Comments on: Share your ideas for downtown Hayward at meeting tomorrow

By: Kathi Booth

Kathi Booth — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 20:45:29 +0000

I support leaving Big Mike on the header…He was and is a part of Hayward history.

By: Michael Moore

Michael Moore — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 17:57:28 +0000

Eric,

Please leave Big Mike up on your Hayword Blog header.

By: John Kyle

John Kyle — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 07:33:47 +0000

Ms. Blair

Wonder how Paul Bunyon the forest woodsman made it to the muffler Biz?

If he returns will he be associated with a particular biz?

Perhaps a ‘bouncer’ at a bawdy house?

By: Sherry Blair

Sherry Blair — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:16:43 +0000

Fortunately, you and I still have free speech and Eric can chose whatever he wants for his header regardless of what we say.

By: John Kyle

John Kyle — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:48:40 +0000

I RECALL AN ARGUMENT, DURING THE CITY COUNCIL’S REVIEW OF A PLAN DEPARTMENT APPROVAL INVOLVING A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WHICH WAS TO CONTAIN A LARGE COUNT OF HOMES BUT WHICH INJVOLVED ONLY ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE BASIC FLOOR PLANS INVOLVING TWO STORY CONSTRUCTION FOR EACH.

One council person argued extensively against the window arrangement and their sizes as planned for the front (street Side) elevations. He thoroughly disliked the window arrangement. Thought that it lacked balance in size etc etc. argued for a reduction of the area which was to consist of glass, wanted the large windows at lower level with smaller ones at top etc etc.
It had to be explained, in some time consuming detail what the California State building code proscribed as to the ratio of floor space to window area etc. etc. Developer’s spokesman went into great detail about the window area ratio minimums which are tied to floor area, etc etc. The tail twisting by developer’s advocate went so far as to state, that the home model in question was one of the most popular in applicant’s developments at other locations within other communities Further, the required ratio of glass to floor space had to be met…..California has window space to floor area ratios which must be met, even down to areas which must be ‘operable’
Well perhaps I am too argumentative, I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT HAVE CHOSEN THAT PLAN HAD I BEEN IN A POSITION TO NEED A HOME IN THAT LOCALE….SOME OF THOSE WINDOWS REQUIRED AN INTERIOR USE OF A LENGTHY LADDER AND MY WIFE, BEING THRIFTY AS WELL AS POSSESSED BY A FEAR OF HEIGHT ON A LADDER WOULD HAVE PASSED THE EXPENSIVE LABOR PROBLEM TO ME… AND BEING REASONABLY JEALOUS OF MY PERSONAL TIME, WOULD HAVE PASSED ON THAT PARTICULAR PLAN.
I SPENT 30 OF MY FORTY YEAARS IN THE BANKING BUSINESS Laboring as Real Estate Appraiser. I was not confined to appraisal of ‘cookie cutter housing’ but spent better than half my time delivering appraisal numbers as well as a critique of land value trends within a reasonable distance to the subjects of commercial, industrial and special purpose properties.
So my attitude, such as it is, is to do what the early Christians feared most, a thumbs down from the mob at the arena!
Poor mike, your era has passed, my thumb points down rather than up!
I suspect Mike’s new owner will be met by negativity when or if a permit for re-installation is requested.

By: John Kyle

John Kyle — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:39:06 +0000

Ms. Blair;
Relative to our differing viewpoint on the subject of ‘Big Mike….’
Perhaps it is poor analogy but a ‘spin’ on your comment might lead to cancellation of the ‘supporting arguments’ for the existence of a CITY’S PLANNING DEPT. The purpose of the planning Department, in a broad view, is to assure not only a supply of decent safe and sanitary housing which complies with adopted standards of safety in construction, but to also assure a certain measure of compliance in what some see as an intrusion into design of a structure. In short, would you accept introduction of something akin to San Jose’s mystery house if the opportunity for such arose at a location in close proximity to your own investment in a home?
There are times when our City Fathers disagree amongst themselves in which case we come to understand why that august body has an odd number of participants. No tie votes tie which only delay ‘the process’.
I RECALL AN ARGUMENT, DURING THE CITY COUNJCIL’S REVIEW OF A PLAN DEPARTMENT APPROVAL INVOLVING A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WHICH WAS TO CONTAIN A LARGE COUNT OF HOMES BUT WHICH INJVOLVED ONLY ABOUT FOR OR FIVE BASIC FLOOR PLANS INVOLVING TWO STORY CONSTRUCTION FOR EACH.
One council person argued extensively against the window arrangement and their sizes as planned for the front (street Side) elevations. He thoroughly disliked the window arrangement. Thought that it lacked balance in size etc etc. argued for a reduction of the area which was to consist of glass, wanted the large windows at lower level with smaller ones at top etc etc.
It had to be explained, in some time consuming detail what the California State building code proscribed as to the ratio of floor space to window area etc. etc. Developer’s spokesman went into great detail about the window area ratio minimums which are tied to floor area, etc etc. The tail twisting by developer’s advocate went so far as to state, that the home model in question was one of the most popular in applicant’s developments at other locations within other communities Further, the required ratio of glass to floor space had to be met…..California has window space to floor area ratios which must be met, even down to areas which must be ‘operable’
Well perhaps I am too argumentative, I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT HAVE CHOSEN THAT PLAN HAD I BEEN IN A POSITION TO NEED A HOME IN THAT LOCALE….SOME OF THOSE WINDOWS REQUIRED AN INTERIOR USE OF A LENGTHY LADDER AND MY WIFE, BEING THRIFTY AS WELL AS POSSESSED BY A FEAR OF HEIGHT ON A LADDER WOULD HAVE PASSED THE EXPENSIVE LABOR PROBLEM TO ME… AND BEING REASONABLY JEALOUS OF MY PERSONAL TIME, WOULD HAVE PASSED ON THAT PARTICULAR PLAN.
I SPENT 30 OF MY FORTY YEAARS IN THE BANKING BUSINESS Laboring as Real Estate Appraiser. I was not confined to appraisal of ‘cookie cutter housing’ but spent better than half my time delivering appraisal numbers as well as a critique of land value trends within a reasonable distance to the subjects of commercial, industrial and special purpose properties.
So my attitude, such as it is, is to do what the early Christians feared most, a thumbs down from the mob at the arena!
Poor mike, your era has passed, my thumb points down rather than up!
I suspect Mike’s new owner will be met by negativity when or if a permit for re-installation is requested.

By: Sherry Blair

Sherry Blair — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 13:39:27 +0000

Eric. Please don’t remove Big Mike from the Hayword header.

I see no reason to destroy things that others find of value just because some don’t. Big Mike is important to many including the Hayward Historical Society.

Even if a vote were taken as Mr. Kyle suggests, and if the majority did not want to preserve Big Mike, in our country a minority of one is valued. Didn’t we see enough of the destruction of whole cultures in our history?

Personally, I think forgetting that principle, believing everything has to be a competition with winners and losers is what is leading us to a lack of compassion for each other and a consequent lack of respect for individual human rights. The only result can be a very nasty kind of group-think.

By: teachermama

teachermama — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 04:38:23 +0000

Qodrn, you have me laughing out loud. Who is their marketing rep? Top notch stuff.

By: qodrn

qodrn — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 02:39:25 +0000

In today’s mail:

The Lone Tree Cemetary wants me, dead apparently.
They are having a 50% off special “in select locations.”

Anyway, with the discount a double grave (dug four feet lower than a single) costs $4,997. A single side by side costs $3550 (I assume per plot). Niches for your jar of ashes go for $1187. There is a 10% discount with cash.

I can’t afford to live; I can’t afford to die either. Guess I better pay more attention to those old folks life insurance commercials.

Lone Tree really needs to start a collection to fix up the William Hayward memorial area on the side of the hill. It’s kind of wrinkled.

By: John Kyle

John Kyle — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:34:11 +0000

All;
Is it not an appropriate time to remove the ‘Big Mike’
image from the blog banner above.

WHY ENCOURAGE HIS RETURN? IT DETRACTS FROM THE IMAGE OF ‘DOWN TOWN’ WHICH, AS WE ALL KNOW, NEEDS A BOOST!

IT SHOULD BE SUBJECTED TO A VOTE BY THE ‘MASSES’ CURRENTLY SEEN AS CONTRIBUTORS TO THE BLOG.

PERHAPS CITY OF PLEASANTON WILL PERMIT INSTALLATI0ON AT EITHER THE FAIRGROUNDS OR THEIR PRESTIGIOUS MALL?

OR SEND HIM TO NEVADA FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE ‘BURNING MAN’ SAGA….??