OB Property Owner Who Swore If Granted Variances He Would Live in House – Now Advertises It as “Vacation Rental” for $2500 to $3600 per Week

by on July 24, 2014 · 81 comments

in Environment, History, Ocean Beach, Politics, San Diego

OB Cox Wpt Loma Mcmansions sm

The Cox vacation rental, next to Stubbins’ residence.

Back in 2011, a property owner on West Point Loma Avenue who while pleading for variances to build his 3-story McMansion, swore both to the OB Planning Board and to the Coastal Commission that if the variances were granted, he would live in the house as his home.

Alvin Cox swore it.  So, he was granted the variances, and he built his mansion.

And now, Alvin Cox rents it out as a “vacation rental” for between $2,450 to $3,675 a week ($350 – $525 a day).

This is what his internet ad states:

BRAND NEW 3 Story Custom Designer Ocean Beach Home.

This is the kind of vacation rental that most people only dream about! Custom built to showcase every ocean view, for a relaxing, luxurious get-away! (A/C, Security System, Wi-Fi, AT&T U-Verse and private parking for 4 cars, the carport will even accommodate a motorhome).

OB Cox ad upstairs view02

Upstairs views from the Cox vacation rental.

Climb the one of a kind LED lighted rainbow-tiled stairway to watch the beautiful California sunsets from your 3rd story Master Suite Hot tub, entertain family and friends in the 2nd story (kitchen, dining and living) ‘Great Room’ as you watch ships sailing from Mission Bay, toast another sunset from your 2nd floor balcony then watch the nitely fireworks display from nearby Sea World.

Can’t get away from work? Use the 1st floor bedroom (with custom built-in desk) to check in with things back at the office with the on line computer and wireless printer.

OB Cox ad upstairs view01Close to everything people LOVE about San Diego: Sea World, San Diego Zoo, Balboa Park, Mission Bay, Old Town, La Jolla. Walk to the Ocean Beach Pier and check out the wonderful local restaurants. Easy access to Amtrak and San Diego International Airport.

This kind of development is EXACTLY what the OB Planning Board feared when they opposed the variances for Cox, that Cox, as well as the other property owners in that immediate area who were granted improper variances, would simply turn their McMansions over a la Mission Beach into expensive, vacation rentals, out of reach of ordinary OBceans or working people. Who can afford that kind of vacation?

Here is the carport, which was the subject of much debate at the time.

This is exactly why the improper granting of variances by city planners – variances upheld by the Planning Commission – has led Ocean Beach to this moment, where the planning tool that OB has used for the past 38 years – the low floor-area-ratio (FAR) for coastal residential areas of the village – is being fought for by OBceans and their planners.

It was the variances granted to Cox, to Stebbins, to Burk that has forced the OB Planning Board to fight so hard to keep the 0.70 FAR for most of OB, and to force a showdown against the Planning Commission’s recommendations to be brought up at the City Council hearing on July 29 on the OB Community Plan.

And this is exactly the type of development that will lead OB – or parts of OB – to be like the Boardwalk in Mission Beach where you find wall to wall, 3 story mansions that are either time shares, very expensive vacation rentals going for $2,000 to $4,000 a week, or empty buildings that no one can afford – but the very wealthy.

A couple of OB Planning Board members also have informed the OB Rag that Cox is also violating his Coastal Development Permit by installing gates and fences that are too high.

{ 81 comments… read them below or add one }

avatar Tyler July 24, 2014 at 10:15 am

Sorry for the expletive, but what a piece of shit.

Reply

avatar Marc Snelling July 24, 2014 at 10:25 am

Mission Beach out of OB! Projects like this poison the water for every future project to come before the OBPB… good and bad.

The daily rent is more than I spent monthly to split a 2-br when I moved to OB. Greed is turning OB from a village into a playground for the rich. So much for San Diego’s ‘City of Villages’ vision.

Reply

avatar Tyler July 24, 2014 at 10:30 am

If anything this is good ammo to have for the City Council meeting next week, yes? Perfect example of the small minority of property owners clamoring for “more rights.” It’s a cut and dry example of how OB can turn into MB, as well as pointing out the disingenuous intentions of the property owners in question.

Reply

avatar Frank Gormlie July 24, 2014 at 10:42 am

^word

Reply

avatar Geoff Page July 24, 2014 at 10:41 am

When I was on the Peninsula Community Planning Board, we heard all kinds of pleas for variances because someone wanted to accommodate an aging mom or dad or some other sob story. My response was that they needed to find a property that fit their needs not ask the rest of us to to allow variances that were permanent when their problems were not. One applicant wanted to add 600/SF to a home that had already maxed out the FAR for his sick mom, but when asked why he could not accommodate her needs on the 1,700/SF first floor, he said it just wasn’t possible. I’ve been in construction for 40 years and I can say without a doubt, anything is possible. Once mom finally passed on, the applicant would be left with a home with a fantastic selling point no one else would have had. Watch the variance requests, most are only needed because the owner wants to do something the lot won’t allow and that is not a problem for the rest of us. This story doesn’t surprise me at all.

Reply

avatar Mindy July 24, 2014 at 11:32 am

This should make us ALL wise to not be changing the variances. I agree wit Geoff Page. Buy somewhere to fit your needs!!!!! Do not change any existing ones, or we will become MB in 2.2 seconds.

Reply

avatar SaneVoice July 24, 2014 at 11:34 am

Is there any legal recourse available to the OBPB since Mr. Cox lied ? And he certainly lives up to his last name

Reply

avatar Geoff Page July 24, 2014 at 11:52 am

None unless this was documented in the development process and I guarentee it was not.

Reply

avatar Sam Anderson July 24, 2014 at 12:48 pm

As long as the building was built correctly and safely he should be left alone. So many selfish people out there trying to control how people use their own property which they bought with the money they earned legally. Stop forcing people to do whatever everyone else wants. Planning commission= Planning communism.

Reply

avatar SaneVoice July 25, 2014 at 9:56 am

Obviously, you don’t understand how planning commissions work.

Reply

avatar Sam Anderson July 25, 2014 at 1:00 pm

No I completely understand. Their completely wrong because it allows the public and political power to infringe on someones freedom of expression and personal beliefs. “oh yeah its a great property! You should buy it because we want your money but we are going to tell you what you can and cannot do with it based on opinions other than your’s”. Go back to your own homes and admire what you have you whining hippies. I think someone should buy up a huge plot right smack dab in OB and put in a FARM to give a little diversity other than rich little snobs that complain about what everyone else has.

Reply

avatar Frank Gormlie July 25, 2014 at 1:38 pm

Sam Anderson – You have just violated our comment policy and from now on, any comments from you will have to be individually approved.

Reply

avatar Sam Anderson July 27, 2014 at 10:06 am

Sorry frank. I got a little upset about how selfish some people can get to the point that they would impose their own ideas, creativity and beliefs on someone else in the free world.

Reply

avatar SaneVoice July 25, 2014 at 3:10 pm

By your rationale, then if I own a plot of land, I should be allowed to do anything I choose on it, regardless of how it affects my neighbors, the general public or the environment with no concerns for the appropriate zoning. I can build a trash incinerator on my property right next door to you. Oh, the smoke is blowing into your windows ? Too bad. Or I decide to open up a hotel, taxing the sewer system and parking situation. Now you can’t find a place to park and your toilet is overflowing. Again, not my problem.

Planning commissions are comprised of local citizens so issues such as this don’t occur. Their mission is to improve the greater good for all the citizens, not just one individual.

Reply

avatar Sam Anderson July 27, 2014 at 10:03 am

We are not discussing commercial issues here. We are talking about a single citizens residence. Yes you should be able to do anything you want on your property as long as it fits into citizen daily life. We aren’t talking about burning trash or building hotels. There is many families that own homes like this that rent them out when they go to their summer homes in the summer or on vacation. It doesn’t raise the occupancy of the home in any way to the point it taxes anything out. People should be able to grow a garden, paint their house whatever color they desire, build it any way they like and enjoy life as they would like to live. For someone to say that he needs to change his property because they don’t like how it looks is sheer selfishness. Enjoy and create your own property the way you like it and don’t be self conscious of everyone else.

Reply

avatar unwashedwallmarththonG July 25, 2014 at 5:06 pm

Sam,
Take a little time
And remember long ago
Of the difference
Among
They’re
There
Their
Tis us, Sam, the Whining Hippies, who revolted against the . . .
Viet Nam War
The Invasion of Panama to snag Noriega
The Invasion of Afghanistan
The Invasion of Iraq. Atrocities of the IDF, the AUC, School of the Americas.
And now some of us stand against liars requesting variances to increase their wealth only. We the Whining Hippies wish to control the world! Please call one of us when you try to decide upon wearing black socks or white socks. We’re usually on call.
No thanks to your ignorance, Sam, it is an uphill battle of Sisyphus proportions to overturn & reverse crap like the Chicago School, Reaganomics,
& privatization. And if you need a good debate on the subject, engage Marc Snelling or Tyler; they are both very good as debate. I am simply filled w/ snide remarks & puppy dog tails.

Reply

avatar unwashedwallmarththonG July 26, 2014 at 4:16 pm

What time is it?

Reply

avatar Geoff Page July 25, 2014 at 11:05 am

And how do you know he “bought the place with the money he earned legally?”

Reply

avatar Sam Anderson July 25, 2014 at 1:02 pm

Because we pay taxes and every american deserves to be assumed as a loyal citizen unless proven otherwise.

Reply

avatar Mike July 24, 2014 at 1:27 pm

But everybody is still fine with the 3 story disgusting vacation condos going up at Saratoga & Abbott…

Reply

avatar Elyse July 24, 2014 at 2:21 pm

Not everybody… I still roll my eyes every time I pass it. :-/

Reply

avatar Dave Rice July 24, 2014 at 9:46 pm

Who’s “everybody?” I haven’t met anyone that thinks that thing is a good idea, though I must admit I also haven’t met the developer.

Reply

avatar sean M July 24, 2014 at 1:36 pm

Maybe the owner didnt lie, how long did he say he would live in it for?

Reply

avatar doug porter July 24, 2014 at 2:02 pm

And maybe pigs are going to fly up Newport Avenue. And maybe the OB Town Council will give everybody a free pony. And maybe the Beatles will have a reunion at Collier Park. Just maybe….

Reply

avatar sean M July 24, 2014 at 2:21 pm

The article doesn’t specify a time frame. Sounds like the obtc assumed the owner would “live” there longer than he intended.

Reply

avatar Jon July 24, 2014 at 2:43 pm

^you mean OBPB, not OBTC. The planning board, not the town council, reviews these types of variances. Also would appear you’re assuming someone else assumed something, which I would assume is a dangerous game where everyone looks like a…what?? :)

Reply

avatar Bill Ray July 25, 2014 at 3:04 pm

I’m just here for the ponies. ;)

Reply

avatar Hunter July 24, 2014 at 3:12 pm

Looks better than the mobile homes there, but man that would be a great family home!! Hate the vacation rental problem in mission and pacific beach.

Rent is too damn high as well for the run down homes and apartments most of us live in.

Reply

avatar Tennyson July 24, 2014 at 3:59 pm

Did anyone get this in writing, is it even legally binding if it was documented?
Is running a vacation rental considered a business as opposed to renting the home as a residence? If so does he need a business license? Any “not zoned for business” restrictions ? He is probably gonna do what he is gonna do but no reason it can’t be made painful with zoning, etc bureaucratic restrictions.

At least he has photos “showcasing” his hideous decorating. Looking for peaceful, seaside rental, I’d look further after seeing his interior shots.

Reply

avatar Jeffeck July 25, 2014 at 3:30 pm

I think this is a good tack. I have no problem if an owner wants to build a code approved home but , that is a business or sublet… It should not be zoned for that. The little duplexes to me are an eyesore along WPL Blvd. but there is world of difference between that and as everyone else says creating an extension of Mission Beach.

Why cant you restrict the rental period to monthly rather than weekly? isn’t that like becoming a hotelier? I guess I need to study zoninig to know what I am talking about here.

Reply

avatar Graham Wellington July 24, 2014 at 5:01 pm

Damn, that house is pretty pimp inside. So what if he lied. Think of all the $$$ trickling down to local businesses from these fat cat tourists. Cox should be celebrated rather than villified. Better to have those kind of tourists here in OB than the sort that end up dead on our beach (more than likely an OD like the one dude found dead in the lifeguard tower mens restroom months ago).

Reply

avatar Kristen July 25, 2014 at 4:06 am

what?? The charm of OB is the lack of these kind of places… I’m for less tourist housing and more affordable residential housing. there’s almost none of that left in san diego period….

Reply

avatar Graham Wellington July 25, 2014 at 9:58 am

Affordable residential housing in OB is an oxymoron. And charm? Did you see the rainbow staircase in the Cox crib? It’s got LED lighting. Think green!

Reply

avatar SaneVoice July 25, 2014 at 9:55 am

So since there’s money trickling down, it’s ok to lie and mislead ? Nice morals there, bub. The main money coming in is going to the liar himself with his massive overcharge for a vacation rental. And really classy to try and bring someone dying into it.

Reply

avatar Graham Wellington July 25, 2014 at 10:36 am

Thanks for you acknowledgement of trickle down economics. But how do you know he lied or mislead? His position on residency could have simply evolved. Kinda like how Obama and Hillary evolved on gay marriage when it was convenient. Come on and walk a mile in Cox’s loafers.

Is he really overcharging? Seems like he has satisfied vacay renters so his pricing is within what the market will accept.

Not meant to be classy. Was pointing out the difference in the sort of tourists we want in OB – those with means vs those without. We have enough burnouts here.

Reply

avatar SaneVoice July 25, 2014 at 10:51 am

Well, I’ll take the OB Rag’s word for it that he lied as they were present at the meeting. It’s not like they’re Fox News and prone to spread misinformation.

One possible valid review coupled with two made up reviews hardly qualifies as having satisfied vacation renters. Most likely the most recent review is Mr. Cox trying to drum up some business for himself as he’s having problems getting people to live in his monstrosity. (Interesting that the “reviewer” claims they stayed in the property in May, but didn’t have a renter profile created until July.)

And speak for yourself about what OB wants. I hardly think you’re the representative slice that can use the term “we” when speaking for all of OB since you think trickle down economics works.

Reply

avatar Frank Gormlie July 25, 2014 at 11:09 am

We have it from two reputable and credible OB Planning Board members that Cox misrepresented what his intentions were before the Board and the Coastal Commission.

Yeah, sure, “trickle down economics” is a Republican Party ploy to get people to stop bothering them and their wealthy friends. Does not work.

Reply

avatar Graham Wellington July 25, 2014 at 11:46 am

I dont know about you but i never got a job from a poor person. Like there are no wealthy progressives? Mikey moore has 9 houses.

Reply

avatar Tyler July 25, 2014 at 11:57 am

Most wealthy progressives know trickle down economics don’t work. I work with a lot of them.

Reply

avatar Graham Wellington July 25, 2014 at 12:09 pm

I guess they inherited their wealth then. Can you ask them to pay their fair share please? The govt needs it so they can trickle it down for those on the dole.

Reply

avatar Tyler July 25, 2014 at 12:24 pm

Oh, you’re trolling. Later.

Reply

avatar Marc Snelling July 25, 2014 at 1:50 pm

In my ten+ years of running a business I’ve found that the poorer clients are the quickest to pay and the most grateful. The only clients I’ve ever had that did not pay were wealthy ones. Trickle down applies to sewage but money not so much.

Reply

avatar SaneVoice July 25, 2014 at 3:12 pm

Trickle-down economics – the rich pissing on the poor

Reply

avatar Tennyson July 24, 2014 at 5:28 pm

Pretty pimp inside?? Well said, Graham! Damn, wish I’d said that !!!

Reply

avatar Geez July 24, 2014 at 6:20 pm

Does that first “review” on the VRBO page sound like a total insider job, or what? Come on, you can disguise it better than that, can’t you?

Reply

avatar d. rod-man July 24, 2014 at 7:29 pm

Whose dis’ man trying to kid? Seem like da man is trying for the affluent,
yes you heard that right the affluent from Detroit, or maybe even da
boy from New York City! Anyway Cox is surely lookin’ for a sucker!

natty dread

Reply

avatar Cindy July 24, 2014 at 8:30 pm

Question- it appears that Mr Cox’s gates and fences are no taller than any of the current homes on West Point Loma Blvd. How come the OBPB isn’t commenting about those homes as well. It obvious there is a target for these new homes.

Reply

avatar Frank Gormlie July 25, 2014 at 11:11 am

I don’t think the Planning Board has a mechanism – other than complaining to Development Services or to the Coastal Commission – that allows them to ding any homeowner who later is found to misrepresent their development. One rumor had it that he – Cox – originally installed legal gate and fencing and then later replaced them with the 6 foot ones.

Reply

avatar Sam Anderson July 27, 2014 at 10:13 am

I agree that this issue should be addressed. Cox was wrong about this issue and should be fined or take the fence down. It is a fire and law enforcement issue in place to keep him and his neighbors safe.

Reply

avatar OB Dude July 28, 2014 at 10:13 am

okie dokie….then everyone in OB needs to take down their 6′ illegal fence or illegal front yard fences? Don’t just single out this dude.

Reply

avatar nostalgic July 24, 2014 at 8:33 pm

In Asheville, North Carolina, a spokesman addressed the question of vacation rentals with the following comment: “if you don’t live there, they don’t stay there.”
This permits B & B businesses. Not vacation rentals.

Reply

avatar Walker July 24, 2014 at 11:32 pm

He didn’t “swear” unless he agreed to a recorded cc&r to the title prohibiting future use as a vacay rental.

Reply

avatar obd9 July 25, 2014 at 12:39 am

Thanks for sharing this story Frank… this just makes me furious!

Reply

avatar obracer July 25, 2014 at 8:49 am

3 story mansions ?

Reply

avatar Frank Gormlie July 25, 2014 at 11:04 am

Last night, I was on the lawn in front of the Cox, Stebbins and Burk residences next to Dog Beach parking lot; the Cox building was totally dark – not even a back yard light or anything: NO ONE HOME is the message.

Reply

avatar obd9 July 26, 2014 at 12:12 am

I live on West Point Loma Blvd and walk my dogs by these residences nearly every day. The Cox residence has never appeared to be lived in. I’ll be paying closer attention to all three.

Reply

avatar South Park July 25, 2014 at 11:44 am

He “swore both to the OB Planning Board and to the Coastal Commission that if the variances were granted, he would live in the house as his home.”
http://www.sandiego.gov/planning-commission/pdf/pcreports/2011/11026.pdf

Was he asked, when he swore this, if he was going to move to OB and leave his nice, large home in San Marcos? He takes the homeowner’s exemption for the San Marcos spread, so, if he’s honest, that’s where he lives. He also owns other properties. Maybe he just took all of the DSD, PC, and other City variance approvers out for ride on his swell 44.5-foot yacht, the Enchantress, and enchanted them.

Reply

avatar OB Dude July 25, 2014 at 3:24 pm

So in all the mumbo jumbo of the city, coast commission, OBPB does it say he will live in it and if so for how long?

Reply

avatar Seth July 25, 2014 at 1:59 pm

Way I look at it, the OBPB is only asked to vote recommendations on buildings, not people. I voted against this project, and the owner or his intentions had nothing to do with it — and still don’t.

Reply

avatar Wireless Mike July 25, 2014 at 4:06 pm

Cox “swore both to the OB Planning Board and to the Coastal Commission that if the variances were granted, he would live in the house as his home.” Was Cox’s statement documented, notarized and legally binding? If not, did OBPB and the Coastal Commission just take his word on faith, and impose no repercussions if he failed to keep his word?

People tend to misrepresent their true intentions when there is personal profit involved. If a variance is to be granted based on the verbal statement of a property owner, that statement should become legally binding with legal consequences if it is violated. Put some teeth into the rules and hold people accountable for what they say so this won’t happen again.

Reply

avatar Debra July 26, 2014 at 12:17 pm

I agree.

Reply

avatar South Park July 25, 2014 at 4:19 pm

To OBDude, no; to Seth and WirelessMike, I agree.

That was why I posed the question (“Was he asked, when he swore this, if he was going to move to OB…?”),supplied the planning record, and mentioned that he lives in a very nice house elsewhere. The various entities that decide to grant variances cannot give weight to anything that isn’t part of the legal codes.

He isn’t at fault for going after what he wanted and knowing how to play the deciders.

Reply

avatar OB Dude July 25, 2014 at 4:53 pm

No one can call Mr. Cox a liar unless he NEVER lived there. Even if he only lived there for one day that would be living there.

Similar to two people who take wedding vows….” until death do us part”. Parties to divorces aren’t necessarily scum bags?

SH_T happens for whatever reason. So I agree with Seth that personal statements circumstances should not be the primary focus of reviewing a project.

Questions: What are city regs on vacation rentals? Are they allowed/legal without permits? Are TOT taxes required to be paid? Can OB ban them? Should we ban them?

Reply

avatar Debbie July 25, 2014 at 5:03 pm
avatar Seth July 25, 2014 at 6:16 pm

To clarify a little, the OBPB did not vote to recommend this project. Forget the exact vote, but one of this blog’s previous article states that it was 10-1 against, which fits my recollection of events. I really don’t think any claim of his living here or not had any impact whatsoever on anyone’s decision, at the OBPB level or at any step above.

I’m also a little wary of making any of this sound personal, lest it detract from the actual issue as I see it, which is the City granting a series of FAR variances in OB without making the proper findings for them. Truth is, these homeowners have the right to ask for these variances, and to change their minds or not about where they choose to live. That’s not my focus in any of this, personally.

Reply

avatar Jon July 25, 2014 at 9:49 pm

It was voted 10-1 against. That’s clear in the link South Park provided; which was very informative by the way.

Seth, I always appreciate your perspective in these conversations. If there’s anything that bothers me about this whole issue, it’s the point you make: Our local “elected” planning board voted 10-1 AGAINST this project. I repeat….10-1!! That should be a done deal. Forget the property investor and his ulterior motives. The real scandal (if there is one) is that the city has been systematically undoing the will of this community by granting these variances to developers looking to cash-in here because every other coastline in San Diego (and most of Southern California’s coast) is built out with these bulky vacation rentals. They have no real investment in our “community.” This is OB….people live here.

Reply

avatar Cindy July 26, 2014 at 3:16 pm

To Jon – I don’t believe those building on West Point Loma are considered “Developers”. The definition of developer is – a person who invests in and develops the urban or suburban potentialities of real estate, especially by subdividing the land into home sites and then building houses and selling them. None here are building and then selling, Mr. Stebbins has made this is home. A Developer would be the building going up by the Main Lifeguard station. They had to have variances approved there with being allowed underground parking.

Reply

avatar Jon July 27, 2014 at 9:52 am

Sort of an odd bit of semantics to argue, but if you must..

I was using the term developer because I read through the planning commission report South Park provided and saw that he tore down the existing building and needed multiple ‘development’ permits in order to erect the 3 story home, and also needed variances to complete the parking garage. Call it whatever you want I guess. Developer/investor/carpetbagger/scallywag…

Reply

avatar Cindy July 27, 2014 at 4:36 pm

Homeowner in Stebbins case and I guess landlord in Cox’s maybe!

Reply

avatar Rufus July 27, 2014 at 7:02 am

If the property owner is renting his home for less than 30 days at a time, he should be paying Transiet Occupancy Tax. Is he? Is that property zoned for a vacation rental? If not, he’s in violation of the code. Does he have a business license? If his gates are higher than code allows, a neighbor has to step up to the plate and make a written complaint to the city’s neighborhood code compliance office.

The city does not investigate code violations without a written complaint!!

These steps are time consuming, but if you are a neighbor and don’t want a hotel next door, you have to step to the plate and get involved.

Years ago the builder who was notorious for cramming multiple homes into OB/PL lots bought the property next to our house. My wife and I, plus the neighbors got together and studied the codes and learned that our neighborhood was R5000 which meant that only one house could be built on a 5,oo0 square foot lot and each house had to have at least a 50′ street frontage. Subdividing the lot and cramming multiple houses in there would have changed the “character of the neighborhood” which is one of the issues the Planning Commission focuses on.

We hired a land use lawyer for a couple of thousand bucks (split between us) and stayed on top of the permitting process at city hall and attended all the planning hearings, yes, taking off days from work. When the developer understood we were not going away, he sold the house to a very nice young couple. They’re still our neighbors.

So folks, learn the law, be tenacious, get involved, and put your money where your mouth is.

Reply

avatar OB Dude July 27, 2014 at 9:13 am

I found the info below:

http://sdvrma.org/regulations-and-laws/

• San Diego: Each rental unit must register for and obtain a certificate of TOT, as set forth in Chapter 3, Article 5 of the Municipal Code. The TOT rate is calculated at 10.5% of taxable rent collect from a transient occupant- staying less than 30 days. Effective January 1, 2013, the City of San Diego levied a Tourism Marketing District (TMD), based on the number of units/rooms. Lodging businesses with thirty (30) or more units/rooms pay 2% of Assessable Rent; this is comprised of TMD Category A of 1.45% and TMD Category B of .55%. Lodging businesses with twenty-nine (29) or less units/rooms pay TMD Category B only or .55% of taxable Rent.
? According to Chapter 13, Article 1, Division 4 of the San Diego Municipal Code, Multiple Dwelling Units located in Residential- Multiple Unit Zones (MAP), must enforce a 7 night minimum – as all non-owner occupants must occupy the dwelling for a minimum of 7 consecutive days.

Reply

avatar kenloc July 27, 2014 at 9:56 am

There are many vacation rentals in OB,this is just one of the pricier ones. I think more harm is done by someone renting out 2 bedroom/2 bath condos for 1500 to 2 k per week,driving up rental prices for everyone,than renting a new house out for a large sum,as nothing really comps to it around here.
What if something happened in this persons life that makes it impossible for him/her to live there any longer.medical condition and they can no longer climb stairs?Death? Did the planning board think this person would live forever?Did they look into their medical history to ensure longevity?Perhaps they should have been monitoring the owners diet and habits to ensure he lives a long life.
Or maybe he/she is tired of being constantly vilified by the community,driven by media reports on their every move.You badger them constantly,but want them to stay?I don’t get it…..
Or maybe they are simply jerks as you all say…

Reply

avatar John July 28, 2014 at 5:12 am

Too bad Cox’s pitch doesnt mention that for the better part of the next year his luxury rental is just 75 feet downwind of a construction site and all the relentness pounding, hammering, dust, noise, painting, etc that come with it. I put up with it for the last year while Burks built his house and you can only get so used to it. I think the hammers were the worst of it. I’m sure his vacationers will love the forced 7 am wakeup when they have a good hangover. You really can’t blame the workers, they have a job to do (and the crew that built Burks’ place were the most professional crew I’ve ever seen. Same small group of guys start to finish, all trades).
But really, what a dirtbag this Cox guy is. You want a villain, a DEVELOPER to despise in this story, someone stepping on the little guy and making a buck tearing up a neighborhood, I guess he’s as good as any.

Reply

avatar John O. July 28, 2014 at 4:24 pm

Somebody should rent it and then “live” in it. I hear it is difficult to evict someone.

But really though, I find it amusing and inspiring that people are so bent out of shape about this. In case you don’t know, Southern California real estate is very valuable. Money talks and rules in our society, and people are generally self serving.

Gentrification is an issue. I’m a CA native priced out of the market, just like so many of you. So does this guy piss me off, sure. Yet, there isn’t a single thing that I can do about it except MAKE MORE MONEY. And if he pisses off a few of his neighbors (most who moved here from “name the place”) then so be it. The guy got the variance. He gamed the system.

Life is too short to be bitter.

Reply

avatar Cindy July 28, 2014 at 6:30 pm

Here here John, well said! It pisses me off some off the comments made when I bet the majority are transplants. I’m a second generation native San Diego and my father was a native OB resident. We’ve seen a lot of change thru out San Diego. It’s going to happen, move on.

Reply

avatar Seth July 28, 2014 at 7:54 pm

Let it happen according to the rules then, unless there is a compelling case for an exception to them.

Reply

avatar Sane Voice July 28, 2014 at 8:42 pm

Because someone’s a transplant, they aren’t allowed to comment or care ? Or they have less of a voice than you because you’re part of some OB Royal Family ? Those transplants you look down on pay rent and taxes, support local business, work here, volunteer their time here, vote here and some of them even become president of the OBTC. And all of them also love OB.

You appear to be suffering from the same disease Mr. Stebbins and Mr. Cox are. It’s called selfishness. And I don’t know the character of your father, but I’m willing to bet he’s like my old man who wouldn’t tell me to just lay down and take it. He’d tell me to stand up for what I believe in and that’s what a majority of OB residents (native and transplant) are doing.

Reply

avatar Tyler July 29, 2014 at 8:46 am

Here here.

The bravado of some OBceans in regards to being local or a transplant is ridiculous. If you are involved in the community and you live here you are local. I know people on my block that have been here 30-50 years and they are not involved whatsoever in the community. I also know people who haven’t even been here 3 years and are super involved.

Reply

avatar Cindy July 29, 2014 at 10:31 am

First off I’m not looking down on anyone and my father did stand up for what he believed and and taught me to do so as well. He also served the USA in the Army and the City of San Diego as a Police Officer for 25 years. He and I both have seen many changes to our fair City over the years. I don’t always like or agree with the changes. I work, pay taxes, support local businesses and I love OB. I also love the City of San Diego and feel very blessed to have had the luck of geography to be born and raised here. I’m just saying change happens. This makes me selfish?

Reply

avatar SaneVoice July 29, 2014 at 11:04 am

No, what makes you come off as selfish is a comment that you’re pissed off because you bet that most of the commenters are transplants. You’re insinuating that since they’re transplants, their opinion has less weight (than yours since you were born here, etc.) or none at all.

Unless you support this type of greedy takeover of OB, join the fight with the rest of the concerned citizens. Help us to make a positive change instead of just accepting it. Be the change that you wish to see in the world.

Reply

avatar Cindy July 29, 2014 at 11:12 am

Well then I apologize for my comment if it came off that way. My apologies.

I don’t however agree with you comment about greedy takeovers. I don’t agree with what Mr Cox is doing with his home. Enough said.

Reply

Leave a Comment


4 + = 11

Older Article:

Newer Article: