Sunday, June 30, 2013

Keep Leucadia Trendy

Union-Trib: Leucadia evolves from funky to chic:
“Leucadia is getting very trendy,” said Criss Crozier, managing partner of Swell Property. “That whole funkiness is changing.” Many of the people who have lived here for more than 40 years are selling the older homes, which buyers are then renovating or razing to build new larger homes on the property. Crozier describes the current real estate market as “more than red hot — it’s white hot.”

Leucadia falls within the Encinitas 92024 ZIP code where the median price in 2012 for a single-family home was $755,000 – a 7.2 percent increase over the previous year. The median price for condos was $333,750. Prices in Leucadia fall into the higher end. At the low end of home sales, Crozier noted that a two-bedroom house recently sold for $799,000. “Everything else is likely to be over $1 million,” he said. At the high end, a five-bedroom oceanfront home along Neptune Avenue is currently listed for $5.5 million.

50 comments:

  1. It's about time. Now if the city would water the plants......oh nooooo!!! Can't do that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No Shit. Who ever is in charge of City Irrigation for City trees should be fired.

      Is that Park and Rec or Public Works?

      Heads need to role!

      Delete
    2. I second that....

      I see tons of City trees that are water starved.

      the ones in front of the train parking lot on Vulcan. Starved of water for over 10 years.

      The trees on Leucadia Boulevard continually died due to not enough water.

      Someone needs to be fired over all the trees that die do to mismanagement. Is it the new parks director or some subordinate?

      Delete
    3. don't forget the water starved oaks along Encinitas Blvd in front of cottonwood creek park.

      I think the guys name is Franken. I contacted him numerous times over the years and nothing. Trees keep dying. Did he retire yet?

      He is the meaning of deadwood. If he is fired, The trees will rejoice!!!

      Delete
  2. Some of us liked Leucadia as it was before they put in this high rise blight.

    The worst part of this is how two-faced builders and City staff are about this issue.

    On the one hand, they push through these projects with the promise of social benefit and supposed low-income housing, but in the end, they are converting it to a high-income area that has nothing to do with public good and everything to do with private financial benefit for the few.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Buy up all the land in Leucadia and keep it shitty if that's your idea of nice.
      But rejoice the north end of Leucadia is still the same shit hole it was 40 years ago.

      Delete
  3. Why so angry, 11:24? If you live in Leucadia and don't like it, I'd wonder why you moved here. If you don't live here and don't like it, look away and save the nasty comments.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here, Here! 11:24 sounds like one of the people who has made his living off of development and so-called property rights--meaning how he can use other people's property on top of his own property to make the most money.

      Certainly, people who live in Leucadia are not anti-development. It is just that it has been done in such a one-sided fashion, that everyone outside of the investors and the City has lost out as compared to projects that they could have built.

      Delete
    2. So what should have been built compared to what was built.??

      Delete
  4. The most popular "topic" chosen at the so-called "workshops" by Peltz and Associates was Keep Leucadia Funky. Next most votes was under Save the Canopy. Thanks, posters, 1:39 and 4:12, and 9:17.

    There is one complainer/flamer here who gets off on casting stones. People who live in the neighborhood, and in any neighborhood in the city have every right to express our shared opinions that we would like to Keep Leucadia Funky. This solitary individual's campaign to equate funky with crappy didn't work with Prop A, and has never convinced a single reader, I'd wager. Being mean, making aspersions is not an effective method of persuasion, lol.

    Trendy is not unique, original, and goes against what we love. We can enhance and preserve the canopy, finally complete our Bicycle Masterplan with a rail trail corridor, dedicated to bicyclists, and keep our character, add more local art along 101, as in Solana Beach.

    And, as in the previous Supreme Court discussion posted by WCV, we can find a balance between property rights and neighborhood needs, community character. One doesn't have to own ALL the property to have a stake in the neighborhood!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You talk the talk but don't walk the walk. Solana Beach is 98% finished with their 101 streetscape. Leucadia has a restored canopy?? No. Rail trail?? No. I won't repeat the obvious. Why bother.

      Keep Leucadia Crappy Club is in control, I just wish they valued hwy 101 as much as they claim. Clearly they don't, just look at the landscaping. They can't / won't water the flowers. ( Yes I know KLCC isn't responsible for watering the plants, they only care about denigrating L101, Norby, and anyone that wants to see a nice H101.)

      Delete
    2. Oh, dry up and blow away, already. Tedious, and I'd bet dollars to donuts you don't live here. Snore.

      Delete
    3. Just go spend your morning watering the plants I stalled by L101, they are thirsty.

      Delete
  5. Leucadia , the poor mans imperial beach.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yup. 6:36pm-


    thats why Leucadia properties sell for the highest in the nation right?

    Catch a clue or go have coffee with Lynn and try and sober up and learn to appreciate reality. You both have a way to go.

    I believe the market well above you two blow hards.

    ReplyDelete
  7. UT is well known to be a developer owned, pro-development newspaper. Of course opinions will be advanced through that rag that "trendy" or "chic," is preferable to funky!

    If a true neighborhood needs assessment were performed, such as happened through the Prop A initiative, honest statistics would show that residents do want to retain our neighborhood's charm, and community character. We can only suggest ways for the City to save money, so as to put more towards improving the canopy, watering the median, sponsoring art along North 101, and more, that would actually benefit residents, rather than would-be developers.

    Many generous volunteers have also gone to great efforts to plant trees, flowers, get rid of the Goathead Thorns, and more. Residents do what we can, but we don't need more city funding siphoned off to lobbyist/contractors, who take more and more money for studies and "workshops," which are just opportunities for more lobbying, more pushing of the trendy gentrification, "genericifacation" agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 6:36
    Yeah right.

    Imperial Beach 3 bedrooms $199,000

    http://www.trulia.com/property/3120320083-575-7th-St-202-Imperial-Beach-CA-91932

    Leucadia 3 bedrooms on Urania St. $1,199,700

    http://www.zillow.com/leucadia-encinitas-ca/#/homes/for_sale/Encinitas-CA/pmf,pf_pt/2112105768_zpid/45164_rid/days_sort/33.110308,-117.244806,33.018236,-117.359476_rect/12_zm/_fm/

    ReplyDelete
  9. Not to argue, but....

    generic definition
    [dʒəˈnɛrɪk]
    mod.
    cheap; plain; undesirable. : I don't want any old generic car, I want something with power and good looks.


    I don't see either the embellishments in the Downtown Streetscape or what's planned for the Leucadia Streetscape as this definition of generic. The other definition of generic is "without a brand name or trademark". That doesn't seem to fit either - except for the cool trademark icons: SRF Lotus, 101 sheild, ECR bell, the "surf naked" handsign etc...

    I concur that "cookie cutter" development is generic. That duplicitous chain stores engulfing a town is generic. But not adding better infrastructure, safety, beauty and restoring history like the classic streetlamps that used to be here, the landmark ENCINITAS sign, great landscaping, local themed art tile mosaics in the sidewalk, a smooth and usable sidewalk (compared to 6" to 12" wide dirt path like used to be on both sides of B street on 101.)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Couldn't there be a compromise between funky and trendy. Cannot think of a name at this moment but it seems like there could be a little more upscaling and not lose the character of Leucadia. In Cardiff, we water the plants by the trains. Don't know if that is a option for Leucadia or not. We also put in plants, planters, etc. Has the NCTD said you cannot do this? If they haven't perhaps some of the citizens could go ahead and do it. I know it should come from the City, but since it isn't, perhaps have a fundraiser and a community of volunteers that help out. Just a suggestion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many leucadians have seeded the medians and nctd right of way with wildflower seeds only to have the city spray herbicide and kill all living plants.

      Delete
    2. Well, to be fair, we did ask them to get rid of the goat head thorns. Perhaps scorched earth is the only way they know.

      Delete
  11. In my opinion the solana beach project is crap! sustainable? walkable? environmentla? BS ! there are 4 new street lights that back up traffic making cars idle and pollute more. There is more stop and go, stop and go, stop and go. The slanted parking takes away from the uniquness of the town and now it's like otay lake, the bike/sharrow with paralell parking is a death trap lawsuit waiting to happen. I quit my gym at frogs becauxe what used to be a nice pleasant noontime drive is now a hazard and tedious. Of course the know it all control your life elitist like shaffer at the universities want to make it difficult to drive so we all start riding bikes...........like the peasants in the third world, the elitlist enviornmentalist call this progress.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. good. You should workout at a local gym closer to your home, or bike to the gym and you will get more exercise. Isn't the whole reason for going to the gym exercise? Got out of your car and bike lazy ass.

      Delete
    2. I too hate the new signals. they should have been roundabouts. Apparently Encinitas is smarter than Solana Beach.

      Delete
    3. 9:41 are you a fascist or just intellectually superior to everyone else that you can dictate how they should live? Please share with the group what qualifies you to decide what gym a person should or should not work out at? Can you share with us your skill set that enables you to tell another that they should bike to the gym? Can you help us understand what special powers you have to be able to tell people you have never met and know nothing about that they are as you say a 'lazy ass'? Is it simply because a person has a different political viewpoint than you that demean them? Is it because they choose to live a different lifestyle that you in your superiority can call them derogatory names?

      9:41 you present a frightening example of other fascist's throughout history. Should we thank you for telling all of us how we should live, where we should live and what we should or should not be doing. Hey who needs freedom when we can have elitist like you telling us all how we should live.

      Delete
    4. LA Fitness in encinitas is full of gay men that show you their junk in the locker room. Please, please cover yourselves. Why would any man assume the Capt Morgan position and blow dry his shnutts?? Happens at LA Fitness Enc. only God knows what's happening in the showers. I can barely force myself to go in to wash yes it's wash not worsh, my hands after working out.

      Delete
    5. Look for Solana Beach to soon be adding parking meters like Del Mar. It is the next step in the elitists world view to take our money. SOlbeach will be putting in fancy meters so 'revenuer's can ride around on their segue's and give residents parking tickets that with fees will probably cost $125.00 dollars. It is the next step in the Environmental madness. These are the types of things they teach in academic classes.............where they all know best what is good for us.

      Delete
    6. 11:38- flaming torches and patch forks.....

      Delete
    7. 10:16 am lazy ass-

      Glad I can help!

      Now get out of your car and bike and walk more. Its exercise and fun!

      Delete
    8. 12:35 Thanks for deciding for all of us how we should or should not live our lives. Whew, we are all so lucky to have you deciding for all of us what we should or should not do, eat or should not eat or where we should or should not live. Thank you so much for deciding for me and my family our values and lifestyle. I am incapable of deciding for myself, thank you omnipotent one for saving us all from ourselves. Enjoy the 8 cylinder SUV you drive around town in and go on trips in with your family. My family and I are so lucky you have left us with bicycles to use for our own good.

      Delete
    9. funny, hey is that you J. Stocks? the lazy ass reference sounds like Stocks, as does 12:35 failing to answer a single of the questions put out there by 10:16, then again, with the name calling, a little decorum please

      Delete
    10. You are a dumbass. You think Jerome stops would be calling somebody a fat ass?

      Delete
    11. 9:42
      Right on. The extra lights further exacerbate pollution, gas consumption, wear and tear on cars etc. Roundabouts are the future, like it or not. Nothing new under the sun though. Blame the ancient Romans. The jumbo palms they put at the 101 / Lomas Santa Fe intersection look awesome though.

      11:38
      Evidently, you don't have a business with one parking spot that a non-customer parks in for 3 days at a time - or you might feel differently about parking meters.




      Delete
    12. I don't shop at stores that have parking meters in front of them. I used to shop in del mar but don't anymore, the cops driving around all day ticketing cars is disgusting. Parking meters are for poorly run cities. when meters go in in solbeach itqs residents who will pay the price.

      Delete
  12. Hey, they are removing the dead oleander bushes that the city tried to trim into looking like a tree. Wow!! See, we're not so bad after all. Just in time for the 4th....

    ReplyDelete
  13. They are removing all kinds of dead city trees that the City never waters. Staff are great at killing things and cutting them down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If only they could remove the dead wood at City Hall and replace them with Mr. Fiscal Responsibility! That guy is banned from the property.

      Delete
  14. Yoga ok in the school says judge. Namaste.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Fred, if a true neighborhood need's assessment were done, by a truly neutral "facilitator," or through a public vote, then five roundabouts and lane elimination on North Highway 101 will not be approved.

    The four roundabouts planned for south of La Costa would be one lane roundabouts, which are definitely NOT recommended next to a railway corridor or where cross-street traffic is significantly less than a major roadway's traffic, as with our three way intersections. Moreover, these one lane roundabouts, with LESS safety features, would require the median to be moved, and for many more trees to be removed. The "cartoon" plans drawn up by Peltz and Associates do not "pencil out" with Planning and Engineering's diagrams. But those four roundabouts, if installed, would effectively reduce that portion of 101 to a two lane road, with only one lane north and one lane south.

    The angled parking would create more challenges for bicyclists, as would the roundabouts, themselves. Studies have shown that there are more bicycle accidents in intersections after roundabouts are installed, than before. I've sent these statistics to Council, and presented them at a public Council Meeting.

    But no matter what, Fred, I respect your support of Prop A. I wish that you could see that roundabouts are another tool that developers would use to be able to get mitigated negative environmental impact declarations, through the City, for their high density projects they hope to build along N101, without having to get Environmental Impact Reports with respect to traffic. Intersections with roundabouts are no longer "graded" from A through F, but once installed automatically are considered to be "traffic calming," when narrowing a four lane Major Roadway in the Coastal Zone would NOT be calming, but would create more back-up and congestion, more challenges for residents adjacent to the highway, beachgoers, and local commuters.

    I want the City to help Leucadia with a beautiful Greenscape, by opening up a dedicated bicycle lane in the railroad right of way, which, as part of our Bicycle Masterplan Update, has been on the books, from Chesterfield, in Cardiff, north, to La Costa, since at least 2005. The City could also sponsor more public art to be placed along the highway, on the east side, by cutting back on salaries of Department Heads and the City Manager, and NOT hiring an unwanted PR Communications Specialist. Also, the City should not renew Peder Norby's contract. This would go a long way toward allowing more beautification and improvements in Leucadia, which we all favor.

    ReplyDelete
  16. If "a true neighborhood need's assessment were done, by a truly neutral "facilitator," or through a public vote, then five roundabouts and lane elimination on North Highway 101 will not be approved."

    Short of only hearing a lot of misinformation about them, I don't see how an educated neighbor here could deny the following numbered benefits of Roundabouts.

    Lynn, I haven't given up on you yet. So here's my 16 reasons Streetscape is not a poisoned glass of James Jones Kook-Aid, but a healthy float made of fresh pressed Trader Joe's organic carrot juice poured over their best vanilla ice cream. Might sound bad at first, but try it, you'll like it.

    1. When counting all the routes local drivers utilize, the Streetscape eliminates 22 of their mandatory stops. That's only 10 physical stop points, but some of those stops share 2 or 3 options for directions that cars need to go. Removing these stops collectively saves years of time for people annually
    2. Roundabouts provide a safer left turn access onto 101 for residents west of 101. (They'll only have to navigate ONE lane of traffic then vs. 3 lanes today).
    3. Roundabouts look far better than stop signs and traffic signals and create a venue for public art.
    4. Roundabouts cost less than traffic signals.
    5. Roundabouts eliminate most vehicles from having to stop at an intersection.
    6. Less vehicles having to stop (then accelerate) decreases pollution - both air and storm drain water run off.
    7. Less vehicles having to stop reduces gas consumption saving every consumer a lot of money.
    8. Less vehicles having to stop creates more efficient traffic circulation.
    9. Because of their slower speed requirements, Roundabouts become safer than intersections for everyone. 1000 pedestrians died in US intersections last year. Not one pedestrian died in any of the over 3000 US roundabouts.
    10. Roundabouts virtually make head on and T-bone collisions impossible.
    11. Our roundabouts will enable 6 U-turn capacities we currently cannot legally or safely perform.
    12. The long awaited lowered speed limit (realized) vastly improves safety.
    13. They are not "pseudo-roundabouts" as some have claimed but full fledged roundabouts.
    14. They are neither "Traffic Circles"; another misrepresentation that's been printed against them. Traffic Circles are far larger and less safe.
    15. Because of the collective amount of stops roundabouts eliminate for our 2 mile stretch, and even at the new slower speed limit, vehicles will be able to cross town in LESS time from point A to point B than it takes to travel the same distance right now. Count how many seconds you spend at stop lights or stop signs on 101.
    16. The northbound lane elimination has just had the acid test with the Del Mar Fair and has passed with flying colors. It's true, the one lane is more crowded at times, but even at peak hours, it still flows fine and does not back up from La Costa Ave for very long or very far when the light is red.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How many times do you count for the stop sign(s) at Marchetta, and when have you seen, on any plans, where that would be eliminated?

      As far as streets feeding onto N101, people will have to come to a complete stop when traffic is heavy going north or south, because there will almost always be someone in the roundabout, & people get confused about yielding.

      No one's recommending more traffic signals, so the fact that roundabouts cost less, isn't a bonus. Stop signs cost far less than roundabouts, but I wouldn't want more than one more stop sign, if numbers justified it. According to the staff report for the 7/8/12 Council Meeting, a year ago, statistics don't justify stop signs (and also wouldn't justify roundabouts)!

      Narrowing Historic Highway 101 to one lane in each direction between the four one lane roundabouts, would result in LESS breaks in traffic for those trying to turn north or south onto N101 from the west side of the hwy.

      Again, we already lowered speed limits. Accident statistics over the last 10 years show that Leucadia's intersections, along N101, are safer than similar intersections throughout the state. Because in some places roundabouts are justified due to a higher level of collisions, doesn't mean we need to reduce our speed from 35 MPH down to 15 MPH, the speed recommended to navigate through roundabouts, that will be placed one after another, within less than a 2 mile stretch. Because slower is "safer" according to your logic, we should lower the speed limit to 15 MPH on freeways, & on every street in Encinitas!

      I don't care what we call them. Roundabouts ARE a type of traffic circle. There are LARGE traffic circles & smaller, neighborhood traffic circles. Roundabouts do not have to have two lanes, but they are also recommended by the U.S. Dept. of transportation to have wider diameters than those one lane "roundabouts" planned on 101. A wider diameter would allow MORE SAFETY FEATURES.

      Your logic on the "collective amount of stops," assumes that no one will be stopping with roundabouts. Check out Santa Fe Rd. or Lecuadia Blvd. if you don't think people are stopping at the 3 roundabouts, there, during peak traffic periods. Go look at the back-up on Leucadia Blvd., to see that there is MORE congestion during peak traffic periods WITH roundabouts. The Leucadia Blvd. roundabouts ARE complicated by the railroad tracks, & some feel they were built too close to the railway corridor, so that their resulting traffic does, indeed, INTERSECT with the RR corridor.

      Why is there only ONE roundabout anywhere else in the City, on Santa Fe, when we had three planned for Leucadia Blvd and five planned for Highway 101, through Leucadia, so a total of EIGHT? I can tell you why, Fred; it's because so much high density development is planned for Leucadia and development interests want to be able to get mitigated negative environmental impact declarations through the use of roundabouts as alleged "traffic calmers."

      Delete
    2. Fred, regardless of your opinion of the one lane only for motor vehicles "flowing fine" northbound, north of Leucadia Blvd on 101, I've seen "near misses," as motorists try to merge into the single lane. Others seem oblivious; while riding our bikes, including past your shop, we just watched people, this afternoon, driving through the bike lane in their cars, seemingly with no clue.

      I've also seen people having more problems turning left onto the hwy, as there are less breaks in traffic. And because there will always be back-ups going south, is no reason to exacerbate that challenge by essentially doing another southbound "lane diet," which would occur were four one-lane roundabouts to be installed on the hwy.

      The Coastal Commission is supposed to review Major Roadway lane eliminations in the Coastal Zone. Many, including Teresa Barth, in her latest newsletter, warned about Coastal Commission jurisdiction, but the City more or less IGNORED the CCC letter, from the District Manager, Deborah Lee, that spelled out how a CDP(Coastal Development Permit) & LCP (Local Coastal Program) amendment are required for lane elimination for motorists. But Council wanted, and still wants to make us all quake in our shoes over CCC review of Prop A. Hypocritical!

      Delete
  17. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Roundabouts are not recommended to INTERSECT and work in conjunction with railroad crossings. Neither do any of our roundabouts. That would bring all traffic to a standstill and clog roundabouts every time a train went by.
    Neither are roundabouts beneficial used with seldom used roads. But there are thousands of daily car trips generated west of 101 that will benefit from safer access to the hwy with roundabouts. All of our roundabouts will have three access points. 3 entrances/exits will have 25# less impacts and be easier to navigate than a 4 door roundabout.

    Incidentally, there will always be times the southbound lane backs up. These times can usually coincide with southbound accidents on the freeway, and at times just prior to Post Time during race track season in Del Mar. Cut through traffic a few years back that was occurring every morning was from commuters all points north because of the crowded freeway. Since Solana Beach and Del Mar have added an extra lane to the freeway, the early morning congestion is half what it used to be, greatly reducing any southbound cut-through traffic on Melrose for cars going south. Cars going north have never cut through Melrose, as northbound traffic is never at a stand still for very long. The elimination of the hwy stops at Marcheta St. will also improve southbound flow for eight thousand cars a day.

    I'm with you when a "consensus" is skewed, and have seen evidence of that at at least one city held meeting where a slide show was presented and the public was give a multiple choice question limited to "Which kind of 3 story building do you like best for Encinitas"? Definitely a stacked question. I'm also leery of elements of "Agenda 21" potentially caving the foundation of American ideals. But I think the passage of Prop A curbs high density plans like nothing else could - and that's why it was no minor issue when big bucks near and far recently fought it's passage.

    Check out Rosa Koire's take on everything at the link below. She's hit the nail on the head several times. "You'll hear terms like "Pedestrian Friendly", "Consensus", "Stakeholders", "Sustainable Development" & "Mixed Use Zoning". And certainly those are all buzz words today in Encinitas. However, seeing what all the new (temporary) sidewalks on our biz district have brought is most definately more "friendly" and really does encourage more people to walk here in our business district. Likewise, the bike paths that were tretcherous are now safer. There are definately good things to do to a neighborhood and basic working infrastructure is surely one of them. But watch the video and see what you think. But don't let the fact that the speaker is a pro-choice lesbian democrat going over well at a Tea Party meeting disturb you or make you cut her off early! (She does play with her hair too much though - as one friend pointed out to me).

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDtCb45Lqt0

    ReplyDelete
  19. No, Fred. Roundabouts are not recommended by the U.S. Dept. of transportation along railway corridors, period. Peltz and Associates could not name one single place in the U.S., or anywhere where they have been built alongside a railroad corridor.

    Nor are roundabouts recommended by the USDT when crossing street traffic is significantly less than through traffic on a Major Roadway. The four one-lane roundabouts scheduled have NO cross street traffic, only sidestreets feeding in from the west side of Highway 101.

    I have spoken to people from Europe, and to friends and family who have travelled throughout Mexico and Central America. They also inform me that they know of no roundabouts built alongside a railroad corridor. These traveling friends have also shared that roundabouts DON"T work where the cross street traffic was out of balance with that of the main thoroughfare. Again, four of the five planned roundabouts will have NO crossings streets, DUE TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why does Lynn outrank Fred?

      Fred helped pass Prop A.

      Give Fred his roundabouts.

      Delete
  20. Lynn,
    Once again, the only logic behind roundabouts not being recommended next to railroads occurs only when they INTERSECT with at grade RR crossings. None of our 5 Roundabouts will. But here's a link to the exact problem. .

    http://lscdenver.com/Papers/Roundabouts%20near%20Railroad%20Crossings%20By%20Ariniello.pdf

    3 way roundabouts are just as functional and beneficial as 4 way ones. They are not unheard of. And in every instance of 3 way Roundabouts, a fourth entrance is not possible.

    WSDOT - Roundabout Benefits

    East Lake Sammamish Parkway/SE 43rd Way Roundabout, City of Issaquah, Washington: Three-leg, multi-lane, open 2010 | Reid Our B

    http://www.fruitville210.org/traffic_calming.html


    Of course cross traffic for our Roundabouts is not equal to hwy traffic counts, but there are still thousands of car trips daily from and to the west of 101 daily. Let's say there are 9000 vehicles per day on 101 merging with only 1000 western vehicles at our 3 way Roundabouts. Do you really think a 4 way roundabout with 9000 vehicles from all directions daily would function better with 8000 more cars going east/west?

    Also, I would think our side streets qualify in the definition of cross traffic or they'd all be parallel.

    But most importantly, 7:12 makes some pretty good arguments.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Fred, Washington State Dept. of Transportation, if that's what your link refers to, is not the U.S. Dept. of Transportation. Also, that Colorado link, which is five years old, and written by a consultant for a transportation agency likely pushing roundabouts stated:

    "Since US 6 and the Union Pacific railroad are less than 100 feet apart in this area, concern was expressed about the effect of the railroad on operations of the roundabout. In addition, the Union Pacific railroad expressed concern about the proximity of the roundabout to the railroad. Another concern was raised by CDOT about the possibility of queues developing at the railroad crossing backing up into the new I-70 interchange.

    Roundabouts near railroad crossings are relatively rare in the United States."

    Fred, if you took the time to actually read the links you are sharing, you would see that what was being analyzed in Colorado, is similar to what we have with the Roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd. I don't know how many feet the westernmost roundabout on Leucadia is from the tracks, but we know, from experience, that back-up happens.

    The Colorado link is discussing roads with roundabouts that do cross railroad tracks. One hundred feet from the tracks is MUCH less than the roundabouts will have alongside 101. But you are comparing apples to oranges, with your links.

    You do not name any specific instances where there are three way intersection roundabouts, with relatively small traffic volumes exiting onto the highway. There may be "thousands of car trips a day," but I don't think that is the case here, for each of the intersections where roundabouts are planned.

    The Fruitville link, also over five years old, is about roundabouts, but not near a railway corrido, as far as I could read, anywhere, proposed for New Jersey. "At the Venice roundabout, big yellow signs will announce the presence of foot traffic. Eastwood unveiled them during a city-county meeting Monday in Venice.

    When pedestrians push a button, eight lights on each sign will start flashing like a Reno slot machine paying off its jackpot."

    That isn't what's planned for Highway 101, through Leucadia. Also, in the NJ link, critics of roundabouts complained that they were being removed, in other locations.

    Both of these links seem to be slanted in a way that puts roundabouts in a favorable light. They may be great in some places. NOT alongside railroad tracks, at three way intersections. Because three way intersections do not have cross streets. There could be some roundabouts, somewhere, with three streets intersecting, but not with a Major Roadway as a through street, primary circulation element, and the only "feeder street," coming in at a right angle, NOT crossing the Highway.

    Thanks for helping with Prop A, Fred. But one lane, three way intersection roundabouts shouldn't happen on North 101. They would further deplete the canopy; the median would have to be significantly narrowed; the City can't afford them, and adjacent residents don't want them. If we could have a vote for or against roundabouts, they would NOT be endorsed by the voters, as Prop A was, for which we are both grateful!

    Also, the sidewalk and landscaping improvements promised by the City on Leucadia Blvd., with the installation of roundabouts there, should be completed ASAP.

    ReplyDelete