Single Source News Flash
Members of the Coastal Commission have appealed the City Council's apparent defiance of the Coastal Commission, an anon source reports to the LB. (Hoax?)
Don't like the current laws? Accept them or work as a citizen in the effort to change them. Don't pick and choose laws and hold them up only when convenient. Certainly, don't see the Coastal Commission as a savior one day when they are on your side and as intrusive and overreaching because they expect to be part of a process that you want to rush through.
Those who claim practicality as a justification for cutting corners on the open processes of infrastructure changes, sorta justify 3/4th of everything Jerome and Danny did that people said were dishonest.
Democracy is rarely an efficient mode of governance.
In a democracy it is not dishonest for an elected official to seek different goals than you. Dishonesty arises in the process leading up to and during the decisions (or acts of omission).
If it is worth risking $300K for the good cause of a dedicated bike lane, then what else is worth $300k?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete$300k is a drop in the bucket compared to a huge check to some attorney for not addressing an unsafe road condition.
ReplyDeleteReally? I think you missed the point.
Its not ECC vs CCC.
Its ECC implementing CCC mission statement.
The CCC staff got it wrong.
There are so many laws that every law has another law that contradicts it.
ReplyDeleteBig deal. We need to simplify, but the state leg. is incapable of doing that, so they just make more laws. Like over a 1000 every year.
Its a joke. Live by common sense and good integrity and forget the laws.
Laws are for weaniees.
Anarchy for the ENC
ReplyDeleteIt's coming some time and maybe
Staff reads the law wrong
Paints new traffic lines
Your future dream is a gridlock
'Cause I wanna be anarchy,
In the city!
Imagine the new striping had been here 70 years, and the city had decided to mark out the bike lanes and raise the speed limit to make it safer. Now that would be cause for concern.
ReplyDeleteI think this was a good post by Leucadia Blog.
ReplyDeleteAt first I didn't understand who or what ECC is, but then I realized: Encinitas City Council v California Coastal Commission.
By the way, there is more than one person posting as "anon" with a lowercase "a" now. anon from yesterday, at 9:09 and his/her "follow-up" at 9:16 p.m., is not me. I had only recently realized that more than one person can post under the identical log in name?
Fred's argument, just after 12 Noon, today, is a "red herring." We don't have to imagine something that never existed, and never could have existed. The point of the original post is that process is enacted, in this case through our LCP (Local Coastal Program) and Coastal Act law, for a reason. The LCP, as certified through the CCC mandates that to eliminate a lane on the primary circulation element which is North Hwy. 101 requires amendments to our General Plan, our 101 Corridor Specific Plan, and our LCP.
The Streetscape for 101 through Leucadia was NOT fully "vetted." It is still going through the process of getting a CDP (Coastal Development Permit) through our LCP, and getting all the required amendments. Our General and 101 Specific Plans are part of our LCP!
ReplyDeleteOur Council should be intelligent enough, and have enough integrity to stick by the rules, not change them "mid-game" as Kristin Gaspar charged the CCC of doing. Quite the opposite is true!
Lane elimination also did not go through the Planning, Traffic or Environmental Commissions, to allow public hearings. Sharrows did go before the Traffic and Environmental Commissions, at least.
The "workshops," held by Peltz and Associates, were mainly participated in by so-called STAKEHOLDERS, with L101MA and Leucadia Town Council, both of which Fred belongs to, were top on the list, as well as a bicyclist group? Adjacent residents were NOT listed as STAKEHOLDERS.
The workshop's "surveys" were tweaked. When the initial "survey" showed that the majority of business owners and nearly two thirds of others attending the 2009 meeting at City Hall were OPPOSED to roundabouts and a lane elimination, that survey was discarded. Another one was held, about a year later? which was less well attended, less noticed, by and to opposition.
People who, on this final survey, which was chosen to be the one "that counts" voted that we do not want traffic signals OR 5 roundabouts and lane elimination, were counted as DID NOT RESPOND! We had the option of voting for "none of the above" in the previous City Hall Survey. People who voted having ANY roundabouts "deserves consideration" were counted as being in favor of "enhanced Plan 4A" with 5 roundabouts and lane elimination.
The Community Center Survey was held after a couple of "open houses" at the library, where no public comments were allowed, not even through a "suggestion box." Through these bogus open houses, which were not workshops, some in the community and Council were "sold" on a cartoon that is much different than the actual engineered drawings. Peltz and Associates rolled out their "conceptual drawings" which are deceiving, and are actually a kind of "bait and switch" between them and the actual engineered plans.
Many more trees would have to be removed. The trees that are being planted as replacements are SAPLINGS, which will not reach full growth in at least twenty years, or more. The medians would have to be narrowed for the proposed roundabouts to fit in, along with angled parking and dedicated bicycle lanes on both sides of the highway.
There would also be another lane elimination, southbound, as four of the five planned roundabouts are within 4/5 of a mile. Four of the five roundabouts, with the exception of the one planned at La Costa, are for 3 way intersections, only, when the U.S. Dept. of Transportation does not recommend roundabouts along railway corridors or where cross traffic is significantly less than the main thoroughfare's traffic.
Roundabouts, for those who have traveled them, especially in Europe, as I spoke to one Encinitas resident, don't work when the traffic is very uneven. They are unheard of when there is not a through intersection, crossing. Peltz and Associates could not come up with a SINGLE INSTANCE of roundabouts along a railway corridor, ANYWHERE! They were asked the question, at one of their bogus, biased toward roundabouts "workshops" and gave no response!
I have biked and driven my car on 101 since the "sharrows" were painted. The traffic has moved along at the posted 35 mph and I felt much safer on my bike. Ms. Marr, aka anon I suspect, does not seem to want any improvements in Leucadia. I hve lived here for 40 years and have wanted to make 101 safer for cars and bikes all that time. Thank you City Council for making these changes!
ReplyDeleteBecause someone wants the process to be followed, and wants ALL of the community to be heard, not only a bicyclist clubs and L101MA members, does not mean he or she does not want any improvements in Leucadia.
ReplyDeleteBecause people want to keep Leucadia Funky and laid back, does not mean they want it to be crappy, that they don't want improvements.
You may have ridden on North 101 since the sharrows were painted, but that is irrelevant to the removal of one lane, northbound, for motorists, where there are no Sharrows.
When traffic backs up during peak periods, when I-5, northbound becomes significantly slowed or blocked, during morning rush hour, or during the summer months, traffic will NOT be "moving along at 35 MPH." Also, should the roundabouts ever be installed, traffic would have to slow down to 15 MPH, both directions, including cyclists, to go through the one lane roundabouts, four roundabouts, between La Costa and Jupiter, within 4/5 of a mile, as I said.
Because you want to demonize the CCC, Ms. Marr, or anyone who asks that process be followed, that an actual VOTE be taken, does not mean that anyone who opposes 5 roundabouts and lane elimination is against improving and enhancing Leucadia.
Again and again we offer a great alternative, a GREENSCAPE, that would include more trees, a beautiful railway corridor path for pedestrians and bicyclists, more involvement of local artists and artisans, such as seen along the Coast Highway in Solana Beach. Instead of looking at alternatives, discussing the fact that due process was NOT done, you simply try to demonize the messengers and the CCC.
"Fred's argument, just after 12 Noon, today, is a "red herring." We don't have to imagine something that never existed, and never could have existed."
ReplyDeleteIt's true, you don't have to imagine something that never existed. And if that were the only attitude we'd still have square wheels. It's false to say it "never could have existed", because it does exist now and works well so far. I have a front row seat. It's like Ross Perot said a few years back. "If something's wrong, fix it!" Life is an experiment. But when I try to imagine what you're thinking:
1. Paint out the bike paths on 101 immediately.
2. Raise the speed limit.
3. Help punish the City (i.e. taxpayers) with a $300K fine.
I can't imagine why you think those are good ideas.
The old saying: "Those who do not learn from the past are condemned to repeat it." comes to mind. We've learned what no bike lanes result in on 101. We've also learned the benefits of what lower speed limits and other traffic calming measures achieve in many if not all cities that install them.
What group of taxpayers celebrates suing themselves? Now try to imagine this. That there is one person you know in that $300,000 photograph who is a resident of Encinitas. If you can do that, you're imagination is still alive. If you can't, you'll learn what a red herring really is. I'll bet that's a bunch of Texas wineos.
Lynn,
ReplyDeleteBelieve me, we can tell your senseless rants no matter what you post under.
They are always the same- fat nonsense repetitious garbage.
Sound familar.
I could care less if you post under Lynn, anon, or Lword. Garbage in = Garbage out.
anon Lynn,
ReplyDeleteIt would be so nice to live in a utopian funky Leucadia with the train track below grade and a great trail and greenscape above it to Solana Beach.
I believe we all have wanted something like that and no one on this blog is standing in the way of it happening.
The ones preventing it are SANDAG, the CCC and NCTD. It Is Not L101MC or LTC!
It's just not possible at this time and it would take more and more wasted years to get it done.
Those of us who have lived here for 30 plus years have waited long enough for some changes to this end of town.
I had reservations about this lane diet and sharrows too but now see that this is a good thing and it will work just fine for us westside locals.
The recent changes seem to be working pretty well for all so far. No horrible traffic backups or issues with bikes that I have seen so far.
So stop the obstructionist behavior and enjoy the ride.
This little and much needed road change and the pending roundabouts that will be installed would not prevent that Walden like dream of yours from being implimented in the future.
"The ones preventing it are SANDAG, the CCC and NCTD."
ReplyDeleteNot to mention the lack of epic funds possible to make it so.
There have always been back-ups for southbounders from the light at Leucadia Blvd when traffic gets heavy. Especially before post-time in Del Mar and once in a while when the Fwy is closed. I suspect the reason they don't happen as often as they used to is because Solana Beach and Del Mar have added a lane to their southbound portions of 5. It has noticable improved these southbound back-ups when they do happen on 101, especially early mornings. As for North Bound traffic it seldom EVER backs up from La Costa Ave. to where I am in the middle of there and Leucadia Blvd. It probably will periodically until the LC roundabout is installed when that roundabout allows circulation where currently it is blocked half of the time with red lights.
All good points, LL!
LL,
ReplyDeleteGreat job. You clearly get it.
The railway corridor bicycle plan is not part of a "utopian dream." We already have the right of ways; we don't have the funds, maybe, but it would be much less than the North 101 Streetscape. That's an "autopian nightmare!"
ReplyDeleteThe City already has the permissions to use some of that right of way. There is already a bicycle lane in the railroad corridor, on the east side of Highway 101, for northbound bicyclists, from Marchetta south to A Street, and points south, near Chesterfield.
What the City could and should focus on is removing those plants with thorns and extending the rail trail bicycle lane north from Marchetta to La Costa. All this BS about having to go though the Coastal Commission, is just that. Lane elimination changing a four lane major roadway, within the Coastal Commission's jurisdiction, a primary circulation element is what "kicks in" the requirements for all the amendments to our General and Specific Plans and to our LCP, NOT adding a bicycle lane.
You are using false logic to distract from the truth. SANDAG has already been a part of our Bicycle Materplan update. This plan, including the rail trail corridor, with a bicycle lane, was just approved by the Planning Commission on 1/17/13. You can check it out online!
The CCC staff did not get it wrong "anon." The City began a process, the North 101 Streetscape, without vetting it before the Planning, Traffic and Environmental Commissions. It has relied exclusively on biased consultants, staff, and STAKEHOLDERS, including L101MA, LTC, a bicyclist "committee," but NOT including residents living adjacent to the proposed Streetscape project on Hwy 101. The "workshops" and their bogus last "survey" were rigged . . . Adjacent residents, opponents of roundabouts and lane elimination on the highway were given very little opportunity for input. We either would "run out of time" or we were limited to speaking for two minutes after listening to hours of lobbying . . .
But the process the City began did include applying for and BEING GRANTED a Coastal Development Permit, Design Review Permit, and Amendments to the GP, the N101SP and the LCP, in March of 2010, BECAUSE OF THE LANE ELIMINATION, which was to be an early phasing IN of the 101 Streetscape through Leucadia.
The City, NOT the CCC changed the rules "mid-game." Encinitas didn't COMPLETE the process it started, and tried to claim the lane elimination is instead part of a "re-striping" project.
Regardless of WHAT PROJECT the City wants to claim that changing a four lane configured Coast Highway to a 3 lane configuration, permanent lane closure for motorists on North 101 REQUIRES AN AMENDMENT TO OUR LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM, APPEALABLE TO THE CCC. It requires a Coastal Development permit because the slurry, overlay, street striping project was $1.5+ Million, and the Streetscape will be over $20 Million. What matters is that further traffic studies, of both bicyclists and motorists are/were required before the lane could be eliminated.
There was no matter of immediate emergency, that the process had to be shortcutted. The bicyclist accidents were NOT on the east side of the highway, going northbound, except for one, repeated over and over, involving a drunk driver, a hit and run, who drifted over to lane two at 1 a.m. . .
Anyone who disagrees with the sock puppets posting here, some probably paid operatives of L101MA, is defamed, libeled and told we are posting garbage. Think what you want. I'm not trying to change your minds, only to post the facts.
But you don't want to hear the facts, because they don't agree with your close minded pre-formed conclusions. Why bother to answer at all? You aren't going to drive anyone away, and you are only talking to your other sock puppet friends, cowards and bullies. If you had legitimate arguments, you wouldn't need to trash people behind your anonymous bravado and all knowing arrogance.
Why are you bullies and bad-mouthers so afraid of waiting for the results of further traffic studies already contracted out to Peltz & Assoc. who subcontracted them out to Linscott and Greenspan?
ReplyDeleteWould you also be afraid to allow the public to vote on whether or NOT we want and need five roundabouts and lane elimination? What are you so afraid of, that you resort to your constant attacks against those who use facts to explain how the City is not following its own rules? Your personal attacks and libels only weaken your "case," and draw attention to your own small minded, mean-spiritedness.
Jerome Stocks was famous for twisting the facts backwards, so that he accused his political "opponents" of doing exactly what he was, in fact, doing to us.
Council and staff have insulted us citizens by exposing us to fines and legal action through the CCC, which does not want any City in the State to say, our judgment supersedes and trumps your authority to regulate Coastal Act Law through the various cites' Local Coastal Programs. Otherwise CCC certification of the LCPs would be a joke; ignoring Encinitas' unwise and emotional decision to disregard the well-reasoned, legal direction of the CCC staff would stand as a terrible precedent.
Too bad Lisa Shaffer and Teresa Barth have both campaigned so much on being environmentally sensitive. Shaffer wanted to be appointed as an Environmental Commissioner! The Mayor and Deputy Mayor should know better.
And as Tony Kranz said, because he had asked for clarification re PROCEDURE, not hours of emotional but irrelevant testimony from bicycle clubs, many speakers from outside Encinitas, who can't vote here, anyway: "I asked for clarity, and we didn't get it!"
Everyone's needs must be balanced. That's why a vote would be advisable, or a true needs assessment by an impartial, unbiased consultant, NOT a lobbyist who goes across the country pushing roundabouts. From the beginning, the workshops were "all about the roundabouts," and the redevelopment they would allow and promote.
Most folks here don't think Leucadia is crappy. We want improvements, hence the discussion of the GREENSCAPE. We should scrap the Streetscape. It benefits the few at the expense of the common good. And it would take away that eight foot wide open bicycle lane, for cyclists, too, who would also be forced to go through four one lane, narrow diameter roundabouts, with motorists. Roundabouts have been shown to be LESS SAFE for bicyclists.
Keep Leucaida Funky, preserve and enhance what's left of the canopy. Stop trash talking your neighbors, and try to open your minds and hearts to the perspective of adjacent residents, the elderly and disabled, and local commuters who must rely on North Highway 101 to get from Point A to Point B.
Lynn, do not call yourself leucadian as a title. It's further lies from you. You're not a leucadian. you live in Encinitas and I feel bad for them that you live in their community.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that Lynn is really good at, is lies. She is one proven liar.
ReplyDeleteAnybody living here along the corridor for the last 30 plus years does not need another traffic study to tell us what is happening on 101.
ReplyDeleteWe have had a couple of weekends now with this change and I am not hearing or seeing any massive public outcry about their personal democracy being taken away in Encinitas.
You have the right to state your interpretation of the laws as fact Lynn but you will not allow for anyone else to interpret them a different way or have a different opinion of the issue.
You are not a lawyer or a public representitive for Leucadia. You are not our spokesperson either!
This streetscape process has been going on for sometime now and with the exception of you and your fellow full time city project obstructionists.
There is no one that I know of personally from this end of town crying foul or that this version of the streetscape is a public danger or misguided and not vetted by the locals that live west of 101.
Your claims that our voices were not counted at the workshops is laughable and totaly false.
By the way.
ReplyDeleteAs far as keeping Leucadia funky... Fred is the KING OF FUNKINESS!
Ever been in his store Lynn?
Leucadia old school funky at it's best!
Fred... Thanks for droping by the yard sale yesterday.
LL, good comments, but please remain seated when you talk about me. And yes, I scour the neighborhood sales each week to buy and recycle cool and weird stuff at my modest shop for resale. Sadly some on here think that's evil or that I have some other grandious plan to ruin Leucadia. (Like what? Make my shop 5 stories tall?)
ReplyDeleteAnd just to try to clear up a few myths with "Leucadian" (who curiously calls annonymous bloggers cowards):
1. Peltz did not reroute local computers to only find good news about traffic calming measures online. That's just the way it really works in other cities.
2. One reporter for the Coast News still calls roundabouts "traffic circles". She should learn the vast difference between the two. Especially when "traffic circles" is one of the favorite words misused by a few to frighten unsuspecting listners into thinking we're getting something far inferior to 100% roundabouts.
3. If you have LESS traffic at a roundabout because it has three ports instead of four, that doesn't diminish it's usefulness, it IMPROVES it. Some would have you believe otherwise but their logic is blinded by their crusade to stop Streetscape for whatever reason.
4. Of the 200 parcels on N. Coast Hwy 101, I don't know of one local merchant/property owner who's ever built or intends to build a 3 to 5 story structure. NAME ONE. The ones who have built 3 stories are and will be from out of town - but that doesn't stop a few from unilaterally attacking all merchants here on local blogs as if total buildout is our secret agenda.
5. Me belonging to two local groups has never been a conflict of interest, violation of a Brown Act or even "incestuous", as the tone of one suggests. Talk about name calling and bullying!.
6. Community input and votes are important things, but there are some who will stop at nothing to have expensive public votes mandatory on every single aspect of Streetscape. Their aim can only be to stall it indefinately. This is evident from their recent waffling. First they tried to keep bicyclists from having safe designated bike lanes on 101. But when they lost that round, now they're engaging bicyclists to fear roundabouts! Also now it would give them great satisfaction for the city to be enormously fined and have to paint out the safe bike lanes that are now in place. That would be at the expense of taxpayers AND the safety of cyclists. Streetscape meetings and workshops were widely publicized, well attended and votes were not scewed. It was at a general plan meeting that showed pictures of various 3 story buildings and asked "Which kind of 3 story building do you like better?" Now THAT was scewed. I have no problem with 3 story buildings IF they're in a location that can accomodate parking, and N. Coast Hwy 101 obviously CAN NOT.(except for PROBABLY KSL's hotel approved for the north end - which bought up ample real estate, and MAYBE the existing bankrupt 3 story "Lofts" at the south end that supplied many parking spaces below their building.) There probably won't be any underground parking in Leucadia as the water table is only a dozen feet down.
Lynn,
ReplyDeleteTry and speak the truth for once. Your actions are only costing us taxpayers big time money. Your sick mind thinking bike lanes are not needed and the Hwy101 is OK as is, is totally twisted.
Lastly, You are not a Leucadian nor do you represent anyone other than your overgrown self. So quite acting like you speak for others.
IMHO- You suck and have no logic in that fat head. I can't weight for the day that Encinitas is clear from you wasting all our time and negative mind frame.
Opps! I meant "skewed". So I won't throw stones at 11:31 for misspelling "wait" and "quit" as we both probably went to San Dieguito before it was an Academy. Calling someone a fat head though doesn't solve anything. Unless I'm just a poopiehead who doesn't know what I'm talking about.
ReplyDeleteThe roundabouts will NEVER be built.
ReplyDeleteThe Streetscape will not be funded.
The Hall Park will take every penny this city has.
There will be NO significant infrastructure improvements in Leucadia.
Stop stressing out.
OK I'm done JP. You don't have to yell!
ReplyDeleteThe exact boundaries of Leucadia are unclear. Seaside Gardens is a subdivision created in 1928, which runs along Neptune and east to La Veta. Parts of it are listed, on County Assessor records as being in (Old) Encinitas and parts of it are listed as being within Leucadia.
ReplyDeleteNorth of El Portal, on La Veta, is listed as Seaside Gardens Leucadia. The L101MA is on Highway 101, a few lots south of Leucadia Glass. It is definitely not within the Leucadia Boundaries. Charles Marvin has stated at public Council Meetings that his address is at 200 Neptune. That also is not within Leucadia.
However there is no point in trying to distract the conversation by turning the conversation to a debate about whether one lives in Leucadia or not. Anyone driving north on Highway 101, or any bicyclists can be affected by one lane being eliminated for motorists.
When traffic is at peak periods, people could swerve into the bike lane, to get around blockage. This would endanger bicyclists.
People who want the city to follow its own rules and complete the CDP and Design Review application processing, which was begun on March 15, 2010, do care about our entire community.
Many of the bicyclists who spoke at the January 30 Council Meeting were also not from Leucadia. They are not being demonized.
All you have to do is connect the dots to find the original borders of Leucadia. North to South the dots go from the center of the Batiquitos to (at least) Santa Fe Dr. where Cardiff starts. Later hands changed names of streets and took territory leaving us from La Costa Ave to Union St. A Persian rug is still a Persian rug regardless what they call the country now or change it to later. Anybody wanna guess why they called it Leucadia County Water District forever?
ReplyDeleteWhen someone is so focused on Charlie Marvin, you know its the L-word.
ReplyDeleteI personally think she's had a crush on that nice old man for years. Sorry L-word, Charlie don't like scum.
It's very obvious that someone here is focused on Lynn. It's simply a fact that some prominent members of L101MA, such as Charles Marvin and Morgan Mallory do not reside in Leucadia.
ReplyDeleteThe facts are that:
ReplyDelete1. There is one board member of L-101 who does not reside here but loves Leucadia enough to have a business here for over two decades and is actively concerned about beautifying and making Leucadia safer for all to enjoy.
2. The other board member of L-101 you referred to lives in the gray area which some rightfully refer to as Leucadia and others rightfully refer to as Old Encinitas. He and his family love Leucadia enough to spend a LOT of money and time restoring and enhancing his boutique and his Inn in Leucadia. Not bulldozing them for 5 story complexes as few suggest for ulterior motives.
Take a look for yourself: http://www.leucadiabeachinn.org or better yet, go down and check them out in person. Then when your friends and family come to visit, book them a room at the Inn. They'll love it!
Or, go ahead and keep being the rain, and we'll keep being the parade.
Wow, I'm getting better. Just ran this through spell check and got an "A"! Now if only my grammar didn't suck.