City of Encinitas General Plan Update: HOME

The one very basic premise that I believe is not clear, is that one of the major the driving forces behind the GP Update is meeting the projections as set forth by the 2013-2020 SANDAG planning requirements. Most Encinitas citizens believe that the General Plan Update is their opportunity to create what their vision of our City will be in the future. The truth is far from that because we begin with the idea that we must design to regional requirements, and that there isn't any choice.

My guess is that most citizens would prefer to infill existing vacant sites and build out to current standards, but not allow increases to further congest an already burdened system. It's likely they wouldn't understand that this exercise is not about preserving or maintaining the City they love, or creating a more ideal City in the future...but is more about finding room for the many thousands that SANDAG tells us we must accomodate.

Many words have been written and I appreciate the goals, etc., who wouldn't. The way it is written seems like we are considering every angle, but if implimented, would it give us a more liveable City?

Many people would ask why we aren't emulating similar coastal cities like Carmel, Santa Cruz and Laguna Beach. There are no plans for 5-7 story mixed-use projects simply so we can make numbers.

I, and many others, don't see a need to sacrifice this wonderful city for the purpose of "making numbers."

I am also very interested in how this might be employed in a responsible way in terms of services, transportation, etc. but will address that in other posts.

Since a great deal of the housing element, and the thrust of the General Plan Update is driven by our SANDAG requirements, why not post this in the Key Reports section. The Key Report posted is a document that has not been adopted as yet.

Do not be fooled by the term "density bonus" used in this plan: What it means is that developers will be able to build as many apartment units as legally possible in a confined space. This allows them to build as many low income housing units to make it worth their investment.

I agree with comments with Gene Shappo above. It would be nice to know what kind of county or state funding the city would lose if we did not comply with the guidelines/methodoly/target of the RHNA and the the SANDAG housing elements. Is this a budget breaking deal? Do we have to sacrifice our quality of life to make these numbers in number of new housing, density, low income housing?

Residents should be presented with options.

Read about the reasons why so many of us object to the proposed land re-zoning and redevelopment of El Camino Real:

visit our website at

www.NewEncinitasResidents.com.

A maximum of 1255 new residential units will result in the El Camino Real

Corridor Focus Area as set forth with the new land use designations proposed in the draft

General Plan.

I received NOTHING on this. I have lived in Encinitas for 16 years. Anyone who has driven on El Camino Real on Fri. Sat or Sun knows that this is NOT feasible.

KILL IT.

Assumptions

Our new general plan update [GPU] uses a population figure of 60,000 for Encinitas, which is

approximate since at the time of the release of the draft GPU, 2010 census figures were not available.

The information given in the GPU says that between 2000 and 2010, our population grew 2.6%. The

SANDAG project for population growth over the next ten year time period is 15.2%. The GPU goes

on to say :”Therefore it is very likely the growth projections by SANDAG are inflated.” [pg3-27].

The GPU goes on to state that in 2010 there were 2.8 residents per household, a slight increase over

2000's 2.5 residents per household [3-36]. In the time period between 2000-2010 there was an 8%

increase in housing – 1911 units [3.54]. The GPU indicates that in 2010 there were 1658 vacant

housing units or 6.4 percent of the total [3.57].

If we use the known population increase for 2000 to 2010 [2.6%] and multiple times 60,000 [aprox.

population] we get an increase of 1560 folks for the next ten years. Since the 2.6% increase figure

includes both boom and bust cycles of our economy, it would seem more accurate than the SANDAG

projection, especially in light of the GPU doubts about the SANDAG projection. Now if we take the

1560 new residents in the next ten years and divide by 2.8 residents per family [this should be

conservative since the last known trend was toward more residents per household], we get 558 new

households [rounded up]. So as of 2010, we had just under three times the amount of vacant housing

than the ten year projected population increase. Further more, we are continuing to build new units.

Who are we planning to build a large amount of mixed use units for on El Camino Real ?

SANDAG envisions a future need for housing in Encinitas between 2010 and 2020 of 2253 units - and

then there are “penalties” for failure to meet housing goals previously. In the 20+ years I have lived

here, the City of Encinitas has never meet their housing goals. The goals are unrealistic and will get

more so when the economy rebounds further and prices go up. I believe the City has worked hard to

achieve the mandated goals, but how can you meet goals based on unsupported assumptions presumed

to be inaccurate?

Lets assume that in the years between 2010 and 2020 we build 1000 new units [half the 2000-2010

figure] as SANDAG believes housing starts will decline in the future. Take that “normal” housing

starts figure [1000] and add the 1658 vacant units and you have 2658 available units or more than the

mandated SANDAG/State figure [base , not with penalty]. This does not take into account any other

efforts towards providing more affordable housing or accounting for the “granny flat” units in a more

accurate manner.

When the 2010 census figures come in we need to completely re-evaluate the GPU – especially the El

Camino Real corridor assumption.



This corridor is one, wide, street of businesses IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD! I live there and have since 1995! Don't turn it into a Mission Valley commercial type area.As residents we already have all we need in terms of goods and services so much so we have empty buildings and stupid large box stores that bring people from other towns to over crowd our streets.

On March 7th, 2012, with a unanimous vote, City Council decided to kill the housing element. The pressure from New Encinitas residents and business people along El Camino Real was just too much to be ignored.

So where are we now? This a complete reboot of the housing element and the other elements that are intimately intertwined with it. Watch for major changes in the land-use, and circulation element.

The ERAC has started its evaluation. There will also be public workshops and open houses where the input from residents will be taken. Watch for postcard in the e-mail. This time around let's all pay attention and attend in great numbers to shown to the city officials that the residents do care about the future of our Encinitas. Workshops and open houses will take place in April and May.

www.savenewencinitas.com

I understand that SANDAG wants us to provide more housing. What happens if we don't?