The Encinitas City Council Wednesday night stalled on providing direction to one of the committees tasked with reviewing the general plan update.
The City Council voted 4-0 to continue its discussion and direction on the Element Review Advisory Committee’s vacancy, attendance and quorum, as well as the Housing Policy Report presentation schedule, to its next meeting. Councilman Mark Muir was absent.
City Manager Gus Vina requested council members postpone their discussion until the Jan. 9 meeting when he will make a presentation on the city’s budget development approach. During his report, Vina said he would present a decision-making model that the City Council can use to advise the ERAC.
“I’m not suggesting that we throw out any of the work that’s been accomplished by the groups, I’m just suggesting that we put those on hold,” Vina said. “Then after Jan. 9, given your direction, we can decide what to do with all of that work and we can certainly direct ERAC on what they need to do next.”
The City Council established the ERAC in December 2011 to review all draft general plan elements and provide feedback on the plan's goals and policies. Originally intended to be a 23-member volunteer board, one position was not filled and one member recently resigned.
With membership already down and attendance sporadic for some of the members, the committee has failed to reach a 12-member quorum on multiple occasions.
Peter Norby, the ERAC facilitator, suggested the City Council establish different standards for what constitutes a quorum.
A few residents urged council members to move in a different direction with the ERAC, pointing to the committee's lack of attendance as only one problem.
Sheila Cameron of Leucadia argued there are too many developers on the committee. Instead of the ERAC, Cameron suggested forming an ad hoc general plan steering committee comprised of only Encinitas residents.
“Please dissolve this current Element Review Advisory Committee,” Cameron said. “We don’t need it. They’ve got a bad reputation, and they are not the right people for this job.”
Councilman Tony Kranz said he doesn’t support dissolving the committee at this time.
“I’ve attended several meetings and heard a lot of conversation,” Kranz said. “I didn’t agree with several of the opinions, but nonetheless, I think that it’s important to hear from everybody.”
In addition to seeking direction on the ERAC’s vacancy, attendance and quorum, Norby asked the Council to confirm whether the tentative housing policy reports schedule is appropriate. The ERAC, General Plan Advisory Committee and Planning Commission are tentatively scheduled to present individual housing policy reports to the Council in February.
Deputy Mayor Lisa Shaffer said that it’s “premature to make any decisions.”
“I think that we’re not in a position to give specific direction to the ERAC right now,” Shaffer said. “We need to relook at the whole process we’re going through to update the general plan.”
Kranz added that the new City Council might want to develop a new vision for the ERAC and the city’s general plan.
“We’ve got some new people here and perhaps we want to take this in another direction,” Kranz said.
In other City Council business:
- Council members approved their appointments to city and regional committees and boards.
- The Council canceled the Jan. 16 meeting due to lack of quorum.
- The Council approved a contract with WalkSanDiego and appropriated $210,450 to conduct public outreach activities and prepare the Encinitas "Let’s Move" Pedestrian Travel and Safe Routes to School Plan.
- The Council awarded a $280,046 contract to PAL General Engineering, Inc. for the construction of Gardendale Road Traffic Calming and Safe Routes to School Improvements.
Follow us on Twitter | Like us on Facebook | Sign up for our daily newsletter
2) Over a year, the ERAC has gathered many varied alternatives for a 'Housing Element' report to the City Council, to be made this month, which was recently moved to Feb. 27: 2013. 3) The ERAC has a 'bad reputation', the Encinitas Project' members are responsible for it: they've completely misled the public about the ERAC, repeatedly smearing it’s progress, as a way to convince the unknowing public to sign a petition for the 'Encinitas Right To Vote' Act; that if passed, or 'adopted', will condemn the Hwy 101 neighborhoods from Swami's to Ponto to 'infill development armageddon', as the sole recipient for capacity of the State mandated 1300 low-income units in Encinitas. Ask the City. 4) These same people who have told the '5 Story lie' about the ERAC just delivered 8000 signatures to the City forcing a 'Special Election' or 'Adoption' of the Initiative: gathered under completely ‘false’ pretenses. If passed, it’ll nullify 3 out of 4 Specific Plan protections and condemn the coast. 5) If the ERAC is allowed to publicly present their report, the public will finally hear the truth: there are no '5 Story buildings coming to a neighborhood near you, soon!" Period. And there 'never' were.
I believe in 'principles' before 'personalities'. What does that mean? It means that others are 'free' to try and attack the facts I've stated above but if they cannot 'prove' their case with 'documented' facts, I believe most readers would prefer reasoned discourse over personal attacks. Read the 'minutes' to the ERAC meetings at Encinitas 2035.com and you'll see clearly that the voters have been purposefully misled as to both the mission assigned the ERAC by Council and the 'method' used to prepare a report to present to the City Council on 2-27-13. I welcome an 'open and transparent' debate on the facts concerning the ERAC, the General Plan Update and the 'Encinitas Right To Vote' Act. And shouldn't that open 'debate' and discourse logically take place during the Feb. 2013 public hearings before the Encinitas City Council? I believe that once the average voter is availed of all the actual facts and truth about the ERAC and that they learn the 'unintended consequences' resulting from the passage or adoption of the ERTVA will be plain to see and that nullification of the 3 Specific Plans and condemnation of the 101 corridor to 'Infill Hell' inherent in passing or adopting the ERTVA, will be judged too costly environmentally, financially and culturally by the voters. Please plan to attend all three public hearings in Feb. 2013 and determine for yourself what is 'fact' from what is 'fiction'.
"5) Strategy/Policy recommendation: Selectively consider 4 to 5 stories in certain locations.Planning Staff would identify specific sites where high density could be accomplished in a context sensitive manner (e.g.; views and surrounding land use zoning). Reason: There may be parcels that lend themselves to higher density/more stories without impact to surrounding areas and would utilize less horizontal land and require fewer locations to accomplish the needed units. Minority Report: None." This was a unanimous decision from all ERAC members. So we are to trust that staff would know where 5 story buildings would make sense in Encinitas? I don't care how this is sugar coated by 5 story buildings just does not fit in Encinitas. I like the ERAC vision statement which I believe was well thought out. I would have liked the ERAC to be more forceful in suggesting council should push back on the number of high-density units (1300) negotiated with SANDAG The city of San Diego and National City were asking for more units. We should gratefully give them some. Now that Lisa Shaffer is our SANDAG representative we will hopefully see some re-negotiating of this allocation. There also need to be a strong message send to HCD in Sacramento, though the League of Cities, about the allocation process and the ludicrous notion that R-30+ density can yield low income housing in our coastal community.
A few still are crying sour grapes, but the initiative as written will protect our entire community. It WON'T nullify any specific plans or the general plan. Mike's are undocumented opinions, unsupported by evidence or any sourcing of facts. On the contrary, Olivier has supported neighborhood concerns re up to 5 story development being allowed, quoting from ERACs own report to "Selectively consider 4 to 5 stories in certain locations. Planning Staff would identify specific sites where high density could be accomplished …" That, as Olivier suggests, gives far too much discretion to planning staff & council, who can take away the public's right to vote any time, according to the current general plan (to be amended by the initiative when it's adopted) whereby now, council, by a super majority vote, of 4 members, or 3 members & the mayor, declare that avoiding a citizen vote would be for "public benefit!" Now the citizens will be allowed to vote, on upzoning. Before council could determine public benefit would be derived from more development fees & property tax revenues from high rise, density bonus development! Fear mongering, pitting one part of Encinitas against the other, isn't helpful. We all will feel the effects of infill development if we're forced to reach the artificially high quota for affordable housing, when only about 1 in 10 or 15 new builds would be designated low income!
I do not see Mr Andreen's as a positive addition to this dialogue. He has tried to tell people that the general plan update wants to eliminate private car ownership and that ALL the possible higher density identified locations are on El Camino Real. Not True. He states he represents masses of businesses in Encinitas. not true, again. This out of towner only shows about twenty members in his business group. Advice: Don't read his propaganda, or make sure you check his proposed facts.