Oceanside council delays vote on Oceanside Transit Center redevelopment after hours of testimony over bus routing, affordability and CEQA

Oceanside City Council on Oct. 7 continued a final decision on a proposed redevelopment of the Oceanside Transit Center at 235 South Tremont Street after more than three hours of presentations, public testimony and council questions. Council members said they wanted more information and time to consider community concerns before taking formal action.

Staff and the applicant outlined a mixed‑use, transit‑oriented plan that would replace the existing surface parking with an integrated intermodal transit facility, multifamily housing, office space and a boutique hotel on a 10.15‑acre coastal site. Development Services Director Darlene Nicandro told the council that staff recommends certification of the final environmental impact report and adoption of the OTC specific plan, and that the Planning Commission and Downtown Advisory Committee had recommended approval.

Arlene Tendeck, presenting for the applicant team, described design concepts, circulation plans and community benefits including a centralized customer service building, expanded bike parking and a stated 15% affordable housing component. "This 15% affordable housing does exceed the 10% required within the coastal zone," Tendeck said, adding the residential portion would be 100% electric.

Speakers at the public hearing were sharply divided. Supporters, including the Oceanside Chamber of Commerce and several younger residents, framed the proposal as needed housing and downtown revitalization. Scott Ashton, CEO of the Oceanside Chamber, said the project would address a local jobs‑housing imbalance, citing regional data on job and housing growth. Several speakers emphasized the project's economic benefits and increased ridership convenience.

Opponents and nearby residents pressed the council on traffic and safety, particularly the proposed relocation of the bus terminal and any resulting routing onto Michigan and Missouri Avenues. Kevin Hamm of the Oceanside Coastal Neighborhood Association urged the council to vote no unless outbound bus routing is changed, saying the traffic study did not adequately account for neighborhood impacts. Multiple residents submitted petitions and described narrow local streets they said are ill‑suited to frequent bus traffic.

Environmental and technical objections were raised as well. A representative of SAFER urged the council not to certify the EIR and to recirculate it, alleging gaps in the biological resources, air‑quality and noise analyses. Preserve Calavera and other local environmental groups acknowledged design improvements but flagged remaining concerns including open‑space amounts and bird‑friendly design features.

City and applicant officials answered council questions about sequencing, finance and mitigation. Developer representatives said there is no proposed disposition of the land but rather ground leases and that nearly $100 million of public improvements are part of the plan; they told the council the ground‑lease payment is about $350,000 per year and rises 2.5% annually. The developer committed to prevailing wages on the public improvements portion of the project but said applying prevailing wages to the private residential and hotel components would substantially increase costs and risk project feasibility.

Representatives of the North County Transit District (NCTD) told the council that moving the bus bay has been part of their long‑range plans since 2008 and that construction sequencing makes temporary use of Michigan or Missouri likely; NCTD also said its fleet is moving toward low‑ or zero‑emission vehicles. "Our support of this project is because we support the city," an NCTD speaker said.

Deputy Mayor Joyce moved for a short, date‑certain continuance so staff and the applicant could return with clarifying information on bus routing options, prevailing‑wage breakdowns for the public improvements, open‑space metrics, and other requested details. After debate, the council voted to continue the OTC item — and a related Mission Avenue project — to Nov. 19, 2025 at 6:00 p.m. The motion passed by a recorded voice vote that the clerk stated as three yes votes and two no votes.

What remains unresolved is primarily how and whether the city can influence off‑site bus routing (NCTD asserts some routing decisions are operational and outside city zoning authority), whether the EIR requires recirculation on technical grounds, and whether the balance of affordable units should be altered as council members and speakers requested. Council members said they expect staff and the applicant to return with specific answers on those items at the Nov. 19 hearing.

The council approved an unrelated consent item earlier in the special meeting by a unanimous vote, and after the OTC continuance moved on to continue other calendar items to November 19. The record shows the applicant asked for a continuance on one Mission Avenue item as well; council granted that request.

Next steps: the council set the next hearing for Nov. 19, 2025, at which staff and the applicant are to provide additional data specified during the Oct. 7 meeting, and the council may vote then to certify, modify or deny the project's requested approvals.