Streetscape Workshop 4: The Two Alternatives

A notion cannot be made to 'fall apart' simply by asking a question, but rather,
only by providing an adequate answer to the question posed.

Drewfus, Econobrowser

The consultants started by pointing out that they really wanted to work on the big picture issues. Much of the presentation was general. I took that to mean that details like what is going into the plant palette are to be discussed later. However, there were very detailed maps with specifics out for review and that focused the attention of many.

The presentation itself was well organized and informative. The only thing I thought was missing was clear discussion of how the discussion would play into the process and how things would proceed after the workshop.

Objectives Determined
At the outset Peltz outlined the objectives. Sidewalks, trees, and sidewalk features are the old school streetscape makeover. When combined with the Specific Plan, Leucadia 101 is shooting for the New Urbanism make over. Walkable communities allow you to walk to where you need to go. Traffic calming means slower traffic with less friction. The infrastructure will be rebalanced away from automobile domination to more space for pedestrian and bicycle uses.

Increasing parking was also a priority and this leads to my first question. This goes out to those people who hope that walkable design induces people to leave their cars at home.

In other places, like Santa Barbara for instance, walkable community activists have pushed to reduce parking and to centralize parking. The thinking is would make it less desirable to drive and the expectation is that more people will walk, ride, or take transit.

Q1: Does designing for more parking promote an automobile centered culture and promote more driving?

Restoring the tree canopy was noted as one of the unifying concerns of Leucadians. I would have put that on top of the other objectives.

The city makes a big distinction between "restoring" and "preserving" the tree canopy. Q2: Why is that distinction being made now?

Q3: Are any of the large heritage trees slated to be cut down in either of the alternatives? Has anybody looked?

The Two Alternatives
The two alternatives overlap on a lot of features. Q4: If the meeting was about big picture stuff, how come the different features have to packaged? Why not allow people to consider 3 lanes and signals or 4 lanes and roundabouts?

Q5: Are there any local examples of roundabouts used to cut traffic speeds in configurations like that being proposed, and on an arterial with conditions similar to 101? Are people going to be able speed back up between roundabouts?

Bird Rock has roundabouts very close together.

The pedestrian path along the tracks doesn't go through the center part of leucadia, because the right-of-way is too narrow to handle the path and the Leucadia Blvd intersection.

I was sitting next to one of the most ecofriendly, walking path promotional Leucadian and he noted that forcing pedestrians to cross the 101 twice was a usage killer for the path. I've also thought it was weird to push a walking path across the street from all the action and across the street from where there better be a very nice walking zone.

If it sucks to walk along the west side of 101 when this is done we're all to blame for losing sight of what should be the first priority of the project -> good sidewalks on the west side of 101!

The walking path is going to be next to the NCTD dust bowl.

Q6: If we gave up the east side walking path could we assign more space to the bike lane?

Riding the 101 is seriously dangerous. Q7: Would it be safer if there were only one southbound lane?

The city says this is not a consideration because people parking would cause too much friction with southbound traffic. It would slow traffic. Two lanes are not as affected by people slowing to park.

The alternatives for major intersections were roundabouts and traffic signals, not roundabouts and stop signs. Q8: Why has discussion focused on roundabouts vs stop signs?

There were people who spoke of their motivation to send commuters back to the freeway. Q8.5: Would stop signs slow traffic down more and send more commuter traffic back to the I5?