Comments by Ray Olson
July 11, 2006
Mr Johnson,
You had made a post on july 9th @ 10:44pm with a concern over gridlock. Well, please read my reply I had made on 7/10 at 1:48pm (it seems to be a little delayed in getting on the discussion board).
July 10, 2006
I have a question for Mr. King. You state the following:
"The bottom line though is 92 remains a 2-lane road even after the slated improvements by the County. So there is nothing we on the coastside can do about this at all, except be wary about any proposal that will add substantially to our existing traffic."
What if we could do something about it (and there was funding for it). Would you want to make the necessary improvements? And if so, what would they be?
July 10, 2006
Mr Johnson, Again, your logic does not make sense to me. Let's look at the ideal scenario first (in my opinion anyways). Hwy 1 is 4 lanes, hwy 92 is 4 lanes. Going south on hwy 1 (from say El Granada) you have 2 options: drive into town, or connect to 92. 92 connection is no lights like what we have connecting 92 to 280 today. Same thing if you were to drive north on 1 (say from the golf course). Also, the same thing would exist driving west on 92 in that you 3 options: Connect to hwy 1 North, connect…
July 09, 2006
Ken, are you saying that if it were 4 lanes you would be more supportive (I really would like to know)?? You know, it really is too easy to be critical of every idea or solution that comes to fruition. Which reminds me.. How about that effort for an alternative to measure S?
July 09, 2006
Sorry Ken but I don't get your logic. Here is what you stated: "Turns from a roadway, SLOWS thru traffic flow. Entry to a roadway SLOWS thru traffic flow. OK. Now, if in the mourning [spelling intentional] Foothill exists with traffic turning into it from South bound SR 1 – thru traffic will be impeded. Also, if in the mourning [spelling still intentional] Foothill exists with traffic turning onto east bound SR 92 – thru traffic will be impeded." This is no different than today's morning traffic…
July 07, 2006
Hi Ken, It would be great if you can try and refrain from any name calling or labeling, as it is not really constructive to the discussion. I would also like know how the foothill bypass is currently designed, however. Can anyone comment on the amount of driveways that might be attached to the road, are there any stop signs, or intersections (in the current design that is)? Ken, you make the following statement: “Foothill/Bayview, with nonstop dedicated right-hand turn lanes at both westbound 92…
July 05, 2006
There is no doubt in my mind that the bypass would make for a more efficient flow for the northside of the coastside (going both North and South). The question really is how much would it help. By separating the North bound and South bound cars earlier (before hitting Main st) it will also help out the folks south of 92 as well. This has been proven by the fact that HMB prevented any traffic onto Main st in the morning, which is really a "bypass" in itself. The best solution of course would be to…
June 23, 2006
Thanks again for the info Barry. It is very informative to find out that some parts of HMB might be exempt for the 1% growth rate. I (and others) would also be interested to find out any and all exemptions that the city may provide. Still there is a requirement that the city stay within the 1% growth rate. The point here is that development does not have unbounded ability, and that as a community proper checks and balances are put in place to ensure that. I think this reasoning would be applied to…
June 23, 2006
Thanks for the info Barry. Very good article in that in includes the reasons for the exceptions, mainly the senior housing apartments and that homes that were authorized in past years actually completed in 2004. If you take out the senior housing apartment numbers then the percentage comes back closer to the average. Seems reasonable to me, though it would be interesting to see annual trending (to see how many exceptions have been granted). One side comment.. I had no idea coastsider.com has been…
June 22, 2006
I didn't mean to say that Highway 1 or Pescadero Road is part of the argument. It was merely to note that highways or roads can be built and have no adverse effect on the surrounding area, specifically a wetland area. I am asking these questions because I want to understand the point of disagreement. I'm guessing that other folks would like to know as well so I am asking. Regarding your point 2: It seems to me that actually we are under the City's definition of a "wetland".. at least that is my understanding…
June 22, 2006
Oh and one other thought.. Look at highway 1 down by Pescadero. It runs right through a wetland I believe. Pescadero road also runs adjacent to a wetland. To me those wetlands are thriving and healthy. Should those roads be taken away?
June 22, 2006
Ken: If Ailanto was required to build homes, wouldn't they be required to comply with the 1% growth like everyone else (thus no additional homes in the city)? And, can I ask why you consider the road a residential street and not a highway? Isn't Highway 1 a highway? If your opinion is that the foothill bypass is residential street, than what do you think would need to change for it to become a highway? What is very eye-opening to me is the definition of a wetlands. It seems ridiculous to me. The…
June 19, 2006
I think the goal should also be a freedom to post what people's opinions are, without fear of being slammed or put down. Barry, you do an AWESOME job on this site, but please keep this in mind also. I say this because "Good Ole Charlie Brown" sounds alot like name calling.
Ray
June 18, 2006
Ken, I am interested in knowing if you even agree to the original problem that the proposal is trying to address. Which is, that our current road infrastructure is inadequate for the current population and for the planned growth that we must accept? Do you disagree that this problem is real? On a similar note, did anyone try to drive to HMB business from around 3 - 6pm yesterday? It was absolutely horrible. Tourist traffic from both ends clogged everything up. I understand that the slide is mainly…
June 14, 2006
Mark: I think we all need to be informed about what our current wetlands really are. I haven't yet seen the area that is currently at issue as being "wetlands". But, by looking at the map, my guess is that is probably no more a wetlands than some of the vacant lots that are in my neighborhood. Does the current piece of land in question support any sort of wildlife? Is it even environmentally clean at all? And the big question, How much of an impact will a road actually make? I don't know the answer,…
June 19, 2006
Can someone clarify the issue about developments? Even if we were to ask a developer to help pay for a new bypass, that developer would still need to abide by the 1% growth as stipulated in the LCP, correct? If that is so, then there are no new cars on the road, since the new cars are coming because of the current 1% growth (and more) today. Regardless, why can't we come up with a scenario where we do not need developer funding? Why can't we go to the county and say we need this to support the 1%…
June 16, 2006
Kevin wrote: "but the “bypass” proposal is inextricably linked to new development. The bypass proposal would never have seen the light of day if it were not for the prospect of new development." Well, we as a community can come up with any plan on improving our roads (who says we can't). I don't think we have to take only one certain option. And if we decided to include any sort of development, we have the ability to control that development. Growth is happening whether you like it or not. Ray
June 15, 2006
I don't think we necessarily have to have new developments along with road improvements. However, new developments should be dealt with as a separate issue. For example, there is a 1% growth cap on HMB, which should address the issue. You will have to accept that there will be some level of growth (which is not unbounded). The current solution (from reading CCFs website right now) does not state there has to be lights. I vote for no lights. So we should strive to make that a reality (if that is what…
June 15, 2006
Barry:
I read Charlie's post and I don't think he stated "comprehensive community based planning" is needed for school buses. What he stated is that we shouldn't be shortsighted in a solution, and that by looking only at school busing we are falling short of true solution.
June 15, 2006
Please tell me how you think the bypass will exacerbate any current situation (including surfers beach). I don't understand that and so maybe you could help me. Just looking at it logically it seems to me that a bypass does two things: 1. reduces the amount of traffic that has to go thru the downtown sections. 92 and Main cross traffic will be reduced. This is advantageous for us local residents that would like to go shopping. 2. traffic flow to the north side of 1 will be improved. This is simply…
Page 10 of 13 pages ‹ First < 8 9 10 11 12 > Last ›
Facebook
Twitter
RSS