- November 4, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
Dear Editor:
So the proposal by City Councilwomn Heidi Shipley to place stop signs on Florida Park Drive is to stop people from using Florida Park Drive as a short cut?
How is it known that there is a back traffic issue? Has someone stood on Florida Park Drive and looked into cars to determine who is short-cutting and who is using Florida Park Drive to get home from work or from shopping?
So the idea is to punish the thousands of people that live in the F- and C-sections for the few that may use Florida Park Drive as a short cut?
Councilman Nick Klufas and Bob Cuff agree that it will cause more auto emissions from the stop-and-go traffic. Did anyone take in consideration the extra burden that those of us that use Florida Park Drive will have due to more wear of brake pads to stop at the extra stop signs and the extra gas it will take to start again?
Do any of the council members that may be in favor of this proposal live in the F- and C-sections?
I travel Florida Park Drive almost on a daily basis, and at all times of day and night and I do not see a traffic problem.
The only time that there is some back up is when schools buses pick up and drop off children and a little on garbage pick-up days, or if there some sort of road construction work. Even then it is not that bad.
Florida Park Drive is designed as a main road, fed by several streets that all have stop signs.
When I exit unto Florida Park Drive from my street, at any given time the most I wait for traffic to pass is no more than a few seconds. Main streets need and have stop signs at major intersections. There are two major intersections with Florida Park Drive: Palm Coast Parkway with a traffic light, and Palm Harbor Parkway with a stop sign.
The intersections of Florida Park Drive and Palm Harbor need a traffic light. Money spent for a study there will serve the citizens of Palm Coast better. There are accidents there waiting to happen. People travel too fast coming from both directions, especially from the right; as you turn left, they come so fast over the bridge that, by the time you make the turn, they are on top of you.
To spend $42,000 for a study for stop signs for Florida Park Drive is a waste taxpayer money, so why not take a survey of the people that live in F- and C-sections. It may not cost as much.
James Motta
Palm Coast
Dear Editor:
Florida Park Drive is a road I travel daily (up to four times) because, like a good portion of the F-section, the road I live on is a feeder to this road (since 1993).
I do not have any interest in dealing with stop signs nor dealing with traffic control, other than the reasonable 30 mph limit now imposed.
It is not a good idea, will not "solve" the "problems" and will cause real problems by way of increased confusion and accidents over right of way at these stops.
Further, while it may not be the bee's knees to live on this road, it has been an artery for this area and the adjoining feeder roads and neighborhoods since well before my family moved here in 1982.
According to the property appraiser site, around 70% of the residential properties on the road have been purchased between 2005 and now, and if you look closer, you will find that the address of record for the owners is not the same as the Florida Park Drive address for about 30%, indicating a rental property.
This means that a significant majority of the residents chose to buy or rent in this period of time. I point this out because due to the percentage of built and occupied property, there won't be any more significant development in this area.
The traffic is about what it was the last time the city spent time and money doing air quality and traffic studies and determined that the road was not over capacity and there was not an air quality problem.
I agree with City Councilman Nick Klufas that the stopping of all that traffic will cause greater emissions, and I witness every day how well Palm Coast drivers deal with four-way stops on my way to work. Yikes!
I feel for the residents if in fact they perceive a problem there, but many, many, many more people, including me, do not perceive a problem, and there is almost no possible way for the situation to degrade — there is just no room to build.
This squeaky wheel does not warrant grease.
Jake Scully
Palm Coast
Dear Editor:
In the April 12 article on Florida Park Drive traffic issues, City Manager Jim Landon told the City Council that the city can't just "add stop signs at will."
How ironic that there is no problem when he arbitrarily decides to close two lanes of Whiteview Parkway at an estimated $1 million plus without approval by the residents nor a "detailed $42,000 traffic study of the street" that he declares necessary for a few stop signs.
Karen Jacobs
Bunnell
Editor's Note: About Whiteview Parkway, Jim Landon told the City Council at the March 27 meeting, “This is really a serious safety issue, and one that’s documented that we’ve had deaths, and it’s just a matter of time before we have others if we don’t take some action.” He also said city engineers had considered resident feedback on the project.
Dear Editor:
When I read Mr. Matt Walsh's piece on tariffs, I thought he did an excellent job of breaking down, in easy to understand terms, why tariffs are never good for the economy. However, it seems that the current fever pitch or rising nationalism has blinded many to the obvious facts.
Fact: We buy more from China than they buy from us, lots more. Thus we have a trade imbalance. That is not likely to change, so imposing tariffs will mean higher prices for most Americans.
Fact: China has retaliated with threats of their own tariffs. Did anybody really think they wouldn't? Thus we end up with a zero sum game.
Fact: China can now source some of the things they bought from us, at lower prices, from other countries. Not good news for American farmers.
And then there is the unintended effect of increasing China's sphere of influence as they increase their trade with other countries.
Another exercise in futility from our wasteful government.
Edith Campins
Palm Coast
Dear Editor:
Bike Week generates millions of dollars to the economy. What could be a draw? Palm Coast could present new activities to draw the Bikers' taste buds.
Create a welcome center for bikers during the week. Motorcycle safety would be the top priority. A menu board of the attractions would be displayed.
Have a show and shine at Washington Gardens State Park on A1A. Food trucks, an art exhibit of local tattoo artists, and soft country music could be a draw.
Show biker movies at the Flagler Auditorium such as "Easy Rider," "Marlboro Man," and "Five Easy Pieces."
Palm Coast can provide hospitable activities to draw in the bikers.
Glenwrick Elliott
Palm Coast
Dear Editor:
As you know, the Parkland shooting revived longstanding concerns over school safety and other measures. I am writing in an attempt to end the false debate that a dress code is a viable security measure.
Attire and school security are in no way related. At best, it is a well-intentioned provision to mandate a minimum degree of professionalism. At worst, it bars students from wearing whatever attire (within reason) that he or she feels best in while learning.
Detractors of a looser dress code are so quick to repeat ad nauseum that a dress code allows suspicious individuals to be conspicuous and thus apprehended — but this is a romantic idealization. Instead, a better policy would be to encourage everybody in and out of the school to report suspicious behavior. If that was the case in Parkland, perhaps the attack on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School would have been averted.
School safety truly lies with the security staff, school resource officers, surveillance and communication, the vigilance of students and faculty alike, and last resort procedures (i.e. the code system).
So, what I propose is a modest tweaking of the current rules of the dress code to allow no-collared shirts, athletic attire (e.g. Dri-FIT shirts), and sweatpants on all school days. Current rules restricting shorts length, body exposure, gang references, and drugs or alcohol paraphernalia will remain.
In essence, the dress code would be streamlined, entrusting more discretion with the students. As for those who would attempt to exploit the code, there would be disciplinary measures. And now since the dress code would encompass the overwhelming majority of one’s typical wardrobe, it becomes much less of an issue that school officials would encounter.
This would be a win for students, and a win for faculty who have became de facto policemen of the dress code, which diverts their time away from higher priorities such as teaching. It is well overdue for this paradigm to be shifted.
Nicholas A. Conforti
Palm Coast
