taking footprints

leave only footprints, take only memories. nah, i am taking my footprints with me.

9.07.2001

don't wanna miss these camel races!!! hurry! tickets will sell out soon!

i was pondering comic character's ears this morning. some comics hide the ears and pretend they don't exist. some draw them as silly representations. and some just us the generic looking'c' shape. are ears that hard to draw? i think way way too much. i eat too much i drink too much too much too much. (damn. i can never say too much without that one popping into my head)

happy fucking friday. just my usual Friday greeting. started saying that long ago, i am still not sure why. What? you wanted to know why i quit environmental planning? why i was so frustrated with the job? i wanted to save the world! create areas planned for people & the environment, not for developer's wallets. perfect example here.

the airport here in sacramento was built in 1967. they built it in a logical place, about 10 miles from the city center, in an area that was surrounded by a floodplain. residential growth is not allowed in these areas due to this potential for flooding. about four years ago, the dams and levees in the area were reinforced. this pulled the area around the airport (natomas) out of the flood zone it was in, allowing for development. the developers, with big dollar signs in their eyes began developments almost immediately. i wrote environmental impact reports and negative declarations (CEQA) for housing 'planned communities' (just shitty suburban development) in the area.

i KNEW this would happen. the airport? been there for 34 years. the noise does not bother anyone. so what is just the logical thing to put next to it? HOUSING? i don't think so. i said it when i was writing the neg decs - they are going to build these houses, and everyone that lives in them is going to bitch about noise and sue the airport. DUH. the airport was there FIRST. YOU chose to buy a house near it. the airport did not choose to put itself next to you.

this is why environmental planning frustrated me. anyone with half a brain could figure out there would be noise conflicts in this area. however, due to the environmental policies, as long as the projected noise imapacts were within the allowed levels (which is still LOUD), there was not a 'significant impact' and there were not findings in the neg dec or EIR that would prevent development. logically, the noise impacts would be too much for many people. but policy-wise? nothing to stop the development

it makes me angry. and bummed. why do we continue this fucked up development pattern? i know, i know. it's all about money. grr.

it's Friday take care of yourself today. take a nap. you deserve it. whether it is to curl up under your desk george costanza style, or to go to a park at lunch and lay under the trees on this gorgeous early autumn day, do it. corporate america needs to realize we are people, not machines, and sometimes there are more important things than work.

hmm. might have to check this maze out. oh and speaking of mays, comment should be working this afternoon. thanks, mays.


0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home