Meeting cancelled, changed to November 21st, 2011 (rev. 11/7/11)
The Planning Commission meeting is located at City
Council Chambers, 2212 Beach Boulevard, 2nd floor, from 7pm, Monday
November 7, 2011. The public is welcome to attend, or view on Pacifica Community Television live feed http://www.pct26.com/ .
 |
| Thank you Pacifica! |
PC Agenda 11/7/2011, 19 pages. Public hearing: Certify the Final Environmental Report (EIR), site development permit, use permit and sign permit for construction of a 3-story, 96 unit
Assisted Living Center at 721 Oddstad Boulevard. The project includes 3 buildings and underground parking. San Pedro Creek boarders 2-sides of the property, located behind a single-family house at 725 Oddstad Boulevard. The site is approximately 2 acres of land, previous use was agricultural. Current zoning is C-1 (neighborhood commercial), no change.
Reference. Final EIR, 10/2011, on city website, broken into sections. Previous
DEIR, 5/2011, 72 pages. Project applicant: Ken Winters (Contact), WDM Marketing Consultants, LLC , San Francisco, on behalf of the owner, Cabot Sheley. Applicants Agent: JC Engineering, Pacifica.
Submitted by Jim Wagner
Posted by Kathy Meeh
25 comments:
Wouldn't this be nice for Pacifica? Please.
presumably all adjacent homeowners find some fault with this project. These opponents will demand all sorts of restrictions. Wonder if those same creek side homeowners will take the same remodel restrictions on their homes and backyards to protect the creek and fish. Danger: hypocrisy approaching!
"Environmentalists" NIMBYS oppose this project, according to an article by Rich Zipkin on Riptide. So, what does that mean for "normal" people? In summary: The needed long-term-care facility is good for our community and should be built without destroying its viability in planning and approval regulations.
Let's do this.
I am part of an environmental group called Protectors of San Pedro Creek. We are trying to stop developers from constructing the multi-building, multilevel Oddstad Assisted Living Center at 721 Oddstad Boulevard in Pacifica. We are not against assisted living as such. It is just that this is the WRONG location! They want to build this where many semi-endangered and endangered species live: steelhead salmon, red-legged frogs, garter snakes, deer, bats, raptors, and more.
Also, the construction period (up to two years) would severely and negatively impact the mating habits/cycles of these creatures, quite probably upsetting or curtailing this activity, causing their extinction. If this project were allowed, the added air, land, and water pollution would be truly devastating, not only to the aforementioned wildlife but also to residents of the area.
want a 50 million dollar trust fund funded by the owners of this project to pay out cause of noise or dust during construction and the damage to the creek area.
I have organized a group of humanistic individuals devoted to promoting and working towards an acceptance of all on this wonderful orb we call Earth. Save Our Aging Population (SOAP) is working hard to cleanse our culture of ethnocentric discrimination against our older members. Each member of the “over-old” group is in danger of extinction. With their demise go generations of historical data. It is our responsibility to protect them from the elements and tend to their needs so that they may be enjoyed by all. SOAP believes this path starts with an abode for the “over-old” to reside within. These poor endangered inhabitants wish to reside in a peaceful setting, interacting with all of god’s creatures, even Zipkin. Over-olds need a place to finish their day and the plans coming forward Monday nite to the planning commission provide this oasis of comfort. SOAP believes that cleaning out and improving the Oddstad property is the correct thing to do. The thousands of us that comprise SOAP will vigilantly work to make right with the “over-olds”.
The good thing about this project is the revised traffic study that shows the area to be widened is performing at a LOS E during AM peak hours! This is great news. The project itself is way out of scale with the neighborhood unfortunately and shouldn't be built there. Perhaps a better location can be found... ?
Same 'ol "build nothing on YOUR private property" NIMBY arguments in the Zipkin article on Riptide. NIMBY rules:
1. Development (anywhere) means "wrong location".
2. If critters exist or could exist on any Pacifica land, including the creeks, developers cannot build. (Zipkin's includes endangered species (RLF, SFGS), and "semi-endangered" species (bats, raptors, DEER).
3. "Added air, land, and water pollution", which is "truly devastating" to critters-- (in the human neighborhood where they already exist).
4. The researched, DEIR: "WE (NIMBYS) have many issues with the accuracy of these official statements and findings." Of course you do, its science.
5. Not included but next: 1) chop the project, hence reduce viability to own and operate, 2) once approved by Planning, appeal and fight the project all the way through regulations-- (before you or your family has reason to use the Assisted Care Center). Duh.
Two senior apartments in the area. One on Oddstad the other on Terra Nova Blvd.
Nice try Todd!!
we NIMBYs live in a perfect world. Therefore your project must be perfect as well.
go away.
Hey, Bray, we ought build it on that nice lot on Pedro Point. You know the one, yep, that one!
How can this not be a great project for Pacifica? Perhaps even the start of a type of industry this ridiculous town still has space for. So what's the problem? Oh yeah, it only improves the lives of people and this community. And we're not having any of that! We'd rather go broke.
Pedro (438), speaking of that "nice lot on Pedro Point" and "wrong location planning": don't you just love the way any future hotel at Pedro Point was excluded in advance from the General Plan by the Planning Commission and City Council?
One of the issues was road traffic, but it looks like the road could eventually connect more directly with the highway through developer and possibly city/county mitigation. Just a thought. (Any trashing of the Planning Commission and their commissioners does not include my friend Tom).
@Protectors of Pacifica said...
I really am getting tired of you calling yourself environmental groups. True environmental groups build a community that works in concert with the local environment. You know, people and animals all getting along.
Just call yourself a NIMBY and make yourself clear about what you stand for. Nothing wrong with that, just don't hind behind something that you aren't.
By the way, I don't agree with you at all. We need business and also a home for the elderly. You can call me IMBY for in my back yard.
Don't you love the self-righteous? Today a NIMBY, tomorrow an IMBY. Just depends on where you're at.
Regardless, businesses serving seniors are a growth industry and one very well-suited to Pacifica's limited developable space and delicate sensibilities. We should go for it because it's best for the community. The greater good will be served. Will we see our esteemed elected officials do what's best for the community? Oh probably not... unless it directly benefits them or a friend. Hmmmm.
Let me be clear, I stand for ladies of all ages and the American Flag in my backyard or yours.
I'm joining SOAP!
look out for the death panels
@Anonymous said... November 4, 2011 12:36 PM
No, I don't like the self-righteous. From your smug reply, that would mean you.
It seems like Kathy loves to complain about anonymous posting, except when she is posting anonymously.
Anon (136), example of my anonymous postings, 11/2/11, "Deer NIMBY" (10:26am) or "I'm voting for you Pedro" (8:04pm) above. Click on either, and up comes the identity: "Kathy Meeh". But, you are clearly Anonymous, and what you are referring to is unknown to me.
Having said that, you may have left your myopic city comment on the Asteroid article (11/4/11, 5pm).
@Anon@651pm...what bothers you? The giddy enthusiasm for a viable business in Pacifica or the informed observation on our local elected officials?
Merely a rhetorical question. Happy in my smugness.
I think the problem earlier was with 'today a nimby tomorrow an imby'. Cynical but probably true.
@Anonymous said... November 5, 2011 5:47 PM
Glad your happy in your smugness. You can keep it to yourself.
I'm all for viable businesses in Pacifica. Get development in the quarry, expand the highway, and bring in the assisted living center.
In regards to the local elected folks, I want them out period. After years of doing nothing, its time to clear the bench.
Post a Comment