Sunday, April 26, 2015

Millenials want to drive cars and live in the suburbs

We're told by Smart Growthers that Millenials are different than prior generations and want to live in high-density urban centers, so we have to put high-density development in formerly charming suburbs like Encinitas.

The truth? Not so much. The Atlantic:
Rich 20- and 30-somethings with college degrees are much, much more likely to live in dense urban centers than they were 20 years ago, as Ben Casselman and Jed Kolko have explained. Some media narratives treat this rarified group as synonymous with Millennials, perhaps because it describes the clientele of the bars frequented by the coastal journalists who write those stories. But step outside Brooklyn, D.C., or Oakland, and you'll find that the broader story is completely different. Adults between 25 and 34 without bachelor's degrees (which is the majority!) are actually less likely to live in urban neighborhoods than they were at the turn of the century. Most of them are moving to the suburbs as soon as they can afford to.

91 comments:

  1. You won't see that link in a Barth or Shaffer newsletter! This is issue was summed up best at a One Paseo hearing in this response to a speaker who thought it would be great to have city living in Carmel Valley:

    "In that case, you MOVE to the city: you don't move the city to you."

    ReplyDelete
  2. If there's no demand, then the market will solve the problem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is demand. For luxury condos for vacation rentals and second homes for the wealthy.

      Delete
    2. And college-educated millenials don't count, eh?

      Delete
    3. Nothing new about the young and ambitious moving to the city. Gen X did it too in their 20's. And then by their mid-30's they decided they wanted kids, pets, and a yard. The Millenials will too.

      Delete
    4. The issue as always is appropriate density for the location and topography. Smart growth in the instances of developments like One Paseo is just a front for inappropriate density.

      Encinitas is not Pasadena, and vice versa.

      -MGJ

      Delete
  3. Urban solutions are not appropriate for our town. Except for those who stand to directly profit, there is justifiably little public support this for this lie of a Smart Growth bs plan such as what Streetscape is hoping for. Sure, there are parts that we all would like to see but 6 or 7 roundabouts as proposed are not a solution and will only exacerbate traffic flow. Reducing the speed to 35mph is good but the small size of these roundabouts will only serve to make a poor plan worse. That densities close to these roundabouts will be allowed to get around current zoning should be telling to any observer where this push stems from.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roundabouts are good. Put in as many as possible to get rid of stop signs.

      Delete
    2. Roundabouts are for four-way intersections where the traffic is approximately equal in all directions. They're not for intersections where the traffic is overwhelmingly heavy in two directions and light in the other two, or for T intersections where the traffic is super heavy in two directions and occasional in the third.

      If you enter heavy traffic from a light traffic side at a roundabout without stopping first to wait for a break, you'll get smacked, and you should, but you can claim your flawed roundabout principle as you're checking your smashed car and your injuries.

      Delete
    3. OHHHH MG… really?

      roundabouts are good. You are a fool. fool.

      Go drive the one on Carlsbad Blvd (PCH) at State Street. 3 legged intersection just like in Leucadia.

      Shut up fool and learn how to yield and use your blinkers.

      Delete
    4. 11:58, You and your "higher densities will be permitted because of roundabouts" malarkey. Got any examples where that's happened? Just how many develop-able properties do you think there are along north 101 possible only on one side of the street? Few. And how many will be 3 stories or more without a public vote? Nada. Streetscape has nothing to do with "Smart Growth",
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSic42oqKgw Smart Growth has everything to do with stack and pack development near transit centers. But it is smart. Its smart to restore our canopy of trees; lower our speed limit; work with NCTD to allow parking on their side of 101; put sidewalks and streetlamps along our business strip; put in roundabouts instead of more stops; re-surface the highway; designate bike paths; landscape with drought tolerant plants and trees; allow for better storm drainage and enhance Leucadia with Trans Net funds. Too bad its still going to be another 3 years a way.

      Delete
    5. It's not smart to put in roundabouts "instead of more stop signs." There is no guarantee that any stop signs will be eliminated, and there is no evidence that more stop signs are planned. If there is an under crossing for the RR at North El Portal, there will surely be a traffic light or some kind of flashing crosswalk, there, similar to the undercrossing in Cardiff, with the new traffic light, and the further highway lane diet.

      Delete
    6. 10:54 doesn't have the intelligence, logic or knowledge to debate the issue. That's typical of the people who are being hoodwinked by Streetscape.

      Oh, incidentally, State and 101 in Carlsbad is not a T, it's a Y and wholly unlike any T in Leucadia.

      Delete
    7. One Paseo is defined as Smart Growth, and it's nowhere near transit centers.

      Dan Burden, one of the consultants the city hired to tell them what they wanted to hear about N Hwy 101 Streetscape, promised "bigger, grander buildings" at roundabouts.

      If roundabouts at T intersections will solve every N Hwy 101 traffic problem, why are five of the six planned crammed way up at the north end of the 2.5 miles between La Costa Ave. and Encinitas Blvd.?

      Delete
    8. That's a developer trying to pass a huge, dense, multi-use development that will need lots of parking off as a solution instead of the problem it will be. Same pig, different lipstick...

      Delete
    9. I wish all these sofa traffic engineers who tell us what kind of intersections are appropriate for traffic circles would rent a car and drive through Europe or Australia as I have.

      All of your nightmare fantasies would be displaced by real observation and experience. Some of what you declare with certainty, just ain't so.

      9:50 says "If you enter heavy traffic from a light traffic side at a roundabout without stopping first to wait for a break, you'll get smacked"

      Let me rephrase that for you: If you enter heavy traffic from a light traffic side at a roundabout without stopping first to wait for a break, then you are an idiot who should not be driving at all.

      There. Fixed it for you.

      Remember folks: if the stupidest person in all of France can figure it out, then you can too.

      Delete
    10. 2:47,

      4 stop signs are coming down at Marcheta St.
      1 at Grandview
      1 at Bishop's Gate
      1 at Jupiter St.
      1 at El Portal
      All stop lights at La Costa Ave.

      Gone. Finished. Nixed.

      Hawk ped crossings are smart. Del Mar is dumb. Had there been a roundabout at the intersection where the woman was killed last year, she probably wouldn't have been standing way out in the street there to cross traffic. The southbound lane there is nearly 40' across and comprised of 3 traffic lanes and one bike lane. Roundabouts do not guarantee a drunk will not kill you, but because they allow only 12 feet of pedestrial crosstraffic, they make crossing any street a LOT safer.

      Delete
    11. Drivers entering 101 from Marcheta, El Portal, Jupiter, Grandview, Bishops Gate or La Costa Ave will have to stop to wait for a break in the cross traffic. It doesn't matter if those T stops disappear. Drivers have to stop anyway.

      Similarly, any driver entering Leucadia Blvd from Hermes or Hymettus, or Santa Fe Drive from Rubenstein or Devonshire has to stop to wait for a break in the cross traffic. That's the same as they did when there were north-south stop signs at those intersections.

      The conditions roundabouts were designed to relieve do not exist where the current roundabouts are or where they're proposed. They cost a million bucks each. There are much cheaper ways to slow traffic and provide safe crosswalks.

      Delete
    12. 2:21 confirmed 9:50. The point is that cars going from the light to the heavy direction have to stop and wait for a break in the traffic.

      Delete
    13. Don't count the number of stop signs, count the number of northbound/southbound, throughway cross-street stop signs. It is disingenuous to keep counting individual stop signs, when autos will have to come to a complete stop, to yield to northbound-southbound traffic during peak traffic periods with or without stop signs.

      This back-up and increased congestion, along with more collisions, not less, already happens daily in the roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd. The argument that roundabouts will calm traffic has no merit, not with the specific factors which come into play here, on 101, through Leucadia.

      Putting in two roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd has not resulted in eliminating any of the six to eight traffic lights, and one stop sign, at Hygeia, which one must go through to get to El Camino Real.

      Also, there is no assurance that the one intersection in the L101 Streetscam plan that now has northbound/southbound stop signs, at Marcheta. will ever have its north/south stop sign(s) removed. Just as the stop signs at Hygeia and Leucadia Blvd never were eliminated, and Phase II of the Leucadia Blvd. Streetscape was never completed. Nor was Phase 2 of the Downtown Encinitas 101 Streetscape ever completed. The vast majority of the money goes into "planning," and to pay lobbyist consultants, like Peltz and Associates.

      There is no assurance that some type of signal or a stop sign wouldn't be required at El Portal and 101, if there is ever an undercrossing there, as was necessary in Cardiff.

      Also, one single roundabout on State Street, a Y intersection, with a much shorter distance where there is lane elimination on 101, is completely different than five one lane roundabouts at 3-way T intersections planned through Leucadia on 101.

      Delete
    14. 11:59,

      That's right. Ignore what you said: "Stops won't be removed" and divert to a new myth; "Drivers will have to stop anyway". Not MOST of the time they won't and that's what's efficient about roundabouts - the elimination of stopping when you don't have to. You just refuse to admit that.

      "Oh, incidentally, State and 101 in Carlsbad is not a T, it's a Y and wholly unlike any T in Leucadia." Assuming you mean Y roundabouts work better than T roundabouts, please share with us evidence you have discovered for their vast differences.

      11:51, Yield signs are not Stop signs.

      Delete
    15. 6:14

      You are counter-factual and so radically biased you can't see reality and are not equipped to rationally debate the issue. You're like a birther or an evangelical.

      Drive on Hermes and Hymettus and see how often you can enter Leucadia Blvd without stopping as opposed to how often you can't.

      That imbalance would tip even more toward having to stop to enter 101 from a side street because the 101 traffic is heavier and more consistent than on Leucadia Blvd.

      After your experiment, have fun at the auto body shop.

      Incidentally, there is one roundabout in San Clemente, and it's not on 101. Rational minds have prevailed there.

      Delete
    16. 10:06 AM

      I live near Leucadia Blvd and go through those roundabouts often. What you fail to mention is both Hymettus and Hermes were originally stop signs and a car could sit there a long time before being able to enter. I knew the roundabouts would still have a bias to Leucadia Blvd but they're better than stop signs and Lecadia Blvd traffic has to slow down to go through the roundabout so they aren't traveling as fast if there is a collision.

      The same will be true on 101 where the local cross streets now have stop signs. 101 traffic will have to slow down to enter the roundabout. A car pulling into the roundabout from a cross street doesn't have to constantly look both ways when going north. With a roundabout, you first look left to southbound traffic, enter the roundabout and then look right for northbound traffic. Except at La Costa, because on the rail corridor you don't have to worry about oncoming westbound traffic when entering the roundabout.

      So are you "counter-factual and so radically biased"? Can you "see reality"? Are you equipped to "rationally debate the issue"?

      I've gone through at least one of the two roundabout practically every day since they were built and have yet to have a close call. Sure a couple of times somebody turned in front of me when I was entering the roundabout but I was able to stop easily.

      "Rational minds"?? Maybe you're a bad driver.

      Oh, and as far as San Clemente is concerned, you may see more roundabouts up there as their February 2014 adopted Circulation Element (Mobility & Complete Streets) says:

      "M-1.11. Innovative Design. We support the design principles in the City’s Design Manual of Living Streets. We will consider use of innovative transportation design features, such as, but not limited to Intelligent Transportation System improvements, modern day roundabouts, midblock and corner bulbouts and road diets where such changes can improve the balance of the roadway and its compatibility with surrounding land uses."

      Delete
    17. 10:06, I drive through them almost every morning. I'd say around half of the time I have to stop. Big deal. Even when traffic is heavy, there are always gaps when no one is in the circle at 9 o'clock and its all yours.

      "After your experiment, have fun at the auto body shop." As if you are familiar with frequent crashes at Hymettus and/or Hermes. Who's radically biased and non-factual now? Unless you crash there a lot. In that case, do us all a favor and take La Costa Ave. until further notice.

      Incidentally, Old Hwy 101 barely enters San Clemente, and what part does borders no buildings at all.

      Delete
  4. So does this degenerate into finding articles that support each position because that's easy to do. I never really believed that the Millenial urban trend was all encompassing and one-way. That doesn't mean that a large segment of Mellenials didn't seek an urban experience whether in big cities or in older, close in suburbs. They did and my kid is one of them. It also doesn't mean that at some point, as salaries and families increase, that many of them won't seek a more suburban setting.

    Many of the arguments here worry about extremes, like rampant high density throughout Encinitas. Not going to happen. There will be some higher density developments spread throughout the city but not at the scale or number that many here fear.

    North 101 still largely reflects the original roadside development layout when 101 was the main highway to San Diego and Mexico. Those days are gone.

    Many here just want nothing to change in Encinitas - ever. But we know that's not possible. Look how many greenhouses are left. Not many, and it's the long time owners of those greenhouses that are selling to developers. Look at the size of many new houses being built compared to the older houses. And those new big houses are all within existing city codes.

    Encinitas is changing whether we have an approved housing element or not. And talk about vacation rentals, just walk along Neptune and see all the vacation rental signs along the coast.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, what 12:57 said.

      +1

      Delete
  5. This for me is about having a natural and well-founded suspicion when any city-suggested "improvements" are made.

    As far as resident input, the city has a long history of pretending to include resident input at best or twisting our input to fit their foregone conclusions at worst.

    So articles from both sides can be produced, but in Encinitas' case "consider the source" and be wary of what the city is trying to sell you. Money is always involved. Always.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Another silly myth disproved. People hear it, apply no common sense, repeat it, other people believe it, repeat it, and the BS grows as it rolls along.

    Another silly myth: Everybody doesn't walk or bike everywhere because the proper infrastructure isn't in place to permit it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does it have to be all or nothing?

      If people living downtown shop at Whole Foods, dry clean at Surf Cleaners, get their Hardware at Ace, and eat out at Qero, El Callejon, or Roxy, then they aren't driving for those trips. If they lived out in Olivenhain, all of those activities would add to traffic and parking headaches for the rest of us.

      Even if people still own a car and use it, as long as they are using it less, then doesn't that reduce the impact relative to that same person living elsewhere in town?

      Delete
    2. How many people live downtown?

      Of those, how many want to be confined to their immediate neighborhoods?

      Delete
    3. Yes, how many can afford to live downtown? Sham exposed. Why won't the council see this??

      Delete
  7. Quality of life goes down, Encinitas becomes less special. What is so difficult in this equation that our council can't get it? On fridays it often takes 9 minutes to go from 101 to El Camino, and high density even being considered along there is ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The traffic signals are improperly synced for peak traffic hours at the freeway entrance and 101/Encinitas Blvd, on up . It leaves cars stranded and blocking intersections, lanes blocked as the traffic backs up for freeway access or green lights allowing traffic into lanes blocked by red lights. It is a fiasco! Where is the City Traffic Co-ordinator?

      Delete
  8. Gosh, traffic jams? And here we were told that high density rat housing made people want to magically take the bus. And therefore save the world from global warming. You mean to say it won't?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. new data out today - global warming is non-existent and climate change is a hoax. Ice cap growing, polar bear population increasing - Al Gore is rich-

      Delete
    2. Data was in years ago.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQshyqCLYHo

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P5RW0Tmp-U

      Delete
  9. Face it - the developers will jam pack this city, as they've done everywhere else.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you sit on your hands and let them...and with your "face it" remark, that sounds exactly link what you're doing, 7:20.

      Delete
    2. Check back in 10 years for a progress report.

      Delete
  10. Perhaps Barth should add a seat to her bicycle and haul Millenials to and frow.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Encinitas firefighters are heroes again!!! They rescue a dog from the bluffs that never should have been on those bluffs if the owners had kept it on a leash. I expect the city to bill the dog owners the $8000 fee for the rescue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did they engage Paw Patrol?

      Delete
    2. 12:59 AM

      "Encinitas firefighters are heroes again!!!" Maybe the late hour is causing your short attention span.

      Delete
  12. Our enemies in this town in terms of density are the same people as always, Doug Harwood, David Meyer and the Stocks/Bonds/Gaspar axis.Teresa has kind been vilified for something that was already going to be built, ie Pac Station. Developers develop, and they're always going to want to ram in the most density as possible so they maximize return. See the dev. behind La Especial, or over on Hermes.

    As for the car thing, you don't get to work without a car in SD without it. NYC, Boston, maybe. That's just common sense. That said, we need better public transport here. If you drove the 5 during spring break this year, you know about how bad it was...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wait until Summer....

      Delete
    2. 7:19, And how exactly would you arrange this better public transportation here? 360 buses instead of 180?

      Delete
    3. In some cities they use trolleys to get citizens to and fro. Denver's downtown area has a free trolley, as well as many other cities. They are fun for tourists, and people get around pretty well. Coast Hwy. could have trolleys every 10 minutes or so, and would go from Cardiff to Leucadia. It could also be low cost, to help all people get around. It's been dine in many smaller communities like ours. Just takes a little thinking outside the box and some money for it.

      Delete
    4. 10:19,
      Good for Denver if that works for them. They probably never pulled up their old trolley tracks in the 40's like most cities did. However, twice the city funded our own trolley bus for a 3 month period from Leucadia to Cardiff which went down a few side streets too. The trolley bus cost $10,000. Tickets to ride it all day were only $1. It was also heavily advertised. The second time it was done, it raked in a whopping $350. for the whole 3 months of one summer. NCTD buses do the same route every 30 min. in both directions. They are heavily subsidized by the government. I realize a lot of people think if the government throws a lot of money at supplying free transportation to everyone it would solve a lot of problems. But we've tried it twice already and it miserably failed. But there are some around who still think every street in Encinitas should have public transportation. Dream on. NCTD does a pretty amazing job with the many many routes they have for North County. PS. If you want the thrill of your life, take the San Diego Trolley round-trip sometime. But don't do it at night and don't make eye-contact with anyone.

      Delete
  13. People want their own cars to drive so they do not have to depend on other means of transportation. When we need to get to work, we want to get there as quickly as possible. Walking is great and a good healthy exercise, but it would take a very long time to get your chores done.

    The car is and will remain the most favored way to get around. Council can come up with all kinds of plans and little tactics to entice us otherwise, but any plan will fail.

    I would be lost without my car and I don't want some government geek telling me how I can get where.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 4:59,

      You seem to posit that everyone thinks and believes as you do.

      If so, then you have nothing to worry about. Capital will not flow through loans to projects that are not supported by demand.

      Lenders lost a lot of money on Moonlight Lofts. Part of that was just bad luck related to the Timing of the housing market collapse. But lenders will look carefully at construction costs and sales price per square foot at the lofts and similar projects to determine if the goals of a developer are achievable or not. If demand is low, as you assume it to be, then market price will also be low. If market price cannot support paying the construction cost, property acquisition cost, architects, tradesmen, lenders and developers, then the project will fail financially. That won't happen more than once or twice before the lenders get wise and adjust their lending criteria.

      If nobody wants to live in a walkable district, then you have nothing to fear from smart growth projects.

      Delete
    2. 5:25 expanding, our family lives in a traditional detached home. But after the kids leave the nest, I would consider a move to a place like Moonlight Lofts. Sure I would keep a car, but I would use it a hell of a lot less. I would love to be able to go to the beach, restaurants, lofty coffee, Padres games, cottonwood creek, etc. without having to deal with parking or traffic. To me, that might be worth some sacrifice in terms of a yard and privacy.

      Delete
    3. 5:25,

      The flaw in your logic is that you're not considering demand for vacation rentals and second homes for the wealthy.

      See Pacific Station.

      Delete
    4. 7:08,

      I'm all for tightening the rules to make more real affordable housing, but even that comes with trade offs.

      Consider that affordable housing is sold or rented on an annual lease. Meaning the units will be occupied year round, and the occupants will be using water, driving and parking some (even if less, see above).

      If your concern is crowding, water, traffic and parking, then vacation homes for the wealthy looks pretty good, and the wealthier the better. If they have six homes, then on average they will only be here 60 days each year. Likewise vacation rentals create a mess during spring and summer breaks, but vacancy rates are much higher the rest of the year.

      But the real fault in your argument is, well, me. As stated above, I might consider living downtown, and I am neither of the types you imagine. I would be a full-time owner-resident.

      Delete
    5. 7:08 PM

      Pacific Station is restricted through the CC&R from short term rentals. It was a condition added by council. Remember, while Pacific Station includes affordable units (to qualify for the third floor) it's a mixed use development not an affordable housing development. Wealthy people can afford to buy second (and third and fourth...) homes whether or not they are part of a Pacific Station type development or just a regular house. That's what comes with having the money to do what they want. Just ask the Romneys.

      A lot of property in Encinitas is already rental. Walk along Neptune and see the many single family houses along the bluff with signs for vacation rentals. Whether or not there are condominiums available, rich people will buy and/or rent what's available. That's the nice thing about being wealthy.

      Delete
  14. Here in America, the overwhelming majority of people will continue to drive cars unless they live in inner cities where there's more than adequate public transportation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like Baltimore. Everyone wants to live there.

      Delete
  15. We leave within walking distance to downtown, parks and library and walk every chance we get sometimes my car doesn't even leave the driveway for 4 days at a time. Its awesome to be able to walk then drive. I am no fan of whole foods it is not my primary market but I like being able to walk for groceries when I only need a few items.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are thousands in this city who live quite a distance from the places and walking is not an option. You must get in your car and drive. It will remain that way as we are pretty well built out.

      Delete
  16. I like to walk and drive as well and I'm a Mellineal.

    - Sylvia

    ReplyDelete
  17. My total miles driven in 2014: 1,934.

    How many people in Encinitas would have to match that or drive less for it to make a noticeable, measurable difference?

    ReplyDelete
  18. I echo the comments above. I love to walk but prefer to do it as part of an errand or to go somewhere. Last Sunday I walked to the street fair which was about four miles round trip. I prefer to take the Coaster to go to Padre games. I've used the Coaster to get to the airport but the schedules have limited how many times that has been available.

    Having said that, I also love to drive. To me it's about choice. Sometimes I just want the exercise. Sometimes I just don't want to hassle with (or pay for) parking.

    Some people here appear to want to limit those choices. We aren't going to eliminate driving even if we wanted to. I sometimes drive over to Stater Bros. and then walk over to Target. See you can do both.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Everything and every statistic from the Building Industry is either a lie or a spin. Pity that Barth was a booster for that propaganda.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I remember when coastal Encinitas and Leucadia were predominantly groves, and Cardiff was cute summer cottages with great views. Lone Jack was where you would go to hunt. Some of the locals were living in trees! Then some of the locals made good in the underground economy and started buying land. Others well versed in the trades would turn that land into houses. Small houses – large lots; except for Cardiff. The quality of life, or community character, started to suffer. They were even building on Lone Jack! Then the ‘80’s happened and tracts appeared over night. The place no longer grew avocados, beans and poinsettias, but houses. You couldn’t skateboard down El Camino from Santa Fe to Encinitas Blvd. anymore – that sucked! Forget about hunting! Then the ‘90’s came and pretty much finished everything off. Crowded surf full of inland noobs with leashes and no clue how to behave in the lineup. Today you can’t do anything that you used to. Quality of life sucks - Bummer.

    - The Sculpin

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Underground economy = pot. De Luz Canyon was famous for the pot production. Growers would siphon off water from the orchards; I imagine that activity has minimized due to water costs and the development in the canyon.

      Delete
  21. It's all when you show up. To me, Encinitas was a paradise in the 80's, coming from the LA area. It was still relatively uncrowded, great weather, cheap rent. Well, the cheap rent era is over. The battle the last 20 years is over inappropriate, dense development. Pac Station is a loss, the places by Caldwell's are a loss, and some of the density bonus housing is a loss. This is the battle we fight.

    The whole smart growth thing when used by a large developer is a false front to make the whole enterprise more palatable to the locals. It's a density issue. I supported Teresa in the past, but that smart growth comment was perhaps not her finest moment. That said, I think it's time to let that go. She's no longer on the council, and I think her stance on keeping development to appropriate densities got confused with that statement. to me it's like chasing a rabbit you'll never catch.

    Really are issues now are density, parking and traffic, because the build out is pretty complete.

    -MGJ

    ReplyDelete
  22. You have to realize that the way you sell crap in California is you tell the dumb bunnies that you're doing it to save the world. High density SB375 development is designed to help cut down car miles traveled, reducing your carbon footprint and therefore saving the world from global warming. That it is all a lie designed to cram nasty development into desirable towns is besides the point and you are not allowed to talk about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And you have to pretend you're doing it to help the affordable housing effort while we all know we're shoveling $$$$ into grinning developer pockets instead.

      Delete
    2. It's just the latest lie to cram nasty development in. The lies have been there for most of the last 30 years....

      Delete
    3. Stack and Pack coming to the 101 at the old hotel in front of thePotato shack- complete with underground parking taking up surface area now used for plants that combat so called global warming and do in fact contribute to bettering the environment

      Delete
    4. I would be interested to see that project. Done correctly it could be very nice. Then again, it could be a disaster......... Nice to see they're thinking of off street parking....

      - The Sculpin

      Delete
    5. Hotel? Nah. That dump was a motel.

      I won't offer any opinion on the new project, as I know nothing about it yet. But they would have to work hard to make it worse than what was there.

      Delete
    6. 11:34 AM

      Do you just mindlessly say "Stack and Pack"? The mixed use development that is replacing the 16 room motel is just two stories.

      Delete
    7. And it will have just about the same footprint as the motel. It now fills nearly the whole lot. The square footage that's plants is tiny. There are a few parking spaces on the alley in the rear. The on-street parking won't change.

      Delete
    8. I'm with Sculpin on this one. Plus, their life-giving oxygen rich and anti-global warming garden area has always been dismal at best. Its always been a drab, wannabe charming Spanish influence corner.

      Delete
  23. Millennial males don't want to live in the suburbs, but they will marry millennial girls who want too, and the new bride always gets her dream house on the cul-de-sac in a gated community.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I disagree with MGJ. Barth forgot, as does everyone else once they are on council, that they are ELECTED citizens, not born politicians. Barth was influenced and manipulated by our city manager in his zeal to pass the Housing Element, and she forgot to listen to the people whom she was suppose to represent. It's a sad story that bears repeating. I supported her as well, and still do, to a degree, but she drank the Kool Aid big time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are almost 40,000 people (registered voters) a councilperson should listen to as well as nonresident property and business owners. I doubt they will all be on the same page. Council actions also have to be mindful of state and federal regulations.

      The sad story is how you (collectively speaking) make it sound so simple when it often isn't. This blog is mostly a small band of dissenters. Check the last election results for an indication of your influence. In a low turnout election, the highly motivated often prevail. Not so last election.

      Unfortunately, the Kool Aid gets consumed here bigtime.

      Delete
    2. Barth is gone. Vina is gone. Both departed. Stocks and Dalager were defeated in general elections. No state or federal regulations required Vina to hire Rutan and Tucker or to attempt to hire Lew Edwards. Nor Barth to support his decision. Who's drinking the Kool Aid?

      Delete
    3. 1:56 PM

      "Who's drinking the Kool Aid?"

      It appears you are.

      Delete
    4. 11:29

      Everybody knows it's not easy.

      In a democracy, the majority is supposed to prevail. The minority views are taken into account, but the majority rules.

      If individuals pulled as many boneheaded moves as recent Encinitas City Councils, they would be bankrupt and reviled by their families and neighbors.

      Delete
    5. 11:29

      Stocks run out of town
      Dalager pled guilty to the DA
      Norby run out of town
      MIG run out of town
      Vina fled town before his job review
      Barth feared getting her ass beat so didn't run
      Prop A passed

      scoreboard - alert citizens alerting other citizens produces results

      Delete
    6. Hey don't hog the Kool Aid!

      Delete
  25. James Jones church did'nt drink Kool Aid. It was a cheaper vergin called Flavor Aid. Some of us can tell the diffrence.

    - Sylvia

    ReplyDelete
  26. I support cheaper vergins!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Encinitas was set up as a democracy but it is now a bureaucracy. Layer upon layer of directors and managers who end up hiring consultants instead of using their own staff members to do meaningful work!!

    The Parks and Rec Director Lisa Rudloff is paid $160,000 per year, and she stated that she had been working on the GreenPlay report for two years while she gave away the ball fields. To date, they have paid GreenPlay $75,000 for a list of money raising schemes that other municipalities have used like charging children and their parents for annual Easter Egg Hunts.

    Does it seem reasonable that the Director spent tens of thousands of dollars of her own time on top of the $75,000 that GreenPlay took home for a list of recommendations that come from other places?

    Wouldn't a more traditional approach be to assign some of this work to Parks and Recs staff instead of paying the time-and-a-half-overtime for them to sit in a council meeting and listen to Rudloff quote "the report?" Her staff dislike here, and commissioners have resigned because of her. Where is the accountability when anywhere else she would have been sacked.

    How can P &R staff members be their best with such a controlling person who spends our money to cover her mistakes while she won't allow her own staff to do meaningful work but instead outsources it to consultants?

    ReplyDelete
  28. De-incorporate the city - county governance couldn't be any worse than this out of control money handout to "civil servants".

    ReplyDelete
  29. 11:46, How PI of you. We only have "Spring Egg Hunts" in Encinitas now.

    ReplyDelete
  30. 30% of city employees could not get hired in the real world. This is a fantasy land of dreamers, dreaming of their fat pension if they fake their way through.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Said by someone who has no idea what they're talking about but had to say it anyway.

      Delete
    2. I think that 30% is low. I doubt that any of them could get paid what they get in the private sector--though they might find a job of some sort.

      Delete