Thursday, July 18, 2013

Wagner on Langille (figuratively speaking)

It was an adventure deciphering what Celeste Langille's theme was supposed to be in her "My Turn" column last week. After several re-readings, I will attempt to paraphrase what she waxed so melodically in her prose. First, I want to thank her for the unabashed compliment and shout-out to the Chamber of Commerce and the San Mateo County Association of Realtors. As a member of both, I truly appreciate the acknowledgment from a leader known for her anti development/anti economic revitalization movement. To say publicly that "the real estate lobby (and Chamber of Commerce) now has an even more powerful presence in Pacifica" is a testament to the work both entities have done over the last several years to help our community recover from both the recession and misguided decisions made over the past 30 years by our city leadership.

As for your stint on the Planning Commission, thank you for your service. As a former Planning Commissioner myself, I understand how much work there is in reading all those draft environmental reports. The reports contain a tremendous amount of detailed information explaining the proposed project. That is precisely why I am at a loss to understand your ending riff, "I don't think anyone in Pacifica has a concrete idea of how many hillsides will be leveled, how many businesses will be moved, how high the sound walls will be, or how many trees will be cut for highway widening." I have read, and re-read, the draft report, which has been available since August 2011, and I didn't see anything remotely in there that would have led me to believe that any of those draconian actions exist. Perhaps this is just a little "puffery" on your part to rile the public against a project that Pacifica needs and wants. Moreover, you are an attorney with a background in environmental law, so I suspect you knew exactly what you were doing.

For those reading this who would like the facts regarding the design, please check this link
Go to doc page 80 or adobe page counter 135 (all pages, table content, etc) to see visual impacts and mock-up photos 19 and 20 (same west side wall, different median) visible west side wall three foot above pavement plus open railing.

I would certainly hope that you, and anyone else set against moving Pacifica past the destitute stage we have been in for so many years, will check your facts in the future. Sometimes facts matter.

Submitted by Jim Wagner


Anonymous said...

She is an attorney she sues developers to go away. She like filing bogus lawsuits like Bohner. Don't be surprised if she sues you also!

Anonymous said...

Mr. Wagner, if you've read the DEIR and you can't see that businesses on both sides of the highway will be impacted, that hillsides will be excavated, that soundwalls are proposed but never described, etc. then you are the one who can't check facts. Facts do matter.

Anonymous said...

It has the potential to perhaps be a different planning commission because of the streamlining of process and the absence of Leon and Langille. Mr. Clifford must've drawn the short straw to make room for new blood.