.
Feedback

County Grand Jury Urges Council to Fix Leucadia Street Flooding

The Encinitas City Council has until Aug. 23 to respond.

The San Diego County grand jury today urged the Encinitas City Council to do something about the flooding in Leucadia caused by a storm drain system unable to handle the runoff.

The worst problem, according to the watchdog panel, is around Leucadia
Roadside Park at Coast Highway and Vulcan Avenue, where firefighters use

portable pumps to help move water away from a drain overwhelmed when as little as a half-inch of rain falls.

In a severe downpour, as many as 152 properties could be flooded,
according to the grand jury report, which suggests running a drain through a
bluff at Leucadia Roadside Park and considering the creation of a special tax
district to raise money to pay for the job.

The Encinitas City Council has until Aug. 23 to respond to the grand jury.

Mayor Jerome Stocks said the city would respond in "an appropriate and
timely manner." He did not address the condition of the storm drains.  

The city last upgraded the storm drain system about eight years ago.

The state Coastal Commission limits drain pipes that discharge into the ocean to a diameter of 2 feet, and a roughly 9-foot conduit would be needed in Leucadia to handle the runoff in a worst-case scenario.

The grand jury cited an engineering report that overhauling the drain system could cost as much as $42 million. The city's annual is of less than $60 million. Individual projects would range from $1 million to about $4.5 million, according to the report.

—City News Service

Julie Graboi May 30, 2012 at 11:38 am
Leucadia is a beautiful community with wonderful residents. It is sad that someone had to take this issue that is so important to the health and safety of our citizens to the Grand Jury. This is an issue that impacts us all, and as one of the entrances to Encinitas, this neglect reflects poorly on our entire City.
I would ask the City to make this repair its top priority before funding any other projects (like roundabouts) or entering into new agreements with other consultants. I want to see those needs and obligations of current residents met before starting anything new.
Lynn Marr June 2, 2012 at 07:14 pm
Encinitas’ utter failure to follow through on ANY of the suggestions of Rick Engineering to mitigate flooding, for which consultants we taxpayers paid dearly, in 2004, shows an ongoing failure of leadership on the part of council incumbents who have been in office since that time, particularly our current mayor, Jerome Stocks, who is running for re-election in November. This is another in a long list of failures, including Stocks' failure to follow process or to honor the public trust.
Locals and commuters do NOT favor roundabouts, which would encourage unchecked development. “Mitigation" tools for high-density developers, roundabouts have no formal traffic standards. Stocks and cohorts should've been more concerned about chronic flooding, made worse by City practices, than paying roundabout consultant/lobbyists to hold numerous workshops, then massage the data, to comply with pre-determined conclusions desired primarily by developers, through a game of smoke and mirrors: “beautification," designed to deceive and to win at any cost to citizens and Leucadia’s “funky” community character! Stocks was quick to disagree with the U-T Watchdog's liquid reserves report, both on the U-T Blog and through a recent article published in the Coast News. Yet Encinitas officials now neglect to respond to media requests for comments on the Grand Jury report re the city's failure to follow through on any plans detailed nearly eight years ago to ease flooding in Leucadia,

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Encinitas Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Vicki Campbell June 17, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Prop A will help residents and stop greedy developers from buying city council. Vote YES
Rick Moore June 18, 2013 at 09:27 am
I wholeheartedly agree with the recommendation that folks read the initiative. When you readRead More sections 6 and 9, you will see that Prop A sets a 30-foot or 2-story ceiling across the entire city, overriding lower height limits in many areas. The Downtown Specific Plan limits residences to 22-26 feet, as detailed on the DEMA website, so Prop A would actually allow the building of taller homes. It makes no exemptions or allowances for historic buildings like La Paloma, church towers or other structures over 30 feet high; the only exceptions are medical complexes and public high schools (see clause 6.2). Rebuilding or renovating (more than 50%) would require expensive public votes. Should the SRF be required to pay for an election to rebuild the Lotus Tower? Such contingencies are allowed for in our Historic Overlay Zone, which would clearly be overridden by Prop A. So is the Encinitas Preservation Association's plan to convert one of the boathouses to a museum. Again, Prop A would require an election (see section 4.1, clause e), which the EPA cannot afford. Prop A would thus favor large developers who have the money, time, lawyers and other resources to campaign for their project. How many nonprofits and small businessmen can afford to spend a minimum $30,000 just to get their project on a general election ballot (upwards of $300,000 for a special election like this one)? Yes, folks, please read the initiative, especially Section 9, which lays waste to anything that conflicts with it. That's why this has been dubbed Propzilla. I trust that most Encinitas citizens are smart enough to see that this meausre is deeply flawed, problematic and counter-productive. We can find much better ways to limit growth and preserve community character.
BlueAngel2 June 18, 2013 at 10:20 am
SAVE ENCINITAS FROM RANCID DEVELOPERS. VOTE YES ON PROP A!
BlueAngel2 June 15, 2013 at 09:47 pm
It would NOT surprise me. I thought we dumped Stocks. Why is he still around?
Encinitas YES on A June 16, 2013 at 02:44 pm
My YES on Prop. A sign was stolen yesterday. Other YES on Prop. A signs are disappearing. YetRead More another deceptive and untruthful mailer from the opponents of Prop. A was in my mail box. There's a shrillness and desperation in their opposition. They can't rely on facts and fair play. Polling data not looking good?
BlueAngel2 June 16, 2013 at 03:17 pm
YES ON PROP A will be victorious!
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 11:20 am
It just goes to show if Stocks or any of his puppets are involved, you will not hear the truth aboutRead More this proposition. They continue to confuse the issue. Please do not throw your vote away to ruin our city and enhance the developer's pockets who do not care what they do to our beautiful Encinitas. Vote YES on PROP A!
TB-ENC June 7, 2013 at 02:01 pm
How is this not a racist group with Hispanics in California at 14 million second behind whites atRead More 14.8 million. We only need one chamber to represent all Californians.
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 02:09 pm
So any group other than white is a racist group?
Miranda Klassen June 5, 2013 at 10:39 am
Congrats to all on the groundbreaking. Reesey has done an incredible job with making Lux what it isRead More today!
BlueAngel2 June 4, 2013 at 10:40 am
Vote YES on PROP A! The City Council is not experienced in real estate, zoning, construction orRead More development to make decisions for us.
CardiffCreature June 4, 2013 at 10:44 am
Prop A will not control growth. It will make sure that BOTH the council and the public get toRead More directly weigh in on the deals being brokered between big developers and the city. This won't end the indirect developer subsidies, but it sure will help.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:26 am
Yes, it will help to slow growth, by making sure that the public approves raising height limits orRead More upzoning, for developments over the parameters of a MAXIMUM of 30 ft. and two stories. Lower set height limits will not be repealed, because they are not in conflict with the initiative or the General Plan. David Ahlgren's fear and speculation is not backed up by one single fact. He just raises the usual building industry "mantra" of alleged risks created by unnamed "unintended consequences." Council's attempt at a preemptive ordinance does NOT guarantee that will be placed on the ballot in 2014, and does NOT eliminate other loopholes such as the "less-than-5-acre" exception, the "categorization of intensity of use" exception, and the height limit exception. The only loophole that Council's drafted ordinance affects is Council's ability to vote by a 4/5 supermajority on upzoing if it is done with respect to a "significant public benefit." Not only is Council's recently drafted ordinance NOT guaranteed, in that a future Council could reverse it, if it is not enacted through a public vote, but also Council's attempt at preempting the "right to vote on upzoning and raising height limits initiative" DOESN"T eliminate the other loopholes that still exist in our General Plan, Policy 3.12., which exceptions I've spelled out, here.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:37 am
An initiative to Prop A has worked in Escondido, without any lawsuits. "In the 26-yearRead More history of Encinitas, no council has ever used this provision to approve a major project without first a vote of the people." That's completely untrue. The North 101 and Downtown Encinitas Specific Plans were pushed through by the Planning Department, the Planning Commission and a supermajority of past Council AGAINST the wishes of citizens, against years of feedback from Specific Action Review Committees (Sparc)s and Community Advisory Boards (CABs), who wanted to stay with the limits of the General Plan of two stories, 30 ft, MAX, with certain exceptions, consistent with the Initiative! Just posting your opinion without any supporting evidence, Mr. Stocks, is only hurting your "cause." We and everyone we know, all our friends and neighbors, are voting YES on A! Voting YES is best if you want to take back your ability to help slow growth and to take back local control. Yes on A is a vote for Democracy and against insider influence and spinmaster jive promoted by marketing masters of misinformation, attempting to manipulate the uninformed masses with distortions of the truth. We don't need to be spoon-fed our opinions, but can think for ourselves, and act to protect and preserve our community character and our quality of life.
Greg Hay June 6, 2013 at 07:19 pm
Lies, lies and more lies. That's all the supporters of "No on Prop A" can come up with.Read More Even their slogan is weak and devoid of anything of substance… "It's not what it seems"… Really, THAT'S your argument against it?
BlueAngel2 June 6, 2013 at 07:22 pm
YES on PROP A which is NOT deeply flawed and very well written.