Sunday, March 4, 2018

City staff celebrates successful behind-the-scenes orchestration of Streetscape

From the Inbox:
From: Brenda Wisneski
Subject: PC Recommends Streetscape Approval
Date: March 2, 2018 at 3:08:31 PM PST
To: Karen Brust
Cc: Roy Sapau, Stephanie Kellar, Anna Yentile, Mark Delin, Laura Ferguson


Hi Karen and Councilmembers (Blind Copied)

Good News!! Last night, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the Leucadia Streetscape project. We had 25 speakers. Twenty speakers were in support. Three indicated support, but were concerned with traffic overflowing onto Vulcan. One asked for the item to be continued for additional analysis and one was opposed based concerns with emergency response time delays.

It was a tremendous team effort. Anna Yentile introduced the project, Stephanie Keller orchestrated the staff and consultants behind the scenes, and Roy supported the Planning Commission.

We are on schedule to present the project to the City Council on March 21st.

Have a great weekend

BRENDA WISNESKI
Development Services Director

67 comments:

  1. All that is missing is the high five with developers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What is so warped with this process and the way that Encinitas approaches building / development in general is the charade that residents have a say or "vote" in the process. Whether it was this meeting or any other planning meeting, the decision / vote - by the City - appears to be pre-determined. This evening was especially offensive. Clearly, no amount of public objection could override the decisions the City already made. Truly discouraging.

      Delete
  2. This is a good project that only 4 or 5 people oppose. The turnout and representation speaks for itself (only 1 person opposed it).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bub, if the whole city opposed it, it would not matter. Focus on Wisnesk's "tremendous team effort" comment.

      Delete
    2. Bulloney! Nonsense propaganda! Few people know about it. Most who do are against it. When told what it proposes, most people are against it.

      Property owners, real estate people and developers are for it. It's for their benefit, not for the residents.

      Brenda's letter reveals the collusion. The project is a scam being imposed on residents who don't want it.

      If you think the people want it, do a pro poll and prove it.

      Delete
  3. What is the total cost of the 2.5 mile Streetscape 101?

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Leucadia Streetscape 101 project is $25 million for the 2.5 mile section of 101. Council isn't discussing this over cost bloated project, and what it will do to the General Fund. The city manager is culpable in mismanagement along with the City Council in her fiduciary duty in bring out the costs to the residents.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Here you go! The 4 or 5 anti-everything trolls are at it again. It amazing that they're quick to post (probably same person) but never come out. Oh, that's right ONE did! lol

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where's the public poll that shows the community supports it?

      It's a scam by the council, staff, consultants and L101.

      Shameful!

      Delete
    2. Your point is correct if the outcome of a city wide election is conducted and supports your view. And if the city wide vote is as you say, that should make the trolls go away, but if it does not go as you expect, will you go away? The point we agree on is that the majority should make this determination not a small controlled focus group.

      Delete
    3. I'm not 12:06 but yes, I'd "go away." Take this thing out of the dark back room and bring it into the light of day. That would be the right thing to do.

      Delete
  6. The fact that the Streetscape 101 project will cost taxpayers $25 million should be of concern to everyone in Encinitas. The project is bloated and over cost. The Council and City Manager are to blame.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The city docs say $19 million, but it will cost more than that. It's SANDAG Transnet money. One of the reasons the city is so behind it is that the dollar damage is spread over the whole county.

      The selfish, greedy people who are for it stand to personally gain. It's not for the residents. It's for commercial property owners and real estate people and developers.

      The city subsidizes L101 with $30,000 of taxpayer money every year. L101 is on the dole.

      See the enormous building on the corner of H and 101 downtown? That's what Streetscape will bring to Leucadia 101. The rents will skyrocket and the Mom and Pop merchants will be pushed out.

      Bye-bye Morgan Mallory! Your rent is gonna soar!

      Delete
    2. Yes, stack and pack, the environment and community be dammed. Of the 3 beach communities in Encinitas only 1 has zoning that is consistent with its original character. Residents fought of Stocks, Bond, Dalager,Cotton, Barth and Norby, how did they do it?

      Delete
  7. Seems like a serious Brown Act violation to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So what are you going to do about it you little worthless...

      Delete
    2. How do you know nothing is being done, 3:03?

      Delete
  8. Sneaky, sneaky City Council, planning department, and City Manager. Vote them out and fire them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Bumpstock Fiddle-FaddleMarch 4, 2018 at 2:01 PM

    It's a process.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As one who thought this was a dumb plan when I first heard about it way back when, I am resigned to knowing who to blame once these road obstructions are installed and traffic flow turns out worse than predicted by the profiteers who stand to make a bundle at our expense. So be it.

    The fix has been in. After so many changes and many of them unnoticed, it was never clear just where this plan was. I suppose there are no surprises left to come out and whatever plan is now set in concrete and asphalt, is done.

    That the cart is still being put in front of the horse is nothing new for our city. CCC approval? What will these monied interests do if the CCC does not fall in line?

    Someone please explain what our 101 is classified as. A major arterial with divided four lanes or not? Apparently our 101 is not a major arterial, since it is to become single lanes north and south.

    I remember my mom driving my sister and I down from Santa Ana in the mid to late 50's to pick up my Marine pilot father coming back from a year deployment overseas when this same 101 was the only road to get to Coronado. That was the major and only arterial.

    With the coming of the 5 a decade later, that must have relegated our 101 to not being a major arterial. Just asking. I am sure others will know how and when our 101 was downgraded from a major arterial so that the four lanes could be lane dieted to two.

    I am sincere in asking when our 101 become subject to reducing the number of lanes from four to two.

    There is a lot of good to come from this plan, but certain aspects cannot be answered and won't be. We will all just have to see how rosy this turns out to be for the store owners and the residents.

    Fabrications of how good this will turn out to be are worth just that and nothing more. It is a done deal and has been for quite awhile.

    Since it was never going to be allowed to be voted on a ballot or a poll be taken, whether there was the broad support of our community most affected will never be known and this was by design. The proponents knew better and it worked for them.

    Now we can hope they are correct in their assumptions. It is all we have left. Done and done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Doesn't have to be done and done, but staff is clearly celebrating a victory they were directed to accomplish.

      Wonder what, if anything, will be said to Ms. Brenda tomorrow at work? "Good job, Brownie."

      Delete
  11. Morgan Mallory just read Lorri Green the riot act for her posting this in Encinitas Votes. Me thinks he protest too loudly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When people actually say something it is always upsetting to those who have nothing to say.

      Delete
  12. The General Plan defines a major arterial as a four-lane highway, with or without medians. N and S Hwy 101, Enc Blvd and El Cam Real are major arterials. Some stretches have medians, some don't.

    The reason for some of the amendments the Plan Comm rubber-stamped is the dieted road would no longer meet the General Plan definition of a major arterial. The EIR says Leucadia 101 at two lanes would still have the characteristics of a major arterial.

    That's BS, as is much else about the plan that the council, staff, consultants and property owners are foisting on the public.

    If the plan were so great, the city would get a confirmation from the public. It's not great. It's a scam.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 3:31pm Thank you for that clarification about the definition of major arterials.

    3:25pm. For those that don't subscribe to Facebook, could you possibly share that here with us?

    In a public communication last year from Mallory, it showed he was still thinking Plan 4a was happening.

    It was not at that time, and I knew it. He did not. It had already been replaced by whatever is happening now.

    For being one of the leaders of this plan for our community, one would think he would have been more up to date. He was not.

    He is far from alone, and others who led this have been shown to be just as clueless when questioned directly about certain particulars of their own plan for us.

    This makes one wonder just who has been in the background pulling the strings all along. It certainly was not those who were the public faces pushing this, since their knowledge was shown to be so lacking about specific details when they should have been better informed, especially since they were supposedly on the inside track with the workings of this plan.

    It is a shame that nothing was offered by this group to address the root cause of the greatest division in our community, the railroad tracks. Solve that and the rest is easy. Not one at grade rail crossing, while one tunnel that costs as much as a dozen at grade rail crossings goes forward.

    Can anyone say piecemeal projects to serve a small portion of our residents? Good for them, while the rest of the corridor changes little for access from the east side of the tracks.



    ReplyDelete
  14. The citizens of Encinitas need to be made aware of the potential effects of the city staff proposed design of the Streetscape plan on their quality of life, then be given the opportunity to vote on the plan. The citizens should make the determination whether this plan goes through, not the city staff, and the only way to achieve this is through the voting process.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I just went over to Encinitas Votes and Mallory took his snide comments to Lori down. He was pretty brutal to her. He accused her of saying the city was corrupt. She might have actually been right, but she didn't say that. All she did was post what was posted here. I don't envy her right about now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does Mallory still have his business on 101. It was mentioned that he sold the business and retired.

      Delete
  16. Lorri Greene did nothing wrong; she merely posted what Brenda Wisneski wrote. This is squarely on Wisneski. It is Wisneski I don't envy right about now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not only Brenda. She's the new kid in town. She has comfortably fit into the culture and standard operating procedure at City Hall. What her letter shows has been going on for years at City Hall. What's unusual is that the evidence rarely comes so clearly to the surface.

      Delete
    2. You have that right, 7:37. Brenda feeling free to express herself as she did reveals a systemic attitude toward residents as insignificant non "stakeholders."

      Delete
    3. I am so disappointed with my neighbors, city business and our city. Bottom line is this is an issue that has been on the table for years and when there is a demonstration of large non support, not in favor of it, no one but the demonstrators care. Now those that favor it and showed overwhelming support, may have used a stacked deck, to do so. Now is a chance for citizens to speak up or shut up. As there was a lack of support for those that object to this proposal at the PC meeting. This process should be a level playing field and when its not, it divides our city citizens and city government. Sad day for our city as no one wins here. Close attention should be paid to our CC to see just how much leadership they do have. Most of all the ability to keep us all together by being fair and neutral.

      Delete
  17. There is definitely a culture problem at City Hall. Who is Brenda’s boss ?

    Her boss definitely needs to be fired .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, the complainer back on the city manager. Don't you get it? She works "at the pleasure of the Council." This goes up higher than her. Write your five Council members and ask what they know about the behind-the-scenes deal here. The issue lies with them. Then report back and we can compare notes, because I sure as hell wrote to ask them wtf.

      Delete
    2. What?-

      So you think City Council sets the culture at City Hall? Guess again...

      Where do you come up with that idea? What do you think the City Managers responsibilities are?

      To run around with her head cut off and disrupt productive work by others?

      We already know that all the City Council members support the streetscape. that has been known for years. Whats your point?

      Delete
    3. "Productive work?" Funniest thing I've heard in a long time.

      Delete
  18. And the cost of $25 million will be on every taxpayer in Encinitas.

    ReplyDelete
  19. It's $19 million and it's Transnet money, so the burden is spread over every taxpayer in the county.

    The City Council members won't have time to read emails objecting to the staff scam because they're getting their rubber stamps ready for Mar 21. They'll put on a little show, an entertaining charade of objections, then they'll vote 5-0 to approve. The fix has been in for years. The staff and consultants are doing exactly as directed by the council.

    If you don't think that's true, you haven't been paying attention.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The $19 million was from a 2010 staff report. That was 8 years ago. It is now up to $25 million.

      Delete
    2. The city's capital improvement program lists the general fund as providing the money for the streetscape 101. Transnet isn't listed.

      Delete
    3. I believe the transnet money is put into the General Fund for spending purposes. The city never spends this kind of money from locally generated income. It borrows the money with lease revenue bonds, like the new marine center at Moonlight Beach or the Hall property park.

      Alternately the council can set aside money each year in a CIP fund, but councils have a hard time resisting the temptation of dipping into these monies. Councils love to spend money.

      Delete
    4. This page, which is current, gives $19 million as the total cost:

      http://www.ci.encinitas.ca.us/Government/Departments/Development-Services/Engineering-Division/Capital-Improvement-Section/Leucadia-Streetscape-Project

      It's been Transnet money from the start. It doesn't all come as a one-time grant. To spend it, the city has to put it in the general fund. It can't be spent on anything but the designated project.

      Delete
    5. The city doesn't have the money whether from the General Fund or Transnet to build Streetscape 101. The first segment on this project starts at A Street and a very short segment from there. That will cost almost $8 million. There is no funding after that. Look it up. This is an election year. We are all being played by the Council.

      Delete
    6. Correct about the funding. The first segment is from A St thru El Portal.

      That's been portrayed as a traffic test, which it's not. The big problems are farther north approaching Leucadia Blvd from north or south. The traffic backups will be worse than they are now.

      Delete
    7. A "traffic test?" Like Masih Maher's self-described "experiments" in materials in pursuit of his infamous "curbs, gutters, sidewalks" everywhere mantra?

      Delete
  20. 9:16 - if you want people to put up or shut up, you need to give them some information as to when and how.

    Wednesday, March 21, 6 pm City Council Meeting.

    Be there or don't complain later when you can't back out of your own driveway from the overflow traffic off the 101. It's already back up into Carlsbad at various times throughout the day. My dog could tell you that reducing the number of lanes will only make that worse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no 9:16. 10:15 probably means 9:14.

      Good to repeat the when and where. Wed, Mar 21, 6 pm City Hall is at the top of this string and specified in the other string on the topic.

      Delete
    2. I did mean 9:16. Read through the thread.

      Delete
    3. OK, way up there!

      Delete
    4. OMG- The KLCC can't stop the whining......

      I can't Waite for City Council to approve the EIR to move this project closer to construction. The City has failed for years on this project and its time to get it done.

      Delete
  21. I just went by the 101 Diner and there is paper in the windows and a small sign says they are turning into a vegan restaurant?!!?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. sorry to hear that and it is bad news. Loved 101 Diner.

      Delete
  22. I like vegan... I hope it makes it.

    ReplyDelete
  23. "We had 25 speakers." Curious choice of pronoun. Not "There were 25 speakers." Followed by "We are on schedule to present the project to the City Council on March 21st."

    Presumably, "We" is the Development Services Department. Apparently, the department orchestrated at least some of the speakers.

    The proponents outnumbered the opponents 4 to 1. The staff and consultants were on the proponents' side.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good observations, 11:25. "Staff" known to post here and, as usual, lined up against the residents who pay their salaries.

      Delete
    2. No doubt, citizens also paid for the said "consultants" too.

      The city uses the term consultant very loosely since they basically pay people (using our money) to report pre-determined decisions. I would not call that a consultant.

      Delete
  24. If the City can waste 5,000,000 per fire station and $5,000,000 for a life guard tower on a huge concrete block in the surf zone, then It can easily fund $25 t o$30 million for street improvements that will improve the qualify of life for most Encinitans and property values for all the properties in Encinitas.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think we will all be ok. (Please don't over think my use of "we"). People need to show up to Planning Commission hearings and City Council meetings and go on record and pound the City in person. Complaining on a blog just won't get it done. Write letters. Make appointments to speak with your reps. Run for Planning Commission. The Streetscape project involves the street, r-o-w and other at-grade construction. As far as bigger buildings, parking standards, incentives etc., that was the North 101 Specific Plan - which was approved a decade (or so) ago. Damage done. For better or worse, its happening. All in all, we still have a great place to live - no go to the beach and smile.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Not a spoonful of dirt has yet been dug, so what is with this "Damage done" BS? Shades of Shaffer's passive-voice "It's been decided," equally absurd as a reason to move ahead with so many issues still unaddressed.

    Ten years ago Norby and his developer pals were busy designating Leucadia "blighted" to get now-gone redevelopment funds so they could build, baby, build.

    Fast forward ten years and traffic and resident attitudes are different than they were back when Norby was on his "roundabouts as a unifying theme for Encinitas" mission. Even back when the workshops were held, residents were unhappy. Staff refers now to the supposed extensive input, but they're loathe to show what that input actually said. Why is that?

    What is so wrong about taking a step back and understanding what will change and looking at unintended consequences of such a huge project?

    Agree folks need to show up and start talking to the right people: those who want to get reelected.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Total BS!!

      Go back to ur crappy life KLCC.

      - hugs Anon

      Delete
  27. The first $1.6 million that that taxpayers were charged in 2010 was to MIG and other consultants, who made findings that 90% of residents surveyed didn't want to change ANYTHING about the city.

    The past 8 years several million dollars later has been spent to try to convince the majority of Encinitas residents that we don't really know what we want. The original General Plan Update was done, to quote Teresa Barth, "to keep staff busy" during the housing slow down.

    All that was required by the state was to read through the Housing Element, make a few minor changes, and send it back eight years ago. Had they followed the simple directions at that time, Encinitas would not be out of compliance, but many in the Planning Department and the consultants that they hired to outsource their jobs to would not have been needed.

    We could have had a Housing Element many years ago had it not been for the stupidity and greed of certain people.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Visit this link!!!!!!!!!!!!

    http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/communities/north-county/sd-no-encinitas-loan-20180329-story.html

    ReplyDelete
  29. Lots of interest and well intended wants and needs, from both sides. Now is the time for action. If your like me i am very disappointed with our city leadership and the direction our City Staff has been and is going with our city. The question goes far beyond why? As our citizens are very aware and informed but we still keep fighting the same fights. I have met lots of incredible neighbors and fellow citizens who want nothing more than to protect and preserve our city. Plus wishes to support or local business. Most of all willing to give their time and energy for our city. If the city staff and/or elected leadership is steering investors, developers, profiteers etc... into morphing our city into something citizens do not want than the needed change is our city government. And if these businesses or profiteers are being told that they can do something that is contrary to our citizens voted on city policies, land use or guidelines through the city imposed, designed and morphing process than that is where our citizens energy should be focused. We are a city and have the right to live the way we choose. This point is all over the news now a days. Lets start by voting out our elected officials until we find someone who does support and is willing to support our city and our citizens wishes. Take back our city by fighting the fights that matter and that will protect and preserve our city which is the will of our city citizens. Playing into our city government hand by allowing the political processes and government administration bog us down in detail, we need to stay away form this. Our city government must do its citizens wishes period. Letting outside interests dictate local land use policy thus telling us how to live contradicts why we became a city, to protect and preserve our city for us to enjoy and share. Vote them out! It is a start.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Below are excerpts of agenda items for the 18th CC meeting that shows a cumulative and comprehensive attack on our city life style and are a significant change to our city and its citizens chosen voted on life style and personality. The circumvention of the voting process by adoption of amendments, ordinances and zoning changes are done without public vote. Please let the city know, by emailing them, that as a citizen(s) of an incorporated city we have the right to vote on major and significant LAND USE changes that effect our chosen way of life and our life style.

    Resolution No. 2018-38 approving a Substantial Amendment

    "The CDBG program is a federal program that is administered by HUD. The City of Encinitas has been an entitlement jurisdiction, receiving CDBG funds directly from HUD since 1990."

    2018-04-18 Item 08P FY 2018-19 CDBG Action Plan

    "Funding is not easily separated by phase for the overall funding as some of the projects are on hold or in a study phase where costs are variable,
    the scope can vary, done in-house and not easily calculated, and/or unfunded. Once the project is able to move to the design phase, the ACTUAL hard costs for design and construction can be established. The projects shown in the construction phase and completed projects reflect the true cost of construction."

    Ordinance No. 2018-05 titled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Encinitas, California, adopting the amendments to the Local Coastal Plan, North 101 Corridor Specific Plan and the General Plan

    "The proposed amendments qualify as a “regular AMENDMENT” under EMC 30.00.040, but do not meet the intent or purpose of a Citizen’s Participation Plan as specified under the Municipal Code."



    2018-04-18 Item 10A Housing Element

    "1) Conduct the public hearing; 2) Introduce City Council Ordinance No. 2018-03, titled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Encinitas, California, adopting amendments to Title 24 (Subdivisions) and Title 30 (Zoning) of the Encinitas Municipal Code, which proposes changes to the City's inclusionary housing regulations to better address the need for affordable units reserved in new residential development projects." etc...

    2018-04-18 Item 08P FY 2018-19 CDBG Action Plan

    "The Annual Action Plan describes the activities and programs funded during the program year, and how each activity meets a national objective and
    a local priority as identified in the City’s Consolidated Plan. The Action Plan must be reviewed and accepted by HUD each year."

    2018-04-18 Item 08O Transnet Local Street Improvement Program of Projects for Fiscal Years 2018-19 Through 2022-23

    "The 2018 RTIP is a program of proposed highway, arterial, transit and bikeway projects for Fiscal Years 2018/19 through 2022/23. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is required by State and Federal laws to develop and adopt the RTIP every two years."

    "Each member agency of SANDAG that desires to expend TransNet and/or certain Federal and State funds must approve a Program of Projects once every two years."

    ReplyDelete
  31. Increasing density, changing single purpose commercial properties to multi purpose or use commercial properties, on the same real estate plot, reducing travel lanes and adding roundabouts is not traffic calming or protecting and preserving our coastal neighborhoods or communities quality and way of life. Nor the tactic of dividing effects of these changes under three topics, Streetscape, HEU (circulation) and affordable housing, going to change its negative effects on family's and their neighborhoods. Not to mention that leucadia is taking on 47% of the density or affordable housing issue and morphing of its commercial zone into high volume needed business types. This is not protecting and preserving our style and way of life which if you check our article's of incorporation is contrary to our city's establishment. Not to mention the taking away the right of citizens to vote on significant and major changes to our in place land use policies.

    Yes there is a PC meeting tonight. But as those of us who have been following this issue know their decision has most likely been made and it is unlikely to favor the majority. From past performance they view the minority as the majority. Pole the city by the uninhibited and fare voting process, to determine majority.

    Yes Leucadia is taking on 47% of the housing up date or affordable housing needs of our city. And the city wants to reduce travel lanes and add round abouts as a traffic calming measure, really?

    ReplyDelete