Coastsiders may have seen people out in front of Long’s or Safeway gathering signatures for a petition opposing a stoplight at Terrace.  Hundreds have signed up, because a Terrace stoplight makes no sense.  As the Coastal Commission wrote, "it would interrupt the flow of through traffic on Highway 1.  The distance between the current signalized North Main Street/Highway 1 intersection and Terrace is approximately 1,000 feet.  Spacing signalized intersections on Highway 1 this close could increase congestion on the highway because of insufficient ‘stacking’ space."

The interesting question is how such a bad idea ever grew legs.  For the answer, we need to briefly touch upon the history of the Ailanto/Pacific Ridge project.  In 2001, the Coastal Commission approved a 126-house subdivision with some special conditions, like a lot retirement program and only temporary use of Terrace as access for 40 homes. The developer didn’t accept these conditions, so he sued.  By the end of 2002, the Commission was getting nervous and offered to cave in on the lot retirement and Terrace access issues.  HMB Council members were irate.  Mike Ferreira stated (Review, 11/20/02): "This is a complete surrender, and it is so gratuitous to the developer that it sickens me.  That flies right in the face of traffic analysis for the area.  Highway 1 is already at an unsafe level of usage.  This will be a huge mess."  Toni Taylor added: "I can’t even imagine how we’re going to police that intersection [Terrace].  That would be a disaster for the area."

This is Lyme Disease Awareness Month. Be aware that the nymphal ticks are prominent right now, and most likely to carry Lyme disease and other devastating co-infections like Babesia and Erlichia! Get treatment promptly, rash or no rash, if you have a bite and experience ANY unusual symptoms. Check out the California Lime Disease Association and ILADS - International Lyme And Associated Diseases Society websites.

Chris Pritchard

Caltrans disclosed more details about the situation at Devil’s Slide and their plans to repair the highway at Wendnesday’s Pacifica City Council meeting. Caltrans plans to announce a schedule for repairs on Tuesday.

Keyhan Moghbel, who is in charge of the project, said that the slide movement has stabilized to the level of movement prior to the rainy season, which means that Caltrans can begin the repair. CalTrans has already begun initial repairs and material movement. The work will start while Caltrans is refining the design. Gordon Ball, which did the improvements on Highway 92, has been selected as the prime contractor for the work.  They have said they will get as many drill operators as possible and work around the clock on the repairs.  The contractor will meet CalTrans at the slide Thursday at 8:00am.

The design is similar to the 1995 design, using concrete piers in holes bored into the slide to tie the material together. But this time the piers will be in 150 foot holes instead of 65 foot holes, as they used before.  The number of bore holes and their locations appears not to have been finalized. Some logistical issues remain, including finding a way to position multiple drilling rigs for simultaneous use and uncertainty about what they will encounter as they begin to drill.

People at the meeting report that most of the public speakers were frustrated by Mr. Moghbel’s lack of responsiveness to question.  "He must have been asked in fifteen different ways to give us a worst case and best case scenario," said one observer. "He gave as many variants and didn’t budge."

While crabbing on the Pacifica Pier this weekend I overheard someone telling a fisherman that they were soon going to close the pier due to deterioration of the pilings near the shore. He said there was allegedly no money to make the repairs so it would likely close indefinitely.

Is there any truth to what I heard? Having just moved to Pacifica in January, the pier was a big draw for me, not to mention how important it is to the retirees who spend every day out there crabbing, fishing and socializing.

If the pier were to close it would be a huge blow to the Sharp Park community, the developing seaside walk there, and turn the pier into a true eye-sore. Right now its function overshadows its form. If it were closed for good it would be a blight on all of Pacifica, visually and communally.

—Chuck Baldwin

Mike Ferreira is a former member of the Half Moon Bay City Council and a former member of the city’s Planning Commission.  This is the third part of a three-part article.

The Official Foothill Bypass won’t solve our traffic problems and is fraught with environmental and legal complications. And we can’t afford it. One of the biggest flaws in the long-standing Foothill Boulevard proposalin the City’s LCP is its configuration as a City of Half Moon Bay operated "bypass". This is a city of less than 13,000 people which historically has had chronic budget problems and which couldn’t even maintain its own streets until the Ritz started laying its golden eggs just a few years ago.

The idea that a city of such a small size could construct and maintain—yes, maintain—a 4-lane eastern bypass stretching from Young Avenue and Highway 1 in the north and over creeks and wetlands to connect with Highway 92 just east of Hilltop is downright zany. But that’s how it’s drawn up in the city’s Land Use Plan.

Assuming it could even be permitted, it would have to be constructed to highway standards or it would be reduced to rubble by highway traffic usage in a relatively short time. Conservatively, such a bypass would cost at least $150 million and the city would have to set aside millions per year for maintenance and reserves to operate it. I am not familiar with any other small coastal city that operates a bypass of State Highway 1—not Monterey, not Moss Landing. not Watsonville, not Aptos, not Capitola, not Santa Cruz, not Pacifica, not Daly City, and certainly not Bolinas.

And that’s why so many of us have concluded that the only purpose for its inclusion in the Land Use Plan back in the 80s was to facilitate the development of vacant parcels in the City’s foothills. It’s the only sensible explanation for its existence, because there’s no other credible rationale.

The idea of building a below grade intersection at Highway 92 is not new. It was the city’s traffic engineer’s preferred alternative when he studied the issue in the late 90s during the city’s Foothill negotiations with Ailanto over Pacific Ridge. The problem was that it would have added $8 million to the project (The cost has certainly gone up since then).

The city manager then proposed that a traffic signal would be the "short term" solution (for which the developer would pay) and the below grade connection would be the "long term" solution (for which the public would pay). This interesting, to say the least, proposal was never tested at the City Council. The Foothill alignment ran into other problems with wetlands and ensuing problematical realignments, so no Coastal Development Permit has ever been applied for.

In conclusion I would say that CCF’s re-proposal of the Bayview/Foothill Bypass of the 90s, reducing it to two lanes, and restricting it to autos would reduce the overall cost of building it and maintaining it, but it would still be very expensive. And, it wouldn’t really function as a bypass, just as an extra side street with some limited circulation value. And certainly not enough of such value as to justify a significant public expenditure. Or emergency permits.  Or throwing in the towel on lawsuits.  Or looking the other way as laws are ignored or fudged.

This month’s presentation opens with the short film Coastside Ruins  (10:10), a beautiful and haunting little documentary about abandoned structures in Half Moon Bay and the stories they tell. It will have you looking at familiar buildings in a new way and have you scanning for a few secret places you probably missed.   Kathryn Murdock, the local film maker behind this gem, will be on hand to serve as a tour guide to our own back yard.

The feature is The Burden Of Dreams  (94 minutes), a documentary by Les Blank, the legendary documentary film maker about the work of another film legend.  This extraordinary  documentary follows messianic German director Werner Herzog as he struggles against desperate odds in the Amazon basin to complete Fitzcarraldo, his epic feature film. The work has amazing behind-the-scenes footage for those who appreciate daring filmmaking. Question: Why did tribesmen approach Herzog and offer to kill brilliant actor Klaus Kinski?  Don’t assume you have to have seen the original feature to appreciate Burden of Dreams.  The documentary stands by itself and give you a chance to see what the version starring Mick Jagger would have looked like if he had not walked off near the end of the first shoot.

Bring your thoughts to discuss with film historian Warren Haack after the screening.

Friday, April 12, 2006 7:30pm
Community Methodist Sanctuary
777 Miramontes, Half Moon Bay
Corner of Johnston & Miramontes
$6.00 donation per person For more information see: www.hmbfilm.org

The Harbor District, which operates Pillar Point Harbor, is likely to increase fees beginning July 1, reports the Examiner. The district is facing a deficit of $573,000.

Pillar Point in particular has been hit hard by a loss of revenue due to restrictions on salmon fishing, the closure of Devil’s Slide and cool, overcast weather, Harbor District General Manager Peter Grenell said.

Another reason for the deficit was the district’s payments for construction debt to the state Department of Boating and Waterways. The Harbor District will hold a public hearing on the proposed budget at its meeting June 21, at the Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA 94083 at 7:00 p.m.

A roommate dispute leads to an arrest, three juveniles escape from the custody of the state, a storage shed in La Honda is burglarized, an abandoned trailer in Princeton catches fire, two suspects in Moss Beach are caught with marijuana, and a missing Atlanta man suffering from dementia is found in San Gregorio.

DUI, battery on a SamTrans bus by a juvenile, indecent exposure at Redondo Beach, a missing 14-year-old girl turns up at a friend’s house, graffiti on Main Street and the Pilarcitos Creek Bridge, a stolen pig-shaped mailbox, used oil being dumped near a business, graffiti on San Mateo Road, shoplifting, two rowdy drunks are removed from a HMB restaurant, and a second missing 14-year-old girl comes home at midnight. Click for details and more.

Mike Ferreira is a former member of the Half Moon Bay City Council and a former member of the city’s Planning Commission.  This is the second part of a three-part article.

The Bayview/Foothill Bypass will not solve our traffic problems. It would most likely just move the Coastside’s traffic bottlenecks to new locations. But it also fails to solve the legal and environmental challenges that have stymied it in the past.

The original Bayview Drive alignment runs along the dividing line of two moribund subdivisions: Glencree occupies the northern third of the now-open space and Beachwood occupies the southern two-thirds. Glencree’s subdivision map has expired. And in 2005, a state appeals court upheld the city’s denial of a Coastal Development Permit to Beachwood because of wetlands which Beachwood had unsuccessfully argued as not being wetlands.  The state Supreme Court refused Beachwood’s appeal thereby making the decision final.

Although Bayview was dead and buried with the subdivisions it was to have served, it is now being exhumed and slightly realigned onto what at first glance appears to be slightly higher ground. My guess is that someone has selected one of the several wetland delineations that were conducted over time and has conjectured that this new meander would avoid wetlands. I have serious doubts that it would.

CCF infers that Bayview Drive could resurrect the Beachwood subdivision, and avoid a $30 million lawsuit by the developer through a settlement with the City. But the developer’s lawsuit is about refunds and claimed damages, not subdivision/wetlands.  The subdivision/wetland matter was decided by the courts as a function of state law, not as a function of the city’s discretion. The City must abide by the court rulings and cannot consent to a negotiated subdivision resurrection.

Any new project must start from scratch. There must be a new Coastal Development Permit application, a new Environmental Impact Report, and, unquestionably, a new wetland delineation. During recent years the criteria for wetland determination have become more inclusive, not less. Whatever may have been mapped before would most likely be expanded by a new delineation. And, due to the history of these parcels, the Coastal Commission would keep a sharp eye on the process. You can bank on that.

Meanwhile, the proposed Foothill Boulevard alignment behind the high school is inexplicably drawn right through the very wetland (officially delineated) that stalled the project in the 90’s. How does CCF think that would work? Surely, they must have talked to someone in City Hall with a vestige of institutional memory. Or did they?

And extending Foothill into and through Cypress Cove sure looks like cavalier treatment of those voters in Cypress Cove who thought the pro-development folks would deliver them from the traffic exiting a community park. Now they find themselves targeted for the traffic of a major thoroughfare. It’ll be interesting to see how that gets discussed. Especially since the attorney that was used to sue the City is one of the CCF’s founders.

 We shouldn’t be surprised to observe some strong objections from that neighborhood and I think they would have some quite credible legal positions which they could take, as well.