Comments by Ray Olson
July 05, 2006
Can somone tell me what NIMBY means?
June 20, 2006
Thanks for the updated story Barry. It is great to see the other side of this story. It sounds like David truly tried to go thru the proper channels and had thought he had gotten the proper ok. I'm sure he was trying to do the right thing. I wish the community could really get behind him in trying to get a club built. We really need a good place for teenagers to hang out.
June 22, 2006
Totally agree with your statements and suggestions Mary! Keep it up!
It is not an either or proposition. I think there are enough smart people in our community to do both.. Be good stewards of our environment and have a community that takes care of our health (ie sufficient roadways and bikeways, support for local businesses, etc).
Ray
June 20, 2006
Oh man, my front lawn is a wetland? You mean I can't cut it?
And that pesky red-legged frog strikes again!
Ray
June 19, 2006
Carl,
I have a feeling you will bring your gun.
June 19, 2006
Good point Brian. Can I ask why the phrase "probable wetlands" was even included in the headlines?
Ray
June 20, 2006
That makes sense Barry. I actually think that it is a high probability that Trader Joe's won't come over here, but it is definitely worth trying. We desperately need a Movie Theater (or at least a place where teens can hang out) and your reasoning makes total sense for the theater.
June 20, 2006
Barry, How about if we are just replacing an existing chain with one that might add more value to the community? Would you agree that this is not really taking anything away? Maybe, Trader Joes will have a more positive effect than you think. My guess is that the majority of folks that would visit the Trader Joes shop at Trader Joes anyways. So, we would be supporting our community better by keeping the money on the coastside, and it increases the possibility of folks interacting more within our…
June 19, 2006
I don't know Mikey, what can you say???
Having a Trader Joes come into the Albertsons lease space is nothing but good news for everyone.
Ray
June 19, 2006
Looks like we might be off topic within this thread. I believe we are talking about replacing Albertsons with a Trader Joes. The only development I believe would be needed is a new sign (of course inside of the store would need to be reconfigured).
Do we have any recent info on the petition?
Ray
June 18, 2006
Totally agree with K. Loegering. I can see maybe some discussion if a new building needed to be built, and maybe if Trader Joes was coming in addition to Albertsons. But, it is replacing one business with another, in an already existing shopping center.
Ray
June 18, 2006
Let's come back to reality please... It is just a Trader Joe's. Just like we currently have an Albertsons and a Safeway. There has been no harm to our environment because of these 2 franchises. Trader Joe's will not damage our environment. Businesses on Main St cater to tourists mainly, since most of the shopping is for Art, Books, and specialty items. There needs to be a conscious effort to try and bring more tourists into the downtown area for these businesses to survive, plain and simple. Ray
June 16, 2006
Businesses may have been doing poorly prior to the slide going out, but since the slide went out business has been bad. Nobody wants to sit in traffic for 2 hours to get to the coast. And I don't see how trader joes would effect the local stores other than safeway and possibly cuhna's. Most everyone shops already at Trader Joe's.
Ray
June 15, 2006
It would be SO GREAT if a Traders Joes came into our town. Everyone I know has been talking about this. It is amazing how many folks shop at Trader Joes.
Way to go to John and Barry (and everyone else) for getting this started.
Ray
July 21, 2006
John: I understand that there was a county wide measure passed to limit the size of 92. There could also be a measure to expand it again. I wonder how Measure A actually got started? Perhaps from folks on the coast that wanted to keep the coast to themselves?? Does someone know why it was even created (and what was the argument back then for passing this measure)? One other comment regarding overpasses on highway 1. One argument against this idea is that folks oceans views would be impacted. Of course…
July 21, 2006
Hi Leonard The above 2 posts were not meant to be a response to your last 2 posts. So what your argument seems to be is that the growth limit (or maximum houses) is too large and should be reduced. If we were to reduce this number then we wouldn't have such a serious problem. It also sounds like you are in agreement with improving our road conditions, but not necessarily to the extent that would support the current planned buildout amounts (and population). Based on this, there are 2 issues: 1. Is…
July 20, 2006
Oh by the way Ken.. How is that Alternative Tax Measure coming? Our children and our schools could really use those some additional funds.
July 20, 2006
I was merely suggesting one option (there are many) and my suggestion is rather incomplete. I am not responsible for the strategic plans for highway 92. My only point is this: There should be a strategic (ie long term) plan for expanding 92 and 1, with short term steps to get us to that objective. The goal is to satisfy the needs of the community, including the businesses, for the planned population count of our coastside. In fact, I think the local businesses would fine favor with my suggestion.…
July 17, 2006
Hi Leonard, So maybe there is a semantic issue when you say Growth Limit? Are you saying that HMB cannot buildout more than 4,000 homes, and the unincorporated areas cannot build out more than 4,000 homes? If so, then I now understand what you are saying (though to me I guess I wouldn't term it as growth limit but maximum home amount or something). From reading the LCP I think we might be at half that right now? I am saying our infrastructure cannot even support this amount, let alone this housing…
July 13, 2006
Leonard, Thanks for your response. I do respect your comments and point of view. Now, you state the following: "Regardless, your fundamental assumption is the problem which needs to be fixed—we need to reduce the amount of growth which will happen, and slowing it down to 1% is not a solution." I can only then assume that you want the growth rate for our coastside to be a negative rate?? The term "fixed" is quite subjective and I really think that the reality in our county is that the growth rate…
Page 9 of 13 pages ‹ First < 7 8 9 10 11 > Last ›
Facebook
Twitter
RSS