The following message comes from Tom Frank, Leucadia's representative on the Traffic Commission.
THIS ISSUE IS BEING DISCUSSED AT THE MARCH 8th CITY COUNCIL MEETING, 6 pm CITY HALL. THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE YOUR VOICE HEARD. PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION.IT IS VERY IMPORTANT.
From Tom Frank: "We need major public comment at council this week to make sure they head in the right direction. I have read the study and offer the following comments. The study concludes that it will take $150 to $160 million to create an acceptable grade separated crossing. With no funding source identified for the project, the only improvements for the next 50-100 years will be at grade improvements. The at grade alternative should be called 50 to 100 year improvements not interim improvements to reflect reality. This project is one of the paramount issues effecting Leucadia's future character. The at grade crossing section of the study is very preliminary and contains many flaws. Examples include:
1. Not conforming to the N. Coast HW Specific Plan, the General Plan, and
the goals of L101.
2. Interim improvements do not include a walkway along the south side of Leucadia Blvd. between Vulcan and HW101 as shown in the NCHW specific plan. This Crosswalk is imperative to promote a walkable community.
3. Report does not specify width of walkway on north side. The Walkway should be a minimum 8 feet wide with a protective barrier similar to the walkway design on the new North Torry Pines bridge constructed just S. of Del Mar on H.W. 101.
4. Bike lines should be min. 8 feet.
5. Travel lanes on Leucadia Blvd. do not need to be (actually should not be) 12 feet and should be reduced to 11 feet. 1 12 foot travel lanes would promote speeds above the posted speed limit.
6. The study did not list or address the comments received at the public workshops or letters. The participation at the 2nd workshop was well over 100. Closer to 200 residents attended (I counted 180). No minutes or record of the meeting comments were recorded or addressed. The majority of the participants at the workshop favored the one way couplets alternatives, and did not support adding travel lanes to promote cut through traffic at the expense of pedestrian safety and community character.
7. Although listed in several written comment letters, the study does not address a quite zone at the Leucadia Blvd. which should be required prior to placing any 2nd track.
8. The list goes on and on.
1. SANDAG's goal is to promote "SmartGrowth". Smartgrowth focuses on high density land use along with walkable and bicycle improvements to get people out their cars and using public transportation. Without these vital walkable community infrastructure improvements, "smart growth" quickly becomes Stupid Growth and only make communities look more like the LA mistakes.
2. NCTD's Goals is to get people out of their car and using public transportation. Adequate walkways and bicycle infrastructure is imperative to allow this to happen.
3. Encinitas General Plan has similar content to promote a walkable community similar to smart growth.
Mainstreet Goals include goals to promote a more walkable community consistent with Smartgrowth.
Leucadia Blvd. at HW101 is:
1. The heart of Leucadia and should be treated in a manner to improve the character of our community with walkways and design to encourage the neighborhood to the east to visit the L101 businesses and beach by foot or bike.
2. The only legal RR crossing within a 3 mile Stretch from Encinitas Blvd. to La Costa Blvd.
3. Currently a hazard and should be improved in the near future. The public was only given 3 working days notice to get to City hall and read the study and provide comments. Most of the public is not aware this project is being discussed at this Wednesdays meeting. More public notice and input is need on this paramount project.
As currently outlined in the study, the proposed at grade improvements at Leucadia Blvd. would promote more I5 commuter cut through traffic at the expense of Leucadia's character, pedestrian and bicycle safety, property values, coastal pedestrian access,
business revenues, and City revenues. I recommend that council accept the report as a starting point and schedule a series of public workshops to further the development of the 50 to 100 year at grade improvements.
Walkable community concepts, N. Coast HW specific plan, and L101 goals need to be properly addressed before moving forward."