The City of Newport is guilty
The pertinent question at Banning Ranch is whether, during CEQA review (the Environmental Impact Report, which comes before project permitting), the public is better served by having local government make a good-faith effort to work with State agencies to avoid approving actions that clearly violate State policies and/or precedents, or whether it’s better for the local government to go through the motions of collaboration and then approve a project that clearly violates those policies/precedents. In this case, the City of Newport Beach actually has a requirement in its General Plan that the City will “work with” the Coastal Commission and other agencies during the CEQA review process, to ensure they are not wasting everyone’s time and money by approving a project that clearly violates the Coastal Act or other regulations. The City argued that having a meeting and a site visit, and then completely blowing off Commission staff and its many concerns, satisfied their requirements under both their General Plan and CEQA. We can only hope that the Supreme Court is able to discern the wastefulness and ultimately the illegality of such a bad-faith approach to planning.
City of Newport Beach is potentially violating…
Besides possibly violating the Coastal Act, the City of Newport Beach also possibly violated the Alquist-Priolo Act by approving development on the southern mesa.
Re: Boaters urged to sign ethanol reform petition (Jan. 13 issue)
Stop using ethanol altogether
Please discontinue all ethanol use due to damage to fuel line and other parts of marine engines.
Old argument with flawed reasoning
Actually ethanol moves the water through the system not letting it stagnate and cause problems. This is the same anti ethanol argument for the last 40 years. Still not correct.
Re: Mr. Ning’s in Avalon delays closure (Jan. 13 issue)
Don’t leave us, Mr. Ning!
Great food and great people. Don’t leave us (Newport boaters) to eat only Mexican food when we get there.
Re: Port of Los Angeles breaks ground on L.A. Waterfront roadside improvements (Dec. 16 issue)
San Pedro should remain a sleepy fishing village
Living in San Pedro, I am highly skeptical that any roadway improvement of Harbor Boulevard will really be the thing that inspires people to visit San Pedro. You have only one real road to get to all the things that you plan to create. The freeway off-ramp and bridge access are shared by both people traffic and shipping traffic and are a nightmare when anything major is going on. I have to stay at home during these sessions because there are times you just can’t move. On 22nd St., there should be four lanes from Gaffey to Harbor. The bike lane kills a whole mess of parking along 22nd St. and is almost never really used; just a real waste of funds. The Iowa should have been parked at the end by the lane victory, and don’t bring back the red car as it just messes with travel time when it crosses all the intersections. There is too much more that I could say, just a total waste of money. A sleepy fishing village should be a sleepy fishing village.
Re: Dog Abroad
Four legged furry friends are the ones in command
Great photos of the ones really in charge of the vessel, the four legged Captains.