Blakespear's all-electric requirement for new construction throws a monkey wrench into his project, according to the Clark St. developer. Argued in front of a panel of his peers he was denied his request to apply 2019 code standards to his project. Represented by Marco Gonzalez, it is well worth watching.
Notable quote from the developer: "We started construction thinking we were going to get our building permit."
New requirements for controversial Clark Avenue apartment are justified, board finds
A view of South Coast Highway 101 on Saturday, April 18, 2026 in Encinitas, California. (Meg McLaughlin / The San Diego Union-Tribune)
By BARBARA HENRY
PUBLISHED: November 7, 2026 at 5:00 AM PST | UPDATED: November 7, 2026 at 10:59 AM PST
An Encinitas city building official acted appropriately when he added new conditions to a permit extension for the controversial Clark Avenue apartment complex project, a special city appeals board ruled Wednesday.
However, board members said Encinitas building officials and the developers now ought to work together to craft a compromise that doesn’t require the developers to completely rework their project’s design.
Long controversial, the Clark Avenue apartment project is proposed to go on a 6.22-acre site on Union Street, just east of Interstate 5 in an area of aging, narrow roadways and single-family homes. The project’s 199 units are to be spread between 15 buildings, each three stories tall. Nearby residents have argued that the large apartment complex will be a poor fit for their neighborhood, citing concerns about traffic congestion and fire department access, among other things.
After a new majority on the City Council was elected in late 2024, the Clark Avenue apartment plans received additional scrutiny, with some council members saying the developers ought to be required to do a full-scale environmental assessment. There’s also been lawsuits, filed both by the city and by the developers. One filed by the developers was later withdrawn, while one filed by the city is working its way through the appeals process.
At issue Wednesday was whether city building official Joseph Romero had the right to add a new condition to the project when he approved a 90-day permit extension in March. His new condition called for the project’s plans, which had initially been submitted in late 2022, to be upgraded to meet the new 2025 building code standards. The changes include everything from new fire alarm regulations to a requirement that buildings be all-electric, instead of using natural gas for heating.
Project developer, Western National Group, appealed Romero’s decision, saying it should be held to the 2019 code standards in effect when it submitted its plans in 2022. Western National’s appeal required the city to form a special, all-volunteer board of area building officials and people who work in the design industry. Members of this new Board of Appeals said that Wednesday’s hearing might have been a first for Encinitas.
During the hearing, Romero repeatedly told the board members that there’s nothing in the city codes that prevents him from adding conditions when approving a permit extension. Also, he noted, the 90-day extension wasn’t the first permit extension the developers had received for this project. And, he said, changes in city codes have been significant since 2022 when the original project plans were filed.
“These (code) changes are substantive, not merely administrative,” he said, mentioning new fire and seismic safety standards.
Marco Gonzalez, an attorney representing the developers, said Western National believes the city has been regularly creating new roadblocks to keep the project from proceeding.
“This whole process has been kind of absurd,” he said, adding that he expects more legal action with result from the situation.
Brian Gilchrist, managing director for development at Western National, said his company has already started grading work at the site, yet now is being asked to rework its plans to meet the new codes.
“Why, at the last moment, would you require us to change our entire project?” he asked.
Appeals board members said they agreed that Romero had the right to add new conditions to the project when he approved the permit extension in March, but said they wanted the city and the developer to work together now to create a compromise that includes some, but not all, of the new 2025 building code standards. Pick the ones that relate to life safety issues, such as fire alarms and seismic reinforcement, not all the changes, they said.
Gilchrist said the apartment complex plans already comply with some of the new standards, including ones related to fire and earthquake safety. The all-electric building one would be challenging, he and others said.
