Page 1 of 3
Posted on August 7 at 9:56 p.m.
There's no harm to this whatsoever. I'm not a fast food fan, but there are times with a car full of hungry soccer players ready for home and a shower that a drive thru is a life saver. It's a practical, simple solution. I like the Petersons - they are a generous family.
On Will McDonald's Drive-Thru Supersize Traffic?
Posted on August 7 at 9:47 p.m.
This is just common sense. A drive thru is cleaner for air than a stop and start and people will not use parking. Why wouldn't we do this?
On McDonald's Rep on Why Drive-Thru Needed
Posted on May 17 at 9:31 p.m.
I have no clue what you're talking about. I was a serious Botanic Garden member - I volunteer now at Elings.
While it is none of your business - I'm voting for Obama again.
Can I see your ID?
Seems if you're not in he club you have no say. You are a bit narrow.
I think the bridge, creek clean up, new park and trail to Douglas and Hendrys is a great idea.
Let's talk issues.
On Our Dueling Mayors
Posted on May 17 at 8:51 p.m.
Oh my - you got me. I'm in favor of a better garden and a new park. Seems normal. But evil lurks in those in favor of a garden and a new park.
You make me laugh. The only answer you have is to attack another persons right to speak out.
It's telling. As telling as Barney's tired rant about Chicago. Read it a number of times.
Marc. You are just flat wrong and you know it. You are willing to gamble with the neighborhood on Alan Road having traffic - while the EIR says and you know quite well what it says - that there is no issue with traffic on Alan Road, it is NOT a significant impact. So no reason to say no.
The project is approved. Using the road would be a minor change and no court would uphold denying the project when the EIR says there is not a significant impact.
The only things reduced would be the cost of the bridge, the safety of kids moving between Hendrys, Douglas Preserve and Elings - and peace in the neighborhood.
Posted on May 17 at 9:08 a.m.
Very long article that doesn't impress me one bit. Why is there a rant about Chicago? Reads like like a smear piece rather than a journalistic article.
Smearing and lies don't change the facts: A yes vote gives Santa Barbara residents the benefits of creek restoration, a new public park, and a new pedestrian trail all at no taxpayer expense.
Where's the money? The money for creek restoration, a new public park, 44 acres of open space, and a new bike trail is coming from Mark Lee and the Veronica Meadows community. Pretty great deal if you ask me.
Follow the facts - Yes on Y.
Posted on May 17 at 8:37 a.m.
Sometimes you have to create a lie to cover up a lie.
Those opposed to Measure Y continue to create misleading statements out of thin air. The truth is, the city hasn't acted on any plans to clean up Arroyo Burro because it can't afford to. I also noticed Mr. Trautwhine admits the creek needs improvement but also claims it's the nicest creek in SB - which is it?
Voting Yes on Y will provide the funds necessary to clean up the creek - I agree with that half of the argument stating it needs cleanup. Obviously the park and trail as part of the deal weren't mentioned in this article as they can't even make up an argument against those. Or can they?
Yes on Y.
On Not What We Call Restoration
Posted on May 4 at 1:44 p.m.
Randy thanks. Well stated. Y is a model measure - loved seeing environmentalist like Alex Pujo standing with Secord and Marty Blum standing with Francisco in support of Y.
League - either you have never seen the state of the creek or refuse to admit that it's a disaster.
The banks collapsing, trash, an old abandoned bridge, an abandoned sewer line - chain linked fences trying to hold back the banks fill the filthy creek. No animals but for dirty diseased rats are near this creek today.
The way the creek is today, animals would be the first to use the new bridge to avoid the creek.
The more than $1 million from the property owner to clean the creek and restore it as a natural creek is a huge gift to the community and a welcome to wildlife.
On Y Pro and Con
Posted on May 3 at 3:46 p.m.
Seems like those opposed are hard pressed to find a real argument.
So let's review:
Veronica Meadows is approved by city and Coastal Commission - true.
Measure Y allows a bridge - a nice bridge to respect neighbors (instead of using their street). Property owner pays.
Measure Y ensures the dirty creek is cleaned up naturally - a 6 acre park is created from horrible land.
Bridge and trail gets people off Los Positas, and away from cars driving 40 - 50 mph.
This all cost tax payers nothing.
Community leaders, including environmentalist and business leaders, join neighbors in support.
And all I read here is questioning the legitimacy of others people's right to post, who disagree.
Marc my words - Y will pass.
On Yes on Y Campaign Kicks Off
Posted on May 3 at 10:35 a.m.
What a breath of fresh air. A published article that states the facts instead of crying "wolf!"
Mr. Fastman I appreciate your straight-forward approach to laying out the facts.
The fact is, Yes on Y is good for the city and great for those of us who live and play near the Las Positas valley. We get a trail and a park so that we can also get the creek cleaned up.
Posted on May 3 at 9:08 a.m.
I hear a lot of screaming and not a lot of truth. Like others have explained, I received the Yes on Y mailer with a very clear explanation of the 25 homes being built.
In return for a small piece of land we will receive a safe trail to the beach, a cleaned up creek bed, and an actual, usable park.
I grew up in Santa Barbara and know full well that the land being asked for is no "park land." I've been playing soccer at Elings Park for 20 years - and never have I looked across Las Positas and thought about having a picnic or taking my dog there.
The truth is we are being asked for a very small piece of degrading land. Mark wants to clean all of that up and give us a park and trail on top of that. Talk about going above and beyond...
On Y a Lie