Tuesday, February 5, 2019

City staff working hard to bring the density

From the Inbox:
This is from page 22 of the January 28, 2019 letter [Development Services Director] Brenda [Wisneski] wrote to HCD: (is the example for all the other sites)

"As stated in Appendix C of the HEU, the Sage Canyon Parcel has a net acreage of 2.40, which yields 72 dwelling units (DU) at 30 du/net ac (although site capacity for purposes of the Housing Element was estimated as only 60 units). The sample developments detailed in the following analysis are based on 72 units and the setback, parking, and open space and other standard requirements provided in the proposed R-30 development standards."

People voted on the total of 1,504 housing units. The number that will be built is closer to 1900 housing units. This is before using any density bonus.

23 comments:

  1. There were good reasons why the majority of voters rejected Measure U.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Measure T would have gifted developers just under 3,000 units. The city, asked repeatedly, never explained why the dramatic drop between T and U units.

      Let me put some words in Blakespear and Phony Tony's mouths: "The voters figured out the 3,000 units in T were WELL in excess of state requirements, so we thought we'd take it down a notch to trick them into voting for U."

      That is what they would say if they would say if they were honest, but....

      Delete
    2. Measure U was a fraud perpetrated by the City Council. Voters were told by the City Council in the Council's argument for Measure U that the number of homes would be 1,504. The planning department put that number in the housing element. With the defeat of Measure U, the City is now exposing their fraud to residents. The number of new homes on the up-zoned properties will be 1,900. This is without density bonus at another 35% increase of homes.

      Delete
  2. Yup. But the current City Council love the staff who ignore the citizens comments. So while we have Kranz and Blakespear, staff is encouraged to shit on the existing citizens and expedite the development of Huntington Beach South.

    Nicely played Kranz and Blakespear nicely played.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quit blaming Blakespear! She has a mandate from the voters in Encinitas to build affordable housing in all parts of our city. We need to provide for the less fortunate. We shouldn't look for the lowest number, but should look for the highest number.

      Delete
    2. Yes, blame Blakespear! She was against Prop A. Voters approved it. She was for Measures T and U. Voters defeated them. She let L-7 go off the HEU. She has stacked the council with her cronies. She is enabling Wisneski. She is pushing the Streetscam disaster. She has no mandate from the majority of residents. She's a scourge on the community!

      Delete
    3. 2:25 You obviously failed to pay attention to the last election. You tried and were defeated badly. It wasn't even close. Those 85% of the voters want more affordable housing, bike access (need to get people out of their cars), streetscape, find a spot for the homeless in our town. Elections have consequeces! Get over it!!!

      Delete
    4. If you think you're getting more affordable housing with your candidates, 2:57, you're in for a very, very rude awakening.

      Blakespear's already listening sympathetically to Keith Harrison and the BIA that single-digit affordability - that's right, under 10% - is still a hardship.

      Get people out of cars? Pipe dream. You don't get them out of cars through force, but you and your dictator will learn that lesson the hard way.

      Joke's on you, 2:57.

      Delete
    5. 2:57 In what warped minds persists the thought that Blakespear has a mandate because she won an election where her only opponent was a well-meaning but hopelessly ineffective guy on a lark?

      A serious, well-informed candidate who knows how to campaign could defeat Blakespear.

      Delete
    6. And her whole scam would come tumbling down.

      Delete
    7. 7:46 PM

      "... Blakespear has a mandate because she won an election where her only opponent was a well-meaning but hopelessly ineffective guy on a lark?" Of course the fact that this city of over 60,000 could only muster a candidate of this low quality says nothing about how well regarded Blakespear is in the community. Speaking of warped minds.

      Delete
    8. 1:18 "Quit blaming Blakespear! She has a mandate from the voters in Encinitas to build affordable housing in all parts of our city. We need to provide for the less fortunate. We shouldn't look for the lowest number, but should look for the highest number" HELLOOOOOO, do you think these 1900 units will be affordable housing? These are 1900 new units built by developers, where they have the option to include or NOT include affordable housing. None of the 1900 proposed units are required to be affordable housing. The whole "affordable housing" notion is one the city is pushing to make the zoning changes more palatable to you. Do you think adding 1900 new units will bring down the cost of homes in Encinitas, making housing more "affordable"? I can promise you that it won't. And I can guarantee that not a single one of these new units will benefit the homeless in any way. Unless you buy one of the new units, and use it to provide some homeless folks a home.

      Delete
  3. Yeah. Encinitas all homeless and poor welcome. The City will provide affordable stack and pack housing. We all want to like in Huntington Beach!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1:47 PM

      "Encinitas all homeless and poor welcome." you fundamentally don't understand the target population that most of the affordable housing is aimed at. Whether or not you believe the methods achieve the goals, the target is people who make less than the median income here in Encinitas. Most of these people have jobs and many probably have more than one. Equating these people with riff-raff is just flat out wrong.

      Delete
  4. 1:47 Whatever! You lost, our candidates won!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Our? Who is our?

      Delete
    2. Oh, you mean the people who didn't vote for the nutty guy with the dog?

      Delete
  5. When there was no real competition, there is no mandate.

    You better believe there will be next time.

    This was a joke, and a not funny one from the beginning when he placed his ass licking, ball licking, flea scratching mutt on the debate table with Catherine.

    In a way, this mutt raising his rear end to audience said it all.

    Mandate, my ass. I chose not to vote for either of them.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 8:55 PM

    When no quality candidates enter an election it's usually because the incumbent is considered unbeatable which must mean most people like what they are doing. That's better than a mandate. Save your boasts for the next election if any quality candidates enter the mayoral race. Until then it's pretty lame.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How many qualified people ran against Muir? Mosca? Who has the track record of commission and council time Blakespear had before running for mayor? The longer Blakespear is mayor, the more she shows she doesn't represent the majority of residents, let alone has a mandate.

      Delete
  7. 12:58- Shut up and run. Actions always speak louder then words.

    I will probably vote for you if you don't like Huntington Beach and don't want Encintas to develop like HB.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 10:48 You lost the debate.

    ReplyDelete