SDSU Template, Version 11.1

80 Pages·2015·0.54 MB·English

by  Tania Nava

GROWTH POLITICS IN SAN DIEGO: DEVELOPMENT OF MISSION
BAY AND MISSION VALLEY
_______________
A Thesis
Presented to the
Faculty of
San Diego State University
_______________
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts
in
History
_______________
by
Matthew Lewis Vasilakis
Spring 2015

iii
Copyright © 2015
by
Matthew Lewis Vasilakis
All Rights Reserved
iv
ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS
Growth Politics in San Diego: Development of Mission Bay and
Mission Valley
by
Matthew Lewis Vasilakis
Master of Arts in History
San Diego State University, 2015

After World War II, San Diego began a campaign to secure its economic position in
the post war era. As a city particularly vulnerable to boom and bust cycles, civic and business
leaders in the community formed a pro-growth coalition to invest in projects that could
secure economic growth. Part of that effort involved capitalizing on some of the region’s few
natural resources: its renowned climate and stunning natural beauty. Vast, underdeveloped
spaces in both bucolic Mission Bay and pastoral Mission Valley were targeted for grand
projects. The pro-growth coalition successfully transformed these spaces and has lured
millions of visitors and their dollars since, helping to boost the local economy, while securing
San Diego as a major tourism hub. However, the resulting economic success has left a mixed
legacy for the people of San Diego who now deal with the various consequences of poorly
planned landscape transformation, and who continue to debate what is to come next. The
development history of Mission Bay and Mission Valley provide important insights into the
creation of modern San Diego, shaping the identity of a community mostly known for its
beaches and that zoo.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................... iv
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1
2 MISSION BAY ....................................................................................................... 15
3 MISSION VALLEY ................................................................................................ 36
4 CONCEQUENCES ................................................................................................. 57
5 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 67
REFERENCES.................................................................................................................... 72
1

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Instead of lamenting the state of the world let us transform the corner in which we
live.
–Mission Valley Council Inc. 1977
In an intensive effort of city-building, pro-growth coalitions of government and
business interests in San Diego supported, planned, and transformed two vast landscapes to
expand the local economy in the mid-20th century. Utilizing local, state and federal
resources, growth advocates successfully opened the doors to development of Mission Bay
and Mission Valley, transforming them into new urban centers of commerce, recreation, and
tourism. The efforts of San Diego’s pro-growth coalition in opening these landscapes to
development present significant legacies in reshaping the physical places, economy, and
growth politics of the community. The development history of Mission Bay and Mission
Valley are important to understanding how local growth machines worked, what they
accomplished, and the unintended consequences of their actions in the community.
In the mid-20th century throughout the United States, cities sought to expand and
diversify their economies to avoid the potential harmful effects of postwar demobilization.
Communities invested in industries, infrastructure, and pro-growth strategies. They
developed comprehensive economic plans and promoted pro-business initiatives by
bolstering their regional strengths to entice both public and private capital.1 Clever marketing
and civic boosting, political posturing in federal and state capitals, and ever-increasing
incentives and investments by organized pro-growth coalitions laid the foundation for great

1. Bradley R. Rice and Richard M. Bernard, Sunbelt Cities (Austin: University of Texas, 1983), 4-12.
2

change in urban places across the country. The tactics used by these coalitions to attract new
business and prevent economic peril left lasting legacies of both success and failure.2
Today’s American geography of community, economy, and politics began to formulate in
this period of change, growth, and uncertainty.
In San Diego, city, business, and community leaders forming an informal coalition of
pro-growth advocates saw the writing on the wall: move quickly or be left behind. Like many
pro-growth, Sunbelt cities, San Diego’s political and business leaders held concentrated
power and influence in the community at City Hall, the Chamber of Commerce, trade
associations, and other government and business institutions. Together, they supported a
comprehensive, pro-business, pro-development growth machine in the “Cul-de-sac of
California.” Regardless of conflicts over the exact details of growth, those within this
coalition were united in advancing the local economy. In the postwar period these growth
advocates opened development in Mission Bay and subsequently in Mission Valley by laying
the foundation for a new service-based sector. The main features of this process included
coordinated infrastructure, planning, and project approvals supported by a plurality of growth
advocates with limited public participation and input. It was a movement towards landscape
transformation, and aptly, leaders in this era adopted a new slogan to reflect their vision:
“San Diego: City in Motion.”3
This “motion” came only after expansive and multi-faceted undertakings were
completed to overcome obstacles to development. Mission Bay and Mission Valley, impeded
by periodic flooding, infrastructure deficiencies, poor access, and few planning guidelines,
remained lightly developed spaces garnering minimal investment. The transformation of
Mission Bay and Mission Valley came only after decades of strategy, policy, and planning
finally arrived as wartime spending and economic demand made development not only

2. Ibid.
3. Harold Keen, “San Diego: From Navy Town to ‘America’s Finest City,’” Planning, April/May 1977, 1-
4, Folder 13, Box 6, Harold Keen Papers, Special Collections and University Archives, San Diego State
University.
3

possible, but feasible. The long process to make the bay and the valley accessible and
desirable for large scale growth only became a reality in postwar period.
Opening these two landscapes to development had been a part of the community
vision for at least a half century previous, but it was not until the 1940’s that real
opportunities appeared. In 1902, San Diego County Commissioner George P. Hall declared
to a gathering of local Chamber of Commerce officials that “San Diego’s destiny lay in False
Bay.”4 Even earlier, Mission Valley hosted Spanish and Mexican efforts to colonize the
region. However, due to various circumstances and constraints, the bay and the valley saw
little change after California joined the United States in 1850. Nearly 100 years later, as
World War II turned in favor of the Allies and the national economy expanded exponentially,
local pro-growth advocates saw the opportunity to accomplish long held goals of creating a
new era of economic prosperity in San Diego through development in the bay and the valley.
In many ways the efforts of the pro-growth coalition were successful. Mission Bay
and Mission Valley are now centers of commerce, attracting locals and tourists, businesses,
and recreational attractions. The bay and the valley are home to theme parks, resorts,
timeshares, hotels, motels, offices, apartments, homes, and major regional shopping centers.
Mission Valley is a dense urban center, home to multiple shopping malls, offices,
entertainment venues and homes.5 Growth continues to occur in both landscapes, and future
plans call for thousands of more homes, hotel rooms, and people, furthering the initial efforts
of postwar planners in creating economic opportunity in tourism, recreation, and service
industries.
Equally though, postwar efforts to mobilize and secure the local economy through
landscape transformation in the bay and the valley have left a lasting legacy of negative
effects due to both the scale of development and in the lack of thorough planning.
Throughout both landscapes, decades of development have created a long list of land-uses

4. “Mission Bay: San Diego Planning Pays Off,” San Diego Union, (1977), Folder 6, Series 121: Mission
Bay, San Diego Vertical File, Special Collections and University Archives, San Diego State University.
5. Roger Showley, “Déjà vu in Mission Valley,” San Diego Union Tribune, 22 June 2008, sec. H4.
4

problems for locals and visitors alike.6 San Diegans must traverse incomplete thoroughfares,
tangled highway interchanges, and limited public transit to reach sporadic strip malls,
industrial parks, multifamily housing, and office complexes, while being provided with fewer
public services’ compared to their neighboring communities.7 These drawbacks are in
addition to the environmental degradation, flood control issues, and other vexing problems
that come with urbanizing a flood plain and coastal marshland, and the poor mitigation
efforts to address these and other problems thereafter.
In retrospect, it is easy to criticize the development of these landscapes, but it is
important to remember the circumstances the community faced at this crucial juncture and
how the city’s own history influenced its decision makers. As San Diego searched for new
avenues to economic growth, the city’s past eerily suggested another spin of the boom and
bust wheel that for nearly a century had spurred local fears and calls for community action
and intervention. In San Diego in particular, these boom and bust cycles were hyperbolic,
with population spikes and depressions following closely since the region had become a part
of the United States in the mid-19th century. Eagerness to boost San Diego into national
economic relevance thus coincided with a long standing nervousness and tension over the
region’s economic realities versus its potential.8
This atmosphere of uncertainty came from a variety of economic and morale deflating
events throughout the late 19th and early 20th century. Denied by competition with Los
Angeles success of the commercial port and transcontinental railroad, city boosters grasped
for any successful economic scheme. With San Francisco’s established aristocracy and well-
financed entrepreneurial leaders, and the well-organized metropolis of Los Angeles drawing
industries and infrastructure, San Diego’s insecurity intensified. The city lost much of its

6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. Philip R. Pryde, San Diego, An Introduction to the Region, (Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt Publishing
Company, 1976), 137-140; “San Diego City and County Populations from U.S. Census,” San Diego History
Center Website, October 25, 2012, http://www.sandiegohistory.org/links/sandiegopopulation.htm.
5

agency simply by being the smaller, third sister in California, whose limited outside
investment came largely from the Navy, and Department of Defense.9
To its boosters, securing San Diego’s postwar economy meant abandoning old
commodity based industries and pursing new options in service related sectors. By 1945 even
the most rabid San Diego boosters knew the city was never going to become the trade hub it
long dreamed of being. As the Chamber of Commerce drafted economic reports on San
Diego’s postwar position, options appeared limited. Meanwhile, the draw down after the war
placed a ticking timer on the defense-industrial complex supporting local coffers, pulling San
Diego towards a potential recession. Locals knew their city, sitting on the “Harbor of the
Sun,” could not rely on traditional commodity-based industries in ranching, mining,
agriculture, manufacturing, and industry. Instead, San Diego could offer one definite thing:
its place. San Diego’s physical beauty, climate, geography, and its diverse, open landscapes
became the key to thwarting a postwar recession. Tourism, recreation, and growing a service-
based economy became the solution boosters fixed on to provide San Diego with long-term
economic security.
The transition to creating a vibrant commercial-recreation and tourism industry was
not new. Pursing service-based industries over heavy industrial and trade development
reflects the continuation of an old debate amongst local boosters and leaders. The idea of
capitalizing on region’s gorgeous climate and landscapes to advance the local economy was
nearly a half-century old. In 1908, commissioned by the city’s “Civic Improvements
Committee,” famous city planner and park designer John Nolen drew a blueprint for a “City
Beautiful.”10 Nolen’s plan, whose supporters became known as “geraniums,” emphasized the
natural beauty of the region as a means to providing a higher quality of life and economic
success. However, Nolan’s plans conflicted with self-described “smokestackers,” who

9. Roger W. Lotchin, Fortress California, 1910-1960, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 23-26.
10. Melanie Macchio, “John Nolen and San Diego’s Early Residential Planning in Mission Hills Area,”
The Journal of San Diego History 52, no. 3 (2006).