Comments on: Community Commentary

By: your "spin"

your "spin" — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 00:09:29 +0000

Lynn Braun Marr wrote on Monday, Aug 31 at 03:49 PM »
Ms Marr writes “This commentary makes some incorrect assumptions and puts a “spin” on the facts.”
Apparently Ms. Marr does not want to restore the tree canopy, offer safe bike lanes, create needed parking opportunities, or improve traffic flow.
Adding more stop signs instead of roundabout would create far more interference to an easy flow of traffic. Just drive up Leucadia Blvd. Safely flow through the two roundabouts and stop at the stop sign. When no one is there, do the same thing. When there is traffic, you do the same thing.
Other Marr statements: “It’s unfair that a few longtime commercial property owners would get substantially more parking, at the expense of the General Fund. Also unfair is that some businesses, such as Leucadia Glass, would have property taken away by City encroachments.

· The parking is needed for all in the area. This need was identified 15 years ago and now.
· There is not or ever was any plans to take away any property by the city.
“The owners of Leucadia Glass and Sub Palace have collected over 1000 signatures in opposition to roundabouts and reducing traffic lanes. Many business owners oppose this plan.”

· The referenced petition stated that if you don’t want the majority of trees cut down, sign the petition. And sign if you don’t want roundabouts.
· So those who signed may just not want all the trees killed.
· It also stated Leucadia Blvd would not go through the tracks.
· Beach access would be limited.
· and other fallacies

“People who oppose the roundabout plans are not in opposition to all change. We want change that will enhance our quality of life, and that will not cause further traffic deadlocks…”
· Roundabout had been proven to allow more volume of traffic flow through an intersection even at a slower speed that stop signs or lights.
· Stop signs and lights will “cause further deadlocks.”
It seems that Ms. Marr has, in her own words, put ” a “spin” on the facts.”.

By: valid

valid — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:27:46 +0000

I agree with John, completely. Well stated, John.
I may add that roundabouts are safer for cars and pedestrians and bikes and offer an opportunity for attractive landscapes and art. Those who say they don’t like roundabout can not seem to give a valid reason. You may not like vegetables, but that doesn’t mean they are not good for you. As for the one lane north: there is not room for the appropriate improvements identified years ago and recently by the public, (revive the tree canopy, safe bike lanes, parking opportunities, pedestrian friendly environment and more), without one lane. It works elsewhere on our coast. Change can be good, too.

By: Lynn Braun Marr

Lynn Braun Marr — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:49:50 +0000

This commentary makes some incorrect assumptions and puts a “spin” on the facts. Over 60% of the people filling out the surveys at the last workshop were not in favor of five roundabouts in less than two miles. Public speakers weren’t then allowed, but when Council later voted to award more money to consultants, who have already spent well over $500,000, for preliminary plans for the streetscape, from A street to El Portal, many speakers didn’t want roundabouts on Historic North 101, and did not want to reduce northbound traffic to one lane!

Logically, traffic would get clogged during rush hour, particularly in the summer, during racetrack season. Traffic isn’t moving too fast, then, anyway. It’s unfair that a few longtime commercial property owners would get substantially more parking, at the expense of the General Fund. Also unfair is that some businesses, such as Leucadia Glass, would have property taken away by City encroachments.

The owners of Leucadia Glass and Sub Palace have collected over 1000 signatures in opposition to roundabouts and reducing traffic lanes. Many business owners oppose this plan. As an alternative, the City could put in one or two more stop signs, and u-turn lanes. Also the Sheriff could be more proactive in citing speeders.

We don’t want Encinitas to escalate City spending on high priced “out of area” consultants and contractors. With the money already spent, we could have planted thousands of trees, and flowers in the medians, and watered them from water trucks, if necessary, using reclaimed water. People who oppose the roundabout plans are not in opposition to all change. We want change that will enhance our quality of life, and that will not cause further traffic deadlocks, and force more cars onto Neptune and onto Vulcan, our residential neighborhoods.