Saturday, May 31, 2008

Some Leucadia Streetscape Images & Thoughts

First, I must apologize for the lack of images of the Streetscape workshop. Unfortunately my digital camera is broken. Our friend Fred Caldwell e-mailed me these pics. Hopefully it will all be on the city website soon. If anyone has images to share please e-mail them to me.






Some thoughts I have about the proposals,

*First, if we really want roundabouts we need to fight for our rights and try to get the NCTD to give us that 9 feet of dirt. I say no roundabouts if we have to start clipping corners of buildings. It's not cool to the property owners and I don't think the city can afford to buy them out anyway.

*Personally, I don't like the one lane north or one lane south ideas. I want to keep two lanes both directions but with a lower speed limit (35 mph or lower) with narrower lanes and the painted red bike lane. Peder Norby mentioned that there are parts of our coast highway that are one lane, south of Swami's, but I hate that part.

*Don't move the center median in north Leucadia. Don't destroy the tree tunnel canopy, add to it! Only a few center median trees are nearing the end of their life cycle. Most of them have decades ahead of them, especially the young Torrey Pines planted in the 1990's.

*South Leucadia doesn't have a tree canopy and has the busy restaurant and shopping zone with all the chaotic traffic so this is a good place to make big changes with center medians and traffic lanes. And this is where we need more street parking (I'm shocked the NCTD allows nighttime restaurant parking on their property, especially since they are so hostile about everything else). I'm thinking two different plans for north and south Leucadia.

*The Leucadia Blvd/Hwy101 intersection is the key to the streetscape working or not. What is the point of all these groovy roundabouts and traffic measures if the intersection continues to create long backups?

*Check out photo 3, it's a redesign of the Leucadia Roadside Park. I like it. What do you think?

*All the talk of roundabouts and art nodes and pocket parks are really nice, but at what point are we going beyond enhancing Leucadia and completely blowing it up and creating a new whole new town?

*Of the 3 plans presented there was no discussion of the difference in cost. We can't just shoot for the moon. We still have to build the Hall Park and maintain all of Encinitas. What is the financial plan for the Leucadia Streetscape?

19 comments:

  1. If you want lower speed limits, bike lanes, walkways, and landscaping something needs to give. The City only has 100 foot right of way for all the roadway needs.

    A second lane in each direction is heavy used for cut through traffic, is unnecessary and actually damages the community. Use the area for things that help the community- bikelanes, walkways, landscaping.

    I personally think the less Asphalt the better.

    Leucadia is more than just that decrepted fast unsafe ugly roadway. Leucadia is great-----The existing roadway is promoting blight.

    Fix the roadway and let Leucadia realise its full potential.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I also like the reconfigured Leucadia Blvd, HW101, and railroad crossing and think it needs to be studied further.

    First thought it looks great and would work better.

    Blow the existing intersection up. It looks and works like shit.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I too like the traffic redesign around Leucadia Roadside park.

    ReplyDelete
  4. IF YOU MAKE THE 101 A 2 LANE ROAD (VS CURRENT 4 LANE) -- THEN VULCAN AVE IS GOING TO BECOME A NIGHTMARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Not if roundabouts actually increase traffic flow on 101 - as they have proven to do in other cities Peltz has remodeled.

    Vulcan will however become a nightmare if those 3 story structures keep popping up.

    ReplyDelete
  6. At 5:30 this morning on my way to the cafe I happened upon an accident at (on top of) the Leucadia Blvd/Hymeteus roundabout. A red toyota, young male driver, and three cops getting his statement.

    I quess small red cars are not meant to drive over the top of the Roundabouts.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Roundabouts are great. They keep the drunks hitting roundabouts and not our kids.

    They need to make the drunks pay for all the damage to the roundabouts when they hit them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anon 7:48

    Not true. The plan will need to include traffic calming on Vulcan so the traffic will actually be calmer on Vulcan which will be better for the school kids.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Vulcan has needed upgrading since incorporation, as mentioned in the Cities general plan. The term overburndened infrustructure comes to mind.

    A sidewalk on Vulcan is long overdue.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I don't like the way the options have been presented. Either roundabouts, or lose the canopy?

    The NCTD is in shambles, right now. The "Chair" resigned, and so have some others. Jerome Stocks talked about that at the last Council Meeting. There isn't enough room, an no real need for more roundabouts on Hwy 101. Maybe one at La Costa could work; I don't know.

    I also wonder why the roundabouts are so popular? And yes, it does seem to be flagrantly "cookie cutter" the way every city is going this route. Previous poster, absolutely: "they seem to be too small of a circle to work properly and safely" I agree.

    Slowing down the speed limit seems like an obvious fix to me, as well.

    If state law prevents reducing the speed limit, then put in more stop signs, as in Del Mar. And yes, the top priority should be restoring the canopy.

    These roundabouts present lots of challenges. They are not proven, yet, on Leucadia Blvd, or Santa Fe, as far as traffic surveys go. Lets wait to see what happens after racetrack season this year, at least.

    Roundabouts do seem intended to also be "make-work" projects for local contractors.

    During rush hour, the traffic is already slow on North 101. Streetscape does not have to mean redevelopment. Also, it seems as though we could have some parts of the highway where it narrows to one lane, in order to make room for u-turn lanes. That would also slow traffic. You are never going to eliminate all "cut through" traffic on a major highway. It can be slowed down, but that isn't the main problem during rush hour. Traffic enforcement of the speed limit we now have would help.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Speaking of the last Council Meeting, Council is just plowing ahead with the $5 million each pedestrian undercrossings, which will never actually be built for years and years.

    Maggie brought up the idea of an at grade improvement, "meanwhile." Jerome Stocks said there was no "guarantee" that it could be done for only $50,000, as quoted by Maggie, from some newspaper source, I think.

    Teresa Barth's dad, Bill Arballo, has suggested several times in the Coast News that the obvious answer would be to underground the train, as in Solana Beach. That is what the City should be working toward, not undergrounding the pedestrian crossings, which would cost just as much, in total, and would be subject to flooding and more crime.

    Maggie and Teresa meekly went along with the three men. The vote was unanimous to pursue the Hillcrest underpass, burying the pedestrian crossing, rather than pursuing undergrounding the train.

    Big mistake, and it will come back to them at election time. People want the tracks undergrounded! But once Council begins work on the underpass for pedestrians at Santa Fe, we can kiss undergrounding the tracks goodbye.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anon 7:40:

    I don't think that if we do pedestrian crossings we can "kiss undergrounding goodbye".

    The cost of undergrounding will dwarf the cost of undercrossings, so it is not either or.

    The big trick, of course, is to find the money to underground the tracks - that is going to take political will and some creativity, which we have.

    The best thing that we can do is write our City Council people and City Staff.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Roundabouts are the furthest from cookie cutter. Each one looks different with different landscaping and centerpieces including art.

    Traffic Signals are the cookie cutter crap that mindless people would put in like Carlsbad. Expensive, unsafe, the highest fatality rate of any intersection control, expensive long term maintenance costs, time wasting, and uglier than all sin. Plus I bet they make the property values go down around them.

    Absolutely the opposite for Roundabouts. Roundabouts work great, don't waste my life waiting for a mindless light to tell me when its safe to go, and look great!

    Sante Fe roundabouts been in for 2 years and works great. Plus there are thousands throughout the rest of the US and world that work great. The data is there and proves the facts.

    Install more please.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anon-

    If roundabouts we in a few years ago, a leucadian would not have been killed by an reckless 16 year old going 85mph.

    Lets prevent that in the future.

    What about when its not rush hour?

    The road has to be designed for 25mph for people to feel unsafe at speeds higher than 35 mph.

    Speed kills.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Some roundabouts work great -- location is everything. Living next to the one on Santa Fe I can tell you it works great most of the time, but as Santa Fe is primarily an east west route, so trying to access it from Rubenstein or Devonshire during peak times is a bit of a wait. Overall I like the roundabout, but people need to learn how to drive one. Why can't some people learn that the car in the roundabout has the right of way! I think 101 would be appropriate for one lane roundabouts -- then don't need the nasty NCTD property. Just configure the one lane roundabouts in front of areas that don't have many destinations and where people usually drive through, then open up to two lanes where the businesses are so people can turn right.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Unless NCTD gives us that 9 feet of dirt the roundabouts are not going to happen.

    ReplyDelete
  17. there are only a few locations where a roundabout would need additional area.

    If anything the remaining roundabouts can be installed and the areas where they will not fit can get some alternate design.

    I think some stop signs are in order at the areas like Grandview Avenue.

    Stop Signs do not need right-of-way and work better than Signals.

    Why wasn't their an option for Stop Signs?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Stop signs don't work that great on one lane roads especially with gas at $4.45 per gallon and everyone concerned about greenhouse gas emissions. Not the environmental friendly way anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Signals are worse. Just try waiting at Leucadia an Vulcan for 15 minutes. That’s not really good for the environment.

    With a stop sign, the idle time would be reduced. Signals just suck. Roundabouts are probably better than stop signs.

    ReplyDelete

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