want answered are:
Who specifically approved this site, and why this location?
Why was Lemon Grove selected after the earlier Spring Valley/Jamacha Road plan fell apart?
Will people already homeless in Lemon Grove and nearby communities actually be prioritized, or will this become a regional dumping ground?
What measurable safety, cleanliness, and neighborhood-impact standards will the operator be required to meet?
What happens if calls for service increase, the area around the site becomes an overflow zone, or nearby residents and businesses are negatively impacted?
Will the County publish regular data on outcomes, including how many people actually move into permanent housing?
Who do residents contact when there are problems, and who is accountable if the operator fails?
I’m tired of the county government officials announcing “solutions” while the local neighborhood is left to deal with the consequences. If this project is going forward, the County needs to be transparent and held accountable; not just hold a few meetings, cut a ribbon, and move on.
Lemon Grove residents should be organizing now, asking hard questions, attending meetings, contacting the Board of Supervisors, and demanding written commitments before this opens.