Comments on: Reasons for supporting San Vicente Road project

By: Herve Auch-Roy

Herve Auch-Roy — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:50:37 +0000

Mike,
I understand your point of view, however, I'm assuming that you have a driving license, and therefore you went to driving lessons.
I started driving in 1976, and accumulated over 1 million miles driving motorcycles, cars, SUV and trucks, in the USA as well as in western and eastern Europe.
You are missing a fundamental point in your argument: as a driver in charge of our vehicle, we are supposed to adapt our driving to the road conditions, whether it is curved, tiled "the wrong way", with blind corners, wet and slippery, icy, foggy, crowded, with bicyclists or horse riders on the side, with road construction, you-name-it. Not the other way around.
It is precisely because roads have been straightened, widened, and titled "the right way" that people lost their ability to operate a vehicle and adapt to the changes in the road conditions, which is inevitable.
Driving is a full time task: no time for phone, no time for texting, no time for sipping coffee our of our mug, no time for drinking, no time for eating, no time for drugs. Drive, period, end of story. You wanna do something else? Stop your vehicle, do that something else, and once and only once you're done, get back to full time driving.
Don't ask the government to take over your responsibility as a driver by pouring in millions of tax payers money.

By: MCB

MCB — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 05:39:33 +0000

Mike, I went to the SDCEA board meeting in December after seeing the proposed agenda. I expressed the same viewpoint as you – almost verbatim. I was not happy that the board had taken a position on the matter as my representative and used SDCEA resources to further their cause. I made an official statement at the meeting in the official prescribed three minute format. I did not take a position on the project in my statement. I only objected to the use of association resources. The published minutes of the meeting did not make any mention of my statement. It was as if I was not there. The board told me point blank after the meeting that they act as a pseudo city council, which I disagree with. One board member approached me after the meeting and stated, "We represent you." They are not elected on election day and are not official government representatives. They have done a good job improving quality of life and facilities out here. I applaud their efforts in that regard. That is what they were elected to do. Lastly, I moved here four years ago and I have known about this project, and many others that are pending, for several years. For the board to claim ignorance is laughable, if not negligent.

By: Flying Dutchman

Flying Dutchman — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:12:38 +0000

I travel those roads everyday. And so does my wife. I don't see any reason to do any excessive repair between Wild Cat Canyon and Ramona Oaks. However, the twisty roads before that are an accident waiting to happen. Besides the potholes, there is no usable bike lane, yet I still see folks peddling on them. I also believe that repairing the roads will likely lead to higher average speeds – regardless of the posted speed limit. So even though fixed potholes and guardrails seems like an improvement, they may actually make the situation worse. If excessive funds and work are still being contemplated, I would recommended widening the paved shoulders. This would provide additional safety to cyclists, walkers and joggers, while at the same time improving overall driver visibility.

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:12:25 +0000

Agreed, thanks for putting this out there. Most of us agree that improvements to the road are needed, and it will at the same time allow for the replacement of a pipeline that is very old and will need work soon anyway. The bike lane would be a welcome addition for many cyclists that live in SDCE that have no safe route out of the neighborhood.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 05:27:41 +0000

Mike your letter is well written but I disagree that the road project is worth doing as it is currently planned. The key point is the cost vs what we are due to end up with in the end. Quite simply, if we do not get more lanes than the plan doesn't get a yes vote from me.
We aren't asking for too much when we ask for one more lane in each direction. We could even get one lane that is manageable with moveable dividers so that commute traffic gets two lanes during their busy times going in and out of the SDCE area. During emergencies that lane would be set for whichever way needed the extra lane. But leaving the road as is, though crappy for the commute and for emergencies, is a better option than spending money for essentially nothing in the end.
This whole plan as currently written is like having frosting and candles without first having the cake. Bike and horse lanes are all fine and dandy if the foundation is properly in place. To spend this money now only to go back sometime in the future to spend more money to add a lane or two is crazy. Lets get it done right the first time.

By: Kari Gonter

Kari Gonter — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 03:59:18 +0000

Mike this is excellent. Thanks for writing this.