Saturday, November 9, 2019
By (Buy) Right Density Bonus Bonanza
Measure U, the City's most recent attempt at updating Encinitas' Housing Element, was rejected by voters in 2018. The City was sued by the BIA and an affordable housing advocate to force the Housing Element Update's adoption; the judge agreed with them and suspended Prop A for one cycle.
Mayor Blakespear then took the additional step of suing residents and asking the court to invalidate Prop A in perpetuity for all Housing Element Updates.
The "Encinitas Boulevard Apartments" density bonus submission comes just months after the Housing Element Update was approved and is in direct contrast to Mayor Blakespear's comments that approval "Does not necessarily mean they [upzoned parcels] will be built on right away." The Mayor also remarked "I don't think we'll have a bonanza of building."
This Housing Element Update parcel is certainly a bonanza to developer Randy Goodson of Accretive Investments: 277 units, 69' tall at Rancho Santa Fe Rd. and Encinitas Blvd.
Encinitas Boulevard Apartments
The estimated 14.8% affordable units may or may not be built, as "unlimited waivers" would apply and allow the developer a variety of ways out.
In addition, the City is reminded by the developer's attorney that requiring traffic and GHG (Greenhouse Gas) studies is contrary to a "by right" entitlement process: Allen Matkins - "Submittal Requirements."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
And there it is. This is in Olivenhain. Upzoned to ruin everyone's property values that surround the un-gawdly sprawl of apartments.
ReplyDeleteWhat happened to the zoning of this property that was one dwelling per half acre? This is proof that it doesn't matter what was, it can get changed, screw the property owners. The traffic is already a nightmare in the area. But planning/local government couldn't care less. Here come the lawsuits you crooked rats. And you better sleep with one eye open.
Moscow looked me right in the eye and told me there would be NO traffic coming in or out of Rancho Santa Fe Rd. So I went and looked. That little funky narrow road coming onto Encinitas Blvd from that property will not handle the extreme traffic. Moscow, where you telling the truth or, are your clowns going to let that punk developer install a driveway on to Rancho Santa Fe Rd?
ReplyDeleteAppears from the map like there are two outlets: Rancho Santa Fe Rd. and Encinitas Blvd.
DeleteMosca's history in Sierra Madre should have been your warning. He is toast.
His clowns are going to let that punk developer install a driveway on to Rancho Santa Fe Rd. Now that you have your answer are you going to go back to Moscow and confront him??
DeleteThey could decide to build it with no parking places at all and provide a walking path up to the bus stop on El Camino Real. Olivenhain residents have the right to get a residents-only parking district on their local streets. What a frigging mess.
ReplyDeleteOlivenhain got away with murder in the HEU.
ReplyDeleteIn a way, it's a good thing that this monstrosity is planned for Olivenhain. There are plenty of smart, moneyed, well-connected people there who will fight this tooth and nail.
ReplyDeleteSixty-nine feet!? That's a high-rise tower. So much for the assurances that 39 or 42 feet would be the height limit.
Those smart, moneyed people have stayed out of the fight. They'd better wake the hell up! Blakespear is coming for them.
DeleteThis part of RSF Rd. is already one of the most dangerous in Encinitas. Encinitas is 19 Square miles, and it looks like the City will not be content until every inch is covered with buildings.
ReplyDeleteThe City's project info does NOT indicate that this is a Density Bonus project. Planning no longer puts TMDB (Tentative Map Density Bonus) in the project title so it's becoming harder and harder to track these things.
ReplyDelete3:47 PM
DeleteThe change in the method of naming these projects is to prevent public tracking.
If you want to stop these changes and go back to the old titles and listings, yell and write letters.
Get ready for it:
ReplyDeleteO'Grady and Blakespear: "Our hands are tied!"
yep, watch for it in Sunday's Blakespear Bugle. not only will her hands be "tied," she'll find a way to blame the voters.
DeleteJust have Trump build a 100 story tower there (just one waiver!), put Blakespear in the penthouse, and be done with it.
ReplyDeletePermanently destroying the community character with ill advised high density clap traps. The developer should be responsible for major road improvements in the vicinity of this proposal. As previously stated, this area is already a dangerously overloaded location for traffic.
ReplyDeleteOceanside just approved a high intensity housing proposal in the former agricultural areas served by 2 lane roads. This will be another traffic nightmare, as hundreds of additional vehicles crowd these 1950's era roads. It is short sighted over development without the corresponding infrastructural support. Developers own this county, with the help of the legislature and law firms.
ReplyDeleteThe Building Industry Association of San Diego County (BIA) in a January 18, 2019 letter to the State Housing and Community Development Agency (HCD) demanded of HCD that HCD make it very clear to the city of Encinitas what BIA wanted in the city Housing Element. February 4, 2019 the HCD send a demand letter to the Encinitas city manager with the BIA demands but without notification that the HCD demands were actually the Building Industry Association demands.
ReplyDeleteThese demands then became what HCD and the Mayor/Council declared as meeting state law requirements. Included in the changes to city ordinances are how the city approves density bonus projects. These houses sell in the millions of dollars range and bring in extra property tax for the city which outweighs the cost of any BIA lawsuit.
How many people in the county could afford one or two million dollars homes built under the guise of providing low income housing? The links between HCD, the BIA, and Encinitas officials smell.
Yet, news articles continue to ignore how the HCD, BIA, and the city use the state law to enrich their coffers.
Even the city knows that only 150 of the 1500 upzoned properties for housing units will be for low income families.
HCD wants more housing units than required by SANDAG’s RHNA. These additional housing units aren’t required by state housing law, but HCD won’t approve a housing plan without additional units which numbers depend on the whim of the HCD managers. These additional units benefit the Building Industry because they will become market rate housing to increase their profits and the city's coffers.
SANDAG is still in the RHNA 5th cycle. The regional agency that consists of the counties to the north of San Diego (LA, Orange, Ventura, etc.) had cities that only had to find room for 5 low income housing units. As Mayor Blakespear would say – That doesn’t concern us. We have to do what the state tells us to do. In the meantime, the BIA keeps building to keep their members in a job and the Encinitas Council sues its residents for rejecting a con artist housing element.
Mayor Blakespear and the rest of the Council must be salivating with expectation of the increased revenue from 277 more housing units.
Claremont in LA county recently had their housing element passed by HCD.
ReplyDeleteClaremont has the following requirement in their housing element that at least 50% of the R-30 overlay housing units are signed into an agreement for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households before the development would qualify by right for the R-30 zoning.
"A development would qualify by right for a base density of 30 units per acre if at least 50 percent of the units are affordable for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households. To accommodate the increased density for an affordable project, the Residential 30 Overlay will allow greater building height (a mix of three- and four-stories), reduced setbacks, increased lot coverage, smaller floor area requirements, less open space and landscaping, and reduced parking requirements from what is otherwise permitted/required in an underlying land use category. An agreement shall be required between the developer and the City to ensure the affordability of the units. Such agreements shall be binding to all future owners of the development and successors in interest. Projects where at least 50 percent of the units are not affordable will not qualify for the base density of 30 units per acre and would be subject to the development standards of the underlying designation. A housing project permitted by the underlying designation could be entitled to a density bonus and/or equivalent concessions or incentives under certain conditions pursuant to the City’s density bonus ordinance and state law."
Mayor Blakespear with the Council could have had the same requirement in the Encinitas Housing Element.
This is an excellent observation, which shows that in this case 'affordable housing' is just window dressing for inordinate land speculation. Could you please post the source of the quote? Thanks for using this comparison for putting in perspective how fraudulent the Encinitas Housing Element really is.
Delete6:51 PM
DeleteClaremont put some teeth into their housing element requirements on upzoned property to R-30. At least 50% of the units have to be low income. In the case of the Goodson property that would be 139 low income housing units instead of the 40 they are proposing. According to the Claremont housing element the developer couldn't use the R-30 overlay to determine the number of extra market rate units and must use the underlying zoning. In the case of the Goodson property, it would RR-2 or 2 housing units per acre. What is HCD's role in this scandal to increase the profits of the property owner? Did HCD provide the Claremont requirements for the R-30 zoning to Encinitas officials. Did the Mayor, rest of Council, and city planning decide to not put the information into the housing element policies and municipal code in order to increase landowner profits.
City of Encinitas, the properties owners and developers, expect a lawsuit concerning building in Olivenihain with this gheto garbage. Now it's time to sue Encinitas instead of them suing the residents.
ReplyDeleteThe usual way to change the direction of a government is an election. Last November we chose C.B. over J.P.Elliott but J.P. did not raise enough money to seem credible. Next November will be another choice.
DeleteThis project will be able to pay cheap in lieu fees and trade units offsite to avoid building any affordable. But will still get all 277 units except now at market rate.
ReplyDeleteYou good with that, Marco? That what you had in mind for the brown people? And weren't you the one arguing that not all projects would be density bonus? Tell us why this monstrosity won't be the case for every parcel in the plan city wide - tell us why any developer with half a brain would leave money on the table and not go for density bonus.
Will sit back and wait for you to try to spinning the truth like your galpal the mayor thinks she's managing to do. She's not, by the way.
Hey genius, under CA Density Bonus Law you can't pay in lieu fees or "trade units" to avoid building the affordable requirement. See, that's the problem with all you keyboard warriors, you pontificate about matters and talk shit about people without caring to actually know the law or the facts. 41 low income units will be built. Period. Regarding the other projects around town, I expect they will also use Density Bonus, but not all of them will need to waive height to achieve density. Also, some will require Subdivision Maps, which will make them discretionary actions.
Delete2:31 was Me (Marco). Not sure why it isn't putting my name on it.
DeleteKeyboard warriors? Unknown sounds like Marco, just a wild guess.
DeleteGonzalez was the one complaining that the anti-U crowd was exaggerating when they said most of these projects would be density bonus. Now he singing a different tune. Cha-ching defending all these stand-up developers, eh?
Why are the residents just learning about this now??? Where are meeting notices on this project like they do every other multi build in someones neighborhood? I smell a rat, or ten.
ReplyDeleteThe Olivenhain area has historical history in fact there were just 10 acres put on the historical list. This is outrageous.
Buckle up Randy Goodson and your other girlfriends, you rats.
Where does Olivenhain council member Joe Mosca stand on this project?
ReplyDelete2:55 - no one should be just now learning about anything. This is exactly what opponents of T and U were warning against. And still many voters had their heads in the sand and bought hook, line, sinker what blakespear was telling them. Shame on them.
DeleteShould not come as a shock at all, totally predicted.
Mosca goes with the monied interests - he is a carpetbagger that is in the pocket of anyone that pays him off. He was run out of Sierra Madre and ends up here - now we pay the price of his sell out.
DeleteThis is wrong on so many levels. There is a pre-school next to McCain Rd where construction vehicles would be going in and out along with all the renters traffic if built, traffic is horrible at one of the WORST intersections in Encinitas. Is the building permit department insane??? Rancho Santa Fe Rd is a mess and although the speed limit of vehicles coming up and down Encinitas Blvd is 50 mph, there is no way people drive that speed, try 60 +.
ReplyDeleteThese developers have found ways to do the wrong thing, not the right thing. This falls on the State of California and developers that "couldn't care less the impact on others" just as long as they make money. What happened to RR zoning???
As for the rest of you people that live in Encinitas, don't get to complacent, as they will come for your area soon enough. I listened to a guy talk about land being ruined by upzoning last year. The crowd laughed at him and stated that could never happen. Well guess what? It's happening and those gathering of people that laughed at the guy? Now they are the fools.
If this project isn't fought tooth and nail then there is no limit to the ruination of neighborhoods.
Googling the developer's company Accretive Capital from the Lilac Hills debacle: https://www.valleycenter.com/articles/the-man-behind-the-curtain-part-ii/
ReplyDelete"Accretive’s strategy has from the beginning been to acquire agricultural land at rock bottom prices, and then jack up the worth by changing the land use designation and zoning."
and "When Accretive began acquiring parcels within the current boundaries of the proposed development they operated through a half a dozen limited partnerships. They advertised themselves as farmers, because they didn’t want to drive up the cost of property. If people found out that someone wanted to develop, the properties would get more expensive."
Typical deception to control the market prices. Then wait for the up zoning being forced on the community and over ride any provisions for traffic mediation or other infrastructural issues. Pure profit!
DeleteA quick pro forma calculation based on comps shows that the developer stands to make around $120 million out of this project (the initial cost of the parcels was $6 million.) This is the scale of what the City gifted the developer with the upzoning.
DeleteThe city will be gifted with property tax income. Uh win/win? *crickets*
DeleteNo mention in Mosca's newsletter about the project. At least Leucadians could expect an abusive commentary from our "representative" Kranz.
ReplyDeleteEnough about small potatoes.
ReplyDeleteIsn’t it the time of year for some twat to cry victim because there’s no government funded Jesus parade?
12:30...I'm sorry, who are you?
ReplyDeleteNobody fucks with the Jesus.
Deletehttps://youtu.be/c05yoCzLrKU
Mosca spent most of his newsletter writing about the Community Choice Energy program. He used to work for SDG&E, but was fired for writing his field reports from his home. He got caught. No wonder he's thumbing his nose at SDG&E.
ReplyDeleteSounds a bit BS to me.
DeleteHe was a lawyer, not a lineman.
Doesn't sound BS at all....
DeleteThe Mosca story comes from a number of SDG&E sources. Odd he's kept so mum about his reason for leaving.
DeleteAs a lawyer Mosca was doing field work for SDG&E. He wasn't repairing downed lines or replacing burnt out transformers. He figured out he could write his reports at home. It saved him a lot of time, but he got caught. And this after the shenanigans in Sierra Madre, which were highlighted on this blog.
DeleteWhat field work does an SDG&E lawyer do? Is saving time by writing reports at home terribly wrong?
DeleteIs it possible SDG&E used that to ax the clueless dead wood? I've seen similar happen elsewhere. The company fears getting sued — especially by a lawyer — so they wait to find an offense to justify the firing. The offense is silly, but according to the law, or maybe it's the company's policies, it justifies termination.
It is if your job description requires actually seeing a site before writing the report. Otherwise, it's called faking it. You can contact Mosca though his city hall email. Why don't you schedule a meeting with him and ask about it?
DeleteI heard someone found American Indian artifacts on this land.
ReplyDeleteNow build your ghetto apartments you America Indian haters.
Claremont in LA county recently had their housing element passed by HCD for the 5th cycle. The Encinitas housing element was just passed by HCD and has no requirement that the R-30 zone be at least 50% low income housing Claremont requires.
ReplyDeleteClaremont has the following requirement in their housing element that at least 50% of the R-30 overlay housing units are signed into an agreement for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households before the development would qualify by right for the R-30 zoning.
From the Claremont housing element (p.99)from the HCD website: )
"A development would qualify by right for a base density of 30 units per acre if at least 50 percent of the units are affordable for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households. To accommodate the increased density for an affordable project, the Residential 30 Overlay will allow greater building height (a mix of three- and four-stories), reduced setbacks, increased lot coverage, smaller floor area requirements, less open space and landscaping, and reduced parking requirements from what is otherwise permitted/required in an underlying land use category. An agreement shall be required between the developer and the City to ensure the affordability of the units. Such agreements shall be binding to all future owners of the development and successors in interest. Projects where at least 50 percent of the units are not affordable will not qualify for the base density of 30 units per acre and would be subject to the development standards of the underlying designation. A housing project permitted by the underlying designation could be entitled to a density bonus and/or equivalent concessions or incentives under certain conditions pursuant to the City’s density bonus ordinance and state law."
Why isn't the Mayor/council placing a moratorium on building permits until they modify the recently approved housing element with the new addition of what Claremont has required. It would mean that low income units would be guaranteed in the R-30 zone overlay. There would be no waiting until 2021. Will the Mayor
declare the moratorium on building permits and send a revised housing element to HCD? Or, will the smelly links between HCD, the BIA, and the city officials continue unabated.
The council doesn't consider HCD and the BIA smelly links. The BIA is a friendly STAKEHOLDER and HCD is the OUR HANDS ARE TIED LAW and don't you forget it!
ReplyDeleteIf another city puts certain requirements on the R-30 zone overlay, HCD can't deny other cities from using the same requirements. Blakespear and council should resign. That also includes the bogus Prop A lawsuit against the residents.
ReplyDeleteGosh, this low income housing being force rings just like something decades ago...FORCED BUSING. This has nothing to do with affordable housing and everything to do with integrating different cultures with one another. Don't you people get it?
ReplyDeleteThe leftist one world order is behind this, make no mistake.
Thank Jerry Brown and that current wound tight nut case newsom, Nancy pelosis nephew.
5:58 You are losing your touch. You forgot to mention George Soros.
Delete5:58 is a certified idiot!
ReplyDelete6:13. This person may be on to something. So your response is to call them a name instead of thinking first but instead writing first with no counter opinion. Who's the idiot?
ReplyDelete7:11 same idiot as 5:58 with a lame defense.
DeleteSome things are so idiotic, they don't warrant a counter argument.
Uh, 7:11, do you see the words "nut case" in 5:58's post?
DeleteSo, this marco/marcos person responsds to the low income housing issue, "low income housing and brown people" and you hapless buffoons don't write anything in response. I write basically the same thing and lookie at the responses. Something tells me the responses are from the people behind the low income fraud. I wonder. This is forced busing in another form.
DeleteExactly like the lie of man made global warming. Follow the money find the fraud.
Yep, forced multiculturalism. The left, the enemy within
ReplyDeleteWhy not buy a travel trailer and put it on your property. They are legal. Why not? Then charge rent which would pay for the travel trailer. People in my area are doing it.
ReplyDelete