Best Available Fix for Oceanside’s STR Problem

On Wednesday, the council is expected to approve a new Short Term Rental ordinance for the Coastal Zone. This is important to all of South O and Seaside, because STR conversions in the Coastal Zone reduce the availability of rental and owner-occupied housing for everyone West of I-5.

The council will consider three options, of these Option 1 is clearly superior to the other two. It is not what South O asked for in 2019 or last winter, but is the best option available now and the best the council majority is going to enact right now.

Why Option 1?

Since March, Option 1 changed for the better in two ways, one for the worse:

• For the better
  • No new STRs in the R-1 zone, and existing permits cannot be transferred upon sale.
  • A total cap of 480 non-hosted STRs west of Coast Highway (vs. 505 proposed in March and no cap today). This means about 25 more STRs in the RT, R-3 or commercial zones (or equivalent zones downtown).
• For the worse
  • Restricting all STRs of more than 5 bedrooms to only allowing 14 people (occupancy of 6 bedrooms under the current ordinance). This should reduce (but not eliminate) the beach-area parking taken away by these these under-parked mini-motels. This is better than current law, but the limit was 12 people in March.
• Unchanged: General clarifications that apply to all options

In December, the city approved an ordinance banning new STRs outside the Coastal Zone, essentially capping these inland STRs at existing levels.

Meanwhile, all these promises are worthless without actual enforcement. The previous enforcement was inconsistent (with major loopholes), although the council and staff are promising better enforcement going forward

Call to Action

The conversion of residential property to STRs over the past decade has reduced the supply of housing in South O and elsewhere in the city. Adding a cap to the Coastal Zone will limit the future loss of housing that could be instead be occupied by renters or new homeowners.

Therefore, we recommend that all South O residents email the council with this message

Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, The conversion of Oceanside housing to Short Term Rentals has reduced the availability and raised the cost of housing for full-time city residents. I ask that you enact Option 1, which caps the number of STRs in the Coastal Zone, and limits the maximum occupancy of STRs to reduce the impact on beach area parking. Finally, the city needs to deliver on its promise to improve enforcement of the new and existing regulations.

Attending the Hearing

The STR is agenda item #23 Wednesday, the second of two public hearings that will be heard starting around 6pm. The city council chambers are on the second floor of Oceanside City Hall, 300 N. Coast Highway, Oceanside, CA 92054.

South O (and others) who favor protecting neighborhoods and housing supply should wear blue.

Note: Revised April 20 to clarify Option 1 details, and provide information on Wednesday’s hearing.

Progress on saving Oceanside beaches

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Fortunately, when it comes to Oceanside’s disappearing beaches, the city of Oceanside is finally doing something different.

That something different is called Rebeach — a coastal preservation design competition — and the first efforts were on display in a workshop Tuesday at the city council chambers. The three hour workshop include an 88 minute presentation that has been uploaded to YouTube; the city is accepting public feedback through September 30 — and also invites resident to attend the October 17 and December 13 workshops.

How We Got Here

A lack of sand is a problem for much of the Oceanside Littoral Cell that extends from Dana Point to La Jolla, including Oceanside. The issues are summarized by Save Oceanside Sand, a community advocacy group.

Since 2001, Oceanside and other government agencies have funded various efforts at sand replenishment i.e. dredging up sand and depositing it on city beaches. These efforts have emphasized the beaches near the Pier, and only rarely made it south of Wisconsin Street. Even so, the amount of sand remaining on these beaches today seems below the average during this period.

Compared to the tourist-serving beaches, South O beaches have suffered even more. Those of us who have lived in Oceanside for decades recall when Buccaneer and even Cassidy Street beaches had sand. Now we hobble over the cobble (muffin-sized rocks) to get into the Pacific, which discourages all but the most determined from venturing into the water.

The city and others in the county have spent the past decades blaming the Marine Corps for building the Del Mar Boat Basin in 1942 and thus blocking the southbound transport of sand along the beaches. Efforts by one (or even two) of 435 congressional representatives to force the US government to fix the problem have been (predictably) unsuccessful.

Meanwhile, the Army Corps of Engineers concluded that the city’s harbor contributed to the problem. Despite years of study, there are conflicting theories about the most important (and relative impact) of possible contributing factors — which, in addition to lateral transport of sand, might also include currents drawing sand offshore (or failing to return onshore).

The past 22 years have demonstrated that replenishment without retention matches the aforementioned definition of insanity. The Rebeach competition is intended to generate retention solutions that are scientifically, economically and politically feasible.

Rebeach Oceanside

In January, the city approved creating the Rebeach design competition, and promised to advertise the competition globally. The stated mission of the competition is “To construct an innovative, multi-benefit, sand retention project on the City of Oceanside’s beaches that serves both local and regional benefits” while the criteria include:

• Align with the community character and history of place within the City of Oceanside.
• Leverage previous analysis and feasibility studies completed to-date.
• Maintain a forward-thinking design that incorporates adaptive capacity of solutions to future coastal conditions while addressing chronic erosion issues.
• Be technically feasible, financially viable, and environmentally and socially acceptable.

In May, the city announced the 15-member selection jury. Later that month, the jury selected three design teams, which have been working with the city since then. The three teams were announced on August 1.

August 29 Workshop

On Tuesday, the city’s project committee introduced the three finalists, which each made a 20 minutes presentation about the ideas they developed over the past three months.  The workshop attracted a standing room only crowd of more than 200 people — the most I’ve ever seen in the council chambers.

The three teams were (in order of presentation):

1. Deltares (from Delft, Netherlands), Deltares USA (Silver Spring, MD) and the architectural firm MVRDV (Rotterdam). Three representatives discussed the various tradeoffs, provided examples from around the world, and promised to select from a catalog of previously successful coastal engineering approach. Among their three concept designs was building out a “green dream peninsula” at Buccaneer Beach to aid in sand retention.
2. SCAPE Landscape Architecture (New York) with its earlier partner, the nonprofit Dredge Research Collaborative and the engineering firm ESA (Florence, Italy). The entire presentation was by a landscape architect from SCAPE’s San Francisco office. The presentation include converting Tyson Street beach into a “Dunepark” and building a “Cobble Crest” and “Nearshore Reef” at Buccaneer.
3. International Coastal Management, a 34-year-old coastal engineering firm based on Australia’s Gold Coast near Brisbane. The firm was represented by its third most senior engineer, who emphasized the similarity of the beach preservation issues of California and the Gold Coast, including the importance of working with the surfing community. He presented more general ideas for sandbars and reefs.

Design concept for Buccaneer Beach by Deltares

Design concept for Buccaneer Beach by SCAPE Landscape Architecture.

The public had a chance to meet with the firms before and after the public presentation, but the city emphasized its desire to obtain public input using its formal online survey process.

Process and Key Players

Introducing Tuesday’s session were two key members of the city’s five-member project committee. One was Sam Carter from Resilient Cities Catalyst, a nonprofit consulting firm that is running the design competition, and has run more than 60 projects for local governments. It helped launch the San Diego Region Coastal Exchange to discuss issues such as coastal erosion.

The other was Jayme Timberlake, who for the past 16 months has been the city’s (First ever) Coastal Zone Administrator. In addition to beach erosion, she’s also involved in the Buccaneer Park refurbishment. The other three committee members represent RCC and GHD, a 95-year-old Melbourne-based engineering design company with more than 200 global locations, including 13 in California.

The decision of the council (and the city manager) to hire a full-time staffer to handle coastal issues — and start the competition — suggests that our city (unlike many other SD cities) is no longer doing the same thing and expecting different results. In addition to the city manager, Mayor Sanchez and two councilmen (Keim, Weiss) attended Tuesday’s session.

The jury has 15 members, five of whom are nonvoting. It includes five PhDs, one current and two former staffers of the California Coastal Commission, two coastal engineers and a marine biologist. Community representation includes four Oceanside residents: the heads of the local Audubon Society, the Chamber of Commerce, a charter boat company and Save Oceanside Sand, while a fifth public member (a director of Oceanside Boardriders) is also a city resident.

Among the 10 voting members are two councilmen, from Del Mar and Encinitas.  However — perhaps as a testimonial to coastal insanity — Carlsbad has repeatedly criticized Oceanside for not collaborating but refused an invitation to collaborate in the jury process.

Going Forward

The plan is for the three teams to refine their ideas and present them two more workshops set for October 17 and December 13 (dates subject to change).

The schedule in the city’s April 26 guidelines concludes with the following dates:

• December 18: “Jury selects one preferred option to bring to City Council”
• January 1: “Consistency Review: GHD conducts consistency review of preferred design”
• January 22: “City Council Vote: preferred Design Team should be in-person”

The city’s guidelines state

Upon a passing vote, the winning design will move directly into final engineering and environmental compliance phases, with the GHD team. What sets this process apart from other, more traditional design competition processes, is its direct link to the engineering design and permitting phases for construction. The ultimate outcome of this process will be a shovel ready sand retention pilot project.

There are many opportunities for public participation in the next three months. Given how important the beach is to our community and our city, South O residents should avail themselves of every opportunity to provide input that influences the city’s eventual decision.

Setting boundaries for 2022 council elections

The city is in the middle of its decennial redistricting effort, to realign city council district boundaries to equalize the size of the various districts. City Clerk Zeb Navarro visited South O on Jan. 25, to highlight the 2022 redistricting effort for the bimonthly meeting of the South Oceanside Community and Merchants Association.

On Wednesday Feb. 2, the hearings and workshops will make their only appearance in South O’s district (District 3), in a 6pm workshop at Lincoln Middle School, 2000 California St., Oceanside.

As in previous years, the boundaries must be set (according to state law) to have similar population, contiguous territory, follow natural boundaries, and respect communities of interest.

City Council District boundaries, 2017-2021

When the first districts were picked in 2017 — in response to a threatened lawsuit by a shakedown lawyer — Save South O was involved in the process. In the midst of South O’s (largely successful) fight against imposing the Coast Highway “Road Diet” on South O, we asked to be placed in a different district than Seaside/Townsite, where residents sought the Road Diet (less cars, less road capacity, more walking/bikes). That desire was granted, in that the northern boundary of District 3 is Oceanside Blvd, and almost all of the area South of Oceanside Blvd. is in District 3.

District 3 is now the biggest district in the city and nearly 5% too big. The city’s 174,578 residents call for four districts of approximately 43,645 residents, so any approved plan must shed (about) 1,968 residents from District 3. (Under US law, districts are determined by residents and not voters).

Because Communities of Interest are an important (and difficult to define) construct, residents are encouraged to use the process to submit their own boundaries for Communities of Interest (COI) that should be used in setting boundaries. The city uses this definition:

A COI is a group of people in a defined geographic location that share a common bond or interest. A Community of Interest is defined as “a contiguous population which shares common social and economic interests that should be included within a single district for purposes of fair and effective representation.” Please tell us what defines your Community of Interest, where it is located, and why it should stay together.

For example, most South O residents would consider South O and the West side of Fire Mountain to share a Community of Interest — in terms of schools, traffic, freeway access, and shopping.

If possible, residents should attend Wednesday’s hearing. No matter what, residents are encouraged to submit their information (using the city’s process) no later than Feb. 10, so that it is considered in making the initial draft maps.

Election Results and South O

Oceanside Results

Once the initial local election results were posted, there wasn’t a lot of suspense remaining. Three of the four measures passed easily: term limits (K), cannabis tax (M) and tax increase for school bonds (W). The most controversial topic this year — North River Farms and Proposition L — failed miserably by a 2:1 margin.

Our next mayor will be Councilwoman Esther Sanchez, while our current mayor Pete Weiss will become District 4 councilman. Both won easily — with nearly twice as many votes as their nearest competitor — and both will have a limit of three terms in that new position.

The only suspense is over who will be the council member for District 3 and South O: former councilwoman Shari Mackin took an early lead, but incumbent Ryan Keim led in the final tally of the night (which does not included many uncounted ballots). As expected, business owner Amber Newman finished third.

Both candidates opposed North River Farms (while Weiss and the 2nd and 3rd place mayoral candidates supported it). Both strongly supported Save South O positions on Coast Highway and redevelopment of Buccaneer Park, although Keim thus far has been much weaker on Short Term Rental regulation. In the campaign, the two both appear to support protecting the South O business district, but differ on policy and beach issues.

Mayor-elect Sanchez is vacating her District 1 seat, which will be filled by appointment (likely if Keim wins) or by special election (likely if Mackin wins and the council deadlocks on an appointment).

Several issues will be important to the city in the next two years

1. Rebuilding the city’s economy — both recovery of small business and attracting new business — when the national epidemic ends in 6-12 months with the vaccination of a substantial proportion of the country.
2. Preserving the character of our business district with the changes in local business and jobs inevitable with that recovery.
3. Dealing with the need for affordable housing and strong state pressure to increase house density, while pushing back against an ongoing pattern of developers seeking to maximize profits by providing limited parking onsite and generating increased demand for neighborhood parking
4. Repairing the Short Term Rental ordinance as the impacts on neighborhoods continue to worsen.

Beyond these citywide issues, Save South O will continue to push the city to reveal a master plan for the future of Buccaneer Park and the surrounding area.

Elsewhere in San Diego County

North County’s two first-term representatives in Sacramento (Tasha Boerner Horvath) and Washington (Mike Levin) easily won re-election. Horvath will be re-elected one more time before term limits kick in; however both will represent different parts of San Diego County when the 2022 redistricting kicks in. 

Rep. Levin and Scott Peters are joined by newly elected Sarah Jacobs (granddaughter of billionaire Irwin Jacobs) in safe Democratic seats. Barring scandal, they will have a job for life — like Ron Packard or Susan Peters did — or until they decide to run for something else (Bob Filner). Meanwhile, the future of the swing seat closely fought by Darrell Issa and Ammar Campa-Najjar will depend heavily on the 2022 redistricting.

Most incumbents easily won re-election, with one notable exception. Former Encinitas mayor Kirstin Gaspar (a moderate Republican) lost badly to community organizer Terra Lawson-Remer. Barring a surprise reversal, this will give Democrats a majority on the Board of Supervisors for the first time in decades.

Finally, after decades of electing outsiders as mayors, San Diegans elected the ultimate insider Assemblyman Todd Gloria — a statewide Democratic leader and former interim mayor — over Councilwoman Barbara Bry. Gloria has supported a number of controversial measures in Sacramento, including AB5 (eliminating most independent contractors) and mandating increased housing density by cities without regard to local preferences.

He is expected to accelerate the city’s trend towards increased housing density and reducing or eliminating parking to force residents out of their cars (or force their cars onto local streets). He has stated his opposition to Short Term Rentals because they reduce housing supply, but it is unclear how (or if) he will get a majority of the council to institute meaningful regulation and enforcement to preserve that housing supply.

 

Council Candidates: Economy and Development

Below are the answers to the three remaining questions asked of the candidates for the District 3 city council seat. These are follow up questions to yesterday’s two questions about beaches and parks. As before, we received answers from four of the six candidates:

• Kellie Davis
• Ryan Keim
• Shari Mackin
• Amber Newman

At Tuesday’s live candidate forum (6-7:30pm on Zoom) we (and the candidates) will ask other questions of these candidates.

3. What do you think of the city’s current regulation of cannabis cultivation and distribution? Are there any changes that you would like to make?

Kellie Davis

I do agree with the current direction the City Council is taking regarding the cultivation and distribution of cannabis. I am in favor of creating new revenue streams for our City, and it is my understanding the San Diego County Farm Bureau and some of our local farmers are in favor of the cultivation of cannabis as a viable crop, as other crops have become more problematic to grow, and therefore, less profitable. I support our local farmers in having options to support their families, and our local economy.

Ryan Keim

Balancing access and community safety will be a challenge going forward with the 2016 legalization of marijuana. The city of Oceanside has used a slow and steady approach to cultivation and distribution to ensure we have the ability to address unintended consequences and protect our citizens. Responsible growers and manufacturers were identified and approved in a methodical method so we can accurately assess the success of the program as we move forward. Local governments were given control of the regulation of marijuana so specific issues could be addressed appropriately. Public safety should be a local government’s top priority and it will be mine with the drafting of any further specific ordinances.

Shari Mackin

Currently, the regulatory structure requires both a local license along with a conditional use permit for both cultivation and manufacturing. However, currently cultivation is the only cannabis related activity that allows for both recreational and medical operations and all other types are restricted to medical use only. Although we have a cap of twelve for cultivation uses allowed in Agri-zone, we do not have a cap on the number of manufacturing businesses.

We’ve (the planning commission) had discussions in the past about putting caps on how many breweries and where they should be located. I think it might be time to apply that thinking to marijuana manufacturing businesses in Oceanside. Additionally, I feel a business park/industrial park would be best suited for manufacturing and far, far away from schools, youth centers, and other uses that youth might gravitate to.

Amber Newman

Oceanside’s current cannabis regulations, in their entirety, are woefully inadequate for increasing patient access and/or city revenue. Some of the needed changes are allowing cultivation indoors in industrial areas, expanding zoning for manufacturing, distribution & delivery services to include all industrial and business park zones, and removing the two license cap for delivery services and the twelve license cap for cultivators. We must also allow for storefront dispensaries in both industrial and commercial zones. Further, we should permit all licensed cannabis businesses to operate in the state sanctioned medical and adult-use capacities. Making these adjustments will maximize the potential for this new industry to create good paying local jobs and truly become a contributing factor in our local tax base.

I strongly recommend voting No on Measure M. Overtaxing this emerging industry to the degree Measure M does will not provide the boon our current council seems to think it will. I already know of two businesses that were exploring opportunities in Oceanside until they learned the details of Measure M. More will follow. If we continue to discourage the cannabis industry, we will lose to other cities those gains which should rightfully be ours.

4. The state is strongly encouraging “infill” housing development to increase supply without creating sprawl. Can this be done without changing the character of South O?

Kellie Davis

Infill housing development would change the character of South O, and I do not think it could be done without changing its character. With respect for current and long-term residents, I acknowledge and understand a change like infill housing development may not be a favorable solution for some.

Ryan Keim

Preserving the character of Oceanside and our quality of life needs to shape all land use and zoning decisions in our City. Oceanside is mandated by the State to allow the construction of a specified number of houses to address the “housing crisis.” I disagree with the amount of housing (almost 6000 units) Oceanside is required to provide and will continually advocate to Sacramento for reasonable growth in appropriate areas. It is imperative we constrain height and density to the downtown area to allow our other neighborhoods to retain their current uniqueness and charm. Through the use of underutilized commercial property and available infill lots in the downtown region, we can meet our housing goals without impacting South O, Fire Mountain or any other neighborhood.

Shari Mackin

Yes, absolutely this can be done and needs to be done. South O is unique in that much of our building stock and homes are eclectic; I would push to keep our South O character at all costs. This can be done through our LCP and general plan update and solidified through the use of explicit language and examples of preferred development written into both plans that is focused on retaining character, retains our neighborhood friendly ambience that respects our beachside setting and consideration for scenic views along with size and scale of development. The last thing I would like to see is Coast Hwy becoming an extension of downtown. I believe each segment (South O, Seaside, Downtown, and North Beach) should be looked at separately with regards to the general plan and remain special places that serve neighborhoods and visitors to Oceanside.

Amber Newman

Yes, I believe it can be done while keeping the character of all our neighborhoods. Development is another area where Oceanside could behave proactively vs reactively.

Much like our business community, we don’t need to wait to see what shows up. We can (and should) actively seek out that which is best for our community. We need to identify sites appropriate for infill development and work with the property owners to develop a concept that fits within the neighborhood. Once we know what we expect, then we can seek out developers interested in building to those specifications. Ours is a coastal city, we will not have a problem finding builders who are willing to satisfy our exacting standards.

Areas that should be considered include everything from building heights and architectural features to setbacks, parking and even landscaping. We allow higher density on sites where it makes sense and disallow it where it doesn’t. We make clear what we need from a given project and make them conditions of approval.

5. When the COVID crisis is over, what should the city do to increase jobs and tax revenues?

Kellie Davis

I find it more beneficial to think in terms of increasing household revenue, and not in terms of creating jobs. We should not wait until COVID-19 is over to re-imagine new revenue streams to grow our local economy.

As an example, the other day, “Jackie,” saw our big eucalyptus tree in our backyard, and asked if she and her mother could trim our tree and keep the trimmings, which she then sells to stores. Aside from the gas it took to drive to our home, there were no other out of pocket expense for Jackie; she made a profit, and we now have a trimmed tree. Jackie demonstrates how to use what you have to create new revenue streams, and how to do it with little to no personal financial investment.

As for tax revenues, I am cautious in exploring any further taxing. I prefer to put my efforts in strategizing ways to capitalize on what we presently have to offer and contribute to our local economy, by visioning and creating new revenue streams.

Ryan Keim

As we entered 2020, the city of Oceanside was in the best economic position in recent memory – Oceanside recovered well from the Great Recession with a lean and efficient city government and a thriving business community. This allowed us to respond effectively and quickly to the health crisis without cutting our core services to Oceanside residents.

Going forward, the clearest path to our recovery from COVID will be to continue what we were doing prior to the pandemic – supporting our businesses by removing red tape, listening to their concerns and ensuring the City actually works for them. We can also do this safely while following the health guidelines and keep our per-capita infection rate as one of the lowest in the County.

Fortunately, we have been proactive and started these recovery efforts in early March. I immediately formed an Economic Recovery Task Force to connect the business community with leaders from all levels of government to identify the ever-changing challenges they were facing and this communication will continue. Additionally, I will continue to advocate on behalf of our small businesses to the County and State on a daily basis to ensure they are given the same ability to operate as big-box stores during the health crisis. Small business is the backbone of Oceanside’s economy and their survival is crucial to the success of our City.

Shari Mackin

Small business is the backbone of all business and we must support them during these unstable times. It is difficult to gage the full effect of the virus currently however, I don’t think that waiting until COVID is over to increase jobs and tax revenues is the way to go. The city has an Economic Development Department and that department should be closely monitoring job gains/losses and business additions/closures. Alike, the city’s Financial Services Department monitors expenditures and revenues. I would expect at minimum, to hear from them monthly the trends, both jobs and revenues and the departments are seeing. Upon hearing the report, interventions can be adjusted and/or discussion of applying other strategies and services within the city’s capabilities without jeopardizing our general fund should be discussed.

Currently the city has relaxed parking regulations, allowed for expansion into and allowed permit free use of public spaces, offered a low interest loan program, and outdoor displays. I support these interventions; however, I would like to carefully monitor the progress to ensure that our general fund is not compromised and remains solvent. I have faith in our small business, they are resilient and between small business and our economic development and financial services departments, I feel we have the experts we need at the table to support them while keeping the city solvent.

Amber Newman

Covid really has no significant bearing on what the city should do to increase jobs and tax revenues because what should be done post-Covid is the same thing that should have been done pre-Covid.

We need a proactive and creative business development team that focuses on bringing businesses to Oceanside rather than just approving whatever happens to show up. We need to monitor for available spaces and seek companies we feel would be a good fit for those spaces. We need to encourage local entrepreneurs to set up shop. I would like to see the city offering workshops to help people looking to start their own small business. Perhaps include mentorship opportunities and incentive plans for moving into specific planned areas targeted for re-growth.

We should also take advantage of Covid showing us that many jobs can be done from home and explore opportunities for building live/work spaces. We need to stop converting industrial properties into other uses and find ways to increase our industrial inventory. We need to craft mixed use opportunities so that neighborhood needs are met closer to home and so that longstanding businesses can remain in place as the landscape changes.

Council Candidates: Beaches & Parks

In advance of Tuesday’s debate, we asked the six candidates for the District 3 seat to answer five written questions. Four of the candidates completed the survey:

• Kellie Davis
• Ryan Keim
• Shari Mackin
• Amber Newman

Of the remaining candidates, one (Bill Batchelor) declined to participate, and the other (David Zernik) did not respond.

Below are the responses to the two questions related to beaches and parks. The answer to the three remaining questions can be found here.

1. The city/federal priority for beach replenishment has been for the area around the pier; what is the short term and long-term solution for restoring South O beaches?

Kellie Davis

There are six conceptional ideas that have been presented to the City for restoring the beaches, which center around sand retention and beach nourishment. Admittedly, at the date I write this response, I have not spoken with any residents who currently reside along the coast of South O; I am hoping to rectify this soon. In order to give a proper answer to what the short- and long-term solutions are for South O, I would need to speak with people who are immediately and directly impacted before submitting an answer.

After attending a virtual meeting on the topic, I asked Mr. Kiel Koger a similar question, what are solutions for restoring South O beaches. He said there wasn’t one particular option his office was in favor of, and he hoped going through a “criteria matrix” will help things become more clearer and narrow down the decision as to which option to choose.

I would like to hear again from Mr. Koger after he goes through the criteria matrix, and directly from the residents from south O before making any decision about what the short term and long-term solutions are for restoring South O beaches.

Ryan Keim

The priority of the federal government (Army Corp of Engineers) is not beach replenishment and hasn’t been for decades – excess sand from the annual harbor dredgings have traditionally been dumped near the pier and harbor; the sand was only a byproduct of that process and not for the explicit purpose of replenishing our beaches. To save beaches throughout Oceanside we have to identify, fund and, complete a sand replenishment and/or retention project immediately.

After more than 20 years of waiting, I ordered a sand replenishment study last year (which was unanimously approved by council) that will identify potential solutions in 2021. Simultaneously we need to continue to hold the federal government responsible for their role in the loss of our beaches and ensure they provide the funding and support we need to complete a project.

Shari Mackin

As for short term solutions, sand has typically been replenished to Tyson St. without regard for South Oceanside. As deputy mayor for the City of Oceanside I was Oceanside’s representative on SANDAG and member of the Shoreline Preservation Committee and was able to bring opportunity sand to South Oceanside beaches via barge and/truck which gave us beautiful sandy beaches for several seasons. Unfortunately, that hasn’t been a focus for the current city council and their lobbying efforts have failed. I’ve always had a great relationship with agencies that have so much control on what happens or doesn’t happen in Oceanside and I’m confident that I will be able to secure funding for additional sand movement to our beaches. I would like to explore a relationship with Camp Pendleton to “shift” some of the sand from the

Santa Margarita River, the boat basin, and Del Mar beach to our beaches as the buildup is soon to become a big problem for them. Finally, I also believe there is some opportunity to create living shorelines along our coast which could provide a means of managing coastal areas to protect, restore, and/or enhance habitat and hopefully sand retention.

As far as long term solutions, the city has contracted with a consultant to look at various ways to protect City beaches from the impacts of long-term shoreline erosion with the goal of the study to identify a beach replenishment strategy that is “environmentally sensitive, financially feasible and has a reasonable chance of being approved through the regulatory permitting process”. Since the city is in the middle of conducting data collection with the help of the CCIA at Scripps, it would be premature to discuss suggested long term solutions without data to support any proposed “solutions” at this time. I’ll let the scientist do their work and then base my opinion on the science.

Amber Newman

I’ve long felt that city hall is hyper-focused on tourists to the point where they seem to forget that the rest of us actually live here and need amenities, entertainment and recreation opportunities as well. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t be welcoming to our visitors and do everything we can to make sure they have a good time and come back, but we also need to make sure our residents enjoy living here and want to stay. Our beaches are a big part of that.

I won’t pretend to be an expert on the best practices of sand retention. What I can assure is that as your councilmember I will continue to interface with qualified personnel and ensure that an ecologically sound solution which serves residents as well as visitors is properly funded. How can I ensure the money will be there? The truth is, we can’t afford not to invest in sand retention. To do so and slowly lose our beaches means we also say goodbye to the 300 plus million a year that happy beachgoers bring to our city. That goes for local residents as well as our guests.

2. What changes would you like to make to city parks and how would you pay for it?

Kellie Davis

In echoing the recommendations from the Parks & Recreation Master Plan 2019, part of the changes I would like to see implemented is evaluating the conditions of the park on a regular basis by maintenance staff, and giving maintenance staff proper training on how to maintain a City Park’s appearance. Even if funds where presently available to renovate Oceanside parks and its facilities, it is paramount to have trained staff who know what the City of Oceanside’s standards are, and how to maintain those standards for our parks.

Training staff to properly maintain our parks would be a nominal expense, and one I hope is already covered when the City of Oceanside hires new maintenance employees.

After staff is properly trained, I would then evaluate and address the aging infrastructure of our City Parks. In understanding the challenges of our current economy, a possible revenue stream could come from citizens or businesses donating to the park, or, would like to memorialize a loved one by: purchasing a portion of an asphalt pathway in their name; donating the cost for a picnic shelter; planting a tree; purchase plaques or signs, and display in the park in their honor.

Ryan Keim

Parks throughout the City are in different states of condition and we need to identify the greatest needs in our recent Parks Master plan. This plan was developed by input from the community, Oceanside Parks and Recreation Commission and the City Council and provides a good outline of our current priorities. Additionally, going to the beach is the most popular family pastime in Oceanside and it acts as community park for much of our City. By preserving access to our coastline and restoring beaches, we can increase usable “park” space.

We also need to ensure our parks and beaches are safe and comfortable for families by addressing the increasing quality-of-life crimes. Funding will come from delivering a balanced general fund every year without raising taxes or cutting services and partnering with the County and State for grants and awards. Last year, I coordinated with Assemblymember Tasha Boerner Horvath to receive more than $7 million for beach-front improvements and similar partnership is vital going forward.

Shari Mackin

I feel the city has completely dropped the ball in fulfilling its original plan to bring parkland and playing fields to El Corazon. The developer made promises he did not keep and there is no one at the city to make him fulfill his obligations to create more playing fields and parkland. I would like to see El Corazon dedicated parkland to protect what little we have left for our community rather than uses such as more housing and hotels – it’s free! Fields can be developed through our Parks and Recreation Foundation and community outreach.

I would like to revisit our Parks Master Plan and make sure that the property currently housing the La Salina Wastewater Facility is incorporated into the master plan once decommissioned. Our LCP states that the property should remain in the public’s hands should the plant be decommissioned. The property should be dedicated parkland, therefore protected by our park ordinance to expand Buccaneer Beach Park. Due to my ongoing relationships with State agencies, I am confident that I would be able to get funding (as discussed years ago) from the Coastal Conservancy for the planning and creation of the beach park. Additionally, we can create a fund that could accept mitigation payments to help fund the park.

Amber Newman

One issue that I’d like to address with regard to our parks is a situation I was made aware of by resident concerning Oak Riparian Park which borders Carlsbad. There used to be a footpath into Carlsbad over the creek but recently it’s fallen into disrepair. I am concerned about foot traffic across the creek disturbing the local ecosystem in this prime piece of natural habitat. Environments such as this are few and far between in our city and they must be cherished and protected. I would like to get to the bottom of which city holds the onus for addressing the situation and work on a mutual solution that benefits visitors from both cities.

Save South O hosting Oct. 6 council forum

On October 6, from 6:00-7:30pm, Save South O will be hosting a candidate forum for those seeking to represent District 3 on the Oceanside City Council. The forumwill be hosted by Richard Fox (founder/leader of the South Oceanside Community and Merchants Association), using his Zoom account at

http://richardszoom.us

We will be posting written candidate answers to this website between now and October 6. Between the written and live questions, we plan to address questions both specific to South O and of more general interest for those located in District 3.

Stay tuned for additional details about the candidates, format and schedule.

Oct. 3 Update: Format of the Forum

Four candidates are participating in the debate:

• Kellie Davis
• Ryan Keim
• Shari Mackin
• Amber Newman

The other two candidates — Bill Batchelor and David Zernik — chose not to participate.

The forum will include opening and closing statements by the four candidates, before and after questions from Save South O.

Final candidate list for November

While the state and national list hasn’t changed, the Oceanside ballot has simplified slightly since last month according to the latest records from the City Clerk.

For Oceanside Council District 3—the 78 corridor that includes South O—six of the seven candidates who pulled papers qualified for the ballot:

1. Bill Batchelor
2. Kellie Davis
3. Ryan Keim
4. Shari Mackin
5. Amber Newman
6. David Zernik

By comparison, District 4 has only four candidates that qualified for the ballot: Michelle Gomez, Jane Marshall, Morgan McCray, Peter Weiss.

The mayor’s race cuts 12 down to 8 candidates

1. Perry Alvarez
2. Rocky Chavez
3. Jack Feller
4. Fernando Garcia
5. Rob Howard
6. Ruben Major
7. Fabio Marchi
8. Christopher Rodriguez
9. Alex Sortino
10. Esther Sanchez
11. David Turgeon
12. Lou Uridel

Meanwhile, the city’s website reports that the ballot measures have now been numbered:

• Measure K: Term Limits (yes approves term limits, no leaves things unchanged)
• Measure L: North River Farms Referendum (yes approves the project, no leaves things unchanged)
• Measure M: Cannabis Business Tax (yes approves the new tax, no leaves things unchanged)

Zoning Integrity – Wednesday’s Council

Wednesday’s city council meeting will hear the appeal of a rezoning request by the owner of a Short Term Rental at 1643 S. Pacific Street; if the appeal is granted, the 8BR STR would be torn down and (according to proposed plans) replaced by three condos. The hearing is item #29 on the agenda, and the staff report can be found here.

On Nov. 18, the Planning Commission voted 6-1 to deny the rezoning request by the owner, and instead upheld the determination of City Planner Jeff Hunt. The agenda item begins 87 minutes (1:27) into Cindy Rocco’s video of the PC hearing.

The PC agreed with staff that the parcel (APN 153-091-17-00) is south of the boundary between the R-1 and RT zone, and thus was always intended (including in the city’s approved zoning map) to be in the R-1 zone. That boundary is set by the coastal access (north of the property) that aligns with the extension of Whaley Street.

The property is one of 29 S. Pacific Street properties managed or owned by David Fischbach, CEO of Beachfront Only — the largest STR owner in Oceanside. The property was the subject of numerous code violations, including noise and trespassing complaints, and (unique to South O) a pool that was installed (without permit) in November 2017 and removed in April 2018.

The developer’s two consultants argued that the issue was a matter of fairness, because the city’s online database said it was RT; the city says only the paper map is legally binding. The claim that the owner was misled in his 2017 purchase is expected to be the basis of the appeal, which requires 3 of the 5 council members to side with the applicant. However, the applicant has not produced a single document saying “RT” from 2017 or earlier, suggesting that the decision

We had a great turnout last month, so we hope that all Oceanside residents who want to protect the integrity of the city’s process will attend Wednesday’s council meeting — asking the council to support the staff and PC decision, and with it, the integrity of the city’s existing zoning regulations.

The KEY Coast Highway vote

On Wednesday (Aug. 14), the City Council will finally vote on the Coast Highway plan. The proposal, developed since 2007, has two major elements: the Road Diet (cutting 4 lanes to 2, replacing signals with traffic circles) and an Incentive District for developing on Coast (both denser development and accelerated approval).

The hearing was originally planned for 2pm, but — in response to public complaints — the council last week voted to move the hearing to 6pm; it is the only agenda item. It will be held at the council chambers, on the 2nd floor of 300 N. Coast Highway.

Save South O summarized its position and arguments in a June posting. As South O residents have asked for the past three years, we call for no Road Diet anywhere in South O — i.e. 4 lanes south of Oceanside Blvd. We also the city to reject plans for any Incentive District South of Morse Street. This position was unanimously backed by the South Oceanside Business District.

While many in South O oppose any Road Diet, the June 10 Planning Commission hearing made clear that many residents downtown (aka Seaside, aka Townsite) support the Road Diet. Thus, South O asked the Planning Commission respect our wishes and recognize that South O is not downtown.  South O does not want a road diet: 23 from South O testified against a South O Road Diet, while 2 testified in favor.

The Planning Commission voted to endorse Alternative 3: no Road Diet or Incentive District south of Morse Street. In addition, this option provides South O with two new protected crosswalks; as the April 2019 Final EIR (Volume 1, p. S-8) writes:

Alternative 3 would provide Class III sharrow markings on Coast Highway between Morse Street and Vista Way and curb-extending mid-block pedestrian crosswalks at Whaley Street and Kelly Street.

Eliminating the South O Road Diet

The “temporary” road diet — begun in March 2016 — has now run to 40 months. On weekends — and much of the summer — it has brought regular gridlock as residents, employees and visitors struggle to get in and out of South O from its main northern entrance.

There are many reasons to oppose the Road Diet South of Oceanside Blvd. — including that Coast is part of the city’s official tsunami evacuation route. However, there is an inherent contradiction in Alternative 3 — which increases density in the Dip while reducing traffic lanes.

In the city’s Incentive District plan, any property marked as a “Node” (purple) is allowed to be 65′ maximum height (55′ average height) and 63 dwelling units/acre.

Public records show that the Node properties around the Sprinter station total 38.69 acres. This would allow 2,437 new dwelling units — in addition to any residential development in the (blue) “Avenue” properties, which allow all-residential projects up to 45’ high.

Worse, 15.39 acres of Node properties are South of Godfrey Street. There is no way for residents of these properties (and the associated 970 units) to drive to their property without either driving in (on the East side) or driving out (on the West side) via South Oceanside.

Some claim that these residents will not have cars, but instead will use mass transit. However, cars will be important for these residents for at least several decades. The Sprinter has had only limited ridership to date, averaging 46,000/week across the entire system in the most recent fiscal year.

In addition, like other brand-new units West of I-5, these units will rent for $2,000-3,000/month, which under federal guidelines means they’ll need a household income of $80k-$120k/year; buying a $600,000 condo would also require about $120k/year. This is more than what two people making $15/hour can afford, and well above the average Oceanside household income (which is $62k/year). Clearly many of these affluent renters/owners will have cars.

Taking Action

Save South O was formed to make the concerns of South Oceanside heard at City Hall. In turn, we need your help. We ask that you please

• Email the council to voice your opposition to any Road Diet south of Oceanside Blvd.
• Come to the hearing at 6pm Wednesday:
  • Wear your “Save South O” t-shirt if you have one (contact us to obtain one); if you don’t have one, please wear a blue shirt
  • Be polite at all times
  • When you testify, ask the council that in addition to Alternative 3, that the “Dip” be restored to four lanes, i.e. no Road Diet between Oceanside Blvd. and Morse Street.