Thursday, January 25, 2007

Going around and around

This blog has become really popular (I'm as surprised as you) and I find the comments people take time to post fascinating. Sometimes I post comments as a main blog post. Here is one of them:

The whole roundabout thing has caused me think in circles.

We came together as a city because we were less than pleased by the dumping attitude of the county. That was a time that if you had 5k (or a prostitute) you could get Paul Eckert, our supervisor, to vote your way on anything.

The five communities were necessary to achieve a critical mass (lafco) to become a city. I think that critical mass is still needed today.

That brings me to the circle part:

First it was the city services and the El Camino Real corridor that got the attention. That attention and expenditures were possible because of the property values along the coast that the new city of Encinitas was able to spend inland.*

Next it was downtown, those improvements were made possible by the new sales tax revenue of the Encinitas Ranch and the El Camino Real corridor.

Now, and the next five years, it’s Leucadia’s turn, those projects are made possible by the generation of property tax and sales tax generated by downtown and the Encinitas Ranch.

I have no doubt in the future, improvements to Cardiff and the El Camino Real corridor will be made possible by the Leucadia corridor property tax and hotel tax.

My simple point is that we are all making it better. It’s Leucadia’s turn at the wheel for the near future.

California has 33 million people and most of those folks (us) live in the bottom third of the state, along the coast.

It’s difficult to lock the doors and say stay away. Its possible to say here’s what we want when you come to our town, or drive through.

We have the right, and I think the obligation to control traffic and calm traffic as it comes through our city.

Reduce the lanes, the lane width, and most importantly the speed.

And finally, don’t pick on other areas of the city, but thank them for helping Leucadia.

--Anonymous

*This is a key point. Without the original property tax collected from the private homes of old Leucadia, Olivehain, Encinitas and Cardiff none of the capital projects could have been jump started in the first place. The older neighborhoods deserve respect.

49 comments:

  1. Anybody know who Paul Eckert worked for?

    ReplyDelete
  2. In 1994, after incorporation but before the commercial developments, the city received $10.6 million in property-tax revenue and $4.2 million in sales taxes.

    This year, property-tax income has reached $22.7 million, and sales-tax revenue has brought in $11.4 million.

    Respect the homeowners because it's all about property tax.

    Who do you think spent the $11.4 million in sales tax? It was mostly local property owners, not tourist.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If it was up to me we would split this city down I-5. We would have West encinitas ( the real surf city USA ) and east encinitas. We can support west Encinitas through property taxes and the businesses in old encinitas. The rest of the city are just West Enciniats wantabees. Let them develop their own city based on the Guerins of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Can't we all just get along...

    ReplyDelete
  5. That's friggin brilliant!

    Thanks J.P. for the forum and the post.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The person accusing others of posting multiple comments, then labeling them "Babble" is really the one doing it himself, using different names, but usually anonymous.

    Thank you, JP, for today's post, from anonymous. The post talks about issues and getting along, not attacking personalities to distract from the discussion. Excellent!

    I just talked to a young mom who said the roundabout at Lego Land in Carlsbad is horrific; people don't yield to let the side streets in.

    ReplyDelete
  7. In answer to people who want a separate Coastal area, first I think we would have to seceed from Encinitas Inc. It's so complicated; of course, you'd need lawyers to help set it up. Power seems to corrupt, wherever it flows.

    I say we could try to empower the Council we have to do the right thing. Of course I'm an idealist, still.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I just talked with a young father who nearly got Tboned at Hygeia. After he slammed on his brakes, his young daughter cracked her tooth on the DVD playing Nemo. At least she wasn't killed.

    If only we had a roundabout.....

    ReplyDelete
  9. What, did somebody run the stop sign???

    ReplyDelete
  10. If we only banned autos...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Didn't the young father have his daughter belted in or in a child's car seat? The same poster is again trying to frighten us all with threats of t-bone accidents. Get real. This kind of accident was more common in Encinitas three decades ago before there were stop signs and then stoplights at Saxony and Encinitas Blvd. and El Camino Real and Encinitas Blvd. That's what prompted the control. Enough of the scare tactics.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I live just East of I5 by Weidener's Gardens and consider myself a Leucadian. Some residents West of 5 resent those of us who don't live next door to them. But we don't mean ya no harm. We love the ocean just as much as you do. I love my house, love my kid's school, Capri, and don't want to live West of 5. I try not to envy my neighbor...I have so damn much to be thankful for that I really don't have time to think about what I don't have. Go spend some time volunteering in a 2nd or 3rd world country in order to get your priorities in place. God I'm lucky!

    ReplyDelete
  13. All you wanted to know about RoundaboutsJanuary 25, 2007 5:11 PM

    This is an excellent site on Roundabout’s history and performance. Check it out and what do you think?


    http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/fall95/p95a41.htm


    Roundabout Safety Comes to America


    The superior safety record of modern roundabouts is well-known in Western Europe and in most British-influenced countries around the globe. Still, many in North America question whether drivers who are unfamiliar with this type of intersection can safely adapt to it.

    But many American highway engineers have become advocates for modern roundabouts, and they are designing and building roundabouts to reduce accidents and increase capacity. Modern roundabouts have recently been built in California, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Nevada, and Vermont. (1-4) Additional modern roundabouts are proposed for freeway interchanges in Maryland and California, and one modern roundabout interchange was built this summer on Interstate Highway 70 in Colorado.

    This article takes a look at the roundabout accident experience of America, which began building modern roundabouts in 1990, and of some European countries, where as recently as five years ago modern roundabouts were relatively new. But first ...

    What Is a Modern Roundabout?
    The era of modern roundabouts began in the United Kingdom in 1956 with the construction of the first "yield-at-entry" roundabouts. In 1966, a nationwide yield-at-entry rule launched the modern roundabout revolution. Australia and most other British-influenced countries soon built modern roundabouts. Countries such as the United States, where people drive on the right side of the road, were slower to follow, but many of these countries have been rapidly catching up. For example, roundabouts have greatly increased in number in France since the adoption of the yield-at-entry rule on national routes in 1983.

    Yield-at-entry is the most important operational element of a modern roundabout, but it is not the only one. Deflection of the vehicle path and entry flare are also important characteristics that distinguish the modern roundabout from the nonconforming traffic circle, which does not have these characteristics. (See side bar page 48). Other features include splitter islands at all approaches (to control entry speed and deter left turns), good sight distance, good lighting, good signing, no crosswalks across the circulatory roadway, yield lines downstream of the pedestrian crossings, and no parking in the roundabout.

    All of these design characteristics must be met for a traffic circle to qualify as a modern roundabout. For example, figure 1 illustrates changing an old traffic circle to conform to a roundabout design by installing yield signs at all entries and forcing a deflection at the northern entry to the circle.

    Roundabouts are designed in different sizes to serve various objectives and conditions. Even mini-roundabouts (with a diameter of 25 meters or less) are effective at reducing speed and improving safety. Small to medium roundabouts are 25 to 40 m in diameter. The larger roundabouts (with a diameter greater than 40 m) provide greater separation of traffic and a higher capacity.

    Why Are Roundabouts Safer?
    The primary characteristics of the modern roundabout reduce many of the safety hazards of traditional intersections and nonconforming traffic circles.

    The physical configuration of a modern roundabout, with a deflected entry and yield-at-entry, forces a driver to reduce speed during the approach, entry, and movement within the roundabout. This is contrary to an intersection where many drivers are encouraged by a green or yellow light to accelerate to get across the intersection quickly and to "beat the red light" and contrary to old traffic circles where tangent approaches also encourage, or at least allow, high-speed entries.

    Another important safety factor is that the only movement at an entry and an exit of a roundabout is a right turn, thus reducing the potential frequency and severity of accidents compared to accidents typically occurring during left turns and when traffic crosses an intersection in perpendicular directions.

    Modern Roundabouts Spread
    DeAragao reported on the history of roundabouts. It is thought that one-way circular intersections were invented by a French architect, Eugene Henard, in 1877.(5) During the same period, the American architect William Eno was also proposing his plan for small circles to alleviate traffic congestion in New York City. Since the adoption of a yield-at-entry regulation in 1966 by Great Britain and in 1983 by France, there has been overwhelming interest and research in roundabouts because of the simplicity of their design and operation and particularly because of their safety.

    Enthusiasm for the safety and high capacity of roundabouts has resulted in a huge increase in the number of roundabouts. By contrast, as growing traffic demand causes nonconforming traffic circles to fail, they are converted to other types of intersections.

    The Netherlands experienced spectacular growth of roundabouts beginning in the late 1980s.(6) In only six years, approximately 400 roundabouts were built. The reasons given are: a drastic reduction in serious crashes; lower driving speeds through the roundabouts; improved pedestrian crossing facilities; elimination of the need for traffic signals, thus reducing the costs of maintenance and enforcement; and high capacity more than 2,000 motor vehicles and several hundred bicycles and mopeds per hour in one-lane roundabouts.

    Norway installed yield signs at the entries of all roundabouts in 1985, thus improving traffic flow and reducing accidents.(7) The number of roundabouts in Norway increased to 500 in 1992 (about one roundabout per 8,000 persons) from 350 in 1990.(8) In 1980, there were only 15 roundabouts in Norway.

    Switzerland adopted the yield-at-entry rule in 1987. (7) The number of Swiss roundabouts grew to 220 in early 1992 from 19 in 1980. (6) Five hundred roundabouts were under study in 1992.

    By 1987, more than 500 roundabouts had been built in the Brittany and western regions of France. Thereafter, new yield-at-entry roundabouts started "popping up" everywhere in France in new construction and in changing signalized intersections. In 1991, the growth of implementation was at the rate of 1,000 roundabouts per year.

    Accidents Fall as Roundabouts Spread to America
    The first modern American roundabouts were built in the spring of 1990 in Summerlin, a rapidly growing planned community on the west side of Las Vegas. (See figures 2 and 3.) With rapid growth of the surrounding community, daily traffic has increased from very low flows to about 7,000 vehicles in the north roundabout and to about 11,000 vehicles in the south roundabout. Only four accidents have been reported at the two roundabouts over their five-year history.

    The first modern roundabout on the California state highway system was installed by the city of Santa Barbara in October 1992. The roundabout replaced an intersection of five two-lane streets regulated by stop signs. The old intersection averaged four accidents per year. Since installation of the roundabout, accidents have averaged 2.1 per year, with only five accidents reported in a 28-month period.(2)

    Maryland's first roundabout was built in April 1993 in Lisbon. The 31.5 -mdiameter roundabout replaced a lightly traveled four-leg intersection regulated by a flashing beacon. The former intersection had averaged eight accidents with eight personal injuries per year.(1) Two accidents occurred in the first three months after construction of the roundabout, resulting in two personal injuries. For the following 21 months, there were no reported accidents.


    Unlike nonconforming traffic circles, which often permit traffic to enter tangentially at speed, modern roundabouts deflect and slow entering traffic. At this roundabout in England, in the year before it was converted to a roundabout, there were eight serious injury accidents and two fatalities; in the year after conversion, there were no serious injury accidents.


    The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) converted the old nonconforming Long Beach traffic circle to a modern roundabout on June 30, 1993. (See figure 4.) Yield signs, stripes, and legends were added to all entries, which were widened to three and four lanes. The circulatory roadway was opened to one unstriped lane 11 m wide in front of the three-lane entries and 15 m wide in front of the four-lane entries. Accidents fell 36 percent compared to the average rate of the previous three years. Accidents with injuries fell 20 percent.

    Accidents Fall as Roundabouts Spread to Other Countries
    Around the world, accident rates are falling as roundabouts spread.

    The Netherlands achieved a 95-percent reduction in injuries to vehicle occupants as many conventional intersections were replaced by modern roundabouts.(10)

    1/25/2007 5:05 PM

    ReplyDelete
  14. The I-5 is an arbitrary line drawn through Leucadia. We don't need any west vs east infighting.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Thanks, why didn' t you say so.

    I am all for a roundabout at Hygia! But not if costs ten trillion dollars. Maybe for a few hundred grand.

    Unless we should make every interesection a roundabout, why two others on that section of leucadia blvd?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thanks for the roundabout link. That was very informative. But the crazies on this blog will deny any FHWA safety data and dismiss the information as pure conspiracy against the victimized Leucadians.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Once again, roundabouts are needed at Hermes and Hymettus for 3 reasons.

    1. To provide safe pedestrian crossings.

    2. To provide safe vehicular access to Leucadia Boulevard.

    3. To balance the neighborhood traffic. Currently Hygeia receives 5 times the traffic of Hermes and Hymettus because people are fearful to access the interestion of Hermes and Leucadia and Hymettus and Leucadia.

    Bonus- We get landscaping along the barren strip of asphalt, dirt and litter.

    The 4 way stop actually helps limit traffic volume on Leucadia Blvd. like the ones do on Rancho Santa Fe. If you want less traffic on Leucadia Blvd. put up 3 four way stops. That would be a major cut through traffic deterrent.

    These issues are all in the City's staff reports on the subject.

    The Roundabouts cost is actually lower in the long run when you consider maintenance cost, reduced liability and reduced loss of life.

    The 2 roundabout cost is only a few hundred thousand. The remaining 800,000 costs are for the walkways, landscaping, irrigation, new pavement, etc..... and to provide left hand turn lanes at Vulcan.

    Go look at the plans. The project will be an amazing improvement to the gauntlet.

    Well worth the money in my humble opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I don't think you are humble. That information link you provided is not relevant to the specific circumstances of Leucadia Blvd.

    We should look at figures from the roundabout on Santa Fe, or the roundabout in Carlsbad, by Legoland. The one on Santa Fe, particularly should be checked to see accident rates before and after the roundabout was built.

    The residents of Rancho Santa Fe are concerned with pedestrian safety. You can go get a copy of the Rancho Santa Fe News.

    Also, this should have to go through the Coastal Commission because it will affect ciruclation.

    The circulation report needs to be released, too, before bidding begins. When we do start, we should begin with ONE at Hygeia, see how that works out.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous wrote:
    "The 4 way stop actually helps limit traffic volume on Leucadia Blvd. like the ones do on Rancho Santa Fe. If you want less traffic on Leucadia Blvd. put up 3 four way stops. That would be a major cut through traffic deterrent."

    At last the truth is out. The city and its supporters are pushing roundabouts to allow more traffic through our streets. That way they can say the upzoning and increases in density has no impact. Nice con job!

    ReplyDelete
  20. city development lobbiest is postingJanuary 25, 2007 8:40 PM

    The sidewalks and landscaping can begin before and beyond the initial roundabout.

    This lobbyist poster, always pro city development, is beginning to sound a lot like Aceti to me. Or could be Charlie Marvin. He wants so much to have all us taxpayers foot the bill for his personal net worth going up.

    ReplyDelete
  21. We do want sidewalks; we don't need two or more roundabouts.

    Pedestrian safety would be better at a stop sign, logically.

    Yes, sure feels like we are being conned so upzoning can happen with a "negative impact declaration," and major development, like three roundabouts. I want to see the EIR on that!

    ReplyDelete
  22. One of the consent calendar agenda items at last night's Council Meeting was a special waiver for the affordable housing fee, related usually, to high densigy housing, which must be available depending upon the circustances of the case, for the developer. This is according to recent Court precedent, so Encinitas made a new ordinance.

    Surely, there should also be a fee waiver available for the $250.00 appeal fee that we must pay to appeal a Planning Commission Decision. Staff should not be able to give two or three roundabouts a negative impact declaration, legally.

    When the Developer is the City, supported by our taxpayer dollar, then we should be able to Appeal to City Council on a fee waiver.

    Our City Attorney should see the ethics of this, right Glenn Sabine? He was the contact person on the integrity training requirements, also mandated for the Planning Commission and Council per new State Legislation.

    ReplyDelete
  23. The roundabouts are not safer for pedestrians, or cars, than 4 way stops. That online "report," which is only opinion, is mostly about other countries. It is written by contractors, consultants and developers and their associates. There are only two roundabouts in SD County right now, supposedly, one in Carlsbad, one on Santa Fe.

    The danger of someone running a stoplight is always there. We are not comparing stoplights and roundabouts. We are comparing one more stop sign, or just keep the one at Hygeia.

    Because one cocktail is soothing, doesn't mean you should gulp down two or three. Same thing for roundabouts. Lets see how the one is working at Santa Fe.

    Completing the library should be our priority.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Long Time LeucadianJanuary 25, 2007 11:24 PM

    Lynn Braun- We all heard the same statements you made before council last night. Please quite repeating the same old nonfactual nonsense.

    I am sorry you don’t think the roundabouts will benefit Leucadia but there are many Leucadian that want safer streets to walk and drive. We all know that oundabouts will help the cause.

    Did you go to the link and read the facts about roundabouts? Do you own research and present facts, otherwise your voice does not carry any weight.

    Do you live anywhere near the gauntlet? Are you just looking for attention or do you seek to improve Leucadia? Please explain your reasons why you are opposed to the improvements along Leucadia Boulevard?

    Common Lynn, many Leucadians want to improve our community, please explain yourself?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Long Time LeucadianJanuary 25, 2007 11:28 PM

    PS Lynn.

    The library is already a done deal so you don't need to worry about completing the library.

    Man-Please read and listen more and post less. The babbling kills your credibility.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Are you Doug Long, or Jerome Stocks? There were so few people there. I am leaning toward Doug Long. But Jerome was staring into space, being patronizing to the public speakers.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I watched the Cox replay at 6:00 Thursday.

    I, for one, did read the spam article posted from the lobbiest's links. Pure opinion, no facts. Comparisons were off. Comparing apples and oranges. We are talking about stop signs or roundabouts, not more stop lights on Leucadia Blvd.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Pro roundabout person does not answer questions about the Environmental Impact Report for the roundabouts.

    You don't answer the questions as to a specific study for the Santa Fe roundabout accident reports before and after construction.

    You don't answer the question about waiting for the traffic circulation study to be released.

    You call someone a name, me and others who hold these same opinions. You post many times, same stuff, pro roundabout, pro spending more money without caution and study.

    Others hold these opinions. I am not the only one with these concerns.

    If someone wanted attention, he or she would not post under anonymous.

    If you had courage and integrity, you would not dismiss people, pointing your finger in disdain, labeling everyone you don't agree with whiners or babblers, without revealing your own identity, hypocrite.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Right on! Instead of asking why someone doesn't want to waste money, instead of asking why Council cannot give the public the opportunity to comment upon the roundabouts through a regular agenda item, some anonymous coward hides behind his own arrogance and blown up sense of self-importance.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Why didn't this pro roundabout guy speak at oral communications? Why haven't we had a report from Engineering and the Planning Commission, as an agenda item, about the roundabouts?

    ReplyDelete
  31. I think "longtime leucadian" is Jerome Stocks, who doesn't live in Leucadia.

    Or it could be Charlie Marvin, if he watched the Cox replay.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Where does Doug Long live?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Again, when and where were the workshops that were supposedly held re Leucadia Blvd? Who participated in these? Who was noticed? What is Leucadia Town Council's opinion?

    Also, this will affect a lot of people throughout the entire City, not just those of us who live in Leucadia.

    ReplyDelete
  34. You smell like a con jobJanuary 26, 2007 12:42 AM

    Many of us do not want our taxes being spent by a Council which is going hog wild, charging higher fees and forcing bonds on us without our permission.

    How will Coucil pay for all these capital improvements? That's right, more development through higher density, upzoning.

    The roundabouts must be a guise to con us into thinking the traffic circulation will not be affected by more traffic caused by high density, if the current E.I.R. is any indication, re the Hall Property.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Just went to

    http://roundabouts.kittelson.com/RoundaboutList.asp
    and looked for roundabouts in san diego. Thanks for the link. HOLLY SHIT!!!!

    There are three planned and two roundabouts in SD county? Legoland and Santa Fe. The three planned are on leucadia blvd. That is jumping in head first if you ask me.

    1/25/2007 5:47 PM

    ReplyDelete
  36. As for saftey for walkers, they are not safer because cars do not stop unless cars are already in the circle, and that is really bad for walkers. Not everyone drives sober and I would rather be on the corner of a four way stop than at a corner with a roundabout.

    Controlled intersections of anytype can increase cut-through traffic! Just ask the Council and have them tell you about Crest drive.

    1/24/2007 7:38 PM

    ReplyDelete
  37. I think the person criticizing someone who had the guts and the initiative to go to the meeting and speak to Council, has lost his or her own credibility, here.

    I don't see the specific concerns being addressed, or questions being answered, either; only someone being rude to someone else who appears to care.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Just a point of view so don't flame me.

    Even in the most pro roundabout countries as mentioned, less than one percent of their intersections are roundabouts. Most of those are in rural areas. The major intersections in the urban areas are traffic circles which are a different animal.

    I lived there for a decade so I have some experiance.

    I say proceed cautiously on the roundabouts.

    1/24/2007 8:43 PM

    ReplyDelete
  39. "The Roundabouts cost is actually lower in the long run when you consider maintenance cost, reduced liability and reduced loss of life."

    This is pure opinion and speculation. Stop signs don't require maintenance. The City and the taxpayers are not liable for drunk drivers or speeders who don't stop at stop signs.

    This sounds like Jerome Stocks talking insurance agent jive. Care to sell us some more BS?

    ReplyDelete
  40. "perception is an interesting thing." Who said that?

    So is deception. That's what too many politicians and wanna be politicians do, con, through lies of commission and lies of omission.

    Socrates said, "Question authority." Because power corrupts. These guy start lying to themselves, then say, "perception is an interesting thing."

    Truth is constant. Lies don't change the facts. Calling people names, trying to attack someone's self-esteem doesn't give some anonymous poster any credibility in the eyes of those who are reading this.

    I also appreciated Bob Nanninga's column this past Friday in the Coast News.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Holy Crap Lynn- The was the longest string of babbling posts yet.

    I hope you slept well after the last 1am post. Go to City Hall and ask for the staff report from the planning commision meeting. All your questions will be answered and may you find peace with roundabouts.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Go to the city web site and read the report.

    ReplyDelete
  43. You're silly. Tee-Hee. Now, go get some sun. You're pasty from blogging at all crazy hours of the night. Yeah you.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Couple of good letters from Encinitas in today's Coast News, one from me!

    The letter to the editor signed by eleven activists and watchdogs in last Friday's (1/19/07) Coast News was terrific.

    Thanks, everyone for caring about our community and trying to reign in wasteful spending. I am grateful lots of us are addressing the issues. There are a few who post here anonymously attacking others, focusing on personalities, and distracting from the concerned questions that are being asked.

    For example, previous "anonymous" said library is a done deal. That seems ridiculous when you look at the hole in the ground where our library and public works yard, the San Dieguito Water District headquarters used to be.

    SDWD ratepayers should not have had to pay $3.5 million for the use of the Mossy Property for a new public works yard. This was more gravy for brokers, private interests and the City as a developer, through private contractors.

    ReplyDelete
  45. The Draft EIR for the Hall property is an eyeopener in terms of what it says about traffic. Go to:

    ci.encinitas.ca.us/Government/PublicD/

    Click on Hall Property Community Park and then either go to Summary, or to Traffic and Circulation for the complete section. The word roundabout is mentioned numerous times. The implication is that roundabouts are a major mitigation for traffic.

    Be sure to read the part that talks about what happens when regional tournaments are held. It's scary. The roundabouts will do nothing if the streets are clogged. They look nice, but it now appears to me to be the way the city council will justify their votes for upzoning, higher density, and intensive use of the Hall property.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Dear Ms. Braun-

    I am a thirty year resident and have paid taxes to Encinitas for 20 years waiting for some improvements to our neighborhood.

    After the opening of Leucadia to El Camino Real, I could not believe the increase in traffic. I am so hopeful that the City is finally planning on making the roadway safer. My kids are lucky they are alive, they were not so lucky. Good news is my grandkids will benefit by being able to safely walking to Beacons beach and experiencing all the glory that their parents did during their upbringing. I don’t understand your problem with improving Leucadia.

    I have driven the roundabout on Sante Fe Avenue many times a week and have never seen a problem with traffic in the area. The roundabout is nice, the walkways are great and the landscaping, while a little scarce, is much nicer that the barren dirt and litter on Leucadia Blvd. We have all being waiting a long time for some improvements.

    I have respected Encinitas Tax Payer Association for being vigilant on past issues. However, your inability to recognize tax dollars well spent, that will give return to the neighborhood well beyond the cost, is really making me loses respect for you and the Encinitas Tax Payer Association. You better poll your members to make sure you are speaking for the group. In my opinion, spending money on making Leucadia a more walkable community and safe for kids is money well spent.

    Respectfully,

    Grandpa in Leucadia.

    ReplyDelete
  47. This single person, or single "group" of persons, its false conclusions and phony opinions on sheer greed and political ambition, without supporting facts, or local studies, without complete E.I.R's as should be required, or any traffic circulation report release; they/it selfishly promote roundabouts and reckless spending.

    We've come together and decided this "entity" is Stocks, Long, Andreen and/or Marvin = SLAM, the infamous cyber bully.

    Better watch out, they're attempting another campaign of misinformation, name calling and deceit, trying to SLAM our self-esteem, to manipulate us with fear and personal attacks if anyone stands ups and says, "Wait, give this some thought."

    They will SLAM you if you dare to suggest you are against roundabouts being used as a ploy for developers, both the City, and private developers, and all their associates and lobbiest "buds," to increase high density congestion, to decrease our quality of life, so they will personally profit upon our losses, and the losses of future generations.

    How do they do this? They falsely claim two, three, or four roundabouts will be "traffic calming," without studying the first one on Santa Fe!

    ReplyDelete
  48. Longtime Leucadian, "Grandpa George," is Cyber Bully is SLAM = Stocks, Long, Andreen and Marvin.

    Easy to name names, first and last, and not give your own, fake "George."

    ReplyDelete
  49. Oh sweet Lynn-

    But you do not dare name names, do you?

    Sweet Dreams Dear,

    Leucadia

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for posting on our blog.
Anonymous comments are allowed after moderator review.
The moderator works at his leisure.