In regard to Measure U (in the Coast News): The reporter should state how much low income housing, being labeled as affordable housing, the BIA developers will build on the city selected very low density (some are R1, R2) private parcels. From all indications, no more than 15% and probably closer to 10% or less of low income housing may be built and the rest will be market rate condos. The City Council is moving away from requiring 25% (discussed in October Council meeting). Does the Court have this information? Less than 200 low income units out of 2000 condos (if density bonus) won’t make a dent in the RHNA numbers assigned by SANDAG and the State. Why is Encinitas being sued when 95% of the other cities and counties haven't come close to building their required low income housing (per a state report). Why isn't the BIA and San Diego Tenants United filing a class action suit against the other 481 cities in California for not meeting state requirements? To placate the BIA and developers, this City Council has removed many of the safeguards of the current Housing Element that is in the General Plan. Some of these safeguards remain in the Housing Elements of other cities and, yes, the officials at HCD have found that those Housing Elements have substantial compliance with State Law. The City Council added more policies than required by law. Many of these new policies will be difficult if not impossible to carry out which leaves another wide loophole for more lawsuits. Additionally, the new housing laws that took effect in January of this year are being applied to only a few cities. The rest of the 450 cities won’t have to abide by the new January 2018 law until after 2020. By that time the law may change. In which case, the Encinitas Housing Element will be held to this law that may be more draconian than future laws. The property owners of the selected parcels will reap a windfall with the upzoning. Does the Court have this information? Is there a law principle that there shouldn’t be an enrichment for the property owners?
Now our council is seeking to align themselves with the Vision Zero group.
This is the same group who convinced the city of Marina del Rey to reduce their main thoroughfare from four lanes to two , which caused their community to rise up in outrage at the traffic backups and demand the four lanes be restored.
They were.
It looks like that is what will need to happen here when this disaster in the making for OUR 101 to fruition.
Then again, $30 million? There is no funding. That $30 million is only the beginning, as past projects have always gone over budget. That is an undeniable fact of history here. There may be a few exceptions where some project comes in on schedule and funding, but I can't recall if there ever was one.
The group Bike, Walk Encinitas is approving or changing the street stripping in Encinitas that doesn't go to the Traffic Commission. Elena Thompson and Brian Grover are members. When did a private group get the authority to approve the street stripping.
The engineer has discretion to restripe. However, consulting with this group and not others is problematic. Its just as bad as the planning department working with developers and against citizens. Who authorized citizens guiding city operations?
Kinda reminds me of when Julie G. talked Karen into running a English writing class for all staff report writers.
As some point, there needs to be a dividing wall between running an organization based on professional expertise and running it based on the emotions of a few stakeholders.
Mayor Blakespear ordered the city engineer to provide the plans of restriping of the new slurry seal on city streets to the Bike and Walk Group. See the Council video at 31:47 where Blakspear makes her beginning speech. The subject begins at 31:18. The standard is that the city engineer restrips to the previous stripping. Blakspear's later comment in the Council video referred to a restriping from a 14 feet wide lane to 10 feet. Blakespear's comment that Brian Grover, a member of the Bike Walk Encinitas group and also on the Traffic Commission implied that it was OK to provide the slurry stripping plans to him for his group's imput. Brian Grover should be immediately removed from the traffic commission.
Stepping over 12:11's lack of help, Grover won't be removed. We need to get the ugly truth: Blakespear has assembled her foot soldiers and no one is getting fired.
How to slow her down is anyone's guess, but the more light shone on her shenanigans, the better. She's nothing better than Jerome in a wig.
The mayor believes in man made global warming. The deputy mayor supported Hillary Clinton............ What could possibly go wrong with their decisions?
You guys need to get over it already! They Mayor won a clear mandate of the people of Encinitas. She should call all of the shots!!! You had your chance with JP and lost badly.
3:17 - Are you saying 3000 more people voted on Prop U than on Mayor? I'm not seeing that. As of now there are 23,496 votes for Mayor and 23,476 votes on Prop U.
the worst part about the housing element courts issue is the City has the most incompetent managers making key decisions and recommendations to our City Council on the matter.
They hire the worst and we the citizens end up with the worst result on our town.
I agree that next election its time to take out the trash that support this current direction. Encinitas is getting hammered from this poor leadership.
Its time for Charlie McDermott to become Mayor and get smart City Council members who understand issues like Charlie. This is My wish for 2019 and beyond.
And our council are more than willing to accommodate developers at "staff's" recommendation. They are part of the problem! They can say no - but they don't.
Is Charlie McDermott the same Charlie that was petitioning the council for an alcohol permit for his private club in Leucadia? Weren't there some "concerned residents" and neighbors wary of the proposal? That's the guy you want for Mayor? Or, there may be more than one Charlie McDermott in Encinitas......
There are 2 villains in Encinitas that are responsible for 98% of the city's woes.....Developers and Liquor License owners...if those 2 groups didn't exist community character could be preserved ad infinitum......
Those that didn't want the beacon initial design, streetscape or more affordable housing voted for JP "AND" the Mayor won, so get over it! Spend some time getting JP ready for 2020 one the same outcome.
Blakespear waited till too late to do the feasibility study. She directed further study when the first one came back with an affordability percentage too high for her developer "stakeholders."
Blakespear told whining developers even before the election she could lower the amount of affordability.
Those who wanted more affordable housing voted for JP. Those who wanted less went with Blakespear.
3:29pm. So HCD, or some such state government branch does not, or will not, consider a reclassification from metro to suburban status, and that determination is set in stone for every county in the state by HCD or whatever branch makes this decision.
Is that the fact that you are stating? Not one county in the state has had any success in changing their metro status to suburban?
That sure would let any city claim it is not responsible in any way for their metro status. How convenient for them. It is not us, it is always the states doing.
The BIA and Tenants United have nothing to do with allowing any county to make their own metro vs suburban determination? How convenient.
You live in the greater area that is called San Diego. I get the need to fight this, but seek out something more credible, like dissolving the city into the county. Or splitting Encinitas into three cities to avoid this categorization, like Solana Beach.
How a county is categorized is in the statute. It's not up to HCD or any other state department to decide. In regards to your question about whether a county has been successful in changing their metropolitan status to suburban the answer is yes. Marin County was able to get the legislature to insert wording that would define the county as suburban based on its size even though it's in the Bay Area metropolitan area. See Gov Code 65583.2(e)(1). But that's for the whole county. Good luck getting them to make a special exemption for Encinitas.
SANDAG has a fact sheet on the San Diego region required percentage allocation of the 171,685 dwelling units that will be required to be built in the next state housing cycle. It is an intriguing document with 40.20% of housing dedicated to restricted income of very low (less than $45,450) and low income (less than $72,750) and 42.50% dedicated to above moderate income (120% and above of the area median of $79,300 (all income quoted for a family of four). That gap between the low income and above moderate income families which should be the affordable areas of housing for families with a moderate income (less than $95,150) are only designated at 17.30% of the 171,685 new dwelling units mandated by the State and HCD. If these housing percentages are representative of the entire state, the middle income wage earners will be pushed out of California. The new Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) numbers are for the very poor or the very rich. Developers don't want to built restricted income housing. What is left for development is housing for the rich. More information on this fact sheet is on the SANDAG website.
A deal was done when Blakespear and Horvath sign on to AB850. This gave Horvath backing from Gonzales for the Assembly and Blakespear a new leadership role at SANDAG. What did Encinitas get - around 2,000 new affordable housing units next cycle.
A judge will hear the housing case later in November. Why not build 100% "affordable" homes on the Encinitas golf course - it is supposedly a money losing proposition. Butt them up to the Meyer and Ecke mansions, so that they can share the wealth with the down-trodden. Watch their attitudes take a quantum shift, when they are impacted more directly with mass density clap traps.
Soon, every nook and cranny will be on the rezone list. No where is safe. We will have 1,300 units rezoned through judge order. Then another 2,000 or 3,000 come next year. Time to leave.
The city had to farm out this housing legal issue to a contract law agency? Time to dump Sabine - he is an industry mole on the inside. He hasn't served the greater interests of the community in decades.
Of course we had to farm it out. Sabine's standard response to any question is "I'll need to look that up." But first he has to rouse himself and realize there's a meeting in progress.
Sabine represents institutional rot. He has had the job so long, he has lost all incentive to be active. As long as outside law firms have to be hired to do the actual work, why should he lift s finger? He needs to go.
What were 8 fire trucks from SB, DM and ENC doing at city hall this morning?? Oh that's right, new contracts for salary and pensions for the princesses. Always done behind closed doors. Never a rep from the taxpayers who foot the bill present.
The average cost of running an engine is $1,308 per incident. It does takes into account the time and expense of training, prevention efforts and other costs associated with running the department.
So the cost to run a truck to City Hall is probably a couple hundred dollars, when netting out "training and other prevention costs" from the equation.
I saw the nightnare in Encinitas is still the City Manager.... bummer for all taxpayers, and the town itself.
ReplyDeleteSo is the nightmare council who sold out our town, like so many before them.
ReplyDeleteIn regard to Measure U (in the Coast News):
ReplyDeleteThe reporter should state how much low income housing, being labeled as affordable housing, the BIA developers will build on the city selected very low density (some are R1, R2) private parcels. From all indications, no more than 15% and probably closer to 10% or less of low income housing may be built and the rest will be market rate condos. The City Council is moving away from requiring 25% (discussed in October Council meeting). Does the Court have this information? Less than 200 low income units out of 2000 condos (if density bonus) won’t make a dent in the RHNA numbers assigned by SANDAG and the State. Why is Encinitas being sued when 95% of the other cities and counties haven't come close to building their required low income housing (per a state report). Why isn't the BIA and San Diego Tenants United filing a class action suit against the other 481 cities in California for not meeting state requirements? To placate the BIA and developers, this City Council has removed many of the safeguards of the current Housing Element that is in the General Plan. Some of these safeguards remain in the Housing Elements of other cities and, yes, the officials at HCD have found that those Housing Elements have substantial compliance with State Law. The City Council added more policies than required by law. Many of these new policies will be difficult if not impossible to carry out which leaves another wide loophole for more lawsuits. Additionally, the new housing laws that took effect in January of this year are being applied to only a few cities. The rest of the 450 cities won’t have to abide by the new January 2018 law until after 2020. By that time the law may change. In which case, the Encinitas Housing Element will be held to this law that may be more draconian than future laws. The property owners of the selected parcels will reap a windfall with the upzoning. Does the Court have this information? Is there a law principle that there shouldn’t be an enrichment for the property owners?
I understand Judge Frazer is pro-development. This city needs to fight the fight and appeal if necessary.
ReplyDeleteNow our council is seeking to align themselves with the Vision Zero group.
ReplyDeleteThis is the same group who convinced the city of Marina del Rey to reduce their main thoroughfare from four lanes to two , which caused their community to rise up in outrage at the traffic backups and demand the four lanes be restored.
They were.
It looks like that is what will need to happen here when this disaster in the making for OUR 101 to fruition.
Then again, $30 million? There is no funding. That $30 million is only the beginning, as past projects have always gone over budget. That is an undeniable fact of history here. There may be a few exceptions where some project comes in on schedule and funding, but I can't recall if there ever was one.
And if the $30 million is a bond issue, the true cost will approximately double.
DeleteThe group Bike, Walk Encinitas is approving or changing the street stripping in Encinitas that doesn't go to the Traffic Commission. Elena Thompson and Brian Grover are members. When did a private group get the authority to approve the street stripping.
ReplyDeleteThe engineer has discretion to restripe. However, consulting with this group and not others is problematic. Its just as bad as the planning department working with developers and against citizens. Who authorized citizens guiding city operations?
DeleteKinda reminds me of when Julie G. talked Karen into running a English writing class for all staff report writers.
As some point, there needs to be a dividing wall between running an organization based on professional expertise and running it based on the emotions of a few stakeholders.
Looks like another firing coming soon.
Mayor Blakespear ordered the city engineer to provide the plans of restriping of the new slurry seal on city streets to the Bike and Walk Group.
DeleteSee the Council video at 31:47 where Blakspear makes her beginning speech. The subject begins at 31:18. The standard is that the city engineer restrips to the previous stripping. Blakspear's later comment in the Council video referred to a restriping from a 14 feet wide lane to 10 feet. Blakespear's comment that Brian Grover, a member of the Bike Walk Encinitas group and also on the Traffic Commission implied that it was OK to provide the slurry stripping plans to him for his group's imput. Brian Grover should be immediately removed from the traffic commission.
The white lines are stripes. The term for painting them on the pavement is striping.
DeleteStripping is an entirely different thing!
Stepping over 12:11's lack of help, Grover won't be removed. We need to get the ugly truth: Blakespear has assembled her foot soldiers and no one is getting fired.
DeleteHow to slow her down is anyone's guess, but the more light shone on her shenanigans, the better. She's nothing better than Jerome in a wig.
On the contrary, 12:11 was helpful. If you don't spell the words right, how can anybody be sure what you're trying to say?
DeleteStriping is very different from stripping, right?
Before the slurry seal is applied, there must be a stripping of the lines on the road. After the seal finish new stripes are applied.
DeleteThe mayor believes in man made global warming. The deputy mayor supported Hillary Clinton............
ReplyDeleteWhat could possibly go wrong with their decisions?
Are you saying you don't believe in man made global warming?
Delete12:29 I'm no fan of the mayor, but I also don't believe the earth is flat.
DeleteIt isn't referred to as "gullible warming" for nothing. It's a scam and has been so for twenty years. "man made global warming, the man made lie"
Delete11:14 PM This person's last stint was the Inquisition and probably had a hand in silencing Galileo too!
Delete11:14 I've never heard of that term. Must be flat-earthier lingo. No Breitbart link to your "evidence" needed, 11:14.
DeleteYou guys need to get over it already! They Mayor won a clear mandate of the people of Encinitas. She should call all of the shots!!! You had your chance with JP and lost badly.
ReplyDeleteYes, and JP opposed measure U while Blakespear supported it. Call it a split mandate.
DeleteSomething like 3,000 more people voted on Measure U than Mayor.
Delete2:44, wait'll she calls the shots on your street. Quote the code till you're blue in the face and she'll stare stonily and vote against you.
3:17 - Are you saying 3000 more people voted on Prop U than on Mayor? I'm not seeing that. As of now there are 23,496 votes for Mayor and 23,476 votes on Prop U.
DeleteIf you don't like our Mayor, I suggest you MOVE!
ReplyDelete11:04 pm, if you don't like people speaking out against our mayor, I suggest that you move....
ReplyDeletesick burn.
Deletethe worst part about the housing element courts issue is the City has the most incompetent managers making key decisions and recommendations to our City Council on the matter.
ReplyDeleteThey hire the worst and we the citizens end up with the worst result on our town.
I agree that next election its time to take out the trash that support this current direction. Encinitas is getting hammered from this poor leadership.
Its time for Charlie McDermott to become Mayor and get smart City Council members who understand issues like Charlie. This is My wish for 2019 and beyond.
And our council are more than willing to accommodate developers at "staff's" recommendation. They are part of the problem! They can say no - but they don't.
DeleteIs Charlie McDermott the same Charlie that was petitioning the council for an alcohol permit for his private club in Leucadia? Weren't there some "concerned residents" and neighbors wary of the proposal? That's the guy you want for Mayor? Or, there may be more than one Charlie McDermott in Encinitas......
ReplyDeletePetitioning for an alcohol permit is disqualifying?
DeletePerhaps he smoked a joint in high school too. Gott in Himmel!
There are 2 villains in Encinitas that are responsible for 98% of the city's woes.....Developers and Liquor License owners...if those 2 groups didn't exist community character could be preserved ad infinitum......
DeleteThe Encinitas Temperance League is back.
DeleteNo to booze and yoga pants.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrie_Nation
DeleteHow stupid can you be... Charlie McDermott would be the best thing for Encinitas and would squash Blakespear if he ever ran.
DeleteLike a bug!
DeleteThose that didn't want the beacon initial design, streetscape or more affordable housing voted for JP "AND" the Mayor won, so get over it! Spend some time getting JP ready for 2020 one the same outcome.
ReplyDeleteBlakespear waited till too late to do the feasibility study. She directed further study when the first one came back with an affordability percentage too high for her developer "stakeholders."
DeleteBlakespear told whining developers even before the election she could lower the amount of affordability.
Those who wanted more affordable housing voted for JP. Those who wanted less went with Blakespear.
When our city reps have the option to declare our city a suburban classification over an urban, why has this not be employed?
ReplyDeleteThe answer is all too obvious.
If there is an ounce of genuine defense against SANDAGs allotment for our city, this should be easy.
What are you talking about?
DeleteOur city has a metropolitan, rather than suburban classification. A metropolitan city designation receives a higher allocation than suburban.
DeleteNow you know what we're talking about.
To add to the explanation: this is something our city leadership can and should have changed.
DeleteCue developers screaming and the council deciding not to take any action.
Now you really know what we're talking about.
Yeah. That’s what I thought.
DeleteYou haven’t a clue.
State housing law defines metro vs. suburban by county, abd San Diego County is defined as metro.
There is no way for a city to argue for reclassification under the law.
3:29pm. So HCD, or some such state government branch does not, or will not, consider a reclassification from metro to suburban status, and that determination is set in stone for every county in the state by HCD or whatever branch makes this decision.
ReplyDeleteIs that the fact that you are stating? Not one county in the state has had any success in changing their metro status to suburban?
That sure would let any city claim it is not responsible in any way for their metro status. How convenient for them. It is not us, it is always the states doing.
The BIA and Tenants United have nothing to do with allowing any county to make their own metro vs suburban determination? How convenient.
Democracy plays no part. How convenient.
You are weird.
DeleteYou live in the greater area that is called San Diego. I get the need to fight this, but seek out something more credible, like dissolving the city into the county. Or splitting Encinitas into three cities to avoid this categorization, like Solana Beach.
8:15,
DeleteI’ll bet you have a similar “democracy is dead” speech for when you get pulled over for a burned out tail light.
8:15 PM (11/18)
DeleteHow a county is categorized is in the statute. It's not up to HCD or any other state department to decide. In regards to your question about whether a county has been successful in changing their metropolitan status to suburban the answer is yes. Marin County was able to get the legislature to insert wording that would define the county as suburban based on its size even though it's in the Bay Area metropolitan area. See Gov Code 65583.2(e)(1). But that's for the whole county. Good luck getting them to make a special exemption for Encinitas.
SANDAG has a fact sheet on the San Diego region required percentage allocation of the 171,685 dwelling units that will be required to be built in the next state housing cycle. It is an intriguing document with 40.20% of housing dedicated to restricted income of very low (less than $45,450) and low income (less than $72,750) and 42.50% dedicated to above moderate income (120% and above of the area median of $79,300 (all income quoted for a family of four). That gap between the low income and above moderate income families which should be the affordable areas of housing for families with a moderate income (less than $95,150) are only designated at 17.30% of the 171,685 new dwelling units mandated by the State and HCD. If these housing percentages are representative of the entire state, the middle income wage earners will be pushed out of California. The new Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) numbers are for the very poor or the very rich. Developers don't want to built restricted income housing. What is left for development is housing for the rich. More information on this fact sheet is on the SANDAG website.
ReplyDeleteTranslation: get ready for another 2000 units?
DeleteBuild them next to the Ecke's and Meyer households. You'd see a change of attitude really quick.
Delete10:41 AM
ReplyDeleteProbably closer to 3000 units. Mayor "more cement" Blakespear was just elected as second in command at SANDAG.
A deal was done when Blakespear and Horvath sign on to AB850. This gave Horvath backing from Gonzales for the Assembly and Blakespear a new leadership role at SANDAG. What did Encinitas get - around 2,000 new affordable housing units next cycle.
ReplyDeletePlus 35% density bonus.
DeleteRemember, the 35% figure is only one small element of the density bonus "round up" formulas. For smaller lots of ~2 acres the net "bonus" can be 100%.
DeleteA judge will hear the housing case later in November. Why not build 100% "affordable" homes on the Encinitas golf course - it is supposedly a money losing proposition. Butt them up to the Meyer and Ecke mansions, so that they can share the wealth with the down-trodden. Watch their attitudes take a quantum shift, when they are impacted more directly with mass density clap traps.
DeleteSoon, every nook and cranny will be on the rezone list. No where is safe. We will have 1,300 units rezoned through judge order. Then another 2,000 or 3,000 come next year. Time to leave.
DeleteThe city had to farm out this housing legal issue to a contract law agency? Time to dump Sabine - he is an industry mole on the inside. He hasn't served the greater interests of the community in decades.
DeleteOf course we had to farm it out. Sabine's standard response to any question is "I'll need to look that up." But first he has to rouse himself and realize there's a meeting in progress.
DeleteSabine represents institutional rot. He has had the job so long, he has lost all incentive to be active. As long as outside law firms have to be hired to do the actual work, why should he lift s finger? He needs to go.
DeleteWhat were 8 fire trucks from SB, DM and ENC doing at city hall this morning??
ReplyDeleteOh that's right, new contracts for salary and pensions for the princesses. Always done behind closed doors. Never a rep from the taxpayers who foot the bill present.
Didn't we just have an election where we decided on who our rep's would be?
DeleteTraining. They don't bring trucks for the salary negotiations, Michael Moore.
DeleteIf they are there for training they should use regular means of travel. No need to run expensive machines to non-emergency activities.
DeleteTo 5:33 -
DeleteThe average cost of running an engine is $1,308 per incident. It does takes into account the time and expense of training, prevention efforts and other costs associated with running the department.
So the cost to run a truck to City Hall is probably a couple hundred dollars, when netting out "training and other prevention costs" from the equation.
5:33 PM,
DeleteEmergency responders need to be able to respond, even from a training location.
City officials don't represent the tax payer, i.e. Mr.Muir, just a tool for the unions. All of them are tools of the unions.
ReplyDelete