03-31-2023, 04:52 PM
(03-31-2023, 04:36 PM)jacket3ree Wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if they all are. That gives Cal Trans the power to intervene as they see fit. My opinion is that they should let the city do what it wants unless there is some overwhelming transportation related reason to intervene and stop it. Intervening for esthetic reasons is, IMO, unnecessary and unwise. The people of Burlingame should be allowed to decide what they like and what they don't like. Cal Trans shouldn't have to pay for such actions (unless they have reason to), but shouldn't get in the way without "good reason".(03-28-2023, 11:34 AM)Goose Wrote: IMO the Cal Trans authority along 82 in Burlingame regarding trees should be limited to questions of traffic obstruction. It the city wants to do something that obstructs traffic, Cal Trans could possibly veto it. If the City wants to remove trees, that doesn't obstruct traffic and Cal Trans should stay out of it. It just isn't the States business IMO. It makes everything harder when you get more agencies involved, many of which have no obvious interest in the issue at hand.
I suspect some or perhaps many of those trees are within State right-of-way.
