Is City Council stonewalling a downtown problem?

I initially became aware of a problem involving the placement of tables and chairs associated with various businesses in downtown Encinitas when I observed a woman pushing a baby stroller being forced to enter Coast Highway 101 in order to circumvent diners in front of a restaurant as patrons were encroaching upon the public sidewalk right-of-way. This was several years ago.
The issue has since escalated from that of an innocuous right-of-way to one that also includes public safety concerning the illegality of curbside table and chair placement.
It has been well over two years since I first appeared before the Encinitas City Council bringing to their attention the placement of such tables and chairs located along Coast Highway 101 and nearby side streets.
They were set in front of particular establishments, namely restaurants, which infringed upon the public right-of-way.
In a subsequent meeting, a city representative reviewing the state law, stated that the tables and chairs situated at the curb adjacent to vehicles, either parallel or angle parked, were illegally there without the existence of a permanent fixed barrier. This fact certainly added to the dimension of the problem.
Finally, close to eight months ago, City Planning Director Patrick Murphy reported to the council the consequences of chair and table locations, as well as that of the public right-of-way involving them.
At that meeting, the council voted to allow no fixed to the sidewalk bolted down tables and chairs, as well as no fastened permanent barriers.
That for all intent and purposes eliminated curbside table and chair placement. In addition, a five-foot sidewalk public right-of-way corridor was agreed upon. Mr. Murphy was requested to return to the council stating those facts among others with a final draft to be voted upon.
I now ask the following: Has Mr. Murphy finished the report. If completed, where is it? Has the report been shelved for various reasons? Are we being stonewalled by a council majority, which intends to skirt the issue?
Particular council members have indicated that the position of a rotated figurehead mayor is not very important. I totally disagree. The mayor chooses the items to be discussed at council meetings in conjunction with the city manager, or so we are led to believe.
The council has a sworn obligation to enforce “all” laws and not yield to individual business proprietors who may not cherish adhering to them.
This was the case concerning two restaurant owners who appeared immediately before the council expounding their exemption from curbside table and chair location and/or the required five foot public sidewalk right-of-way. If granted, what prevents others from requesting such?
Mayor Bond, judging by his comments at the forum, appeared to be quite cozy with them.
The City Council, as well as some business owners, must relish sitting on the edge of an absolute potential lawsuit. If a vehicle jumps the curb and maims a curbside table patron, it is a documented fact that the issue has been brought before the City Council on several occasions.
The Encinitas City Attorney, Glen Sabine, may be losing sleep in anticipation of such a lawsuit. Perhaps not, as required additional services add to his normal retainer fee.
In retrospect, is it possible that Mayor Bond, with his power of setting the meeting agenda, has placed the subject in limbo hoping that public interest for one reason or other will fade away.
Remember that it took five years for the illegally placed temporary yurts (located on downtown Encinitas property) issue to be resolved with a former mayor intimately associated with one that was generating income. Was rent compensation involved? Why weren’t our fire and building inspectors interested sooner in challenging yurts safety and illegality?
Using an analogy, the current matter was brought to the attention of the City Council years ago. The wheels of justice seemingly do move at a snail’s pace, especially if certain individuals have an influence in and command of the matter.
Are we once again observing a City Council majority more aligned with established business/real estate interests than the public welfare and for what reasons?
They must stop stonewalling and proceed with the implementation of Mr. Murphy’s report.
For the public’s safety, all curbside tables and chairs must go. That is the law. For the public’s benefit, a five-foot sidewalk corridor with enforcement must be established. That is the council’s decree.

Share

Filed Under: Community Commentary

RSSComments (2)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. Sharona Beak says:

    It has been three years.
    Rather than vote; Mrs. Barth asked for a map to be produced, even though she could have been taken for a car trip and in one half an hour seen the one or two locations NOT along 101 or Vulcan Avenue
    are located.
    The issue has been moved repeatedly from associate planner etc…
    The Cardiff councilwoman’s concern, that adults drinking $10 glasses of wine, who might ‘share’ with skateboarding youths riding by in the gutter is almost as funny as the idea of back-in parking along 101 after what Mr. Bond referred to as the ‘highway diet’ down to three lanes throughout Leucadia.
    Moms Against Drunk Drivers’ Judy Strang has ‘strang’elled this item and left business owners downtown hoping for equality under the law from a council and staff that are too busy promoting a new public health commission to advise the council on which fast-food and drive-thrus are ‘good’ and which are ‘bad’, but that’s no reason for Vigilucci’s to lose their sidewalk-serving rights.

  2. FlawedDirector says:

    Patrick Murphy has had 3 years to study a sidewalk encroachment issue and still hasn’t delivered a report? Is this the level of performance that is appropriate for a City director paid 6-figures? Does anyone see a pattern here? Wal-Mart was snuck in since he granted them a permit before asking them to do a public hearing for a liquor license, and he also kept information under wraps so that citizens could not appeal his decision until the deadline had expired.

    Mr. Murphy is also responsible for the Updated General Plan. Is it any wonder that this project has been such a monumental failure that on the 25th anniversary of this City, residents of some communities are considering succeeding from Encinitas? He has managed to offend people from every community and every political background, and his credibility is ZERO.

Leave a Reply




If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar.