The predatory litigious "Baykeeper" is at it again- only this time they got caught: Apparently, Pete Nichols don't need no stinkin' permits. But he'll sure sue the shit out of you if you didn't have one.
Baykeeper apparently "sidestepped regulatory agency procedures when it conducted a chemical dye test last week on Eureka’s Waterfront.
...Humboldt Baykeeper did not provide the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board the requested paperwork the agency needed to determine if a permit was necessary to conduct a fluorescent tracer test on the Balloon Track property.
...Humboldt Baykeeper didn’t comment on why it didn’t provide the Regional Water Board with the information it asked for.
Dave Evans,,, said the agency had not received a requested written description from Baykeeper on the specific testing to make a determination whether a permit would be required or if a waiver could be granted.
“We didn’t know what the purpose was because they didn’t submit the requested information,” Evans said.
Nichols stated only one drop of the non-toxic, biodegradable fluorescent dye was used by its consultants to trace the discharge."
BUT - "...An SHN Consulting Engineers & Geologists employee representing SN’s Marina Center project was among the more than 20 people who were present for the testing and observed the approximately one liter dye solution being poured into the water.
...Brian Morrissey, senior vice president for Security National, said it is ironic that Baykeeper chose to ignore the Regional Water Board and didn’t obtain a required permit, which he said was the basis for the environmental group’s lawsuit against SN.
...In May 2007, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White ruled to dismiss eight of the 11 Baykeeper’s charges in the lawsuit against Union Pacific and SN.
The remaining three claims from the lawsuit filed March last year, allege violations of the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and Clean Water Act, as well as a failure of the land owner to apply for a National Pollution Discharge Elimination permit for storm water discharge."
Word on the street is "Baykeeper" is complaining that they are being "picked on." That's rich. There's not much oversight of the predatory orgs - but the Water Board certainly has some rights to monitor them and they are apparently sidestepping even that basic procedure. There's big money in this for them - How can anyone trust them?
The trouble with these guys - who is to verify the accuracy of their tests? Their own labs? Who is to say if they follow proper procedure? Who monitors the chain of command of the samples they take? Who knows whether samples get spiked or not? Switched or not? Maybe someone should sue "Baykeeper."
But just as a side note - if no one owned the property, if it was sitting there in limbo - would the water still be running into the ditches? Who would care? How would "Baykeeper" make any money if there were no rich pockets to try to pick?
One drop of a non-toxic dye. So what? Talk about spin, they dump thousands of gallons of the same thing in the river in Chicago every year for St. Patrick's Day.
ReplyDeleteIf the DA caught wind of me or you doing anything like this ,we would be charge with a crime. If you didn't believe BK's dishonesty from their phony dioxon samples to the coastal comm. or their crap with the water board to get the bay a toxic listing or buying seats on the harbor dst. then this should do the trick. It's all about power,it's all about money,it's all about the new "good old boys" dishonest network with agencies,grants and cool pot/cocktail parties.
ReplyDeleteA liter of ,who knows what,dye. With these arrogant phonies who will do or say anything to get their way how can they ever be trusted. Every agency ,buisness group or concerned citizen should demand they be prosecuted and run out of town. Disdainful action.
ReplyDeleteOn a similar note. Did you see that our #1 midget(Mark Loveless) along with David Simpson HWC have joined in with the Nature Conservacy to try to buy PL. Why would little old mark have worked so hard to devalue the PL property? No question now.
ReplyDeleteOne drop of a non-toxic dye. So what?
ReplyDeleteYep! So what?
Question is - what would be happening - and what would you be saying if the shoe was on the other foot?
For that matter, what were you saying when "Baykeeper" filed their suit and one of their points was that a permit had not been applied for?
How much do you think "Baykeeper" intends to make off that little lawsuit?
And 1:34 - I absolutely agree - there is something in this Palco deal for Mark Lovelace - he got way way way too involved and upset about the TPZ thing - even going to far as to completely pillory many of the people who would have been his base of supporters.
ReplyDeleteHe was WAY to willing to let them be collateral damage.
I think you're going to get to see the real picture pretty soon.
And hey,these guys are just doing their job . Right? Getting a pay check. Heck,they're just a couple working stiffs.
ReplyDeleteUsual, typical, better-than-you, hypocrite, money-grubbing enviro-blackmailing terrorists. Scammers.
ReplyDeleteQther than the generalalites in the slur I'd have to agree with your point.
ReplyDeleteRose,
ReplyDeleteAre you related to Patricia Welch?
Nope.
ReplyDeleteI just hope that they decide to build something other than Home Depot on that site
ReplyDeleteI just hope they build what ever they want on the ballon trac.it's their property and it's not water front.
ReplyDeleteWhat 7:45 fails to appreciate is that Home Depot is only a vehicle that enables a building to be built. Home Depot may be a temporary tenant, here only as long as it serves a purpose, then there will come other tenants, but the building will remain, as an asset for the town and the community. Like the Carson Block Building, the Feuerwerker Building in Arcata and others, they will go on.
ReplyDeleteIt is nothing to be afraid of. The rhetoric is the dogma that stops you from thinking, and keeps you afraid.
"but the building will remain, as an asset for the town and the community."
ReplyDeleteReally? A big cheap steel frame building built on a huge pad of concrete? Rose, these are the cheapest buildings you can build. It's basically just a big metal warehouse.
If a new tenant came in, I'm sure they'd look to replace the building. Unless they were another big box store. They they'd feel right at home.
Comparing the Carson Block Building to a big box warehouse?
ReplyDeleteApples to Oranges Rose
Every construction project Arkley has been involved in has improved the look of things in Eureka. The design of the Marina Center includes alot more than just a Home Depot, it includes office space and apartments - from what I have seen. Who wouldn't want an office in a location like that? It is definitely an asset.
ReplyDeleteThe vast majority if a warehouse and parking lot. Just look at their computer rendering.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.marinacenter.org/images/BalloonCreatedWetlandsView.jpg
OF COURSE IT IS.
ReplyDeleteSo you'll take a few office and apartment buildings in trade for a giant warehouse and parking lot?
ReplyDeleteIf so, I'll leave it there.
In trade for what? The garbage infested swamp that is there now? Yeah. I'll take Home Depot. To me it is no different than Montgomery Wards was on the now Target site. Eureka is a city. It's one reason I don't live there.
ReplyDeleteYou should realize that there have been many many many developments and subdivisions over the years that people thought were the end of the world - and had they been stopped I would warrant that you yourself may not have a place to live today, you yourself may be shopping in the shopping center that was the Marina Center of its day. The world didn't end.
I guess you're saying you'll take whatever you can get, because that is better than an empty lot.
ReplyDeleteOkay, fine. Progress is progress right?
The great planners of San Francisco in the 50's felt the same way when they built freeways along the Waterfront and thru the neighborhoods, carving them in half.
Progress.
And no, OF COURSE it isn't the end of the world, But is it a positive addition? Objective question.
Not a question of "take what I can get" - it isn't my property. If I owned it, what would I do? Hard to say.
ReplyDeleteMost likely I would not buy there, even if I had the money.
Is it a positive addition? Taken on the whole - yes. The derelict beaten down rotting nature of our waterfront "development" to date has not been. It is progress for progress' sake? No. The man bought the land. He has the means to develop it. It will be an asset. How is it any different than Goldan and Vellutini's plan? It's a bit bigger, may possibly be nicer, given the resources...
I don't really care what businesses go in - but I recognize the value of an anchor as a draw to bring prosperity to any shops that locate there. If your objection is to Home Depot, what would you propose? - (deleted some snarky remarks in an attempt to stay in the "objective realm) -
I think the Vellutini plan is a thousand times better than a metal warehouse.
ReplyDeleteHave you seen their renderings?
http://www.eurekapier.com/images/pier.jpg
I guess I'd like to see development in there that didn't require as much parking as they are currently showing. And buildings that really look like they belong on the waterfront, not I-5. What does that mean? Not exactly sure.
ReplyDeleteI heard that at one point they were speaking with the folks from Lost Coast Brewery. I would have loved to see a large scale microbrew manufacturing and retail complex there, possibly for some of the other great microbreweries in the area as well. The Northwest doesn't really have a destination for beer lovers given all the great labels. It would be great to see a collaboration between some of those producers.
That would be a fantastic idea. The Brewery people have a can-do attitude, so they'd be a good fit.
ReplyDeleteYou know, years ago, Lazio's was the only restaurant on the waterfront - and it didn't even have windows facing the bay - the fish cleaning part of the operation was between the restaurant and the bay. Cafe Marina was a welcome change to that - and I would assume that there will be more, isn't Curley's coming?
ReplyDeleteThe old warehouses have been rotting away, and it is time for revitalization, new places, new restaurants, new shops, little parks tucked in... There've been people over the years with the vision, like Bob Imperiale, but few have had resources. Now you have an opportunity, reminiscent of the days when Imperiale and a few others revitalized Old Town. It takes a particular synergy, and naysayers have no place there.
Eureka needs some beautification.
That's just my opinion
"Eureka needs some beautification.
ReplyDeleteThat's just my opinion"
I completely agree 100%. I just think the current proposal misses the mark by a wide margin.
If they could somehow develop a walkable place such as the current Old Town area, then possibly bridge the gap to create a great place. It could happen!
Seafood processing and retail market is a great idea as well. It just makes sense to start with ideas that take advantage of the site.
Call me crazy, but I would bet alot of options were considered, as things were narrowed down and choices were made. Even as it stands now - things are probably fluid, and what ends up, ow who ends up where might be very different. It looks to me like alot of thought went into making it a destination point, and make it a pleasing environment for the shoppers and shop owners alike.
ReplyDeleteThe question is will it be successful - in five years, which will still be operating - the Marina Center shops or the EcoHostel?
If I were to guess?
ReplyDeleteI'd say the Marina Center proposal falls apart because of the traffic congestion issues, and the eco-hostel plans will be compete, but there won't be anything built because they will still be looking for major grants.
Just a guess-
Ever play Sim City?
ReplyDeleteWhen I was a kid. I enjoyed watching the buildings turn into thriving towers. And it only took acouple of days to have a thriving city!
ReplyDeleteDo you people forget we live on a fault line? what do you want it to be built of straw?
ReplyDelete