David Loya wrote:
“Staff will incorporate the adopted changes, with the exception of the recommendation for the K/L street couplet….”
First off, the TSC did not give a recommendation for the K/L street couplet.
Their recommendation was against the K/L street couplet — to eliminate all references to the K & L Streets couplet.
What David Loya wrote here is 100% false and is completely misleading to anyone who viewed it and read it.
The letter below was sent on June 12, 2023 to the City Council, the Planning Commission, the Transportation Safety Committee Chair Dave Ryan, the TSC staff liaison David Caisse, Community Development Director David Loya, and the City Manager Karen Diemer.
The letter was written in reaction to the staff report for the upcoming June 13th Planning Commission meeting.
The damning part of all these misleading, mischaracterizing, and outright false statements from David Loya is that we — the Transportation Safety Committee, the Planning Commission, and the public, that is — had already gone through this same set of shenanigans with David Loya and his distortions on the Transportation Safety Committee’s recommendations.
In that case the TSC wrote “Revise circulation plan that eliminate L St southbound as a through road” and what David Loya portrayed this as was “Maintain current configuration.”
This letter was quickly (25 minutes later) responded to by David Loya, which prompted a further message to reply to his response. That interchange is here on Arcata1.com also.
David Caisse, David Loya, Karen Diemer
TSC Chair Dave Ryan (as BCC)
https://arcata1.com/letters/
with the exception of the recommendation for the K/L street couplet….”
- Staff report: “Most TSC policy recommendations released May 30, 2023, are similar to the PC recommendations.”
I counted 44 distinct recommendations in the Transportation Safety Committee’s policy recommendations. Of those, I counted 5 that are similar to the Planning Commission recommendations. The other 39 TSC policy recommendations are unique to the Transportation Safety Committee.
Five out of 44 is a bit over 11%. That is most definitely not “most.” To say “most” is false.
- “Staff will incorporate the adopted changes, with the exception of the recommendation for the K/L street couplet….”
First off, the TSC did not give a recommendation for the K/L street couplet. Their recommendation was against the K/L street couplet — to eliminate all references to the K & L Streets couplet.
What David Loya wrote here is 100% false and is completely misleading to anyone who viewed it and read it. - Why would the Transportation Safety Committee’s exceedingly clear recommendation against the K/L Street couplet not be included in the updated draft of the General Plan? Why should it be specifically excluded?
- Doesn’t the Council want to see all the input from the Committees — and not just what has gotten filtered by what Director Loya would like the Council to see?
This was the danger (or, that is, one of the dangers) of how Director Loya had the whole General Plan and Gateway Plan process set up. All input from the Committees goes through him, and he determines what the Commission and the Council sees, and what they don’t see.
- What part of this is not clear?
What’s in red is what David Caisse wrote at the Transportation Safety Committee on May 16, 2023.
The TSC has come out against the K/L Streets couplet for over a year. Director Loya continues to refuse to acknowledge the work of the Transportation Safety Committee.
The above are recommendations from the TSC on the General Plan, from the document: Transportation Safety Committee – Circulation Element – Adopted Policy Recommendations, on the City’s website at: https://www.cityofarcata.org/DocumentCenter/View/13167/ Mobility-Alt-Transpo-TSC
Pages 12, 13, and 15. - As a reminder to the Council, to the Planning Commission, and the Transportation Safety Committee, there has been a discussion around Staff providing an alternate plan to the K/L Streets Couplet concept. This alternative — and, in reality, there could be a number of alternatives offered — has been referred to as “Plan B.”
“Plan B” has been proposed as something that staff would supply to the TSC for their evaluation since January, 2022 — that is, just about a year and a half ago. And in this time, staff has not provided a Plan B. Back at the TSC’s meeting on January 18, 2022, David Loya spoke as though Plan B existed — but no alternative plan has ever been provided.
David Loya said: “So we definitely need a backup plan, a Plan B. And we, Todd, can maybe touch base on what the Plan B is.” Todd Tregenza of GHD said: “And I look forward to coming up with a Plan B. There have definitely been other options described and evaluated here at a high level. We’re probably going to need to come up with one that we analyze in greater detail as a backup plan. We’re not there yet. And I don’t have the answer to what that kind of consensus backup plan is.”
- David Loya also said: “So if folks can come up with ideas that are superior to what’s in this plan, we want to make sure and bring that forward to the Council and have them consider it.”
But it sure seems that he’s pretty keen on not letting that happen.