Comments by art

Previous | Page 2 of 6 | Next

Posted on October 24 at 1:43 p.m.

Helene didn't make the cut and get a spot on the Board!?!?

On Bellosguardo Foundation Named

Posted on October 20 at 11:39 a.m.

From what I have read here, and in other media, Mayor Schneider is being incorrectly and unfairly labeled as being against the 101 widening project. To the contrary, what I've read, even in this article, is that she is for the highway widening but is against CalTrans and SBCAG pushing forward on this project while ignoring some of the impacts that their plan will cause.

For example, the RR under-crossing on Cabrillo Blvd will still cause a major delay to commuters because there isn't room for a right turn lane to speed access to a new southbound on ramp. This was supposed to have been widened when CalTrans did the last 101 project there about 5 years ago and they didn't do it then as they said they would. What happened to that?

And the impact to city intersections was identified in traffic studies but CalTrans has refused to include mitigation for those impacts in the EIR which they themselves have certified.

So while we can all have our opinions as to the benefits or impacts from this proposed project it doesn't help informed discourse by lying about one person's position. And I'm not even a political supporter of the mayor!

On Mayor Blasted for Alleged Conflict-of-Interest

Posted on October 19 at 8:19 a.m.

Nomore, No, I wouldn't be in favor of this project at the density proposed if it wasn't small studios for seniors with minimal parking, group dining room, etc.

And we should realize that we aren't talking about a year round creek that is in a natural setting in the foothills. We are talking about a 500 yard concrete channel with huge culverts on each end where it passes under major streets that flows water only occasionally.

Perhaps removing the concrete bottom would aid in absorption and filtering. But county flood control and city creeks division would have to find funding to do even that. In the meantime while we discuss the source of such funding we have more and more seniors looking for a place to live.

On Can Creek Restoration and Affordable Housing Coexist?

Posted on October 18 at 2:58 p.m.

Dr Dan, I'm sure that you realize that the section of creek we are discussing passes under large sections of concrete box culverts at each end of this section (Hope Ave and 101). So why do you think that restoring this small land-locked section of a creek is more important than a facility to provide appropriate housing for senior citizens and allowing the creek to remain as it currently exists? Seriously, perhaps you could help us understand.

On Can Creek Restoration and Affordable Housing Coexist?

Posted on October 17 at 6:33 p.m.

Let's hope all of these naysayers don't get old. There may not be any rooms for them then if they get their way now.

On Can Creek Restoration and Affordable Housing Coexist?

Posted on October 15 at 2:11 p.m.

chilldrinfthenight, Re your comments about Rouse, if you had actually read the entire EIR that was used to justify the ban, and read the actual back up reports that were referenced in that EIR, you would see that the entire ban is based on junk science. It might "feel" good; but whether or not we are better off with the ban is not a certainty.

On Shooting Fish in a Barrel

Posted on October 15 at 2:07 p.m.

What an absolutely bizarre situation. Fish (that we use for food) over people!?

Why should I worry about whether or not I flush my toilet too many times a day at 1.6 gallons/flush if these bozos can release 3 million gallons per day AND get sued if they don't do it.

What world do these people live in!?

On Shooting Fish in a Barrel

Posted on October 7 at 12:27 p.m.

Laws are meant to apply to everyone - everyone except for law enforcement personnel who get a free pass. This happens entirely too much.

If this was a UPS driver that was entering data in his mobile computer while on duty do you think that driver or UPS would get a free pass like the cop?

On Failing to Share the Road

Posted on September 24 at 5:29 p.m.

Some of us may have been sarcastic but what else besides sarcasm have we got left. We have no input to this process and the Chumash, Inc. can do just about whatever they please.

"Regular" Americans can't build a casino or a 12 story hotel in a rural zone. But the Chumash can because they are a "sovereign nation." Well if they are a "sovereign nation," why don't they have Chumash passports when they travel internationally. And why then, as SBKid points out, are there no border crossings when going in and out of the "sovereign nation?"

I also note that there are many impoverished native American tribes in the US but the casino-culture tribes don't seem to be interested in helping them at all. It's all for their corporation.

All in all it seems to be a good deal if you are a member of this elite group.

On 12-Story Hotel by 2016?

Posted on September 24 at 3:42 p.m.

Why are you upset?

After all, the Chumash are simply trying to honor their culture and tribal ancestors.

Twelve story teepees and gambling casinos were part of the culture weren't they?

On 12-Story Hotel by 2016?

Previous | Page 2 of 6 | Next

event calendar sponsored by: