Friday, April 19, 2013
Highway 1 right of way
Attached is a letter from Caltrans explaining the encroachment rights for a 50 plus acre property next to the Lutheran church. This was never discussed nor included in the widening EIR which made an incorrect statement that it is not tied to a project or growth inducing.
www.fixpacifica.com/docs/RightOfWay.pdf
Submitted by Todd McCune Bray
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
74 comments:
So?
Nothing will be ever built here cause you and your buddies won't let anyone build.
So?
So... the DEIR doesn't mention this promise. I know that is meaningless to most of you (4 in total I'm convinced) Rantanons, Dramanons and Redherringanons. BTW, try reading the attached letter, it is worthy of the 2 minutes it will take.
so?
It allows the owner of the property to build a driveway from the highway onto his property. That's only reasonable. It was in effect long before the latest highway widening proposal.
As other people have said, "So?"
Is this the property the guy who owns the clocktower building owns? Or owned at one time.
Steve_O, the issue is one of you and your Fixie's fav's, openness in government. In this item there is none.
Oh wait, I forgot, your mission is merely to bitch about scapegoats. Brownshirtanons!
"Rantanons, Dramanons and Redherringanons"
This is odd to keep repeating. Your friends must find you hilarious Todd.
Our mission here isn't to "bitch" as you say, Our mission is to move Pacifica forward by removing NIMBY's in power as we have on Council and next on the planning commission.
#WINNING
That's a very well-reasoned comment, Todd.
And the king of the Scootercons rants on. Searching for any minute reason to oppose any growth or progress in Pacifica. Jeez we know what these liars are AGAINST, what are the FOR besides NOTHING??
Open government?? coming from the guy who helped orchestrate the blatant Brown Act violation with the Planning Commission?? BEEP BEEP
Todd, is your vehement opposition to this project due to you proximity to the hwy or the fact that you never have to endure the traffic that occurs? Underlying all the arguments against is the overwhelmingly common sense conclusion that the highway is unsafe. Period. Some like to maintain that since none have died because of the congestion, it's OK. Think about that logic next time we have a 4.1 earthquake and we shake a little. How would emergency services be able to respond in a much more severe earthquake. Hasn't happened, so of course it won't. Didn't we just pass another anniversary of the SF earthquake?
Actually, this situation is similar to what triggered the lawsuit over the Fish Bowl property. Prior to the widening of Hwy 1,(the Edgemar Freeway) , the owner(s) of the Fish Bowl property had access from Hwy 1; probably pre-1964. Following completion of the freeway, their access was cut-off. The property changed hands several times, I believe, and eventually one of the owners, filed a lawsuit concerning the lack of access. The oner prevailed in court against the City of Pacifica, was awarded damages( $5m +) that were never paid. I am assuming here that Caltrans is avoiding any potential lawsuit by clarifying the access issue on the property adjacent to the Lutheran Church.
"eventually one of the owners, filed a lawsuit concerning the lack of access. The oner prevailed in court against the City of Pacifica, was awarded damages( $5m +) that were never paid."
Not exactly. An award of $665,000 in damages and legal expenses to the developer was thrown out by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
http://www.cp-dr.com/node/2063
Hey Toddo, forget the highway thing. It'll be bogged down in lawsuits for decades. Dirt naps for everyone on here and Riptide before it gets built. Of more immediate impact here in Pathetica is the planning commission overhaul. What do you think of that? Not that anyone wants to build anything but a shack here and there, yet, but we're going to be ready. Yahoo baby! You nobees are outta there!
http://www.pacificariptide.com/pacifica_riptide/2008/03/clarificationco.html
John Maybury said Keith Fromm "filed something like two dozen lawsuits against the City of Pacifica and came out batting 0-for-24."
Fromm said "we won a judgment against the City in the San Mateo Superior Court for approximately $5,000,000, which was overturned on appeal."
When your judgment, no matter how big it was, is overturned on appeal, it means you lost. And if you leave that part out when you tell your story, it means you're lying.
That's 24 against Pacifica. We weren't the only city he sued, repeatedly.
The Pacifica oligarchs that get in the way of anything being built and Pacifica from being the only beach town that does not take advanatage of being a beach town can sue Caltrans all they want.
Let them take on Caltrans and I hope Caltrans goes after then for legal fees and expenses.
Be careful for what you wish for bray
Too bad all you Rant/Drama/Redherring/Brownshirtanons lack the balls or courage to post as yourselves. We could have some very interesting encounters if you did, but then you'd have to stand by your fairy princess make believe concocted persona's and that just would'nt do would it? It's a good thing you are ashamed of who you are.
Maybe you can go to the Caltrans office and have a fit like you did at Barry Swensons office. You know tell Caltrans not to build the freeway thru Pacifica like you told Swenson Corp to back away from buying the quarry.
Ding! Ding! Todd wins the prize for validating Godwin's Law again. Does anyone else see the irony in someone who likes to call other people "Drama" choosing to invoke Nazi Germany in this silly highway widening discussion?
The NIMBYs' ridiculous arguments against widening make so little sense that they have to resort to ad hominem attacks and attempt to demonize those with which they disagree. Hmmm.... Who exactly is acting like a Brownshirt here?
Mikey-pooh, Anonymous versions of anonymous are name calling how? Who is being called a name?
Drama-poo, the fact that you have to rant about the people rather than their arguments clearly shows how weak your position is.
the king of drama has spoken!
"The NIMBYs' ridiculous arguments against widening make so little sense..."
Can you say what some of those arguments are?
The funniest argument is when a bunch of hippies, artists, and twirly dancers pretend that they know more about engineering than Caltrans and start tossing out random solutions to our traffic problems. So cute.
The most bizarro one is when they go full-on militia-style tea-bagger and start making up vast governmental conspiracies being run by nefarious agents of Caltrans.
The most hypocritical argument they have is the one where they say there really isn't a traffic problem. These are the same people who used the devastating traffic problems on Highway One as one of their reasons to obstruct development in the abandoned quarry.
"Can you say what some of those arguments are?"
Claiming traffic isn't bad enough to warrant widening, when just a few years ago NIMBYs were screaming that traffic was so bad that we couldn't allow any development in the quarry.
Complaining about the cost of widening and alternatively suggesting overpasses, which Caltrans said would cost two or three times as much as widening.
Saying the problem is caused by the school, without accounting for the fact that traffic jams occur in the afternoon, long after school has let out.
Their reliance on conspiracy theories, e.g., Caltrans has a secret plan to build a freeway on the coast between SF and Santa Cruz.
Since in the past nobody's died because emergency vehicles were stuck in Highway 1 traffic, there is no risk of it happening in the future.
Complaints about how Caltrans has not addressed alternatives, when they have clearly done so at both public meetings and in public documents like the DEIR.
And those are just off the top of my head.
I forgot about the creatively brilliant argument that says the tunnels won't increase Highway 1 traffic because people will be afraid to drive through the tunnels.
All in your mind Steve, all in your mind.
Brownshirts = paramilitary assault division of the nazi party.
Godwin said that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis.
You win Todd
It's off to the courts with this one. Where every argument, for or against, will be reviewed, very slowly. And, of course, we'll need a visit with our dear friends on the CA Coastal Commission for the permit. Possibly more than one visit. Maybe we can even put it on the ballot some year? More than once? This is coastal California, you know. Gather the lawyers, the activists, the money-folk both large and small.
Council has the right idea. Play dead, don't get involved. It's just a road. Let nature take its litigious public course!
I forgot about the nobees hippies and nimby's not saying a word about Whole Energy costing the taxpayers over $200,000.
"When your judgment, no matter how big it was, is overturned on appeal, it means you lost. And if you leave that part out when you tell your story, it means you're lying."
when you leave out the part that the lawsuits cost the city over $1 million in legal fees that were never reimbursed, does that mean you are lying as well??
As a follow up to the above document I've requested a copy of the ENTRY ROAD PLAN prepared for property owner David Thomas of Walnut Creek Ca. by Aliquot Associates (a civil planning and engineering firm) that was submitted to Caltrans and mentioned in the letter featured here.
Of note is the response by Caltrans Deputy District Director R.A. Macpherson to the plans submitted by Mr. Thomas as prepared by Aliquot Associates "... we do believe that we would be favorably disposed conceptually to that design."
The promises and agreements along with the prepared plans title ENTRY ROAD PLAN existed at least in 2009 if not sooner. The agreement itself dates to 1972. That none of this is mentioned in the widenings EIR there is no way that it will be addressed in the FEIR. I have asked that it be included in the DEIR and addressed in the FEIR but was sent a canned statement that the public comment period is closed.
Whether or not the public comment period is closed these are all items belonging to and in the possession of Caltrans and known to the Project Development Team which includes city employees. That the DEIR overlooked this information after it was discussed by the PDT that prepared the widening's EIR is to me a gift. What better way to illustrate Caltrans deliberate exclusion of information regarding the widenings impacts than Caltrans own admission.
As to the duplicity of our local, county and state staffers, wadda ya gonna do?
Maybe caltrans just doesn't like you?
Did you ever think about that?
@428 No, it just means you're a Fromm Fan. He's been called a serial litigant and he has a history of lawsuits similar to the one he filed against Pacifica. It's his thing. Perhaps if he can't win on the merits of the case, he's happy to run up the court costs? That might even discourage opposition from others he might target. You know, play dead.
Duplicity or stupidity? Probably some of both. Anyone who thinks that Caltrans is some apolitical, benevolent group on a holy mission to build roads for the people is a fool. It's about money and influence. Follow the money.
Always, always follow the money.
@12 You think? Caltrans doesn't like anyone who questions their methods. Bray is one of those people put on this earth to ask questions, particularly of "those in charge". No action required, just the knowing is enough for some. Might be an Irish thing?
No Todd, it just means that your very small group opposing highway one widening is getting desperate.
You know that if you can stop this project Caltrans will not take up one of your alternate ideas. The bond money would be gone and you have what you want which is a stagnant little town unchanged in 30 years.
So please go peddle your "ideas" over on RIP tide for the 10 like minded people on that blog.
He isn't Irish he is an alien!
He asks questions cause his Vallemar hippies and noobies ask him too.
For whatever reason your repeated anti- North Pacifica/Fromm, comments are twisted trash, Anonymous 12:16 PM.
Here's one account: North Pacifica LLC v. City of Pacifica. There are others. The 7 year lawsuit from 2003 was appealed by Pacifica all the way to the 9th Court Circuit. And from my recall, 1998-2002 City Councilmember Maxine Gonsalves, said their city council approved the Pacifica LLC 1) with road access to the project, and 2) without a "several and all" poison pill insurance liability clause. Road access and regular PUD insured liability make sense. Maxine said, the mix-up occurred after city council approved this project.
Mostly the city got their money back from the city forced, costly Association of Bay Area Cities (ABAG) lawsuit defense. Return of that money (later aka "the city reserve") lasted about 2 years. Time and money worked in favor of the city in this instance. And the gain? The city lost city housing for people, and tax revenue for the city.
North Pacifica LLC/Fromm wasn't able to build the APPROVED project. The multiyear lawsuit was a drag on that business, plus the cost. The land was not developed. And the negative reputation of this city toward developers continues.
These anti-progress dialogs are all about NIMBY vision, strategy and control of this city over 3 decades. And the NIMBY stranglehold on this city is the reason this city continues to deteriorate. Be proud NIMBY (not).
John Curtis appealed it.
oh so Fromm had an approved project that got derailed by the city attorney injecting a clause that was not a part of what city council approved. And John Curtis appealed to the Coastal Commission to further delay the project. So Fromm sued everyone.
Fromm sounds like a complete jerk. #sarcasm
Bray is such a nuisance to CalTrans. Actually, the whole city is a nuisance to CalTrans.
Why won't Bray (and the nobies) just admit he wants NOTHING done to HWY 1? this is not about traffic, this is about power and control.
Someone on the taxpayer taet shouldn't complain about municipal salaries.
oh here comes the old nobie "spaghetti" tactic . . . throw any argument against the wall and see what sticks.
it is also cute when the Scootercons pretend like they give a damn about local business.
@1216 so your argument is that Fromm tricked the city into tricking him into filing a lawsuit against them. So he could intimidate anyone else who tried to keep him from developing his property. Because he successfully developed the Fish & Bowl.
you spin me right round baby right round like a record baby round round . . .
Noobies claim over 80 businesses will close when Caltrans starts the Highway 1 project. Of course they never spoke to any of the business owners and just pulled this out of their arces
I just heard a rumor that scootercon applied to be on the planning commission.
I heard another rumor. The City Council and counsultants have already decided who the next City Manager is.
First hint..She
Jeezlaweez! It's not even dark and they're awake. Was the magic word Fromm, Bray or Caltrans? Do you guys share a brain?
4:19 its a full moon
@357 that's not funny. it would confirm suspicions about this council and how they operate. you better be wrong.
Tonights studdy session canceled. Train off the tracks.
Steve Sinai said...
It allows the owner of the property to build a driveway from the highway onto his property. That's only reasonable. It was in effect long before the latest highway widening proposal.
Not to split hairs but a driveway goes from the street to the garage. This is an easement!
Of course!
3:57 confirmed by a city council member it is a done deal
Ok uomo grasso took a meeting today. Back tomorrow
@508 Hmmm, Ritzma has always been reliably cited as the one who brought cafeteria cash and the rest of the senior exec benefit package to council soon after her arrival. She's just the kind of clever and discreet underling council would want around just in case they need to be clever and discreet. I guess it's possible that she's got the job, but oh it would not be a popular decision with the employees. Anything wrong with that? Should we expect poverty to be given as a reason? Ours, not hers. Oh, this waiting is awful.
5:22 beating not meeting typo
Uomo grasso? What or who is that? Front-runner for the CM job?
"Not to split hairs but a driveway goes from the street to the garage. This is an easement!"
He needs the easement to build his driveway.
What's worse: NIMBY Caltrans conspiracy ridiculousness or idiotic Ritzma ridiculousness?
Whatever you guessed, you're wrong.
Which came first the chicken or the egg?
Which came first the easement or the driveway?
I am told by a reliable source that Ritzma is definitely not getting the job.
I was told by a reliable source she is getting the job.
I'm reliably unreliable. On that, you may rely.
This is completely unreliable. To make the Ritzma thing more palatable council will declare her Mega-Manager responsible for everything...finance, hr, city admin. She and Rhodes make about $400k total so pay her $300K and feel the universal love from a safe, undisclosed location.
@1110 that's ridiculous!
My sources are very reliable.
Someone other than Ritzma will be city manager, or else my name isn't Anonymous.
Bold move 145. You've put the prestige of all anonymi at risk. Such as it is.
Post a Comment