Friday, March 31, 2006

The Rage of Frank Ferry Part II: “The Raging Bull”

Yesterday’s article in the Daily News was a balanced account of the Tuesday nights verbal rampage by Frank Ferry. I was glad they said he was red in the face as it gives you a better picture of Frank’s explosive outburst. A friend commented that if a student in Frank’s school had such a childish tantrum they would be thrown out of class or even suspended from school for a day or so. I was just glad that I wasn’t sitting up front in the council chambers as Ferry vomited his anger, red faced, fist pounding, finger pointing and all, because he might have thrown something at me! It’s hard to believe that he may get re-elected to city council.
• I think that one of the more shocking revelations from Frank’s Tuesday night diatribe was the statement that he didn’t care about the economic contribution of the 9000+ residents over on the west side. This seemed like a complete contradiction since the city spent about $8500 last year encouraging the non-city residents to shop locally because the city needs all the tax dollars it can get its hands on. Even more surprising is the fact that Frank has a campaign war chest that is funded by lots of dollars from the local business community. So in essence, Frank was saying he didn’t care if the non-city residents spent their money outside the city because it’s not important to the city. Okay! I guess the auto dealers would be fine with non-city residents purchasing cars elsewhere?
• Another stand out from Ferry’s embarrassing display was the accusation that the county approves developments in an uncaring way. This was by far one of biggest loads of crap Frank tossed out. He forgets that the City was working with DRHorton on the Lyons Canyon project (the old Warner Ranch property) in which the city was willing to approve anything as long as the builder agreed to annex the property into the city. The project plans called for the removal of ridge lines, oak tree, the moving of 6 million cubic yards of dirt and the construction of nearly 1000 dwellings. All without any thought for infrastructure or even consulting the community. I know because I called the project manager for DRHorton and was promptly told that they were working with the City. Well fortunately the West Ranch Town Council and the county were able to beat the city back. DRHorton sent a letter to the city stating the following: In a letter to City Manager Ken Pulskamp, and the Santa Clarita City Council DR Horton said in part it “feels that the fundamental issue of the City of Santa Clarita’s expansion, including Lyons Canyon and areas west of the interstate 5 freeway, is an issue to be resolved by the City of Santa Clarita, the County of Los Angeles, the area community groups and LAFCO.” The letter went on to say, “Accordingly, we are choosing to seek County approval of a project that conforms with the General Plan of the County of Los Angeles.”
DRHorton homebuilders has since submitted a plan that leaves the existing ridge lines in place, keeps the majority of the oak trees, and reduces the dwellings/home sites to 183. A large portion of the property will be left as open space with a trail system and a park included. That’s afar cry from the abomination that the city was supporting. Frank has a short memory!

More to come, Part III: “Boss Tweed is stuffed in an Attic!"

Thursday, March 30, 2006

The Daily News coverage of the City Park Fee matter

Here is the link to the Daily News article on the City Park Fee issue from Tuesday nights City Council meeting.
http://www.dailynews.com/santaclarita/ci_3652785

The Rage of Frank Ferry Part 1

On Tuesday night March 28th I attended the Santa Clarita City Council meeting at City Hall. If you weren’t lucky enough to be there you missed something absolutely amazing; Councilman Frank Ferry’s explosive outburst. It was an unbelievable childish tirade that was clearly embarrassing to some of his fellow council members and city workers. Heck, I was almost embarrassed as well! I was only there to speak out against the increase and to offer an alternative plan that was more inclusive and ultimately would have resulted in a solution for the city’s park fee issue.
But Frank’s proposal had more to do with annexation of the West Ranch area than it did of the park fee issue. This was evident after I exhausted the three minutes of speaker time allotted and Frank launched into a five minute rant that was woven with misinformation and personal attacks. What a spectacle it was!
The following, in no particular order, are some of the highlights from Frank’s tantrum and what was inaccurate, misleading or just wrong about what he said.

• Frank couldn’t understand why the west side didn’t want to just blindly jump into the arms of the city by annexing. He went on to say that 26 other neighborhoods did it so what’s the difference now?
Simple, the West Ranch communities have an enormous sales tax base along the commercial corridor of The Old Road from Calgrove all the way up to Magic Mountain. The other 26 annexations that the City has done to date were, for the most part, net negative on the city. In other words, it has cost the city more in services to these areas then they are taking in from a revenue standpoint.
Frank even shouted out that there was three million dollars in sales tax from the Market Place that the city was not receiving. I would argue that it is probably higher than that.
I believe that our community has every right to ask questions and yes negotiate our future. Self-determination is a basic right for our communities on the west side and Frank does not have any respect for that view.

• Frank rambled on about the residents not being able to vote on annexation. Here the Councilman was completely wrong since there have been a number of votes on this matter. In fact the community has voted at least three times over the past ten years on annexation. In each vote the community turned thumbs down on the prospect of annexing into the city. In fact, in the last vote more than 70% of those that voted said they didn’t want an annexation at this time. Also, it is worth pointing out that a number of years back a group of west side residents formed the West Side Annexation Committee to try and drive an annexation. This group managed to collect only a few hundred signatures in favor of annexation and eventually folded up and disappeared.

• Frank’s display on Tuesday night was truly unprofessional, embarrassing, and lacking in any amount of civility. Someone should tell Frank that it is the norm for a person in a leadership role to generally try to keep their emotions in check. Frank’s outburst really showcased what an immature politician he is and the fact that he has no interest in building a consensus or respecting other points of view.

Please pass the link to this blog to anyone interested.

Part II coming soon!

Wednesday, March 29, 2006

March 28, 2006 Newhall School Board Meeting by Ronald Mechsner

Last night, the Newhall School Board held their meeting at the Stevenson Ranch Elementary School. A key item on the agenda was to determine how the Board would address the Kindergarten overcrowding issue that will impact Stevenson Ranch Elementary School.

At the meeting held March 14, 2006, the School Board already decided to freeze Grade 1-6 enrollment and establish a cap for Kindergarten enrollment at both Stevenson Ranch and Pico Canyon Elementary schools. They also decided to permit priority enrollment into Kindergarten for those students who had siblings already enrolled at Stevenson Ranch Elementary and Pico Canyon schools. After reviews of the enrollments for Stevenson Ranch Elementary when taking in consideration siblings, it was determined that there were approximately 71 students vying for 27 open slots. Those beyond the 27 open slots would be diverted to Oak Hill Elementary School in Westridge.

Dr. Winger provided the Board, and the almost 45 parents in attendance, a review of how this issue was addressed last year. The numbers were almost the same as last year – and the decision made by the Board at that time was to define a geographical area around the school where those inside the boundary would attend the school, and those outside would be diverted. He indicated that because of where the prospective students were located for 2006-7, the boundary used last year would not work because the cap would be exceeded. Therefore any geographical boundary based on last year would need to be redrawn covering a smaller area than last year.

In addition to a geographical boundary defining who would attend Stevenson Ranch Elementary, the other option under serious consideration was an individual lottery for each open slot at the school. During the open comment timeframe, parents fit into 2 basic groups – those in close proximity to the school who preferred a new geographic based boundary, and those from outside last years’ boundary who wanted a lottery.

After the public comments, a Board member suggested an alternative option – a lottery based not on the individual, but upon the street. The idea was to avoid cases where neighbors on the same street could go to different schools because of the luck of the draw in an individual lottery. All new Kindergarten students on a street would go to the same school – either Stevenson Ranch or Oak Hills.

The Board re-opened the meeting to public comments to gain feedback on this version of the lottery. Again, the comments were polarized based on geography and the desire that “neighborhoods” or tracts go in as a group versus individual streets being selected until the total number of enrollments was achieved. Families not in close proximity to the school still favored the lottery as the best solution.

After a motion was made for a vote on the Street level Lottery solution, the Board approved it by a vote of 4 to 1.

Dr. Winger will determine the logistics and define the date when the drawing will take place. This will be communicated to the affected families and the community and will be open to the public.

Thanks to Ronald Mechsner for covering this community meeting and writing this summary of the evenings discussion.

My full comments at the City Council meeting on 3/28

Well, last nights city council meeting turned out beyond my expectations. I was the only one to show up and speak out against the dual park fee proposal by Councilman Ferry. My full comments are posted below. It only took three minutes to light Ferry's fuse and expose the true motivation behind his park fee proposal; annexation! Of course the council voted 4 to 1 in favor of the proposal. I will have a piece on Frank Ferry's explosive outburst and personal attacks soon.
More to Follow.

I don't agree with Frank Ferry's proposed dual-tier program for Park fees. No Surprise! Honestly, I felt that this issue was resolved last year??
These proposed fees for non-residents can not be instituted at former county parks. Any city park that was a county park prior to the City of Santa Clarita being incorporated can not have a dual fee system. The County has made this case before and I hope will fight any attempt to do so now!
I have to take issue with Councilman Ferry's assertion in a recent Daily News article that the City is subsidizing non-residents. For those unaware, the City of Santa Clarita contracts many of its services from Los Angeles County. LA County recently did an audit which showed that contract Cities, including the City of Santa Clarita, were not paying their fair share for the contracted Sheriff services. It is important to point out the County Tax Payers had been subsidizing the City of Santa Clarita's Sheriff Services for many years as just one example. This is now a known fact and one that has recently been corrected!

But put those couple of points aside!

More importantly, non-city residents are spending a tremendous amount of money within the City of Santa Clarita which is generating millions in sales tax dollars annually for the city. One only needs to look at non-resident dollars being spent at restaurants, fomerchandiseze and on automobiles! What would happen if 10%, 20% or even 50% of this spending went away? It would be financially devastating not only to the City but to the business community in this city.

Ferry's proposal is dead wrong and is another example, if it passed, of the City trying to take the Gold Mine while giving the residents of the unincorporated areas the shaft!

Councilman Ferry's proposal is a slap in the face to those non-city residents who are shopping locally in the city. The sales tax dollars that are generated more than offset any park issues. In fact, the City Park’s programs used by non-residents should be looked at as a thank you to the unincorporated areas for their patronage!

If the City has been managed into a financial corner regarding the parks programs than maybe that is indicative of larger more systemic problem with how the city is being operated. I would suggest that other options be explored to remedy this problem instead of the standard call to raise fees or taxes.

Frank Ferry has already chosen the easy road of arrogance, ignorance and uninspired vision with this poorly thought out proposal which will only further divide and strain relations between the City and its neighbors. It also showcases Frank's myopic view of the economic landscape of the entire Santa Clarita Valley.

Now, I would hope that the rest of the City Council would chose a different path, one that is thoughtful and respectful of your neighbors in the unincorporated areas, and vote this ridiculous proposal down.

An alternate suggestion would be to have representatives from the various town councils come and meet with the city managers to see if we could collectively come up with a solution that would be palatable and inclusive to all. I believe that a win/win solution could be reach that could resolve this matter once and for all.

Thank you.

Monday, March 27, 2006

World Music Festival at CalArts; April 5-9

The World Music Festival kicks off on Wednesday April 5th with a 8:00 PM performance of Fe Fe. CalArts World Music faculty member Alfred Ladzekpo will perform in the first play he has written, Fe Fe, an African love story featuring African music and dance by CalArts African Storytellers and Dance Ensemble.
Thursday, April 6th @ 8:00 PM, Balinese Music and DanceBalinese music and dance gamelan Burat Wangi (fragrant offering) will perform new pieces Ratnayu and Legong Taksu along with Monkey Chant. Directed by I Nyoman Wenten, dance director Nanik Wenten and special guest Dewa Putu Beratha.
Friday, April 7th @ 8:00 PM, North Indian Classical MusicAn evening of North Indian classical music featuring maestros Pandit Swapan Chaudhuri (tabla), and Aashish Khan (sarod).
Saturday, April 8th @ 8:00 PM, African Music and DanceCalArts students and Alumni working under the direction of Kobla Ladzekpo and Beatrice Lawluvi present an exciting evening of traditional West African music and dance from Ghana, Benin, and Togo.
Sunday, April 9th @ 8:00 PM, Javanese Music and DanceTraditional dances, a new dance drama, traditional and world premiere instrumental works performed on the CalArts gamelan Kyai Dorodasih under the direction of Djoko Walujo. Rooted in centuries of tradition- at times elegant and stately or lively and boisterous- this large and elaborate collection of precision tuned bronze metailphones will be played by 30 musicians. Works include two new instrumental compositions by Djoko Walujo, including trumpets, field drums, violas and cellos.
General Admission for each performance is $7, Alumni $3, Students, Faculty, Staff and Seniors $2

Friday, March 24, 2006

Park Fees, Here we go again!!

There is a great article in the Daily News by Judy O'Rourke entitled "City considers raising fees for nonresidents: City considers dual-tier program fees". To read it just click on the link: http://www.dailynews.com/santaclarita/ci_3629083
I don't agree with Frank Ferry's proposed dual-tier program for Park fees for several reasons. First, non-city residents are spending a tremendous amount of money within the City of Santa Clarita which is generating sales tax dollars to the city. One only needs to look at auto row! It would be a slap in the face to the residents of the unincorporated areas who are shopping locally. The sales tax dollars that are generated more than offset the park use issues.
Second, the proposed fees could not be instituted at former county parks. Any city park that was a county park prior to the City of Santa Clarita being incorporated could not have a dual fee system. The County will fight any attempt to do so!
Finally, it is important to point out the County Tax Payers are subsidizing the Sheriff Services for the City of Santa Clarita. If the City wants to be petty about park fees than I would think that the County should make sure that all contracted services that the County is supling the City are being charged for fully.
Once again the City of Santa Clarita is taking the role of antagonist and no surprise it is being driven by Frank Ferry. As a reminder, several years ago Frank Ferry came to a West Ranch Town Council meeting and told our community that if we didn't annex into the City of Santa Clarita they (the city) would "bury us". Since then Frank has had a terrible relationship with the West Ranch Town Council. In fact there is no relationship!

It looks the annexation issue is going to start heating up again. I suspect that after the City Council elections are over annexation will become a hot topic again. Sadly though, if there isn't a change of leadership at City Hall the same divisive tactics, like the park fee issues, will continue.

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Scroll Down!!

You can scroll down for updates on the HOA meeting and Annexation. Also, check out the archives along the left side of this page.

Alert:FULL FREEWAY CLOSURE PLANNED

Route 126 Pavement Replacement Project
FULL FREEWAY CLOSURE PLANNED

Ventura and Santa Paula – The California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) will close portions of State Route 126 as part of a 13-mile pavement replacement project. The entire project extends from the Ventura Freeway (U.S. 101) to Hallock Drive. The following closures are weather permitting and subject to change, ramp closures are as needed:

Daily, Monday March 20, through Friday March 24:
· 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The following on- and off-ramps east- and
westbound on SR-126 between the US-101 interchange and Hallock Road may be closed intermittently for paving:
Victoria Avenue, Kimball Road, Wells Road, Briggs Road, Peck Road,
Palm Avenue and Hallock Road.
· 7 a.m. to 2 p.m. – one lane east or westbound SR-126 between US-101
interchange and Hallock Road may be closed intermittently for paving

Nightly, Monday, March 20, through Friday March 24:
· 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. – full freeway closure eastbound SR-126 from Kimball
Road to Briggs Road
· 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. – one lane eastbound SR-126 from Kimball Road to
Hallock Road may intermittently close
· 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. – US-101 connector to eastbound SR-126
· 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. – eastbound SR-126 on- and off-ramps at Peck Road
· 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. – eastbound SR-126 on- and off-ramps at Briggs Road
· 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. – eastbound SR-126 all on- and off-ramps at Wells
Road
· 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. – eastbound SR-126 on- and off-ramps at Kimball Road
· 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. – eastbound SR-126 on- and off-ramps at Victoria
Avenue
· 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. – Full freeway closure westbound SR-126 from US-101
to Victoria Avenue. Note: Saturday morning interchange may be closed
until 9 a.m.
· 9 p.m. to 9 a.m. – westbound SR-126 connector to northbound US-101
· 9 p.m. to 9 a.m. – westbound SR-126 off-ramp at Main Street
· 9 p.m. to 9 a.m. – westbound SR-126 on-ramps at Victoria Avenue


The $10 million project involves replacing deteriorated concrete pavement slabs with rapid-setting, high-strength concrete on the freeway mainline, placing concrete overlay on various on-and off-ramps, sealing cracks, grinding the pavement and restriping. The project is estimated to complete by the end of 2006. When completed, the result will be a smoother riding surface that will last longer and require less maintenance. A signed detour for the full eastbound SR-126 closure will be posted. Caltrans advises motorists to please, SLOW FOR THE CONE ZONE.

Alert: Stevenson Ranch HOA Meeting tonight

The Stevenson Ranch Community Association is having it's regular monthly meeting tonight at the IHOP on Lyons/Pico Canyon at 6:00 PM. Tonight's agenda includes updates on Security, Landscaping and the Civic Committees.

Be a Smart Shopper about Annexation

Over the past week or so I have gotten several calls regarding the future of the west side of the Santa Clarita Valley. With the City Council race starting to heat up in the City of Santa Clarita I thought it would be useful to re-post a piece I wrote last year on annexation. Further, it will be interesting to see how the City Council race turns out because that will have a direct impact on whether or not annexation talks could ever get restarted and actually get some traction. If the usual suspects get reelected I doubt that there will be any meaningful discussion on the topic in the future. Enjoy the reading!!

*************************************************************************************
From 2005

When I go shopping for anything, big or small, I tend to be a comparison shopper. If I’m in the supermarket it usually entails comparing ingredients or nutritional information from two different brands of the same product. For instance, are the Vons Pop Tarts really the same as the Kellogg’s brand but just less expensive?
Generally the amount of time spent doing comparisons is in direct relation to cost of the particular product. For example, I don’t spend a lot of time comparing milk but I will spend an awful lot of time researching and comparing cars. Part of that research involves asking lots and lots of questions and sometimes questioning the answers to make sure that I understand all the information that is being disseminated. Basically I am educating myself on whatever topic or product that I am interested in learning about.
For the past several years I have been doing just that in regards to annexation or the other options that may be available for the west-side communities. I've read government documents, visited our elected officials, question members of LAFCO, and yes, even gleaned an occasional fact out of the local newspapers.
The one thing that I learned when I was a teen is that if you ask the right questions you will eventually ferret out the truth. If during the course of asking questions the person your questioning starts to get agitated and doesn't want to give or validate their answers there is a good chance that they are hiding something. That becomes a red flag and usually makes me quite suspicious.
In my opinion, that’s exactly what is happening right now with the issue of annexation in the Santa Clarita Valley. Members of the community, myself included, are asking questions, sometimes very tough questions, of the City. These are legitimate questions as they involve comparing the unincorporated areas of the valley with those of the City. Question about parks, recreation, taxes, road maintenance, etc. These are questions that need to be asked so that the community can make an intelligent and informed decision at some point in the future as to the governmental status of our neighborhoods on the west-side.
This is why I have been writing these commentaries so that some of those questions can be asked publicly and also to point out when the questions are not being fully answered. It is clear from the response to my last commentary that I am asking hard questions that are making some people squirm because they seem not to want to talk about the whole truth. We should all be suspicious of this type of behavior.
Recently my suspicions were validated in several articles that appeared in the local papers. Both articles pointed out the that the City of Santa Clarita in fact is trying to circumvent the Castaic Town Council on the question of annexation. The proof is in the pudding as they say!
So there we are, we are doing some comparison-shopping and asking lots of tough questions that some in the City don't want to answer. Instead the City has chosen to try and bypass the elected town councils, or not give a complete answer to questions. Further, they have gotten a former Mayor of Santa Clarita, a "use-to-be", to try and defend the City and it's bizarre behavior.
It begs the question, why doesn't the City want to be forthright with all the information being asked for? Why have they attempted to dodge the Town Councils so many times? Why is the City giving vague and misleading answers?
It's time that the City starts to show transparency in its quest to annex neighboring communities. Trying to cherry pick the Valencia Commerce Center or other areas is inappropriate and is a divide and conquer tactic that will short change the residents of the Castaic and west side communities.
Most people in this valley can think for themselves and can make intelligent decisions. If they are presented with all the information that is being asked for, they can then make clear well thought out comparisons.
Don’t be "bamboozled" by people who don't want to give you the entire answer to your questions. And certainly don't be bamboozled by a former City of Santa Clarita Mayor, a use-to-be, that tries to brand any questioning as "anti-city rhetoric" as that person doesn't have the best interests of the unincorporated communities in mind.
It will pay dividends to be an informed and smart comparison shopper!

Friday, March 10, 2006

News: DRHorton Helps out Pico Canyon Elementary

DRHorton Homebuilders have generously agreed to donate $2500 towards to the completion of the perimeter fence at Pico Canyon Elementary School. The request was made by the Stevenson Ranch Civic Committee. The donation will bring the fence fund almost to it's goal of $10,000. The project should hopefully be completed within the next few months.
Thanks to DRHorton for being great corporate citizens and a friend of the West Ranch Communities!

Alert: I-5 Lane Closures

LANE CLOSURES FOR I-5 CARPOOL LANE CONSTRUCTION 3/10-3/11

Sylmar/North San Fernando Valley – The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) will close the following lanes of the Golden State Freeway (I-5), as part of a $41.6-million project to construct High Occupancy Vehicle, (HOV), or carpool lanes, on northbound and southbound I-5 from State Route 118 to State Route 14:

FRIDAY, MARCH 10:
· 5 a.m. to 1 p.m. – One lane of northbound I-5 from State Route 210 to
State Route 14
· 8 a.m. to 11 a.m. – One lane of northbound I-5 at eastbound State
Route 210
· 8 a.m. to 11 a.m. – One lane of northbound I-5 from State Route 210
to State Route 14
· 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The Chatsworth Street on-ramp to southbound I-5
· 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. – The westbound State Route 210 connector to
northbound I-5
· 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The southbound I-5 connector to I-405 truck bypass
· 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The northbound I-5 off-ramp to Brand Boulevard
· 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The northbound I-5 off-ramp to San Fernando
Mission Boulevard
· 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The southbound I-5 off-ramp to San Fernando
Mission Boulevard
· 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The eastbound and westbound San Fernando Mission
Boulevard
on-ramps to southbound I-5
· 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The Brand Boulevard on-ramp to southbound I-5
OVERNIGHT FRIDAY, MARCH 10 TO SATURDAY, MARCH 11:
· 6 p.m. to 11 a.m. – Up to two lanes of southbound I-5 from State
Route 14 to Balboa Blvd.
· 7 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – Up to two lanes of southbound I-5 from San
Fernando Mission Boulevard to Brand Boulevard
continued…
Page 2 of 2

OVERNIGHT FRIDAY, MARCH 10 TO SATURDAY, MARCH 11:

· 7 p.m. to 8 a.m. – Up to two lanes of southbound I-5 from State Route
14 to Roxford Street
· 7 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – The southbound I-5 auxiliary lane from Brand
Boulevard to State Route 118
· 7 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – The southbound I-5 connector to I-405 truck
bypass
· 7 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – The southbound I-5 connector to eastbound
State Route 118
· 8 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – The eastbound and westbound San Fernando
Mission Boulevard on-ramps to southbound I-5
· 8 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – The Laurel Canyon Avenue on-ramp to northbound
I-5
· 8 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – The Brand Boulevard on-ramp to southbound I-5
· 8 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – The Chatsworth Street on-ramp to southbound
I-5
· 8 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – The northbound I-5 off-ramp to San Fernando
Mission Boulevard
· 8 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – The southbound I-5 off-ramp to San Fernando
Mission Boulevard
· 8 p.m. to 11:59 a.m. – Up to three lanes of northbound I-5 from
Balboa Boulevard to State Route 14
· 8 p.m. to 8 a.m. – Up to three lanes of northbound I-5 from I-405 to
Roxford Street
· 9 p.m. to 7 a.m. – Up to three lanes of southbound I-5 from State
Route 14 to eastbound State Route 210 on-ramp
· 9 p.m. to 8 a.m. – Up to three lanes of northbound I-5 from Roxford
Street to eastbound State Route 210 on-ramp
· 9 p.m. to 10 a.m. – Two lanes of northbound I-5 from Laurel Canyon
Avenue to I-405
· 9 p.m. to 8 a.m. – Up to three lanes of northbound I-5 from Roxford
Street to eastbound State Route 210
· 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. – Up to three lanes of northbound I-5 from
eastbound State Route 210 on-ramp to Balboa Blvd.
· 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. – Up to two lanes of southbound I-5 from I-405 to
San Fernando Mission Boulevard
· 11:59 p.m. to 6 a.m. – Up to three lanes of southbound I-5 from
westbound State Route 210 off-ramp to Roxford Street
· 1 a.m. to 5 am. -- Up to three lanes of southbound I-5 from eastbound
State Route 210 on-ramp to westbound State Route 210 off-ramp
· 1 a.m. to 6 a.m. – Up to two lanes of northbound I-5 at State Route
14

Monday, March 06, 2006

Alert:CalTrans Closures

I-5 CARPOOL LANE FROM SR-118 TO SR-14
UPDATE #54

LANE CLOSURES FOR I-5 CARPOOL LANE CONSTRUCTION 3/6 – 3/9

Sylmar/North San Fernando Valley – The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) will close the following lanes of the Golden State Freeway (I-5), as part of a $41.6-million project to construct High Occupancy Vehicle, (HOV), or carpool lanes, on northbound and southbound I-5 from State Route 118 to State Route 14:

DAILY -- MONDAY, MARCH 6 THROUGH THURSDAY, MARCH 9:

·5 a.m. to 2 p.m. – One lane of northbound I-5 from State Route 210 to
State Route 14
·8 a.m. to 2 p.m. – One lane of northbound I-5 from I-405 to eastbound
State Route 210 on-ramp
·8 a.m. to 2 p.m. – Two lanes of northbound I-5 from State Route 210
to State Route 14
·9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The Chatsworth Street on-ramp to southbound I-5
·9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The westbound State Route 210 connector to
northbound I-5
·9 a.m. to 2 p.m. – The westbound State Route 118 connector to
northbound I-5
·9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The southbound I-5 connector to I-405 truck bypass
·9 a.m. 1 p.m. – One lane of northbound I-5 from State Route 118 to
I-405
·9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The northbound I-5 off-ramp to Brand Boulevard
·9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The northbound I-5 off-ramp to San Fernando
Mission Boulevard
·9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – One southbound lane and the southbound auxiliary
lane from Chatsworth Street to eastbound State Route 118
·9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The southbound I-5 off-ramp to San Fernando
Mission Boulevard
·9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The eastbound and westbound San Fernando Mission
Boulevard on-ramps to southbound I-5
·9 a.m. to 3 p.m. – The Brand Boulevard on-ramp to southbound I-5


OVERNIGHT -- MONDAY, MARCH 6 THROUGH THURSDAY, MARCH 9:
10 p.m. to 6 a.m. – Up to three lanes of northbound I-5 from
eastbound State Route 210 on-ramp to Balboa Blvd.
11 p.m. to 5 a.m. – Up to two lanes of northbound I-5 at State Route
14
11:59 p.m. to 4 a.m. – Up to three lanes of southbound I-5 from
eastbound State Route 210 on-ramp to westbound State Route 210 off-ramp

Friday, March 03, 2006

Alert: Stevenson Ranch HOA meeting March 15th

The Stevenson Ranch Community Association will hold it's regular monthly meeting on Wednesday March 15, 6:00 PM at the IHOP on Lyons/Pico.
Be informed!