Monday, October 12, 2015

Roundabout gridlock!

One August afternoon in Leucadia.

54 comments:

  1. That's because of the light at 101. Happens all the time. But those two Roundies are a lifesaver, people used to hit Hymettus going about 60 before they put those in. Now you can actually make a left.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You must be joking. Only a dragster could hit 60 going uphill one block from the stop sign at Hygeia to Hymettus, and anybody going west would have to make and race through up to four lights at Urania, Piraeus, next on-off ramp and Orpheus to hit 60 before reaching Hymettus.

      You can make a left coming out of Hymettus after you stop and wait for a break in the traffic – same as you did when there was a stop sign there.

      Delete
    2. nope . pre roundabout era… that road was a death trap with speeds regularly exceeding 55 miles per hour.

      The roundabouts make it much easier to make a left considering you only need a gap for westbound traffic not both west and east traffic.

      6:28- You seem clueless.

      Delete
    3. So drivers came screaming downhill at 55 mph through the Hymettus intersection then came to a screeching halt at the Hygeia stop sign?

      There are cheaper, safer, more effective ways to slow traffic than roundabouts. And they're not stop signs or traffic lights.

      Delete
    4. 6:28, downhill going West on Leucadia, use your thinking cap dude...Trust me, people hit that intersection with a ton of speed, you could not make a left from Hymettus onto Leucadia East.

      Delete
    5. 8:04, yes. Pretty much. Maybe it wasn't 60. But it was a solid 45+. I saw several accidents there over the years. Those two roundabouts help local traffic flow and slow people down..We all know people are hauling ass, let's not kid ourselves...

      Delete
    6. If it isn't a roundabout, a light or a stop sign, what is it, spike strip?

      Delete
    7. Modern roundabouts are the safest form of intersection in the world (much more so than comparable signals). Visit http://tinyurl.com/iihsRAB for modern roundabout FAQs and safety facts. Modern roundabouts, and the pedestrian refuge islands approaching them, are two of nine proven safety measures identified by the FHWA, http://tinyurl.com/7qvsaem
      The FHWA has a video about modern roundabouts on Youtube, or check out the IIHS video (iihs dot org).

      http://priceonomics.com/the-case-for-more-traffic-roundabouts/

      Delete
  2. That's what 101 will look like if the five roundabouts from Jupiter north to La Costa Ave go in. It'll back up single file from Phoebe north to La Costa Ave and two lanes wide from Phoebe south to L Blvd. whenever the freeway plugs southbound.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. wrong. its the signals that back up all the traffic.

      The title of the post is wrong. Its should read Traffic Signal Gridlock.

      The gridlock starts at the signals and than backup all the traffic on the street. The signals at Vulcan/Hwy101 and I5 Signals cause all the gridlock.

      Delete
    2. The signal at 101 and Leucadia Blvd isn't going away — even if the tracks go below grade there. The intersection is too complex for anything but a signal.

      Another crosswalk on the south side of the intersection or a crisscross crosswalk will make the southbound wait at the signal longer than it is now.

      Heavy traffic commonly backs up from that light past Jupiter, sometimes to Avocado, sometimes to Grandview, sometimes even to La Costa Ave.

      Five roundabouts and reducing the two southbound lanes to one except from Phoebe to Leucadia Blvd will plug heavy traffic single file to and past La Costa Ave.

      That wait is now 20-30 minutes. Plan on its doubling. And good luck trying to go north from any of the T intersections into a single northbound lane, whether at the one of the roundabouts or not. The southbound traffic will be bumper to bumper.

      Delete
  3. This post is the equivalent of saying "it's snowing here today" in a lame attempt to disprove global climate change.

    You don't need you assumptions and fears.

    We have d-a-t-a.

    Read, people, read. The literate welcome you. Join us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somebody's got some preconceived notions!

      I actually like roundabouts.

      Delete
    2. Fair enough. Bait taken.

      (Winky-face emoticon)

      Delete
    3. 6:29 PM

      "I actually like roundabouts" So please tell us the point of this post. You can't be naive enough not to know your headline will set off some people here. You're being a little too cute. The exclamation point gives you away.

      As people mentioned above, the backup is from the stoplights at Leucadia/Vulcan/101 especially when a train goes through. I knew this would periodically happen when the roundabouts were proposed. Anyone who has lived in the area saw westbound Leucadia regularly backup past Hermes especially when it was only two lanes. Adding the left turn lane at Vulcan has helped.

      And yes, westbound cars can get going pretty fast coming on to Hymettus as they try to beat the light at Orpheus. I plead guilty of doing it a few times but now you have to slow down entering the roundabout instead of on the downward slope to the stop sign at Hygeia.

      I have news for you all. Traffic around here will never be perfect no matter what the city does. By their very nature, if drivers are moving through the roundabout at the proper speed and using the proper spacing, cars will come to a stop only for pedestrians or the occasional miscommunication between drivers. But the efficiency of any street corridor is dependent on all the intersections in that corridor as well as the various factors between them.

      Delete
    4. Settle down 9:12.

      Slow news day.

      Part of running a vibrant and engaging blog is keeping the fire stoked.

      Delete
  4. The title of the post is wrong. Its should read Traffic Signal Gridlock.

    The gridlock starts at the signals and than backup all the traffic on the street. The signals at Vulcan/Hwy101 and I5 Signals cause all the gridlock.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The light does back the traffic up, regardless of any design of intersection. And sure, when infrequent freeway mishaps occur, 101 will always clog for the same reason they do now. People DO have to learn to not block a roundabout though. That's for sure. I'm surprised how often Vulcan @ Enc Blvd gets blocked with people who can't think ahead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The big issue with 101 is the train, I think we all know that.....

      Delete
    2. Very few people know this and the irrational roundabout proponents don't want to acknowledge it:

      Leucadia Streetscape has been changed to one traffic lane in both directions over its entire length except for two southbound lanes from Phoebe to Leucadia Blvd and a short apron northbound at L Blvd.

      There are now five roundabouts from Jupiter to La Costa Ave. That's 8/10 mile. The new roundabout at the present Cabo Grill entrance is 230 feet from the La Costa Ave roundabout.

      Roundabouts are not intended for T intersections, especially where traffic in two opposite directions overwhelms traffic in the third direction.

      Roundabout fans are stuck in their trendy, faddish ideology and are not acknowledging the reality on the ground.

      The freeway plug southbound that pushes traffic onto 101 is not infrequent. It happens often on summer Fridays and Saturdays, and at commuting time on weekday mornings all year. That traffic will be squeezed into one southbound 101 lane and around five roundabouts from La Costa Ave to Jupiter.

      It's a formula for gridlock, and it endangers public safety. It will, however, cause motorists to pause longer outside Fred's shop.

      Delete
    3. People are so afraid of change. Round abouts are good. If you don't like them, take another route.

      Delete
    4. Roundabouts work well in Europe and in England. In Rome, there is hardly anywhere where you are going to see a stop light. I live by the Roundabout off of Santa Fe by Scripps. It works well. Not sure what the problms are that people are talking about with regards to roundabouts.

      Delete
    5. 9:19 and 9:44

      Further proof that people are ignoring our facts on our ground along 101 in Leucadia.

      Look at our circumstances on our roads.

      9:19 is so ignorant he/she doesn't even know there's no other road but 101 to get to or out of west of 101.

      Delete
    6. 9:59 Oh please spare me you obnoxious attitude. Get out your map you friggin idiot.

      Delete
  6. If you can't drive a roundabout you shouldn't be on the road.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you don't have a working brain, don't post to the EU blog.

      Delete
    2. 10:01- how kind of you to post a comment, now go and crawl under that rock you call a home.

      Delete
    3. That additional roundabout is to enable the development near Cabo Grill and La Costa. It will serve as traffic "mitigation," when closing down another lane, this time southbound, on Historic Highway 101 will have anything but a calming effect. Roundabouts work best when the traffic is more equal from the sidestreets. We don't need roundabouts for T intersections, where there is no actual cross-street through traffic.

      Traffic studies for 10 years, presented through the Traffic Commission before the Leucadia Blvd. roundabouts were built did not justify traffic calming at Hermes and Hymetus, according to the numbers of collisions.

      Because one cocktail is good, does that mean that six would be better? No other City in California has so many roundabouts in a row along Highway 101. The 2008 survey, at the workshop at City Hall, most widely attended by the public, showed that over 60% of the people said no to the multiple roundabout plan.

      Another survey was taken the following year, in 2009. This is all part of staff and Peltz and Associate agenda reports. That survey didn't have the alternative of no roundabouts. It had two questions, with two choices each. Should we have five roundabouts or traffic signals? Should we have front in or back in diagonal parking?

      Bad data in, poor conclusions. The numbers were massaged and the public was manipulated. Also, the City is paying for the EIR for KSL, the developer of the property where the sixth roundabout is now planned. The developer should have to do its own EIR.

      Delete
  7. 9:17,

    * A fifth roundabout in the 8/10 mile distance you mentioned is only in review and if approved would only be built should KSL ever build their hotel. (They've been saying they intend to break ground every October for the last 22 years). If ever approved, KSL pays for all of it.

    * Bird Rock's traffic count is a little higher than N 101's and they have 5 roundabouts that work well within only 5 blocks of each other.

    * There are still plenty of places where the road flairs out to accommodate cars for both North and South bound traffic on N 101.

    * Roundabouts are recommended anywhere safety is an issue and the potential for traditional dangerous intersections would be another choice. Less traffic on a third leg is just that. More traffic with a 4th leg would mean more congestion.

    * As far as overwhelming traffic, sure, when there's a problem on 5. And that is definitely not frequent. Even whenever traffic is heavy on 101, someone exiting a side street will always have a safe break in traffic to navigate through. The undulating speeds caused on 101 contributes to open spaces between cars when no one will be in in the circle.

    * Roundabouts are not trendy or faddish, but beautify a neighborhood while making it a lot safer from the day they are put in. Traditional signals are deadly, ugly, inefficient. gas hogs and more expensive in the long run.

    Fathom the self-serving greed of someone fabricating beautiful and safer infrastructure just to have people drive slower by their shop! The noive!

    ReplyDelete
  8. And let's all not forget about the increased density allowed with these roundabouts on OUR 101. These, as planned, will benefit the properties closest to them. How about a list of these owners by name and address that stand to gain if these are permitted where they are now being pushed?

    The owners of the corner at Grandview and 101 do not want a roundabout there as they will have to be deprived of crucial footage of their property if a roundabout is ever allowed to go in. Imminent domain will have to used to gain that footage needed by Streetscape.

    They have never been offered a thing, as of yet, in future compensation for the loss that is come. If there was one roundabout location that should be removed from consideration, this would be a good place to start. Stop signs there would be a good move by Streetscape and should include pedestrian crosswalks.

    How about it, Streetscape promoters? Is it within your limited scope to consider this or will you forge on no matter who is adversely affected by this not ready for primetime plan of yours.

    Fred. No one knows better than you how the traffic is backed up so often, most, if not almost, to your shop, heading south, and oftentimes further north of you.

    One can only imagine what single lanes north and south will bring with them, and that is before these roundabouts become a reality. This plan is a disaster in the making if we allow a select handful of certain development and real estate interest to have their way with OUR 101.

    This is a major arterial and reducing these to single lanes is just dumb and dumbfounding.

    The cyclers at times have already achieved this single lane to some degree in places and when there are groups riding together they deserve this shared space. That being said, I often see single bikers using the whole sharrow lane because they can when they could just as easily move a little to the right to show some consideration for the vehicles stacking up behind them.

    Add all these ill-planned roundabouts, as they are now planned and where they are planned, will only serve to exacerbate a poor situation even worse.

    As I heard recently, some of these were put where they are for convenience sake and more likely, the monetary gain for the property owners has something to say about these locations.

    This should be on the ballot next year but will never be allowed by the self-interested parties pushing this disaster in the remaking of OUR 101 to their tastes.

    Lastly, just because this part of the Plan is so shortsighted, this does not mean we objectors want to dump the whole thing and indeed do like certain parts of the plan. Certain parties always go back to a 'all or nothing'. It never was all or nothing. It was only all or nothing to these few individual promoters.

    Let us have our vote and write the ballot statement so each vote can have their say on each part of this plan. There would be an overwhelming public approval of some of these facets of the plan and of course, others that would be shot down where they belong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 11:34,

      That's nice, dear.

      Pat-Pat.

      Delete
  9. If you can't yield, do not drive.

    Signals are deadly.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Fred is usually a rational, reasonable guy. Why he abandons those admirable qualities when it comes to Leucadia Streetscape, its one-laning a major arterial in both directions and packing five pointless roundabouts in 8/10 mile at the extreme north end is baffling, especially to people who have known him for decades.

    Like many ideologues who want nothing but to promote their agenda, Fred ignores facts that contradict his ideology and distorts others.

    Yes, roundabouts are trendy and faddish. Ideologues tout them as the solution to every traffic problem in existence. They're fine where they fit the roadscape and provide a benefit that can't be better and less expensively accomplished by another means. Few if any are suggesting stop signs or signals. If avoiding adding those is your argument, you don't have one.

    So far, we've seen Streetscape advocates in three categories:

    * Ideologues — They don't seek the best solution for the greatest number of people. They just want to impose their ideology, regardless of how illogical and ineffective it is.

    • Greedies — They think Streetscape will greatly boost retail trade and property values on 101. The corridor is one sided and too narrow for that even if a lot more parking is provided on the east side. Narrowing the road to one lane in each direction and packing five roundabouts at the north end will discourage auto traffic on 101, divert it to Vulcan and reduce rather than expand retail activity. Prop A spoiled some of the greedies' grand schemes, but they're sticking with the dumb Streetscape plan anyway. They're hunkered down, not wanting to admit they've been wrong from the start. They're out for themselves, not what's best for the community at large.

    * The Grossly Ignorant — These woefully uninformed or misinformed people post here frequently. They have strong yet unfounded opinions. They don't know what they're talking about but demand to be heard. They have nothing valuable to add and should be disregarded.

    If the city and the L101 group the city subsidizes with $30K a year were genuine and wanted what's best for the community, they would survey the most affected citizens and find out what they want and don't want for Leucadia 101. They haven't done that and until they do, they reveal themselves as imposing an unwanted plan on the community.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 11:51

      "Fred ignores facts that contradict his ideology and distorts others."

      I know it sounds impossible turning a 4 lane business district into a two lane without gridlock happening. But Bird Rock (which handles more traffic than N 101 does) did it with 5 lanes to 2 lanes with no problem. Many other cities have as well. Birdrock also has a lot more side street traffic with all 5 of their roundabouts being 4 legged.

      No, roundabouts are not a magic cure for southbound morning congestion on N 101. However, I expect the expansion of Fwy 5 to reduce it further. (It was already reduced quite a bit a few years back when Solana Beach and Del Mar added their extra lane on 5).

      No. Roundabouts will not prevent heavy traffic on N 101 for whenever Fwy 5 is shut down a handfull of times each year. Nothing can.

      Yes. I think roundabouts are a smart way to prevent future signals and/or stops from forever clogging the hwy as they do in Del Mar, etc. The science shows they're safer, more efficient, nicer to look at and preferred wherever possible by not only the National Dept of Transportation but insurance companies as well - of course because they prevent more accidents.

      I can't see how I've distorted any facts here, nor how I may have contradicted any. But thanks for your "usual" vote of confidence anyway!




      Delete
    2. Bird Rock is nowhere near a parallel to Leucadia 101. That's one of your distortions. Our corridor is 2.4 miles long. The congested, claustrophobic, extremely annoying roundabout stretch at Bird Rock is a few blocks.

      It defies logic and the facts on the ground that single-laning Leucadia 101 in both directions and packing five of six roundabouts in 8/10 mile at the extreme north end won't make an already bad traffic situation worse.

      The southbound jam is not an occasional event. It happens on many summer Fridays and Saturdays. It also happens whenever the freeway plugs during the weekday morning commute.

      One southbound lane will double the length of the jam, pushing it back through all the north roundabouts at its worst. That's bumper to bumper for about 1.2 miles — half the length of the corridor. Every T intersection and roundabout entrance from the west will be blocked. Besides being aggravating, gridlock is a public safety hazard.

      Rather than insisting on sticking with a really bad idea — one that turns bad to worse — why not seek a better plan?

      What's the purpose of roundabouts at T intersections? Two are at private driveways. The one at Jupiter seems a random choice. It's 1.2 miles from the one at El Portal. Does jamming five of the six at the north end really make sense to you? Really? If they have value, which on Leucadia 101 they don't, why not spread them out evenly?

      Delete
    3. Never said the two areas were parallel, 9:32. They do have similarities and differences. And differences weigh in our Streetscape's favor.

      Their project encompasses 5 blocks with 5 roundabouts. Ours encompasses up to 2.4 miles with up to 6 roundabouts. Their area serves over 20K cars per day. Ours, under 20K per day. Which area would have more spaces between cars each day in your opinion?

      Here's are my links to a video and recent article about Bird Rock's roundabouts. They don't echo your sentiments of a nightmare of congestion. Please post some negative ones for us if you can find them.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQki1Aecktk

      http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2015/aug/06/bird-rock-runs-circles/

      "What's the purpose of roundabouts at T intersections?"

      1. They slow down traffic on 101 making it safer for peds to cross to bus stops.
      2. They create U-turn capability where we don't have that now.
      3. They create easier and safer left turns.
      4. They remove all of the stop signs at Marcheta St. for 101.
      5. They prevent dangerous stop lights and signs which would be inevitable and at the same time remove over a dozen existing stop signs / lights, greatly aiding circulation for everyone.
      6. They beautify our stretch of 101.
      7. They greatly reduce the need to stop when arriving at them.
      8. They reduce pollution and wear and tear on cars.
      9. They reduce gas consumption.
      10. They're recommended by the USDT wherever possible.

      Why not spread them out evenly? Not an engineer here, but if Neptune was one way southbound instead of northbound, it might affect their number and positioning. Fortunately, the city made Neptune one-way going north, preventing all cut-through traffic going southbound in the mornings.

      Delete
  11. Revolving thoughts go
    round again--like cars filled with
    Fear. Fear not circles.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Roundabout we go
    Dizzying for no purpose
    Serve special int'rests

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pro tip: Even when you misspell it, interests has three syllables.

      in·ter·est
      ˈ/int(ə)rəst/

      Delete
    2. Of course "interest" has three syllables, but it's pronounced as two. To fit the 5-7-5 haiku pattern, the poet dropped the "e" and replaced it with an apostrophe. But maybe you don't understand contractions or poetic license.

      Delete
    3. I understand that some people live in a world of self-absorbed fantasy, where normal rules, laws, and facts do not apply to them.

      Let's agree that the arguments against Streetscape use a whole lot of "poetic license."

      Delete
    4. A huge steaming pile of poetic license.

      Delete
    5. No one is objecting to an improved streestscape. The roundabouts are not wanted by the majority of the public or the business owners. They would not calm traffic but would further impede it. The public should get to vote. There has been vocal opposition from the start. The Streetscape in Leucadia, as currently being pushed on us, is driven by previous council members, staff, and various lobbyists, business and real estate interests, and non profit city subsidiaries.

      Any public works plan of this magnitude should not only have to go before the Planning Commission, but also the Traffic and Safety Commission and the Environmental Commission.

      Why do we need another left hand turn pocket at Leucadia Blvd? That heritage tree needs to be preserved. This is a huge make work project, which will benefit special interests at the expense of the majority of the public, including neighbors and local commuters.

      Delete
    6. "No one is objecting to an improved streetscape"

      I and all my neighbors are. And they can start by taking all those ugly "improvements" at Leucadia Roadside Park and sending them to Disneyland. Public involvement is the key. They should circular file their cartoon drawings and have workshops open to the public to help US decide what is best for OUR 101. I pity the poor people wanting to drive 40 mph from Carlsbad to Sorento Valley each morning on OUR 101. And those aren't enough commissions to review streetscape, 12:55. There need to be so many that we can postpone streetscape forever. If they just closed the RR crossing at Leucadia Bld, we could save our last heritage tree and have a LOT less cut through traffic.

      Delete
  13. South 101 is jammed this morning.

    Must be the thought of future roundabouts causing the problem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. They're going through gridlock withdrawals already.

      Delete
  14. If you think this morning was jammed, just try to imagine a single lane southbound and what this mornings jam up will be looking like backed up all the way to La Costa single file. 101 Pollution Plus is headed our way, if Streetscape gets their way. This traffic plan is beyond dumb. Please don't go all crappy, as usual, reverting to every facet of this plan as being objectionable. It is not. Changing a four lane major arterial to two lanes is, plain and simple crap.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They'll work fine, dear.

      Delete
  15. And we should just believe you, deary? Not happening, deary. Dumb, dumber, dumbest idea. The flow doesn't work fine with the four lanes. Two lanes, not a snowballs chance in Hades.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I guess you didn't get the memo....

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNlTdoFV9bQ

    ReplyDelete
  17. The undercrossing planned for El Portal will end up requiring some sort of signalization at that intersection. So will the two lane roundabout planned for La Costa. Having roundabouts is no guarantee that traffic signals also won't be added, both at the intersections with roundabouts, and at other intersections. There are 10 traffic signals, one stop sign and two roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd, between Highway 101 and Camino Real.

    And there is no guarantee the stop signs at Marcheta would be removed. The stop sign at Hygeia and Leucadia Blvd. was to be eliminated during Phase 2, which never happened. That was when more landscaping and sidewalks were also to be installed. The public was bamboozled by master manipulators.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "The public was bamboozled by master manipulators."

    Yes. Guilty. We were fooled by facts and data suggesting that the roadway would be safer, and more efficient. We were star struck by people who seem to know what they are talking about. We were dazzled by the illusion of beauty and smooth flowing traffic experienced first-hand in our travels. We were snookered by doing actual research, and reading traffic planning guides.

    I guess we are fools, huh?

    The really smart people, the clear thinkers, the brilliant communicators are all against Streetscape.

    http://m.encinitasadvocate.com/news/2015/oct/16/letter-editor-encinitas-staff/

    ReplyDelete
  19. 9:11, The clear thinkers aren't the ones putting more dangerous stop lights and stop signs everywhere. Nor are they the ones letting infrastructure crumble (keeping it crappy). We know your mind's made up and that its good therapy for you to tout "facts fool people" so keep those snippets of wisdom coming.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 1:00 AM, You're wrong on both counts. Marcheta stops are coming down, 100% certain. Stop lights at roundabouts not gonna happen, 100% certain. They only put those at larger ones and they are not required for peds crossing one lane @ 15mph. Periodic "Hawk Crossings" will occur for pedestrians for bus stops, but they're unneeded at roundabouts.

    ReplyDelete