Every Claim on the Sign Above Is False

Sad to say the only way Leucadia Streetscape supporters can get any traction is to deceive their neighbors.

The city of Encinitas and the Leucadia 101 Main Street Association have wasted 12 years and millions of taxpayer dollars pushing a plan that makes no sense, contradicts its main goal, is opposed by the majority of residents, and violates the California Coastal Act of 1976.

First False Claim: Alleviates congestion and cut through traffic.

Shrinking a four-lane highway to two narrowed lanes and stuffing it with roundabouts cannot alleviate congestion. That’s physically impossible. It would do the opposite. It would make the current traffic jams twice as long in distance and time.

By “cut through traffic,” Streetscape supporters mean weekday commuting traffic. They want to prohibit people who commute between beach cities from driving on Highway 101. First, it’s outrageous and monstrously arrogant to presume to stop a certain category of drivers from using a public highway. Second, just how would Streetscape distinguish between commuters and any other driver on the road? Do the city and L101 plan to issue passes that allow only locals and visitors to use the road? Third, yes the project would increase cut through traffic on Vulcan, Melrose, La Veta, La Mesa and Neptune.

Second False Claim: Pedestrian track crossing at El Portal.

The proposed Streetscape has nothing to do with the planned and funded undercrossing at El Portal. The two are completely separate projects. Streetscape provides no new track crossings from La Costa Avenue to A Street. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

Third False Claim: 4 Roundabouts for safe Hwy 101 crossing.

First, for clarification because people keep getting this wrong: The plan proposed six roundabouts. The two northernmost were to be at La Costa Avenue and New Road, which is the driveway to Cabo Grill. The fate of those two rested on what the developers of the hotel opposite the foot of La Costa Avenue did and when. What they wanted and whether they or the city started working first determined what would come of those proposed roundabouts. Since the developers will start their project before the city, they get their way. They don’t want those two roundabouts.

That puts the remaining four roundabouts at Bishop’s Gate (the private driveway to Sea Bluff condos), Grandview, Jupiter and El Portal. The first three are in the half mile from Bishop’s Gate to Jupiter. The fourth is 1.2 miles south of Jupiter at El Portal.

So to say that three roundabouts in a half mile at the north end of the corridor and another one more than a mile away are somehow going to benefit the entire 2.4-mile corridor is ridiculous. It’s laughable. The supporters should be embarrassed!

Crossing Hwy 101 to what? The proposed Bishop’s Gate, Grandview and Jupiter roundabouts aren’t opposite any of the proposed parking bays, so the only 101 crossers there would be what? Crossing to a bus stop maybe? Going east to check out the dirt in the railroad right-of-way? Going west after illegally crossing the tracks?

Granted, if the proposed project is built and when the El Portal rail undercrossing is dug, crosswalks at that proposed roundabout would probably make crossing 101 safer there. So would a ped-activated light like the one near Swami’s.

Fourth False Claim: Creates a beautiful walk & bike corridor.

How many people want to walk or bike alongside long, single-file traffic jams? It’s much safer and more pleasant to walk and bike on Neptune or Melrose or La Veta or La Mesa.

This gets us to what Leucadia 101 Streetscape is really about. The city and L101 want to create a linear shopping mall. To achieve that, one of the disingenuous, deceptive tactics they’ve used is, Hey, it will be a beautiful place to walk and bike! Gee, honey, let’s go for a lovely walk next to the traffic jams on Highway 101 in Leucadia.

As it is now, cars outnumber bikes by 50 or 100 to one, depending on what day of the week it is. Why jam traffic and grossly inconvenience drivers for the sake of a relatively few bicyclists? Especially good question when bicyclists have much safer and more pleasant alternatives. And while we’re on this point, is riding on 101 through downtown Encinitas, Solana Beach and Del Mar a beautiful biking experience? Highway 101 through south Carlsbad is a nice ride, but north Carlsbad and Oceanside are not.

Fifth False Claim: Adds 1000 trees & 134 parking spaces.

The proposed project would remove 90 existing trees, including the iconic eucalyptus at Leucadia Boulevard. It’s six feet in diameter a short way up from the base.

The number of trees the project proposes to add is 839, not 1000. They would be saplings the diameter of a broomstick. It would a dog’s age before they even started to look like trees and several decades before they became a canopy — and that’s only if the city consistently waters and maintains them, which we know the city doesn’t have a good record of doing.

There would be 176 parking spaces in the three proposed parking bays in the NCTD right-of-way. If the net gain of spaces is 134, that must mean 42 spaces would disappear from the west side of 101.

But there’s an overriding point the city and other Streetscape supporters don’t mention: NCTD has not agreed to yield the ground for the proposed parking bays in the railroad right-of-way. NCTD says they don’t want to give ground now that they might have to take back later. That has to do with the Coastal Rail Trail and doubling the tracks. There’s not enough room for the CRT, parking along Vulcan, two sets of tracks, parking bays and a sidewalk along 101, plus the necessary buffer space between all those elements.

Conclusion

Without greatly increased parking capacity and a much wider strip of commercially zoned property on the west side, the Leucadia 101 corridor cannot become a linear shopping mall. The very limited geography defeats that goal. On top of the severe limitations that kill the mall idea, the proposed project violates the California Coastal Act of 1976. It’s highly unlikely the city and L101 will get around that law.

—Doug Fiske