That's not good enough for city planners.
From the Inbox:
I am concerned that a policy that could allow the Engineering Department to standardize roads isIf they don't decide to impose character-destroying conformity on our neighborhoods, they may as a consolation prize demand "in-lieu" fees for permits. It's not clear whether these fees would apply only to new construction or also to home remodels.on the consent calendar. At the very least, this should be discussed as a stand alone agenda item[ed.: OK, so it's not on the consent calendar; it's on the regular agenda].
In my opinion, part of the community character of specific communities and neighborhoods are the types of streets that we have. In Leucadia and Olivenhain, some people actually like having dirt roads and no sidewalks.
The hearing about Crest Street 2 years ago was eye opening since engineers wanted to cut down many old trees and replace them with parking spaces. They tried to force some residents to have pieces of sidewalk in front of 1 house that would break off the next house over, so they were proposing a patchwork of approaches on the same street.
This item seems to be directed by Masih Maher, so that raises a red flag for me after seeing what was proposed on Crest.
For those who want to protect their neighborhoods and community character I hope that you will speak to this item on Wednesday.
http://encinitas.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=7&event_id=281&meta_id=38199
Masih Maher has initiated this item. As anyone who has dealt with this City employee what to expect.
ReplyDeleteBeware!
That he initiated tells the whole story.
DeleteMasih's mantra is that city streets must be brought up to city standards of 60-ft right-of-ways with curbs and sidewalks. He never wavers, unless ordered. Take a look at the standards of the new entrance into the Hall property park along the west side of the Vons center across the street from Scripps Hospital. Suddenly the standards don't apply.
DeleteOn Monday there was a big backup of traffic at the Santa Fe roundabout when a 50-ft flat bed truck coming from Scripps tried to negotiate the roundabout. It finally made it through. You can see the tire tracks and how the rig almost scraped the center raised planter.
That Santa Fe round-about is a disaster - people jam on their brakes, right-of-way is misunderstood, and it creates a general slow down. Look at the blackened curbs to see how smoothly it operates.
DeleteI go through the roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd all the time and have yet to see a car rub the curb. My guess, as I've seen this happen on Leucadia, is large trucks are rubbing the curb. Also, I always use my turn-signal when I'm in the circle and crossing against oncoming traffic.
DeleteI've seen cars rub the curbs in the Leucadia Blvd. roundabouts plenty of times. I've seen car treads across the top of the inner circle at Hymettus. I've seen signage and plants taken out by cars mounting the inner circles at Hermes and Hymettus.
DeleteI've seen an 18-wheeler moving van stop at the east side of the Hymettus roundabout then back up the hill and do a K-turn to turn around at Eolus.
I've been close to T-boned twice going west at Hermes because when vehicles enter from opposite directions, it's impossible to know which way the other guy is going. To be safe, you have to stop and wait.
I've seen drivers come from north or south at the Leucadia Blvd. roundabouts and enter the circle with absolutely no regard for vehicles already in or approaching the circle from other directions.
I've seen drivers come from north or south at those roundabouts, stop, then blow their horns and/or shake their fists at east-west drivers because the latter, who were at or in the circle, didn't yield to those entering from north or south.
The facts are that the puny roundabouts on Santa Fe and Leucadia Blvd. serve no purpose. They're unnecessary solutions to problems that never existed. They are blockades in the roadway. Stop signs on the north-south cross streets and crosswalks in all directions are all that's needed. There's not enough and not consistent enough traffic on the north-south streets to justify any other traffic controls.
The fundamental problem with those roundabouts is they're too small. Roundabouts that work are big and multi-laned.
Puny roundabouts are trendy non-solutions. They come from the same narrow minds that want to standardize all our streets with curbs, gutters, sidewalks and streetlights.
Yes, in certain circumstances, roundabouts work. But we don't have those circumstances on Santa Fe, Leucadia Blvd. or what's proposed for 101. One-lane roundabouts in a four-lane highway don't work. That proposal is so dumb it's mind-boggling.
I agree. Neighborhoods that want to remain rural with dark skies a night and no sidewalks and plenty of trees should remain so without having to worry about 60 st wide streets made mandatory throughout the city. Its probably another stream of revenue untapped.
DeleteI just heard from a cardiff woman who called me specifically to tell me she and her husband love the Santa Fe roundabout and live near it. Not long ago I was behind the tandem fire truck going through both roundabouts on Leucadia Blvd. I thought - this oughta be good! It was no problem at all for the drivers at 15 mph. But there will always be amature truck drivers every blue moon, no matter where you go. If I were to complain about back ups that take a long time, try 5, El Camino Real, Leucadia Blvd and Encinitas Blvd during busy hours. 101 still gets crowded for a few blocks southbound in the mornings from the stop light at Leucadia Blvd. But once the light changes just about everyone in the back of the crowd makes it through.
I drive Leucadia blvd roundabouts every day. They work great. The only time they don't work is when some idiot Prius I'm gonna save the world driver comes to a stop and watches all the other cars instead of entering with the flow of traffic.
Delete12:11 that's very selective observation. They don't work great because they're way too small. Their tiny size defeats the design purpose of roundabouts. Those that work are big. For the design concept to work, they have to be big.
Deleteto 11:54 - "east-west drivers because the latter, who were at or in the circle, didn't yield to those entering from north or south." - There's the rub - you don't yield once you're in the circle! In the circle always has priority over out of the circle.
DeleteThe key is to yield to those already in the circle. If I am doing the Leucadia East to Hermes North move, I use a signal and always wait until I see slowing or eye recognition from the Westbound Leucadia drivers. It's common sense.
DeleteSure beats the old days when the traffic built up from the RR Crossing and you couldn't turn left.
-Mr. Green Turn.
12:48, you missed "at" in 11:54's "at or in the circle." When a driver coming from, say, north, and a driver coming from, say, east and heading west get to the circle at the same time, one has to stop and let the other go first. Since east-west are the overwhelmingly dominant directions, those drivers figure they have the right of way. They expect east-west entrants to yield, which they don't always do.
DeleteBut this ignores the fundamental flaw: The roundabouts are far too small. The entry points are too close together. Roundabouts that work are big. The entry points are far apart, so the who's gonna yield problems don't occur.
Increasing the size of something is rarely the optimal solution........
Delete- The Sculpin
1:31 - if an east/west driver enters the circle at exactly the same time as a north/south driver, then they are 90 degrees apart and need not yield to each other.
Delete- The Sculpin
When I saw the first video of 2 fire trucks crashing at an intersection, I thought wow, THAT's gotta be a first. Then I saw the second one below.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3uoVOOlT2s
Then last week 2 more fire trucks collided in LA injuring 16 people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlrYDeT0AdQ
The truth is, traditional intesections are not safe and where most deaths occur from T-bone accidents. I was T-boned at El Portal St by someone running a stop sign. It totaled both of our cars. It wouldn't have happened if the roundabout were in place. It may not have happened either if El Portal wasn't as wide as it is, because a van obscured the vision of the man running the stop sign. (Its basically two lanes there now exiting onto 101).
You claim our current roundabouts are useless.But just for the sake of saving people time and gas from not having to stop and accelerate for several years, they have collectively saved immesurable amounts of time, money while improving air quality. We'll never know if or how many lives they've save. But seeing that we knnow last year no pedestrian died in a U.S. roundabout, that's encouraging. One was hit but released from a hospital the same day. That impresses me. But I think safer infrastructure beats being a statistic anyday.
2:01, correct, and you forgot to add that in a tiny roundabout they will collide because the entry points are too close together.
Delete2:20, as usual you cherry-pick to support your illogical point of view, and you ignore the facts on the ground.
DeletePrior to the tiny roundabouts at Hymettus, Hermes and Ruberstein/Devonshire at Santa Fe, there were no stop signs in the east-west direction. The only drivers who had to stop were north-south. If they had to wait to cross or turn, it was for a short time. So your "immeasurable" savings are actually insignificant, especially since the north-south and turning traffic from those directions is very light.
The much heavier traffic = the east-west traffic, and it didn't have to stop.
The pertinent point in your T-boning is "running a stop sign." Place the blame where it belongs.
Our current roundabouts are pointless, expensive obstructions in the roadways. Big roundabouts that have far-apart entry points work. The dinky, tinkertoy roundabouts we have in Encinitas don't work. They are absurd and embarrassing. Many out-of-town visitors to me: "What the hell are these things?" They didn't ask that in a complimentary way.
3:45 - physically impossible. Those roundabouts have enough room for 2 cars to enter at the same time. I do it often. Let's not mince words - what you are describing is unsafe driving. It doesn't matter how big the roundabout is, the unsafe speed just increases. And the roundabout does not create the unsafe driving - the driver does because they are not exercising proper care. Regardless, I would much rather deal with a banshee out of hell in a roundabout than in a four way intersection. Inertia always wins!!
Delete- The Sculpin
There was an issue on Santa Fe that the roundabout solved, mainly speed. By the time drivers came through the light at Vons and hit Rubinstein, you had speeds on average (through my observance) of 40-50mph, easy.
DeleteNow you have to slow down to get through, which is one of the reasons to put them in, to control speeds in neighborhoods that are like freeways. I, like the Sculpin, have seen two cars enter plenty of times, and have done it myself. But, you have to slow down, to speeds 25mph or under to navigate.
So sorry, no more hammering it all the way down to the stop at Hygeia at 50mph...
-Mr Green Round
4:04
Delete"The pertinent point in your T-boning is "running a stop sign." Place the blame where it belongs."
I just did. The culprit for the most possible damage while driving belongs to traditional intersections with stop signs/signals. Sometimes signaled/ stop signed intersections are needed, but historically they are deadly and soaked in blood. Real blood, "accidentally" poured out. So called "Stops" do diminish the general population in the US by thousands per year and I hope that's no one's macabre motivation for promoting them.
"The only drivers who had to stop were north-south (at Leucadia Blvd & Santa Fe roundabouts)."
Did I say east/west stops were removed anywhere? No. The equation is valid. No matter how you try to discount it, 6 stop signs, times thousands of cars stopping per day, times many years equals a very long time of collective stopping and waiting that has been removed with three amazingly simple infrastructural improvements.
The bigger the roundabout is, does not determine how much better it works. In fact the larger ones are more dangerous and more likely to require stop lights according to the USDOT- just like the grande multi-lane ones, 40 miles or so south.
You refuse to acknowledge the physics of how erasing 9000 minutes of cars stopping each day on N-101 & side streets could possibly make travel more efficient. Maybe your heart's not in it. If you have a gas station or brake repair business I understand. You also don't answer my left turn question.
I doubt roundabouts ruin your guests visits to Leucadia. But the next time they leave embarrassing skid marks on our roundabout curbs, you might give them two simple tips on how to safely navigate them. 1: All you have to do is slow down to 15 mph and yield to traffic in the circle if there is any. And 2: Swing your turn wide when you bring your 50 ft flatbed or 18 wheeler.
Y'all drive safer, live longer and happy motoring!
Change is good.
ReplyDeleteRoundabouts work.
Not always.
DeleteGod damn it! Irregardless of the content, this item, 10D, is not on consent and this blog should have verified that statement before posting.
ReplyDeleteYou may now resume your conspiracy discussion.
Thank you for pointing that out.
DeleteGod bless you.
9:59 AM
DeleteTut, tut. How many other important items have been put on the consent calendar.
You didn't point out that codifying the street standards into one size fits all is ACTUALLY THE LAST ITEM ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA!
You may now resume your conspiracy.
Oh and don't we all know what being on consent implies. I'm not sure whether you were just sloppy or hoping to fan the flames.
Delete10:20 AM. I guess you can't read. My point was not to address anything in the report, hence saying irregardless. My only point was that it was a public hearing even though any consent item can be removed by the public just by asking.
I didn't know that being the last of four items that look like they would all enjoy public interest was a conspiracy. Those evil bastards!
Funny you should use the word, "conspiracy."
DeleteTwo council members recently used the word "conspiracy," without any substantiation, to attempt to discredit their critics.
9:59 & 10:33 Funny you should use the word "irregardless." There is no such word. You mean "regardless."
Deleteregardless, or irrespective. That word "irregardless" is so often misused, it has become a second choice in many dictionaries.
DeleteName the dictionaries that give "irregardless" as a legitimate word. I'll be sure to avoid them.
DeleteThere is.
Deletehttp://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irregardless?s=t
"Usage note:
DeleteIrregardless is considered nonstandard because of the two negative elements ir- and -less. It was probably formed on the analogy of such words as irrespective, irrelevant, and irreparable. Those who use it, including on occasion educated speakers, may do so from a desire to add emphasis."
Or out of inattentiveness.
I had seen "irregardless" listed in Webster's Dictionary. It is definitely considered to be a non-standard, dialectal usage. In other words, if people say something incorrectly long enough, it becomes part of the dialect. But irregardless is underlined in red, through spell-check, which also doesn't recognize it. No argument, here. I don't use it, myself. When I taught Business English, for awhile, through IDET Corp., I used irregardless and orientated as words that are used incorrectly. It should be regardless and oriented, but I'm not getting a correction, in red, for orientated? Hmmmm?
DeleteOrientated versus oriented
"Q From David Holland: I am uneasy about the word orientated as in business-orientated. I feel the word should be oriented. Am I right, wrong, pedantic, or what?
A We have a minor oddity here, in that both orient and orientate come from the same French verb, orienter, but were introduced at different times, the shorter one in the eighteenth century and the longer in the middle of the nineteenth. There’s been a quiet war going on between the two of them ever since. I tend to use oriented and orientated pretty indiscriminately myself, choosing the shorter one when it seems to fit the flow of the sentence. Robert Burchfield, in the Third Edition of Fowler’s Modern English Usage, says “one can have no fundamental quarrel with anyone who decides to use the longer of the two words”. But all this is a British view, since here orientated is common; in the US it is less so and considered much less a part of the standard language. So, as always, it’s as much a case of who you are writing for and where you are doing so."
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ori1.htm
"Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead."
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
Nice article on the subject. "This is because words get their wordhood not from etymology or logic or some cultural institution granting them official status, but by convention."
Deletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathon-owen/yes-irregardless-is-a-wor_b_4434749.html
Using a word incorrectly doesn't make it correct, regardless of how many people do it and for how long. "Irregardless" is a double negative. It contradicts itself, making it meaningless. It's like saying, "I didn't see nothing."
DeleteSorry to see I got everybody off topic (conspiracy) in my haste to clarify that the original post incorrectly stated that the item was on the consent calendar. It only took a few seconds to confirm that it was not on consent but one of the hearing items. Of course many seized on it being fourth (last) to be further proof of conspiracy.
DeleteI inarticulately said "irregardless" because, since I hadn't looked at the staff report, I knew nothing of its contents and didn't want to appear to be commenting one way or another on its merits.
If anyone cares, I do not favor a one size fits all to street standards especially as Encinitas prides itself on being made up of five unique communities. While this would take some work to analyze, I favor creating a street classification system where each has a standard based on its history and neighborhood desires.
I just won't go down the conspiracy path.
5:53 PM
DeleteHuh. In "your" three posts you used the word conspiracy 4 times. Guilt or a Freudian slip?
5:53 PM
Deletecorrection - the word conspiracy was used 5 times.
Yes, you read it right. Sigmund had nothing to do with it. Guilt?? You've got to be kidding.
DeleteI'm referring to the claims here of the council trying to freeze out public input. It's all a big council conspiracy (oh there I go again).
6:31 PM
DeleteAre you saying in a circumbendibus way that the council is trying to freeze out the public?
Actually Sigmund Freud would have been using cocaine and would not have said a word, as psychoanalysis's just sit and listen. Must have been hard on him, all coked up.
DeleteI've been conspiring to use irregardless, irregardless of a consipiracy to prevent me using it. Feel free to use it here when the grammar cops aren't looking.
Delete10:33 AM
ReplyDeleteThen you understand how the council gets less input on items placed at the end of the agenda. There is an appeal that is placed BEFORE cementing the street standards. You also know that comes the end of the evening the council chambers empty. If the street stands had been placed at 10A instead of 10D more people would have heard the issue.
You are right about one thing concerning the council - those evil bastards!
Why doesn't someone ask the council during Oral Communications to explain how they order agenda items for public hearing?
DeleteI am disappointed it ISN'T on the Consent Calendar, because of the timing. The Consent Calendar is heard directly after oral communications, at the beginning of the meeting. And yes, anyone can pull an item. This item should be discussed, and would have been pulled, had it been on the Consent Calendar.
DeleteBut, there is no reason that this item has to be the last listed action items, specifically, Item 10D.
I just spoke to the Clerk's office and put in a request that the item be moved to the top as a request for changes to the agenda, which is Agenda Item #7.
I was going to go to the Council Meeting and speak during oral communications and the consent calendar, and then leave, as I did last week. But any member of the public can call the Clerk and request a change in the order of the agenda items. They moved up the Lew Edwards contractors "informational presentation," to the top of the agenda, but not before Mayor Barth clarified that because it is an agenda item, Council could still vote on it, although it had been classified as "informational."
Glenn Sabine confirmed that to the Mayor re Lew Edwards' potential contract, which was already "in the works" for much more than $100K, as verified by public information requests through Andrew Audet. Because an agenda item is listed as informational does NOT mean that no action can be taken, according to Sabine, and according to the Brown Act. As long as something is listed on the Agenda, action can be taken by Council, OR Commissioners.
Gus Vina was again disingenuous when he stated at last Wednesday night's Council Meeting that, re the previous Monday night Traffic and Safety Commission meeting: "it can be stated, ahead of time, through the Commission, that there will be no action taken." That's NOT TRUE, according to Sabine and the Brown Act. If it's an agenda item, action can be taken. Vina was trying to WIGGLE OUT OF HIS LIES. He told Peter Kohl, Chair of the Public Safety and Traffic Commission that THERE WAS TO BE NO DISCUSSION BY THE PUBLIC OR BY THE COMMISSIONERS re Bob Bonde's presentation re health and safety, which WAS ON THE AGENDA. As a speaker pointed out, Gus Vina had also before announced, in early July of last year, that there would be NO Council or public discussion re the agenda item pertaining to ratification of Prop A, although the City Clerk disabused Council and the public of this, so there were many speakers, re the ratification, including Pam Slater-Price, Dietmar Rothe, Sheila Cameron, and several more, who all did an EXCELLENT JOB.
10:58 The evil mayor does it.
ReplyDeleteIn conjunction with the City Manager
DeleteSo ask the mayor and city manager.
DeleteShortly after the current council was seated, they made a new rule that any council member can add an agenda item for a future meeting. As chairperson of the meetings, the mayor asks the other council members for agenda items. Barth has been doing that near the end of every council meeting. Last week, Kranz added an agenda item for a future meeting. Sorry, I don't remember the topic.
DeleteAlso, by vote of the majority council, they can change the sequence of items. The council could vote to hear this item first. However, if this item is moved up there may be people who miss it as they are planning to show up later.
DeleteI think the council should meet every week because they try to jam too many things into one meeting, then find they have to postpone important issues. Spread it out so there is more time and no one feels rushed. Seems to me more would get accomplished with more thought and discussion rather than racing through things.
ReplyDeleteExcellent idea, 12:11. Yes, Council also should meet more days per month, because too many of the meetings go too late, and have to be extended until after 10:00 p.m.
DeleteMeeting go to late because morons repeat and repeat and repeat...did I write repeat the same thing speaker after speaker. Just because the speaker has 3 min doesn't mean you have to use all 180 seconds. Also some morons have to speak on every agenda item... Wtf?? Grow up. No one is an expert on every subject and doesn't the council know that? Sure. Limited speaking means more than week after week of absurd non logical thinking....
DeleteAnother way is to not get their hands on so much of what should be individual property and rights. So many agenda items appear to be trying to take away those rights. Maybe if the Council met LESS often they would have to prioritize what is really important.
ReplyDeleteWe used to have public goal setting workshops, at which the public could engage with Council and staff to set priorities. Under Gus Vina that has morphed into Strategic Planning Council Meetings where the public is effectively cut out of the mix; these Strategic Planning "workshops" don't engage the public in any meaningful manner, but work to discourage public participation, as strategic planning meetings are now agendized.
DeleteAlso, all Council Meetings with 72 hour notice, should allow for oral communications, public comments on non-agenda items. Calling a meeting "Special," is not what determines that public comments can be disallowed. The Brown Act defines regular Council Meetings as those that have 72 hour notice, with Special Meetings only receiving 24 hour notice.
Why, for the first time, under Mayor Barth, was the public only allowed 24 hour notice for the last Pacific View Special Meeting? The public is to be given notice when Council Members receive it. Was Council alerted ahead of time, but not the public, and if so, why? If not, why was this meeting scheduled last minute, when the Memorandum of Understanding was in the works since April 9?
Priorities do need to be set, every year. Gus Vina has put off prioritization, because he values marketing and expansion of staff, increasing operating expenses, above prioritizing and reducing operating expenses. His priority appears to be private gain, and political 'massaging" and marketing, manipulation of data and manipulation of Council's and the public's perception, rather than best management practices.
It wasn't noticed to begin with because Barth/Kranz/Shaffer had not planned on hearing it in public: only at the last minute was Gaspar able to convince/threaten them that it needed to be heard in public.
DeleteSo, a Hobbesian Choice posters: not notice it and not hear it in public: or notice it late and hear it in public. Barth et al are out of control:
I can hardly wait until the May meeting in which the staff outlines the bond issue info and then two days later, after the bonds have been approved, the staff will report that there are plenty of assets that could be sold to cover the budget shortfall rather than increasing the overall debt: now that isn't being sloppy, that is being devious.
2:58, kudos for the use of Hobbesian, irregardless of how people feel about it..
DeleteWhy don't Solana Beach and Del Mar have roundabouts?
ReplyDeleteBecause they don't have obsessive, impractical, anal-retentive politicians in their governments and self-serving citizens demanding roundabouts.
DeleteOoh, that's a good one even if it doesn't have anything to do with the council (and citizens) support of roundabouts.
DeleteSolana decided against roundabouts for three reasons: too expensive, too controversial, not enough room for two-lane roundabouts in 101 without taking private land. They dismissed one-lane roundabouts in a four-lane highway as being unimaginably stupid.
Delete4:59, where are the data that the majority of citizens support roundabouts? Forget about the council. We already know they don't represent the majority.
DeleteWhy don't SB and DM have roundabouts?? Not smart enough and no obstructionistas to block progress .
Delete6:13, perverse definition of "progress" and your points contradict each other.
DeleteBecome the laughingstock of Southern California and its most reviled and avoided business corridor: Put one-lane roundabouts in the 101 four-lane highway.
The laughing stock of SoCal are those that post here opposing roundabouts.
DeletePs- they work, big or small.
No they don't. Roundabouts don't function well with high traffic volume. Small ones with lane reductions cause traffic to back up with increased number of vehicles. Large ones end up with stop signs or signal lights, otherwise traffic gridlocks with high volume. They only work good in the wee hours of the morning with very light traffic. But then drunk drivers get confused and crash going home from bars at 2 am since their head is already spinning.
DeleteBecause Del Martians would rather wait in endless car lineups all summer from 4th street to 26th street instead of staying in motion. Then they complain when people drive through the alley.
DeleteObviously roundabouts work, people have driven through them every day for years now on Leucadia Blvd. Therefore, they work. Ask anyone who commutes through Del Mar, it blows...
Because they blew it..they will after they see how well la jollA, Encinitas , Rancho Santa Fe, Carlsbad and Oceanside's work
DeleteOne-lane roundabouts in a four-lane highway do not work.
DeleteCitizens in Del Mar voted they didn't want roundabouts. After public outcry from the public and concerns about the cost, Council in Solana Beach decided that city didn't need or want roundabouts.
DeleteDel Mar and Solana Beach blew it and will be installing roundabouts after they realize how well they are working in Coronado, La Jolla, Rancho Sante Fe, Encinitas, Carlsbad, and Oceanside. Sometime good ideas like not drinking out of deposable plastic bottles all the time, or quitting smoking, take awhile for the slow adaptors to catch on….. but eventually the light comes on or they die. Either way, the world ends up a better place. Right?
Delete4:50
DeleteAccording to the US Dept of Transportation, citizens in many cities are reluctant to adopt roundabouts at first. But most of the naysayers end up thinking they work great after they experience their benefits. Tradition dies hard all around the world, but traditional signaled intersections are by far deadlier than roundabouts.
10:45
Must be a Darwin thing.
Freddie, please stop the deceptive tactics. You know roundabouts are not one size fits all.
DeleteDifferentiate between one-lane roundabouts in a four-lane highway and roundabouts with at least the same number of lanes as in one direction of the larger-volume roadway where they're installed.
While you're at it, be honest and address the fact that as planned, the Streetscape project would cram three one-lane roundabouts in the half-mile from Bishop's Gate to Jupiter, keep the same 1.2-mile speedway that now exists between Jupiter and El Portal, place another one-lane roundabout there, then keep the same half-mile speedway that exists now between El Portal and Encinitas Blvd.
You know these are facts so address them specifically. You know these features of the plan make no logical sense. If the plan made sense and had built-in broad benefits, few would object. The majority objects because, as planned, the project doesn't make sense. It benefits few, burdens many and creates more problems than it solves.
Get real and be honest. It's unlike you and unbecoming that you deceive and hide behind BS. There's always the possibility you've lost your mind. If so, you're excused.
Nine, Thirty-niney,
DeleteOf course roundabouts are not one size fits all. That's why ours will be the size we need.
But if anyone's lost their mind, its a frenzied handful of activists peddling gloom that claim:
* The new bike lanes should be painted out.
* The new bike lanes have forever extinguished a rail trail.
* People belonging to a selfish business group are the only ones who want roundabouts.
* Removing numerous stops will not improve circulation.
* Removing stops will not save anyone gas.
* Removing stops will not save anyone time.
* Removing stops will not save wear and tear on cars.
* Removing stops will not improve air quality.
* Speed bumps trump roundabouts because they do not slow down emergency vehicles.
* Periodically lowering the speed limit to 15 mph will create gridlock.
* Streetscape will destroy our business district from gridlock.
* Streetscape will destroy our business district from people avoiding 101.
* One stop sign can only stop traffic from continuing in one direction.
* Stop signs at Marcheta St. will not be removed.
* * Roundabouts are mostly a developer's tool.
* The USDOT doesn't recommend roundabouts parallel to train tracks.
* There are no other places in the US with roundabouts near train tracks.
* Our roundabouts will interfere with the railroad and/or visa versa.
* 3 legged roundabouts are inferior to 4 legged roundabouts.
* Our roundabouts are tiny tinker toys that haven't worked.
* Our roundabouts will require stop lights.
* Thousands of neighbors utilizing 101 from side streets each day equal insignificant traffic.
* El Portal, Jupiter, Grandview, Bishop's Gate and La Costa Ave do not cross N. 101.
* Fred doesn't live west of 101 and therefore does not qualify as a neighbor with a valid opinion on Streetscape.
* Fred has lost his mind.
How do you justify it? Every single point you make here against Streetscape fails. I suppose your answer to my left turn question would follow suit with: "Dodging 3 lanes of 35 mph traffic is easier than merging with one lane of 15 mph traffic at a roundabout to make a left onto 101" Here's a time saving tip: You can cut and paste that last line somewhere later.
You write very well, by the way. But I think you're living proof that literacy and logic are the two most distant portions of your brain. So I have to give you and those like you, a pass. Not your fault. EGTBOK.
Bravo Fred well put!
DeleteI ask those that have difficulty understanding the virtues and operations of modern day roundabouts to watch this video. I hope you have the ability to learn how to yield and go through a roundabout safely. If not, its probably time to give up your license before you kill some innocent kid walking to the beach.
http://www.ci.lacey.wa.us/city-government/city-departments/public-works/engineering-division/driving-modern-roundabouts
http://lacey.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?clip_id=53
Please learn how to Yield for everyones sake and use your turn signals just like any other intersection.
Re: placement of items the city knows are of most interest to residents/will produce the most speakers being put late on the agenda to wear down attendees in the hopes they'll leave...this was pointed out ad nauseum to Teresa when she was mayor and she kept saying she'd work with Gus to do better...except that would work against them.
ReplyDeleteWho in the public is actually interested in seeing these types of standardized streets? Maybe developers who want to make taxpayers prepay for infrastructure that they should have to put in, but nobody I know wants this.
ReplyDeleteDevelopers are no more interested in sidewalks and standardized streets than your average Leucadian: this is Masi, just like it was Masi on Crest and Manchester etc... why the council or manager hasn't reassigned this psycho by now is perhaps the greatest social crime in recent Encinitas history...
DeleteThe standards are there as a guide for developers who have to install what's required. If anything, relaxed standards save developers money. The Crest drive case is one example. By not requiring the developer to build to the citywide standard, the council saved them money. This doesn't mean the council shouldn't have development follow neighborhood character irrespective of cost.
DeleteIf anyone ever tried to put sidewalks or larger streets in parts of Cardiff, I am pretty sure there would be those banging of pots, as one person goes on about. The streets in the Cardiff walking district and the Composer district are just too small for such things, without eminent domain. And if I were a councilperson, the last thing I would want to do is try to push this thru Cardiff, at least west of I-5 Cardiff.
DeleteGood luck...all you need is the city with an opinion from Murphy and/Sabine, and all reason goes out the window...at which point the impossible becomes possible and Cardiff gets screwed.
DeleteCouncil need to get a City Manager that will fire Masi and a dozen or so other bad employees.
DeleteThe disabled.
DeleteFulvia St residents let the city know that no way do they want sidewalks, yet the developer tells them the city is requiring sidewalks as part of the project. So much for respect for the community.
ReplyDeleteOne thing about Cardiff west of I-5,, good or bad, is there is no more room to build anything. Leucadians must still have some room.
DeleteAt the 2008 Hall Prk hearings Masi told the public and council the grading plan posed no environmental risk to Rossini Creek or toxic water run-off. Resident after resident after resident stood before the council claiming the data showed Masi was wrong-
ReplyDeleteThe city is now being sued $400K for toxic water run-off
see how it works
An we pay this person to make these types of mistakes that keep costing us money? How can we afford people like this on staff? Where is the leadership at the City?
DeleteHas anyone heard how that lawsuit about Rossini is going? Is it over, or being delayed or what? And who in the end has to pay the fine?
DeleteWho's Masi?
DeleteMasih is a city engineer. The Rossini Creek illegal discharge is not a lawsuit, but a complaint and threatened fine by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, a state agency. The final hearing date has not been set yet. Information is found here:
Deletehttp://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/compliance/acl_complaints.shtml
The same obsessive, anal-retentive mentality that wants sidewalks, curbs and streetlights wants one-lane roundabouts in a four-lane highway.
ReplyDeleteWrong…. roundabouts and streetscape is good. The crappy design would be the generic crappy option 3 and traffic signals which waste lives…...But we all know some people are too stupid to understand that fact. Right- KLCC?
DeleteThats BS and offensive. The roundabouts and streetscape are good.
DeleteThe KLCC, traffic signals, and haters are bad. Its that simple.
10:51, the truth hurts, eh? You deserve to be offended. One-lane roundabouts in a four-lane highway are not good, no two ways about it.
Delete9:01
DeleteThe truth feels good. Getting T-boned at a signaled intersection hurts. Yes there are two ways about it' one going north and the other going south. Birdrock has 5 One-lane roundabouts in a former 5 lane Major Arterial that work well. Only it's not "cramed together" like ours will be for a mile and a half. They're "crammed" on 5 consecutive blocks. Time to change for the better.
I have urged Council to support recommendation #5 with respect to 10D:
ReplyDelete5. Direct staff to develop street by street design standards based on the specific community/neighborhood location and the right of way width;
I had thought this, above, was Council's previous staff direction, and also what all the public speakers, from the Crest neighborhood, and beyond, including myself, had requested of the City, at that previous Council Meeting. We have five diverse communities and within those communities, many diverse and unique neighborhoods.
Neighbors treasure our funky community character, in Leucadia, for example. Some neighborhoods have specifically requested no sidewalks, including in Leucadia and on Crest Street. For these reasons, there should not be a "one size fits all" overlay for required improvements.
Right now there is ongoing redevelopment at South Portal and Neptune, immediately adjacent to the Stonesteps beach access, for instance. A few years ago, there was a third story structure built on the south side of that intersection. Apparently, no public improvements were required. Now substantial remodeling is being constructed at the home on the north side of that intersection, at Stonesteps. For years, we have had an issue with water pooling in the curb gutters at these intersections, at the Stonesteps beach access intersection.
Before any significant improvements are done, we feel these homeowners, at or near South El Portal and Neptune, should have to help alleviate the challenges, often created by over-watering, but which also occurs when there is any rain, at all. The water puddles up, at low points, and it becomes a muddy mess. Citizens have complained, and public works came out and cleaned it up, but it's a reoccurring problem. Also, the surface of the small stretch of road from Neptune, on South El Portal, leading directly to the beach access is riddled with pot holes and breaks in the blacktop. That should be a required public improvement. Beach goers could trip.
These are examples of reasons why development or redevelopment should be addressed on a case by case or street by street basis. There should not be "selective enforcement" of standards that would detract from community character and/or would create a hodgepodge of "solutions" on one street, with respect to a mix of pre-existing development and new development, with only the later requiring sidewalks, etc. That hodgepodge was initially planned on Crest Street, before Council voted not to force unwanted and unneeded improvements on the public.
Ohhh so now you want the city to FIX THE STREETS!! Sorry Lynn no money.. It was all spent on a trophy project called PV.
DeletePlease stay quiet on this one. Don't give City Council a reason to want to approve staff's recommendation. If you support option 5, they will be more inclined to vote for Option 3.
ReplyDeleteI hope City Council can see that reasonable people also support Option 5.
I disagree. I saw Senator Elizabeth Warren, from Massachusetts on the Daily Show last night, interviewed by Jon Stewart. She was talking about how so much power has become concentrated in a few corporations which have seemingly unlimited money to pay lobbyists to do their bidding, to influence Congress, and other governmental agencies. It seems to be a legal form of influence peddling, close to the ties previously held by the Mafia.
DeleteAll we, the people have, Ms. Warren said, is our vote and our voice. I will not be silenced by someone telling me or asking me to " please stay quiet on this one."
This is the first time I've ever agreed with Lynn. Say your piece, no matter who objects.
DeleteThe Daily Show?? Jon Stewart??? Oh fuck!! TDS is own by Comedy Central which is owned by Viacom. One of the GIANT corporate companies that Ms. Warren hates.... But takes money from for her election campaigns.. Oh fuck !!
DeleteIf this is where you get your news and information.... Stop!! Jon Stewart is a comedian. Not a funny comedian btw either.. It's a sad reality of life that Americans are so stupid they think this guy is a real news man. The only people more stupid than Stewart are those that watch his show, but then his $30M salary allows his to relate to the common man. Which is the appeal of his show isn't it?? He's just like everyone else, he would want to save PV, he would oppose roundabouts. Here is what he is... He's a shill for big corporations, big govt and hates, HATES the viewers of his show. Last year he left his show for 3 months to direct a film, how bad of a stinker can it be??? No signs of his directorial debut in an theatre that I can see..
Perhaps Lynn can get her great friend Jon Stewart to donate $20M to the city to buy and preserve PV. We can call it the Jon Stewart Lynn is my friend Center for the Arts ...
DeleteElizabeth Warren is a liar.
DeleteShe is on scale with Dalager, Stocks, and the other locally known hoodwinking failures trying to get over on an unsuspecting public.
Warren's entire career has been built on being part native american indian- the only problem is that she isn't.
This makes her Lia- watha , or maybe faux-chahontas - but the greedy elite John Stewert won't make those jokes to protect his fellow rich friend.
Lia-watha built her career getting preferences and entitlements based not on her abilities and accomplishments but on her gender and made up minority race.
On animal farm some animals are more equal than other. While Lia-watha and her cronies live lives of luxury they would have us live lives of subjugation.
7:16, 7:34, 8:09 You have reached a new, even lower level of moronic. Stick with Fox News and vote for Darrell Issa. That's your league. Then move to Nevada and sign up with Cliven Bundy.
DeleteLia - Watha-
DeleteDeal with it. Facts are facts. She ahs built a career based not on performance and ability but on gender, inequality, race and intimidation.
Check out Lia-watha's use of bankers and exploitation to amass millions in wealth.
Rather than talks facts about Warren 9:08 trots out a bunch red herrings- who care's about Issa or Bundy, the comment is about Lia-watha- go ahead, explain her lies?
Lynn can you explain why the big banks AND the big unions donated millions to get Warrnen elected? She out spent her opponent with negative ads by tens of millions of dollars.
DeleteAlso, can you explain why Warren made millions from bankers for consulting fees in keeping the poor poor and the under served under served?
9:08- proud if yourself today?? You put words together to form a sentence. Good dog, good dog. Here's a biscuit.
DeletePS- big owner of Viacom stock are we??
9:51, Elizabeth Warren isn't perfect, but she is one of the only members of congress that speaks up for the "little guy". It's not like the Koch Brothers or the Bankers of America are going to donate to her. Going over who donates to who in the U.S. political system is like saying Imelda Marcos had too many shoes, it's self-evident.
DeleteOur political system is completely controlled by big money. Even in our local politics, do a search and see how much big money and corporate money has come into each of the last few elections. Hint, Team Stocks always is in the lead, especially Gaspar. Muir is no slouch either.
Clearly Warren is not native American, but we all know the right will trumpet and repeat any half truth they get ahold of. You're going to have to do better than that..
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/is-elizabeth-warren-native-american-or-what/257415/
It's a tempest in a teapot. And if you want to play tit for tat, here you go:
"Florida Sen. Marco Rubio spent years describing himself as the "son of exiles" from Castro's Cuba, but the Post reported that "documents show that Rubio's parents came to the United States and were admitted for permanent residence more than two-and-a-half years before Castro's forces overthrew the Cuban government and took power." "I'm going off the oral history of my family," Rubio said in explaining the discrepancy. "
Bottom line, nobody cares, and U.S. elections are nasty...
Do better than that? You admit Warren is a lair, which means you admit her entire career has been built on a lie, promtoed based on a lie, and yet you say do better than that?
DeleteWarren is a scumbag- she has made milions from teh very bankers she wants us to belevie she is against, she is the problem not the solution.
She is an ivy league Harvard academic who wants to tell us all how we should live and what we should think- while she lives a lfie of luxury paid for by the same bankers she wants us to believe she opposed
She's a scumbag
Elizabeth Warren raised $16M in undocumented contributions, possibly foreign, from questionable websites- but hey, nothing to see here folks, please move along
DeleteI don't understand why that would be true, 10:49?
ReplyDeleteAlternative #3 is
3. Continue the current practice and require function based design for street improvements.
The "current practice," as demonstrated by all the public speakers at the previous Council Meeting regarding Crest Street improvements, is not satisfactory. I feel that Planning and Engineering should be able to require improvements, as needed, on a case by case or street by street basis.
The "in lieu fees" alternative also would not work, because the City can simply absorb development fees by raiding accounts, as it did for the former Hall Property regional sports park construction, "robbing Peter, to pay Paul."
Also, $831,000 of in lieu affordable housing development fees was taken and used to subsidize the Encinitas Preservation Association, whose board is composed of developers and "insider" development interests, who opposed Prop A, to help purchase the Boathouses property that already had four pre-existing affordable units. The difference, these already affordable units will be counted "on the books," from this point forward.
I'm glad the Boathouses were preserved, but the in lieu affordable housing fees have been used as a cash cow. These in lieu affordable housing development fees were also used to subsidize MIG, in fees paid, about $1.5 Million, or more, in total, for that over-priced contractor's failed attempt at a General Plan Update.
So would you have been supportive of taking the $831,000 of in-lieu affordable housing development fees if the Encinitas Preservation Association board only had folks who you agree with? The boathouse property was at risk of being redeveloped and those affordable units lost. Besides the boathouses are jewels. Don't we want to preserve jewels in that area?
DeleteI STATED I was glad the Boathouses were preserved. My point is that in lieu affordable housing fees were used, excessively, to subsidize the private foundation's purchase. In lieu fees are too easily absorbed by the City.
DeleteWith Respect to Elizabeth Warren, I don't care what your opinion of her is, or of Jon Stewart is. I respect them both, but that's not the point. My point is, that all we, the people have, all the "little guy" has is our individual and collective voices and our votes.
We don't have millions and billions of dollars, and the enormous power and influence that brings, to hire lobbyists or to "court" Council Members, Supreme Court Justices, or anyone else.
I know you STATED that you were happy with the results, just not with the process.
DeleteIn-lieu fees cannot be used just anywhere as they are fees and not taxes. The city is restricted by ordinance and state law. Fees must be spent according to the purpose for which they were collected. If you can show the city inappropriately used affordable housing in-lieu fees that's a pretty good lawsuit.
Where has the city misused the affordable housing fund? The GP Update was funded out of general revenue funds.
In lieu affordable housing fees were IMPROPERLY used to add to the total of $1.5 Million paid to MIG for the failed General Plan Update.
DeleteIn lieu habitat and acquisition developer fees were used for the Moonlight Beach improvements and the Regional Sports Park improvements. In lieu fees were included in the raided funds.
My hint is because certain people go off on illogical rants so often about every topic that others have lost all respect for them. In fact, many have learned as defense mechanism to get ready for an attack. For when the illogical rants start, its not pretty- Its a waste of time.
ReplyDeleteDo you think City Council respects all the gadflies equally?
Who enjoys wasting time?
I disagree-
Deletewe are lucky to have informed speaker who many times know more about the issues than the council- or the city manager who withholds financial estimates, or the city attorney who buries road reports-
Council does not like speakers becuase speakers are better informed then they are
5:33-Well said. If anyone spends too much time in front of the Council, they look upon that person as either an agitator, or a loony toon( sorry Dr. Lori if you still read this blog). If one has a passion for one thing, then let er rip in front of the Council, if not, either give a the donation, stay at home and watch on t.v with a nice glass of wine or beer, or whatever, or go and just listen. You will get more attention to your cause by doing this. You still might not like how the council responds, but you sure as hell will be heard in a respectful manner.
ReplyDelete9:30: That is unless you go up against Sabine, then all bets are off:)
ReplyDeleteA taxpayer of this city is entitled to speak before the council (those we elected and pay to represent us). They have 3 minutes, or someone can donate their time to them for additional minutes. If you are attending the meeting and don't like what you hear, walk out of the room or exit the building. No one is chaining you to your chair. If you are watching from home and don't like what the speaker says, you have a choice to turn the channel, use the mute button, or leave the room. Your choice. Please stop trying to squelch someone's freedom of speech.
ReplyDelete11:41 I didn't read anyone saying that anyone is trying to squelch a person's freedom of speech. I am just saying that if a person comments on every item on the agenda, the Council stop listening to that person. Of course any person can get up there and give their 3 minute speech. But, to be HEARD, a person has to have facts, be concise and precise, and once in a while just listen and be quiet. That was the only point I was trying to make. I am pro First Amendment rights, but I also know, realistically, that at some point the Council stops listening. And that probably goes back to every Council we have ever had in this City.
ReplyDelete3:19 the council stopped listenting to thsoe who speak the truth
Deleteresidents spoke out against the spin doctor- should they have been silent?
residents spoke out about vina;s risky scheme to raid borrow and steal for teh hall park- should they have sat on their hands?
residents spoke out against 66K for true north that Gaspar's hubby used to feather his own nest- should they have been quite, and the list goes on and on-
3:19 If any council person is NOT listening to what is being said by a taxpayer, then they should NOT be on the city council. They can go home and go to sleep as they are useless.
DeleteMy sense is that they nominally "listen" to the public; they just give more weight to what they hear from Vina, Sabine and staff.
DeleteWe need a hero: someone who will put the interests of the public ahead of the interests of staff. Any volunteers?
EU I do believe you are right. Right now, all of the council members are too timid and afraid of Vina and Sabine. They don't want to rock the boat so they just go along with most things. This is not likely to change over the next few years. Seems like we are beating a dead horse. All we can do is voice our concerns and hope that a couple of them will finally get it, or get a council member who will get the ball rolling in the right direction.
DeleteLast week Kranz did a great job at doing away with his itsy bitsy spider finger routine. Keep up the good work Tony! Now how about making some better decisions?
ReplyDelete4:10-You make the assumption that he is making bad decisions. It has occurred to me he is making the right decisions for the right people. Kranz has changed. Just look at the new haircut, the new duds, and look who he is hanging with. Things have changed for the better in Tony's world, so let's just say, they got to him. And by they, I don't mean the everyday citizen, but the bigger powers in this city who would never run for Council. Kind of like the Koch brothers who would never in their right mind run for President.
Delete6:04 So the bigger powers got to Kranz. Wonderful. I now know why he makes the decisions he does.
DeleteYou mean like that free vacation to the Middle East Tony got last year from Leichstag?
Delete6:56 what are you talking about ? - free vacation? please share details
DeleteWas Tony a nobody who is now a somebody? He's enver seemed the same since going to that special invite only party up in Del Mar that Papa Doug and Logan Jenkins thru for newly elected north county officials-
DeleteTOny- trips to the middle east, trips to Washington DC- 'Deep local roots' my ass
Not so sure that COuncil is afraid of Vina and Sabine. i think it is more likely the case that they use them to support what they want done and then let us blame those two. Well, at least Vina. Somehow Sabine is sacred and so far, no one has been able to make any council budge on even thinking about his removal. I have no idea what it would take to get rid of him at this point. I thought that after what Barth went thru after her $17,000 fact finding mission that Sabine could have offered for what we pay him, she would have seconded Lisa's motion to at least to a Request for Proposal, but she didn't. Not sure what he has on each council member, but if he doesn't have anything, I wonder why they don't at least look at other law firms that work for cities? Does anyone have any idea?
ReplyDeleteDoes Masih even live or reside in Encinitas?
ReplyDeleteOf course not.
DeleteYou don't shit where you eat.
Though to be fair, he does live in a generic McMansion neighborhood in Carlsbad that is much like what he's trying to impose on Encinitas.
DeleteHow and why should non residents be making decisions about Encinitas? There is a significant disconnect here. Has this question ever been raised?
ReplyDeleteStaff make decisions about Encinitas because council lacks the intellect and the moral courage to oppose them.
DeleteI agree with you on that!
ReplyDeleteBy the way, are you aware of any encroachment permits granted for landscaping at a home (in Cardiff) by the engineering department? I have heard that they (Masih) summarily denies every request.