This classic email landed in my inbox from defeatdalager@gmail.com
FYI-Paula's last name is spelled Kirpalani not Kirkpalani.
FYI2-The coast highway from Pipes in Cardiff to Swami's is one lane. I hope this guy plans on lobbying the city to add a north bound lane at that location.
Roundabouts have their pros and cons but to call them bottlenecks is disingenuous. How about protesting the new traffic signal on the coast highway on F St in downtown Encinitas? And, traffic isn't exactly flowing at the stop sign in Leucadia at Juanita's.
Evacuation Suicide is the name of my new band.
Why would anyone want to evacuate from Leucadia?? I thought we were perfect just as we are?? I mean doesn't everyone love the lack of sidewalks, streetlights and poor drainage?? I won't mention the dirt and weeds in the center medians nor the train that zips through town at 70 MPH.. No, no evacuation needed, one lane north AND south will be just fine.
ReplyDeleteBuild the streetscape as planned.
Don't wuss out the the forces of evil that want to keep Leucadia ugly. Ugly as they are, ugly as there businesses and buildings. Ugly as their delivery trucks. Ugly as the ugly people that post here opposing the streetscape. Ugly as their dead hero.
Ugly, just plane ugly.
The streetscape has not been planned yet, or do you know something we don't?
ReplyDeleteHah! I saw this one making the rounds, and since I got it on April 1st, I honestly thought it was an April Fools joke! It's still kind of hard to believe it's not.
ReplyDeleteUP VOICE!
NO SAY! to
bad-grammar-spelling-challenged.
I'm very much looking forward to the meeting on April 8th - I'm dearly looking forward to hearing from whomever it was who crafted this message. Show up if you can! We need to make sure we get our 4th workshop so we can move forward with this project - hopefully we won't be sandbagged with another round of last-minute entrants into the discussion. Progress, not perfection, eh?
-DROZONE-
If we want address the issues identified when the N 101 Corridor Specific Plan and at all the workshops and begin the improvements that Leucadia deserves and has long been waiting for, we all need to work together for the benifit of our future.
ReplyDeleteI have confidence that the author of this email is not aware of the issues that are on the table, not been to the workshops and has by gotten involved in the improvement process or knows the names of the people or organization that are attempting to nurture these positive changes.
All of the alternatives presented address the needs of the community. The fourth alternative allows for preservTion of trees, planting a thousand more, calming traffic, creating safe bike lanes, safe walking passages, increasing needed parking, creates a pedistrian friendly and positive business atmosphere.
The plan does not propose one lane north all along the 101 and offers roundabouts that have been proven to be safer, more efficient and better ecologically.
If this uninformed spell challenged individual,(or is Andreen or the Enc chamber), believes that there are better solutions or alternatives to the very well thought out design concepts they should be shared to benifit of all.
I encourage all to stay informed and involved and don't allow the Ill informed to influence this oppertunity for positive change.
Who be the tard?
ReplyDeleteI do feel that five roundabouts in less than two miles would slow traffic to create bottlenecks, particularly if northbound traffic is reduced to only one lane. To call the opinion of the majority of those filling out the survey at City Hall, and over 400 people who signed petitions at Leucadia Glass and Sub Palace, as well as the vote tallied on this blog, "disingenuous" is disingenuous, imo.
ReplyDeleteHey, JP, were you at that last "workshop?" Did you read the results of the surveys published through the Chamber of Commerce?
Why should a few property owners get the benefit of additional parking at the expense of residents getting more "diversion" traffic, including on Neptune?
Also, businesses would be drastically impacted by the slowdown that would result during construction, during these already challenging economic times. Peder Norby has said that some "encroachments" would be necessary.
I don't blame business and property owners for not wanting to give up part of their private property so that a few people can push their agenda through, and then raise rents.
We do have sidewalks now, much better. The drainage situation is better than it was, from what I've seen, but the drainage isn't really being addressed by this project that I've seen.
disingenuous |ˌdisinˈjenyoōəs|
ReplyDeleteadjective
not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.
If the April 8 Council Meeting is anything like the last workshop, then Charles Marvin, and others will again see that the majority of those "involved," residents and many business owners, do NOT want five roundabouts in less in two miles, and do not want North Highway 101 to be reduced to only one lane going northbound through Leucadia to provide more parking and a "Gucci" look for a few property owners, who can then raise their rents.
ReplyDeleteFive roundabouts in less than two miles is NOT keeping Leucadia Funky, which is what had the most "hits" at the first workshop.
At the last workshop, the overwhelming majority did not favor ANY of the four alternatives that were pushing five roundabouts and narrowing North Hwy. 101 to one lane only, northbound, for the Leucadia Streetscape project.
Whatever. Learn the facts before your post.
ReplyDeleteOn Leucadia Boulevard, the roundabouts work flawlessly. It’s the all way stop at Hygeia and the signals at I5 and Vulcan that back up traffic.
Apparently you are uneducated, have no common sense, or want to keep Leucadia unsafe and crappy.
The plan alternative 4 as presented incorporates public input and will make Leucadia a safe and nice place for all of Encinitas. Plus we preserve 98% of our old growth and gain 1000 new trees.
There will always be a few naysayers. I say fine make your comments known. In the end we will have all have mainstreet that the community will embrace.
I think this is a great project and I look forward to seeing you at next Wednesday meeting to better Encinitas.
roundabouts in the proper place do not create bottlenecks. Can bottlenecks be created by roundabouts...yes. Primary flow means no yielding, means continual traffic on an arterial throughway. The roundabout at Santa Fe is primarily east west so the north south traffic does back up. and, should some poor soul break down in the middle of a roundabout he will probably be tarred and feathered...there is no going around a blockage in a roundabout. heaven forbid you need an ambulance to race through with its sreet light controller....are amublances going to have huge retractable legs to float over the roundabouts? Think before you act as my 5th grade teacher said.
ReplyDeleteThe Leucadia Streetscape is still in planning stages. It frustrates me for people to continue on and on about 5 roundabouts when this is not final. Leucadia's historic Hwy 101 has become a lessway for our community. When did cars become more important than people. This street is a public place, people walking, riding bikes, skateboards, walking pets, conducting buisness. Cars and trucks racing thru at unsafe speeds make our community undesireable. As a community we need to come together and create a place that works for all purposes. Personally, I would like to see the traffic slowed down, I think 3 roundabouts would be suffcient, the tree canopy restored and a walkable community that will be enjoyed by all, and create a positive buisness atmosphere.
ReplyDeleteI encourage everyone to take a drive down to the Birdrock area of La Jolla. There are five roundabouts in about a one mile stretch...decide for yourself if it works or not.
ReplyDeleteClassic case of "killing the messenger." "Stop Diane Langager and the City," simply unbelievable.
ReplyDeleteDiane's job is to provide facilitation for this Project, a task that she has taken on and performed well with poise and professionalism. To attack her, and suggest she needs to be stopped in some way is a serious misdirection of your energy.
She is genuine, sincere and respectful to all parties in this process, and we are very fortunate that she has been the planner assigned to this task. She is also a just and hardworking city employee who happens to care a great deal about our / her community.
So lay off the messenger, concentrate on the project objectives and work to find solutions.
My take on the friction over this issue is that it is not only rooted in how roundabouts function, but also over what objective is trying to be achieved.
ReplyDeleteIt was great that Patricia gave her vision. If that is the adopted vision then the next step should be comparing alternatives to reach the established goals. The scope of the proposed vision for this project has snowballed well beyond getting sidewalks, light posts, and adding trees, I think, I guess... it looks that way to me. I'm not sure if the process was set up to handle the broader scope.
We all know there is no streetscape utopia and I think that not acknowledging the tradeoffs associated with different visions and approaches has only fuelled the "naysayers'" concern. Roundabouts slow emergency vehicle response time according to city staff. Maybe that is just fine. We might make Neptune, Vulcan, Hermes, and Orpheus less pedestrian friendly, if commuter traffic is diverted away from 101. It seems reasonable to expect more cut through traffic on our residential streets _IF_ the perceived through time on 101 decreases. Is there analysis on this? We should make informed decisions, shouldn't we? (This analysis could function as a chill pill for naysayers).
Even though I have always openly supported 101 getting spruced up, I admit that I have not followed the details of the streetscape project closely, and it has been my intent to leave that to others. That changed somewhat when people started saying the trees were geriatric and might as well get cut down. Please inform me.
I think Anon 750 can help out the conversation by indicating what objectives were met with the Bird Rock project and how the achievement of those objectives can be measured.
(Extra Note: Langager is one of the best planners at City Hall, and it is the council that makes policy decisions)
Bottleneck and choke points are not the correct terms for roundabouts. I think the main focus of the streetscape should be sidewalks, trees and flowers. Roundabouts make you swerve slightly to the right at a slow speed. WAAAAHHHH!!!
ReplyDelete8:54 AM - I don't know how long you've dealt with city staff, but in my view Diane is the root of the problem. She sets the tone.
ReplyDeleteDiane has never been genuine, sincere and respectful. She may be a hardworking city employee, but she looks on the residents with contempt and disdain.
What if we designed city life around the happiness of the people who live there instead of the ease of moving materials, cars and trains around for those who don't?
ReplyDelete"Why should a few property owners get the benefit of additional parking at the expense of residents getting more "diversion" traffic, including on Neptune?"
ReplyDeleteNorth bound travelers on fwy 5 are NOT going to go a half mile West (out or their way) to take Neptune north only to be stuck Grandview trying to make a left hand turn. The claim by a citizen at a meeting that Northbound 101 now backs up all the way to Encinias Blvd "Twice a month" is simply not so. Why would someone want to kill the Streetscape by giving everyone false inforamtion like that? Me thinks another agenda is at play.
Hah! I was also going to quote that bit, "Why should a few property ... at the expense of residents getting more "diversion" traffic, including on Neptune?" I'm a dedicated "shortcut taker", and it's always been my take that driving up to Neptune would be a *stupid* shortcut - no shortcut at all! I got the impression that some of the folks at the last CoC meeting who went off on this point are using this as a stalking horse - they would prefer it if NOBODY was allowed on Neptune but them.
ReplyDeleteConcerning roundabouts, I agree with several of the other posters here that 5 is too many. The original 3 proposed (El Portal, La Costa, and one more between Leucadia Blvd and La Costa) should be all we need. It seemed to me that the "extra" 2 that were added in the North end were a kludge added to address some of the concerns voiced by residential users worried about getting out on 101. Hopefully these details will be discussed in Workshop #4. Regardless of what is decided for the first phase, the north end won’t enter construction until 5-7 years from now – plenty of time to petition Council to amend the plans for these last roundabouts.
Be that as it may, I simply *love* roundabouts – they are a blessing to me! Stopping and starting blows IMHO, and that is what we will get plenty of if we add stop signs or signals. Let’s not get hung up on this point, what say we build the first one at El Portal and see how good/bad it really is? Adding Stop Signs would be a catastrophe – we would be just another stretch to avoid like the plague, much like Del Mar. (Sorry Del Mar!)
I also love Eucalyptus trees, anyone else? But that is… another post. =)
Kevin C- Roundabouts do NOT slow emergency vehicles. Staff know nothing about roundabouts, that's why professional planners were brought into this situation. 5 roundabouts work great.
ReplyDeleteEvery day I sit at traffic lights and wonder why there isn't a roundabout so I and everyone else at that intersection can be on our way to our destination. Stupid!! Roundabouts work.
Don't listen to the nay sayers like the glass man and the sandwich man. Their petition was full of lies.
Roundabouts work.
Roundables certainly work well in England! It seems they could work here too.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we should wait for Solana Beach to install them, and then try for a "me too" solution....
Kevin- You should educate your self on this subject. IT will make huge difference for your family cruising to the beach and if the streetscape is implemented there would likely be some shops in N. HWy101 that your family would want to walk too.
ReplyDeleteThe alternatives for intersections include nothing, Stop Signs, Traffic Signals or Roundabouts.
Traffic signals are the worst for fatalities and are terrible for traffic speed and pedestrian friendliness. Plus as someone else wrote, I hate wasting my life staring at a red light on a timer while I could safely go through the intersection.
Stop Signs are not efficient for Vehicle.
Roundabouts are by far the best alternative and are more efficient for vehicles and much Safer for Pedestrians.
Kevin- You seem like a pretty bright guy. Go spend some time on walking around the Leucadia roundabouts. They work great and are great for pedestrians. Hang out long enough and you will see a fire truck go through the roundabouts with easy at about 20mph. Which is probably faster than they travel through the all way stop at Hygeia, and definitely signals.
Roundabouts are great unless you can't learn to yield to traffic and learn to take control of your life.
The very character that most of you moved here because of will be destroyed by any more of these crappy bottle necking roundabouts. They are not Encinitas or Leucadia and I hope the three they put in will be removed someday. Look at the skid marks on the center curbs. Lots of work for alignment and body shops. Let alone someone was killed at the Santa Fe roundabout. If they are so great move somewhere that already has them but don't shove them down our throat.
ReplyDeleteNext thing you know, you will want pedestrian tunnels under the tracks.
Last post is classic and obviously part of the 10% that can’t figure out how to yield.
ReplyDeleteThe guy who ran into the roundabout at over 70mph was wasted at over a .2 BAC and we are lucky he didn't kill anyone else.
I think roundabouts are pure Encinitas and Leucadia. They show that the citizens of our City are smarter than the average generica town and is installing intersection controls that are safer, work great, are efficient, save time, and promote a more walkable community.
Signals are not Leucadia. Signals are the worse.
Some people get it, while others can't seem to except change even for the better.
Less we all forget, the city and certain other parties are pushing roundabouts because they have no level of service standards. So no matter how bad the traffic gets, the intersection is always functioning at Level A. Good for developers, not good for residents.
ReplyDeleteIt's simply a way to promote growth under the guise of making things better, when, in reality, we are losing quality of life. If that is what we want, fine. But let's have an honest discussion about it.
Roundabouts are not a panacea. They have been around for a long time. And please, no crap about the "modern roundabout." All that means is that a yield sign is added.
A roundabout needs to be big in circumference so cars can smoothly merge, flat, and visually unobscured. Everything the roundabout on Santa Fe isn't. Check the tire marks on the curbing and the tire tracks on the ice plant. Plus drivers still seem confused, regardless of the city website instructions.
It's tough to plunk a roundabout in an old location with limited right-of-way. The fact is that the city wants a cheap (but problematic) way to mitigated present and future traffic. Once the roundabouts are in, the major restraint on unlimited development will be gone. Every traffic study will automatically find no impacts.
Anon 8:03
ReplyDeleteYou my friend have a very clear grasp of the whole picture. Roundabouts are truly a mixed bag.
BS- Out of the 3 choices Roundabouts are the best. Maybe not panacea, but the best choice we have for intersections. I love the ones that have been built in Encinitas.
ReplyDeleteI see serious accidents with Signals and they don't work well. I see black marks at every intersection with curb. Face it, there are retards on the road.
Tell Me 8:03 and Left Coast, what type of intersection control do you prefer and why?
To anonymous at 12:45:
ReplyDeleteYou seem to have missed the point of my comments. There is no one best choice for intersections. Again the reason the city is choosing roundabouts is because the intersection will always be at Level A. This will allow unlimited traffic growth with no mitigation required.
Why do you think the city put the roundabout on Santa Fe and is planning four more in ¼ mile? With the Hall property park and now the Scripps Hospital expansion approved, with the Vons expanding, and either a Vons gas station or a medical building going in where the Union 76 was, every intersection in the strip will be at Level F requiring mitigation. With roundabouts, nothing is required because all traffic problems are solved. Do you really believe this?
The Scripps expansion was approved as the EIR says there will be no traffic impacts. The roundabouts will solve all the problems. Again do you really believe this?
All I ask for is an honest and transparent discussion of the issue. That means NOT having the discussion controlled by hired guns who have an agenda.
Roundabouts suck. There is no other way around it. I've lived here all my life and those who want them are either a bit touched or have only lived here 15 minutes. But that doesn't mean that I like stop signs or new traffic lights. It just )means that Encinitas should not build them. Those who want them are city staff, (transplants who don't care) maybe council members, (mostly transplants) and transplants. Get a grip, if they were so hot every city from here to New York would have them. Like that is going to happen. By the way, who is your leader? Dru?
ReplyDeleteI honestly think that most of the pro roundabout posts are by the same one or two people.
ReplyDeleteRoundabouts may work in some places, not on 101, when one lane of traffic will be eliminated.
If more parking is provided for private property owners, then they should pay an assessment fee on their property tax bills.
Many long time property owners, yes, such as Charles Marvin, are paying low property tax rates due to Prop 13, the Jarvis Gann initiative which passed in 1978.
Hundreds of people have signed petitions at Leucadia Glass and Subpalace. Rick and Kathy Smith of Leucadia Glass, and many others do NOT want five roundabouts, and do not want a roundabout an El Portal, WHERE THERE SHOP IS.
I doubt if Dan Dalager would want a roundabout that encroached on his shop, when he had one, or that encroached on his rental property that public records show he owns with his brother, at 3rd and F, WITH AN ILLEGAL UNIT.
There have been numerous posts here, before about the Birdrock roundabouts. The community character there has changed completely due to higher density mixed use. The rents were raised. We are not La Jolla, and we don't want to be.
We are not ugly; we are not the forces of evil. We would just like to have some say in what our community looks like, and our quality of life.
I feel that the people living on all the side streets west of North 101 WOULD BE IMPACTED BY MORE DIVERSION TRAFFIC. That seems inevitable if any of the four alternatives are built.
Listen to the general public, not just a vocal, influential and manipulative few.
Why single out Marvin paying low property taxes? The majority of people in Leucadia have been here since the 60's and 70's.
ReplyDeleteanon 12:45,
ReplyDeleteDo you propose that roundabouts should be used instead of other approaches for all controlled intersections?
Which of the H101 intersections need control? Which do not?
Others,
Have the objectives of the streetscape been established?
Kevin- not all but most.
ReplyDeleteLa Costa, Marchetta or El Portal, Grandview, and La Costa are all needed. Grandview is the only one in my opinion that is newly needed.
The one at Seabluffes condo may or maynot be needed. I don't know the safety issues at that intersection, but some control at Grandview is needed.
Lets see what we will end up with at the intersections.
If its up to Ned, he wishes for no change whether your a local or not. What he doesn't realize is his realatives are all transplantas. If an intersection control is needed for safety reason, he can't explain which option he likes because he appartently does not understand the issues.
Should be interesting.
I honestly think Anon 10:25 is a classic Lynn comment. We are far from La Jolla and will never be. However, if it was up to people like Anon 10:25 our community's mainstreet will become the most unsafe and ugliest along the Coast.
ReplyDeleteMore than 10,000 people go through each of our three roundabouts a day. Total it up and millions of cars have safety traveled through our roundabouts to date and counting. The claims of congestion and “that they don't work” are untrue.
The majority of people love roundabouts, with the minority hating them. According to national statistics the spread is like 80% support ands 20% do not support. According to our Leucadia blog survey over 70% of the respondents "love roundabouts", with 30% “hating them”.
The facts speak for themself.
I bet if you did a survey on traffic signals, you would get 70% of people "Hating Signals".
ReplyDeleteI think signals work terribly. The are ugly, unsafe and inefficient.
Anon10:25 you are as big an idiot as Smith and his bunch. Currently NO cars stop or slow down at Leucadia Glass, they zip by without reason. With a roundabout at that location, Mr. Smith will have thousands of cars slowly driving past his store, they will notice him and his bidness(Jesse Jackson spelling, not mine)will increase.
ReplyDeletePerhaps he will want to improve the look of his building, more than likely NOT!! But for sure his taxes will not increase. He is protected by Prop 13.
What we need protection from are the lies and deceit promoted by the evil, keep it junky crowd that wants Leucadia the blighted,armpit of north county coastal.
As for his claim that he will lose parking spaces...they aren't his spaces to start with, they are the cities. His customers can and should park in the rear of his building. I know I do, after he closes... LOL.