Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Print Edition
Classifieds
Stories
Events
Contests
Music
Movies
Theater
Food
Life Events
Cannabis
May 15, 2024
May 8, 2024
May 1, 2024
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
Close
May 15, 2024
May 8, 2024
May 1, 2024
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
May 15, 2024
May 8, 2024
May 1, 2024
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
Close
Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Would Kate Turn in Her Grave?
It would have been nice if your "Stringer" actually actually attempted to do some real reporting and investigated some of the alleged "facts" thrown about at this meeting. Were there 65 calls made to the police during the period in question? what was the breakdown of these calls? for all we know it could have been for dogs off the leash, teenagers smoking weed in their cars, homeless passed out on the grass, etc. How about checking the origins of the non-alcohol parks? A cursory review of the city ordinances would reveal that the vast majority banning drinking are associated with parks shared with recreation complexes or with schools. A simple talk with the Parks and Recreation district manager at the meeting provides the additional information that this was not the definitive meeting and that the proposal must also be presented to and voted on AT LEAST by the Coastal Area Committee of the Park and Recreation Councils, the Park and Recreation Board, the Land Use and Housing Committee and the City Council. Some were of the opinion that it would need to go to a full City-wide vote, claiming this park was exempted as part of the beach alcohol ban ordinance.— January 30, 2010 1:19 p.m.
No Trucks
where did this one square mile explosion info come from? sounds exaggerated. The roadways mentioned are major feeder streets by the way; besides having residences on there there is commercial development as well. Perhaps the methane can be put onto a barge and transported that way if it is that inherently dangerous to transport. There must be examples of what other cities are doing-- did the NIMBY's look into this to help solve the problem?— September 13, 2009 7:14 p.m.
San Diego off-leash citations
Interesting article- alot of fecophobes out there! Another unofficial off-leash area not mentioned is Western Hills Park in Bay Park. It is frequented by neighbors from Bay Park who like to exercise with their 4-legged companions. It is located at the corner of Garfield and Kane, off Milton Street.— July 9, 2009 10:10 p.m.
Dog owners and non-motor boats battle over Mission Bay
The blame still lies with Parks and Recreation. If the design consultants were told from the beginning that the people using the dog area constituted an existing user group that was not to be displaced then none of this would have occurred. Another solution would have been found that works for the paddlers. This whole situation shows the disdain that Parks and Recreation holds for people whose chosen form of recreation is running/walking off-leash with their dogs. We were told by them years ago to GO TO FIESTA ISLAND when we attempted to establish more neighborhood dog parks in PB. After following their directive they now tell us too bad, we are going to develop the area you use to run with your dogs into parking/roads/fences etc. I find the whole thing despicable.— February 6, 2009 2:40 p.m.
Dog owners and non-motor boats battle over Mission Bay
Don Bauder, isn' t your role as writer to report the facts? I am shocked that you are lobbying for one group to fight another, and suggesting organizing tactics. Is this your responsibility as a reporter? Frankly I find it astonishing. Where is your integrity? You were once a voice in the wilderness. Now you appear to be nothing more than a shill provoking a fight. Writing your column from Colorado-- hmmm, did you go to the site and see how the road right down the middle would bisect the area and destroy its integrity? Did you walk the area and see the topography involved? Perhaps we could build a road through the middle of your back yard to the nearest boat dock. It would only take 10% of your lawn. No biggie.— February 5, 2009 10:30 p.m.
Dog owners and non-motor boats battle over Mission Bay
As a disabled person and a dog owner that uses the off-leash area at Fiesta Island I am very saddened to see the paddler representative bring disabled people and cancer survivors into the discussion. Do we do a head count of how many disabled people, cancer survivors, children and families recreate in the different ways and whoever has the most wins? Be real. The Dept of Parks and Recreation is to blame for all this by trying to take away a large, intact dog area that was established by ordinance in 1972. Somebody in Parks and Rec. made the decision to do this without consulting anybody and told the consultant to design it this way. The rest is all window dressing. Parks and Rec. management has always been against off-leash recreation. It had to be forced by the City Council in 2000 to establish off-leash areas in the city. At that time District 3 had 2 off-leash areas, due to the efforts of Chris Kehoe/Toni Atkins' but there were no others in the entire city other than Fiesta Island and dog beach. Those came from the 1972 ordinance banning off-leash dogs on all the beaches. This city is broke- haven't you been driving around lately on our pot-holed streets? If Park and Rec are bound and determined to develop Fiesta Island then don't take away space from the existing users; finding another economical location for new users only makes sense.— February 5, 2009 8:41 p.m.