Posted by Steve Sinai
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
-
▼
2014
(719)
-
▼
February
(47)
- Climate Action Study Session, Wednesday March 5, 2014
- Ballot measure to increase our Midpeninsula Open S...
- Climate change, the latest scientific view: its s...
- What happens when some of these new species become...
- Highway 1 at Linda Mar closed from June 2014 to re...
- Senator Jerry Hill Appointed to California Coastal...
- The serious need for affordable housing in the Bay...
- Fix our city economy
- McNider and Christy: Why Kerry Is Flat Wrong on Cl...
- Reminder City Council meeting, tonight, Monday Feb...
- Government oversight and accountability, San Mateo...
- Lyme disease widespread in Bay Area Open Space
- Save the 110 year old HMB bridge and let it fall d...
- City Council meeting, Monday, February 24, 2014
- Beloved, talented, funny Eco-NIMBY has a birthday,...
- The better alternative is the Caltrans highway wid...
- Fix Highway 1 Now
- Special Business, Ethics, Compassion event availab...
- 7.7 acre housing development, Brotherhood Way (Par...
- Water recycling, progress stalled coastside (Half ...
- Route 1, San Pedro Creek Bridge Replacement meetin...
- Open Space and Parkland Advisory Committee meeting...
- Presidents' Day, February 17, 2014
- NIMBIES protest fixing highway 1 bottleneck
- Scam Alert
- Redwood City sued, environmental lawsuits usually pay
- Half Moon Bay also needs a new library, for the co...
- CA per capita in gallons per day water usage, us v...
- Children become smarter through quality language a...
- City of San Mateo, an executive employee love story
- Board of Supervisors President speaks to Pacifica,...
- Time to fix the highway 1 problem
- Twisted anti-Highway 1 flyer live today
- Latest on Sharp Park
- Anti-highway 1 manifesto
- Valentines singing event, 2/13/14
- Scam alert asking for PG&E payment, by phone or email
- City Council meeting, Monday, February 10, 2014
- Midcoast annual meeting update, County Supervisor ...
- Chamber of Commerce small business and community a...
- Daly City Serramonte Plaza renovation, renamed Gel...
- Eureka square still has parking spaces, and empty ...
- DRAFT Climate Action Plan—City Council Study Sessi...
- Good weekend for rain, grocery stores, TV ads, and...
- Keeping up with the Windsors
- Rat eradication, a local business service
- GGNRA's coastal plan to ban off-leash dogs is "una...
-
▼
February
(47)
Visitors:
149 comments:
Pete has solid enviro credentials. He also knows the Hwy 1 mess needs to be fixed. Too bad the Gang of No did not listen to him 8 years ago,
I love that one of the king Nimby's (Pete Dejarnatt) recommended the Calera Parkway project. It shows how many years this thing has been dragging on.
Some interesting facts in his letter. Measure A passed in Pacifica because voters wanted this widening.
His statement that the section of hwy 1 has heavy congestion in the morning and evening back in 2006 is even more true today.
Oh it's 99% is it? The letter is strong and shows even a Nimby hero supports the project. Why gum it up with that amateurish addition?
The 1% statement is statistically impossible. Not even Brent Plater would dare to make up such a ridiculous lie.
ahh, it's better than 99%. I counted 15 demonstrators at their gig. That Vs. 18,000 plus south Pacificans. So let's say statistically they are 0% vs the rest of us. Majority rules!
Hutch
I like the "offical" nickname better.
Sneaky Pete.
Who paid for that ad.... I bet you don't have the balls to tell us.
Mark Stechbart paid for that ad.
Pete Dejarnatt said the city letter was not tied to the widening and does not indicate support for it. It only indicates city support for Highway 1 improvements. The letter was written before any plan alternatives were known. He is against the current widening plan. He thinks it will never be approved by the Coastal Commission.
A sure sign we South Pacificans can all sleep in and leave late, someday.
Who doesn't have balls? Oh the one afraid to use their own name?
A lot of regular citizens contributed towards that ad. I was one of them.
Glad you like it.
1202 NOT TRUE, false comment at the time the letter was written. Major Pete DeJarnatt and Councilmember Cal Hinton attended a SM County Board of Supervisors meeting asking to move the Calera Parkway Project forward.
Note the letter, dated 12/19/06:
"The Calera Parkway Project is one of the identified projects in the original expenditure plan of Measure A that was presented to and approved by the voters in 1988 and again in 2004. It is because of this project that Measure A received the overwhelming support of the voters of Pacifica. ...the City council supports this project and Pacifica will always be at the forefront in making sure this project becomes a reality." Sincerely, Peter DeJarnatt, Mayor."
Big thanks to Mark Stechbart and others for reprinting this important letter!!!
People aren't going to sit back and let the NIMBY's ruin anything else like the quarry project again. Glad people are making the voice of reason heard.
Anyone want to guess how much people at the County level listened to Sneaky Pete.
Between 0% to .0001%.
335, the simple answer is the "people at the County level" did listen to Pete DeJarnatt, the Mayor of this City (representing our people and our city council). There was a window of opportunity for needed road projects. This one qualified (highway traffic bottleneck). And from there, the Calera Parkway Project full environmental report process moved forward. There were public meetings and submitted citizen comments before and after this process.
The letter is from 2006. There wasn't any information about the specifics of the Calera Parkway project until 2010, 4 years later.
506, so???? And you really think there were no clues about what Caltrans might consider in fixing a traffic bottleneck at Calera Parkway (or any where else for that matter)? In any event, following the studies, the winner was widening (adding access and exit lanes).
But, maybe you should have supported building the quarry in 2006, Peebles wanted an overpass.
LOL lemme see if I've got this straight:
we shouldn't question Caltrans because they're the experts, except when we want to call the project a "safety widening," then all of a sudden we're traffic engineers and it's okay to directly contradict Caltrans own EIR which states the project doesn't address safety.
Also Caltrans mentions in their own EIR that a grade separation would be the best option for traffic flow, but... again... here come the spin janitors to tell us that while we should never ever question Saint Caltrans, the agency is wrong in this case?
oh and don't forget the claim that there's no correllation between the schools and the traffic and yet magically there's no traffic on the days when the schools are closed (this week for example) but surely that is just coincidence and who are you going to believe, your lying eyes or the brave keyboard warriors manning the front lines of this blog war (involving all of eleven people)?
And somehow there's massive support for this project even though the city of Pacifica has never held a public hearing on it except to vote on "wide" or "wider" yessir yessir three bags full.
b-b-b-but Caltrans hosted a couple of public comment periods you say? Okay, not the city, but... 80% of the on-the-record comments were against the project in some form or another, but somehow this magically transforms into... I almost can't type this I'm laughing so hard... "99% support for the project."
LMFAO way to go guys... and it's all captured in print too! so precious. LOL
506 The letter mentions the Calera Parkway project specifically. While there wasn't an exact plan, everyone knew it involved widening the road.
636 You are wrong on all points. Sorry there is traffic when school is out. The overpass isn't the best option. And our emergency workers who are experts in highway safety say widening would make the highway safer for drivers and get them to calls faster.
656, oh sure, what would Caltrans know, they're the professionals that develop and build highways and other transportation structures all over California. What we really need is 30 more years to consider whether Pacifica really, really, really needs anything (lol).
Meantime, examples of roads with four (4) lanes, plus two (2) access and exit lanes exist throughout the State, including in several locations in San Mateo county.
Oh, but Pacifica is "special". How about a two-lane road-- like the one some of you folks were bemoaning we used to have. That should work-out even "sweller".
There are Highway 1 traffic congestion problems all along our coast, from Pacifica through Half Moon Bay. And the Calera Parkway bottleneck is known by those who have been sitting in traffic for more than 26 years, and identified in traffic studies by Caltrans then. But NOW you're interested in doing what, Mr. 1%er? And your expertise is what?
The sequence of meeting from the County/Caltrans/City have been proper. (The first traffic study meeting I attended occurred in about 2004). But now that its time to build the project, its those pesky NIMBY lawsuits that have delayed the process for the rest of us.
California Coastal Commission. They'll be deciding this issue. They're record is public. Check it out.
We artists know more about traffic engineering than Caltrans.
Yes, we artists have a 99% approval rating in bridge building. We're here to support ya!
So what, they can't find jobs or a barber but when it comes to knowing how to build highways the right way the hippies got that one covered.
"Let's change school times, lets bus the kids, lets time traffic lights, lets build a frontage road, lets just add shoulders, lets build an overpass."
Can't wait to see what their next genius expert idea will be.
Forget the hippies. Nothing they've done has been near as entertaining as that ad. 99%. Shows quite a flair for the dramatic flourish. Who woulda thought?
The reason they know more about hwy 1 is that their 1965 VW buses only go about 35 mph. Give a chance for contemplation. Toke toke pass.
No 113, flog away as you might, and you will, nothing, repeat, nothing is as funny as that ad. I'm 99% sure of that.
You can laugh all the way down the new widened highway 142.
The letter is more accurate than you think.
237 Oh, the letter is more accurate than I think? It would have to be.
Pete Dejarnatt said he stands by that letter and he is still for the Calera Pkwy plan 100%. He also said we should develop the quarry and the Rock. He sends his greetings from Bermuda.
812 Did he say anything about a doggie beach at Sharp Park? That Bermuda Triangle can work wonders on bad attitudes. See if you can contact him again.
Highway one is not a threat to anyone in terms of safety. And lets' face it, even Caltrans stated, the Caltrans EIR, which itself clearly stated that the Calera Parkway Project is not a public safety proposal nor should it be viewed as one.
I got 99 problems, but the highway ain't one.
1231, 153 etc. nope you can stay home, dream, catch RLF's, talk to yourself, and continue to post your series of anti-highway 1 science and public safety comments. But in consideration of such personal ideological NIMBY comments, some of us think its possible you may have 100 problems, rather than just the 99 you claim.
1231 I guess calling it a safety widening is supposed to appeal to our inner patriot. Remind us of guys in uniform, flags, Mom and apple pie. Proponents are working with what's available.
1231 Our emergency workers have said that hwy 1 widening IS absolutely an essential safety necessity. Peter Loeb keeps repeating that bull crap over on Riptide about it not being safety related.
I believe our Firemen over Peter Loeb.
Here again is what they said:
"we believe it irresponsible to wait any longer to implement a Rt. 1 widening to solve traffic congestion we have seen increase for over 20 years. Rt. 1 is a regional highway and thousands of Pacificans use it as their only way out of town. For emergency personnel, Rt. 1 is our lifeline to protect Pacifica. We do not want to tell any Pacifica resident we were late to a fire or medical emergency because we were stuck in traffic."
Jim Bonner, Battalion Chief, Pacifica Fire Dept, retired. 38 years of service
Bob Trapp, Battalion Chief, Pacifica Fire Dept, retired. 33 years of service
Steve Engler, Battalion Chief, Pacifica Fire Dept, retired. 30 years of service
Sorry, Hutch, but I'll stick with Caltrans who are the professional traffic engineers. Wasn't it you who said that only professional traffic engineers could weigh in on the project?
Caltrans own report says the project does not address safety issues.
Obviously safety is very important to you, so you, along with those three upstanding fire chiefs, should demand that Caltrans scrap their current plan and come back with one that does!
Any half witted person can figure out that less traffic congestion is safer all around, less accidents, injuries and less delays for EMT's.. Our EMT's have even said this.
But the one thing Peter and crew choose to pick out of the EIR and believe is that the project is not being built for safety reasons.
Caltrans was speaking to their purpose, not what the ultimate results will be. Any idiot knows the road will be safer after widening. I guess I just answered my own question.
937 Please, we all know you have no questions. It was love at first blight between you and The Widening.
I never said that 8:45. You guys love to twist the facts. I did ask where some of you (that say you know better than the experts) got your engineering degrees. Your side has said traffic light timing, overpasses, school schedules are the answer even though experts have said they are not.
Hutch, how many of those fire chiefs you quoted have engineering degrees?
You probably shouldn't pay them any mind since having a traffic engineering degree is so important to you.
909 I know this is very hard for you and your little minded group to comprehend, but those 3 retired fire chiefs are experts in highway safety and in what constitutes dangerous delays. They rode on 1000's of emergency calls for decades. You and your little crew have absolutely no expertise except in mucking up Pacifica's progress. Your arguments are as weak as your comprehension of the facts.
Dead. Horse. Why bother? The key to Hutch appears in his 803 post with his sentence beginning "Your side..." That is his world view. It couldn't possibly get any simpler. Oh BTW, when he says he didn't say something, it appears to mean he isn't being quoted verbatim. Meaning and content are incidental and will not be discussed. Got it? Back on your horse!
"The new Bay Bridge is a beautiful testament to the Bay Area and what we can accomplish. Bravo, Caltrans, well done."
-Bobby Hutchinson; Sept. 19, 2013
But 104 anonymous NIMBY who has no new solutions (because all of these options have been explored and ruled-out). Your argument is DONE, it is the "dead horse."
Time to stop "bothering" the process, so that Caltrans may move forward to the fix the 1.3 mile traffic bottleneck at Rockaway and Vallemar.
Ehh, I don't think so, Ms. Meeh, but Happy Trails to youuuu.
140 wasted comment, no realistic, not ruled-out alternatives. But happy highway without traffic congestion to youuuu.... (oops hit that traffic again).
I have noticed that the majority of people complaining about the highway widening are either living north of the Fassler/Highway 1 bottleneck (Vallemar and north), telecommute from home so have no commute or are retired. I respect your thought process but you are not engaged in this daily frustration.
Believe me when I say the new tunnel has significantly added to the backup.
A swing and a miss 845, 909, 104. If you're so sure of yourself then why hide behind your computer? Afraid of something?
Occam's razor: The hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected.
Poor Occam. No, Hutch, 104 is not engaged in the question of engineers, nor will I be. However, the sensitivity on this blog towards any mention of a grade separation solution is suspicious. I know, you see it as a worldwide nimby plot. So be it. If it is the better solution, it'll receive due consideration by better minds. Not all of whom are engineers, so prepare yourself. BTW I've commuted to SF for more than 25 years on that road so I do recognize the traffic problem and it needs relief and it does demand a "structural" solution. I simply don't see the widening as the best choice for Pacifica. Your opinion on this issue is well known and your proclivities to label and divert require no further demonstration, but hey, knock yourself out.
Traffic backed up right now from Fassler all the way to Sharp Park. Guess those school kids got out late.
Went to the widening support website and did a double take when I saw that they're calling the whole widening a "safety modernization." Wasn't the utility users tax increase scam served up as a "tax modernization?" Oh brother.
Modernization means "you're gonna get screwed, but we'll make you think it's good for you."
In this case, the intersection that schoolkids cross to/from school every day will be doubled in width and the traffic speeds will be increased to freeway speeds. How modern! How safe!
Vroom, vroom. Gentleman, start your engines. Those children are nothing but speed bumps on our way to modernity. YEE-HAW!!!
School kids, dog walkers and their dogs, people getting off the Samtrans bus or trying to catch one. What about their safety? Widening surely will benefit someone, but it won't make those 2 intersections safer for pedestrians. Any of this blog's "safety experts" care to address that? Maybe too real and chilling a prospect for ya? Caltrans doesn't pick up the bodies for their mistakes. That's left to the locals. The widening may be the most expensive solution for this community. Safety modrrnization? Shameless.
826, 405, etc. your continued twisted comments are nuts, but that's okay because the highway widening choice is A) narrow median or B) wide median.
The C) choice is nothing. And, for the sake of this city and this region, that option is not acceptable.
826, "modernization" is just another word to describe updating. And most funding will come from the 2012 renewed San Mateo County Measure A sales tax. Bet you have not objected when that tax money has been used for trails, right?
11:10 The intersection at Linda Mar Blvd is just as wide as it will be at Vallemar & Fassler. Linda Mar has 10 times the foot traffic and there are no issues with people crossing the street safely.
Just another distraction from the no folks.
Not true. Intersections at Vallemar & Fassler will be much wider than Linda Mar. They will be at least 9 lanes wide (6 thru lanes + 3 turning lanes) and also a wide median strip.
This proposed widening is going to make existing coastal access even more dangerous and difficult for pedestrians at Vallemar and Rockaway. Might someone view that as an impediment to coastal access? I suppose someone might. Better slap up a couple pedestrian overpasses. How scenic! How much does that add to the bill? Maybe better to just do it right to begin with and revisit the overpass solution. Let's not all freak at once.
Near misses at Hiway 1 and Crespi on a daily basis, ditto for Rockaway, LMB and Hiway 1. Every so often they don't miss and it's not as wide an intersection as what is being proposed. That Crespi intersection is particularly envigorating with more kids and pets. Very similar mix to Vallemar.
The overpass is a non solution. And it would still involve extensive widening. Look at the plans.
There are 2 options, widen or do nothing.
4 car wreck yesterday right at Fairway Park.
Took almost an hour to get thru that mess.
The grade separation/overpass is a solution that was dismissed by Caltrans too early. It needs to be revisited for reasons of pedestrian safety, coastal access, and, most importantly, because according to Caltrans, it provides the best improvement to traffic congestion. As we saw with the tunnel, plans can be improved tremendously if there is an honest attempt to do so. Anything less than an honest attempt will be bogged down in controversy and public opposition. Pacifica is not the only stakeholder when it involves the coastal zone--even a laughably fictitious 99% of Pacificans should not be enough.
420 You should of been caught up in the one on 280 or 101 or 5 or, etc, etc. This pathetic stuff has become a hallmark of your campaign.
"There are 2 options, widen or do nothing."
Love it. There are no other choices available to Caltrans. None. Just these. Only two. 99% of Pacifica believes this. That's right: 37,807 of 38,189 residents are on board with this. It's true, I read it in an ad once.
602, not sure why you think a 20 plus year delay to build a two-lane tunnel and a huge additional expense was a "big improvement".
Also, the Environment Report to fix the traffic bottleneck through Pacifica has been completed , so it seems Caltrans would have consulted the Coastal Commission. And that information should also be in the report.
Twice you've used the word "honest" in your comment. Are you being honest? The grade separation/overpass was ruled-out by Caltrans. Yet you say "according to Caltrans, it (referring to grade separation/overpass) provides the best improvement to traffic congestion." Uh, since these conflicting comments (on their face value) make no sense, how about providing a link, and page(s), possibly stated text, so that we may confirm your assertion.
If you cannot provide basic information without the repeated spinning, its reasonable to assess your comments are "laughably fictitious" (the attack you and 605 ascribe to others).
Further, the highway widening project is now at the build stage (studies are completed, and public meetings were held with public input). Again, the funded choices are A) Wide median, B) narrow median, or C) nothing and no funding. So, given a reality check, your insistence on "grade separation/overpass" translates to choice C) nothing, no funding, no build.
Laughable? Should your late-hour "sue and mislead" campaign succeed (and let's hope it does not), your "1%" group effort lame "joke" is directed AGAINST Pacificans, AGAINST potential development, and AGAINST safer coastal travel.
"it seems Caltrans would have consulted the Coastal Commission. And that information should also be in the report." The Coastal Commission sent a letter to Caltrans saying that it should look at a combination of alternatives in its Final Environmental Impact Report. Caltrans did not do that. So apparently Caltrans has not consulted the Coastal Commission. There is no information about that in the FEIR.
814 You know how that goes. It seems the CCC is on board with this solution, it seems 99% of Pacificans favor this solution, it seems this solution is really about fixing the traffic congestion. Hey, that's what it seems like!
There are more pedestrians injured or killed on 2 lane streets everyday than all the highways in California combined.
1118 the time and brain cells you spent on coming up with that wowser are gone forever.
Pete DeJarnatt does not support Caltrans proposed widening Highway 1. Positive results improving scenic Pacifica are easily accomplished with a combination of alternatives including Intelligent Transporation Systems = http://its.dot.gov/
11:18 But this will be a freeway with stop lights. That could really change things.
431 Bizarre. Your source?
I'm not 431 but if you're asking the source for the statement that Pete Dejarnatt does not support the Caltrans widening plan, the source is Pete. Ask him.
If you're asking about the source for the Intelligent Transportation Systems, it's the U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, www.its.dot.gov
903 Didn't Pete join the council majority in the vote on medians?
Sue Digre already brought in a company that does intelligent signal timing, and they found it wouldn't work on that stretch of Highway 1.
Sinai, you might want to really look into that one. It was a set-up, planned and conducted to fail by the city. We're being railroaded on this one and it suits some people just fine. Others not so much. It has all the earmarks of an issue for public referendum.
The company that met with city staff has one type of technology. Intelligent transportation systems include many new technologies, not just signal timing. The company that met with the city said their technology could not solve the congestion problem alone but if could make a difference in combination with other solutions.
437, "...their technology could not solve the congestion problem alone but it could make a difference in combination with other solutions."
437, such as Highway widening to break-up the 1.3 mile "bottle neck" traffic congestion problem. Was that the suggestion on the top of the list? (Surely they didn't leave the city with zero suggestions.)
Nah, Kathy, they said $55 Million was a lot of money to just make much bigger bottlenecks and wondered if there was some other benefit anticipated by proponents. Oh, I know, it's all about safety.
I don't believe that's correct 4:37, the company said there is not enough capacity for their system to work. There are too many cars for the amount of road.
Do you have a link to that Kathy?
2008 re-election: Pete DeJarnatt endorses Hwy 1 widening.
"improve our streets adn (sic) Highway 1 for safety and to relieve traffic congestion"
http://www.smartvoter.org/2008/11/04/ca/sm/vote/dejarnatt_p/philosophy.html
way to go Pete!!
703 It was a set-up. Bad faith and a very convenient outcome.
727 Yeah, Pete was for it. He also said more than once that he didn't think the CCC would ever allow it to be built as planned. Did the city ever respond to the CCC letter or are they hoping that time and new appointees will be friendlier?
I know this is going to be hard for some people to grasp, but in 2008 the current plan to widen the highway didn't exist. What Pete and many people supported was the IDEA of widening the highway by adding a lane in each direction. What Pete and many people don't support now is the Caltrans plan to more than double the width of the current highway. It's overkill, it's unnecessary, it's ridiculous.
703, here's a Fix Pacifica link: InSync Adaptive Traffic Signals,8/4/13. by Mark Stechbart. "Mr. Mager introduced his product and said that it is a successful approach to relieve traffic congestion in some circumstances and has been successfully applied in many situations. He stated that where there is a capacity issue (too many cars for the same stretch of roadway) their product will not resolve the problem."
Whereas, Pacifica Riptide, 9/20/14 is promoting the idea that light timing will work, even though Caltrans studies and the new technology vendor said no. 10 year studied and proposed highway 1 widening in Pacifica involves a traffic congestion bottleneck within 1.3 miles only. However, possibly for the longer stretch of highway 1 through our city, the newer technology light timing may or may not offer some traffic relief.
So many of the current creative 11th hour "alternatives" (and lawsuits) seem designed to run out the clock on funding the highway 1 modernization project. And should that occur, once again Pacifica ends-up with NOTHING, except future nightmare traffic congestion. The "alternatives" are unfunded NIMBY mythology. The funded solution is moving forward with the Caltrans project. (The highway congestion problem has existed for 20 years, time to fix it now, rather than never.)
Oh please. Quote anything and anyone you want, Kathy. The entire presentation was a sham. A complete set-up planned to produce a certain result and it did. Much to the gratification of anyone for whom there is no solution other than widening. 11th hour? Much of the ITS technology is of very recent design and evolving rapidly. The Caltrans solution is based on a 1980's plan designed right here in Pacifica. I like old things but not for 55 million bucks.
11:18 But this will be a freeway with stop lights. That could really change things.
October 18, 2014 at 6:04 PM
I am not sure if they changed highway 50 but right before you come into Placerville, Highway 50 in both directions had stop signs!
12:08
This has been beaten to death. Caltrans needs a request from our city to come out and retime the traffic lights. We looked into this and figured out it was a very simple fix.
This is also the reason why the gang of no get things done, delay, and drive builders and developers out of town, they are so much more organized.
This was looked into by two residents after the gang of no claimed that the quarry would lead to traffic gridlock. Caltrans told me, why isn't your city looking into this? That is when I figured out the city staff is a lost cause.
Notice how during the day on El Camino through traffic flows better and the connector streets have to wait longer at the lights, late at night when someone stops at the signal on a connector streets the sensor makes the light change.
Highway 1 has a signal by Princeton and I go through this intersection, many times and it never has a problem.
Highway 1 signal and traffic problems in Pacifica is a Pacifica problem not a Caltrans problem.
136, 431 "too many cars for the same stretch of road" (InSync). Fix the known, understood, studied evaluations and conclusions by experts (all listed in the Caltrans FEIR). Its science, not "flat earth" belief.
431, obviously there is light timing in this city. Could it be better? Maybe, and if so should the city look into that? Sure. But there are a lot of cars that enter and exit Highway 1 from Sharp Park through Rockaway, and that's a major cause of traffic congestion.
431, my own experience in driving highway 1 between Pacifica and Half Moon Bay is that the road is very busy almost all the time. Coastside highway widening is being planned by SM County in other strategic areas south of Pacifica as well.
Caltrans jugernaut bearing down and developers aided and abetted by local so-called leaders....what's a quiet little seaside town to do? Public referendum. Put it to a vote. We do not have to destroy Pacifica to fix this problem. Don't let anybody tell you otherwise and always follow the money. It'll be easy to do. Let the campaign spending begin!! Barbecue in the streets, ice cream for the kids, robo-calls from somewhere. Put it to a vote.
Yes, Kathy, we know "coast side highway widening" is being planned by SMC for the rest of the county. That's the problem. Not everyone on the coast is enamored of the build it and they will come approach.
1106, is voting for highway improvement typical government practice anywhere? I don't think so. Highway 1 is a State Highway which affects this City, but also affects the County and the Region.
Shall the State vote on this, shall San Mateo County vote on this-- or shall the delays just cause the funding time limit to expire (then no city vote will be necessary). As has been said prior: the Gang of No is all about nothing for Pacifica, NIMBIES forever. We must move on without you.
4:31 said "Caltrans needs a request from our city to come out and retime the traffic lights. We looked into this and figured out it was a very simple fix."
We looked into this? Who is "we"? Who are you? Since you're afraid to put your name to this I doubt it's true.
Again, the traffic light timing experts said it would not help in this instance because there are too many cars for the amount of road.
Now if you or your "we" have any experts that say otherwise in our unique situation then please tell us about it. Otherwise you, Peter Loeb, John Keener, Hal Bohner, Cynthia Kaufman and the rest of the nimby, hippie gang-of-no nobe's can shove your "expert" opinions up a red legged frogs butt.
Hutch
It's puff puff pass!
Hey, what's the problem? I saw a paid ad in the Trib that said 99% of Pacificans favored widening highway one. Don't want to wait for a vote? I bet you don't. This city has shirked its duty on this issue for years. Cowardice or complicity? Nothing remedies that kind of government malpractice like a vote of the people.
The very idea of a public vote on the highway causes the Flat Earth Society members to collectively crap their pants.
You can see them become more and more hysterical as their very carefully constructed reality begins imploding. A public vote sure would put that 99% doozy to rest, wouldn't it, AND would doom the highway project.
That's why the Flat Earth Society will do anything they can to deny the public a voice in the matter.
Of course, of course, 2:55.
If they TRULY believed that 99% of Pacifica wanted the widening, they'd be gung-ho to have an official, on-the-record vote about it.
Turns out they don't believe their own crap that they're peddling.
Twisted 1249, 255, 418 I think your version of democracy in Pacifica is more likely "Gang of No" mob rule,(we've been living with that for 30 years). As Hutch 1202 suggested, your comments lack credibility.
1249, now what you're referring to as "government malpractice" is a 10 year vetted government "best practice" process and project. The Highway 1 widening studies are complete with Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), ready for the Engineering Draft, then build.
1249, 255, now you're proposing a highly unusual citywide vote? This advocacy follows two Gang of No failed lawsuits (one pending but unlikely to merit much change); a failed public hearing, and a failed motion by Councilmember Sue Digre to enact a binding City arbitration (through a "community" meeting) against highway 1 widening.
85% of working Pacificans drive to work (Bay Area Census). And because the city does not have a balanced economy (thanks again NIMBIES), for work and most commerce (beyond basics), we drive the one highway through our city, (as do our coastal neighbors south). Therefore fixing the 1.3 mile highway 1 bottleneck is a priority, funded now.
Meantime, your other city council candidate (John Keener) says most people he talks to are against highway widening. Really, believe that? The PH1A anti-highway petition indicates that 36.91% of those who signed the PH1A petition (over a two months duration) were from out of town (18% Oakland).
Nothing unusual about a public vote on the fate of Highway 1. Remember the vote on the Tunnel? 75% voted against Caltran's plan.
It's exactly because it's such a contentious issue with permanent impact on this town that it demands a public vote. That's why the initiative or referendum process was created. How cool is that? These campaigns often become David and Goliath battles. Dave wins quite a few.
See!
The Flat Earth Society argues that "democracy" means that you shouldn't be able to vote on community-wide issue.
You must pardon the crazies as they hyperventilate and go bonkers -- their world is crashing down about them.
If we're gonna play that game, how many members of the pro-freeway Facebook group are from out of town?
620 How many are from Outer Space?
You can take this statistic to the bank...99% of realtors and associated trades are in favor of widening Highway One. In all things, follow the money!
A public vote is "mob rule" and "highly unusual"? I think not.
551 oh I get it, 20 years outmoded congested highway in Pacifica is equivalent to a 20 years delayed tunnel road. If a highway had been cut through Montara mountain 10 years prior, think of all those lives which would have been saved, (the result of a 10 year safer road). And think of all that money which would have been saved, (the result of lower construction cost and time value of money).
614, 618, 620, 628, 631, really who is the "crazy" Anonymous clown posting these comments. Think Fix Traffic! And while we're at it develop the quarry, (now that is "follow the money"-- this city needs to do that, remember the city is broke).
647, no I said, "I think your version of democracy in Pacifica is more likely "Gang of No" mob rule, (we've been living with that for 30 years)." There you go twisting again.
The gang of no would love to put this up for a vote. That would delay any decision just long enough until the measure A money is gone.
Besides, we already have a vote scheduled on November 4th. And when Greener is massacred it will be a mandate for council to proceed on highway widening.
Oh, it all depends on what happens to Keener? LMAO, but I think Hutch actually believes that. Win or lose, you think council will ignore the thousands of votes that will be cast for Keener, Digre and Dougherty? Those three made the highway their central issue and they don't have to win, one or all, to carry a powerful message. It ain't a football game. This ambitious council ignores the anti-widening voters at their own peril. Next stop on this highway is referendum.
OMG! The Measure A money is gone. Don't you worry. Council will just apply for some grants. Yeah, let's go ahead. $500K or 55 million--we'll just crowd fund. This is a public meeting, right? Can we nudge that sewer rate up, again? Got 'em over a barrel on that one. Well, more like over a toilet, but you get me, right?
The Caltrans plan will never happen. Count on it.
Jeez, doesn't anybody realize if you elect a candidate based on ONE issue (the highway) that you will be stuck with their decisions on 364 OTHER issues. PICK the most reasonable candidate on ALL the issues and stop being so short sighted. Pacifica deserves quality decisions by quality candidates. Watch the utubes of the debates.
Here's a bomb. The Quarry has been sold. Yes folks as of today there is a new owner. Any guesses as to whether these folks are pro highway or NOT?!
Barry Zito bought the quarry yesterday in an all cash transaction.
He plans to Open the Barry Zito pitching and guitar clinic.
He is going to host a lecture series, Barry Zito buys up all of Pacifica, How he did it!
1112, the core city council candidate issue is: Fix this city or not. Fix this city includes 1) advocating for significant economic development, and 2) 1.3 mile highway widening (the money to do that is available now). Not fixing this city includes more of the same, continued city financial and infrastructure insufficiency.
7 candidates running for city council, 3 votes, choices are:
1. Economic Development, widen the 1.3 mile highway: 1) Victor Spano, 2) Therese Dyer, 3) Mike O'Neill, 4) Eric Ruchames (library, tax advocate).
2. Nothing for Pacifica (Gang of NO): 1) Sue Digre, 2) John Keener, 3) Matt Dougherty (lacks experience).
Its just that easy, and the focused issue is just that serious. The bla, bla, bla "about 364 OTHER decisions", etc. is a confused diversion. Who are you voting for?
nobody could do any worse than our current council even if they tried really really hard!
656, seriously, explain. Otherwise, your comments is "really, really" stupid.
You mean except for the Digre, Vreeland, Dejarnatt, Lancille council right 656?
1112 The highway is the issue that counts for Pacifica. Your attempt to say it isn't so, and thus give your pro-widening candidates broader appeal, is laughable.
811 Nah, there were no exceptions to the statement.
614 And Zito's next lecture series will be on why he wished he hadn't done that.
656, 1029, Digre, Vreeland, DeJarnatt, Lancille council did something right, which you may or may not be referring to:
"Re: Route 1, Westport Drive to Fassler Avenue 'Calera Parkway' Project in the City of Pacifica. Please rest assured that the City Council supports this project and Pacifica will always be at the forefront in making sure this project becomes a reality. Mayor Peter DeJarnatt, 12/19/06" (see the official City Hall letter above).
Otherwise, that 8 year city council (except Cal Hinton) worked against Quarry, Beach Blvd, North Pacifica LLC and other city development-- which is a major factor in the continuing collapse of our city economy. Like the anti-development, anti-local jobs, lousy city revenue part, or not?
6:56, you still have yet to explain your one-liner attack on the current city council. Since you added an exclamation mark (!) following the one-liner, you must have had something in mind, rather than NOTHING. Or is that all you've got?
It really doesn't matter what Pete said about it back in 2006. This issue demands a referendum.
1028, lets look at some numbers to try and see if Hwy 1 widening is the issue people care most about
John Keeners Facebook page 56 likes
Victor Spano's FB page 300 likes
PH1A (anti Widening) FB page 150 likes (since Aug 2012)
Pacificans For Highway One Modernization FB group 239 members (up less than 1 year)
I think maybe you're correct. People do care about widening.
1211 the referendum is in two weeks
Is it true that the quarry has been sold?
Does anyone know who bought it?
Hutch,
How many people in your Facebook group are from out of town?
Maybe 10% 1:32. Not that much.
That didn't stop the no group who had pages of out of town signers on that fake petition with typed pages.
Are you saying Victor Spano's likes on FB are from out of town also?
It's not scientific, but it is a gauge of how some people feel. Evidently they are not that passionate about Keener.
Whatever happens, this election will be a mandate for one side or the other.
1222 Don't you wish? I doubt the opposition sees it quite that way. Why should they? Low turnout election and statistically little separation between winners and losers. It'll be a snapshot, not the whole picture, and it has a lot to do with the individual running. Goodness, just think of all the money highway proponents will spend in Pacifica during a highway referendum campaign. I mean additional money. It'll be a mini economic boom. I like me some barbecue tri-tip.
Hey 302, maybe you guys can do another fake petition for a referendum? Good luck with that.
Council will absolutely be paying attention which candidates (pro or anti widening) get more votes. I see Keener losing by a very large percentage which will be a mandate for highway widening.
We don't need no stinkin' referendum which is just another delay tactic.
You can tell the petition was very effective and a real body blow to the concrete crowd because they can't stop bringing it up. They're really really nervous about what it means for their carefully constructed fever dreams.
Their house of cards is collapsing and it is delicious to see them in full freak out mode over it.
Keener's a first time candidate. They usually lose, but not always. IMHO there are a lot of people who will be willing to see the highway issue as quite separate, more important and permanent than candidates for a 4 year term on council. Like Hutch says, it's simply not the only issue voters will consider in this election. It's a bigger issue, deserving of it's own mandate. It just needs to be framed correctly and put before the voters all by itself. Not a problem.
What role will the new buyer of the quarry play in all this highway brouhaha? Was it a purchase, an option, contingent on widening One? Anyone know?
409, yeah the petition was presented as from "the community", 63% Pacifica, 18% Oakland, etc., a real "body blow". Those of us who want city infrastructure that works were amazed it took 2-months for PH1A to deliver 1,322 only signatures, 834 from Pacifica, some of them questionable and duplicates. Our archived article with links to the original petitions is here. Please note: the caption under the descriptive skunk picture: "Misleading campaigns also stink". Sure, that would be your dishonest "house of cards" view of "full freak out mode" (your words).
417, John Keener's views are all NIMBY, including anti-highway. NIMBIES have expressed no real solutions for this city, other than more of the same (as the city continues to deteriorate). Some of you have floated an "alternative": city disincorporation (bankruptcy). That fake-out also carries fees and payback, and doesn't work for most of us. We need to agree (with or without you) to develop a balanced city economy, and fix the outmoded highway traffic flow through Rockaway and Vallemar. That's what the Caltrans project will accomplish, and its currently funded.
Oh, sure, sure, Kathy. The petition was no big whoop. That's why you and Hutch have brought it up 150 times.
"Let me make a few more posts about how the petition doesn't bother me just to prove it doesn't bother me."
hint: it really bothers you
I just went through the first 40 names on the pro-highway widening Facebook page. 13 of the first 40 members don't even live in Pacifica.
Apparantly people who live in Missouri and Hawaii really want our highway widened! Who knew?
I gave up at that point. What a farce!
605, 627 what bothers me is that you are a really big liar, and no surprise the PH1A "community" petition was an exaggerated fraud, as have been your comments here for the past few days.
Hutch could speak to the Facebook page, but I saw a lot of people I knew there, and we all support highway 1 widening. That's what makes sense for the traffic bottleneck at Vallemar-Rockaway.
No, no, no, 6:27 you don't get it.
Pissing and moaning about some petition that had signatures from Oakland while at the same time crowing about a Facebook group with out-of-state members TOTALLY ISN'T HYPOCRITICAL for the following reasons:
Depending on how wide your circle of friends and contacts in Pacifica really is, ie, stay out of realtor's circles, a casual survey produces far more against widening than for it. If you require your friends to be an echo chamber, you'll get the distortion you seek.
How many pages of that petition were typed? I've never seen a phonier document. Someone stood on an Oakland street corner and bugged people to sign. most of whom have probably never even been here.
Re: the Facebook Group, 95% of the people, live here, lived here, have family here, do business or come here regularly.
Hutch's Facebook page is loaded with out-of-towners. They may not be from Oakland, but in percent to total, I bet they rival the PH1A petition for imports. Facebook is a joke.
Ahahaha, and now the story sloooooowly changes, don't it.
"Maybe 10% are out of town"
Now it's "95% have family here"
Pretty soon it'll be "99% have heard of Pacifica once!"
Anyone can check the Facebook group member list. Go ahead and pull up the first 50 and check their profiles. 30% are out of town and quite a few are from out of state.
WAH! Don't lie to me with facts!
Yes, we're just one big family of man, signing petitions, Liking Facebook pages. And then we start defending these dubious endeavors. Makes you wonder who's fooling who?
95%, 99%. Go for broke, Hutch. Just claim 100%. Nobody believes you anyway.
Hope we're done with this now. If not, Steve "Blogmaster" Sinai will override the last few "stinky" anonymous nonsense comments in spam.
FYI, the PH1A petition included the following tallied signature percentages: Pacifica, 63.09%; Oakland 18%; San Francisco 5.75%; Other San Mateo County Cities 7.79%; Other CA Counties 4.77%; Out of State/Out of County .60%.
Total 1,322 individuals (or others) signed these PH1A petitions. This occurred over 2-months, with all over the world representation. These were all people protesting this city fixing (through widening) the 1.3 mile traffic bottleneck on State Highway 1 though our city at Rockaway and Vallemar. Ridiculous, isn't it?
Kathy, by your own calculations, well over 800 Pacificans signed a petition opposing the Caltrans plan to widen highway 1. That's a pretty impressive number in anybody's book. Are there 800 Pacificans who will say they support the Caltrans plan to widen highway 1? I don't think so.
Kathy, you've come to epitomize censorship in Pacifica. You overshadow even Horace Hinshaw.
Interesting.
When the tide turns and the Fix Pacifica party line is shown to be 100% bogus, the comments get censored.
Very, very interesting.
815, a "community" petition drive run by a team of individuals is quite different from an individual setting-up a "we are friends of Highway 1 widening" Facebook page. And there would be no reason for those who support Caltrans research and process to protest through a petition, the 10 years of meetings and research has moved forward.
2-months, possibly 417 Pacificans (including teenagers) per month (13.90 per day) signed these petition pages that scream "Don't Concrete our Coast" (or some such thing, its memory at this point). Whatever you think about that is your own experience.
Most Pacificans expect their municipality process to work, and they expect their roads to be safe, efficient and functional. Most Pacificans are not radicalized earth religion NIMBIES, whereas some of you are.
Why does voting on the widening scare you so much?
Kathy, you have no idea what you're talking about when you start with your stereotypes of people who oppose widening Highway One. Next, the rest of the chorus will chime in with more ludicrous claims and remarks personal rather than insightful. What a joke. If you and the Fix chorus represent the proponents of widening, it'll never happen.
Post a Comment