Jump to content






Photo
- - - - -

General Plan Update Website, Nothing Substantive


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 maestro

maestro

    Superstar

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts

Posted 07 February 2017 - 11:49 AM

You can fool all of the people some of the time.    City had 2 choices for commercial feedback collection.   They hired MindMixer -- like before.   The city draft document online is revolting:  only one sentence is devoted to public infrastructure handling raw sewage, and one for stormwater.  

Here's my feedback:   give us Engineered Reports to evaluate.   Tell us what the Geotechnical Reports say about building on loose rock piles.   Release Youngdahl Geotech Reports to all, because lots of this place are rock piles, and are not safe.   42 gas leaks in < 12 sq miles!!

 

Oh well, same old...    here's a statement describing difference between Mindmixer and MetroQuest:

 

.Key Differences Between MetroQuest and MindMixer

 

Breadth and number of participants desired

How important is it to engage the widest demographic and attract the most participants possible?

 

 

MindMixer: Attracts the most enthusiastic and motivated stakeholders.
Tools like MindMixer, which require people to register before participating, attract about 90% less participants compared to tools that allow users to participate instantly. The reason is simple: on average only 10% of visitors (typically the most motivated stakeholders) are willing to register before participating in a planning project. On projects where both MetroQuest and MindMixer were used, MetroQuest collected input from approximately 10x the number of participants compared with MindMixer.

 

 

MetroQuest: Attracts a large number of participants from a broad demographic.
To maximize participation visitors can begin contributing instantly with MetroQuest as there is no mandatory registration step. The result is typically 10x the number of participants compared with tools with mandatory registration. To avoid the possibility of people abusing the system, MetroQuest has a sophisticated fraud detection capability so it’s easy to identify and eliminate any abusers. MetroQuest collects demographic information and email addresses at the end when people are most invested in the project.

 

 



#2 kcrides99

kcrides99

    Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 220 posts

Posted 07 February 2017 - 04:52 PM

Another rambling diatribe on engineering certificates....

Perhaps your time would be better spent looking at the land use map that shows south of south of 50 i.e. South of white rock road as a "future study area".

I don't want to see any more growth south of 50 but this opens the door for that to be considered. THAT is what people should be scared of or at least concerned by, not which company the city uses

#3 Chris

Chris

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,857 posts
  • Location:Folsom CA

Posted 07 February 2017 - 09:07 PM

Another rambling diatribe on engineering certificates....

Perhaps your time would be better spent looking at the land use map that shows south of south of 50 i.e. South of white rock road as a "future study area".

I don't want to see any more growth south of 50 but this opens the door for that to be considered. THAT is what people should be scared of or at least concerned by, not which company the city uses

I agree, never really know what her point is....?  I got a sharp pain in my head when I read her post, painful, disjointed, and rambling composition as always.   Are you going to sue the city again Maestro and cost us all a bunch of money....?  And building on loose rock piles...?  If that is a problem then most of Folsom is in deep doo doo, to use a scientific term....  Oh, and I'm a geologist by the way...   And I am not worried.  Chris


1A - 2A = -1A


#4 ducky

ducky

    untitled

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,115 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 08 February 2017 - 09:04 AM

I am happy to report that my neighborhood is also built on "loose rocks" and seems to be doing fine 60 years later.

 

The update is also going to be addressing infill in current Folsom as well as what will happen South of 50.  

The Folsom Telegraph has a story about how schools are already getting to capacity, and they are talking about restricting inter-district transfers and such.  South of 50 already has plans to build new schools.

So there might be reasons to attend even if you don't care about what happens S50, i.e., schools, traffic, parking issues, water supply, increased costs to current residents are just a few things that come to mind.

 

There is a Planning Commission Workshop Wednesday, February 15 at 6:30.  Historic District is at 5:00 on the same date.

Parks and Recreation Commission Workshop Tuesday, March 7 at 6:30.

City Council Workshop is Tuesday, March 21 at 6:30.

 

For questions, call 355-7222.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users