In April 2016, the council voted 4-0 (Feller, Kern, Lowery and Sanchez yes; Wood absent) to fund Environmental Impact Report study of reducing Coast Highway from four lanes to two. After the EIR is completed, a vote on implementation of this “diet” is expected by the council in early 2017.
Last week, South O residents and merchants testified against the “diet” at the Oct. 26 council meeting. Save South O presented petitions with 401 signatures against having the lane reduction in our community, as well as a survey that showed South O residents and merchants overwhelmingly opposed to this plan.
The November 8 election will determine who gets to decide the future of the Coast Highway project. Therefore, we wrote to all seven council candidates and five mayoral candidates to ask their position. Below are the responses we received, in the order that we received them.
Mayor’s Race
Rick Kratcoski:
I am a firm believer in the neighborhood’s feeling about a change to traffic patterns or zoning or whatever is a concern in their neighborhood rather that what is best for ALL OCEANSIDE. As a Mayoral candidate I am more concerned about what your neighborhood desires. Compromise! Rather than the city forcing something down the neighborhood’s throat they don’t want. The neighborhood and city staff should work together, not run by the whims of a city council.
Debbie Walker-Mikulay, aide to Jim Wood:
Mayor Wood is not in favor of reducing the lanes on Coast Highway.
Did not respond:
- Jim Gibson
- Georgeo Kerpani
- Cynthia Rocco
Council Race
Daniel Dumouchel:
I have been very affirmative about my position on this subject. I have been against the reduction and constriction of the 101 since I first caught light of this proposal.
Oceanside is a vast city of 180,000 residents and this number will continue to expand into the future. The 101 already see’s a vast backup of cars during peak rush hours, and if we were to constrict the lanes and build roundabouts, we would be further increasing traffic. Looking into the future (10-20 years) we will see Oceanside grow exponentially. If we are to reduce the size now, we will have to expand it again in the future. Expansion of lanes will cost more than the current proposed reduction. This would mean that our future children and city members will have to pay for the mistake, but not only that, Oceanside would have to pay twice on that mistake. The first mistake is doing the project, and the second is not planning for the future, so we will have to fix it.
The small businesses along the 101 cannot survive a reconstruction project of this extent. If our council is so adamant about saying they are for small business, they would not want a project that would deter shopping and clientele for many months to a year from the small shops. Oceanside should use the funding for beautification, future planning and helping the small business culture thrive in Downtown/South O.
Vickie Prosser, aide to Jack Feller:
Councilmember Feller has been strong on his stance on this subject.. He has let staff know he does not support the narrowing of Coast Highway. He does support some of the upgrades, but not the roundabouts. He believes a lot of upgrades can be done with beautification and maybe crosswalks.
Linda Gonzales:
I believe that all projects of this magnitude and change should be delayed until after the city has completed a comprehensive General Plan and Circulation Element that addresses traffic in all parts of the city. I think that the patchwork solutions (avoidance of General Planning) are not achieving the right outcomes. The city is constantly trying to fit round pegs into square holes.
I think that narrowing the Coast Hwy. could create dangerous situations for pedestrians on the streets north and south of Coast Hwy.; limited parking for businesses; and possible impediments to safety vehicles that need to respond. I agree that the city should remove South Oceanside from any plans to reduce Coast Highway from 4 lanes to 2 lanes especially at this time.
Victor Roy:
I am waiting for the current study to conclude and provide its findings and recommendations before I am able to determine how best to proceed with regards to the Coast Highway Vision Project.
Replacing a lot of signal lights for roundabouts does not bode well for public safety. Roundabouts are supposed to enhance traffic calming and slowing; however, signal lights are much more effective for public safety and for the use of controlled crosswalks for pedestrians along a very busy Coast Highway corridor. So I am reluctant to go along with proponents who want to completely transform Coast Highway. Some of the project merits are good. But public safety comes first and foremost in my mind.
We already have just witnessed the narrowing of Coast Highway down to one lane in each direction from Morse to Oceanside Blvd, and the complaints about this constant log jam keep coming in to the city from what I have heard; most cite this development as an unwelcomed nuisance, and ask for the full four lanes to be restored. I have personally experienced driving northbound from Carlsbad to Oceanside, and being caught in this bottleneck/log-jam and did not find it pleasant. So if this was allowed in South O then I can only imagine that frustrated drivers would retreat to neighborhood streets in order to get out of massive congestion which will get created frequently by accidents.
Your South O businesses and residents have rallied by petitions against the project to include their area. This now needs to be taken into serious consideration by the project proponents and planners.
Esther Sanchez:
Thank you for your petition and presentation at the last council meeting regarding Coast Highway and South O.
I have been calling for completion of the Coastal Rail Trail for several years. With our recent loss of young Logan Lipton, perhaps there is now a will on the council to finally make it a priority by paying for it using Transnet dollars, much as how the $7 million Quiet Zones are being funded.
South O has become and is becoming an exciting, world renown destination place. With success come challenges, like higher densities, more traffic, congestion, higher speeds, parking issues, and impacts to neighboring residential areas. The Coast Highway environmental studies are supposed to look at all of these community impacts and make recommendations regarding walkability and bicycle friendly. I also believe there will be opportunities for creating public parking via leasing private space that already exists, as well as creating parking at the La Salina Treatment Plant, scheduled to be removed and replaced with the much smaller footprint of a pumping station.
Coast Highway must be able to function as a roadway for cars. It must also be fully functional for pedestrians. The question is how do you accomplish both? I believe the studies will provide us with several alternatives to consider, and I further believe that the decision of what to do, if anything, will be a community decision.
With the South O community currently evenly divided on one potential alternative (i.e., reduction of lanes), I would strongly consider N. Coast Highway as the demonstration project. That doesn’t mean I am currently completely sold on reduction of lanes anywhere on Coast Highway. I want to wait for the studies to be completed and have a full public hearing.
I love South O, have all my life. What we do to improve South O will be a decision by its community of residents and businesses.
Did not respond:
- Steve Hasty
- Ward O’Doherty
Save South O 