Santa Monica Lookout:
Santa Monica is in the midst of creating a new Downtown Specific Plan and three pending hotel projects, all taller than any building constructed in Santa Monica in three decades, has bitterly divided the community over the future of development in the city.The people behind Encinitas' Proposition A have much to be proud of. This rag-tag band of rebels defeated both the entrenched powers of City Hall and the deep pockets of development interests. And residents of other cities all over Southern California and beyond are poised to benefit from our neighbors' leadership.
Developers have proposed those projects on three of eight special “opportunity” sites, each identified in the pending Downtown Specific Plan as places where there could be increased height and density limits to encourage more intense development in exchange for more community benefits.
Those sites, however, have become flashpoints for controversy with some members of the community characterizing the sites as give-aways to developers looking to cash in on Santa Monica's choice real estate.
“If they approve the Downtown Santa Monica Specific Plan with those heights in the plan, not as a separate text amendment, collecting signatures (for a ballot initiative) begins the next day,” Feinstein said.
Placing an initiative like Encinitas' Prop A on the ballot would only take about 8,000 signatures, or roughly 15 percent of Santa Monica's registered voters, he said.
So why does the City want to turn us into Pacific Beach or Tijuana? We want to stay a quality community--not party central. There are about 60,000 residents and 250 Encinitas city staff.
ReplyDeleteThey need to find some other city to ruin!
A vibrant downtown brings people together, gives us something fun to do, and entices 20 somethings and seniors to purchase mixed use residential units. We do need more parking to accommodate all of the new automobile trips originating from far away.
Delete
DeleteI am so happy that I don't live downtown.
Downtown residents have been given 'fun things to do' like cleaning up vomit and feces from their yards, or having their houses broken into, or having inebriated strangers fornicating in public in their neighborhoods.
I can do without this type of ‘fun’ and this definition of ‘sustainability.’
So true.
ReplyDeleteFeels good that citizens in other so cal cities are envying our right to vote on major projects here in Encinitas. Looks like it takes 50 years or more (and thousands of bad examples) for a modern city to evolve to realize exactly what it is that increases problems and destroys a community's safety and character. Likewise, Solana Beach will envy our roundabouts when it takes vehicles longer to get through 2 miles of their stretch of 101 Streetscape (due to all the lovely new stops they installed) than it will with our same length of N. 101 (with 22 stops removed and 5 roundabouts installed). Boils down to two words: good circulation.
ReplyDeleteDel Mar? They'll always enjoy stopping 10 to 50 times traveling through their beautiful downtown regardless how long it takes. They're more impressed with long stares at new cars than efficient travel. To each his own.
Fred, why do you bring this back to roundabouts? WCV, your post is excellent, thank you.
ReplyDeleteI like Solana Beach's new streetscape. How many new stops did they add? When given a chance, Del Mar citizens voted down a Specific Plan with roundabouts to replace the stop signs, there. Why wouldn't those that think people would support four one-lane roundabouts suggest that a measure to determine if they're wanted could be placed on the November 2014 ballot, by Council? This could save tons of money and years of senseless arguing by a few narrow interests that support the one-lane roundabouts.
Plus, most of the stop signs that you are talking about being removed are at the cross streets, not actually for traffic going northbound or southbound, with the exception of Marchetta, which the City has never verified, in writing, will be removed, just as the stop sign at Hygeia was not removed with the Leucadia Blvd. roundabouts.
How many times are you counting each intersections stop signs? How many INTERSECTIONS are you suggesting will have stop signs removed Fred, not how many "stop signs." For instance, how many stop signs are you counting on Marchetta?
The stop signs that you suggest will be removed on the side streets, such as at Bishop's Gate, could be removed, but during peak periods, people would still have to stop, in order to yield, to the traffic in the roundabouts. Many, many times on Leucadia Blvd., people have to come to a complete stop to go through the roundabouts, when traffic is heavy. You just have this idea in your head, a "best-case scenario" where people won't be stopping, just slowing to 15 MPH. Why can't we enforce the new lower 35 MPH speed limit?
If one lane, narrow diameter roundabouts were "efficient" between a railway corridor and beach access streets, then you would be able to point out another location in California, or any other state, that has them! When I asked for you to show me roundabouts with three way intersections, you showed photos of three main throroughfares that crossed. I don't believe you showed a main thoroughfare with a side street west of it, at a perpendicular angel, that "merged" into the highway, NOT crossing over to the other side, through the roundabout. In this way, the roundabouts proposed on 101 are far different than those on Leucadia Blvd.
Roundabouts, whether you want to think so or not, are another tool developers want to use so that the intersections won't be graded, and so that traffic impact will not have to be measured. Rather for projects planned nearby could receive negative environmental impact declarations, whether or not traffic was actually calmed. Effectively reducing North 101 to a two lane road, one lane south and one lane north, through the four one lane roundabouts would not be traffic calming.
Bla.... skip.
DeleteLynn, you ask why Fred took the conversation away to roundabouts, then continue the hijack yourself!
DeleteLocals know the ally run that sidesteps 101 traffic, fun trick while others are stuck. Lets push the 250 out, replace them with 80 productive workers with realistic pensions.
ReplyDeleteRoundabouts would remove the pressure to cause the deflection to the side streets and help the "sidestepping"
DeleteI am so grateful that Prop A passed. It passed because people WANT to have a say in upzoning or developer's being allowed to raise height limits. Prop A clarifies conflicting code about how height limits can be measured. Now it's crystal clear, and development proponents of capturing ocean views by elevating pads, and taking away the views of pre-existing neighbors, won't be able to go to Court, again, falsely claiming they need to elevate pads to accomplish sewer flow, when many, many locations without gravity feed use pumps.
ReplyDeleteI hope Santa Monica can make a similar check on over-densification happen for them, too. Most locals who supported roundabouts opposed Prop A. Fred and Rachelle Collier are two welcome exceptions, but no matter how much you push for four one-lane roundabouts, Fred, no matter how much L101MA lobbies for them, or convinces members of Leucadia Town Council who don't speak for the whole community, and who live east of the RR Corridor, with the exception of you, Fred, I feel that taxpayer, fee payer, ratepayer monies would be much better spent for a true community art center at Pacific View.
Another question, if the money for the roundabouts is to come from Transnet taxes, then what are we having to give up, more road repairs, keeping up with our deteriorating infrastructure? Will we have to agree to unrealistic and unfair population projections through SANDAG, that results in calls for higher and higher densification?
DeleteI also don't feel that part of the proceeds from the Farmer's Market at Paul Ecke Central School should continue to go to Leucadia 101 Mainstreet Association, nor money from vendors selling their wares or art at the Leucadia Artwalk. The business associations should be self-supporting through membership dues.
The 101 Business groups and the EPA have had far too much negative influence on Council, as can be seen through the deceptive mailers for the Prop A election. Money that vendors, many of them crafts people and artists trying to sell their wares, pay for their booth "rentals," should go to a foundation that would allow TAX DEDUCTIBLE contributions, toward a community art center. Setting up an arts foundation could be accomplished through LOCAL artists and art lovers, and could be subsidized by the City as Encinitas Preservation Association has been, for about $841,000.
Plus the same few people who keep saying we who love Leucadia want to "keep it crappy," (it's not crappy, now; we welcome improvement, but not at the expense of our neighborhood's charm and our quality of life) should recognize that Paul Ecke Central School is also not "technically" in Leucadia, if one uses Union St as the southernmost boundary. Although I, personally don't agree with that unofficial drawing of boundaries, but go by what my assessor's documents and property tax bill states: Leucadia.
However, according to the harcore few who insist the line must be drawn at Union, then the the Sunday Farmers Market at Paul Ecke Central isn't in Leucadia. Why should a business association in Leucaida get a portion of the proceeds, other than the fact that Peder Norby finagled and said, "Make it so?" He also loved to use L101MA's headquarters, SOUTH of El Portal on 101, and definitely NOT in Leucadia, as his office. Although it was seldom open, when we walked by, in the past; the few times it has been open, Norby has been seen sitting there, enjoying the taxpayer subsidized office as part of his personal business domain.
L101MA and EPA should be reporting ALL lobbying activities, including pushing roundabouts that the vast majority of residents adjacent to 101 don't want, and local commuters don't want. Roundabouts could be "more efficient" than more stop signs, or more traffic signals, but these are NOT the alternatives. What could be beneficial is a for one or two short stretches to have installed a longer left-hand turn or u-turn lane.
Longer left hand turn or u-turn lanes would also slow traffic down, and could help northbound vehicles to more easily access businesses on the west side of the highway. Peltz and Associates are private contractors that travel across the U.S. pushing roundabouts, and offering expensive workshops and "open houses" to accomplish that goal, also contracting to accomplish the "first stage of design," which according to City traffic engineers have actually been non-engineered "cartoon drawings,"
Plus we truly need a railtrail corridor bicycle lane, which Solana Beach, San Clemente and other cities have. No reason was ever given why Gus Vina took the Bicycle Masterplan Update approval, approved unanimously by the Planning Commission on January 17, off the Agenda, after it had been published in the Coast News, and had been scheduled to be heard at the last Council Meeting in February, on 2/27.
Bla, Bla, Bla.... skip.
DeleteSolana Beach Streetscape added two new traffic signals- Yuk.
DeleteFor the same money, they could have been efficeint and safe roundabouts with beautiful landscaping or world class art in the center.
Solana Beach chose the scope with the least permitting involved that could be constructed in the shortest time frame. Bad Call.
I like doing the right thing, not the easy thing in life. Our streetscape will blow away Solana Beache's sidewalk and traffic signal project.
Plus what is up with putting in more diagonal parking along the busiest bicycle cooridor in the nation. Another mistake. The parking should have been reverse angled parking, like solana beach has behind its CVS drug store on Hwy 101 shown here-
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Solana+Beach,+CA&hl=en&ll=32.988289,-117.272082&spn=0.000996,0.000862&sll=37.269174,-119.306607&sspn=10.869827,14.128418&oq=sol&t=h&hnear=Solana+Beach,+San+Diego,+California&z=20
another blown opportunity.
My prediction is within 10 to 15 years all the signals in Solana Beach are replaced with roundabouts just like they successfully did on Hwy101 down in birdrock.
It hard to argue with proven success, but somehow the Lword keeps beating her head against the wall...... shy.
Hopefully, City Council will quickly implement our streetscape. Our quality of life will improve for the entire City.
No where in the deed to your property does it say you have the right to a view ... Of anything. Prop A does not protect views.
Delete1 min, if it can't be said in 1 min it's not worth listening. Learn....
Norby had nothing to do with the Farmers market at PE school, again you are so WRONG as to redefine the meaning of the word. Join L101 attend the meetings, LEARN something.
DeleteRhubarb lady?
Deleteha ha ha ha Fred!!
DeletePeder Norby negotiated the contract that splits the "rent" vendors pay at Sunday Farmers' Markets at Paul Ecke Central School between the parent teachers' organization, and Leucadia 101 Mainstreet Association.
DeleteNorby has facilitated many contracts on behalf of the various 101 sponsored/sponsoring business groups/Encinitas, Inc. and various public/private organizations, you know, "public/semi-public." Although he is resigning, or has resigned from being contracted as a public/private facilitator for the City and the 101 business associations, I presume he will continue to be on the Board of the Encinitas Preservation Association, which also attempted to influence the outcome of the Prop A election.
With all due respect, thank God EPA, the 101 pro-development biz "non-profits" sponsors, subsidiaries of Big Build Encinitas, Inc, and Gus Vina's hand picked cabinet team/evaluators, along with Team Council, of our newbie city czar/manager, failed, in their campaign of disingenuousness, dissimulation, distraction, deception and deceit.
Prop A passed. The majority could see right through the wool pulled, scraped over our tearful eyes.
L-101 doesn not get 50% of the proceeds from the Farmer's Market, Lynn.
DeleteNeither does the PTA.
DeleteThe interest in roundabouts is not narrow locally, and I only bring them up because I like it when Encinitas leads the pack with good inovation - just like we did with Prop A.
ReplyDeleteSome people prefer cars stop, idle and accelerate several times within 2 miles of driving a hwy. I don't and if they THINK about it, I doubt most would prefer it either. To have to stop every time there's a stop sign or red light; or not to stop every time. That is the question. And to not have to stop saves A LOT of time, money, lives, gas and air. That's why I like Plan 4a. But research is why I'm sold on these benefits, not spin from a city, business group or carpetbagger.
I would say there are at least 3 new stop light intersections on 101 in Solana Beach, but I'll pay more attention next time I go through there. The new "improvement" to two intersections in Carlsbad is a real doozy too. Now pedestrians can cross the street diagonally. Interesting concept, and handy for pedestrian part of the time but that nearly doubles the time you have to wait for a red light to change much of the time now.
What will save the public tons of money is 9000 drivers per day not having to stop, wait and accelerate like they do now. Anything working contrary to that is wasteful on many levels.
"How many times are you counting each intersections stop signs?"
Cars all go directions. One stop sign stops cars going in up to 3 different directions. When you remove that stop sign, you likewise remove a mandatory stop for cars going in each of those directions.
For example. You're in the 101 left lane northbound and come to the stop at Marcheta St. You can either go straight, make a left, or a (very tight) U Turn. When that ONE stop sign is removed (as the city has told me is the plan) so are mandatory stops for cars needing to go in those 3 different directions.
There are 4 stop signs at Marcheta; 4 stop signs coming from the west, and 5 (intermittent) red lights at La Costa Blvd that will all be removed with Streetscape. I count that equals fully legitimate stops for traffic going 22 different directions where cars will no longer have to stop, (except of course whenever another car is to your left within the circle.)
The stops I am not counting (which are just as valid) are the many times per day cars have to repeatedly stop and go waiting for the more or less than 8 cars in front of them to get through a stop sign. "Lady of Spain" on an accordion requires less changing motion.
I never said roundabouts eliminate stopping. Of course many times you have to. But not every time as is mandatory with EVERY stop sign and EVERY red light you encounter - even when there's absolutely no cross traffic (which is not unusual).
Lynn, first you asked me to show you anywhere in the country where there's a three way roundabout next to a railroad. After I posted the link on this blog to a picture of one a few hundred miles away in AZ, you're not satisfied. Fine. Everywhere is different. As much as we are similar to Solana Beach in our one sided business district, there are many contrasts. If I found exactly what you asked for once again, I doubt it would make any difference to you and suspect you'd narrow the question further. You're mind's made up.
I get the sense you think "cartoon drawings" lack legitimacy. But which of the next 100 things you look at did not come from an illustration?
Wow... this clearly shows intelligent people like Fred get it, while those with cognitive problems are so lost.
DeleteFred- You are spot on and I love your real life stories.
Lynn is focused on making Leucadia have a blighted freeway running thru an empty mainstreet business district. I hate Lynn's vision or lack there of....
I asked how many INTERSECTIONS have stop signs that the city has verified will be removed. You claim Marchetta, over and over, with no concrete proof of that, in writing, from the City, and no answer to the fact that the stop sign(s) at Hygeia was/were never removed as promised, when the roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd were installed.
DeleteMore specifically, I am discussing stop signs relative to the four one-way roundabouts south of La Costa on 101. La Costa would be a two lane roundabout. I am not certain the signal would be removed there, either, but my objection has consistently been to the four unneeded one-lane roundabouts and lane elimination for motorists going northbound on 101, through Leucadia.
So you can take your statistics about the La Costa roundabout off the table, Fred. Although that roundabout, also, would be used by developers to obtain more negative environmental impact declarations.
OK, let's say La Costa Ave is out of the equation for a moment.
DeleteYou still want westerners to continue to stop every time they come to 101 at Bishops Gate, Grandview, Jupiter and El Portal before they can proceed. You also want those same people to fight 3 lanes 35 mph traffic instead of one lane of 15 mph traffic to be able to make a left onto 101. I don't.
Is something I said here incorrect?
I never saw railroad tracks on the photo links you shared, Fred. I didn't see that the three way intersection roundabout links you shared were directly alongside a railway corridor and that the three way intersection involved in the roundabout involved a side street, at a right angle to a highway, AND was significantly smaller, with much less traffic, and a Major Roadway, primary circulation element, whereby the side street was not CROSSING the tracks, but was merely "merging" by a right or left turn, onto the Major Roadway.
DeleteIt looked to me as though the examples you shared were involving three major roadways crossing or merging, at the roundabout, all three of which roadways are relatively EQUAL in size and traffic.
Do you know the number of motor vehicles turning left at EACH of the proposed one-lane roundabout intersections compared to the number of motorists driving north or south? Because that small fraction of people turning left AT EACH INTERSECTION PROPOSED FOR EACH ONE-LANE ROUNDABOUT, is far less than the number of north/southbound motorists that would be "hung up" at 15 MPH one lane roundabouts. Again, the traffic signal at Leucadia Blvd, which will NOT be removed, does allow a small break for people who are turning left, but reducing northbound motorist traffic to one lane has not HELPED, traffic flow.
Sharrows should have been placed on BOTH sides of the highway, southbound and northbound, and a railtrail corridor should be funded ASAP. Roundabout proponents may actually be postponing fulfillment of the Bicycle Masterplan Update, because they may be expecting that the railtrail corridor won't happen until AFTER the North 101 Streetscape? By the way, that's another misnomer, because El Portal and 101, is NOT considered North 101, correct? Doesn't North 101 begin north of Leucadia Blvd? Or does it begin at A Street? I'll admit, I don't know all the answers, so please let me know where North 101 officially begins.
Also, obviously, Arizona doesn't have a primary recreational area, the beaches, on one side of proposed one-lane roundabouts, and railroad tracks on the other side.
The U.S. Dept. of Transportation recommends against roundabouts at intersections where the CROSS STREET traffic is significantly less than that of the major thoroughfare, for a reason. In the case of your proposed four one-lane roundabouts, the side street DOES NOT CROSS the main thoroughfare.
Fred, you never address adjacent neighbors' concerns about proposed roundabouts relative to more cut through traffic (the City has verified this would happen), cut-through traffic concerns also expressed by Pam Slater-Price, in Del Mar, where roundabouts were voted down, and Encinitas/Leucadia neighbors' related concerns about slowing already sub-par emergency response times, further adversely affecting public health and safety. The neighbors we've spoken with are far more concerned about cut through traffic and slower emergency response times than they are about trying to turn left onto the highway, although as I keep repeating, lane elimination for northbound motorists, a preliminary phasing in of the N101 Streetscape, has made that situation worse, not better.
Yes, Fred, "westerners," or those motorists living west of 101, turning left onto the highway, would still, invariably, have to stop, because they would have to yield to cars already in the roundabout or entering the roundabout, which will primarily be those drivers traveling northbound or southbound on 101.
DeleteDuring heavy traffic periods, or even lighter traffic periods, when traffic is moving along at 35 MPH, motorists turning left WILL STILL HAVE TO YIELD, AND INVARIABLY, STOP, before entering those roundabouts you list.
Most of the time, they will not have to stop.
DeleteThe ragtag band of rebels that got Prop. A passed turned out to be the gang that COULD shoot straight. It's not only Santa Monica that is interested in the doing something similar, but also San Clemente and Del Mar. Ragtag rebels in the three cities have already contacted the local gang.
ReplyDeleteAnd since Fred has already hijacked the thread, I'll join the hijinks. A new bottleneck has been created at Swamis with the new rail undercrossing and stoplight The lane reduction has been pushed back to Hansen's. When busy, Highway 101 now backs up to the Lumberyard. The lane reduction was better when it was south of Swamis because no local businesses are there. Unless traffic is light, any lane reduction will back up traffic. I-5 is the classic example. Another is when road works is being done and one lane is closed.
Let's not pretend that roundabouts will solve all the problems. Do I dare use the words "unintended consequences"? It's difficult to squeeze a roundabout into an established area and not cause congestion. Check the Highway Capacity Manual. For roundabouts there is a lack of guaranteed service (unlike signals) and need for more research. Unintended consequences, indeed!
Lynn and Fred both have their individual reasons for not liking/liking roundabouts.
DeleteIn the larger context, Encinitas residents should oppose roundabouts in general since there is an INTENDED consequence and benefit to developers that is not being explained.
The reason that the Planning Department wasted so much time and money to get roundabouts in place is because putting in roundabouts takes 'traffic' off the table under CEQA law. This means that it is easier for developers to stack and pack high density units when traffic is not considered an impact.
Most of the people who praise Fred seem to be developers. Just remember roundabouts = traffic impacts ignored for developers!
I praise Fred for his clear logical understanding of roundabouts. I'm not a developer, just someone that hates sitting in my car at a red light for no reason.
DeleteRoundabouts work. KLCC does not.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete"Most of the people who praise Fred seem to be developers"
DeleteSomewhere on some blog someone typed the farthest thing from the truth. I think I just read it.
roundabouts do not take traffic off the table for development. Man you people are stupid.
DeleteIf you love the existing LOS system, you most love the way LA was developed. KLCC club needs to move to LA.
Roundabouts are the better way over time wasting traffic signals.
Hey dumbs-
DeleteThe backups at Swamis are caused by the new signal not the one lane in each direction. You don't see backups south of swamis do you? That is one lane in each direction.
Traffic Signals cause the backups, Roundabouts do not.
Capacity is controlled at the intersection not the links. Learn your subject before you spout off.
Traffic signals AND lane eliminations cause back ups. Four one-lane roundabouts in a row would effectively turn North 101 into a two lane road, not a four lane, Major Roadway, primary circulation element.
DeleteChanging Historic State Highway 101 to a two lane "destination" road, wouldn't work; doing so would create backups, bottlenecks, and gridlock worse than presently exist. Highway 101 was designed to be a major arterial, and has so served our community and Pacific Coast Highway cruisers, for generations.
Lynn, like Birdrock used to be, 101 was a raceway. The speed was 60 mph in the 60's. The days of it being the main arterial it was are gone. El Camino Real has twice as much traffic and the freeway has about 10 times as much. The changes that have happend and are coming are by far for the better of all. The one lane north portion has had the acid test. Summer. It passed. When the La Costa choke light is gone there will be even better movement of northbound cars. And like someone said earlier, its not bottlenecks that back traffic up it's having to stop.
DeleteHwy101 was designed as the Highway between LA and TJ for 70 mph design speeds.
DeleteIn the sixties, I5 was built and Hwy101 became a local road.
Its time to convert our local road to a balanced local road and not keep it auxiliary lanes for I5. The road should serve our community needs not I5 commuter needs.
Changing historic Hwy101 to serve local needs does work as seen in Bird Rock.
Congestion on roads is caused primarily at the intersections, not the road segments between. Look at Leucadia boulevard and Hwy101. No congestion along the one lane sections - only at the signalized intersections.
Most people see the value in doing so. Lword and a few other with challenges will never understand many things...... shy....
I am not an expert in roundabouts, but I like the one we have in Encinitas on Santa Fe. The traffic keeps moving, and considering it is by Scripps, which is growing, it will help even more. I have driven roundabouts in Europe and were impressed by them, after I learned to navigate them. Perhaps some peoples fear of driving roundabouts is what is getting in the way. If the City were to give a few classes in how to navigate them,would that help people who don't want them? I think the sheriff could do that if asked.
ReplyDeleteI am personally neutral about roundabouts on their own now that I have gotten used to them. However, most people who live in Encinitas are viciously protective of our community character, and are therefore opposed to anything that makes it easier for developers to bring in high-density blight to our city. Since roundabouts take traffic off the table as an impact for development, I am opposed to roundabouts for that reason alone.
DeleteOther people better educated on this topic are against traffic circles for how much they cost. I have heard estimates that they cost 1 million dollars each.
This is not really an argument about roundabouts but about a work around for how the City and developers can more readily build high density dwellings since they won’t have to consider traffic impacts. In the end, this is mainly about the money that the City wants for so-called ‘sustainability’ of pensions and staff benefits at the expense of quality of life for 60,000 Encinitas residents.
8:40,
DeleteGlad you're used to roundabouts. Usually when people drive through them the last thing on their mind is how much time they're saving by not having to stop and go behind 8 cars as they approach a stop sign. I think that's why the slide part of playground equipment is more popular with children than the flight of stairs on the other side.
The costs of roundabouts are cheaper in the long run than traffic lights.
The sliver of our 101 business district is of little consequence becoming a golden calf to city coffers. #1 It's only one side of a street that's developable. #2 It's nearly built out.
Sure, there's a few tear downs (and it's tempting to have someone make a sampler for our living room "God Bless Our Teardown"). But at least two of the "most feared" property owners named on this blog have restored and enhanced 70 year old structures they own doing beautiful work instead of stack and pack their lot. And for cryin out loud Prop A passed. BTW, I am one of many viciously protective of our community character and it doesn't look that that's going to change.
Check out this short video a traffic planner interviewing people about their opinions of the Birdrock roundabouts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQki1Aecktk
Great one Fred-
DeleteHere is one that really explains the virtues of Roundabouts over Signals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwNve97oO_8
Of Course Lword or KLCC don't like them.
KLCC love ugly poles and lights, they love to waste time and money, They love to pollute and they love less safer and more inefficient road conditions.
The biggest thing Lword could learn if she was able would be how to yield, but unfortunately, we know Lword is incapable of leaning or listening..... shy.
Don't listen to the lies of Lword and KLCC, roundabouts do not take traffic off the table for development. Any significant development needs to complete a traffic study.
DeleteRoundabouts can cost as little as $25,000 each a fraction of a signalized intersection. It all depends on the design.
Take responsibility in your life, educate yourself on matters before making decisions. What this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwNve97oO_8
How much did the roundabout on Santa Fe cost and when was it installed? How much did the two roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd., and when were they installed? I'll put in another CPRA request to find out whether it's correct that the average price spent has been over $1 Million per roundabout?
DeleteWhere is your source that roundabouts can cost as little as $25,000 at this time, with the design as drawn by Peltz and Associates? I know that over $560,000 has been spent on consultants, alone,with Peltz and Associates subcontracting out some of the work.
These numbers can be verified through t2012-06-27 City Item #03 North Coast Highway 101 Streetscape Contract Amendment: http://archive.ci.encinitas.ca.us/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=683638&dbid=0.
Also, with respect to the traffic study analyzing crash statistics at non signalized intersections from Encinitas Blvd to La Costa, on Highway 101, a THREE YEAR STUDY, not 10 year as I previously stated, shows that safety concerns do not require "traffic calming" controls. The speed limit at 35 MPH should be enforced, the "lane elimination/lane diet," needs to be reversed:
Page 15, Exhibit 9 7/18/12 Agenda Report: http://archive.ci.encinitas.ca.us/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=683926&dbid=0
If one reads through the comments from the then newly formed, through lobbying of L101MA, Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee, a committee created just prior to the Traffic Commission Meeting, In June of 2012, one can see that what came before the Traffic Commission and the Environmental Commission were SHARROWS, NOT lane elimination. "Lane Diet" was later "stuck on," to the Agenda by Encinitas staff.
"the "lane elimination/lane diet," needs to be reversed"
DeleteYou prefer the north bike lane the way it was? About 1' wide in places? OK fine.
No, Fred, I prefer that the bike lane be installed in the railtrail corridor, as has been on the books for so many years, and is confirmed by the bicycle masterplan update, unanimously approved by the Planning Commission on January 17. The Goathead Thorns need to be removed, and the plants that bear them. The railtrail corridor is on the books, and exists, intermittently, from Chesterfiled, north to La Costa.
DeleteHoly cow, we agree on something. But my understanding that what the Planning Commission approved for the bike masterplan unfortunately does not go next to the train tracks.
DeleteThe BMP was online, Fred. Your understanding is incorrect.
DeleteExcerpts from Bike Masterplan Update:
Delete[T]he planned Coastal Rail Trail is considered the primary priority of this bikeway master plan . . .
Like most cities, there are gaps in the bikeway system. Potentially important ones
include . . . Coast Highway 101 along its entire length and Leucadia Boulevard between Interstate 6 and Coast Highway 101. . .
Completion of the Class 1 portions of the Coastal Rail Trail along the entire length of the City of Encinitas between the Cities of Carlsbad and Solana Beach would be a boon to local and regional cyclists. The facility will be a paved, multi -use, regional route connecting the coastal cities of San Diego County within the rights -of -way of the existing rail line and within roadways where the rail line access does not exist, such as over lagoons. . ."
The Bicycle Master Plan (BMP) Update,which was approved by the Planning Commission on 1/17/13, was to go before Council for a resolution of approval, in order for the City to apply for grant funding, on February 27, as Agenda Item #4, already published in the Coast News, but was "removed from the agenda" (crossed out) without explanation, except that the item would be "rescheduled at a later date.
DeleteAnother individual and I had planned to address the BMP as public speakers on 2/27. We were only allowed to do so during oral communications. According to parliamentary procedure, Robert's Rules of Order and the Brown Act, once an Agenda Item is published and listed on the agenda, then public speakers should be allowed to address it, even if the City Manager decides, again, without explanation," to cancel or continue it (without asking for Council Consensus) to a later date. That date still has not come. So it's been nearly six months since Council's hearing of the BMP Update, approved by the Planning Commission on 1/17, was continued.
http://archive.ci.encinitas.ca.us/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=696109&dbid=0
Here's another excerpt from what was before approved by the Planning Commission on January 17:
"6.1.2 Coastal Rail Trail, Page 6 -2
As the sole Class 1 facility proposed within Encinitas, the planned Coastal Rail Trail should provide an attractive alternative to the adjacent roadways for many recreational cyclists. It is anticipated that this will be a highly desirable recreational route because it capitalizes on the flat terrain and scenic character of the coastal zone, as well as much of its route being free of motor vehicle traffic. Since it is a portion of a long- range, truly regional bikeway route connecting all the coastal cities of Sari Diego County from Oceanside to San Diego, it should be attractive to many- commuting cyclists as well . . .
The City started design for the Coastal Rail Trail back in 2005 The City has spent $450,000 to date in designing a Class I bike /pedestrian trail on the east side of the railroad tracks from E Street to, Chesterfield Dr. and then a Class II bike lane on the east side of Highway 101 from Chesterfield Dr to the south City limits Currently SANDAL has taken over the protect and the City is working closely with SANDAL to complete the design of this Class I Bike/Pedestrian Facility within the NCTD rail corridor . . ."
finally..... Lword writes something worthy.
DeleteGoing back to the original thread, Santa Monica also has rent control. Do we have that here? I don't think we do. It might be nice to see some way that land owners who are renting, could only be able to raise their rent a certain percentage each year. We have a property we rent in Pacific Beach and we never raise the rent on tenants. When they move out, we raise it a bit to cover the costs of repairs needed to rent again. I don't want to "screw" people, and our tenants have always been responsible and appreciative of the fact. We tell them that there will not be a rent increase as long as they live there, unless they add a bunch of people to the place, or if they truly trash the place when living there. We allow cats and small dogs, as it only has a tiny patio and personally I don't think that is fair for a dog. Because we we this, we get good people and they get a decent rent and don't have to worry about it changing every year. Across the street from us in Cardiff, there is a house for rent for $4000.00 per month. It doesn't have a view, and is decent but not a McMansion. Perhaps if we had rent control, we could meet the State's expectations and still keep out community character.
ReplyDeleteHow about turning your pacific beach rental into a rent control unit? You offer no rent inflation in exchange for good renter behavior already. What happens when your renters know they don't need to have good behavior to keep inflation away?
Deleteapples and oranges
No rent control ever!! Go to a communist country like Cuba and see what rent control has done for the country. Rent control is favored by lazy assholes!!
DeleteHaha! So much romanticism in this post, W.C. I think it's worth noting that Santa Monica is arguing about the difference between buildings 84 feet tall and 135 feet. Our debate over 22 feet vs. 33 feet seems pretty quaint.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.smmirror.com/articles/News/Santa-Monicas-Downtown-Specific-Plan-Detours-Through-Planning-Commission/38062
Ha ha...
DeleteProp A was about 10 story buildings too. Proposals for those will now have to go to a vote of the people because of a bunch of gnats that never do anything. Your comment is very short-sighted.
My comment was totally devoid of vision. It was a simple observation. Don't take yourself too seriously.
DeleteAnon 9:16, whether SM is arguing 84' vs. 135 ' is not the issue. Encinitas became a city so that it could determine its own future. It is bogus to compare us with other cities and to point out places that are already worse.
DeleteThe comparision is Encinitas with its own General Plan and the vision of its founders and its current residents. Encinitas has a LONG history of wanting to preserve its charm, and a LONG history of developers and the City wanting to degrade it for cash. You sound like a developer who will continue to try to degrade our city for profit.
Sorry, but in my humble opinion, the relative heights are an issue. It gives some perspective. I like that we have the right to vote on upzoning.
ReplyDeleteYou need to tune up your Developer Detector though.
Sorry, I clicked the wrong reply button.
DeleteIf not a developer or a COE employee, Anon 11:16 sounds like Marco Gonzalez. He is now representing developers and argues that we need to look at a regional plan that would make Encinitas as high density like Carlsbad. He even claimed that doing so would protect Cleveland National Forest. Huh?
DeleteWhy should we compromise Encinitas just to make his clients rich? The green that he represents is the green of money--not the environment.
Why not keep Encinitas a great place for the people who already live here?
Sure. Another of your Boogiemen. Not Marco though. What's in the next drawer? Lock the gates. No more interlopers in your paradise. How long does someone have to have been here before they're welcome to stay?
DeleteNobody's suggesting, least of all me, that anyone should "compromise" Encinitas. But there are things that can be done to make our city better. Alas, therein lies the rub: it appears we might disagree on what might make things better.
Imagine that, not everyone agrees with you. What a concept.
Better for whom? A lot of the development community talks about progress and making things better. They get to make projects pencil out for themselves and speak of public benefits when they personally benfit at the public's expense.
DeleteIn fact, the only thing that they care about is how much money they can make.
Nobody is trying to stop development--only to develop within the scope of General Plan. How is it wrong for the majority of Encinitas residents to have projects that are higher quality and have appropriate heights, density and enough parking? What is so wrong with keeping with the rules that we have in place?
That does not stop development--it only keeps a standard that is agreeable to everyone but the ones who want to make the most money short term.
Lynn- do Leucadia a favor , cut down all the dead oleander bushes. Contribute to Leucadia. Make it a nicer place. Dead trees and bushes are not allowed in Del Mar, SB, LaJolla, Carlsbad nor Santa Monica. Why must Leucadia have to tolerate these eyesores ???
ReplyDeleteThe City's contracted "arborist" should remove the dead oleanders alongside the railroad tracks. As the Coast News article states, an insect, the Sharpshooter, is spreading a bacteria that is causing Oleanders to die all over our area. But I feel the dead and dying plants alongside the RR are making matters worse for those plants on residential properties, which were planted as they are good privacy screens, and they are drought tolerant.
DeleteI did some additional research on this; the bacterium becomes systemic, spreading throughout the plants system, including the roots. There is no cure, as with other plant diseases. It can take up for five years for an infected plant to die, though. We've had to remove two old growth oleander bushes from our property, not without a lot of work, as the root balls are large. Older plants are like small trees, but with an extensive root system.
I appreciate oleanders, although I do realize they are poisonous. But they provide good sound and visual screens, lovely flowers during part of the year, and as I said, they're drought resistant. I'm sorry this disease is affecting so many plantings throughout our State and this community.
Too bad they can't make the Sharpshooter think goathead thorns are oleanders.
DeleteHow can staff be so incompetent... so many plants die from no water.
DeleteWho is in charge of Parks and Recreation? Aren't they responsible for maintaining the City's landscaping in parks and roadways?
Some folks need to be fired.
Your constant harping on one person only proves that person's effectiveness in calling attention to serious problems in the city. Otherwise you would not even mention the name. Get real.
DeleteAnon 6:58 idiots need to be called out for their stupidity. And will be, no more Mr.Nice Guy.
DeleteAnon 9:03, you seem to be saying that other posters are stupid and claime that there are idiots on this blog while saying that you are or have been Mr. Nice Guy.
DeleteYou sort of scare me!
Desert rose even if legal was made a flash point by Barth praising it, just salt in the wound for a dismal project. Prop A was wanted by the majority and money wasted on election there. Gus just buying time to retirement extortion, city legal help beyond bad, start with road report and work back 14 years for history there. Ad bar scene that is pathetic and you have a roadmap to upset citizens.
ReplyDeleteso True, so true.....
ReplyDeleteHow can City Council be so blind.
The 101 improvements at K street start on Monday. More landscaping for the Vina's cabinet to kill.
ReplyDeleteMore improvements for downtown Encinitas as Leucadia rots to the ground.
ReplyDeleteI think the biggest problem I have is I pay huge taxes and all the improvement money goes towards downtown Encinitas. WTH?
No wonder Leucadians have a huge distrust/dislike for City Council and staff. We've been shit on for years. We would like landscaping improvements like you've done in other parts of the City.
Besides Lword and about 4 others, most Leucadians like plants other than dead weeds.
I know- Sad Sac has a strategic planning program going on and after two years we will have a plan, after another 2 years we will than be told we don't have any money for improvement projects because all the money is going towards staff pensions and the Regional Sports Park. Sad Sac don't care, he will be long gone with his $220,000 per year all from tax payers. Just think, 5 years of retirement- Sad Sac will make $1,000,000 dollars. How many of you have $1,000,000 saved in the bank for retirement?
$1,000,0000 dollars would fund a nice project every five years.
What do we get? - Thats right more "planning" and community communications until Sad Sac retires. Well played Sad Sac. WAKE UP CITY COUNCIL!
Lynn is not effective ,she is ignored and wastes huge amounts of staff time.
ReplyDeleteThat equals money
Lword Is bad for Encinitas!
ReplyDeleteLynn- the city is spending $250,000 for the pocket park at SRF. Wouldn't you rather see this money go to Leucadia??
ReplyDelete...meanwhile, no bench or water fountain at Leucadia Roadside Park. Maybe if we form a non profit "religion" nearby, it'll get the city's attention?
ReplyDeleteNext topic please. How about one on Glen Sabine.
ReplyDeleteLeucadia Main Street association seeking volunteers to help with the Artwalk for Sunday the 25 of August. Ask for Debbie if you desire to help
ReplyDeleteWhat secret conversations were taking place this pm at cafe ipy by known local activists??
ReplyDeleteAre you worried, Gus?
DeleteWe're all 28 there, or just a "behind closed doors" inner circle subset?
DeleteHow did 28 activists who are part-time, unpaid volunteers manage to raise 6,675 yes votes on Prop A, when the city has hundreds of paid, full-time staff, paid consultants, and big moneyed donors, the support of council, and superior press coverage for the No campaign, which lost?
DeleteMaybe the 28 activists could run the city better. Or, maybe the 28 activists simply represent the actual majority views in this city, and Gus and the council need to start paying attention. Maybe there are many more than 28 people who care and who are watching what is happening at City Hall.
Maybe it is time for a recall!
DeleteWithout question any of these activists could run city hall better! Where is city hall being run now but into the ground. The answer is simple, cut staff and make those remaining work harder. This is what has happened in the private sector since 2008 so let's get with the present and quit living in this past mindset.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletedude- do the math, 22-33 is a nearly a 50% increase, 84-135 slightly more than 50%, both are about the same. Want to try again?
ReplyDeleteI like LeucadiArt.
ReplyDeleteDog Days in Cardiff tomorrow.
That is also a fun time. There are going to be a million dogs there.
What about goats and pigs?
ReplyDeleteand I didn't mean Sad Sac.
Hey.... You know who you are,
ReplyDeleteThe new Leucadia Artwalk poster is out. Why don't I see your name as a sponsor of this wonderful event?? You claim to love Leucadia but you're no where to be found when push comes to shove. Tanks fer nuffin
Pack ur bags. We're goin' on a guilt trip.
ReplyDeleteHey Jackass-
ReplyDeleteMy company is on the poster. Watch your tongue. That kind of tactic is for west virginia not SoCa.