Highway 1 Debate Rages On: Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Peace

Download Calera Parkway Widening DEIR comment letter 10-1.21.11

Click Here for Pacifica Tribune Story on Council Vote

Download Caltrans letter 6-20-12

Highway 1 widening was on the City Council agenda June 25, but council kicked this political football downfield, perhaps hoping to buy some time or get some clarity. Click Comments (below) to join our conversation on this contentious issue. We say, "Don't let the highway engineers 'railroad' this project through Pacifica. We deserve full public review and input. Democratic process and local control are at stake." Please see Peter Loeb's analysis of this issue (below).

John Maybury, Editor and Publisher

=============

Analysis: There's a Word for All This, But We Can't Print It

By Peter Loeb

I was concerned about the City Council agenda item choosing a preferred alternative for Highway 1 widening because the public and the city had been told some time ago that no further action was needed by the city. Now we're being told that the city is supposed to choose an alternative so Caltrans can complete the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). Caltrans, in its usual bureaucratic doublespeak, says it hasn't told the city to select an alternative, but it sent a letter (see link above) saying that an alternative must be selected. The clear implication is that if the city doesn't choose, Caltrans will. 

The two choices are widening with a concrete median or widening with a landscaped median. No other alternatives are considered. In the agenda memo for this item, city staff ask City Council to give them direction and to choose the landscaped median as the better-looking of the two alternatives. If the city does not select a preferred alternative, Caltrans will select the concrete median.

The problem is that council is asked to make a decision without benefit of a public input process and without information contained in the 213 comments the public submitted on the draft EIR and that Caltrans supposedly responded to in preparing the FEIR. But council can't see these comments to make its decision on the preferred alternative.

It's quite likely that some comments have important information bearing on the decision. For instance, what are the dimensions of the highway in each alternative? What will be the impacts of each alternative on residences and businesses east of the highway? What will be the impacts of each alternative on businesses in Rockaway that face the highway, and on the entrance to the Rockaway commercial area? What will be the width of pedestrian crossings at Rockaway and Vallemar for each alternative? How long will it take to cross each intersection with each alternative? What will be the visual impacts? Will there be soundwalls for each alternative and, if so, where will they be?

Many more issues like these were raised in the comments on the DEIR. If the FEIR addresses these issues, isn't it important to have these answers before selecting an alternative? Shouldn't the public have access to this information and be allowed to provide input to council prior to its selecting an alternative? If council selects a preferred alternative without any of the relevant information, it essentially will be making the decision blindfolded.

Either way—if council makes this decision without the information in the FEIR and without a public hearing, or if Caltrans selects the alternative because council opts not to—the process is dysfunctional. Council would not comment on the DEIR when it was released and it wouldn't have a public hearing on it because it was told that no further council action was required, so it shouldn't comment on it now. Really?

Council should not make this decision. It should give it back to city staff to say to Caltrans whatever they want to about staff's preferred alternative. It may not make any difference in the long run, but at least Caltrans won't be able to come back to council later and say, "This is the project you selected."

There's a word to describe all of this, but it's against the policies of this blog to post that word.

Comments

[Lionel Emde]

Todd,
Humor value +1
Truth be told -- we'll see

[todd bray]

At stake this election is whether or not Ms. Porter, as a spokesperson for the Chamber of Commerce and the manager of our local Recology garbage collector, will be the "muppet" master of a council majority.

Now I know the comic possibilities of such a thing borders on the hysteria-driven American Cinema Classics like Alan Arkin's THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING, THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING and Dick Van Dyke's heartland comedy COLD TURKEY, but we are really looking down the barrel of our waste hauler having the council of its choice come November.

Keeping in mind that not all pro-cement candidates are automatically pro-garbage, this year's election is a very important battle, and we must be vigilant about whom we support. Of the people I've "heard" are running, I have only half a yes vote for one of them, and that person is not currently on council.

This November our garbage company and Chamber of Commerce could easily have the majority they so darkly desire.

[Chris Porter]

Carl May......."Huh?"

[Kathy Jana]

"I wonder if that was staff's intent." No truer words were ever spoken. Clearly, this is all about Pacifica city staff dictation. Pretty funny that council then asked staff for clarification and input.

[Steve Sinai]

Isn't it interesting to see how the most ideological on one side are the ones so quick to accuse the other side of being too ideological?

Carl, you forgot to mention that when ideologues don't get their way, they invariably demonize those who have a different opinion. You did give a good demonstration with Caltrans and "pavementheads," though.

Now I must sign off. It is time for me to kneel down and chant "Asphalt Akbar" 100 times.

[todd bray]

Carl, other agencies have jurisdiction over this project. One has sent in a six-page critique of the project's DEIR. I'll send our esteemed leader a copy in hopes he posts it here for all to read. I highly recommend reading the second paragraph of the first page.

(I have posted the California Coastal Commission critique at the link above. Signed: Esteemed Leader)

[Carl May]

Exaggeration and adhering to the philosophical line no matter how much reality disagrees are seen in the dogged approach of "pavementheads." The twin gods of Concrete and Asphalt are seen as the answer to every problem, from getting children to school to reclaiming economic success to professional advancement due to commute speed. An entire industry of planners and road builders provides the necessary religious infrastructure; and true believers are constantly recruited from a frustrated, misled, and sometimes gullible public using standard myth and magic from the Concrete and Asphalt creed. Challenges from experience, measurement, and common sense are not accepted by the self-ordained keepers of the hardscaping faith.

Consent for the religious agenda cannot be manufactured in an atmosphere of open inquiry, information acquisition, objective and comprehensive data analysis, and brainstorming toward real-world solutions. Blind faith and adherence can be best maintained through control of entire processes, from initial inputs through deliberations and on to predetermined decisions.

Caltrans is the maker, keeper, and dictator of highway truth in California. If they don't say it, it isn't so. The annual budget of this single agency is larger than the entire state budgets of 60 percent of the states in the U.S. Each district of Caltrans has entire departments of public relations people, environmental obstacle clearers, and pavement engineers--seemingly football-field-sized expanses of desks, if you have ever visited Caltrans' offices--soldiering for the faith in Concrete and Asphalt. And keeping all that money flowing through the bureaucracy. It's a rare local government or quasi-governmental Chamber of Commerce that doesn't line up and preach and march with them. $$$

[Chris Porter, Member of the Pacifica Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors]

Linty Marr (kind of cute), the Chamber of Commerce wants to get people to even come into town, and with the morning backup escalating to a larger evening backup, why would anyone want to? If you wanted to go to Vallemar Station, the Surf Spot, or Nick's, why couldn't you? There will be a turning lane, so what is the problem? The business people are starting to speak up and trying to let City Council hear from us as well as the "another study session" group. Linty, been to any of the above-named restaurants lately? If so, let me know and I'll discuss the ideas with you over a glass of wine.

[Karma Dogma]

beats the hell out of exhaust fumes

[Dan Alvarez]

So traffic is down due to the recession.

That is some good dope you are smoking.

puff puff pass!!

[Todd bray]

"The city is headed toward bankruptcy for the same reasons as Vallejo and Stockton."

And those reasons are compensation and pensions that are not bracketed to revenues.

[Karma Dogma]

So is the highway to hell.

[Karma Dogma]

As the hippie-in-chief of this blog, I have to remind all of you name-callers that the change in traffic load here is due to the recession, not due to hippies (or anyone else, for that matter). As James Carville once said, "It's the economy, stupid."

[Mary Jana]

The highway through Pacifica is paved with good intentions.

[Dan Alvarez]

The City of Pacifica had the chance to fix Highway 1 since the mid-1970s. The City Council did nothing. One simple call to Caltrans could have gotten the traffic lights re-timed.

The hippies were crying about traffic when Peebles wanted to build in the quarry. Now the traffic somehow all went away.

You cannot have it both ways.

The city is headed toward bankruptcy for the same reasons as Vallejo and Stockton.

[Linty Marr]

I'm glad that several speakers got up to criticize the Chamber of Commerce for supporting the widening against the interests of its own members. Someone from the chamber tried to justify their irrationality by reading a letter that praised the example of the widening of Highway 92 into Half Moon Bay as an example of what we should expect with the widening in Pacifica, as if that were a valid comparison. Of course, anyone who drives to Half Moon Bay sees that the widening of Highway 92 channels traffic into the town, with the appropriate stoplights and ability to turn into the shopping district, while the Pacifica widening is through the Rockaway district, allowing traffic to bypass these businesses quickly. The chamber needs to come up with the brains to do a better analysis.

[Todd bray]

Recusals are usual, not voluntary, for example, if a public official lives within a certain distance of a project (or in this case, where the public official(s), namely Mary Ann, Len, Ginny, and Pete, have openly made a determination about the project ahead of time). All four in this case have voted their bias, intentional or not.

Say, for some ungodly reason I was on council, I would, by law, have to recuse myself from this project because I live too close to it. The same rule would apply to any proposals for the quarry. I would, by law, need to recuse myself because I live too close to the quarry.

As I said above, if and when this project goes for the two required CDPs Mary Ann and Len (assuming they are still on council by then) would need to recuse themselves because they have voted in favor of an alternative, which, right or wrong, gives the appearance of bias, and the general public could not expect an impartial vote from either of them.

Likewise for Pete because even though his vote was NO, it was a vote and shows bias. The only council member who behaved correctly Monday night was Sue Digre, because she abstained.

Since it was made clear by Caltrans that the city need not take this step, and that staff initiated it, it makes me wonder if it was staff's intent to disqualify council from a CDP vote. I have no idea why, but it's just a thought anyway.

[Lionel Emde]

See you in court!

[Peter Loeb]

To be clear, I spoke in favor of applying for the Measure A funds to keep the project in the funding cycle and allow it to keep moving forward. I spoke against selecting a preferred alternative because City Council did not have critical info about each of the two alternatives it was asked to choose between, and because council would not have a public hearing about the two alternatives. Council members asked staff how the choices got down to two but never got a clear answer. That's because the two choices are really just the widening project Caltrans wanted to build in the first place and the widening project Caltrans wants but with an even wider landscaped median. Removed from consideration were a variety of alternatives that Caltrans doesn't want to do. Council didn't have to select an alternative from the two offered. But now it has to, and I guarantee it will come back to bite council in the behind later on. Caltrans will always be able to say, "But this is the widening project you chose." All other solutions to the traffic problem and safety issues will be forever out of consideration.

[todd bray]

The only thing that happened last night was that council showed bias. If and when this project ever goes for the two CDPs it will need, Mary Ann and Len would need to recuse themselves because they've made a determination about the project. They've voted on a preferred alternative, so it would be impossible for them to be impartial during an LCP CDP hearing.

I wonder if that was staff's intent.

[Steve Sinai]

I would like to thank the City Council for moving forward with the Highway 1 improvement process.

[Kathy Jana]

The community spoke out at length and overwhelmingly in public meetings about this issue over the past year in support of many alternatives to building a freeway through Pacifica, including car-pooling, staggering school schedules, timing of lights, vans for schoolchildren instead of one parent and one child per car, underpass at the intersection of Reina Del Mar and Highway 1, adding bus/van service that gets people to and from transit nodes, bike paths, limit turns onto Highway 1 to allow north/south traffic to flow with fewer stops during peak commute hours.

These ideas and more were submitted by hundreds of Pacifica residents in a few public meetings, supposedly to be taken into account for any decision-making.

In spite of all the pressing problems presented, including economic and sea level rise, all of the public input over the past years was ignored by Pacifica City Council and apparently by Supervisor Don Horsley.

That's a lot of lip service!

[Al Kosen]

Wasn't one of our City Council members on the County Transportation Committee?

Whatever happened to that?

[Karma Dogma]

Not to mention community-busting freeways like the 210 through the heart of Pasadena, and our own Highway 1 trench through the heart of Manor and Sharp Park.

[Lionel Emde]

"I'm going to find out more on this, but in the past Caltrans has had some of the best engineers and planners ever."

Good luck with that. Caltrans has some of the best thinkers that the 1950s ever produced. Think Embarcadero Freeway, for example.