Mailbag - June 20, 2000

Gail Perkins says it all in her letter (Mailbag, June 8; “Grass-roots

group criticizes 17th Street plan,” June 1). But I wish to add that it

really ticks me off to read so often that we, the city, must do this or

do that to get a government handout.

The federal and state bureaucrats know nothing of, nor do they care

about, real local needs. That’s our money to begin with.

City transportation director Peter Naghavi, who seems to be more

interested in getting the federal handout than the quality of life for

local citizens, says we must make East 17th Street a six-lane

thoroughfare (speedway) to get our share of the federal grant. Talk about

Big Brother.

I wish the best of luck to community activist Dan Perlmutter and the

committee of business owners and residents, with their sensible proposal

that would enhance the appearance of East 17th Street and alleviate a

large part of the traffic problem. I don’t hold out much hope, however.

Money is king these days and local governments will continue to grovel

and do as they are told by Washington and Sacramento, to hopefully get a

handout. Local citizens are smiled upon and acknowledged, but that’s

about as far as it goes.

JOHN NETTEL

Costa Mesa

Traffic problems are driving reader mad

Today, I think I hit the wall. I have been reading your excellent

coverage of:

1. The Dunes project

2. The proposed airport at the El Toro Marine air base and the attempt to

override the wishes of the citizens.

3. The attempts to go around the traffic mitigation proposed by the

Greenlight initiative

4. The proposal to create six lanes on 17th Street

All of these affect my small corner of Newport Beach, and I am beginning

to wonder how I will be able to drive without my heart in my throat at

the speed of the other people on the roads--all equally frustrated

drivers.

Jamboree Road is already a nightmare most of the time.

I have lived in Newport Beach since 1966; I have raised my children here,

and they either work or live here.

I am and have always been very active in community activities, including

the Neighborhood Watch sponsored by the Police Department.

What is happening to this gracious city? Is there nothing we can do? My

heart is broken, and I am sure that I am not alone.

ROSALIE KFOURX

Newport Beach

Terrance Phillips is right about Mariner’s Mile

Congratulations to Terrance Phillips for his column (“Nautical heritage

is slipping away,” June 12) regarding the change in Mariner’s Mile to

“Automotive/Fast Food Mile.”

It is ironic that on that same day your front page headline read: “Can

city have growth and keep its character?,” albeit in an article relating

to Costa Mesa.

If Costa Mesa is to look to the example of Newport Beach, the answer at

present may be no.

The problem with Mariner’s Mile is the same as evidenced by other similar

issues existing within the city. The planners and leaders of this city

were once criticized for allegedly being “antibusiness.” If that was ever

true, it is certainly a distant memory today.

The results today of the planning process--when it comes to traditional

or unique properties or areas within the city--reflects no focus on the

preservation of tradition, sites of historical importance or areas of

unique character, such as the Newport Dunes.

The demise of Mariner’s Mile (as it once was and as it was once

conceived) is no different from the imminent demise of the Newport Dunes

area, as a result of the proposed “world-class destination resort” sought

to be built by Evans Hotels.

It is actually not difficult to envision the appearance and character of

Newport Beach in 20 or more years from now. One need only visit areas

such as Marina del Rey and Belmont Shores.

Obviously in some instances, such as Mariner’s Mile (as distinguished

from the Newport Dunes), this is not as simple as city planning. Actual

private property ownership issues are involved, and private owners of

property have vested interests with respect to the use of their land.

Property owners, however, come and go; and their ideas will vary with

respect to the use of their land and profits to be obtained from it.

The responsibility for preservation of traditions and the environment of

the city rests with elected and appointed city officials, who should

have, in many instances, a longer-range view and even a different agenda

where certain areas are concerned. That is their responsibility to the

city and to their constituents.

Phillips is right. A Jiffy Lube and a “world-class destination resort”

have a lot more in common than might seem at first glance.

STEVEN E. BRIGGS

Newport Beach