Norby was extraordininarily highly regarded by both council factions as an effective facilitator, but had recently come under criticism from some quarters, including at the July 17 council meeting, for seeming to promote high-density development and for failing to get downtown bars to take the noise and crime issues more seriously.
A source forwards this grateful and effusive but hastily written and formatted resignation letter in unsigned Word document format:
July 17th, 2013
Dear Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and Council Members,
Thank you for the wonderful opportunity to work for the citizens of Encinitas as the Hwy 101 Corridor Coordinator. I am and will always be, extremely grateful to current and past council members, city staff, property owners, merchants, investors, volunteers and most importantly to all the citizens of Encinitas for the opportunity to work professionally in this great city!
I am choosing to end my contract, consistent with the terms therein, with the city of Encinitas.
I am doing so with a heart filled with warmth and joy, and with great admiration and appreciation for all that is past, present and that lay in the future for this great city. Encinitas is a special place on this earth, with a diverse and engaged citizenry that cares deeply about their city and communities, a truly exceptional city.
I have accepted an opportunity that is very exciting for myself and my family, one that enables me to work in the fields of interest that are most closely aligned with my core beliefs of “Relocalization” and “Sustainability.”
Encinitas and its citizens will forever hold a large and special place in my heart.
With gratitude and thanks,
Peder Norby
Peder is is a great guy with a great mind. I wish the KLCC could learn how to listen, but they can not. If they did they would understand varying sides of an argument. Oh well, we all know some people are shallow or not intelligent enough to understand many things. KLCC club members exhibit those qualities.
ReplyDeleteEncinitas is a much better place because of Peder. I wish him luck in the future!
Yes ,I agree Peder will be missed.The KLCC are nimbys with A bad attitude.
ReplyDeleteHe will be missed.
ReplyDeletePeder had his thumb on downtown Encinitas happenings as he revitalized the area. Among his accomplishments was increasing the number of bar stools available over the years of 2007-2013.
ReplyDeleteBar Stools Available in 7-Block Downtown Area
Year
* 2007 479
* 2008 619
* 2009 780
* 2010 780
* 2011 780
* 2012 1244
* 2013 1476
And what was the increase in tax revenues downtown during that same period of time?? And why weren't you complaining in 2009 after a 50% increase in bar stools from 2007??
Delete9:57 AM
DeleteIt was all well covered up by the city and Norby.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt's my understanding there were only two new liquor licenses added downtown in the last six years you mentioned. Exactly where were you told those 1003 new bar stools were installed?
DeleteSee www.saveencinitas.org
DeleteBar seats can be added when the restaurants instead of closing at 10:00 PM morph into bars then stay open until 2 AM.
It seems that the Saloon is expanding on property around it and will soon have 200 bar seats. Read reviews on the downtown bars. After 10 PM long lines to get inside some of them. Adding live music (which needs a license from the ABC) increases the mass of bar hoppers downtown.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteImpressive website. Some good points. Some not as good?
DeleteThe good ones:
* That alcohol serving establishments expanding their hours from 10 to 2 exacerbate drinking problems.
* That expansion of the same increase problems.
The bad points:
* That there were only 4 alcohol serving establishments in 2007 in downtown Encinitas. There were far more. To list the first ones that come to mind:
Leucadia Pizzeria
El Callejon
Martini Ranch
Viggilucci's
Siamese Basil
Saloon
Kim's
First Street
Roxy
But maybe they were referring to only ones open till 2?
* I noticed several places changing hands that did sell alcohol already. Are all of the places listed now open till 2 as well?
The ugly:
There's definitely problems brewing downtown. But to blame Peder Norby for alcohol sales would be like blaming someone for making an awesome park, only to have it overrun with drunks. Selecting private businesses to promote just was nowhere to be found in his job description. Sounds more like a PR director's or Ombudsman's concern to me. New sidewalks, infrastructure, landscaping etc attract everyone, including jerks. Over development plays a large role in rising crime statistics as well - and that's where the sky is really the limit we're talking about here. Especially with a city hall bent on building 2300 homes to satisfy an insatiable and never ending state rule for housing.
I was curious at a meeting last week about the affordable housing issue and it's rule with proportion to our population. Of our 60,000 residents, I wondered just how many of them OWN their home? Certainly many. Could not these be counted as affordable places many of our residents enjoy? I was told "No, those cannot be counted". WHY NOT? And why not count those who haven't paid off their home yet but CAN afford their monthly payments? And lastly, in the 90's the city granted an amnesty for granny flats that were seperate dwelling places on someone's land. There are still many of those not accounted for that are affordable housing for many too I'm sure.
OK, this one is lastly - and probably my biggest gripe. How the hell did an 8% in our population since 1995 result in a 500% increase in our affordable housing requirement from the state? That's nuts.
No, I don't have THE answer for solving the booze problems downtown. But certainly getting a grip on the runaway train of future alcohol establishments is probably being well addressed on parts of the website you listed. At least with the passage of Prop A, stack and pack production that would cluster and vastly increase our population (and corresponding higher crime statistics) stands to keep the future of Encinitas more enjoyable, safer and sane.
This is like Jim Brown retiring from football: or Fernando Valenzuela retiring from the Dodgers: or the end of Seinfeld.
ReplyDeleteOne of the many talents Peder has, along with being able to get divergent groups to acknowledge each other's right to an opinion: and then work successfully toward an agreed upon goal:(See Library) is that he is able to 'suffer fools gladly': he didn't complain when Lisa Shaffer/Andrew Audet/Jerry Lewis tried to 'frame' him last summer with the Cardiff nonsense and he didn't blanch when lunatic Lynn began speaking in tongues about the boathouses: but what locals don't understand, is that Peder is a very valuable asset that the new Majority of the City Council has foolishly thrown away.
I'll never forget: when after a February 2013 presentation by Leucadia 101, Cardiff 101 and DEMA: the new City Council's Majority's first question was,"How much money do you make per year, Peder?" What? Shaffer cannot read?
This from a 'leader' who claims to have a vast background in 'business' ethics. Nothing unethical in Shaffer's question: it just showed her lack of knowledge and experience: and, oh yeah, her rudeness and bad manners.
This new council seems bound and determined to take Encinitas from 'abundance' to 'sustainability'.
Adios, Peder: thanks for the memories. We know wherever you go, you'll be a success!
P.S.
Should someone suing the City of Encinitas stay in the President's Chair at DEMA? Jes askin'?
Peder has taken Encinitas to an abundance of bars. That will never be forgotten.
DeleteTime for a full audit of the preservation association.
Adios Peder. Don't let the door hit you on your way out.
20 years ago downtown Enc was a dead or dying place, today it is vital, vibrant and growing. Much but not all of that success belongs to P Norby. The fact the sheriffs dept patrols this area with the same numbers of officers as 20 years ago is NOT Nobys fault. Put the blame where it is due... The city council. The failures of every city council are well known and documented, add this to the list. More officers.
ReplyDeleteLet's not kid ourselves. Peder Norby, in spite of his likeability and the impression he was listening to all opinions, did the bidding of the city. In the Cardiff Specific Plan it was 3-story mixed use with reduced setbacks. In ERAC it was 4-5 stories for mixed use. He failed on both because he was videotaped. He lost in his attempt to defeat Prop. A. He realized it was time to move on.
ReplyDeleteSo where is he going? He was seen at the last council meeting sitting not with Dody Crawford of DEMA, but with Tom Blessent of Leichtag Foundation, the new owners of the Ecke property on Saxony. This fits with his plans for "relocalization" and "sustainability," which are exactly what Leichtag is proposing with plans for organic farming and a local farmers market. But there are plans for upzoning to taller buildings and greater density too. There is already support for this on the council, so Peder is just the man to put a happy and friendly face on it. Peder has new buzz words, but his job will still be to "facilitate" the agenda of his new employer if he accepts the position.
I had assumed that he would move into the PR position since he has been so skilled at pushing the pro-growth agenda for years, and he also knows where the bodies are buried.
DeleteI agree with the impression of him as a likable guy, but he represented special interests and not the interests of Encinitas residents who want to preserve the laid-back quality of this town that drew us all here in the first place. I do not see his record as a positive one for Encinitas.
Peder sits where there's an open chair and doesn't reserve seating at Council Meetings. He knows just about eveyrone in the room usually from the epic executive to the lowly antique dealer. I laughed when he stood outside city hall with me last week at their capacity crowd and he told me the Sheriff wouldn't let him in. (The noive!)
DeletePeder is now working elsewhere.
for the record, the Cardiff Specific Plan Peder facilitated is two stories max in height. The previous Cardiff Specific Plan by the previous consultant was tree stories and move the buildings to the sidewalk. It was awful. The citizens committee in Cardiff got it right with two stories and Peder did a great job.
DeleteIt was never a question of two or three stories, it was only a question of mixed use on the second story.
Peder Norby pushed 3+ story's during the Cardiff Specific Plan. Norby and staff used Pacific Station as an example of the benefits of 3 story buildings for Cardiff during the meetings.
DeleteResidents were concerned they would lose control of community character if properties were zoned for residential mixed use as Norby was pushing. The citizens then voted and reached consensus to limit mixed use in the plan area. The minutes at city hall state a consensus was reached. About a year later for some reason Mr. Norby told the planning commission the committee did not reach a consensus. After that city staff told the council the committee did not reach a consensus and high density mixed use changes were put back into the plan that included the possibility of 3 story buildings with state density incentives to exceed height. Council then directed staff and Norby to hold an "open house" and present more stack and pack and zoning changes giving away local control. The owner of the Post Office sent a letter to the council that he wanted to consolidate the New Balance, Post Office and Dental Building to put in a 3 story Walgreen's with condo's on top.
When the final plan went to the Planning Commission more than 20 residents spoke in opposition to Peder Norby's new open house plan. Residents also showed a video the citizens committee voting to limit the mixed use. After seeing the video the Planning Commission removed the open house high density zoning additions and reverted to the local control zoning the residents voted on in the video.
Mr. Norby in my opinion did not do a good job in Cardiff. I think he let us all done.
Cardiff got it right because of the residents. The upzoning was and always will be about 3+ story buildings in Cardiff.
Can someone please tell me what KLCC means? Also what happened in Cardiff. I've been away so sorry I don't know.
ReplyDeletePaste this into your browser.....I didn't have the patience do put in a hyperlink!
Deletehttp://www.theleucadiablog.com/2013/01/the-keep-leucadia-crappy-club.html
The first time I read "KLCC" was on Leucadia Blog. JP used it, in opposing Prop A. The thought is that anyone who opposes five roundabouts and lane elimination for motorists on Highway 101 through Leucadia, and anyone who supported Prop A, were part of the "Keep Leucadia Crappy Club."
DeleteThe same development interests, which had included Peder Norby, that had wanted to blight Leucadia, and make it part of a Redevelopment Agency, also support effectively turning North 101 into a two lane road, one lane north and one lane, south, for the four roundabouts planned south of La Costa Avenue. Those are all to be one lane roundabouts. Roundabouts are not recommended along railway corridors by the U.S. Dept. of Transportation.
Fred has shared links from Colorado and Washington that are not analogous to the proposed roundabouts here. Those links refer to situations, such as on Leucadia Blvd, where there are roundabouts near where a road crosses the railroad tracks. Four of the planned roundabouts on 101 are for three way intersections, only. The U.S. Dept. of Transportation recommends against roundabouts where the CROSS STREET traffic is significantly less than that of the main thoroughfare.
The four one-lane roundabouts, which would have LESS safety features, due to their narrow diameter, would be at intersections with NO cross streets, due to the RR tracks. For the four roundabouts to be installed, the median would have to be moved, further depleting Leucadia's canopy.
KLCC is a marketer's "trick" to try to twist public perception through jingoism and jive, as well as character assassination. Overwhelmingly, at the public workshops, those participating voted to Keep Leucadia Funky. The category with the next most votes was Save the Canopy. Funky does not equal crappy. Leucaida isn't crappy and we all would like more public artwork, more greenscape, more trees and plants, a railtrail corridor for bicyclists and pedestrians, and good relations between merchants, vendors, and those who patronize their businesses.
Because intersections with roundabouts, when installed, no longer are graded for traffic impact, A through F, but automatically count as "traffic calming," whether the traffic is actually bottlenecked, and jamming up, or not, would-be developers favor them. These developers and their sycophants are not concerned with more cut through traffic through neighborhoods adjacent to North 101, including Vulcan and Neptune. They are not concerned with slower emergency response times. Their big concern is their entitlement to escalating property values, higher potential sale, lease or rental value, because these wanna-be high density developers would be able to get negative environmental impact declarations, through installation of roundabouts. A few businesses would also benefit from additional angled parking. However, unlike in Solana Beach, which installed a linear park, but no roundabouts, and managed to keep four lanes, two north and two south, in each direction, on Pacific Coast Hwy, no Special Property Tax Assessment is planned for property owners who stand to profit from installation of roundabouts on 101 in Encinitas.
I agree: thank goodness Prop A passed, so the density cannot be so intense, without public approval, unless a certain percentage, higher than now required, is to be designated as affordable housing. I don't think the "in lieu" affordable housing fees will "cut it," with regard to "bypassing" the will of the voters.
Lynn- your lies are simply sickening. I attended every workshop, at no point in time were we offered a choice of Keep Leucadia Funky. Pure fantasy on your part.
DeleteJP description of the KLCC is 100% accurate. You offer no solutions to the blighted 101 only that you oppose sidewalks, flowers , trees, street lights and roundabouts and L101 Main Street association.
PS- I've been really nice in this posting. (Consider yourself lucky.)
At the initial workshops large pieces of white paper were attached to the white board at the Community Center. We were each given colored dots, and were to place one EACH on each category that we favored. Keep Leucadia Funky got the most votes. Next was Save the Canopy. A couple of members of the Leucaida 101 Mainstreet Association put ALL of their dots on Roundabouts, lined up in a row, all the same two colors, so 14 votes for roundabouts. This is in the report , the number 14, that Tony Kranz provided a link for, previously, to those opposing the lane elimination. Leucadia is not and has not been blighted. JP fought against that. I have NEVER opposed sidewalks along the west side of 101, and was very happy when they were installed. I love the flowers, trees, and street lighting along the highway that makes this major roadway, primary circulation element, safer.
DeletePlease stop calling me a liar, and projecting your own lies onto me and anyone who opposes four one-lane roundabouts and lane elimination prior to required amendments to our General Plan, our N101SP and our Local Coastal Program, which the City has repeatedly admitted are required, in addition to a Coastal Development Permit and completion of design review.
Just because you post under lynn, doesn't absolve you of your lies.
DeleteAnyone can post under a blog name of lynn.
Fact is you are a Liar.
Word is Leichtag wants a convention center off Saxony, complete with hotel and amenities. Watch for Norby to try to figure a workaround a public vote on the re-zoning he'll most certainly be "facilitating."
ReplyDeleteToo busy. Betcha five bucks he don't.
ReplyDeleteThe story on the street is Peder is going to work for the city of Carlsbad in charge of special projects with a very hefty raise.
ReplyDeleteCity of Carlsbad Council Agenda July 23, 2013
ReplyDeleteItem 10. AB #21,327- APPROVE AGREEMENT.
Approving a professional services agreement with Peder Norby for special projects coordination
consulting services; and, authorizing the City Manager to execute said agreement.
Resolution No. 2013-198.
Suckers.
DeleteNorby's contract doesn't detail a hefty raise when the inclusive items are added in.
DeleteContractor's fee shall not exceed one hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000) per
Agreement term, inclusive of all labor, operating costs and travel expenses.
His duties and paperwork are 20 more times intense than his job as the 101 czar.
4:29 Mr. Norby has never had a performance review. Mr. Norby has never turned in a time card. These are facts. Also the public was told in 2012 his contract was 105K, Stocks put Norby up for a raise to about 130K but residents opposed it and the council voted not to give it to him. Is it possible the Stocks led council found another way to provide for the additional money?. Hmm- probably no connection to GPAC, ERAC and GPU coming up with 4-5 story recommendations that Vina and Stocks wanted.
DeleteJust saying-
Isn't it a fact that independent consultants are not required to turn in a time card?
DeleteIsn't it a fact that independent contractors do not have performance reviews per se, but are evaluated on their results?
Perhaps I missed it, but wasn't Norby an independent contractor for the City?
- The Sculpin
Good for Peder. More money and doesn't need to listening to the deadly stupid KLCC ramble all the time......
Delete
DeleteNorby never turned in a time card. He had free run of the place, no residents could track or know what he did or did not do, when he did or did not work, who he did or did not talk to. In all his years there is no paper trail that residents can access. He was DEMA for a while, then some facilitator of Cardiff and later ERAC. The fact is the council could have required Norby (and other contractors) to submit a summary of their efforts for taxpayers to review but the council did not. Perhaps they will in the future. We would all be well served if they did.
Norby never had a review. Again the council could have required one and allowed public comment but the council chose not to. Could it be too stifle public input?
Cardiff residents know that Norby led a citizens meeting, that the citizens committee reached consensus, that the official minutes at city hall state this consensus was reached and that Norby later told the Planning Commission the committee did not reach a consensus.
On ERAC and the GPU residents know it was Mr. Norby shown on videotape suggestion and making a recommendation to allow 4-5 story buildings.
Norby was being evaluated as an Independent Contractor by the public and the residents he was getting failing grades. Like Vina, the public was giving him a "vote of no confidence'
You are not spreading the truth
Delete12:32, your calling someone a liar without citing a single fact is simply another one of your unsubstantiated character assassinations and more of your twisted ad hominem attacks. The comment by 9:10 was "right on the money" and completely truthful. You can't refute the truth by labeling someone a liar or pigeon-holing him or her as part of a made up club you designed to put down concerned members of our community.
DeleteWe know you don't like the term "Funky," but Leucadians do, the general public does. Leucadia could be improved, and has been. We hope for continuing improvements, which don't include four one lane roundabouts on Historic State Highway 101 south of La Costa Blvd.
You can't refute the truth with personal attacks and false stereotypes. You may try to twist the truth, but you can't refute the truth at all.
Lynn-
DeleteYou don't speak for Leucadians, only yourself.
I am a leucadian and do not really care for the term Funky. It makes me think of smelly, old and junky.... It make me think of things like you.
What you idiots don't know is that he works on the private side of life and has for his whole life because he does not want to burden the taxpayers to pay for his pension. He takes care of himself and has made some smart decisions, I wish him the best of luck. Thanks for not adding to the pension problem.
ReplyDeleteThe four roundabouts will be a blessing to all west of 101 who want to make a left turn onto 101. Why? Because they'll only have to navigate ONE lane of traffic instead of THREE. Much of the time they won't even have to stop. Only when there's a car in the circle - or the even less frequent pedestrian or bike.
ReplyDeleteIt's true, there's no need for a roundabout when cross traffic is significantly less. But there are thousands of cars each day coming from and going to the west. That number is not insignificant.
It's also true that roundabouts should not INTERSECT with railroad crossings. None of ours will.
To not want infrastructure improvments to our 101 corridor would be crappy. But to want 5 story buildings here would also be crappy. So Lynn and JP, at least you're both right half of the time on KLCC.
KLCC only exists in your own paranoid minds. Keep Leucadia Funky has been around MUCH longer, and has some real recognition. We have a license plate holder that says that. Very few people ever heard of KLCC except for those who are trying to appeal to prejudice against those who oppose their plans for four one-lane roundabouts where the public doesn't want them! This includes those people turning left onto North 101 from streets west of the highway.
DeleteLynn, really? Who would prefer to make a left turn onto any road, synchronizing 3 lanes of 35 mph traffic for that right moment to be clear, instead of the ease of entering a one lane roundabout - and much of the time not even having to stop? I liked playing dodge ball in school, but cars aren't soft rubber. (Come to think of it, it might not be a bad idea if the state mandated 3 feet of Nerf plastic on every car.)
DeleteBTW, I love "Keep Leucadia Funky". It's probably a spin off of "Keep Austin Weird" but made it's debut at an early LeucadiART WALK by a gentleman passing out free stickers of the catchy phrase. (Glad u like the funky license plate holders LTC asked me to design too.) I like seeing them around town, but some folks tell me they're thousands of miles from home when someone from here or knows Leucadia sees the plate holder on their car and strikes up a conversation. It's fun for me to see them on everything from Ramblers to Mercedes. Reminds me of my dad's line: "Livin' next door to a millionaire never bothered me".
A few years back, Paula at L-101 directed me to design a new street banner for our Light Up Leucadia time of year. "And then at the bottom" she said "just put Happy...whatever!" I laughed and said "That's PERFECT!: 'Happy Whatever!'". Now THAT would have been memorable. But the sensible shoes in our group swiftly trampled the notion. I'll bet few people can tell you what tag line was chosen for the bottom of the banner now.
It's usually the dull and ornery who will forever fear and rebel against "Keep Leucadia Funky" - probably because "funky" can mean something rancid - "ewwww". And boy will they be disappointed if they click images for funky on Google. and the first page is not generously peppered with loathsome imagery. clicky, clicky
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1313&bih=720&oq=funky+&gs_l=img.3..0l10.5890.7310.0.7687.6.6.0.0.0.0.226.889.2j1j3.6.0....0...1ac.1.22.img..2.4.513.-fvns2IXRJg&q=funky
Yes W.C., on July 17th council took a couple of shots at Norby.
ReplyDeleteConsider this, the dispersed map that Planning Director Murphy showed was based on all four groups that Norby facilitated and their recommendation to share the burden; well the workshops were just an exercise that the prior planning Director Murphy ran, but I digress.
The map and recommendation that the new Murphy put forth based on all the input was approved 5-0 with one speaker.
The prior M.I.G. Consultant that walked away with a million of our tax dollars and put forward a map that Kristen Gaspar called the Pac-Man map that showed 70% of the housing going in one community. M.I.G. and the previous Murphy made the mess that basically led to Prop A. Norby was asked to dive into a really shitty mess not of his doing.
And happily "facilitated.". Watch the erac footage where he turns the meeting over to uber-developer Doug Harwood to run and you'll get a feel for the kind of thing he added to that mess.
ReplyDeleteHe may have had his day when he did well for Encinitas, but judging by his performance the last 2-3 years, we're well rid of him. He had become a threat to residents and a liability to the city.
ReplyDeletePoppycick
DeleteI'm grateful he has resigned. What are the terms of his contract, 30 day notice. I know of several occasions, personally, when he was not honest. He wasn't honest about the consensus re the Cardiff Specific Plan. He wasn't honest when he told me "I never got that," referring to the Public Records Act request that the City Clerk forwarded him.
DeleteNorby will probably still be part of the Encinitas PReservation Association, along with Paul Ecke III. They received over $831,000 through the City for "acquisition and rehabilitation" of the Boathouses property, and I do believe an audit is in order. That could clear up any questions the public has raised, including unreported lobbying activities. Some lobbying may be allowed; it must be reported on Federal Tax Form 990s, which are publicly disclosable. Same for the Leucadia 101 Mainstreet Association. The Encinitas Chamber of Commerce had to submit to an audit, correct? All of the subsidized 101 Mainstreet Associations should be subject to a yearly independent audit, to prevent abuse of public monies.
Hmmmm. Lynn-
DeleteIts not like you've been complete truthful have you?
Its like a funky old kettle calling the pot black.
If it is true he will work for Carlsbad (aka Carls Built), I feel sorry for them. I think Norby got too much heat lately - directly or indirectly (Cardiff Specif Plan, ERAC stack-n-Pack & DEMA pro-booze stance)
ReplyDeleteMy opinion is Norby should have been fired after the Cardiff Specific Plan.
DeleteThe official record at city hall states the citizens voted and reached consensus to limit stack and pack. Norby told the Planning Commission the committee did not reach a consensus. Make of this what you will. Carlsbad residents might want to invest in some camcorders and begin recording the 'citizen outreach' and 'community participation meetings' Norby leads.
Anon: 8:57
DeleteRe: Cardiff Specific Plan.
The vote on whether to do mixed use on the second story was 6 to 5 in favor of mixed use according to the approved minutes of the CSPRC Aug28 meeting.
At the September 11th meeting CSPRC minutes show that the minority committee members wanted a reconsideration of the vote. A vote was held to reconsider and passed 5 to 4. This action set aside the original vote and a second vote was taken. This vote was 5 to 5 so the vote failed, thus reinstating the original 6-5 vote of the August 28th meeting.
The votes were 6 to 5 in favor, 5-4 for reconsideration and 5-5 on the reconsideration. Clearly in anyone's view, no matter how politically skewed, this is not even remotely close to a consensus.
Furthermore, the CSPRC minutes Aug28 minutes reflect verbatim:
"however, as the revised plan is forwarded to the Planning Commission for review, it will be noted for the record that the committee is split with (5) committee members opposing mixed use in the specific plan area. "
Norby and the Planning Staff did exactly that when they told to do in the minutes. They informed the Encintias Planning Commission that the committee was split on the issue of mixed use.
Once the issue of mixed use was settled with the original 6 to 5 vote standing, the committee then went through subsequent votes to determine if mixed use was going to be on large medium or small lots. Those votes were unanimous favoring small lots.
You can keep saying it all you want, it will never become the truth. The minutes and the audio tapes are the official record, not your rumor and half story.
Your revisionist history no doubt forwards an agenda.
The official minutes record that in August and September 2007 the citizens committee reached consensus to limit mixed use 6-5.
DeleteThe official minutes record the committee voted to limit mixed use to the east side of Newcastle to lots less than 5,000 sqw feet to include the 2 lots on the east corner of Chesterfield as of the date of the adoption of the plan. You yourself write of this.
actually city planner Dave Decordva is on record reading back the "decision of the committee" after the votes had been held).
The minutes also state these votes were a consensus and even you write that it was "settled". If there was no consensus then what was settled? Please explain.
The record also states the planning commission was later told by the facilitator no consensus was reached and the council was later told by the planning staff no consensus was reached.
The council then reopened what you say was "settled" and ordered the facilitator and staff to hold an open house where high density was put back in. If the council had been told it was 'settled' would they have put it all back in?
For all with an interest the consensus is recorded in the official minutes and a review of the audio of the planning commission and video of the city council is also available.
Please explain if no consensus was reached then what was - as you say -'reinstated' - of course we all know it was the consensus.
12:32 the planning commission and council should have been told the official minutes and that the citizens committee reached a consensus to limit mixed use to the eastside of Newcastle, to lots less than 5000s ft, to include the 2 lots on the east side of the Chesterfield Corner. Instead they were told the committee did not reach a consensus.
I disagree with your premise and believe the Mr. Norby and Planning Staff did not do what they were told in the official minutes.
We can't deny the official minutes, even if we find them unpleasant. They are simply facts all are welcome to review on their own.
12:32 you never responded. If no consensus reached as you claim then what was reinstated?
Delete8:21 what was reinstated was the consensus vote. Isn't that right 12:32.
DeleteThis use of the term "consensus" is an academic construct that came from the MIG consultants. If you look at the survey results, overwhelmingly, 90% of citizens in Encinitas in each of the 5 communities indicated that we want to keep the community character as it is. This is also a direct quote from Daniel Iocafano, the owner of MIG, during one of his many community outreach events. As a man who holds an advanced degrees in Experimental Psychology and Planning, Dr. Iocafano KNOWS that 90% is about as close to actual consensus as any researcher could hope to get. There will always be a range of opinion—even using a valid survey sample of participants and valid test methods. Even with an invalid survey sample where out of town developers and City staff participated, 90% is a overwhelming number of participants who did not want to change community character.
DeleteHow can Encinitas keep its community character when the Planning Department has claimed that the State says that we must absorb thousands of new housing units?
The service that MIG actually provided for $1.3 million plus is the use of poor professional ethics and the application of known strategies to bias results against citizen preferences. It appears that this was why they were hired. MIG even disclosed that they were being sued at the time they submitted their bid, and alluded to other lawsuits in their application. In addition, their contract stipulated that they would be paid the last million dollars a week before the GPU was released to the public. Maybe this is because of their experience of having other clients refuse to pay them, but such an agreement is definitely not in step with the City’s usual claims that they do what they do to AVOID lawsuits. With this in mind, wouldn’t it have been prudent to select from one of the other 10 applicants who were NOT being sued at during the open bid period? Moreover, MIG used as its starting point a “template” instead of the actual Encinitas General Plan. Allegedly, this was to “save money.”
The way that MIG and Planning use the term 'consensus' is similar to the reason that Rutan and Tucker were brought on to create the “appearance of grass roots political support.” It is clear that the General Plan was already written as a high density document and that the various surveys and other citizen participation exercises were not considered in a meaningful way since the results were invalid by design.
Why is what MIG did given any consideration at all with all of the red flags that should have prevented them getting hired and their obvious inability to deliver a workable product. Also, why is anyone surprised since this GPU has been mishandled at every step when motives and abilities of the people doing the work are taken into account? Patrick Murphy continually told us that the plan was “our plan,” and that the consultants and staff were “ahead of schedule.” When they released the plan, it was unusable and rejected by almost everyone. Now the Planning Department says that the Housing Element is due next month, and that we are out of time.
As the passage of Prop A has shown, Encinitas citizens want to have their wishes heard, and these attempts to squelch them through spending tax dollars on outside consultants is a poor use of funds.
All heat his own doing....
ReplyDeleteNorby could not stomach that Prop A passed, the end of his grand vision for a stack-n-pack Encinitas.
ReplyDeleteI thought Carlsbad - was called Carlsbox, so maybe stacknpack is appropriate. They did change some of their downtown to 4 story right?
ReplyDeleteLet them sellout their character for a few developer and bar owners profits.
Lynn:
ReplyDeleteI agree that your comments are so far from the truth is pathetic. You are the quoin-essental example of the KLCC member. Unable to listen and understand any message that is not rattling around in your head for the last 50 years. I am certain you have difficulty with cognitive thinking skills, so I will go easy.
Solana Beach has an Assessment District to pay for maintenance of its landscaping on its linear park improvements.
Roundabouts are more efficient, safe and aesthetically pleasing than Traffic Signals.
This simple fact is witnessed daily by the traffic patterns on Leucadia Blvd. Where is all the traffic congestion?
Here is a hint- NOT at the Roundabouts.
The traffic is back upped at the Traffic Signals at Hwy101, Vulcan and Orpheus Avenue/!5 signals. Same goes for the Roundabout on Sante Fe and all the other roundabouts in our Nation. Thankfully the list is growing.
People who are super frightened of uncertainty or who have difficultly with cognitive thinking typically like a signal with a green or red light telling them when its safe to cross a road and not using their own mind and skills to drive. Does this sound like anyone we know?
Like the above poster. I went easy KLCC member.
The choice is not between traffic signals and roundabouts. That's another red herring.
DeleteYou can make as many assumptions and false conclusions as you wish. Fact: Roundabouts are not recommended along a railway corridor or where cross street traffic is significantly less than the main thoroughfare, by the U.S. Dept. of Transportation.
Fact: I have seen no plans to eliminate the traffic signal at Leucadia Blvd, or the stop sign at Marchetta and 101. I have repeatedly asked for substantiation of Fred's theory that the stop sign at Marchetta, by Juanita's would be eliminated. Nothing has been shown by the City or by Peltz and Associates, to verify that stop sign would be eliminated.
No one has suggested putting in more traffic signals, so comparing roundabout splanned at three way intersections without stop signs or signals is another false analogy.
Many roundabouts, throughout the nation, have either been eliminated, or traffic signals have been added to the roundabouts because they were not working as planned.
You are definitely not a psychologist and you are definitely prejudiced against anyone who opposes a plan that we strongly feel would not be good for Leucadia, or good for our City, or the businesses here, either. Just as fewer people were driving south through Solana Beach during its Highway 101 Streetscape revitalization, during construction, so would many businesses fail were roundabouts to be added to Historic Highway 101 through Leucadia. But Solana Beach has now finally "opened up" and again has two lanes in each direction, north and south on Pacific Coast Highway.
Four one lane roundabouts would effectively permanently create a so-called "lane-diet," eliminating one lane of traffic in each direction. Once installed, without the roundabouts being eliminated, the highway would not open back up. The businesses along North 101 not only serve locals, who are NOT in favor of roundabouts on the highway, but also, tourists, who enjoy driving up and down Coast Highway, from Oceanside to La Jolla. With a Disney style, "Autopia" type road, where motorists would be forced to slow down to 15 MPH, for every one lane roundabout, traffic would inevitably become bottlenecked; that is simple logic. Just as traffic was bottlenecked in Solana Beach during its Coast Hwy construction.
Leucadians do want to keep our town funky. We don't support gentrification and "genericification" of our community. We appreciate our community character, and are sad for all the trees that have been removed, many of them unnecessarily. We would love more plants and flowers, more sidewalks, including on Leucadia Blvd., which were promised with installation of roundabouts there! We appreciate the trees that were added, but had not realized they would be young saplings. We notice in Solana Beach that the City there did add some beautiful MATURE trees to their greenscape.
We also don't get why huge boulders were added to Leucadia Roadside Park, which subtracts from the useable green surface area, and provide no shade. Boulders are not in keeping with our unique community character, which we treasure. I saw the huge trees, on the flat bed trucks after they were cut down. All older trees will have some hollow areas. Those trees were not dead and did not look diseased, either. They should not have been removed, before a real expert was called in for a consultation, someone with a degree in botany, specializing in saving historic trees.
Lynn
DeleteYou are not Leucadia's elected representative. Please refrain from speaking for all of us.
Your doom and gloom prophesy has not happened and it never will.
By the way the boulders are cool and a welcome addition in Roadside Park. They do serve a purpose as they will prevent cars from crashing through the park and they also make great seats for our summer concerts in the park.
Leucadia can gentrify and still be funky without being crappy! Stop stalling all the progress and success in this town.
You are the poster child of the KLCC. Deal with it!
No Arguing, Lynn has no sense.
DeleteShe has the context wrong on almost every fact.
" you are definitely not a psychologist ". Nor are you. Simply because a psychologist might post on this blog praising your lunacy doesn't make you ok, but does make him/her questionable. Again you present no realistic alternative to the streetscape simply poo pooing what others feel is in best interest of Leucadia. YOU HAVE NO PLAN. Nor does the KLCC. To leave Leucadia as it is now is UNACCEPTABLE. It is dangerous and ugly. Shame on YOU. SHAME.
DeletePs- I support the limits on time and time donations at council meetings. Not because I want to limit what others say, but because if you can't say it in 1 minute it's probably not worth hearing. Read that again and again and learn something.
thanks for deciding for the rest of us what we should, should not say and how much time we should have.
DeleteLynn,
DeleteI got my "theory" that the hwy stop signs at Marcheta St will be removed by someone on our L-101 board who I trust knew what they were talking about. I believe it's also laid out that way on the plan 4a Streetscape map which you're welcome to go and see for yourself.
Second, it certainly not is a red herring that an alternative to roundabouts would be lights or stop signs. It's a reality with Solana Beach's 101 Streetscape, and one influential man who frequents city hall has spoken numerous times asking for 9 new stop signs on 101 in Leucadia "to see how they work" as he believed that would be the best improvement. Nearly every business on a corner lot of 101 has always wanted a stop sign at their intersection, and that's usually so their business could be seen better or to slow down speeders. (I personally participated in a city and an LMA survey of local merchants to learn that one). But all that was before the lowered speed limit which turns out to be VERY effective for not only overall safety, but business visibility as well (that's our bread and butter). Placing more stops on 101 (like Solana Beach just did with street lights in their 101 Streetscape) works contrary to cleaner air, better circulation and better aesthetics. They should have put in roundabouts. Their speed limit is 25 mph for much of their hwy!
The old growth trees at the park sadly had to come down before they fell down. Mark Wisnewski (past People For Trees president) himself showed me with a metal rod that he plunged 3 feet into the base of the south tree. That kind of hollow has to go, and he's not one for needlessly removing trees.
There were a lot of complainers about the replacement trees at the Roadside Park. One friend of mine called the two evergreens "weed trees" putting them down. But I'm amazed in the short time they've been there that they're actually larger than the one the city accidentally cut down a few years back. And they're not weed trees. They're the same Monterey Cyprus that was removed. They must look more like a bush when they're young. It would be nice to see more mature trees planted of course. But to my understanding, the city just paid nearly $300 for each sapling they put at the north end of Leucadia. Wish that job had gone out to bid. Can't imagine what they'd pay for a mature tree.
When the rocks were dumped in the park before it's improvements, I didn't like them either. I think they look great now. What I don't like is to see two picnic tables; two attractive street lamps; a large bar-b-que and a public drinking fountain all absent from the park of my youth. About the only thing you can do there now is either sit on the grass or when it rains, canoe. Oh I forgot, beginning rock climbing.
Big mistake. Make that nearly $3000 per tree. I'd be happy to do it for $300 per tree. Might be worth going back to college for me to learn how to dig a hole and become certified so I can make bids.
DeleteThe three small palm trees in the Santa Fe roundabout cost $13,000 plus.
DeleteIt would be nice if the city landscapers replaced the dead flowering plants in the park. The very same flowering plants they kill.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt would be nice if the City Staff would actually water the trees that are planted.
DeleteTake Leucadia Blvd. The trees they plant regularly die, because the City just has surface spray-heads which are on for long enough to barely get the surface wet and evaporate. No water percolates down to the tree roots.
To date they have killed 4 just in that small stretch, We should have a grove of 5 year old 20 to 25 foot trees, but we only have twigs that are water starved and dying. The only ones doing well are receiving water from private sources.
Something needs to change and get rid of these tree killers on our City pay role. Either that or teach them how to program a dam irrigation controller to actually water the plants we spent planting.
fact check against Lword comments
DeleteL-Fact: Roundabouts are not recommended along a railway corridor or where cross street traffic is significantly less than the main thoroughfare, by the U.S. Dept. of Transportation.
Reality: The plan calls for a signal remaining at Leucadia Blvd. which is the only intersection affected by the RR crossing. Not that Lword would actually take the time to look at and try and understand the streetscape plan.
L-Fact: I have seen no plans to eliminate the traffic signal at Leucadia Blvd, or the stop sign at Marchetta and 101. I have repeatedly asked for substantiation of Fred's theory that the stop sign at Marchetta, by Juanita's would be eliminated. Nothing has been shown by the City or by Peltz and Associates, to verify that stop sign would be eliminated.
Reality: The Signal will remain and the stop at Marchetta will be removed. Why do not you go look at the plan like a normal person would do before commenting on it?
L-Point- No one has suggested putting in more traffic signals, so comparing roundabout splanned at three way intersections without stop signs or signals is another false analogy.
Reality- Intersection control is needed at the planned intersections. Either have roundabouts, signal or stop signs... something will be installed, and roundabouts are the most efficient.
L-Opinion- Many roundabouts, throughout the nation, have either been eliminated, or traffic signals have been added to the roundabouts because they were not working as planned.
Reality- Only poorly design traffic 'Circles" or roundabouts are being removed just like poorly designed Signals. The fact is more and more modern day roundabouts are being installed throughout CA and our nation. Its because they work better than signals.
L-Guess: You are definitely not a psychologist and you are definitely prejudiced against anyone who opposes a plan that we strongly feel would not be good for Leucadia, or good for our City, or the businesses here, either. Just as fewer people were driving south through Solana Beach during its Highway 101 Streetscape revitalization, during construction, so would many businesses fail were roundabouts to be added to Historic Highway 101 through Leucadia. But Solana Beach has now finally "opened up" and again has two lanes in each direction, north and south on Pacific Coast Highway.
Reality- Lword has no clue whether I am a phycologist or prejudice- just more false accusations.
The one thing for certain is L-words facts are wrong and therefore her perception is wrong. I suggest the L-word get more oxygen to the brain. I highly recommend walking, bike riding, or swimming in the ocean. Maybe I am a caring individual that wants to help you?
Best,
Anon that wants to help
Norby does what is good for Norby - he aligns with the highest bidder. He's no hero.
ReplyDeleteThe 'sustainability' that he speaks of is the staff's sustainable jobs and pensions at the expense of Encinitas residents. They push it for no other reason than they want to keep the gravy flowing!
DeleteGood riddence!
Peder is a good guy, honest and upright. The main problem left behind is the bars overrunning downtown, that part got away but it's not too late to correct...... but almost. I know several people selling homes now as they know a few more bars will ruin everything from the highlands west. Last sat night was the worst ever, I swear I was woken by gunshots and screaming.
ReplyDeleteWas he honest about the cardiff specific plan?
ReplyDeleteNot in the eyes of resident volunteers sitting around the table when the SP votes were counted. I assume that's Peder posting above with votes and times and a jab at "revisionist" comments. He did not, btw, come up with that voting timeline for at least a couple of weeks - or more - after the video showing the voting was shown at council.
ReplyDeleteThat night, the words "we have consensus" come out of his mouth on video. That same night at council, we heard the words "we did not reach consensus" come out of his mouth , in person.
Further: the room full of Cardiff folks erupted when Peder made his "no consensus" comment to council. If he is such a skilled facilitator, hired for his expertise, why the huge discrepancy between what the Cardiff folks understood from the vote and what Peder understood from the vote?
ReplyDeletePeople like Lynn are keeping things in check at city hall. Perhaps brevity would be helpful but she has people liking what she brings to city hall. Even the council is understanding she is a "gotcha" force to be reckoned with.
ReplyDeleteBS- People like the L-word don't listen and only spew... they are a total waste of time for everyone. People like the L-word is a complete waste of tax dollars and a life waster for anyone listening.
Delete9:23 can you add anything constructive to the discussion or only name calling? Seems to me you want to discredit those shing the light on city mismanagement and malfeasancw
DeleteAttacking people who speak the truth is a very old way to try to discredit them. I seldom hear anyone bring up an example of misinformation that Lynn has said. They attack her personally.
DeleteSome people don't like that she talks "too much." What they are saying is that they don't like 1 person highlighting the problems at the city. There are MANY people who are aware of the problems at the City. Not everyone has the time to do indepth research or to attend meetings like Lynn does. Thank you Lynn.
You must be as clueless as Lword. Read above for an example
DeleteThank you to those people who take the time to read and consider what I share, here, who care about our City enough to remain involved, who want to be informed.
DeleteIt's not realistic to think that people will only drive on North 101 to go to "end point" destinations of shops there. Pacific Coast Highway, throughout our state is a touring "arena," a Major Roadway and a primary circulation element. The freeway often becomes clogged. People will exit the freeway when that happens. But even when I-5 is not clogged, motorists enjoy driving along the Coast. We who live here understand that. We don't want more and more cut through traffic and slower and slower emergency response times, as people get caught up in tangled traffic snarls.
At the initial public workshop by Peltz and Associates, we were each given seven colored "dots" to place, as a vote, on each of the categories suggested. Someone from the audience had yelled out: "NO ROUNDABOUTS.' That was one category, which got quite a few votes. But the facilitator, Dan Burdon, as I recall, suggested, what about "Yes Roundabouts?" So two persons from Leucadia 101 Mainstreet Association placed ALL seven of their dots under Yes, Roundabouts." We were only to place ONE DOT for each category with which we agreed.
I brought this up at a subsequent Council Meeting, when Council received the preliminary report. Jerome asked, does anyone want to comment on the speaker's issue with the way the dots were counted? No one said anything, but I had, at the time, pointed out that the "voting" by placing of dots was not monitored or verified for accuracy, and so was not "statistically significant."
skip..... thats easy.
DeleteLynn, which two people from L101 placed all their voting dots on Yes for roundabouts?? Which members of L101?? Names??
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYes. I respect those shining the light on City mismanagement with truth.
ReplyDeleteI do not respect and discredit someone for spreading mistruths and someone with no integrity.
I do not respect someone that wastes so much time and money on accusations from complete mistruths.
Let Integrity shine.
The "plans" presented by Peltz and Associates have been characterized by "cartoons" by City Hall staff. They are not "engineered drawings." The stop sign at Marchetta could not be removed without Traffic Commission and Traffic engineer's approval, which has not been given. I did try to look at the cartoon plans that were presented at two open houses with no opportunity for comment. I did not see anything specifically stating that the stop sign at Marchetta and 101 was to be removed. Fred, you are relying on a L101MA Board of Director's opinion, his interpretation of cartoon plans, not verified through the City.
ReplyDeletePeder Norby was big into pushing for a generic gentrification of all of Encinitas, and increasing development, using roundabouts as tools. Before that, he was for declaring Leucadia to be blighted, so that a redevelopment agency could be established here. Maggie Houlihan opposed that. After Christy Guerin got so many e-mails, and so much "flak" from Leucadia Blog (thank Goodness JP opposed blighting Leucadia), she changed her mind. I believe it would have taken a super majority, a 4/5 vote, to declare Leucadia blighted.
The July 18, 2012 staff report, so from one year ago, re the lane elimination for motorists on North 101, stated that after comparing accident rates, over a ten year study period, for similar intersections throughout California, the number of any type of collisions on North 101 does not justify adding more stop signs. Traffic signals and stop signs are not viable alternatives, according to traffic statistics, neither are necessary. Therefore, our choice is not between more traffic signals or roundabouts. Our choice is between roundabouts, or no roundabouts, or possibly one more roundabout, a two-lane roundabout with more safety features, at La Costa and Highway 101.
That is why bringing up statistics that say roundabouts are superior to traffic signals is a red herring, a form of false logic. Attempting to relegate those that point out fallacies in roundabout proponents' arguments to a KLCC is another kind of false logic, by character assasination, which equates those wanting to Keep Leucadia Funky with those who insist anyone opposing roundabouts wants to keep Leucadia crappy. We don't think Leucadia is crappy NOW. We can continue to improve, while maintaining our community character, or we can continue to gentrify, becoming more and more generic as part of "Maintown USA," and part of a Disneyesque "Autopia," with cars going around and around in circles at 15 MPH.
Lynn,
DeleteSuppose you're driving north on 101 at a peak traffic hour. You come to a stop at Marchetta St. There are 8 cars stopped in front of you. Do you stop and roll 8 times before you can proceed? Yes. Does that take more time than it would slowing down to 15 mph and going through a roundabout at El Portal one block north? Yes. And that's just for 8 cars. there are over 8000 cars per day that have to stop at Marcheta St. Do the math and add up all that time per day of wasted time, gas and money burned up. Then do the same thing for the La Costa Ave. section. Then add some more time for folks coming from the west onto 101 where they currently have to stop every time the enter the hwy. Collectively, I'm confident there's over a YEAR of time, money and gas that doesn't have to be wasted. Add in all the carbon dioxide poisoned gas pumping into our precious air. If anyone lived in LA in the 60's you know there were days when the healthiest person could simply NOT take a deep breath without it hurting. Never heard of that happening in even the worst of pool halls.
I posted previously why roundabouts are not recommended to INTERSECT with railroads (not merely placed parallel to them), and none of our roundabouts will interface with the railroad. They are completely separate and do not affect each other in the slightest way.
I also think thousands of cars coming from the west each day are NOT "insignificant cross traffic" to 101 - as you point out as being WHY the US Traffic Dept does not recommend roundabouts. Sure, if there were only 100 cars daily coming from the west that would be insignificant. But we have far more. And logically, because our roundabouts with only have 3 doors, they will work better with LESS traffic to deal with if they were 4 doors.
These are the main reasons I'm sold on them. I try to think of one reason they would not be good here or most other intersections and can't find any. Oh yeah, they'd eliminate red light cameras too, btw.
Fred, you have not shown where the CITY says it has plans to remove the stop sign at Marchetta and 101, should roundabouts be installed on 101. The stop sign on Leucadia Blvd and Hygeia, which WAS to be removed, and replaced by a third roundabout, has NOT been eliminated, as promised. NOR were promised landscaping and sidewalks installed. These improvements were PUSHED as a reason for the City's approving the roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd. They never happened.
DeleteInstead, the money was diverted to the North 101 Streetscape project, primarily to pay, now, over $850,000 to consultants, essentially roundabout lobbyists, to push for five more roundabouts on Highway 101, through Leucadia. The only other roundabout in the City, outside of Leucadia, is on Santa Fe. Why is Leucadia being targetted for a total of eight roundabouts, with only one other roundabout in the entire city?
I feel it's because Leucaia is targetted for the majority of high density growth, and roundabouts are to be used as development tools to gain negative environmental impact declarations with regard to increasing traffic impacts along the often already congested 101 corridor.
With respect to the "dot exercises," which were relied upon to sway Council to approve roundabouts, and which were also used in the General Plan Update "community outreach" meetings, those people who abused the system, and placed all their dots on one category, or with respect to GPU mapping exercises, in one location, YOU know who you are. I am not going to name the names, but I saw two individuals standing in front of the YES on roundabouts category. I was busy placing one dot on each category that I favored, as had been requested by Dan Burdon, (Sp?) the facilitator, working with Peltz and Associates. I saw these same two individuals at every workshop, making numerous comments on the schematics, provided by Peltz and Associates, after the two open houses, when no comments were allowed or "facilitated" through a suggestion box, or any other means. These two were always, from the start, completely PRO ROUNDABOUTS, which was their prerogative. However, when they stepped away from the YES on Roundabouts category, ALL of their dots were neatly lined up, in two rows. All of the other categories had dots placed rather haphazardly, not in exact alignment. These two L101MA Board of Directors get an A for neatness, not for operating within the constraints of the exercise, which was to place ONE dot in each category which we favored. YOU know who you are, and I'm not going to subject myself to more derision by calling out your names. I did speak to this misrepresentation and overemphasis of the opinions of a few at a Council Meeting where the report from Peltz and Associates was received. Nothing was done about my expressed concerns, but they ARE a part of the record.
Fred, if you wish, please speak to Bob Aronin, who can give you the title of the specific pamphlet from the U.S. Dept. of Transportation that states roundabouts are not recommended along railway corridors. You keep twisting this to suggest that some states have questioned roundabouts along streets that intersect with railway corridors, which Leucadia Blvd. does, by the way. We do have roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd., just not at Leucadia Blvd. and 101. The narrower, one-lane roundabouts planned for ALONGSIDE the RR tracks are not recommended on several grounds, as I've repeatedly stated.
So I assume the U.S. Dept. of Transportation would equally be against roundabouts next to rivers? I'm not twisting anything. Call the city yourself. Phase 1 of our streetscape installs a roundabout at El Portal, and removes the N/S stops at Marcheta St. That's a GOOD thing. And if Leucadia is targeted for 8 good things, thank you Jesus!
DeleteProp A passed. There will be no 3 to 5 story buildings near roundabouts without a public vote. Thank you Jesus again!
You're saying the U.S Dept of Trans. says roundabouts shouldn't go ALONGSIDE RR tracks. I'm saying they're saying they should not INTERSECT with RR tracks. I sent you the link earlier to a document explaining this. I'll dig it up again if you like.
Skip.... I just saved 3 min of my life.
ReplyDeleteLword:
ReplyDeleteWhat's with the "we" ?
Are you schizo?
Norby is a salesman, pure and simple. He's out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. His fans buy what he sells because they have something to gain. Norby and his fans are a tiny minority imposing their will on everybody else.
ReplyDeleteThe fans of Norby are individuals who have worked with him, know him or have appreciated what he has accomplished. I am a fan.
DeleteThe majority who are informed of the facts will agree. The majority "buy what he sells" because he has a positive well proven track record that has been a great benefit to our community.
He will be sorely missed in Encinitas and will, I am sure, use his talents and caring to asissist in creating a better Carlsbad as he did in Encinitas.
Thank you Peder.
12:24 must have been posted by Norby himself or his PR person. I agree with 11:37, as I think the majority of Encinitans do. If Norby is going to work for Carlsbad, look forward to any remaining square foot of ground to be covered — maybe with high-rises or bars.
DeleteIt seems to me the fans of Norby are people who profit from the zoning ordinances and high density he pushes. People like Doug Harwood, shea Homes, KB homes along with merchant and bar owners.
DeleteBeneath much of the discussion is the fundamentally wrong, unchallenged assumption that more development, more people, more of everything is good, necessary and inevitable. Not true!
ReplyDeleteI agree w that. Well said!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYou can wish for less people, pretend that nothing will ever change or plan for any changes that we have no control of.
DeleteBut you can't pretend that there are and will be more people in our world and city.
Anon 12:30, there is little evidence that there is a huge shortage of housing in Encinitas, and demographic trends show that our growth has slowed way down.
DeleteEncinitas has a high standard of living and so many other things going for it. Why would residents want to cram in more housing and invite in more associated problems like increased traffic, crime, and a decline in safety. We DON'T want more people. The city and the developers do!
There is no water in this desert and we are oversaturated. Why not?
DeleteSupport zero population growth.
Support population decline. It's the only way the human species and the planet can survive in the long term. Get your Google going, and you'll find out that's true.
DeleteAmended. Support population decline.
DeleteWhy hasn't this become a more popular issue?
Because non-thinking people jump to the wrong conclusion that it means killing babies.
DeleteSerious thinkers who address other dire issues stay away from the topic of reducing population because it's like stepping on the third rail. People misunderstand and make them pariahs.
11:42,
ReplyDeleteThanks for boiling that down. Neither are more stop signs/light choke points good or inevitable. Unless you're Solana Beach.
You're the roundabout guy, right?
DeleteFalse choice: Roundabouts, stop signs or traffic signals. How about leaving Leucadia 101 as it is? Nobody in his right mind speeds through the 30 and 35 zones in Carlsbad. Why? Because the cops are on speeders like vultures on carrion. All Leucadia 101 needs to control speeders is deputy sheriffs who ticket a few people every couple of weeks. Word will get around.
Three one-lane roundabouts in the half mile from Bishop's Gate to Jupiter will gridlock southbound traffic whenever it's heavy. And the predicted 2,000 car trips per day diverted to Vulcan won't mix well with the park and pre-school north of Leucadia Boulevard, and PE Central School south.
If you're going to reply that left turns onto 101 from the side streets will be easier at the roundabouts, what about all the side streets between Jupiter and El Portal? There are 11 T intersections in that 1.1-mile distance.
Your points and logic fail. Try again.
Delete7:25, is your comment meant as a response to 5:08? If you have a counter-argument, make it.
Delete"Three one-lane roundabouts in the half mile from Bishop's Gate to Jupiter will gridlock southbound traffic whenever it's heavy. And the predicted 2,000 car trips per day diverted to Vulcan won't mix well with the park and pre-school north of Leucadia Boulevard, and PE Central School south."
DeleteThis paragraph is all wrong.
The roundabouts can easly handle the traffic and our better for bike and pedestrians. Its the signals at Leucadia Blvd. and Encinitas that will limit the flow. Secondly, there will not be a 2,000 car diversion to side streets. The flow will be more efficient on N.C. Hwy101.
We need to change the name of that road like Carlsbad and Del Mar did. Since I5 was built and the road was given to the City, it no longer serves as a highway, only a multimodal arterial. I would support many name changes that better fit the description of the road. How about Leucadia Mainstreet?
I like it!!!
"If you're going to reply that left turns onto 101 from the side streets will be easier at the roundabouts, what about all the side streets between Jupiter and El Portal? There are 11 T intersections in that 1.1-mile distance."
DeleteIt will be bettter than what exists today. When I'm at one of those streets, I turn left when clear. If not clear, I go right and make a U-turn. With more roundabouts, the U-turns are super efficient and easy.
Signals are for chumps who like to waste life staring at red lights.
Change the name to Leucadia Mainstreet or North Coast Boulevard! What do you think is the best name for the multimodal arterial?
If you honestly feel that residents adjacent to Highway 101 want roundabouts on PCH, then you should be in favor of a public vote, which could be placed on the ballot, for minimum cost, in 2014, by Council. That would be a truly impartial "needs assessment."
DeleteNo true needs assessment by impartial "facilitators" has been taken. The so-called "workshops" allowed for minimum public input, and were NOT impartial. From the beginning the "facilitators," and "stakeholders" they labeled, as such, were Pro roundabout.
The name of North Highway 101 was already changed and officially designated as Historic State Highway 101. Citizens also do not favor changing the name of Leucadia or our historic highway, to facilitate the marketing schemes, and pie-in-the-sky plans of a few property owners and/or developers. Whatever Carlsbad has named Highway 101, or Del Mar, it is still Pacific Coast Highway 101, sometimes also known as Highway 1, or First Street.
Skip-
DeleteI like Leucadia Main St., North Coast Boulevard, or first Street. It's been changed several times over the past 50 years let's change it again to represent the new multimodal arterial.
DeleteIn 1997, I approached the city with the prospect of changing First St. downtown to fit the rest of the hwy in Leucadia and Cardiff. In vintage pics of Enciitas, the Hwy 101 shield is in many of them. Traveling back to Indiana every year as a kid, I liked passing by the Route 66 signs - which are the identical shape to our 101 sign. Polls were taken by the city and our business groups about the change. Most loved the idea and so about 10 alternative names were thrown out there. The council unanimously voted for Coast Hwy 101. (Oceanside had recently turned their "Hill St." to "Coast Hwy", but it was Encinitas that first resurrected the vintage shield. I tweaked the sign a bit so COAST HWY 101 would fit. Council liked that too, and 12 signs were installed on our 6 miles of golden coast. (11 were stolen). Solana Beach soon followed suit with their own version of the shield, then John Daley of Oceanside along with Peder Norby took it to the state and had it designated 101 an Historic Route. It gives good branding for everyone on 101 through three states, and as one journalist put it, it made they hwy "Route 66 with and ocean view".
Delete5:08
The lowered speed limit on 101 is working VERY well. But ticketing speeders raises consciousness too, and no doubt the reason the limits are followed so well in Cbad. The cops are usually lying in wait in the dark at night around Palomar Airport Rd. when I cruise by. Haven't been stopped yet, but haven't blazed through there either. Knock on wood.
5:57 makes good points. Well, except for changing the name of our hwy! I see 101 as a unifying element between cities yet offering all kinds of variety. Don't much care for the condos along Carlsbad Blvd. I mean, there was a prime strip of real estate that could be a public treasure and interesting. But there I go forbidding a few people to make a lot of money again! I did make a postcard for them though entitled: "Enjoy our row of California Dream Homes!"
But if someone twisted my arm, a street named "Zeus" is still absent from Leucadia.
DeleteSo be it Fred. We can keep the Hwy 101 shield branding, but lets change the name to "Zues Boulevard" the historic hwy 101 route. How cool would that be?
Deleteits no longer a highway, since I5 was built.
If anyone wants to read a good book about population control, Dan Browns latest called "The Inferno" is amazing and thoughtful. he is the person who wrote the DiVinci Code.
ReplyDeleteDan Brown writes fiction, not truth.
DeleteThanks for the tip!
ReplyDeleteMore alcohol sold in downtown Encinitas; more money in the city coffers. The city investment policy prohibits city funds from being invested in any companies connected to tobacco or alcohol.
ReplyDeleteThis use of the term "consensus" is an academic construct that came from the MIG consultants. If you look at the survey results, overwhelmingly, 90% of citizens in Encinitas in each of the 5 communities indicated that we want to keep the community character as it is. This is also a direct quote from Daniel Iocafano, the owner of MIG, during one of his many community outreach events. As a man who holds an advanced degrees in Experimental Psychology and Planning, Dr. Iocafano KNOWS that 90% is about as close to actual consensus as any researcher could hope to get. There will always be a range of opinion—even using a valid survey sample of participants and valid test methods. Even with an invalid survey sample where out of town developers and City staff participated, 90% is a overwhelming number of participants who did not want to change community character. How can Encinitas keep its community character when the Planning Department has claimed that the State says that we must absorb thousands of new housing units?
ReplyDeleteThe service that MIG actually provided for $1.3 million plus is the use of poor professional ethics and the application of known strategies to bias results against citizen preferences. It appears that this was why they were hired. MIG even disclosed that they were being sued at the time they submitted their bid, and alluded to other lawsuits in their application. In addition, their contract stipulated that they would be paid the last million dollars a week before the GPU was released to the public. Maybe this is because of their experience of having other clients refuse to pay them, but such an agreement is definitely not in step with the City’s usual claims that they do what they do to AVOID lawsuits. With this in mind, wouldn’t it have been prudent to select from one of the other 10 applicants who were NOT being sued at during the open bid period? In addition, MIG used as its starting point a “template” instead of the actual Encinitas General Plan. Allegedly, this was to “save money.”
The way that MIG and Planning use the term 'consensus' is similar to the reason that Rutan and Tucker were brought on to create the “appearance of grass roots political support.” It is clear that the General Plan was already written as a high density document and that the various surveys and other citizen participation exercises were not considered in a meaningful way since the results were invalid by design.
Why is what MIG did given any consideration at all with all of the red flags that should have prevented them getting hired and their obvious inability to deliver a workable product. Also, why is anyone surprised since this GPU has been mishandled at every step when motives and abilities of the people doing the work are taken into account? Patrick Murphy continually told us that the plan was “our plan,” and that the consultants and staff were “ahead of schedule.” When they released the plan, it was unusable and rejected by almost everyone. Now the Planning Department says that the Housing Element is due next month, and that we are out of time.
Didn't you post this same thing on the High density comes to LA part of this blog??
DeleteKLCC member your work is done.
10:34, you are a member of the MLCC, make Leucadia crappy club. You hope to profit at our community's great expense.
ReplyDeleteThanks, in great part, to the efforts of those who rallied and gave grassroots support that enabled passage of Prop A, your vision is not going to happen. You are just blowing smoke, venting your anger. That is obvious to everyone reading and posting here.
Many suspect that you are the one that replies to your own comments, then accuses me and others of doing the same thing. In fact you are pretty good at attempting to twist your psychological "bents" and your own lack of integrity onto others. That doesn't work, either.
Perhaps you are only posting because you are compelled to seek attention, including negative attention, hoping a few people with align with you? After this, I will do my best to refrain from addressing you.
When B.F. Skinner did experiments, with pigeons, to demonstrate his hypotheses in behavioral analysis, he found that when he offered the birds three choices of buttons, which they could peck, they most often gravitated to and pecked the button that delivered the positive reinforcement of food.
Every so often they would go to a second button, which would administer a small shock, "testing," to see if the results would remain the same. So negative stimuli also reinforces behavior, particularly by the emotionally or mentally "immature" who are constantly seeking ANY kind of attention, and who are constantly testing.
The button that the birds tried a few times, initially, and then NEVER came back to, was the button that gave NO RESPONSE, neither positive, as in food, nor negative, as in a small electric shock. I know it can be challenging, but it's best for me, anyway, to do what I can to completely ignore posts which provide no facts and no verifiable opinions, but are simply attempts to discredit or "flame," by name calling, ad hominem attacks, and cyberbullying.
Wow Lynn showing your brain power. Haw!!!
ReplyDeleteHow original..... Could you get any more lame? Pfff.
She finally admits her brain is best equated to a birds.
DeleteGreat Job Lword!-- Or should we call you bird brain?
Just skip Lword's post like I do. It gives life!!!!
ReplyDelete"Three one-lane roundabouts in the half mile from Bishop's Gate to Jupiter will gridlock southbound traffic whenever it's heavy. And the predicted 2,000 car trips per day diverted to Vulcan won't mix well with the park and pre-school north of Leucadia Boulevard, and PE Central School south."
ReplyDeleteIt is extremely rare for northbound traffic to back up for any distance. But even in that rare event, it will be far better to have a roundabout at La Costa Ave than a stop light choking the flow of traffic as it does now.
It is not unusual for southbound traffic to back up from the stop light at Leucadia Blvd. It was many times worse prior to freeway 5 opening. It was also twice as bad here, especially for mornings, before Solana Beach and Del Mar added a southbound lane to fwy 5 just a few years ago.
I'm not "the roundabout guy", just one guy impressed with them and things that provenly work that well always impress me. I thing the roundabout guy was Roman.
Roundabouts take a little getting used to at first, but really improve traffic flow. I have driven a lot in Europe where roundabouts are widely used on main thoroughfares through towns. These roads are similar to the 101, sometimes carrying even more traffic. They eliminate traffic lights and stop signs, keeping traffic moving.
ReplyDeleteThe proposed two-lane roundabout at La Costa Ave. would eliminate the traffic light there. The proposed one-lane roundabout at El Portal would eliminate the Stop sign at Marcheta.
DeleteThe proposed four one-lane roundabouts would inhibit rather than facilitate traffic flow because they would require at least southbound drivers to squeeze from two lanes to one to navigate each roundabout.
Since three of the four proposed one-lane roundabouts would be placed in the half mile from Bishop's Gate to Jupiter, the tie-ups would be exaggerated there, especially when traffic is heavy, and more southbound if northbound remains one lane.
"The proposed four one-lane roundabouts would inhibit rather than facilitate traffic flow because they would require at least southbound drivers to squeeze from two lanes to one to navigate each roundabout."
DeleteIf 9000 cars MUST stop on N. 101 for 30 seconds per day, collectively, that's three full days of wasted gas, time and money. That's an incredible burdon annually, and doesn't even factor in the mandatory stops required for traffic coming from the west onto 101.
Merging from 2 lanes to 1 is seldom difficult for most people but no doubt hardest to do while at or approaching freeway speeds. Roundabouts on Santa Fe and Leucadia Blvd both currently merge 2 lanes into one. In contrast to our 5 roundabouts for 2 miles, Birdrock has 5 roundabouts within 5 blocks. The roundabouts in Birdrock not only merge 2 lanes into one northbound lane, those same intersections on La Jolla Blvd used to be 5 lanes wide. Their roundabouts have 4 doors, while ours only 3.
Time will tell, but I'm optimistic from the track record of roundabouts everywhere else. The formula is pretty simple, and for us it means:
Removing 22 stops; plus reducing speed; equals getting through town in less time than it took when there were stops. And yes, our 4 southernmost roundabouts remove 8 (currently mandatory) stops for vehicles coming from the west onto 101.
"The proposed four one-lane roundabouts would inhibit rather than facilitate traffic flow because they would require at least southbound drivers to squeeze from two lanes to one to navigate each roundabout.
DeleteSince three of the four proposed one-lane roundabouts would be placed in the half mile from Bishop's Gate to Jupiter, the tie-ups would be exaggerated there, especially when traffic is heavy, and more southbound if northbound remains one lane."
Wrong again. I hope your not a traffic engineer, because you have no idea about reality of traffic operations.
The roundabout are more efficient then the Signal at Leucadia Bvld. and the all way stop at Marchetta and are not a limiting factor. The one lane roundabouts can handle between 20,000 and 25,000 trips per day which is way more than the all way stop and the two lane signal at Leucadia Blvd. is programed to handle.
The roundabouts will work great. I hope the City will pull out some signals and put in the roundabouts. I hate wasting life staring at red lights while its safe to proceed with caution.
Roundabouts in the Streetscape plan:
ReplyDeleteTwo-laner at La Costa Ave.
One-laners at Bishop's Gate, Grandview and Jupiter.
Those four would be in 8/10ths of a mile.
Drive 1.1 miles south of Jupiter to El Portal for the fourth and final one-laner.
The four one-laners will be very close to the size of those on Leucadia Blvd.
Traffic engineer's figures for car trips per day diverted from 101 by the roundabouts:
4,000 to 5,000 to the freeway, 2,000 to Vulcan, 100 to Neptune.
Yet, retail business will increase on 101. Correct, as somebody said, because a whole lot of people are going to ride their bikes from New Encinitas to spend money in Leucadia.
Number of new parking spaces in the 2.5 miles from La Costa Ave. to Encinitas Blvd.: 29 to 38, with no new ones four blocks north and south of Leucadia Blvd.
Where will the 40-50-60-70 cars that park in the dirt on the east side of 101 north of Leucadia Blvd. park when Streetscape eliminates that available space?
Then there's this for the canopy people: The huge eucalyptus in the median just north of Leucadia Blvd. gets cut down.
Hold your horses. 4000 to 5000 cars per day will choose to take the freeway instead of 101? AND 2100 cars will choose local streets instead of 101? That's 6100 cars less on a highway that now serves 9000. Roundabouts would reduce traffic on 101 by over two thirds? Malarky. The only thing I'm buying about that is that roundabouts will discourage speed demon commuters so they'll prefer the freeway. More cut through traffic for local streets after a hwy is easier and more efficient getting everyone through town? Only by the lost.
ReplyDelete"Traffic engineer's figures for car trips per day diverted from 101 by the roundabouts:
ReplyDelete4,000 to 5,000 to the freeway, 2,000 to Vulcan, 100 to Neptune."- Wrong. You fail.
Again, the capacity (volume) of the roadway is determined by its most restrictive intersection control. For this street, the most restrictive intersection control is Leucadia Blvd. signal which will remain. The traffic volumes will remain the same until the Leucadia Blvd signal is revised and the all way stop at Marchetta is removed.
The roundabouts at La Costa and other locations along with removing the all way stop at Marchetta will be a improvement in the circulation on N. Coast Blvd (its no longer a highway).
I asked the traffic engineer how he came up with the 100 trips on Neptune and he explained that the model didn't show any increase. He just put the number that to show it may receive a few extra trips if everything else remains the same. Neptune and other side streets need traffic calming as well.
Dictionary.com
ReplyDeletehigh·way noun
1. a main road, especially one between towns or cities: the highway between Los Angeles and Seattle. (Wonder what road they meant by that?)
2. any public road or waterway.
3. any main or ordinary route, track, or course.
=========================================
boul·e·vard noun
1. a broad avenue in a city, usually having areas at the sides or center for trees, grass, or flowers. (Is fwy 5 therefore a Blvd?)
2. Also called boulevard strip. Upper Midwest. a strip of lawn between a sidewalk and the curb.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
III vote for Zeus blvd.
ReplyDeleteConsensus has not been reached about Norby!
ReplyDeleteConsensus saids he is not longer an Encinitas concern.
ReplyDeletePost closed.
I fear that Norby's influence will have a lasting negative impact on Encinitas for many years to come, just as actions from others such as Pat Murphy, Stocks, and Vina have left a mark.
ReplyDeleteYou must fear nice sidewalks, streetlamps, historical preservation, a library downwtown and a healthier economy.
DeleteI fear anything that is new and looks good.
DeleteI like weeds and chipped paint. I like stale smells and old dead trees.
I like being stuck wishing nothing would change.
I support the mission of KLCC.
OK I bite.
ReplyDeleteIn your super negative world of stale, rottening, and malignancy, is there anyone associated with the City that has done anything good?
.... and Dont say Cameron because I don't want to read all the post about all the wacko things she did when she was on City hall which lead to a super bonus for the City Manager at that time.
Yeah, like that wacky idea of televising city hall meetings. The noive. (I didn't say "Cameron". Opps, guess I did!)
ReplyDeleteFor anybody who wants to know the facts about the Streetscape 4A plan, here's how to find out:
ReplyDelete1) Go to the City website, then to the Jan 13, 2010 council meeting and watch the video. It's very long and chocked full of facts.
2) Go to this URL: http://38.106.5.56/index.aspx?page=254# and examine all the drawings designated 4A.
Compare what you find to what's posted at 10:57 and 11:51 above. Those sources are where the posted information came from.
Leucadia Blvd. and Santa Fe are one lane in each direction, feeding into one-lane roundabouts. Highway 101 southbound is two lanes, feeding into four one-lane roundabouts. How many lanes Highway 101 northbound will eventually be remains to be seen.
While you're on the Web, check this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywCBantZ9JY
Do you guys actually live around here?
The biggest hidden reason that many posters want round abouts is because it takes traffic off of the table under CEQA Law, thus making it easier for developers to stack and pack high density.
DeleteI understand that Fred has a different reason since it is his opinion that this will make for safer roads and few accidents. While it might help in the short term, which I am sorry Fred, I don't buy even that, I don't think it will result in safer roads in the long run since it will encourage greater density and MORE drivers using our roads.
You guys and hopefully not girls are smokin way to much.
Deletethe bottom line is roundabouts are far superior than Signals. Debate that fact Lenard?
And what is your solution-naysayer?
ReplyDeleteCome on panty weight lets get some ideas. Whats better solution? Signals?
9:01
ReplyDelete"Leucadia Blvd. and Santa Fe are one lane in each direction, feeding into one-lane roundabouts."
Not true. That's only so for eastbound traffic. Westbound traffic on Leucadia Blvd and Santa Fe are both two lanes roads that merge into one lane prior to a roundabout.
But thanks for the youtube link and letting me know we've all been pronouning that name wrong all these years. And I want that Yellow Cab!
11:39
I fail to see how roundabouts will make an end-run around Prop A and allow any stack and pack development near them without a public vote. Sounds more like a One Note Samba than Marcheta.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-vlX8uRLMQ
And speaking of Charlie Byrd, he and Les Paul would stay in a man's trailer at the south end of Neptune at the Slyvia corner (not far from Marcheta). in the 50's. Mr. Chibarro was an electronics repair man and he would build/work on their amplifiers as they really liked his quality of sound.
And speaking or electronic repair men, "Wiggy" was an old man in the 60's who lived around the Range St. vortex. He would hand on to 110 volts with his bare hands. He had a magnetic device he made that hung from the ceiling and detected when flying saucers were around. He had one wild tale of being abducted in the desert by "greens" way back then. One member of the Haas family told me "That was my uncle Wiggy", so I suppose he liked avocados too.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletepretty good song fred! I want to party with you on a Friday night...sounds like your doing some fun things?
ReplyDeleteMy taste in music is more like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-LB94Kwlws
Prost!
Well, I'd have to do a lot of bath salts to party like that video. But the music was sublime.
ReplyDeleteIf you really want to hang with me on Friday night, you'll have to pass this test first.
Which two videos does Fred love, and which one makes his skin crawl?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKSoBJ8WirE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utVD5s2oPZk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lQneS9LGDw
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI am guessing you like the first two and the third makes your skin crawl.
DeleteMy favorite was the first. The third was as boring as I remember it the first time around.
I know you have better stories than most anyone else Fred....
Prost Fred!
Bingo! Did I mention you're buying?
DeleteThats cool.. for a cool cat like you, I gladly buy.
DeleteI really appreciate all you do Fred for our town.
You are da Man. and I love you for it!
Keep up the great work and Leucadia will continue to be an awesome place.
I hope you and your family realize justice in the end and know that many Leucadians love you.
I personally want to put your face on the Neptune Statue that we erect in the La Costa/ N. Coast Blvd. We will put some huge bicepts and amazing a bbs.
You are da man!
Geesh. There's not enough bronze for my head on the statue now if you sculpt it. I think a blank face on Neptune would better represent my local annonymous friends and foes, but we'll keep the huge biceps and amazing abs anyway assuming you're all in shape. And now for something equally awesome for the unidentifiable mermaid on the backside facing south....
DeleteLeucadia Blvd. west of the shrink between Eolus and Hymettus is one through lane. At the Hymettus and Hermes roundabouts, it's one lane east and westbound. There are turn lanes or a short stretch of two westbound lanes at Hygeia and Vulcan. It's consistently two lanes east and westbound only east of Eolus. There are similar inconsistencies on Santa Fe, but both it and Leucadia Blvd. are basically one through lane in each direction west of Rubenstein or Orpheus.
ReplyDeleteBy quibbling about Leucadia Blvd. and Santa Fe, you're missing the point that four of the proposed roundabouts on 101 will require at least southbound traffic to squeeze from two lanes to one four times to get through the roundabouts. Those roundabouts would be so close in size to those on Leucadia Blvd., they can be called the same size.
And if the Coastal Commission does not approve one 101 northbound lane from A St. to La Costa Ave., two northbound lanes will also have to squeeze to one lane four times to get through the roundabouts.
So, do you guys actually live around here, are you paying attention, have you done your homework, are you just talking through your ball caps, or are you ringers placed by L101MSA and the City to muddy the issue and promote their selfish ends?
There are six three-story buildings north from the corner of Phoebe and 101. How does it feel?
Don't overlook this very, very important point:
ReplyDelete"The biggest hidden reason that many posters want roundabouts is because it takes traffic off of the table under CEQA Law, thus making it easier for developers to stack and pack high density."
Because roundabouts do not have technical street designation, they are exempt from traffic studies. This makes stacknpack much easier for developers to push through because high-density development and traffic are now separated. In other words, developers can go for it with no technical or legal responsibility for the number of cars their projects put on the roads.
Coast Highway 101 was a mess of cars, motorcycles, and bicycles this morning in downtown Encinitas. Bicycle club riders weaving and jerking from the right lane to the left lane to move up through the traffic; running the ped red light crossing at Swami's. Then the sirens later. Hook and ladders, regular fire engine, flashing lights. 101 is vibrant.
ReplyDeleteRevitalization and vibrancy, isn't that what it's all about?? That's how Norby and developers count on making their money, and with no end in sight.
ReplyDeleteSounds nice and alive and what town wouldn't want to say they're revitalized and vibrant? Unfortunately in in reality, it's residents who lose their community big time. Those who are in it for the money don't know or care when enough is enough...or too much.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete12:37
ReplyDeleteLet the readers Google earth themselves to see that two lanes begin at El Camino Real going west where Leucadia Blvd begins. and where those two lanes merge. I assume it was you who claimed earlier that the existing roundabouts did not have 2 lanes merging into one. That is not so. That's what those large white merge arrows are for that are painted on the asphalt for both Leucadia Blvd and Santa Fe.
If you live west of 101 coming to it from a side street, and the Coastal Commission forbids all 4 roundabouts from El Portal to Bishops Gate, I hope you and others you care about will be satified trying to make a left hand turn onto 101. You'll forever dodge 3 lanes of 35 mph traffic from a partially visible vantage point (like it is right now), instead of easily merging with only one very visible lane of traffic going 15 mph for the complete left turn. Wanting efficiency and safety for all isn't muddy or selfish to me.
I don't understand the relevancy of your last sentence. Of course I would prefer something next to me being built that was more down to earth (in every aspect). But if there were not 20 / 30 unit apartments that invaded the Glendale block of my youth, and if there were not 8 three story buildings next to me today, I might not have had the urgency of spirit to support Prop A the way I did in my efforts to help it pass. VERY few people showed up to complain about 3 story buildings on 101 at Encinitas Planning Commission meetings. Did you?
Nice post Fred! As always.
ReplyDeleteI definitely want to party with you some Friday night. I bet you have some amazing stories of wild past Leucadian times.
Your the best,
No 1 Fred Fan
All work and no party makes Fred a dull boy.
ReplyDeleteAmen to dat!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete8:21
ReplyDeleteThe stretch of pertinent road is Leucadia Blvd. at the roundabouts. It's one lane each way feeding into one-lane roundabouts. It carries a lot less traffic than 101.
Yes, dear, there's a westbound merge west of Eolus. That's one of four east-west approaches to the two roundabouts.
North Coast Highway 101 is a major arterial. It carries a lot of traffic, and if the merchants along 101 want to prosper, they better ensure that continues. And they better figure out a way to provide much more parking.
Four one-lane roundabouts in a road that will probably revert to two lanes in each direction throughout when the Coastal Commission weighs in restrict rather than ease traffic flow. In any event, that restriction would still apply southbound.
Your left-turn point would make sense if there were a roundabout at every T intersection. Do you understand that three of the four one-laners are in the half mile from Bishop's Gate to Jupiter? That BG is a private entry to a condo complex?
Are you suggesting that everybody north of Leucadia Blvd., west of 101 and south of Jupiter who wants to go north on 101 should first go north on Neptune to the proposed roundabout at Jupiter? Similarly, to El Portal or Leucadia Blvd. for those west of 101 and south of those streets?
False choice: roundabouts vs. Stop signs or traffic signals.
The least bad of options for Leucadia 101: Two lanes both ways, strictly enforce the 35 mph speed limit, provide more parking.
Didn't you made a point earlier about three-stories next to one-stories supposedly being prohibited? If so, do you want the same powers-that-be who permitted that to control the fate of North Coast Highway 101?
Thank goodness for Prop A and two stories!
Environmental review on changing drainage at the Chevron station located by the freeway off ramp at 540 La Costa -
ReplyDeleteDoes changing the drainage help greenhouse properties to develop?
"Yes, dear, there's a westbound merge west of Eolus."
ReplyDeleteThank you. Someone before claimed that the other roundabouts in town had no merges. Santa Fe does as well.
No argument with you that parking is essential to a business' success.
"Your left-turn point would make sense if there were a roundabout at every T intersection."
One place for residents west of 101 to safely make a left turn onto it would make good sense. It makes more sense to have four times as many options to do that.
"Do you understand that three of the four one-laners are in the half mile from Bishop's Gate to Jupiter? That BG is a private entry to a condo complex?"
Do you understand that the Sea Bluffe community is not a mere condo complex but has 12 streets serving 350 medium to large homes that have only ONE permitted access street to 101? Would you deny them all safe passage to the north from home because their access road is private? I know one long time resident of Sea Bluffe who came to the first Streetscape meeting angry about the roundabout that was proposed at Bishops Gate. But when he learned how much safer it would be for he and his family - especially when it comes to making safe left turns, he can't wait for it to be in place. That's not drinking the Kool-Aid nor falling asleep next to a body snatching Peltz pod. He was making an informed choice that will affect him and his entire community.)
"North Coast Highway 101 is a major arterial. It carries a lot of traffic"
Do you have any idea how much traffic Leucadia Blvd has for your comparison to 101?
"Are you suggesting that everybody north of Leucadia Blvd., west of 101 and south of Jupiter who wants to go north on 101 should first go north on Neptune to the proposed roundabout at Jupiter? Similarly, to El Portal or Leucadia Blvd. for those west of 101 and south of those streets?"
I'm suggesting that is one option. Another is to easily turn right on 101, change lanes and make a U-Turn at your next opportunity. A lot of people including me do that dance already. The only other choice is the sketchiest one through a gauntlet of the lanes of traffic.
Are you suggesting that neighbors that use Neptune for more than one block are the equivilant of cut-through traffic?
Obviously, none of us can really rely on the the "powers that be" to always do the right thing. But some of us attempt to keep them on the right track sometimes. I share your enthusiasm for the passage of Prop A.
My neighbor recently asked a woman who was parking in front of her shop repeatedly, could she please park elsewhere as she needed the small space for her customers. The lady looked at her and said "It's a free country I can park wherever I want to". She followed the woman to her place of work, walked in and in front of everyone said "Really? You won't help a neighbor?" It change the woman's mind. I thought that episode went very well and that was the exact thing she should have said. (you know, instead of using explitives so many others would have.)
Fred, you are the only resident living adjacent to North 101 that I know of, who supported Prop A and doesn't OPPOSE four one-lane roundabouts.
ReplyDeleteI know you gave an anonymous example of someone who changed his or her mind, because their family would allegedly be able to turn left onto the highway more easily, from west of 101. But, Fred, everyone with whom I've personally spoken, living west of 101, and those along Vulcan, too, are more concerned about increased cut through traffic and slower emergency response times (the latter more of an issue for those west of 101). This was the reason, cut through traffic, especially, created by more congestion and bottlenecking on the highway, that roundabouts were defeated by a public vote in Del Mar and Cotati.
The "dance" that you refer to, is already taking place. People do go to points further north, using Neptune, to turn left, as they are going left, anyway. The signal at Leucadi Blvd, especially when there were still two lanes going northbound, did give a break in traffic, so people could turn left, going north on the highway, from west of 101.
Do you realize how much in debt our City actually is? Do you realize how much four one-lane roundabouts would cost? Do you care that the vast majority of Encinitas residents and local commuters don't want them on 101? If the City really wants to do a needs assessment, then for about $23,000, it could put the issue on the General Election ballot in November of 2014.
Lword- Why do you say such BS like
Delete"Do you care that the vast majority of Encinitas residents and local commuters don't want them on 101? "
Which personally was it that belted out that lie. I think you have Sible beat sister.
When you say stupid shit like this it make everyone know you are a bozo. What gives? Provide an explaination on how you can even rationalize a statement such as this.
Its it because your 4 freinds that talk to you agree with you? That would leave over 60,000 people which you have no idea how they feel about roundabouts.
From what I hear. My guess would be 30% really like them, 30% think they are OK but not much better than an all way stop, 20% that dislike them the same as a signal. 15% that like them less than a signal and 5% that hate them because they can not handle uncertainty and using their own judgement when driving through an intersection and having to figure out when to go and yield. We know which camp your in.
Pull your head out and you probably need to admit that you should not be driving anymore. If you can't hande a roundabout, you probably should not be driving.
"Fred, you are the only resident living adjacent to North 101 that I know of, who supported Prop A and doesn't OPPOSE four one-lane roundabouts"
DeleteThen you don't know everyone on our L-101 board.
Fred, there were so many "insiders" arguing against passage of Prop A. They would NEVER have changed their minds, because their minds were SET, closed. The only people I know of who support four one-lane roundabouts alongside the RR tracks are a few members of LTC, who don't live directly adjacent to the 101 corridor, and the Leucadia 101 Mainstreet Association, the latter of which also lobbied, with the City, against Prop A.
ReplyDeleteL101MA is a subsidiary and sponsor of the City. Those few people that constitute active members of Leucadia Town Council, are group now closely tied to L101MA, now, as you well know.
Fred, how many ACTIVE members of LTC are there, now? I was really grateful for your and Rachelle Collier's support, including at City Council Meetings, of Prop A. But Rachelle doesn't live along 101. Some of these LTC members, including you, Fred, are very well intentioned, but you don't really seem to understand the consequences of eliminating the necessity for intersections with "roundabouts" to be graded, with respect to potential traffic impact, so that would-be developers can automatically apply for negative environmental impact declarations.
People who don't live West of North 101 don't really understand the consequences of slowing already subpar emergency response times, or creating more traffic on sidestreets, including Neptune, a major beach access/egress recreational avenue. Public safety would be negatively impacted as more and more people trying to go north would use Neptune, to get avoid one lane roundabouts.
Again, roundabouts are not recommended ALONGSIDE (not talking about intersecting with streets that cross RR Tracks, as at Leucadia Blvd, or for streets with significantly less traffic for the cross street than the main thoroughfare according to the U.S. Dept. of Transportation. This was also verified to me, personally, by a friend who bicycles, and who has had extensive experience with roundabouts in Europe. He also said roundabouts don't work when the traffic at the cross street is much less than the main throughway, and that he'd never seen roundabouts, in Europe, alongside a railway corridor, where there IS NO CROSS STREET!
Roundabouts, nationwide, have been demonstrated to be less safe for bicyclists than at those same intersections before installation of roundabouts. For bicycles and cars to be going through one lane roundabouts, is far more dangerous than having two lanes in both directions, for motorists (and bicycles, with Sharrows) on Highway 101, with a dedicated bicycle lane, MAINTAINED AND EXTENDED, in the railway corridor.
Fred, I don't think I can ever change your mind on this. I am sorry you were in an accident at El Portal and 101 some years ago. I know that has affected your judgment. But there's a good reason why the U.S. Dept. of Transportation has made its recommendations, and a good reason why when asked, Peltz & Associates could not come up with a single example of roundabouts ALONGSIDE a railway corridor, in this country or any other. Fred, the only links you have been able to reference, through Googling, have not been analogous, because they are speaking to instances where roundabouts are near a railway crossing, NOT on a highway alongside a RR corridor, at intersections with NO cross street traffic.
Lynn, 3 door roundabouts are plentiful (regardless of your European friend's life experience). In every instance, there are no continuous cross streets at right angles to the main road. What exactly is the US Trans. Dept's explaination for WHY it is bad magic for a roundabout to be placed 50' away from a train when neither interact with or affect each other in any way? Surely the U.S Dept of Transportation has a logical reason, and as I pointed out earlier, that reason is not merely ALONGSIDE, but more specifically when roundabouts INTERSECT with railroad crossings. THAT'S what's dangersous and/or creates back ups in all directions.
DeletePerhaps our interpretations of "significantly less traffic" from side streets is the rub. You see thousands of cars going to and fro the west of 101 each day as insuficient numbers to qualify for roundabouts. I disagree. Fair enough? If not, what exactly are those numbers / ratios that the U.S. Trans. Dept. uses for their guidlines of significantly less traffic? They must have a template for it.
Skip-
Delete"Roundabouts, nationwide, have been demonstrated to be less safe for bicyclists than at those same intersections before installation of roundabouts." ---Another lie from Lword. Give me your source for this whopper.
ReplyDeleteI believe you are so delusional, so start believing the shit that you make up. How many people are living in that head of yours?
"I am sorry you were in an accident at El Portal and 101 some years ago. I know that has affected your judgment."
You have to be fricken kidding me. You clearly have mental issues and tell more fiction that fact.
The DMV needs to take your license and the county should consider your "status".
If anyone out there cares anything about Lword, please help her. I do not think she can help herself.
The "accident" at El Portal had nothing to do with any decision I've made since then (that I know of!). I did not bump my head, and I "drank the roundabout Kool-Aid" long before last year. I merely refered to it a few times before because #1. It's far less than safe just crossing that street on foot - it's SO damn wide and busy (try it). I don't have any problems crossing streets either, but seems like every time I do right there, some car comes turning out of nowhere wanting to do the Cha Cha. #2 The guy who ran the stop sign and broad sided me couldn't have T-boned me in a roundabout and he wouldn't have been going half the speed he was (which totaled my van). No one was hurt except his insurance company and his parent's pride. But thanks for your condolences. But speaking of bumps on the head....
ReplyDeleteIn 1985 I was stabbed completely through the heart by a thief and dead on arrival at Scripps Memorial La Jolla. Dr. Beuhler massaged my heart for 20 min before it took off on it's own again. (How many doctors would have gone 10 and said "He's a goner"?) I think they did a stellar job putting me back together again at their new Trauma Center. (Thanks, Docs!) But one fair weathered friend of mine named Larry evidently was afraid to visit me afterward and when he ran into my dad at Beacon's 6 months later he asked: "Is Fred O.K.? Dad said "Yeah". Larry asked: "Was there any brain damage?" Dad said: "We can't tell".
Thank goodness you survived, Fred. LOL, about "possible brain damage." You are a lucky man, though. I'm glad the good doctor didn't give up.
DeletePedestrians can now cross at Leucadia Blvd., a little more easily. I also support more at grade, safe RR crossings, for pedestrians, just as many others in Leucadia do! The roundabouts will do NOTHING to help pedestrians wanting to cross the tracks, and will eliminate much parking.
This is parking to which the NCTD has NOT objected. Police are not ticketing cars and trucks (including vendors taking their wares across the highway) parking in the dirt alongside the tracks, on the east side of Highway 101, or on the west side of Vulcan. I see many cars parked there, daily.
Skip liars Comments
DeleteGood story fred. You sure have more patience for Lword than any other soul.
ReplyDeleteBest to you.
DMV needs to take Lwords license. IMHO, She is unfit to drive and a danger to society.
Skip.
DeleteRoundabout Deaths in the U.S.:
ReplyDeleteJerrett Baker, Encinitas, CA 10/8/07
Diane Jensen, Billing, MT 6/4/12
Jaqueline Badomski, Detroit, MT 6/21/12
Keena K. Green, Milwaukee, WI 12/19/12
Fernando Hernandez-Lopez, Carmel, CA 10/1/07
Carlos Herndandez-Sanchez, Carmel, CA 10/1/07
Fernando Santiago, Long Beach, CA 12/21/12
Samantha V. Smith, Appleton, WI 1/10/12
Over the past five years, at least 9,000 people have died as a result of roundabout accidents in the U.S.
Little safety data is collected about neighborhood traffic circles because they are simply circular traffic islands. However, data does indicate they increase the risk of motor vehicle, cyclist and pedestrian injuries and death.
A couple interesting articles. Important to remember, the information is applicable to "roundabouts," not neighborhood traffic circles - but still interesting:
Are Roundabouts Safer for Pedestrians and Cyclists?
Unlike intersections controlled by signs and signals, roundabouts do not require motorists to stop, instead allowing them to continue along a circular path until exiting onto the desired street. Safer than older-style traffic circles because their smaller size forces motorists to reduce speeds in order to negotiate sharper curves, the number of roundabouts in the United States has been steadily increasing in recent years. However, while advocates, including the U.S. Department of Transportation, assert that they reduce the incidence of traffic accidents resulting in personal injury and death at intersections, roundabouts tend to provide safer conditions for motorists and pedestrians than for cyclists, as a crash that recently occurred in California illustrates, explains a California personal injury lawyer.
Last February, a cyclist was killed while riding in a multilane roundabout in Long Beach. Shortly after 7:30 p.m., a Toyota Scion driven by a 64-year-old man entered the roundabout and struck the bicycle rider. The rider sustained major trauma to his upper body and later died at a local hospital. According to the Long Beach Press-Telegram, the roundabout, which receives traffic from Lakewood Boulevard, Los Coyotes Diagonal, and Pacific Coast Highway, has the highest incidence of collisions in the city, with 213 recorded from January 2005 to September 2009.
While roundabouts have been touted as a safe alternative to signalized intersections, they do not benefit the users of varying modes of transportation equally. In areas where they have been installed, motor vehicle collisions have decreased by 40 percent, as well as those resulting in personal injury by 80 percent, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Moreover, an IIHS study of roundabouts in California, Colorado, and several other states indicated a 90 percent reduction in fatal injuries, explains a lawyer.
Roundabouts are safer for pedestrians than intersections because they cross fewer lanes of traffic at shorter distances and, in some cases, may avoid crossing by utilizing sidewalks around the perimeter of the circle. According to IIHS, European studies have found that pedestrian accidents decreased by 75 percent in areas where roundabouts replaced intersections.
These circular intersections can be quite dangerous for cyclists, who are less protected and sometimes less visible than the motorists with whom they share lanes of traffic. Large trucks can block the view of a bicyclist from drivers. In addition, drivers, especially in the United States where roundabouts are less common, may be too distracted watching out for other vehicles to notice cyclists quickly enough to avoid them. A study by the Florida Department of Transportation found that the introduction of roundabouts led to a slight reduction in traffic-related fatalities among pedestrians and an increase in those suffered by bicyclists.
As roundabouts become more commonplace in the United States, hopefully transportation agencies will study how to make them safer for cyclists.
by Jeffrey Shaw and Steve Moler
Skip
Delete"Over the past five years, at least 9,000 people have died as a result of roundabout accidents in the U.S."
DeleteJust where did you get that figure?
Roundabout Deaths:
ReplyDeleteI just Googled "roundabout death".
Article: "Are Roundabouts Safer for Pedestrians and Cyclists?"
Larry Drexel - Hub Pages
http://larrydrexel.hubpages.com/hub/Are-Roundabouts-Safer-for-Pedestrians-and-Cyclists
You may also be interested in:
"Roundabout Safety: Mixed Results for Pedestrians, Cyclists"
http://wearemodeshift.org/roundabout-safety-mixed-results-pedestrians-cyclists
Roundabouts: Not a safer alternative?
http://www.wivb.com/dpp/news/erie/roundabouts-not-a-safer-alternative
Thirty-two injured on Pontypool death-crash roundabout in four years
http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/9822628.Thirty_two_injured_on_Pontypool_death_crash_roundabout_in_four_years/
New numbers show roundabouts unsafe
http://www.franklinnow.com/blogs/communityblogs/59066077.html
Appropriate and Inappropriate Sites for Roundabouts
Source: MODOT Engineering Policy Guide
Skip-
DeleteFred, please share anywhere in the State or the Country where you can show instances of three way roundabouts, with NO cross streets, alongside a railway corridor.
ReplyDeletePlease share anywhere in the state where there are three way intersection, one lane roundabouts on Pacific Coast Highway.
Roundabouts are usually designed to replace stop signs. Please show anywhere where the City has stated, in writing, that the stop sign at Marchetta will be eliminated. I won't believe alleged staff "hearsay,." by some anonymous individual.
Roundabouts are not necessary for cars to "merge," turning left, especially with two lanes, going north, because of the signal at Leucadia Blvd. and 101 provides a break in traffic, for people west of 101 turning left. Similarly the current stop sign at Marchetta and 101, allows a brief break for people turning left, plus there is no median at that point on the highway, so people can pull out, and pause, when turning left, or can drive one block south, to Marchetta, and turn left at the stop sign, there.
We don't need four one-lane roundabouts because you are fearful of crossing traffic in order to turn left. Roundabouts are usually designed to replace stop signs at four or more way intersections. Please share with me any three way intersection roundabouts in southern California?
It's not only my one friend. I have been and friends have been in roundabouts in Mexico, as well as Europe. I've never seen them for three way intersections, where there is NO cross street traffic. The ones on Leucadia Blvd and the one on Santa Fe are not for three way intersections. Why is Leucadia being singled out for a total of 8 roundabouts, when the only other one in the City is on Santa Fe? Why aren't the accident statistics, collisions, etc., released for that roundabout on Santa Fe? It was poorly placed, and graded.
One of the big reasons that roundabouts are NOT recommended alongside RR tracks, is because the U.S. Dept. of transportation recommends them only for intersections where the main thoroughfare does NOT have significantly more traffic than the cross street. Otherwise, they are not a logical and necessary construct. The expense and the negative impacts for the main thoroughfare are not justified, particularly when our City in its July 18, 2012 staff report showed that the intersections for which they are planned do NOT have safety issues, because they have less accidents than average, statistically, when compared to similar intersections throughout the state.
These roundabouts are NOT justified by safety, according to the City's own data. This is another "project" being pushed by Leucaida 101 Mainstreet Association, a subsidiary and sponsor of the City, at the general public's expense.
I support our community; I support the upcoming Artwalk, but I don't support installation of roundabouts which are not what the public wants or needs. A public vote would verify that, just as it verified that we do want to be able to vote on future upzoning or raising of height limits.
"Fred, please share anywhere in the State or the Country where you can show instances of three way roundabouts, with NO cross streets, alongside a railway corridor."
ReplyDeleteLynn, what possible difference would a roundabout make next to a railroad in which it did not interact with?
"Roundabouts are usually designed to replace stop signs. Please show anywhere where the City has stated, in writing, that the stop sign at Marchetta will be eliminated. I won't believe alleged staff "hearsay,." by some anonymous individual."
ReplyDeleteLet's go a bit deeper here. Are you against the stops being taken away at Marcheta?
Yes, I'm against that, NOW, because I don't think the roundabout at El Portal and 101 will EVER be installed. It is not called for.
DeleteRoundabouts are not necessary for cars to "merge," turning left, especially with two lanes, going north, because of the signal at Leucadia Blvd."
ReplyDeleteFriday a bad collision happened at Grandview. I assume it was from someone trying to make a left to go north on 101.
I'm sure you've heard the old dictum: "When u "assume" u make an ass out of u and me."
DeleteI won't assume anything until I hear more facts about the accident. However, the LANE elimination for motorists going north on North 101, beginning at Leucadia Blvd,, COULD NOT HAVE HELPED anyone trying to turn left during high summer traffic periods, such as we have now, during Racetrack season. I have witnessed many near accidents as people try to cram into one lane, from two, and there are less breaks in traffic, after the signal, because more cars are taking up the ONLY lane going north.
"One of the big reasons that roundabouts are NOT recommended alongside RR tracks, is because the U.S. Dept. of transportation recommends them only for intersections where the main thoroughfare does NOT have significantly more traffic than the cross street. Otherwise, they are not a logical and necessary construct"
ReplyDeleteYou keep referring to the thousands of residents west of 101 accessing the hwy every day as "insignificant cross traffic". I disagree.
"Fred, please share anywhere in the State or the Country where you can show instances of three way roundabouts, with NO cross streets, alongside a railway corridor."
ReplyDeletehttp://casagrandeaz.us/dept/publicworks/streets-division/roundabout-information/
Casa Grande has changed. So much desert when the roundabouts were built. Lots of retirees.
ReplyDeleteFred-
ReplyDeleteDon't waste your time with this psychotic women who has not common sense.
Most common people will google roundabouts and find that that they are far superior to stop signs or traffic signals in terms of efficiency of traffic and safety.
Wacko Lynn thinks less than twenty people killed in roundabouts is a big deal. What she doesn't address is that most of the accidents were caused by major DUIs. An example includes the 2007 death in Encinitas when the loaded fire fighter closed the bar and drove 70mph through the roundabout at later then 2pm. What killed him was a light pole to the head.
We are lucky he didn't kill anyone else. How many on your little list were DUI or incompetent drivers like you.
The fact is Stop signs and Traffic Signals are far more fatal than modern day roundabouts. Your ignorance and inability to listen and learn stop you from accepting future positive change.
Lynn is wacked. Enjoy your place in County ward........
Well, right or wrong, no one's as passionate about their opinions as Lynn for sure.
ReplyDelete