Save South O and other community groups around the state are circulating petitions to put the “Our Neighborhood Voices” initiative (also called the Brand-Huang-Mendoza Tripartisan Land Use Initiative) on the November 2022 state ballot. The goal of this is to stop recent efforts by Sacramento politicians to usurp local land use decisions, forcing cities to accelerate property development without regard for local conditions or concerns.
The grassroots support for this measure makes it almost certain it will qualify, but that’s just the beginning of the battle. Local neighborhoods and cities will be outspent 10:1 or even 100:1 by developer interests who will distort the bill as anti-housing or who knows what other lies. Thus, we will need to go door to door to make sure every voter in our city understands what this fight is about and why this measure is essential.
We plan to start signature gathering later this month, so if you are interested, please contact us directly.
The proposed 54-unit (“mixed use”) condominium project at 1602 S. Coast Highway was approved by the Planning Commission’s second hearing October 11. That approval was appealed by South O residents to the council, which will hear the appeal on Wednesday; we are asking for changes to the project to improve its safety, compatibility with South O (per coastal regulations) and to insure that the units are actually used for housing.
The hearing (on Item 28) is being held at 6pm (time certain) in the City Council chambers, 300 North Coast Highway, Oceanside. While the hearing can be viewed online via KOCT, those testifying must appear in person. South O residents are asked to wear their Save South O t-shirts (email if you want one delivered) or wear blue.
The project is unprecedented in its height, density and scale — and, if approved, will set a precedent that all future developers will seek to follow. South O is strongly opposed to this project — to a degree not previously seen since the proposal to shrink Coast Highway from 4 lanes to 2. Whether or not you attend, please email the city council to ask they approve the appeal (sending the project back for changes) citing one or more of the issues listed in our appeal.
City staff have claimed that while they don’t like the project, their hands are tied and they must approve it under state law; the council is currently undecided. Save South O and its supporters have identified specific ways in which the project is contrary to existing development law, which are listed in our appeal. Only categories listed in the appeal can be cited; the eight categories are:
Public safety, particularly how the project will impact traffic safety on Freeman and Morse. The developer has asked for a waiver from the city from the requirement to provide a 15′ setback on Freeman. We ask that the city reject the waiver, which would create future accidents from cars leaving the building that cannot see pedestrians, motor vehicles and bicycles (particularly high-speed e-bikes) on Freeman.
Parking, which with 64 spaces for 54 2- and 3-BR units, is clearly inadequate for the project.
Short Term Vacation Rentals. The developer is allowed to increase the project from 40 to 54 units because it’s providing 5 very low income units. However, the developer refuses to permanently restrict those 54 units from being used as STVRs (which would then allow that housing to be converted into visitor-serving short-term rentals).
Non-Compliance with the California Coastal Act, because it is incompatible with the city’s Local Coastal Plan and Land Use Plan which states that “The City shall ensure that all new development is compatible in height, scale, color and form with the surrounding neighborhood.” The 4-story project is clearly not compatible in height, scale and form with adjacent 1- and 2-story single family residences.
Precedent. Approval of this project would allow other developers to argue for their right to ignore the LCP, LUP and other city policies.
Commercial Use. The only way residential use is allowed on Coast Highway is as part of a “mixed use” project, with both residential and commercial usage. However, the developer has testified that if the commercial space is not rented, it could be used for residential purposes — and thus this “mixed use” project would be a purely residential project not allowed by existing zoning.
Transition between Commercial and R1 Neighborhood. The LCP and LUP requires “adequate buffers or transition zones” between the commercial area and surrounding single-family neighborhoods, but the project does not.
Walkability. The city’s policies are to encourage walkability along Coast Highway, both downtown and in South O. South O has requested some form of outdoor seating but the developer declined to do so.
In response to public pressure, the hearing was moved from 2pm to 6pm. Fewer South O representatives were able to make it than on June 10, while more supporters of the Road Diet showed up.
Thanks to efforts by our PR advisor, the hearing was filmed by TV cameras (and stories) from Channel 5/69 (KSWB), NBC 7/39 (KNSD) and KUSI 9/51. The Save South O perspective was featured in the KSWB story, as well as a pre-story by KNSD
Council Decision
The Road Diet supporters from Seaside and environmental groups testified in favor of the PC decision, for a Road Diet (with traffic circles) from Morse Street north. South O representatives asked that the Road Diet end at Oceanside Blvd.
A motion to create a Road Diet citywide by Councilman Rodriguez failed for the lack of a second. Then Mayor Weiss made a motion to create an Incentive District from Morse to Seagaze — with a decision on a Road Diet to be postponed until later. Although that motion was seconded by Councilman Keim, it was withdrawn in light of opposition by Rodriguez.
Rodriguez then motioned to approve Alternative 3, seconded by Weiss, and it was approved by a 4-1 motion (Councilwoman Sanchez opposed). Throughout the discussion, Councilman Feller expressed the strongest opposition to the Road Diet.
Keep the existing Road Diet for the half mile from Morse to Oceanside Blvd
Add a new Road Diet for almost 2 miles, north from Oceanside Blvd. north to Harbor Drive.
The proposal would also add traffic circles at seven intersections in the Road Diet:
Coast Highway & State Route 76
Coast Highway & Civic Center Drive
Coast Highway & Pier View Way
Coast Highway & Washington Avenue
Coast Highway & Wisconsin Avenue
Coast Highway & Michigan Avenue
Coast Highway & West Street
Intersections at Mission and Oceanside Blvd. will remain signals, because (according to the city’s studies) they have too much traffic for a traffic circle.
This is a great improvement since Save South O began organizing opposition nearly three years ago, even if it leaves the Road Diet in place in the “Dip” between Morse and Oceanside Blvd.
Potential Changes
The council also approved (4-1) a second motion by Keim — to study removing the Road Diet from the Dip. (The three Environmental Impact Reports never studied this option, which was the one repeatedly requested by South O representatives).
The staff was directed to study the impacts of Alternative 3 but with no Road Diet south of Oceanside Blvd. After that study is completed, the council would then vote whether to adopt this approach, or keep this week’s plan (Alternative 3) unmodified.
This was an encouraging outcome, but South O residents and merchants will need to voice their support for this option once it returns to the council. Save South O will keep everyone posted.
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 onlyagenda item. It will be held at the council chambers, on the 2nd floor of 300 N. Coast Highway.
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.
On Monday night, more than 50 South O residents turned out for the first Coast Highway hearing of 2019. We got most of what we wanted, marking a dramatic turnaround from where we started in Fall 2016.
The Hearing
After discussion of two long (Coast Highway) commercial projects, the Coast Highway hearing started at 7:20pm and didn’t end until around 11. It began with staff reports, more than 40 people testifying, and then discussion by six of the seven PC members (one recused herself). Reporters from the SD Union and SD Reader stayed until the end.
The main tension was between Road Diet supporters and opponents of the Road Diet from South O; the latter outnumbered the former by about 2:1. We had more than 40 supporters wearing Save South O t-shirts (of the 80 we distributed in the past week), and probably about 60 overall.
About one third of the Save South O t-shirts at the hearing.
The Arguments
There was nearly 2 hours of testimony (at 2 minutes each). The chair of the PC, Kyle Krahel, kept score, and counted: 23 South O against a South O road diet, 14 in favor of a road diet citywide, and 4 opposed to a road diet citywide.
Supporters. Among the speakers favoring implementing the Coast Highway plan citywide, four were affiliated with the bike coalition and one spoke on behalf of the Sierra Club. One South O resident testified in favor of the road diet, but in general it seemed as though if you like the idea of the road diet, you’ve already chosen to live in Seaside — east of Coast, between Oceanside Blvd. and Mission.
In general, those testifying for the Coast Highway Vision supported the road diet, bike lanes, and the increased residential housing density. A few pointedly said they wanted it for the whole city, including South O. Many accused their opponents of being ignorant, or fearful of change.
Opponents. Based on a decision made by SSO leaders in 2017, the position of Save South O and most of its supporters was we don’t seek to dictate what happens downtown, but conversely want our wishes to be respected in South O. Speaker after speakers said that the road diet and the incentive district don’t belong in South O, making arguments familiar to readers of this blog. The speakers criticized the plan — and sometimes the process — but not our fellow citizens.
Of the 24 South O speakers, eight represented South O businesses, including six from the South Oceanside Business District: the president, vice president, and four other founding members.
The general theme was that the businesses had taken financial risks, the economy was developing nicely, and we neither needed the incentives nor wanted to disruption to our traffic mobility. They also talked about how one of the high density “nodes” — tied to the Cassidy Street freeway onramp rather than any bus lines — would demolish the buildings occupied by Privateer Coal Fire Pizza and Anita’s Mexican Restaurant.
South O business owners prepare to testify against the road diet
Earlier in the day, Save South O was featured for 10 minutes on the John and Ken show on KFI AM 640. They have been very skeptical of road diets, particularly the five in Los Angeles County.
Vote
After the end of testimony, the PC members asked questions of staff and then deliberated. The PC briefly considered stopping at Oceanside Blvd. — what Save South O and the community requested this week, and what we have repeatedly insisted on for more than two years.
Instead, the PC voted unanimously to recommend Alternative 3:
no road diet south of Morse; continue the existing road diet in the “Dip”
no incentive district south of Morse, but have high density “Node” residential (up to 63 units/acre) for most of Coast from Oceanside Blvd. to La Salina Creek
Save South O is evaluating its next steps. In the light of our strong turnout and the PC support, it appears that the city is willing to work with us to address some of our concerns, so we want to see if there is common ground.
Thanks to all who turned out to support us Monday! And we hope to see many of you Wednesday at 2pm.
Little understood is the impact that the city’s proposed development incentives will have on South O. It turns out this increased density will dump more traffic into South O residential neighborhoods between Coast and Interstate 5, according to a new analysis of the city’s numbers.
South O residents have mobilized against the proposed “Road Diet”, reducing Coast from 4 lanes to 2 despite Coast Highway being too busy under federal guidelines for a road diet.
However, the impact of the increased density is buried in the 4,700 pages of the July 2017 and November 2018 EIRs. (Note: Monday 5pm is the deadline for comments on the latter). We have previously noted that having development incentives south of Morse Street would change the character of the business district. Particularly troubling is demolishing the block formerly owned by the Blade-Tribune (aka North County Times) at Cassidy and Coast, for a “transit-oriented node” that is no where near any real mass transit.
Dumping Traffic Into Neighborhoods
The development incentives would increase density along Coast Highway. For the highest density zoning, this would mean residential housing on 3-6 upper floors. The plan envisions increasing apartments/condoson the Coast Highway corridor by 9x (from 621 to 5,871 units) and hotel rooms 7x (from 425 to 3,074 rooms).
What does that mean for South O? Let’s look at the traffic projections for one intersection, Coast and Morse Street.
With or without changes, there will be considerable northbound and southbound traffic through this intersection. At the evening rush hour, today Morse is the 4th busiest intersection on Coast (after Vista Way, Oceanside and Cassidy).
However, what is not so obvious is how the development incentives increase the traffic entering/leaving the intersection from the residential neighborhoods to the east. Here is what the relevant diagrams (Fig 4-1,5-5,5-7,5-9) say about the hourly traffic at evening rush hour in 2035 with three of the four alternatives:
Westbound
Eastbound
Total Traffic
Existing (2013)
114
156
1,679
Alternative 1
232
319
2,149
Alternative 2
232
319
2,149
Alternative 3
322
443
1,911
In other words, Alternatives 1 and 2 double the traffic onto Morse, and Alternative 3 triples the traffic (No traffic models were done for #4). The differences are driven by the incentive districts.
The city’s Alternatives 1,2,3 all have an incentive district: citywide for #1 and #2, and from Harbor to Morse St. for #3. In terms of road diet, #1 stops at Oceanside Blvd., while #2 and #3 extend south to Morse.
Alternative #3 (stopping diet and incentives at Morse) was proposed by the council as a compromise — and an alternative to what the community asked for (stopping both at Oceanside Blvd.) which was not studied. By this this measure, it is worse not better than the other alternatives.
Here is the raw data from Figure 4-1 and 5-9, which report actual data from 2013 and projected 2035 data for Alternative 3:
Providing Feedback
Residents have until 5pm Monday January 14 to provide feedback on the completeness of the EIR in assessing the environmental, traffic and economic impacts of the alternatives on South O and other parts of Oceanside. For example, the city still has not released data from more than two years of the “temporary” road diet between Oceanside and Morse.
Now that the council is back to five votes, the city council is expected to vote to select one of the Coast Highway alternatives (or no project) at a council meeting in Spring 2019. We will keep South O posted on all developments between now and then.
The negative impacts of the proposed road diet and development incentives on South O — including (with some options) more traffic from increased density with fewer traffic lanes
The impact the “temporary” road diet between Morse and Oceanside Blvd. has already had on merchants there
The potential for the traffic circles (not normally used on such narrow streets) to slow emergency vehicle access, and resident concerns about their negative impact on pedestrian safety
The strong and consistent opposition of South O residents and business owners to the proposed changes
The plans of the South Oceanside Business District to push for lighted crosswalks across Coast Highway, particularly at Kelly and Whaley, and better speed enforcement on Coast
The better bicycle safety provided by completing the Rail Trail (or having cyclists continue to use Pacific Street)
Charlie Anderson addresses the Save South O meeting at Beach Break Cafe, January 3, 2019
Those present also heard about the positive vision that South O leaders have to maintain and (incrementally) improve the character of the community, a process that has been going on without (or despite) city hall intervention. As Charlie Anderson said, we want to keep South O “authentic”, which will keep Oceanside attractive to both locals and out of town visitors.
We met at Beach Break Cafe, founded 30 years ago in South O and now the anchor of the business district. Co-owner Zell Dwelley talked about how they invested first to create the business, and then to move to their current, much larger location in 2010 — without developer incentives. It is this sort of organic, community-driven growth that we believe will preserve the character of South O that drew us all to this unique North County neighorhood.
Our Recommendation
For all the reasons summarized (and linked) above, Save South O believes what is best for South Oceanside is for city to keep the Road Diet and Development Incentives north of Oceanside Blvd., with no Coast Highway changes south of Oceanside Blvd.
Despite the community’s consistent position, the council did not study this option in their EIR; instead, the options are:
No Project Alternative: no change from today
Alternative 1, Road Diet on Coast Highway from Harbor Drive to Oceanside Blvd., and development incentives throughout the city, including South O
Alternative 2, the same as #1 except it extends the Road Diet to Morse (through the “Dip”), with the Incentive District throughout the city
Alternative 3,Road Diet and Incentive District from Harbor Drive to Morse Street
Alternative 4, a Road Diet for the entire city, with no development incentives
Therefore, the only two options we can recommend are
No Project Alternative: the only option the city studied that leaves South O alone
Alternative 1, but modified with no Development Incentives south of Oceanside Blvd.
Note that Save South O takes no position on what happens north of Oceanside Blvd. For the same reason that we believe South O deserve autonomy for what happens here, we hope the council decision will reflect the will of the majority of the impacted residents and businesses in North coastal Oceanside.
Submitting Feedback
After issuing the revised EIR in November 2018, the city has set a deadline for submitting feedback: 5 p.m. Monday January 14. Feedback should be sent to John Amberson (JAmberson@ci.oceanside.ca.us). Residents may also want to send their feedback to the city council at Council@ci.oceanside.ca.us
Given our clear arguments, several outside visitors — as well as newcomers to South — said they found it hard to imagine why the city would oppose this position. At this point, our biggest enemy is complacency.
We encourage all South O residents to contact both city staff and the council to let them know your position. You should not only state your position, but also any specific aspect on your, your family or your business that the proposed changes might have.
Please also contact your friends and neighbors — not only those who live in South O, but anyone else who lives in the city who shares your concerns. A change to the character of South O will impact those who visit our community as well.
Next week — at 6 p.m. Thursday January 3 — Save South O will be sponsoring a community forum. The subject is the impact of the proposed Coast Highway Corridor plan on those who live in, shop in or visit South O.
The event is intended to help inform South O and other Oceanside residents about two Coast Highway Environmental Impact Reports. We believe it will be last public discussion of the Coast Highway EIR prior to the city’s January 14 deadline for submitting comments on the most recent EIR.
The event will be held at Beach Break Cafe, 1802 S. Coast Highway, Oceanside. It is scheduled to last 90 minutes.
The topics to be covered will include:
The history of the city’s proposed Coast Highway plan and South O
An overview of the five options being considered
The impacts of each option on traffic and development south of Oceanside Boulevard
How these will affect to local businesses
The city’s approval process and how residents can get involved
Depending on the option selected, the EIRs predict that the Coast Highway plan will
Increase congestion on Coast Highway by reducing the street from 4 lanes to 2
Shift other traffic into neighborhoods parallel to Coast Highway
Through increased density, increase traffic congestion on Coast, major East-West streets (including Cassidy and Vista Way), and at freeway on-/off-ramps
All residents of South O and Fire Mountain — as well as others who visit South O — are encouraged to attend.
Action on Coast Highway had been delayed by the absence of Mayor Jim Wood after his May 2017 stroke, and the potential 2-2 split on key issues. After Wood announced his resignation on December 13, the council voted 3-1 on January 24 to appoint Pete Weiss to serve out Wood’s term, which expires in 2020. Weiss worked for the city of 27 years, retiring in 2013 after seven years as city manager. Leaders of Save South O met with the mayor last month to discuss our concerns about how the Coast Highway plan would impact South Oceanside.
The city voted in February to update its EIR to address Caltrans concerns about the impact on I-5 onramps and offramps. The council also authorized studying a new option, ending the Road Diet and Incentive Districts south of Morse Street.
The position of Save South O remains unchanged: we believe the community is best served by no developer incentives south of Oceanside Blvd., and keeping (and restoring) Coast Highway to four lanes south of Oceanside Blvd. Bicycle access should be solved by completing the safer (and faster) Class I “Rail Trail” across Loma Alta Creek.
After the new EIR is released and has public comments, the council is expected to vote on one option in the fall. We will keep supporters updated as to the public comment options.
May 7 Planning Commission Meeting
At the May 7 Planning Commission Meeting (6pm at City Hall), agenda Item #5 is seeking Planning Commission ratification of the city’s FY2018-2019 Capital Improvement Program as being in conformance with the city’s General Plan. This includes the Coast Highway plan, which is described as follows:
Coast Highway Corridor Study
This project consists of EIR-level transportation and land use studies to change Coast Highway to a single lane of vehicle travel in each direction. The alternatives analysis includes multiple intermediate alternatives with single-lane travel extending southward to Oceanside Boulevard or to Morse Street, and both with or without development incentives. The EIR also includes a “no-build” alternative with Coast Highway remaining as four lanes. The studies examine the advantages and disadvantages of the single-vehicle lane and having additional street width available for alternative uses such as onstreet parking, bicycle travel, and pedestrian-friendly environment. The EIR document will also consider traffic displaced onto parallel streets.
The Circulation Element identifies Coast Highway as a four-lane secondary collector on the basis of current traffic demand. The Coast Highway Corridor Study fulfills specific Policy #2.5: “The City will strive to incorporate complete streets throughout the Oceanside transportation network which are designed to serve all users of streets … ” The traffic study for the Coast Highway Corridor promotes the action items in the “Planwide Initiatives Table” in the Coast Highway Vision and Strategic Plan approved by the Planning Commission on February 23, in 2009. These studies work towards the goals of complete streets and street circulation capacity, and provide clarity on General Plan issues.
A public workshop for the Coast Highway Corridor Study was held on March 29, 2017, and the initial draft EIR was circulated last summer. On February 7, 2018, the City Council authorized additional work to add alternatives for the development incentives and a second Response to Comments when the EIR is re-circulated . The revised EIR is anticipated to be available for public comments in mid-summer. After the public comment period and new written responses to the comments, staff will take the EIR to the Planning Commission for a recommendation on their preferred alternative.
Comments on the city’s Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Coast Highway Corridor are due to the city by August 28. Comments on the EIR should be sent to
The same email can be sent to all council members by emailing council@ci.oceanside.ca.us with a single message.
Business owners should also contact the Oceanside Chamber of Commerce, info@oceansidechamber.com to let them know how the Coast Highway plan would impact them.
We have provided a fact sheet summarizing the impact of the proposals on South O. You can also read the EIR, as well as the recent and older news coverage of the impact of the plan on South O.
Our Position
The leaders of Save South O have been studying the city’s plans for the Coast Highway Corridor since the current round of planning began in 2014. Of the four options, we ask that all who live, work, shop or visit South O contact the city to request
Alternative 1: 2 lanes north of Oceanside Blvd., 4 lanes south of Oceanside Blvd.
In addition, No Incentive District South of Oceanside Blvd.
Road Diet
We have strong support from local residents against the “Road Diet” because:
Replacement of signal lights with traffic circles will make it less safe for bicyclists and pedestrians to cross Coast Highway in South O.
The Caltrans traffic study shows that Coast Highway in South O already exceeds 25,000 trips daily, the maximum that a traffic circle can handle.
The city’s Traffic Analysis (Appendix F) shows that a Road Diet in South O will grind traffic to a halt. In a typical evening rush hour, the delays to get through Cassidy & Coast Highway in 2035 will go from 20 seconds (if nothing is changed) to 4 minutes and 10 seconds (see p. 3-14-24 to 3.14-32 of the EIR).At other times (Saturday mornings?) the delays could be worse. For all of South O, the traffic delays with Alternative 1 (p. 5-35 to 5.37) are much shorter.
The city is preparing to complete the Coastal Rail Trail past Buccaneer Beach, a Class I separated bike path that will always be safer (and more enjoyable) for cyclists than a Class II bike lane on Coast Highway.
Incentive District
More recently, we have come to understand the severe impact that the city’s proposed Incentive District (Appendix H) would have on South O. Throughout the Coast Highway Corridor (including Loma Alta Creek, Oceanside Blvd. and Wisconsin), the city has a plan for expedited approval (no public hearings) and increased density. The hope is that these incentives in front of developers, that old buildings will be knocked down and new ones put up in their place.
Beyond overall concerns about this expedited process, we have two concerns specific to South O. First, the addition of high-density transit-oriented “Nodes” — with heights up to 65′ and density up to 63 units/acre — are out of character for our community. These Nodes (in purple below) occupy almost half of the “Dip” and a key block in South O that currently includes Privateer and the old North County Times building.
Secondly, South Oceanside has been developing on it own — with its own character — for the past 20 years. The current approach has been successful both in upgrading the commercial district and attracting visitors from around Oceanside and neighboring cities to our unique beach community.
South O is Not Downtown
In this month’s issue, San Diego magazine has a long story (“Oceanside Revolution”) about the economic renaissance in Oceanside. It gives prominent coverage to South O merchants such as David Waite (Wrench & Rodent) and Charlie Anderson (Privateer).
The story summarizes the key reason why the Oceanside needs to treat South O differently than the northern part of Coast Highway:
There are two Oceansides: the more tourist-oriented downtown, and the local haven of South O. Both have their charms. When the city allocated redevelopment money years ago, most of it went into downtown. So South O business owners—like Roddy and Aaron Browning of Flying Pig, which most people credit as the bistro that started the city’s little revolution—grabbed some bootstraps and built themselves.
Our surveys show that the overwhelming majority of residents and merchants here in South O want to preserve the character of our community, and thus reject the city’s drastic changes to the highway and development of our area. We ask all who support this position to contact the city and the council by August 28 to let their feelings be known.
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.
What does that mean for South O? Let’s look at the traffic projections for one intersection, Coast and Morse Street.
Replacement of signal lights with traffic circles will make it less safe for bicyclists and pedestrians to cross Coast Highway in South O.
Save South O 