Sunday, March 17, 2013

The Initiative doesn't stop the developments everyone wants to stop

Everyone hates this high density development on Hermes.
It's basically dropping a mini-neighborhood into an old school neighborhood.
Hermes doesn't have sidewalks, it's got a rural feel. Most of the homes on Hermes are single family, maybe a granny flat, with a large yard.
Lots of weeds, lazy dogs sleeping under scrawny citrus trees, and the occasional car that hasn't been started in 20 years.
A classic Keep Leucadia Funky neighborhood.
Everyone on Hermes hates this new development, but the Initiative doesn't block these from happening.
It's under 30' and it's not an upzone.
The developer probably squeezed 2 extra units into it using the state affordable housing mandate.
So, if Leucadians really want to stop these kind of developments what would that piece of legislation look like?

40 comments:

  1. It's bad, but it could be a lot worse: try 45 units per acre. You go to draw the line somewhere. That's what the initiative does.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If the initiative doesn't pass, its going to look a lot worse that that shit on Hermes.

    To really address the problem, the City needs to join with others to get the density bonus law changed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Damn low interest rates...

    Build a turd and somebody will buy it - the more SF, the better.

    Those houses are ugly and don't fit. The people who move in will be the same.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Are you shitting me? That's Hermes?

    It looks exactly like the monstrosity behind La Especial Norte.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To address the increase in density brought on by the Density Bonus Law, the City Should decrease its density on all is property by 30%. Then, when all the future projects are developed they will have the density close to the originally intended in the general plan.

    Jerome Stocks did the same thing to City Pensions in one night that the state did to our density of future development, he increased it by over 30%!

    Both are major blows to Encinitas future.

    You can thank that one for Jerome Stocks.


    When is the Council going to address the super high pensions of Staff. They need to lower all pensions, not just new employees. In fact, lowering the existing pensions should help getting rid of a lot of the useless deadwood at City Hall.

    Then we need to get the State to tax any PERS pension over $50,000, 50-75%. Let them pay for the huge DEBT in their PERS program.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks alot for speaking on my behalf "Everybody on Hermes hates it"

    We'll I live on Hermes and pass it everyday. There used to be drug addicts that lived there that had cops coming twice a month to arrest them or search and seizure.

    The homes are a huge improvement to the street and cannot wait till all the older homes are scraped and restarted too. You cannot stop this from happening. Leucadia is the cheapest beach town north of I8 with loads of "opportunities"!

    If you think these are bad, just wait till they start cramming 30 condos on the same area they built 9 homes in.

    Also, those old wonderful houses you speak of were once built on former farmland and open space. Back then, folks would say geez can't believe there going to cram houses in on a 1/2 acre lot. You are living in the homes that people back then complained just like you are on these new developments. What makes you so special??

    Regardless of what anybody thinks here, you cannot stop this train from coming. And, when you do have some little success, you only make my house more valuable by causing the development process to increase. Thus making the land MORE VALUABLE, thus attracting MORE developers.

    You cannot win this game. It's happening regardless of any of you!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sad, but true, that the initiative won't prevent this kind of development. But it will prevent this kind of development from going to 4 or 5 stories and higher densities.

    Before this project was built, the city would have called this an "under utilized" parcel, ripe for upzoning to accommodate the SANDAG affordable housing requirements. Passing the initiative will give the voters the decision and then force the city to look for alternate solutions if the voters say NO.

    The city can challenge the SANDAG numbers and find creative ways to increase lower cost housing. Right now any "affordable" housing created is lost after 30 years when the developer can then sell it at full market rates. A bummer for our children and grandchildren.

    I'm voting YES on the initiative.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thought you may be interested...
    http://sdrostra.com/?p=33174

    ReplyDelete
  9. Jerome is a tool and a complete RINO. When the GOP has so many people with no integrity in their party they can not attract any decent people. They need to lose the losers like Jerome Stock and Mike Andreen.

    Jerome Stocks voted in a 35% increase in all City pensions including his own.

    Any union loving self serving scum like that needs to be run out of the Republican Party.

    and Adreen's failing speak for themselves over the years.

    Both have no integrity.

    ReplyDelete
  10. If the City gave amnesty to non-permitted granny flats, etc., which are in the thousands in Encinitas, we would not have a density bonus problem. The denisty bonus law was written by developers...I would like to see a report done by the City to see if low income families actually benefit and the added cost to the City to implement it. Nobody helped my low income family move to Encinitas, we did it the old fashioned way, saved and saved, and bought a fixer.

    ReplyDelete
  11. A benefit of having Jerome Stocks around is that sane, decent people know to take whatever position is opposite his. But before condemning him for raising city pensions, check the record for who else voted aye.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Jerome Stock's posted the following on the SD Rostra blog:

    This ill-conceived measure:
    A) Won’t correct or address state mandated forced planning for additional housing units,
    B) Will actually replace steep-slope local 12 ft building height limits currently in place with its blanket 30ft limit which would be very destructive to the impacted neighborhoods and their views,
    C) Will replace the current accessory unit 12 ft height limit with it’s 30 ft ht limit, so get ready for your neighbor to build a 30 ft tall shed in his set-back right on your property line,
    D) Won’t preserve the EUSD Pacific View former School Site as open space,
    E) Will cause folks to pass on re-investment of their property leading to the eventual decline and degradation of Encinitas. Just ask Escondido how their similar measure is working out!
    F) Will override the various Encinitas “Specific Plan” height limits of 33 or 40 ft rendering many of the projects in those areas (such as Whole Foods and Target) non-conforming and therefore unable to expand or be improved.
    And finally:
    Can somebody please point to an example of where the Encinitas City Council used it’s 4/5th’s vote authority to “up-zone” property in town? I can’t, but maybe I missed it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. These buildings are designed to comply with our
    current 22' wall / 26' roof maximum height. Now imagine these all at 30'. Or perhaps .....look out your
    your sideyard window and picture your neighbors
    house 10' away from you 30' tall. For Real !
    The 2 story limit will not control this because you
    may be permitted 2 - 15' stories. Cap this idea with an allowed flat roof and we will be a case study in voters who forgot to read what they signed up for.

    ReplyDelete
  14. 4:12
    The height limit of 30' is the lesser of the two evils because a third story allows more residents. Even a one story 30' building can be amazing, but then we're dealing with the Planning Commission's call on what they think is acceptable to a neighborhood - not the neighbor's preference. But I still think density has a worse effect on everyone than design.

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

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think the current push for up-zoning would create a scenario that is much more profitable for developers and the result would be even more dense developments... Developers don't like making enough to get by, they want to make a killing! So you can be sure to see even more extreme versions of the above as we move forward...

    ReplyDelete
  17. Theoretically, you have to be making $344k/year or $200k take-home, in order to afford those rents ($4300/month).

    Wow!



    ReplyDelete
  18. HH,

    In other words, a married couple of city workers.

    ReplyDelete
  19. But actually, HH, lots of people spend about 40% of take-home pay on housing, which translates to needing about $130K for $4300 a month. So a city government worker could swing that even if his or her spouse was a lowly private-sector employee.

    ReplyDelete
  20. So, if Leucadians really want to stop these kind of developments what would that piece of legislation look like?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Repealing the density bonus law.

    ReplyDelete
  22. If you take home $130k then your salary is $216k.

    $216k is an above average wage... even for a city worker who gets every other friday off, never works a minute over time, and has a gold-plated pension.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Well i have to say that this city worker makes what the majority of the city's workforce does. I gross about 60K and and combined with my private sector better half we gross around 90K.

    We pay 30K per year for our lease and I can tell you that we live paycheck to paycheck. With two kids and one of them in college, there is not a lot of disposable income in our household and we live a pretty basic and boring life.

    I can't speak to everyone but this city worker works his ass off every day. Ask anyone who knows me. I am not getting a golden pension either. So stop painting with such a broad brush.

    ReplyDelete
  24. LL,

    No offense intended. But you probably have a pretty good gig compared to comparable positions in the private sector. Especially with the pension, which is huge for all city employees.

    The city has 80-100 employees pulling in over $100K per yer, plus obscene pensions at 55 or 60. And they advertised a cashier position last year with no education required for $50K plus pension when comparable bank tellers in the private sector pull in a fraction of that with no pension.

    I'm not saying it's easy living here on a middle-class salary. The cost of living is outrageous. As is the cost of the higher education bubble. But Encinitas is broke and can't afford to keep paying far higher pay and pensions than the market price.

    ReplyDelete
  25. WC

    I've made much more when I was in the private sector. I still could but do not wish to spend 2-3 hours a day commuting to work.

    Lets just start comparing apples to apples and leave the pension bullshit out of it. When I retire and it wont be at 55 or 60 unless they tell me to go. I'll be making poverty wages on my pension. I did not start at 25 years old nor will I have 30 years of service as my service started in my mid 40's. Many others are in the same boat as me. I will be penalized for my social security so no double dipping either. If Paul Ryan has his way I won't get any of it or medicare. Enjoy my contribution to your boomer slush fund WC!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Middle class in Encinitas. That is such a joke.

    My kids think we are dirt poor when they compare their friends lifestyles and homes to ours.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Well if you spent much of your career in the private sector then you accrued Social Security and likely a 401(k) there too, and so you can't cry poor because you didn't rack up as many years of service as some of your colleagues who spotted the gravy train straight out of high school or college.

    Trust me: the 2.7% per year of service you're accruing is WAAAYYY more than any of us get with Social Security or 401(k)s.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Heck, put in just 10 years from age 50 to 60 and get paid 27% of your highest salary for the rest of your life, on top of all the Social Security and other savings you earned during the other 30 years of your working life? That's an insane deal.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I'm certainly not crying poor... my kids are. 90K for two is pretty good and I feel very blessed but it doesn't go very far today in this zip code.

    I live a modest life and don't spend a lot of time in a car and earn all that I have. I am content with my lifestyle and feel no regret or shame for what I do.

    Just don't insult me or my parents who taught me to walk the line, do the right thing, respect another's opinion whether you agree with them or not, work hard and to take pride in everything you do.

    The 401K's and IRA's have been plundered by the multiple stock market bubble carnage over the years and family medical bills. I paid into SS for 30 years before I started the public sector "tit sucking" but will not get full credit for it if I draw a pension. We can only suck on one tit at a time you know and I no longer fill the other one so I can only squeeze it while I suck on the other one.

    I hope your right W.C. but who knows what will be in 10 - 15 years I may not get either the way things are going in this thick headed country.

    ReplyDelete
  30. LL - have you ever NOT gotten a yearly raise? Have you ever had to work late and not been paid? Your wife makes half what you make. . . Is her skill set half yours? How come whenever there is a govt job opening the line for the job stretches around the block?

    ReplyDelete
  31. HH

    I have not had a raise for two years not even a cost of living increase and have reached my wage ceiling already.I came on AFTER the dreaded and vile 35% raises. I just became vested after 5 years of service. I am an hourly worker who is not allowed any over time and must take time off if I work any overtime. I consistently work extra time and do not ask for it whenever it needs to get done.

    I'm old school HH you should always show up 15 minutes early and leave late when you have to.

    My wife only works part time and in the medical field and NO her skill set is on par with anyone, especially mine. I said better half didn't I?

    There's a line around the block for any good paying job, public or private.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Oh and when I was hired my government tit contribution was 5% and now I am contributing 8% of my wages to the tit fund.

    ReplyDelete
  33. LL,

    I think you've been misled by the union bosses. You don't lose your 30 years of Social Security just because you earned a pension for 10 years.

    And if instead of retiring after 10 years at 60, you keep working to 67 like people in the private sector have to, you'd get 45.9% of your final year's pay every year for life. That's $27,540 for life. You're getting more for 17 years service than most people get in Social Security for working 50 years.

    ReplyDelete
  34. HH (or anyone else who knows),

    $4300/mo rent?! Where did you find that out?

    ReplyDelete
  35. LL-

    In only 5 years vesting, at 60k per year, you have earned an annuity that pays $675 oer month or $8,100 per year. Thats serious money......

    Seems like a great gig. No wonder the Cities and State are broke.

    I wonder how much money in present day value, and annuity that pays $675 per month would cost. I would bet between $150,000 to $200,000. Not bad for only 5 years service. LL- Say cha Ching! big $$$$!!!

    ReplyDelete
  36. City worker's retirement package is worth $9 million, undiscounted!

    $400k per year until she dies. Clock in, clock out, $400k per year. No risk.

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/private-sector-salary-public-employee-211843471.html

    Call the number on the sign out front to verify the $4300/month rent. They should just put a flyer up at the city hall since those people are the only one who can afford it.

    ReplyDelete
  37. 6 different people told me this development is an example to pass the Initiative, but the Intiative would not have prevented this development.
    So, if Leucadians really want to stop these kind of developments what would that piece of legislation look like?

    ReplyDelete
  38. A state bill to kill the density bonus law.

    Another thing the City could to offset this state power play, is to lower all zoning 30% hence resulting in no net gain density. The state has no business in our zoning laws. Fricken govn0987t always screws things up.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for posting on our blog.
Anonymous comments are allowed after moderator review.
The moderator works at his leisure.