Got your attention, yes? It isn't all the drivers going through Eureka on the main throughways, just a few. But these few are dangerous and very inconsiderate and should be fined heavily!
Several times I try to cross using the crosswalks and after a vehicle stops to allow my crossing, I begin my trip to the other side. But I don't do this gingerly, for if I do, I would possibly get mowed over by an inconsiderate driver believing that the vehicle stopped in front of them had stopped for no reason.
Case in point, yesterday I was crossing 5th & O Streets to have lunch at Marcelli's (Great Food!). As I started to cross in front of the vehicle that had stopped for me in the first lane, the middle land was open and the vehicle coming up on the stopped vehicle pulled over and continued through the crossing without even slowing down... Then another vehicle was great and slowed traffic down in the middle lane and then a vehicle zipped through the third lane without slowing down and acted as if they didn't even see the other vehicles stopped at the intersection. After this vehicle went through, the vehicle in the middle lane tried to do a little traffic control to allow me to complete my crossing - Thanks!
When I entered the restaurant the patrons even remarked about how bad the vehicles were involving this situation.
To stress this a bit more and I am sure it has happened before, for pedestrians need to cross the streets with much care here in Eureka or become as the individual did in the below article:
Pedestrian dies after being hit and flying 100 feet
The Times-Standard - Article Launched: 09/23/2007 06:28:14 PM PDT
A man walking across Fourth Street was struck by a vehicle and thrown 100 feet Saturday afternoon, dying at the scene, Eureka police reported.
Alex Campos, 26, of Rio Dell, the driver, was arrested on charges of vehicular manslaughter and probation violations, and was booked into the Humboldt County Correctional Facility.
The victim, whose name was withheld pending notification of his family, was heading north across Fourth at A Street when he was hit at about 5 p.m.
Campos' vehicle, which was westbound in the far left lane of the one-way street, was traveling at a high rate of speed when it hit the pedestrian, police said.
The impact was so hard that the victim, while flying through the air, struck a traffic sign, bending it over, police said.
I personally feel we need more traffic conttrol lights on the main streets of Eureka!
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Why no one will hire me -
I took this article from the Washington Post - Though the circumstances are different, I feel Humboldt County is prejudice towards the disabled... Take a look at the two private employment agencies here and the public image provided regarding access; look at a few buildings that claim to have access, but truely do not meet what is expected.
Sunday, October 29, 2006; Page B08
I've seen the awkward stares and the compassionate smiles, and I've heard the reassurances and words of encouragement. I've also read the letters and taken the phone calls: I'm sorry, but we've found someone else to fill the position.
Although discrimination in hiring the disabled is illegal, as codified in the Americans With Disabilities Act, it nevertheless occurs. I am a case in point. I'm a one-legged man, and I can't get a job.
In February 2005 I lost my leg to cancer, a sarcoma on my right tibia. I walk with the aid of a prosthesis and a cane. I can walk, stand for prolonged periods, go up and down stairs, and drive a car. By trade, I'm a writer and editor -- office work. I have more than 23 years of professional experience. I have an impressive portfolio and have won awards.
Yet employers will not touch me.
That last statement is not bitterness but experience. For nearly a year, after I was laid off as staff writer for a Washington-area association, I've applied for hundreds of writing and editing jobs in Washington, Baltimore and the surrounding area. I've had more than a dozen face-to-face interviews. They have all resulted in the same state of affairs: I don't have a job.
Here's how it typically works: I respond to a newspaper or Internet employment notice with a cover letter, résumé and writing clips. The human resources person calls me for a telephone interview. She is impressed with my résumé and clips; she gauges my interest; we set a time and date for an on-site, in-person interview. As I hang up the phone, my expectations are high. They like me! I'm on my way to getting a job!
When I show up at the employer's office, my expectations begin to lag as the receptionist sees me walk with my cane as I approach her desk. She is momentarily taken aback by the man with a limp, but she quickly screws a warm smile onto her face. In the reception area, I'm met by more warm smiles, and then I'm invited into an office.
The interview goes well. They say they are impressed with my past work. They outline the job responsibilities, ask questions, answer my questions. It is a pleasant encounter.
Then, I follow the advice I received from my job counselor -- I bring up the subject of my disability. The thinking is this: It is illegal for a potential employer to ask an applicant about a disability. If I don't bring up the subject, I will leave the interviewer with doubt in his mind. He can see by the way I walk that something is wrong with me, but he won't necessarily know what. No one will hire a person he has a doubt about.
So I broach the subject: You've noticed that I walk with a cane. That's because I have an artificial leg. But I can assure you that it does not interfere with my ability to do my job.
Oh, no, no, no, say the interviewers emphatically. That has no bearing on our hiring process! You would be hired on the strength of your skills and talents. A physical disability doesn't have anything to do with the job.
At the end of the interview everyone shakes hands, and warm smiles and assurances abound. They show me to the door, I go home, and a week or so later, I get a letter or a phone call: Thank you for your interest, but we've selected another candidate. Good luck in your career search.
For the past year, the routine hasn't varied. The names, faces and employers change, but the result is the same. I do not get hired.
I realize that active prejudice is probably not in play in these situations. Human nature is. Think of it: If you're a company looking at your bottom line and you're faced with two candidates of equal skills -- one has a disability and one does not, whom would you choose?
This is just my story. But most people with disabilities who are able and willing to work have similar tales. It's not fair, but that's the way it is.
I suppose we disabled people can always work at Wal-Mart, giving out happy-face stickers for minimum-wage pay, but most of us are capable of doing better than that. I only wish the working world would give us a chance to prove it.
-- Chuck Jones
New Market, Md.
cjnewmarket@aol.com
Sunday, October 29, 2006; Page B08
I've seen the awkward stares and the compassionate smiles, and I've heard the reassurances and words of encouragement. I've also read the letters and taken the phone calls: I'm sorry, but we've found someone else to fill the position.
Although discrimination in hiring the disabled is illegal, as codified in the Americans With Disabilities Act, it nevertheless occurs. I am a case in point. I'm a one-legged man, and I can't get a job.
In February 2005 I lost my leg to cancer, a sarcoma on my right tibia. I walk with the aid of a prosthesis and a cane. I can walk, stand for prolonged periods, go up and down stairs, and drive a car. By trade, I'm a writer and editor -- office work. I have more than 23 years of professional experience. I have an impressive portfolio and have won awards.
Yet employers will not touch me.
That last statement is not bitterness but experience. For nearly a year, after I was laid off as staff writer for a Washington-area association, I've applied for hundreds of writing and editing jobs in Washington, Baltimore and the surrounding area. I've had more than a dozen face-to-face interviews. They have all resulted in the same state of affairs: I don't have a job.
Here's how it typically works: I respond to a newspaper or Internet employment notice with a cover letter, résumé and writing clips. The human resources person calls me for a telephone interview. She is impressed with my résumé and clips; she gauges my interest; we set a time and date for an on-site, in-person interview. As I hang up the phone, my expectations are high. They like me! I'm on my way to getting a job!
When I show up at the employer's office, my expectations begin to lag as the receptionist sees me walk with my cane as I approach her desk. She is momentarily taken aback by the man with a limp, but she quickly screws a warm smile onto her face. In the reception area, I'm met by more warm smiles, and then I'm invited into an office.
The interview goes well. They say they are impressed with my past work. They outline the job responsibilities, ask questions, answer my questions. It is a pleasant encounter.
Then, I follow the advice I received from my job counselor -- I bring up the subject of my disability. The thinking is this: It is illegal for a potential employer to ask an applicant about a disability. If I don't bring up the subject, I will leave the interviewer with doubt in his mind. He can see by the way I walk that something is wrong with me, but he won't necessarily know what. No one will hire a person he has a doubt about.
So I broach the subject: You've noticed that I walk with a cane. That's because I have an artificial leg. But I can assure you that it does not interfere with my ability to do my job.
Oh, no, no, no, say the interviewers emphatically. That has no bearing on our hiring process! You would be hired on the strength of your skills and talents. A physical disability doesn't have anything to do with the job.
At the end of the interview everyone shakes hands, and warm smiles and assurances abound. They show me to the door, I go home, and a week or so later, I get a letter or a phone call: Thank you for your interest, but we've selected another candidate. Good luck in your career search.
For the past year, the routine hasn't varied. The names, faces and employers change, but the result is the same. I do not get hired.
I realize that active prejudice is probably not in play in these situations. Human nature is. Think of it: If you're a company looking at your bottom line and you're faced with two candidates of equal skills -- one has a disability and one does not, whom would you choose?
This is just my story. But most people with disabilities who are able and willing to work have similar tales. It's not fair, but that's the way it is.
I suppose we disabled people can always work at Wal-Mart, giving out happy-face stickers for minimum-wage pay, but most of us are capable of doing better than that. I only wish the working world would give us a chance to prove it.
-- Chuck Jones
New Market, Md.
cjnewmarket@aol.com
Friday, September 21, 2007
Arms Industry making money through lost weapons
this was direct to Moveon.org. You know, I think it is great that you point out the unjust ways our leaders seem to be supporting the Iraq War. Here is another point that needs to be addressed in your press releases, for how can we fight terrorism if they can't keep track of the weapons we have sent to fight terrorist? This is just another scam our government is using to provide the arms industry a way of making more money.
Are Lost U.S. Weapons In Enemy Hands?
Investigation Shows Missing U.S. Weapons May Have Turned Up In The Hands Of Iraqi Insurgents
(CBS) Last month, a government report revealed the U.S. military could not account for 190,000 -- or 30 percent -- of all weapons issued to Iraqi Security Forces between June 2004 and December 2005.
Thursday, Pentagon officials said $88 billion in spending in Iraq and Afghanistan is now under audit by the Department of Defense for fraud.
Now, in his exclusive report CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian has learned some of those missing weapons have ended up in the worst possible hands.
CBS News has learned that the CIA has photographic evidence that Austrian-made Glocks intended for Iraqi security forces and paid for by U.S. taxpayers are now in the hands of Iraqi insurgents -- in numbers that the intelligence community believes are in the thousands.
According to an intelligence source, the U.S. contractor in charge of the Glocks somehow lost track of an entire shipment. That mysterious disappearance is now part of a massive military bribery investigation centered around a contracting office run out of a small trailer at a military base in Kuwait. Eighteen federal investigators are digging into the actions of dozens of high-ranking U.S officers and military contractors.
Thursday, at a House Armed Services Committee hearing, lawmakers took aim at what the chairman called "a culture of corruption" surrounding billions in Iraq war contracts, but stopped short of publicly saying where some of the weapons wound up.
"The number of folks who have enormous responsibility to this country are involved has, I think, made this a real tragedy for our country,” says Duncan Hunter, the committee's ranking member.
After the hearing, Keteyian confronted Army Lt. General Ross Thompson, who admitted the Inspector General at the Defense of Department is looking at the CIA's evidence.
“We are going to report tonight that thousands of Glock pistols intended for Iraq security forces instead ended up in the hands of insurgents,” says Keteyian.
“What is your reaction to that?"
“I don't know that for a fact,” Thompson says. “It is something that is being investigated by the DOD IG right now and that's something that is not within my responsibility or my area of expertise to comment on, but it is being actively investigated.”
As Congress prepares to send another $2 billion to the Iraq security forces, Dept. of Defense officials testified they are working to find better ways to maintain appropriate accountability and control over military material.
It’s small comfort to American soldiers in Iraq who may now be staring down the barrel of guns paid for by the U.S. government.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/20/cbsnews_investigates/main3283595.shtml
Are Lost U.S. Weapons In Enemy Hands?
Investigation Shows Missing U.S. Weapons May Have Turned Up In The Hands Of Iraqi Insurgents
(CBS) Last month, a government report revealed the U.S. military could not account for 190,000 -- or 30 percent -- of all weapons issued to Iraqi Security Forces between June 2004 and December 2005.
Thursday, Pentagon officials said $88 billion in spending in Iraq and Afghanistan is now under audit by the Department of Defense for fraud.
Now, in his exclusive report CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian has learned some of those missing weapons have ended up in the worst possible hands.
CBS News has learned that the CIA has photographic evidence that Austrian-made Glocks intended for Iraqi security forces and paid for by U.S. taxpayers are now in the hands of Iraqi insurgents -- in numbers that the intelligence community believes are in the thousands.
According to an intelligence source, the U.S. contractor in charge of the Glocks somehow lost track of an entire shipment. That mysterious disappearance is now part of a massive military bribery investigation centered around a contracting office run out of a small trailer at a military base in Kuwait. Eighteen federal investigators are digging into the actions of dozens of high-ranking U.S officers and military contractors.
Thursday, at a House Armed Services Committee hearing, lawmakers took aim at what the chairman called "a culture of corruption" surrounding billions in Iraq war contracts, but stopped short of publicly saying where some of the weapons wound up.
"The number of folks who have enormous responsibility to this country are involved has, I think, made this a real tragedy for our country,” says Duncan Hunter, the committee's ranking member.
After the hearing, Keteyian confronted Army Lt. General Ross Thompson, who admitted the Inspector General at the Defense of Department is looking at the CIA's evidence.
“We are going to report tonight that thousands of Glock pistols intended for Iraq security forces instead ended up in the hands of insurgents,” says Keteyian.
“What is your reaction to that?"
“I don't know that for a fact,” Thompson says. “It is something that is being investigated by the DOD IG right now and that's something that is not within my responsibility or my area of expertise to comment on, but it is being actively investigated.”
As Congress prepares to send another $2 billion to the Iraq security forces, Dept. of Defense officials testified they are working to find better ways to maintain appropriate accountability and control over military material.
It’s small comfort to American soldiers in Iraq who may now be staring down the barrel of guns paid for by the U.S. government.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/20/cbsnews_investigates/main3283595.shtml
Scandalously easy in some cases.
This is a follow-up to an earlier post from something I heard on the CBS news. This just demonstrates the lack of concern from some of our government representatives for necessities that are needed and are often under-funded as our road infrastructures, medical services, public transportation needs, homeless issues, veteran's services, education and so forth.
September 20, 2007, 2:47 PM
"Noah's Ark" Floats On Your Tax Dollars
Posted by Sharyl Attkisson She is an is investigative correspondent for CBS News.
The subject of my report tonight on the Evening News is a half million dollars earmark of federal tax money to help built a child's playpark for a private charity in Los Angeles: the Skirball Cultural Center. The playpark is called "Noah's Ark." What's the controversy? Some believe that federal tax dollars shouldn't be used for such earmarks, especially when it can be argued that many necessities are underfunded. To do this story, I wanted to visit Noah's Ark myself and interview the head of Skirball: Uri Herscher. At first, Skirball said "no." I argued that public money had helped pay for the playpark, after all, and that the Skirball enjoyed non-profit (special tax-exempt) status courtesy of U.S. taxpayers. It just didn't seem right that the Center would try to lock out the press and refuse to do an interview. The Skirball eventually allowed the visit and interview to happen. Noah's Ark is the kind of place most any kid would like to visit. In fact, the playpark has been pretty much sold out every day since it opened a few months back. In the eyes of some fiscal conservatives, that's part of the problem. When I asked just how much money Noah's Ark was bringing in from ticket sales, the Skirball said an average of $16,000 a week. With such success, will taxpayers be repaid on their investment? No. Earmarks don't require any such thing. Here's another issue. I took some time and researched the financial health of the Skirball Cultural Center. It's incredibly wealthy, as far as charities go. It survives off a $100 million endowment. It lists $885 million in gross receipts for 2005 (its most recent tax return). The executives earn healthy six figure salaries and enjoy healthy annual raises. Few would begrudge them that. The question is: is this the type of project that really needs or deserves federal tax money? The third problem raised by some critics of this earmark is that (they say) it circumvents the normal budgetary process. There is money available in the federal budget for arts, museums and other cultural interests. In fact, Congressman Henry Waxman who got the Skirball its earmark told me he'd tried to get funding through the normal process but when it didn't work, he went for the earmark. (It's worth reminding folks here that an earmark is a quick grant of public money by a member of Congress without the normal public review. Often it's a pet project in the home district.) When an earmark is granted, there is no requirement that a budget for the project be presented or verified, no requirement for the requestor to justify the need for money, no competitive factors by which other legitimate projects have a chance to get some of the money, no requirement for proof to be submitted showing how the money was actually spent. A final argument against earmarking for such projects is that there is an endless number of worthy projects in the country, but not nearly enough federal tax dollars to fund all of them. Why should a group that simply knows the right people or the right processes have an advantage over hundreds of thousands... if not millions... of worthy causes and projects that are traditionally funded privately or with state and local funds? The Skirball Center has several friends in Congress. Senator Dianne Feinstein tried to get the Skirball additional earmark money but it didn't work out. And Congressman Waxman twice tried to get the Skirball an extra $1.25 million on top of the $550,000 the Skirball had already received but for technical reasons, that didn't go through either. After having visited Noah's Ark, I'd say if you have kids, happen to be in Los Angeles, and can manage to get tickets, it's worth a visit. Mr. Herscher seems like a great guy and the Skirball press folks are sharp and couldn't have been nicer, once they agreed to let me visit. But it's not as if Noah's Ark wouldn't have been built without your tax money. Mr. Herscher told me if the federal government had turned down the money request, he'd have gotten the cash elsewhere. It's just that the federal money can be so easy to get when you know the right people in Washington. Scandalously easy in some cases.
September 20, 2007, 2:47 PM
"Noah's Ark" Floats On Your Tax Dollars
Posted by Sharyl Attkisson She is an is investigative correspondent for CBS News.
The subject of my report tonight on the Evening News is a half million dollars earmark of federal tax money to help built a child's playpark for a private charity in Los Angeles: the Skirball Cultural Center. The playpark is called "Noah's Ark." What's the controversy? Some believe that federal tax dollars shouldn't be used for such earmarks, especially when it can be argued that many necessities are underfunded. To do this story, I wanted to visit Noah's Ark myself and interview the head of Skirball: Uri Herscher. At first, Skirball said "no." I argued that public money had helped pay for the playpark, after all, and that the Skirball enjoyed non-profit (special tax-exempt) status courtesy of U.S. taxpayers. It just didn't seem right that the Center would try to lock out the press and refuse to do an interview. The Skirball eventually allowed the visit and interview to happen. Noah's Ark is the kind of place most any kid would like to visit. In fact, the playpark has been pretty much sold out every day since it opened a few months back. In the eyes of some fiscal conservatives, that's part of the problem. When I asked just how much money Noah's Ark was bringing in from ticket sales, the Skirball said an average of $16,000 a week. With such success, will taxpayers be repaid on their investment? No. Earmarks don't require any such thing. Here's another issue. I took some time and researched the financial health of the Skirball Cultural Center. It's incredibly wealthy, as far as charities go. It survives off a $100 million endowment. It lists $885 million in gross receipts for 2005 (its most recent tax return). The executives earn healthy six figure salaries and enjoy healthy annual raises. Few would begrudge them that. The question is: is this the type of project that really needs or deserves federal tax money? The third problem raised by some critics of this earmark is that (they say) it circumvents the normal budgetary process. There is money available in the federal budget for arts, museums and other cultural interests. In fact, Congressman Henry Waxman who got the Skirball its earmark told me he'd tried to get funding through the normal process but when it didn't work, he went for the earmark. (It's worth reminding folks here that an earmark is a quick grant of public money by a member of Congress without the normal public review. Often it's a pet project in the home district.) When an earmark is granted, there is no requirement that a budget for the project be presented or verified, no requirement for the requestor to justify the need for money, no competitive factors by which other legitimate projects have a chance to get some of the money, no requirement for proof to be submitted showing how the money was actually spent. A final argument against earmarking for such projects is that there is an endless number of worthy projects in the country, but not nearly enough federal tax dollars to fund all of them. Why should a group that simply knows the right people or the right processes have an advantage over hundreds of thousands... if not millions... of worthy causes and projects that are traditionally funded privately or with state and local funds? The Skirball Center has several friends in Congress. Senator Dianne Feinstein tried to get the Skirball additional earmark money but it didn't work out. And Congressman Waxman twice tried to get the Skirball an extra $1.25 million on top of the $550,000 the Skirball had already received but for technical reasons, that didn't go through either. After having visited Noah's Ark, I'd say if you have kids, happen to be in Los Angeles, and can manage to get tickets, it's worth a visit. Mr. Herscher seems like a great guy and the Skirball press folks are sharp and couldn't have been nicer, once they agreed to let me visit. But it's not as if Noah's Ark wouldn't have been built without your tax money. Mr. Herscher told me if the federal government had turned down the money request, he'd have gotten the cash elsewhere. It's just that the federal money can be so easy to get when you know the right people in Washington. Scandalously easy in some cases.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Skirball's Noah's Ark
I hope others write their representatives about this waste of tax-payers money!
Skirball Noah's Ark -
I heard on the CBS Evening News tonight that over $500,000 was provided for the building of the "Skirball’s Noah's Ark". This was added to the Transportation bill as an attachment.
Wow! This organization needed Federal tax dollars for building this in the name of education? I have to say I am amazed that this was passed, especially when there are public schools lacking funding to improve facilities and so forth, not mention "the Noah's Ark Exhibition" has nothing to do with our transportation infrastructure.
I hope you ask for this money back, or a part of the income collected weekly (Understand it is $16,000 weekly since they opened.); more than just taxes, more like 50% of the weekly income should be returned to the government if not all the $500,000.
Skirball Cultural Center, 2701 North Sepulveda Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90049 Tel: (310) 440-4500
Skirball Noah's Ark -
I heard on the CBS Evening News tonight that over $500,000 was provided for the building of the "Skirball’s Noah's Ark". This was added to the Transportation bill as an attachment.
Wow! This organization needed Federal tax dollars for building this in the name of education? I have to say I am amazed that this was passed, especially when there are public schools lacking funding to improve facilities and so forth, not mention "the Noah's Ark Exhibition" has nothing to do with our transportation infrastructure.
I hope you ask for this money back, or a part of the income collected weekly (Understand it is $16,000 weekly since they opened.); more than just taxes, more like 50% of the weekly income should be returned to the government if not all the $500,000.
Skirball Cultural Center, 2701 North Sepulveda Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90049 Tel: (310) 440-4500
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Hwy. 101 Corridor
I notice in today's Times Standard, that both the City of Eureka Council and County of Humboldt Supervisors chose alternative 3 of the dEIR for the Hwy. 101 Corridor.
I find this interesting, for even choosing this alternative, it seemed that most agree that the document did not actually give much choice, or alternatives to the public. It was as if Caltrans and a few local representatives came up with these as the final choices and there were no other alternatives.
Since then there have been other alternatives presented that provided for a greater increase in environmental protection through the Green Wheels group, as well as a couple others. Our local governments have stated it is now the decision of HCAOG on what alternative will be approved and this will not be made for maybe a year (Funny how they state the decision is now placed on HCAOG. Isn't HCAOG made of the local government? - sounds like the decision has been made, yes?).
Highway 101 will need a lot of improvement to meet the demand of the future and the increase of traffic from a soon visiting crowd coming from the east over an improved Hwy. 299. It also needs to address commuters that move to the east and are buying property and homes in the Klamath-Trinity Area and commuting to work on the coast.
The pedestrian need is also not addressed in alternative 3 of the document, though HCAOG has addressed this need in the form of a bicycle trail along the bay. This should be included in the Caltrans dEIR and provide for alternative travel methods that will be used in the future.
Below is the dEIR address for reviewing the alternatives and information about the Humboldt Bay Trail HCAOG has put together.
http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist1/d1projects/envdocs.htm
http://www.hcaog.net/
Before any of these projects are approved, I believe that more consideration needs to be placed on alternative transportation and other avenues to meet the demands of the future. Even if the current plans are approved, they will not met future needs because by the time these projects are completed, they will be out of date. The projects need to look further than 20 - 25 years ahead, more like 40 - 50 years ahead the best possible.
I find this interesting, for even choosing this alternative, it seemed that most agree that the document did not actually give much choice, or alternatives to the public. It was as if Caltrans and a few local representatives came up with these as the final choices and there were no other alternatives.
Since then there have been other alternatives presented that provided for a greater increase in environmental protection through the Green Wheels group, as well as a couple others. Our local governments have stated it is now the decision of HCAOG on what alternative will be approved and this will not be made for maybe a year (Funny how they state the decision is now placed on HCAOG. Isn't HCAOG made of the local government? - sounds like the decision has been made, yes?).
Highway 101 will need a lot of improvement to meet the demand of the future and the increase of traffic from a soon visiting crowd coming from the east over an improved Hwy. 299. It also needs to address commuters that move to the east and are buying property and homes in the Klamath-Trinity Area and commuting to work on the coast.
The pedestrian need is also not addressed in alternative 3 of the document, though HCAOG has addressed this need in the form of a bicycle trail along the bay. This should be included in the Caltrans dEIR and provide for alternative travel methods that will be used in the future.
Below is the dEIR address for reviewing the alternatives and information about the Humboldt Bay Trail HCAOG has put together.
http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist1/d1projects/envdocs.htm
http://www.hcaog.net/
Before any of these projects are approved, I believe that more consideration needs to be placed on alternative transportation and other avenues to meet the demands of the future. Even if the current plans are approved, they will not met future needs because by the time these projects are completed, they will be out of date. The projects need to look further than 20 - 25 years ahead, more like 40 - 50 years ahead the best possible.
An Unknown View
In future posts, the views presented will represent the thoughts of an individual with a disability, hence the blog name "An Unknown View". I state this because my view is much like anyone elses, but only because I am seen for the chair I use that many times others decide they know what is needed and don't take the time to look at the disabled person thoughts or feelings, especially when it comes to their needs.
Anyhow, will add more in the very near future and hope we all keep an open mind as it pertains to our individual lives - it is okay to disagree, but it is important to remember to respect the idea and thought presented.
Anyhow, will add more in the very near future and hope we all keep an open mind as it pertains to our individual lives - it is okay to disagree, but it is important to remember to respect the idea and thought presented.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
