Traffic in Lake Forest - Part 1. General Issues

Having promised a Traffic Commission and then refused to create one, Mayor Robinson and his BFF Scott Voigts reasoned that they had to give the peasants something, so they created the “traffic forum” which is the opportunity for the City staff to tell the residents how much the City is doing. Indeed, the large bulk of the forum was taken up by City staff talking about the past, present, and future from the POV of what the City has done, is doing, and plans to do.

Deputy City Manager Debra Rose noted that dis-satisfaction with traffic had peaked in 2004 at about 25% of the people, but since then it’s dropped to 10%. Apparently she wasn’t aware that compared to other cities surveyed by the same company that surveys Lake Forest, almost no other City has 10% of the people unhappy with anything. So while she was trying to say that 10% dis-satisfaction isn’t something to be worried about, compared to other cities it’s a major sign that people are unhappy.

(FWIW – the fact that only 10% of the people say they are concerned with traffic makes you wonder if the survey results are valid. After all, who do you know that doesn’t complain about traffic?)

Public Works Director Tom Wheeler started his talk with a picture of El Toro Rd about 30 years ago and then crowed about all the progress that had been made. He noted that 20 years ago people avoided El Toro Rd. To his chagrin, later in the meeting he learned that people still avoid El Toro Rd when they can. So after all these years and all the money spent on El Toro, it’s still a major problem.

The only thing longer than the City’s list of what they’ve done was the residents’ list of the still existing problems. The dis-connect between the two groups can be attributed to the fact that for most of the highly paid City staff, Lake Forest is not home, so they rely on “models”, acronyms (LOC, UICI, LFTM), statistics, and maps. For those of us who live here, the reality of driving city streets is quite different.

Unfortunately, the first forum (there are 2 more scheduled, May 14 and May 21) had very poor attendance, with City staff out-numbering residents by about 3:1. Not a single Planning Commissioner was in attendance, even though it was apparent to everyone that poor planning is one of the major causes of traffic problems. Indeed, the only dignitary present was Mayor Pro Tem Adam Nick, who was told by the City staff that he needed to be quiet and listen. Astonishingly enough he complied. Thank you Mayor Pro Tem Nick for showing an interest in what many residents perceive to be a major problem.

Once the City staff stopped talking and the residents began listing the problems, it was hard to keep pace. There were a number of general concerns and a long list of specific concerns. Today we’ll cover the general issues and tomorrow we’ll go into the specific issues.

NO UNIFIED PLAN

Residents felt there was no overall plan that makes sense. The City is “reactive”. Problems are approached on a piece-meal basis with no thought for the impact on the people. The “people who plan don’t care.” The planned closing of Alton Pkwy by Baker Ranch was listed as an example of poor planning.  A resident asked – “Why couldn’t Baker Ranch move the dirt at night instead of moving it during the day and closing the Pkwy down?” Another resident wondered why the school system was allowed to accept all the money from the developers and not build a new school. Another resident wondered why a special deal was made with Brookfield to give their children special preference over the children who already live here.

CORRUPTION

Residents were concerned that decisions were being made because City Council members accept thousands of dollars from developers and then let the developers do what they want. The Baker Ranch closure of Alton Pkwy was given as an example of a policy that allows the developer to more cheaply get the job done (move the dirt) at the expense of the residents (closing Alton Pkwy). The Brookfield and Trumark projects were brought up as examples of increased traffic and stress on the school system which should not have been approved, but which was because the developers gave so much money to City Council members.

IMPACT OF 5,000 NEW HOMES

People were worried about the impact of the 5,000 new homes on traffic, and also on the school system. They were worried about how the 4,000+ new school kids were going to get to school and how this was going to impact traffic. They were worried that (a) there was no school busing system and (b) no new schools, and (c) the existing schools are too far from the new homes to allow children to walk. Therefore the 4,000+ new school children would mean nearly 4,000 more cars on the road dropping off and picking up children. Foothill Elementary was signaled out as a school that already has major traffic problems.

VALIDITY OF TRAFFIC MODEL

The City staff is always talking about their “traffic model” as if conformance to the model is the objective, rather than reduction in traffic congestion. At one point, Tom Wheeler pointed out that the City’s model had been developed to handle 152,000 trips per day, and when the City changed the zoning in the “Opportunity Study” area from commercial to residential, and then approved the 5,000 new homes, the number of trips per day dropped to 72,000. That sounds terrific. But one resident pointed out, if the “model” had predicted that things were OK with 152,000 trips per day, and we had less than half of that, why did we still have problems? IOW – the City shouldn’t have such a slavish reliance on a statistical model. After all, ever space ship that ever crashed and every stock program that ever failed was based on a model. Having a model, per se, is not the objective, especially when reality suggests that the model may not be accurate.

One of the residents pointed out that the City’s map which showed that almost all the intersections in the City were operating well didn’t correspond with reality, especially rush hour reality. The City is considering an intersection that has less than 80% capacity as a well-functioning intersection, but these so-called well-functioning intersections are perceived as congested by people who actually sit in traffic. Again, there is a disparity between numbers of a piece of paper and reality as experienced.

COMMUNICATION

There was general consensus that the City did a poor job communicating with the residents. For example, we have no idea where and when construction is happening. If we had advance notice we could chose alternative routes. We have no idea which traffic signals are synchronized and which are not. Again, knowledge would help people design better routes. No one knows how to report a traffic signal that isn‘t working, which means non-functioning traffic signals don’t get fixed as soon as possible.

MARGINALIZATION

I sat with a group of Foothill Ranch residents who unanimously expressed their concern that they were marginalized in everything that the City does. They harbor resentment over the “hostile takeover” by the City and feel the City hasn’t done anything for them. They are particularly upset about the Mello Roos and the fact that no one in the City seems to care about this.

But traffic problems aren’t unique to Foothill Ranch and Portola, and residents from other areas of the City also reported problems. The plain fact is that the Council and the Commissions are over-represented with residents who live in and around Lake 2.

POOR PLANNING

It became obvious to many of the participants that one of the main causes of traffic congestion is poor planning. For example, Raymond Way is the only entrance/exit point for thousands of cars that come from the cul de sacs on the north and the mobile homes on the south. This accounts for the backups at Raymond. Better planning would have avoided this traffic problem. Thus, it was with some concern that none of the Planning Commissioners were in attendance. Of course, for some Commissioners like Fuentes who believe that the Planning Commission shouldn't be engaged in "planning", it's understandable why she was absent. But any Commissioner worth his salt should be attending every one of these forums to listen to people's concerns and try to learn from these anecdotes and observations so they can do a better job planning.

On Monday we’ll discuss some specific concerns expressed by residents.Meantime, here are the next two forums

• Wednesday May 14, City Hall, 7 pm to 9 pm

• Wednesday May 21, Lake 2 Clubhouse, 7 pm to 9 pm

Please try to attend. The City needs to hear your concerns.