Letters to the Editor

RE: RE: Letter to the Editor 

I’m not sure what makes (Lynn Marr’s) “vision” for Leucadia 101 corridor “gadfly,” and I’ve never seen or met the woman, but this I know for sure.

Every single word she wrote, I can agree on. Before moving from Point Loma to Leucadia in 1998, I earned a master’s degree in urban and regional planning at the University of Colorado, college of environmental design, 1977.

My first position upon graduating was supervising four architects, whom we hired from Rhode Island School of Design. We designed historic facades for the “neighborhood storefront program” in the city of Providence. Later I was a real estate broker in Rhode Island and Massachusetts; a residential contractor/architect, public housing architect and spent many years in retail.

This 101-corridor plan is a disaster waiting to happen. What a waste of money that could be used to trench the tracks, as Doug Fiske has suggested, (in Providence, as the republican governor’s appointee to the capital center commission, we moved two rivers and the northeast corridor Amtrak lines and buried them during my term, floating a new train station on top). If her “minority is so small,” why have I never met one person who is not in her camp.

I ran for Providence City Council twice as a republican, and lost I wish she would run for Encinitas Council next time. She wouldn’t be a turncoat on height limits.

Encinitas is fortunate to have such a thoughtful woman, writing intelligent observations at no charge. Fire the consultants and replace them with Lynn Marr.

Sincerely,

Lee J. Juskalian,

Encinitas

 

Trial period for initiative petition

Much of the vociferous opposition to adoption of the citizens’ initiative for the Fletcher Cove Community Center (signed by over 2,000 of the 8,000 registered voters) is centered on the supposed lack of flexibility it permits the City Council. But there’s more to the story than the opposition’s version! Three main items — noise, occupancy, and fines or action for violation of ABC liquor rules — are directly tied to other, existing sections of the Solana Beach Municipal Code – and those items can be changed by the Council literally at will, without submission to the voters. Don’t believe me? Read it for yourself.

Here is my suggestion: Announce a trial period of one year for the adopted initiative, with a formal Council review of its effects at the six-month point and at year’s-end. If events prove that a clear nuisance exists from noise, liquor usage, and/or occupancy, then modify those parts of the Solana Beach Municipal Code to which the initiative is tied.

This will preserve the approach of a trial period. During such period, residents anywhere in Solana Beach are afforded the protections they currently enjoy under the existing Code. And private parties in residential neighborhoods anywhere in the city, which serve any kind of liquor fall under the same existing regulations that protect the neighbors. If those prove to be insufficient for the FCCC usage, then they can be tightened.

This approach has the added benefit in that the Council is tackling the problem from a different angle: it starts from the assumption that the overwhelming majority of FCCC users will be responsible adults who respect neighbors’ concerns. The policy now in effect seems to imply that FCCC users cannot be assumed to be responsible and must therefore be regulated before any transgressions occur.

Richard Moore, Ph.D, PE,

Solana Beach

 

 

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Skip to toolbar