« Manor's Rainbow Island Restaurant for Sale | Main | When the Local Newspaper Gives Up Local Control »

September 18, 2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The EIR certified by Caltrans is inadequate and contradictory -- not compliant with common best standards of practice.

Maybe the City of Pacifica, which is a sponsor of the project, will now take a look at the alternatives, together and in aggregate: timing the lights, changing the way schools use the roads -- and adding some public transit that will address the commute. The public has already said we don't want a massive freeway segment added to the rural, scenic highway we have in our little beach town. Who knows -- maybe they'll even make some comments for public consumption!

Some of the alternatives are here:
http://www.pacificariptide.com/pacifica_riptide/2012/03/public-comments-impact-highway-1-widening-by-bill-collins-the-proposed-widening-of-highway-1-generated-so-much-contro.html

LL: This 2009 USC tsunami map clearly shows the quarry is in absolutely no danger from a big wave. Nick's, on the other hand...

http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/geologic_hazards/Tsunami/Inundation_Maps/SanMateo/Documents/Tsunami_Inundation_MontaraMountain_Quad_SanMateo.pdf

Bravo to the locals who banded together to use the courts for our redress of grievances. The City Council has been MIA on this issue and cowardly in its avoidance. Politicians who avoid stating clear positions on issues such as this, which is probably the number one issue in the long haul, should be shown the door by the voters. At least Len Stone, whom I profoundly disagree with on several issues, told me straight out that he favored this project.

If this walled freeway segment is built, it will finish the job of destroying our town, begun by Caltrans in the 1960s with the great trench of Pacifica.

@Dan Underhill: Let me break it down for you:

The slower a vehicle is, the longer it takes to cross that stretch of scenic Pacifica.
The longer a vehicle takes, the more fuel is expended for that much more time.
When more fuel is expended, more pollutants and particulate matter go in the air.
Multiply that by all the vehicles that are slowed down due to poor planning between Linda Mar and Vallemar.

Either you wanna stop using gas-fueled engines OR don't use them as much. Since we know we can't stop using the gas engines, we'll have to figure out a way to use them less. Ergo, efficiency of use. Or less idling and faster movement for a given amount of fuel.

Also, this traffic bottleneck has a bubble effect of slowing down everyday work. If 15 minutes are lost to traffic one way or 30 minutes twice a day, at $10/hour average wage (low estimate), that is $5 per person spending their time in traffic. Multiply that by so many numbers of people, and you can guesstimate an approximate yearly loss of productivity in addition to really unnecessary decreased quality of life and general frustration and unhappiness.

This particular stretch of expansion between Rockaway and Vallemar is half-baked and a money sink.

But the real motivation from the supporters is their hope that this will somehow unlock access to Rockaway Quarry, which will then attract some rich out-of-towner to come develop it. And therefore the opposition from the other group.

I've said my piece on why building in the Quarry is a really bad idea. Most of it is within the tsunami inundation zone and therefore a dangerous location to develop.

That said, those traffic lights at Linda Mar/Pedro Point, Crespi, Fassler/Rockaway, and Vallemar need to go away and be replaced with appropriate exit/entry ramps.

These same people claimed there was too much traffic when they were fighting the Quarry Project. But now they say there isn't much traffic.

I heard that there are never any bottlenecks on the Bonneville Salt Flats.

I sat in traffic for 30 minutes Saturday on this stretch of Highway 1. So this group that claims this is all caused by schools is full of it.

This is another money sink.

Widening the freeway isn't going to help if there are traffic lights at Rockaway/Fassler and Vallemar.

This approach is what is called increasing the "buffer." The logic is that three lanes will absorb more traffic and relieve the back traffic pressure -- temporarily. It's a half measure at best.

But if they are willing to remove the lights at Vallemar and Rockaway, and build an exit/entry ramp, then it will work. Until then -- same old, same old.

Caltrans has to deal with these whiny nuisance suits on many of its projects. I'm sure it's learned how to deal with them.

Caltrans doesn't have thresholds of significance. Where exactly in the EIR are these thresholds supposedly stated?

Thank you, PSC.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Red Rocks, Colorado and Utah

  • IMG_0955
    By John Maybury riding Amtrak

Southeast France

  • 30-Sainte Agnes
    Photos by John Elk

Viva Mexico

  • Mexico 01 Mexico City Cathedral
    Photos by John Elk

Snow Train

  • IMG_0830
    Photos by John Maybury, onboard Amtrak's California Zephyr

Uzbekistan

  • 7-Samakand
    Photos by John Elk

Dordogne

  • 12-Chateau de Commarque sunset
    Photos by John Elk

Brittany

  • 5-Cado
    Photos by John Elk

Canyons, Cliffs & Clouds

  • IMG_0714
    Photos by John Maybury

Italy

  • 44-Ravello
    Photos by John Elk

Australian Rainforest

  • 2016_0529reunionfamily0032_opt
    Photos by Joel Maybury

Pacifica Shorebirds

  • 20110819_7165.2
    Photos by Paul Donahue

Colombia

  • 20-San Agustin painted statue
    Photos by John Elk

Botswana

  • 27-Okavango elephant
    Photos by John Elk

Namibia

  • 16-Etosha rhinoceros
    Photos by John Elk

Scary Pumpkins

  • Unknown-16
    Photos by Ray Villafane

Big Sur

  • P1030837
    Photos by Dave Yuhas

Joshua Tree Natl. Park

  • Img_0815
    Photos by John Maybury

Gray Lodge

  • IMG_0985
    Photos by John Maybury

Yachats, Oregon

  • IMG_1044
    Photos by John Maybury

Bagpipes on the Beach

  • Img_0258
    Photos by John Maybury

Tucson Botanical Gardens

  • Img_0794
    Photos by John Maybury

Pima Air/Space Museum

  • Img_0758
    Photos by John Maybury

Desert Springtime

  • Img_0839
    Photos by John Maybury
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 03/2007