Monday, November 21, 2011

Fitting in with Starbucks


From the Inbox:


The City of Encinitas Planning Commission has approved a variance in the General Plan guidelines to allow this new development (Starbucks) to ignore the required 20 foot setback for landscaping and use the undeveloped city street (city property) to fulfill this requirement. This will create temporary landscaping that will be removed when the city widens the street. There are no provisions for landscaping in the currently approved building plans for landscaping around the building itself, nor in the parking areas except along the streets.  Starbucks has already agreed to pay for the removal of the street landscaping when the city needs to widen Orpheus Street.  When this happens, we will be left with a 30 foot tall building, parking lot, and no foliage.

We have spent millions landscaping Leucadia Boulevard and now we are going to destroy that effort by crowning it with another bare parking lot and a 30 foot concrete wall complete with neon green Starbucks’ logos 26 feet in the air. The city council is now stacked against beauty and quality of life for us in Leucadia. We can show our support for our community by calling the city ((760) 633-2627, E-mail: cityhall@ci.encinitas.ca.us) and demanding permanent landscaping on the “to be developed property” and not temporary landscaping in our roadway. There will be an appeal hearing to the 20 foot variance at the November 30, 2011 City Council meeting at 6:00 PM. If possible, please attend, sign up on arrival to state your views, or contact the city directly by November 22, 2011 by 5:00 PM.

We cannot and are not trying to stop this development, only make it fit our community guidelines.

B.D.

25 comments:

  1. Can the blog post a proposed picture of this 30 foot structure? And how come the 1% get all these chicanery development loop holes in Encinitas? Is there a process to unseat and replace Planning Commissioners that evade the constraints of the Specific Plan? But more importantly, will they charge more for coffee there than at Coffee Coffee?

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Planning Commissioners don't control shit. If you want a nice community, better get busy and dump the super majority.

    They bring Walmart, super dense and super section 8 housing to Encinitas. They need to pay for all those huge paying pensions like Mark Muirs $170,000 a year forever, plus his council pay. That guy in retirement is clearing $200,000 a year. Not bad for a weak little fire science degree.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Forever !!!!!!- In 10 years, taxpayers will have given Mark Muir $2,000,000.00. If Mark Muir lives to 75, taxpayers will have given Mark Muir over $4,000,000.00.

    Thats for one guy. You do the math and add up all the over $100k employees retirement pay and then its clear why the Cities have no money for parks are anything else. Your taxes all toward paying the windfall pensions for staff.

    Our citizens are so dumb they have no idea they are being robbed. Its sad and true.

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/MainSite/Listing/Profile/Profile.aspx?LID=17283158

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/MainSite/Listing/Profile/Profile.aspx?LID=17283158

    ReplyDelete
  7. Could anything be uglier than the chain-link fenced vacant lot that is there now? I would care a lot more about what is proposed there if there were rules about how ugly a vacant lot can be.

    ReplyDelete
  8. ... if there were rules about how ugly a vacant lot can be

    Clearly you do not live in Leucadia.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Rob,
    I can see that vacant lot out of my window. So if there are rules against ugly vacant lots, they must be pretty lax. Of course I would prefer to have landscaping and a very attractive building. That said, whatever they put up will be better than what is(n't) there now.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Following the rules will not sink that project.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Planning Commissioners don't control shit."

    When the PC approves a project, it takes money to appeal it to the council. Traditionally, the super majority ignores the appeal in favor of any large development. But that powerful decision begins with the PC.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I was hoping for an In and Out Burger.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Are you fucking kicking. A vacant lot beats a piece of shit ugly building anyday. Especially an overbuilt building space.

    Yeah. What I guess is you might like is a ugly building over every openspace area. Lets build houses and starbucks on every openspace area. Especially the hall property.

    What would you rather, an open lot next to your house, or a 30 foot starbucks with all the traffic and scum that comes with it?

    I personally think building pavement over openspace sucks period. Hence, I have grazed my home and returned it to open space to set the example.

    Are you kidding, Open space or over built development? Please.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I can see that vacant lot out of my window. So if there are rules against ugly vacant lots, they must be pretty lax

    I don't understand how anyone who lives in Leucadia could possibly think there are rules against ugly lots.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The extra site allowed additional parking that translates into additional building area. There is no rational explanation to bend the rules for this project.

    A gift, pure and simple.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Corporations can buy this hick town anyday - especially with the group we have in there currently.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Mmmmm...Burger! In and Out would have been a better choice than Starf*ck$! They just opened a coffee shop that fits the community well, so why do we need a Starb*ck$!If they can put an In & Out at Fishermens Warf in SF, than why not Leucadia? We have enough Starf*ck$ in this city already.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I bet you asked for a similar variance for your house you would be laughed out of the council chambers. In Encinitas there is one rule for the taxpayers and another for the developers.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Bill,
    That vacant lot is pavement with weeds and chain-link fence. If they tore up the pavement and let it go wild like the vacant lot on the other side of Leucadia Blvd. (between the Shell and the fire station) the you are correct - it would be better than a Starbucks. As it is, almost anything would be better.

    As for In-N-Out, I am glad they aren't putting one there. I would be as big as a house. Same for any taco stand. Other than that, I am safe.

    ReplyDelete
  21. An In and Out would only cause more animal suffering, while clogging more arteries.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I took pictures of the Lavender-dominant landscaping edging a Starbucks parking lot in northern California once, simply because it was so beautifully done in a variety of lavender I rarely see around here (a very French Provençal type lavandula grosso, deep blue-purple flowers that practically obscured the deep green foliage).

    ReplyDelete
  23. Fine. Let's just put some sheep and chickens or maybe some llamas ans ostriches and just let them graze the open lots in the hood.

    ReplyDelete
  24. We HAD llamas here in the 70's.
    Horses, pigs, and chickens as well.
    Not so sure about ostriches.... anyone know?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Winston and all: please come to the meeting this Wednesday (November 30th, 6 pm). You'll see all the proposed pictures and graphics that go with the Planning Commission-approved variance.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for posting on the Leucadia Blog.
Anonymous comments are allowed, after moderator review.
The moderator works at his leisure.