This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

The Big Rocks in the General Plan Update

What are the key points in the draft Encinitas General Plan Update Circulation Element?

This is the first in a series of posts about the Encinitas General Plan Update.  I begin with the Circulation Element.  As I go through each section of the draft plan update, I will be posting my views.  It is not enough to criticize the entire draft or suggest we should start over.  As a practical matter, we need to find what is important and move forward constructively.  My comments are also being provided directly to the City's Encinitas2035 website as formal input to the process.

There is a parable about time management describing how to fill a jar with rocks.  You need to put the biggest rocks (the most important things) in the jar first, before adding pebbles, gravel and sand.  If you put the sand in first, there won’t be room for the big rocks.  With respect to the Encinitas General Plan Update Circulation Element, there is a lot of lovely language about multi-modal networks and community character, analogous to the sand and gravel.  But in the 57 pages of this element draft, what are the “big rocks”?  Without rewriting the entire chapter, I want to propose the key points that need to be clearly stated to protect and serve our community.

Before evaluating a plan looking out to 2035, we need to start with a competent assessment of where we are today and what changes we might expect going forward.  A complete traffic count needs to be completed in the next year, before the plan is approved, so we have a baseline that everyone can believe.  We also need to recognize that the economic downturn impacts traffic just like it impacts other economic activities. When the economy picks up, we can expect traffic to pick up within Encinitas and from people in surrounding communities driving through our city. So any analysis must look at trends and external factors and provide for adaptive management as the future unfolds. We don’t know how the economy will change, and we don’t know how mass transit will or won’t become available for our community. These are two huge externally controlled forces that have a direct impact on circulation in Encinitas.

Find out what's happening in Encinitaswith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Traffic Counts: The draft GPU (section 6.8) says “Periodically evaluate traffic circulation patterns of all roads in Encinitas.” There is no definition of “periodically.”  Instead, it should mandate that traffic counts must be done every 2-4 years, each time starting in a different month so we capture seasonal variability.  It is essential that we monitor actual road use and not rely solely on models and projections, and that we mandate regular updates.

Level of Service (LOS):  Consistent with the current general plan (Policy 1.2 and 1.3), establish LOS C as the baseline going forward, with allowance for reduction to LOS D at key intersections during peak hours. Peak hours should be defined and limited in duration to no more than 2 hours per day (current definition is 7-9 a.m. and 4-6 p.m.). The GPU draft (sections 6.2, 6.3) say that “the City shall maintain an LOS D or better for roadway and intersections in the AM and PM periods, except as specified below…” This is not acceptable.  Even with transit, whatever remaining automobile traffic we have should be able to move through intersections reasonably.  The current plan is clear in stating “Prohibit development which results in Level of Service E or F at any intersection unless no alternative exists and an overriding public need can be demonstrated.” (my emphasis).  I see no need to weaken this language or policy.

Find out what's happening in Encinitaswith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Maintenance:  Road maintenance is a high priority for Encinitas. We already know that the city budget has underfunded maintenance.  This cannot be perpetuated by weak language in the GPU (section 7.6). Priority should be given to roads in the worst condition.  The current general plan, Policy 1.19, states that “The City will provide for adequate levels of maintenance of all improved components of the circulation system…”  The draft says the city should “Identify outside sources of funding … to provide on-going maintenance, operation, and management of the circulation network” but it never directs the city to actually maintain the roads!

Rail crossings: We need rail crossings that achieve access and safety at the lowest cost. Section 3.3 is too vague and does not provide guidance on how to evaluate between at-grade and tunneled crossings. We have to work aggressively with all agencies to achieve multiple access points. We should also mention a goal to reduce train horn noise through design of crossings and/or use of improved technology such as way-side horns.

Transit: It is great to imagine effective and affordable mass transit for Encinitas.  However, we cannot afford to sacrifice circulation capacity in the optimistic hope that funding and implementation will happen, especially as we have seen bus service deteriorate, and shuttle services fail. The City should work with other regional and state authorities to aggressively pursue transit options that are appropriate for the community and the region. However, the circulation element must have contingent policies – IF transit is available, then the transit-oriented approaches would go into effect, but if transit fails to materialize as projected, an alternate set of policies must be maintained.

Road Classification:  The GPU draft proposes a reclassification of roadways (Table C-2).  The draft says “In resolving unfavorable conditions, potential improvements should point to a range of mitigation measures that draw from both physical design treatment of the street environment and social and programmatic responses appropriate to the particular street context. Measures may range from integrated land uses, pedestrian and/or bicycle improvements, traffic calming, public transit service enhancements, and Transportation Demand Management (TDM).”  This language does not give the City any clear policies for managing impacts on circulation (euphemistically referred to as “resolving unfavorable conditions.) Once the city’s roads have been classified, any development that impacts that road classification would require a transparent process and explicit vote of the planning commission or other regulatory body.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?