Saturday, July 27, 2019

Lane diet fattens up to $54M in 18 months

In the face of Streetscape's mounting costs the Council continues to downplay the real number and under report expenses.  This is no longer a Leucadia-only issue, it is now an Encinitas taxpayer affair.

Here's a breakdown of what we do know:


What future surprises are in store?  Stay tuned....


112 comments:

  1. An early price tag was $19 million, and almost all of that was to be paid by SANDAG's Transnet tax. Then Muir quoted $30 million at a council meeting. No mention of Transnet. Then it jumped to $40 million. Now, according to the charts above, it's $54 million, and that doesn't include the cost of the bonds and interest on them, which will about double the total.

    So besides being impractical and incredibly dumb, it's now prohibitively expensive at $100 million plus. Will Blakespear and her gang of idiots keep trying to impose it on a city that doesn't want it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This has to be the biggest boondoggle, bike-lobby, BS project conceived after the rail trail bait-and-switch.

      I've walked that corridor many times. There's a ridiculous amount of space between the road apron on 101 and the RR tracks. BNSF RR company wants, but can't afford, fencing along their tracks to give legal cover for future suicides (despite all the gesticulations by community "leaders" and regional "fortunate sons," nobody gives a real crap about intentional RR deaths -- they just need one more argument to make about implementation of risk mitigation to keep liability exposure contained).

      So give the RR what it wants, but take what the city needs. A 20' strip along the east edge of 101 for dedicated bike and pedestrian traffic. Install sensible fencing and silent-zone pedestrian cross locations on the tracks. Place flashing-light-assisted crosswalks at regular intervals along 101 for crossover to businesses and restaurants, and return the speed limit to 40-45 MPH for the abused drivers who just want to friggin get to work and school without the slimy bike lobby trying to steal asphalt for their hobby routes. This country became the most advanced in the world because of industry and industriousness on a backbone of transportation, which doesn't reside on the shoulders of emasculated douchesticks dressed in spandex.

      The rail trail comment above is stating an obvious but surreptitious plan by the council to place a bike lane on San Elijo. Look at the new striping they painted just a few months ago. Its coming, and the whole, glorious "mixed-use" justification for the rail trail will be old and cold. The concrete will be dedicated to ped only (thanks to strategic early whinning by grannies on Next Door about irresponsible kids on skateboards threatening the lives of babies in strollers) and drivers on San Elijo will be forced to accommodate the supremacy of the spandex olympic wanna-bes on the asphalt. Bait and switch done over a period of months, and all with a shit eating grin on the faces of the vermin at city hall.

      Delete
  2. Streetscape to nowhere.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Maybe recalls are necessary?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd say so based on the council's public misstatements of cost alone. There's going to be no end in sight on this one.

      Delete
  4. I wish we could vote for Council Members every two years, like the Mayor, so it would be easier to get bad politicians out of office.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Replies
    1. Of Lou's Records?

      Delete
    2. Someone has started posting to EU called Lou. Look at the top of this thread.

      WC / EU isn’t named Lou.

      Who is it?

      Delete
    3. who cares? i'm busy freaking on the $54M and thinking about the unfixed potholes on my road.

      Delete
    4. Is that you, Lou? Who are you?

      Delete
    5. Maybe it’s Lou Caldia?

      Delete
  6. Has there ever been a city project financed with bonds that didn't go over budget? The library was $6 million over and the lifeguard tower was $1 million over. I would add in an additional $5 million to $10 million for the lowball estimate and at least $1 million more for the bond consultant.

    ReplyDelete
  7. build it... the high price tag is due to the incompetent staff who delay the shit out of everything.

    The hazardous conditions are just cause for more and more law suites dropping. Who's kid is going to die on that stretch of hazard this summer?
    How much will that be costing the City? $25 million?

    Let ask Roberta?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Point to the city council first. They let staff continue their incompetence no matter how many times the poor work is exposed. This amounts to taxpayer fraud, wouldn't you agree?

      Since you brought up Walker, let's ask the sheriff for the accident report, how about that?

      The high price tag is due to the incompetency of staff being revealed

      10:21

      Delete
    2. Excuse the repeated comment, but you get my drift.

      Delete
  8. 10:21 You have no idea what you're talking about. Your uninformed opinion is worthless. And it's lawsuits, not law suites.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's about the $$$, whether it's 30 or 50 million, let use TAXPAYER money on things we all agree on, not a sole project that has limited support and who's business owners profit on...

    ReplyDelete
  10. All controversial big budget items should be put to a public vote. This is major debt loading for something that is not backed by the constituencies wishes. This burden will persist long after all these council people are gone - it should NOT be left to their sole discretion. The stench of special interests' priorities being accommodated here is overwhelming.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 3:26 And those special interests are just a handful of people. The small tail is wagging the big dog.

      Delete
    2. It’s supported by all but 20 loudmouths.

      That’s why anti-Streetscape candidates all suffered crushing defeats in the last election.

      Elections have consequences.

      Moving forward.

      Delete
    3. 7:18 Counterfactual, illogical, totally wrong. The city won't put it to a public vote because they know it would be soundly defeated.

      Delete
    4. 7:18 has his figures inverted. It's the 20 loudmouth biz owners who have got the council by the nut$.

      Elections do have consequences and a Streetscape election would mean buh-bye Streetscam.

      Delete
    5. I noticed you forgot to mention that all three candidates opposed to Streetscape got crushed, including an incumbent.

      Wondering how you explain that?

      Delete
    6. Didn't refer to it because "crushed" is hardly the right term for their defeats. If you're referring mainly to JP with 16% of votes you need to retire your story. Considering who he was as a candidate, he should have gotten zero. But we've been all through this. You can take it from here.

      You're sounding a bit desperate. Is it because you fear the big bucks fading away as the streetscam bill escalates? Worried the town is waking up to this boondoggle? You should be.

      Delete
    7. The 2018 election was not a referendum on Streetscape. To say it was is a ridiculous assertion. 7:18 should be embarrassed.

      Delete
    8. Go back to bed KLCC. This day and the future hold nothing positive for you. More darkness in your sad scary world.

      The future looks bright for the rest of us. I think I will go outside and enjoy nature.

      Delete
  11. The numbskulls have yet to do anything about the moronic spending on the elementary school. And there it sits. So they go on to more silly ideas. People cannot be fixed.
    Still making payments and interest payments on that property???
    Hmmmm??

    ReplyDelete
  12. I agree. Sell PV and build the Streetscape. Fire all the incompetent staff that don't get shit done.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Kooks Love Crazy Charlie

    ReplyDelete
  14. The KLCC think Streetscape is a horrible disaster that would destroy the community and is hated by a large majority of the voters. But they also think that it wasn’t important in the 2018 election, and those majority voters didn’t care enough to vote on this existential threat to our community. This is how they explain all three anti-Streetscape candidates losing.

    Also, they say that among this supposed overwhelming majority of citizens opposing Streetscape, that the best candidate they could get to run was a psychic loon and his dog.

    Finally, they will tell you that the 15% of votes received by their mayoral candidate was a huge success, demonstrating the power of this issue to attract votes and win elections.

    The truth is, 7% of Americans are brain dead enough to believe that chocolate milk comes from brown cows (see link). This means the anti-Streetscape candidate got about equal votes from the brown cow group, and the tiny, insignificant anti-Streetscape group.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/american-chocolate-milk-brown-cows-study-us-dairy-innvoation-adults-a7793016.html%3Famp

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marvy Charles getting even more desperate.

      Delete
    2. Even when Marvy was young and part of his brain was still working, he must not have been a good lawyer because he's illogical, denies the facts and can't articulate a good argument.

      Delete
    3. I live in another part of Encinitas and can't fathom how this is a good idea for anyone except a few property owners who will cash in at the expense of others who live there or rent buildings for their businesses. This is insane!

      Delete
    4. We should all be down at city hall demanding to know what's really behind this insanity and demanding that they stop it. I'm also in another part of town and don't appreciate being handed this bill.

      Delete
    5. By “all,” you mean all 20 of you?

      Delete
    6. If you and your city cronies think there are just 20 opponents why not put the thing to a vote? Nothing to fear right.

      Delete
    7. We just had a vote.

      It was 3-0.

      Delete
  15. Blah, Blah, blah KLCC braindead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kooks Love Crazy Charlie

      Delete
    2. Charlie, Charlie, Charlie... a little obsessed aye?

      the weak minds of the Keep Leucadia Crappy Club.

      The Lword and crazy eyes are way passed brain primetime.

      Go back to bed KLCC there is nothing for you outside today or any day in your bleak short future.

      Delete
  16. I live in Olivenhain. Is the city going to spend $54 million on Rancho Santa Fe Road?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know if this will happen, but, construction on the side trail along Rancho Santa Fe Dr (south side I think) is supposed to start Aug 1st. I hope so as it is like gambling with ones life to walk next to the road. We'll see.

      Delete
    2. Drive or Road? Road runs generally north-south, so it has east and west sides. Google Maps shows no RSF Drive.

      Delete
    3. It should. I think it needs to be two lanes in each direction.

      Delete
    4. The name is Rancho Santa Fe Road, not Drive.

      Delete
    5. Yes, Rancho Santa Fe Road. Thank you for correcting me.

      Delete
  17. 5:51- that would be like the City.... jump from one project to the next and get nothing done for 10 years......

    and then build something that benefits the City Managers neighborhood first.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I was in support of the project many years ago. At 55 million I am no longer in support of moving this forward. We are about to have a pension crisis too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The pension crisis is already upon us - it is now at least the proposed cost of Streetscape or more, in underfunded liabilities. And it is ballooning - soon the Encinitas tax base will be only for pensions. Hundreds of millions for a hand full of ex-employees. Public "servants" or parasites?

      Delete
  19. This is not the end of the spending. When it doesn't work, we will have to pay to tear it out again. The few backers of this program are like Trump and want to cash out no matter what it does to others who are in the way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Developers rule the region.

      Delete
    2. Write your "representatives" to ask why they rule Encinitas.

      Delete
  20. And let's not forget: those sidewalks with the cute li'l "Leucadia" stamps are "temporary". That means they'll be torn up too. Wha' th' hell..it's ain't the council's money!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wotttt? anything to obliterate any signs of character is this council's aim. that way anything goes when the "infill" along the 101 really amps up. anyone who doesn't think that's the end game better have another think.

      endless supply of work for our contractors, too. drooling property owners need not comment, we already know your drill.

      Delete
  21. The decision to put in temp sidewalks wasn't the current council. You can thank Maggie, Teresa, Bond, Stocks, Phil Cotton and Norby for that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. NORBY is on the job, don't worry. He's on the Streetscape payroll. Write the city clerk or Brenda and ask how much he's been paid and why he's still here.

      Delete
    2. Oh I'm well aware of that. Mistah "5 Story Buildings" isn't going anywhere, not with this bunch.

      Delete
  22. Leucadia 101 will become a one-sided canyon. The ugly, imposing buildings on the corners of Avocado, Phoebe and Europa have started the trend.

    The massive monstrosity on the corner of H and 101 downtown can become the model. The planning commission with Tasha as a member approved that one — no problem, no violation of community character.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yea, that behemoth at H and 101 shows no creativity in concept or design. Tasha was in the developers' pockets from the start - still is.

      Delete
    2. H/101 was, if memory serves, designed by architect Brett Farrow. Brett is tied in to the cabal at city hall and a top-feeding acolyte of Shaffer and Blakespear. These incestuous relationships are a symptom of a corrosive environment. Politics is never pure, but Encinitas politics has never been as purely corrupt as it is now. Pats on the backs of the EU know-it-alls who knew better than the rest of us and voted these maggots into office. Now you've got a mess to clean.

      Delete
    3. I'm an EU know it all who voted for JP Elliott as did my in-the-know friends. It's those asleep citywide who see blakespear's cutesy photo ops and swallow her bs hook, line, and sinker who put her in office, as that is most of the population. Unless a whole lot of us take it upon ourselves to open eyes in a convincing way and really make a project out of it, the cabal will remain intact.

      Just don't blame me for them, thank you very much. I did my more than my part to divert votes - did you??

      Delete
  23. Streetscape is such an obvious mistake, how is it that the taxpayers are made to suck it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the council cared about what the majority of taxpaying residents want, they would either poll us or put the proposal on the ballot. The fact is the council doesn't care what the residents think or want.

      The council is in league with the few members of the Leucadia 101 who want Streetscape. Councils have been giving L101 $30K of taxpayer money for years because the association doesn't have enough members to support itself.

      City Councils and L101 have been conspiring against residents for many years.

      Delete
    2. some of you good peeps still supporting tony ought to ask him to defend this stinker. he can't. it sure seems like someone or someones have got their claw$ into him good and tight otherwise how can he defend it? ask him why he's not telling us the true cost and instead helps hide the numbers. something isn't right with streetscape or his part in it.

      Delete
    3. Nothing is right with Streetscam.

      Delete
  24. 5:00 you'll recall Peder "whoops I just violated the rules of a facilitator" Norby recommending 4-5 stories on the 101 to a roomful of eagerly nodding developers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97Qxmi3_0Ng.

    This video did him in last time. You can bet your bottom dollar he won't make that caught-on-tape mistake again.

    So which of our council decided he was worth rehiring? No doubt he talked their language and it was a unanimous vote, the Blakespear's favorite kind. And too easy to imagine Kranz front and center clamoring for his return.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And then he LIED about it.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, that was the best part. Of course this council loves him.

      Delete
    3. Norby has wised up since being caught by more than one video. Notice he's trying hard to fly under the radar and not go on record with anything.

      They used to trot him out like some prized pig at every meeting. No more...people have long memories where that dude's concerned and the council knows it.

      Delete
  25. So for all us residents with common sense, when is the streetscape construction starting?

    I'm tired of having that hazardous freeway running right down the middle of our beach-side mainstreet.

    Is the City waiting for a few more deaths or what?

    Why doesn't the City have an agenda item explaining the updated schedule for constructing the project?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Isn't the 101 a highway? I think it is.

      Delete
    2. All streets are "highways".

      Highways Law and Legal Definition. A highway is any public street, road, turnpike or canal which any member of the public has the right to use. A highway is "the entire width between boundary lines of every way or place open to use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel including the streets and alleys."

      Delete
    3. Hwy 101 became a City Road when I5 was built and the State gave the County (now City) the right of way. A City street needs to accommodate pedestrians, bikes and vehicles.

      Delete
    4. "City Road" designation? Quote the code, that sounds like something you pulled out of your, uh, armpit.

      Delete
  26. Who is Lou?

    It’s important to know the potential bias of someone framing community issues.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who cares? Judge the message and not the messenger. If you take the time to respond, you are able to frame community issues too.

      Delete
    2. I will respond here, and frame the issue. I don't like spending over $30 mil for the streetscape. Scrap the plan.

      Delete
    3. I don't understand where there's bias or framing if you're just showing the city's own numbers. If the city doesn't want them getting out then there's your bias and framing.

      Delete
    4. Where does the original post say these are the city’s own numbers?

      Where does the image of the spreadsheet say these are the city’s own numbers?

      Where are the links to the source documents so we can see for ourselves where the numbers came from, and whether they are being spun out of context?

      Does the person who created the spreadsheet have an agenda that would cause them to misrepresent information? Was it Lou? If not, did Lou validate the numbers against primary sources?

      The truth is, without knowing these answers, you should consider the distinct possibility that these numbers have been pulled out of someone’s ass for the purpose of manipulating you.

      Delete
    5. I'm not Lou but do know the primary source is the city. Copy out the spreadsheet and write the city clerk asking for validation. If she pulled the info out of her ass then the city has a bigger problem than EU.

      Delete
    6. You think, or you know?

      If you know, HOW do you know?

      Delete
    7. Anonymous at 2:52 PM and 3:46 PM is the new shill for Leucadia 101. I guess they grew frustrated with Marvy Charlie and wanted a more reasonable voice. However, all we get is the casting of doubt on the figures. The project is coming back to the council. Stay tuned for updated figures.

      Delete
    8. 5:57 provides no sources, no answers, only name calling.

      Is that you, Lou?

      Delete
    9. Anonymous at 6:09 PM -- Not Lou. Sources and answers are at the city. Go directly to city hall on Monday and report back here. Otherwise it's only insinuation.

      Delete
    10. Actually, no. It’s the job of someone making claims to provide supporting evidence.

      If you say the earth is flat, it’s not my job to prove otherwise.

      Make a claim; back it up. It’s all bullshit until you do.

      Delete
  27. I agree. Claim- N. Coast Hwy 101 is a huge known hazard costing the City tens of millions of dollars a year in injury settlements.

    Back up - 1.

    30-year-old Stephanie Berger McKenna was cycling home after dinner, headed south on North Coast Highway 101, when she was hit near Basil Street in Encinitas about 10 p.m.

    My estimate - this one will cost the City between $5 to $10 million. Cause Sharrows improperly used on fast roadway.

    Back up 2 - Roberta Walker was struck in southbound lanes of North Coast Highway 101 south of Phoebe Street at around 6 a.m. Saturday. The San Diego County Sheriff’s Department told NBC7 the driver of a Dodge RAM rear ended her while both were in the slow lane.

    My estimate - this one will cost the City between $10 to $15 million. Cause -Sharrows improperly used on fast roadway.

    Back up 3 and beyond- coming later this summer. Who's kid will be unnessarily run down?

    My estimate - this one will cost the City between $15 to $20 million. Cause -Sharrows improperly used on known fast roadway with tons of history and evidence of problem and the City's failure to act.

    City Hall is broken and its costing taxpayers big millions by the year.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 8:38 Complete nonsense. You're just pushing your stupid agenda. Sharrows all the way through downtown, where the bike/ped/car accident record is worse than Leucadia 101. Sharrows almost all the way through Solana Beach. What's the record there?

    Your two examples were riding bikes on 101 in the dark. How smart is that?

    ReplyDelete
  29. 8:38 is right and the City knows this. Check the design guidelines for the installation of Sharrows. They are not recommended for roads over 35 mph.

    That sketchy road was designed for speeds well over 50 mph. It was a highway designed in the 1920s for high speed traffic between LA and Mexico and drivers feel comfortable traveling 50 mph plus on that road.

    The bottom line is the City will be losing millions big time and quick and the bleeding is no where close to stopping. Sad but true.

    ReplyDelete
  30. 9:45 is 8:38 talking to himself. The speed limit on Leucadia 101 was 35, now it's 30. Vulcan is 35.

    101 is a road, a major arterial, which is defined as four lanes. It's not a park. It's not a promenade. It's the route for thousands of people to get to work, school, business and recreation everyday.

    The city is wrong to plug it up, thinking that will benefit a few merchants and property owners. The city's intent is to kill the traffic. That will kill the businesses.

    ReplyDelete
  31. 11:04,

    You sound like a totally uneducated person on the subject. The plan helps with the efficiency and safety for all the vehicles, bikes and pedestrians. The thing plugged up is your ability to understand good road design.

    The improvements will help all residents and businesses along that corridor. The few that hate the plan, hate every thing and will be gone soon anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Bullshit, 2:58. You are as ignorant as the day is long. You're posting your stupid, blind, illogical, irrational bias.

    The city is corrupt. L101 is corrupt. Baker International and Peltz are corrupt. If you're with them, you're either corrupt or mind-bogglingly stupid. Maybe both.

    ReplyDelete
  33. 3:27,

    Stupid and angry.... not my favorite type of person. Sigh.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 7:19 You are an ignoramus spreading bullshit.

      Go to the EIRs to see what the traffic volume is now and what it's projected to be if Streetscam is implemented. The whole object is to severely reduce the traffic volume and make Leucadia 101 a "linear park." That would kill the roadside businesses. It's a no-brainer that you either don't recognize or don't want to admit.

      Delete
    2. There is money to be made off streetscape at the taxpayer's expense. Look at the list of vendors and look at who owns the properties that line the 101. No mystery there. It's not about safety, it's about development money.

      Delete
  34. there is safety, traffic efficiency, and quality of life improvements to be made by completing the streetscape. Looks at the majority of the residence who have come out time and time again to support this project. Its about making a street much safer and efficient and addressing a known deadly hazard.

    Who's kid will die this year on the hazardous road and when will the City begin construction on this long awaited project?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whose kid has died? Again, stop with the histrionics.

      The road may need some smart, minimal updating to make it safer but $54M and climbing is way overkill.

      The notion that a majority of residents support it is laughable. Either trim it way back and build it or put it to a vote. As with most things in Encinitas this is money-driven insider politics and nothing to do with the rest of us except when it comes time to hand us the bill.

      Delete
    2. 6:17 Transparent, laughable and semi-literate.

      Delete
  35. 9:45am you got that right about charley boy/man child endlessly posting on whose kid is gonna get run over next.

    As one of the very few who stands to profit if this disaster in the making dumb as a rock plan is allowed to come to fruition, he cannot see past his profit motive.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Umm 9:45 is the marvy person talking with himself at 8:38.

    And the sharrows? the spandex crowd begged for them. they're the experts in what works best, right? wonder what went wrong?? I say live with 'em. we've spent enough time and money already repainting this town for out of town recreational cyclists. and despite blakespear's heavy-handed moves meant to miraculously change our transportation "mode" out of our cars, that's all it'll ever be on our roads: a bunch of out of town, recreational cyclists.

    ReplyDelete
  37. 6:57- is old hag whose home always looks like shit and the City should have kept the lean on your title. Why do all the KLCC look like half dead zombies?

    I know, their brains and bodies are half dead.

    You can say all you want old hag. But the courts will say different and us taxpayers will be spending millions on the past incidents and now future accidents when the next victim gets mowed down.

    What does the City do? Nothing as usual and then they will end up paying unnecessary millions of our money. Shame on all the City Council who don't demand accountability.

    ReplyDelete
  38. 8:35 Kooks Love Crazy Charlie

    1. You have to be reckless to ride a bike on a highway with cars.

    2. To do that in the dark, you have to be reckless and nuts.

    3. The city hasn't and very likely won't pay out millions because the city isn't at fault.

    ReplyDelete
  39. 8:56- Stupid and wrong as always. Expect nothing less from the Lword.

    ReplyDelete
  40. 9:05 You have no defense. You're embarrassing yourself with your lunatic ravings.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Right. Stupid and wrong as always old hag. Soon we will not see your useless ramblings. Peace.

    ReplyDelete
  42. 9:39 You're so oblivious you don't even know where you're directing your hatred.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Right. Stupid and wrong as always old hag.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Hey, cretin at 7:43: Your first word is correct with no sarcasm. Everything else you've posted thinking you're wasting somebody whose name starts with an L is wrong. Crawl back in your hole and STFU.

    ReplyDelete
  45. The boy/man child continues his fall into irrelevance and getting meaner by the day.

    HIs blaming someone who does not respond to his ravings against her must be frustrating.

    His infantile ramblings indicate he should seek professional help.

    Always picking on women who refuse to engage him drives what is left of his faculties. Not a pretty way to go out on Charley. Your reputation could use a little help. It would so easy, if it was in your nature. At this point, you are a hopeless mean old man who picks on women that have long ago refused to respond to your attacks on them. Have you learned nothing in your life?

    ReplyDelete
  46. It seems that we have a single, not so stable man, who is lashing out at imagined enemies who simply ask the question of why Encinitas taxpayers should be on the hook for 54 million dollars.

    This project specifically benefits this single person potentially millions of dollars, but what's in it for the rest of us??

    ReplyDelete
  47. 7:34pm. You got that right.

    What's in it for the rest of us who are not seeking to profit?

    If there ever was a vote taken, which there will not be, this disaster in the making would have been relegated to where the sun does not shine.

    Democracy and the rule of the majority here in our little town is nonexistent.

    We need a new majority on the council next year or nothing will change.

    A month ago when the cost had been 20 mill and increased to 36, I stated jsut wait, it will be 50 before much longer.

    Lo and behold, in a shorter time span than I could have imagined, the cost is what it is now.

    All because of a few profiteers incestuous relationship with the Planning Dept, and a spineless council who, rather than standing up for our community, accepts everything the Planning dept. approves of, and they approve every project that comes before them.

    What good is a council who so easily is ruled by their Planning dept. If we could vote out the Planning dept. most would be sent packing. Our only choice is to vote out the council majority.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I really don't understand why we can't pause, now, give the "speed cushions," and the again lowered speed limit an opportunity to work. We don't need more traffic obstructions, four narrow three sided intersection roundabouts through which all bicycle traffic will also have to funnel, with ALL traffic reduced to a single lane through the one lane roundabouts, and all motor vehicle traffic reduced to one lane in each direction. Peak holiday periods were not adequately considered.

    This project is not based on facts or public desire, but on cartoon drawings, marketing spin and artist's renderings, wishful thinking, theories about "moving the narrative on mobility," wishful thinking, special interests and profit motives.

    ReplyDelete