Tuesday, April 17, 2018

Leucadia Streetscape appeal

Waves to Ride Blog:
The Encinitas Local Coastal Program (LCP) reflects the California Coastal Act of 1976. The Leucadia 101 Streetscape project is inconsistent with one or both in these ways:

• On page 4, the city of Encinitas Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 2018-12 states that “the project is not located between the sea and the nearest public road.” That’s erroneous. The project is in the first public road for the half mile of Highway 101 from La Costa Avenue to Grandview Street. It proposes to reduce that half mile from four lanes to two and install four roundabouts in it. Three of the four would be one lane. Those factors alone would restrict beach access at the Grandview stairs. By choking southbound traffic in the first public road gateway, the project would also restrict beach access south of Grandview.

• One of the stated purposes of the project is to reduce traffic volume on Highway 101. It proposes to do that by shrinking nearly 2.4 miles of highway from four lanes to two and by installing six roundabouts. Five would be one lane. Fulfilling that purpose with those features would inherently restrict beach access. The project would discourage visits to the beaches by non-residents and slow visits by residents.



• The city did a traffic study in the month of April. It projected diverting up to 7,100 car trips per normal traffic day from Highway 101 to the freeway, Vulcan Avenue and Neptune Avenue. That’s up to 42 percent of the daily volume. By intentionally diverting traffic from 101, the project would inherently restrict beach access. It’s not possible for drivers who aren’t already west of 101 to get to the beach without driving on or crossing 101.

• The project documents do not detail the current traffic congestion on Leucadia Highway 101, nor do they admit that the project would make it worse. The unavoidably long light at Leucadia Boulevard backs up northbound and southbound traffic. At afternoon commute time on weekdays, the northbound traffic backs up two lanes wide up to half a mile from the light. Whenever the southbound freeway plugs, drivers spill onto southbound Highway 101. The jams back up from the light two lanes wide as far as La Costa Avenue. That’s 1.4 miles. Reducing Highway 101 to one lane in each direction would double the distance and time of the northbound and southbound jams. The southbound jams happen regularly during the morning commute. They are worst on summer Fridays and Saturdays when hordes of drivers descend on San Diego County from points north. By making traffic congestion worse in the Leucadia Highway 101 corridor, the project would restrict beach access not only for locals but for residents of and visitors to the Southern California region.

• By making Highway 101 one lane southbound and putting five roundabouts in 8/10 mile at the north end, the project would build a virtual barrier to corridor entry from the north. That’s where the great majority of visitors come from. The project would slow their transit time through the corridor, restrict their beach access and discourage their visits. No summer weekend visitor wants to sit in miles-long traffic jams.

• By doubling the time and distance of the already bad traffic jams, the project would also double greenhouse gas emissions from hundreds of idling cars.

• The project generally favors walkers and bicyclists over drivers. The latter outnumber the former by hundreds to one. The project would restrict beach access by drivers. The documents claim the project would reduce dependence on automobiles. Everybody who lives west of 101 already walks or bikes to the beach. Few east of 101 do. Streetscape can’t raise that number because the project is west of the railroad tracks. Walkers and bicyclists can’t legally cross the tracks except at La Costa Avenue, Leucadia Boulevard and Encinitas Boulevard. The first two are 1.4 miles apart. The third is 1.1 miles from the second. The bottom line is the project wouldn’t increase access by foot or bike, and it would restrict access by car.

• The city chose the proposed project from among several alternatives. The city rejected the Environmentally Superior Alternative. That plan is consistent with the LCP and Coastal Act. The proposed alternative is not.

• The project proposes three parking bays in the railroad right-of-way between 101 and the tracks. The city has not gotten approval for that use of NCTD land nor for the land it would take to accommodate the roundabouts. The project would add 134 parking spaces. The documents say that number would be reduced when the Coastal Rail Trail comes through, but not by how many. Two of the parking bays are near streets that lead to beach accesses; the third is not. The project specifies a DG trail in the railroad right-of-way. I don’t know if that’s the same trail as the CRT, but either would interfere with parking in the right-of-way. Parking there facilitates beach access when lot and street parking at or near the accesses is full.

Please see comments regarding the project submitted by Sarah Richardson in January 2017 and Eric Stevens in March 2018.

It’s important to understand that there are now three signals in the corridor and one north-south stop sign. The signals are at the north and sound ends, and roughly the middle. The stop sign is at Marcheta Street, which is about a half mile north of Encinitas Boulevard. The project calls for removal of that stop sign. These numbers and placements have been misunderstood earlier.

26 comments:

  1. This latest version of the Streetscape plan is monumentally stupid.

    The city once again, has put the horse before the cart. One would think they would have learned from the past.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Horse before the cart, you say?

      I can’t think of a better symbol of the ignorance of the handful of people trying to obstruct this great project.

      Thank you 5:33. Thank you.

      Delete
    2. 5:58 - horse before cart is correct.
      Here, the cart is loaded with muck from the barn and the city is happily rolling it out to spoil the area.

      Delete
  2. Those at city hall and a handful want it. By far the vast majority want nothing to do with this madness. It will never be built.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wrong KLCC. A vast majority of citizens want it. You should have gone to the project meetings, but no.......

    Ignorance is your way. So be it- take your Valium and get back to bed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Charlie Marvin, Fred Caldwell, and a handful of 101 business owners to not constitute "a vast majority."

      Delete
    2. Half truths based on prejudice, bias and personal financial gain mostly form outside interests. This represents the "majority" of citizens who support streetscape as proposed. Walk and talk among these effected neighborhoods residents about your streetscape improvements. Go inland to New Encinitas etc..., as well, and you may be surprised. Your view of majority may change. Not to mention those that you feel, like customers and employees, who publicly support streetscape may not do so at the voting booth. You will also find that there is agreement that our 101Hwy corridor could use some improvement. There is a reason that this Streetscape has been a topic for so long. It's city staff and business supported design(s) do not service our city citizens wants and needs. That is the issue not that our city needs to protect and preserve our city by maintaining and improving our infrastructure. Majority should be determined by allowing citizens to vote on this proposal not using behind the scene schemes justifying the majority as those that drive and support the proposed streetscape. Which is at the cost of the city wide majority who do not want to support the proposed streetscape. Put it to vote and put this to rest, once and for all. If city staff, CC and the business owners feel so strongly that they represent the majority prove it by allowing city citizens the right to vote on it.

      Delete
  4. Doug Fiske is a best a D level fictional writer. His only talent is basically writing fictional pieces that resemble truth and are not accurate in any way.

    He is missing common sense in his head. Sorry Doug. The residents are tired of that ugly death trap we call N. Coast Hwy 101. A freeway near the beach was replaced by I5 and its time to repurpose the roadway for all users and serve the best interests of the community.

    there are a few tubs of jelly in the KLCC that would greatly benefit from walking and biking a bit more. Maybe they will live a happier and healthier life with a better more realistic outlook on reality.

    The reality is the streetscape will save lives, greatly reduce accidents, improve traffic flow for all users, improve efficiencies of the roadway and reduce hydrocarbon use, and improve the quality of life and property values for the surrounding community. While its is easy understand why the majority in the community support the improvement, you can never get all people agree- Hence the few KLCC members. Enjoy your hate sessions.

    Peace out, Hugs, and enjoy the day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Put it to a vote to find out what the public sentiment really is.

      Delete
  5. The CC can go to hell. Having said, that the project will not be built do the costs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The CC can go to hell. Having said that, the project will not be built due to the costs. You're welcome.

      Delete
  6. 6:32am, Your opinion of a writers work has nothing to do with the topic at hand charley boy/man child. You are just being who you are.

    As tempting as it is to throw your shortcomings back at you with some expletives that you deserve, you are not worth a moments consideration more than this, with this exception, monumentally ignorant fits you like a glove. Add the well known mean streak you display and you have it all.

    ReplyDelete
  7. more word vomit from Lword.

    Please Lword go back to bed or school. In school, you might learn how to organize your thoughts and write.

    Its almost as painful reading your vomit as it is listening to your puke when you present in public. Yuck!!!

    Your simpler more likely choice would be to pop another Xanex and go back to bed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shut up charley and dig into your own substantial medicine cabinet. Maybe you can calm yourself to the point where you no longer fixate on people who don't post here.

      Delete
    2. Oh yeah right. We all recognize the word soup/vomit of the Lword. I hope you have a nice peaceful sleep today. Remember stay medicated. I think its best for all.

      Delete
  8. 8:38pm Poor mind addled charley boy man/child, you are so wrong again. You see someone who is not there and wouldn't lower herself to respond.

    Some here will call you out every time and every time is applicable. You wrong every time.

    You cannot imagine someone else is calling bs on you for blaming someone who chooses to ignore your personal attacks. Ah, that must it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again since you keep puking up the same montra:

      Oh yeah right. We all recognize the word soup/vomit of the Lword. I hope you have a nice peaceful sleep today. Remember stay medicated. I think its best for all.

      Delete
    2. Ooooh, Charlie learned to copy and paste. And they say you can't teach an old dog new tricks!

      Delete
    3. Pop the next pill Lword and night night!!!

      Delete
    4. Whatever, Charlie. Whatever.

      Delete
    5. Eureka!

      I found a name for the condition of a certain writer on EU.

      It’s called Graphorrhea

      Delete
  9. The hired consultants seemed to ignore Prop A for some reason. Duh. Two stories, 30' was not in their plan. Everything exceeded what we put in place.

    Staff is directing the process again. Shame on you council for secret meetings with developers and so much more.

    There is not one I would vote for. With districting we all will get only two votes, the mayor and our district member. Representation is nonexistent. Taxation sure is.

    I can see this effort failing as the other attempts have in the past and for similar reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Unfortunately, the traffic study should be substantiated with summer-season counts, not spring traffic counts. True, school is in session during that time, but there is much more traffic in the peak periods on 101 during summer months. PEC and Vulcan would have more traffic during school season. The EIR is flawed on that alone.

    I like the streetscape concept, but I bet the CCC will want more information. Just like I want to see. I wasn't involved in the project over the last year, but you have to admit the 101 is terrible during the summer. How will this project make that traffic better? By pushing it to the freeway? That won't happen. The people that want to use the 101 are using it for a reason.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah Tony's insistence that everyone will "learn" to use the 5 and stay off the 101 just shows you bright he isn't. Poor thing should not be making decisions for the rest of us.

      Delete
  11. Every citizen would like to see a better infrastructure that serves both citizens and visitors. But to allow outside interest to influence or drive this concept is doing a disservice to our city and its citizens. The good thing out of all of this is that we should all see the true color of our CC members as this streetscape issue really brought it out. Do not forget come election time. Our city is gifted with incredible citizens that are both caring and defensive. More importantly academically savvy. For me a shout out to those that take their personal time to help us protect and preserve our city by challenging the CC and City Staff. Keep fighting for us, thank you. Remember citizen created and voted on Prop A and City staff and CC created measure T which failed. This is why the city staff and CC are going behind closed doors and not allowing our city citizens to make the ultimate decision on Streetscape. Thank you O so very much to these unselfish citizens who are doing their best to protect and preserve our homes and city.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Blog admin, it's well past time to end the anonymous commenting. This is irresponsible.

    - posted as anonymous

    ReplyDelete