Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Pacifica's Economic Plan
Submission and comment policy
Want to share an article or opinion? Unlike some other Pacifica blogs, Fix Pacifica won't bury viewpoints we disagree with. Send your submission, along with your name, to fixpacifica@gmail.com.
People may comment anonymously, but any comments that degenerate into 1) personal attacks against individual blog participants; 2) incomprehensible gibberish; or 3) attempts to turn conversations into grade-school playground brawls, will be removed.
People may comment anonymously, but any comments that degenerate into 1) personal attacks against individual blog participants; 2) incomprehensible gibberish; or 3) attempts to turn conversations into grade-school playground brawls, will be removed.
Search This Blog
Recent Comments
Get this Recent Comments Widget
Historic Sharp Park Golf Course
Blog Archive
-
▼
2011
(601)
-
▼
September
(39)
- Oct. 3 Planning Commission Rage Against Caltrans C...
- Small business owners look out for this new scam
- Patch poll about Sharp Park
- Highway 1 Report 1999
- Do you like pancakes?
- Court Motion Filed to Restrict Illegal Sharp Park ...
- Moving forward even on the farm: robotics
- Governor Jerry Brown signs internet tax compromise
- Reminder about posting guidelines
- Highway widening will make our commute easier
- Highway widening through Pacifica is a safety issue
- Highway improvement from the activist fringe
- Fog Fest - this weekend, September 24th and 25th
- Highway 1 widening poll
- Reminder: SMCTA Pacifica Highway 1 widening meetin...
- City Council Agenda, Monday, September 26, 2011
- Planning Commission Meeting, tonight, Monday, Sept...
- Taking the scary out of our neighbor - Mars
- No more plastic bags in San Jose, beginning Januar...
- First Annual Pacifica Chamber of Commerce Golf Tou...
- From the Land of Lois - Dr. Joe Harrop: Mulligans,...
- Medical cannabis: drive to get it , or have it d...
- You Are Invited: Measure L Parcel Tax Forum - Paci...
- City of Pacifica - General Plan Update
- Jerry Hill Press Release: Primary Accomplishments ...
- Twin towers and Flight 93 - September 11, 2001
- Supervisor Avalos vs. Sharp Park
- City Council Agenda, Monday, September 12, 2011
- Proposed Sharp Park Restoration Ordinance
- Sharp Park Golf Course: SF Golf Allliance Responds...
- Center for Biological Diversity Press Release: Leg...
- Sharp Park FAQ
- SF Chronicle: Battle over future of Sharp Park gol...
- Its just like falling off a cliff, the dog did it
- Caltrans gets the job done
- Owners of Malibu Mansions Cry, 'This Sand Is My Sand'
- Labor Day, September 5, 2011
- Martin's Beach is closed, maybe forever
- Millbrae moves to explore police partnerships
-
▼
September
(39)
Visitors:
16 comments:
Look at Jim's article link if you haven't yet. In 1999 the City of Pacifica was a sponsor of what looks like the same highway 1 widening project-- still waiting.
And in the spirit of "group hug", I'd like to see many of the NIMBY and Tod Schlesinger ideas advanced to take "traffic" off highway 1 too.
big hug Kathy
The DEIR/EA is factually untrue among other reasons because it states part of the project is within the City of Pacifica’s (COP) Right of Way and furthermore the project is within the COP Local Coastal Program’s (LCP) jurisdiction. This is confirmed in a California Coastal Commissions (CCC) Notice of Preparation letter (NOP) sent to Joe Hurley of the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) dated March 18, 2010 that was cc’d to CT and COP .
As we now know the letter clearly outlines COP responsibility regarding issuing a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) and CT need to submit two applications for two separate CDP, one from the COP and another from the CCC. The letter also outlines a process to combine the two permits if all four parties agree.
The DEIR/EA makes no mention of this, the letter or the COP permitting roll which is creating a huge potential Conflict of Interest for the COP, because the document says that CT, the TA and the COP will at some point pick a preferred alternative together. How can that not conflict directly with the COP roll as a permitting agency representing the State of California through it's LCP area?
The EIR really needs an adult.
toddbray@1244 i hate this alphabet soup crap
since you seem to know what is going on why don't you spell this stuff out and identify what and who these depts are
this would help for those of us with an interest but not such an in depth involvement
thanks if you can do
So, Todd (1244), I agree with Anon (138) except
to add there is probably no actual problem with the professional DEIR, including environmental studies and agencies.
"probably" isn't good enough and "professional" in this case includes an agency self-interest it would be naive to overlook
i'd still like some sense made of all the alphabet glop if it isn't too much trouble
just a list of the agencies or depts that go along with the initials would be great
thanks
Todd
The city put no money in to match funds, thus they have zero right to any input.
Not you, not the rest of the hippies not no one will stop this!
Yes, the opinions of professionals who do this for a living are not good enough, and we should rely on someone with Todd's level of expertise. Todd, please explain your credentials relevant to a highway widening project, so everyone can understand.
Thanks
Anon (9/29, 9:25pm), Todd (9/29, 12:44pm) names the alphabet for the most part. The self-interest is more likely on the part of the non-professionals looking for any legal tangents or obscure diversions which may obstruct or cast doubt on the DEIR process-- part of the reason they needed extra time in the public review.
With all the confusion Todd caused in his comment, my comment to him (possibly similar to yours) is: "what does it all mean" even if you're correct, which from my view begins with the premise "I doubt you are".
913, 945, 1049 Todd raises interesting points and valid questions. Is that too scary? The idea that Pacifica has no say unless we put up funds is astounding. I'll bet you're serious. And Caltrans has no self-interest? Awed and seduced by expertise? Yeah, let me tell ya what I'm going to do for you, etc.
ok reading Todd's stuff i do see the alphabet soup explained early on. there's just so much of it so close together that it's a mess to read. read more carefully. thanks
It's odd how the NIMBYs attack this project by denigrating the expertise of Caltrans and replacing it with tons of speculation by amateurs. They remind me of tea party people denying climate change by attacking science.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa they've got to fix the road. I can't get to my hair appt on time.
Anon1256 Odder still, there are plenty of very reputable scientists who have different theories about climate change and its causes and we could find highway and traffic experts who would suggest other alternatives on hiway 1. But what is on the table is Caltrans' very extreme and permanent
"solution" to our problem and it should be examined very carefully before any action is taken. If your "science" is so solid, it will stand up to scrutiny and become a better solution through the process. Resort to all the labels and name calling you want and you still say and solve nothing.
By all means produce your traffic experts who are suggesting other alternatives -- it would greatly upgrade the conversation. So far, I just see a bunch of thinking out loud by local NIMBYs with no credibility versus people who do this for a living.
Not to worry, this is Pacifica and plenty of scrutiny,experts,and political pressure on the way.
Post a Comment