Comments by Leonard Woren
October 27, 2006
Julia called me to ask who she could talk to who wasn't supportive of the project. She wasn't interested in what I had to say because of the GSD involvement. I gave her a number of names and phone numbers of people against the project. A friend of mine is referring to it as "The Disneyland Hotel." Julian McCurrach is quoted “I haven’t heard of anybody who’s against it." He knows damn well that I've always been against it. What he really means is that he knows of no Princeton business owner…
October 22, 2006
I don't think that we're in agreement on very much at all, simply that the bluff is eroding. That's like agreeing that the sun will come up in the morning. The main issue is that armoring causes loss of the beach, and natural erosion doesn't. Nothing else should matter -- it's not reasonable for property owners to steal the beach from the public at large just because they have a structure (house, hotel, restaurant, etc) in a stupid location which prior to purchase anyone with a clue would have known…
October 22, 2006
Carl, any answer I give would be little more than idle speculation. Some of us have discussed the "why", but we really don't know. The idea in your first paragraph never came up in our discussions. The idea in your second paragraph is certainly a possibility. But we do hope that the real reason is a combination of taking into account the widespread strong community feeling against houses there and that they finally understood the historic significance of the Burnham Plan which calls for a 2000' open…
October 20, 2006
"Zero sphere of influence", while it's a source of major irritation to the Harbor District, was described by LAFCo staff as "a term of art" and therefore not easy to change. (They are trying to come up with an alternative.) What it means is that the District could be dissolved because another agency (in this case the County) could take over all the functions. I attended the LAFCo meeting, and heard nothing that would imply that dissolution is on anyone's agenda. LAFCo will not initiate dissolution…
October 18, 2006
Today I spoke with a County Supervisor regarding the two existing applications to build houses on the Burnham Strip and was told that the County always grandfathers existing applications and would not make an exception in this case. So there is still great risk of having two more houses on the Burnham Strip. The Burnham Strip Committee is part of Midcoast Park Lands, a 501(c)(3) organization which is also a land trust. When the Committee raises enough money to acquire property, it will be MPL which…
October 18, 2006
Every two years we are reminded that Mark Twain was right.
October 18, 2006
One SAMCAR (San Mateo County Association of Realtors) rep actually asked the supervisors to change the zoning for the Burnham Strip to be "consistent" with other residential areas and allow 28' houses, and to increase the allowed size over what the current zoning allows. To me, that says everything you need to know about how SAMCAR is a narrow, out-of-touch, special interest group. In fact, it's the very definition of special interest group. Once we acquire the Strip as a public park, I think the…
October 16, 2006
Ok, I think we can all agree that the ocean is having an impact on the bluffs. How does that justify allowing armoring, which makes things worse for everyone except one individual property owner? This was a problem long before any current property owners were here. (Otherwise known as a pre-existing condition.) What gives them the right to be stupid and/or selfish and/or arrogant and/or greedy and protect their one property to the detriment of the general public and the environment?
October 16, 2006
"The County did NO Carrying Capacity Analysis --- THAT would show that the Mid-Coast is nearly built out now"
Actually, an unbiased, objective carrying capacity analysis would probably show that the Midcoast is already overbuilt.
October 14, 2006
I would not have noticed the diatribe on the Review's web site, but someone emailed it to me. It was quite exhausting to read, which I suspect was part of the author's objective. Why did I read it? Morbid curiousity, kind of like looking at a train wreck. Without deconstructing the whole missive (what would be the point?), I just have to say that claiming that Coastsider.com is less objective or more biased than the Review is just laughable. I see that Coastsider.com's editor and publisher admitted…
October 14, 2006
When the original LCP was approved by the CCC in 1980, it was with a certain "estimated" buildout population. My educated guess is that the CCC would not have approved it with a substantially higher buildout population number. We are already at 2/3 or so of that number, but with only half of the residential parcels built out. This means that the final buildout population under the current land use scheme will be at least 50% higher than originally envisioned and approved by the Coastal Commission.…
October 14, 2006
Good article and good analysis. LCPs are supposed to be updated every 5 years to adjust them to account for experience, new knowledge, and changed circumstances. Instead, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors has turned this LCP update into a developer's wishlist, the exact opposite of what an LCP update is supposed to be. Let's just come right out and say that while there are a few parts of the LCP update which are good for the coastside environment, the focus of it as currently being considered…
October 13, 2006
That that photo was worth waiting for! Thanks.
I'll have to ask him how exactly he got those spots to grow like that. :-)
October 10, 2006
I left out schools for a couple of reasons. - The planning agencies who control how much growth there will be and how fast it will happen don't care about the fact that there is no school capacity to handle it. You (Kevin) stated this. - If I'd listed it, someone would come out of the woodwork and claim that some people try to limit growth by keeping the schools inadequate. In any case, it was stated many years ago that you only need to complete 3 legs of the 4 legged stool in order to have excessive…
October 09, 2006
Are we going to see photos of the "square pumpkins" mentioned in the caption? Please...
October 09, 2006
Ok, my shorthand was apparently too short. I thought that the word "capacity" was implied, but apparently not. The revised first paragraph -- Of course this will annoy some people, but let’s review what’s required to fuel excessive growth: 1. Water capacity 2. Sewer capacity 3. Road capacity The perpetually flooded road is not in this category at all, and without knowing any specifics of the issue, I find it appalling that it's not fixed. Maybe there are reasons, but I haven't heard them. Could…
October 09, 2006
(LUP text referred to in previous posting): section 2. PUBLIC WORKS AND SERVICE SYSTEM COMPONENT, III. GENERAL ISSUES D. PHASING OF PUBLIC WORKS 1. Need for Phasing a. Difficulty in Projecting Future Need for Public Works b. Problems in Overbuilding Public Works 2. Method of Phasing 2.III.D.1.b: Building public works and facilities to serve buildout estimates can be a problem. Public money could be wasted on public facilities which are larger than what is required by the Local Coastal Plan. There…
October 09, 2006
I have a vague recollection of there being talk of a Pescadero sewer system maybe 8 years ago, +/- 2. It might be beneficial to look into that and find out what happened back then. Of course this will annoy some people, but let's review what's required to fuel excessive growth: 1. Water 2. Sewer 3. Roads I don't think that 3 is a problem in Pescadero. Yet. 2 is currently a show stopper, but clearly that could change. I'm unclear on the status of water; isn't there a public water system but with restricted…
October 07, 2006
In the linked article is this gem: Pescadero is one of several rural Coastside towns to rely exclusively on septic systems. Others include La Honda, Woodside, Portola Valley and the entire Midcoast north of Half Moon Bay. I have emailed the author and requested that a correction be printed. Do I even have to state here that most of the Midcoast is served by the Sewer Authority Midcoastside? Only the few properties in the rural areas can't get sewer service. "Everything you read in the newspapers…
October 06, 2006
How about we stick to the "over-developer" label?
Bob did succeed in his intent to bring humor to the subject. I'm not too convinced that the smiley on Ray's post mitigates anything.
Page 10 of 17 pages ‹ First < 8 9 10 11 12 > Last ›
Facebook
Twitter
RSS