 |
| Nope, not much contagious urban density in Pacifica |
"Bay Area planning officials adopted a regional plan early Friday morning that aims to steer development toward urban areas near mass transit and stem suburban sprawl.
The votes by the boards of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments to approve what's known as Plan Bay Area concluded a seven-hour meeting crowded with sign-waving critics and a three-year process involving dozens of public hearings across the region.
The plan, through 2040, melds the association's regional housing plan with the commission's regional transportation plan, and is the Bay Area's attempt to satisfy state legislation that requires 18 metropolitan areas to develop strategies to house future population growth while reducing greenhouse gas emissions from cars.
.... The plan hopes to direct 77 percent of future growth to those areas with incentives including grants for affordable and higher-density housing and priority in receiving transportation funds not already committed for other uses." Read article.
Posted by Kathy Meeh
Is this part of the One Bay Area plan?
ReplyDeleteSo because Pacifica is not a transportation hub, future growth should not be directed here?
ReplyDelete"Plan Bay Area lays out a strategy that encourages Bay Area cities and counties, which control land use, to put the majority of the 2 million additional people expected to move to the region in the next three decades in areas near public transportation. It establishes about 160 "priority development areas," zones cities and counties have identified for future growth, mostly denser development.
ReplyDelete"The areas are generally within walking distance of shopping, dining, recreation and public transportation, including rail stations. They include urban areas such as Mission Bay in San Francisco, Oakland's Jack London Square and downtown San Jose as well as suburban centers including downtown San Rafael, Walnut Creek and Fairfield and Suisun City's waterfront."
That leaves Pacifica out of the development plan.
Anon @ 4:32 p.m.: actually, this could prove to be a very good thing for Pacifica property owners as well as all Coastsiders. As urban sprawl converts to urban housing density, there will likely be many who are willing to pay more to live in less congested areas such as ours.
ReplyDeleteYoung, hip, live-where-the-action-is, is a temporary illness for many. As they mature, most seek the tranquility, peace, and quiet of a less congested lifestyle.
"As they mature, most seek the tranquility, peace, and quiet of a less congested lifestyle."
ReplyDeleteSo our "noncontributing open space" will add value?
It only leaves Pacifica out of the development plan if the faux-environmentalist hippies continue to obstruct the type of dense housing that would support mass transit.
ReplyDeletePeople living in Linda Mar ranchers who claim to be environmentalists are NIMBY hypocrites.
We are a bedroom community and always have been. The past decisions about land use guaranteed we'd be nothing else. We need to start capitalizing on that. Don't overbuild, but definitely develop our housing stock and smart amenities to attract people who want to live in a quiet, comfortable, safe town.
ReplyDelete"Don't overbuild, but definitely develop our housing stock and smart amenities to attract people who want to live in a quiet, comfortable, safe town."
ReplyDeleteI agree with that!
You folks are every bit as NIMBY as the hippies who give all our land away to the GGNRA. You can't develop in a way that does not allow for mass transit and then complain about a lack of transit. Going forward, we need dense development around urban centers like Peebles proposed.
ReplyDeleteMass transit in an off the main corridor place like Pacifica will never be more than a few SamTrans buses connecting to Bart. When faced with a trip involving multiple modes on public transit, most people will just stick with their cars. There's no reason or market for high density housing out here, but some nice, new and varied housing would be great. The buyers and renters will support existing businesses and demand new ones.
ReplyDelete@816 Not a nimby or even close. Not a realtor, or even close, either. Dense housing would destroy one of the reasons people move to Pacifica, ie, the space and lack of crowding. We can add lots of in-fill housing of different types and some small developments without looking like Daly City. Housing and shops in the quarry would be great, too, but not in the numbers that Peebles needed to see to make the deal work for him. How about a movie theatre and food in the quarry as well? The multiplex next to DC Bart is always crowded. The coastside from HMB to DC might be ready for one. Our restaurants would benefit greatly from it. Growth is good.
ReplyDeleteYou're right... Mass transit in Pacifica won't work if you develop housing in the asinine ways proposed in the 1950s. That's why we have to do better.
ReplyDeleteAnon@8:16 p.m. Others have already commented about not being nimby's concerning future growth in Pacifica.
ReplyDeleteI'll throw in my two cents as well:
Realize that the only current(and likely future) "transportation corridor" is along Hwy 1. Any additional housing, dense or otherwise, is bound to impact that roadway. The question is just how much more traffic Hwy 1 can handle. Even if widened to 3 lanes each way, dense development could possibly result in as much or more congestion than we complain about now. Same goes for any overly dense development to the south in Montara, Moss Beach, etc. Those folks seem to prefer heading North through Pacifica rather than use already crowded Hwy 92.
So we need to be careful with future development and not overbuild. A few houses, small clustered developments here and there are likely all we can handle. Pacifica will never be able to compete with the "big boys" over the hill as our lack of potential for sensible dense development actually works in our favor. I suppose an argument could be made to start tearing down poorly designed tract housing and replace with more dense housing ( front of Linda Mar perhaps), and that might be a future plan, far, far down the road. But that would likely result in an even wider Hwy 1 that many people would prefer not to see.
I don't want shopping outlet malls in the quarry. Yuck! We need a good theater. All others in DC and SB are far and always crowded. Kids can't get there without parents help. It has always been a hassell. No public transportation we can rely on or trust, safety issues.
ReplyDeleteAgenda 21 is real, Kathy. Why won't you talk about it? huh?
ReplyDeleteThey are building micro-mini apartments for two right now in San Francisco. Get yours now before they sell out. 220sf built for two by mass transit. 347 units will be ready in a matter of months.
ReplyDelete"Agenda 21", Anonymous 8:42 AM.
ReplyDeleteTry "search this blog" upper left of this blog. We have talked about Agenda 21.
@ 840, we had a movie theater it closed, not enough business. We are not DC or SB, we don't have the crowds here. We need to take what we can get, not dictate what kinds of business we want.
ReplyDeleteWalgreens was the town savior.
ReplyDelete8:40
ReplyDeleteProbably why we have a crime and growing meth problem.
Went to the Midnight showing of Song Remains The Same there many times!
ReplyDeleteWell, there it is. This town is terminal. Bulldoze it over and put up thousands of mini-houses. Maybe a mini-theater. Nothing but mini-cars allowed and of course driven by mini-people. Mini-golf, too. Freakish, but it might finally draw those tourists we've been waiting for.
ReplyDelete840 poor public transit has its upside. keeps a lot of trouble out of town. ask the cops.
ReplyDelete1104 times change. more homes are being built. the coastside from HMB to DC can probably support a theatre. just need a big enough space to accommodate it and the parking. it's an amenity that people, particularly families, like to see in a community.
ReplyDeleteWe shouldn't be looking for the same types of businesses that are in Daly City, SSF or San Bruno. We need something unique that attracts people here, like a Premium Outlet Mall.
ReplyDeleteYes, Sinai, great outlets with a theater! Build it and they will come.
ReplyDeleteYou never see multi-plexs by outlet malls? Why? Cause the outlet malls want you to shop till you drop. Going to the movies for 2 hours will take too much money off the table for them.
ReplyDelete1:25 it is easier for people in Half Moon Bay to go over the hill to San Mateo or Redwood City then come down to deadsville Pacifica.
ReplyDeleteGet over the outlet mall. I hate that idea and will fight against it. I want a Theater, Ice Skating Rink, New City Hall, Library. That should do it. Make it easy for people to remodel, I hear is still a problem for people with the money to do it. Then they will come. Stay away from our beachside. Build where there is blight. Well, that could be lots of places in Pacifica but at least we have space to choose from.
ReplyDelete419 Are you sure you don't want a pony, too?
ReplyDeleteIf it doesn't make money for this city, we don't need it.
@316 You're right. Let's just leave it the way it is. Maybe that could be our distinction, our draw. Won't take us long on this path. We can be ghetto-by-the-sea. THE place yuppie city and peninsula kids go for their dose of gritty with a little salt air thrown in.
ReplyDelete6:32
ReplyDeleteA bag of fresh meth with every visit
We could be Bodie-by-the-Bay.
ReplyDeleteWe're on our way!
ReplyDelete@259 This particular quarry fantasy would allow the coastside locals to enjoy a little cinema before or after they shop, or all by itself. Maybe a meal. Out-of-towners will have shopping on their minds. Very single-minded.
ReplyDeleteBodie State Park has a reason for people to stop, its one of the more famous places movies used for filming.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bodie.com
And so does Pacifica. Pacifica is beautiful. Maybe you should get out more.
ReplyDelete"Pacifica is beautiful."
ReplyDeletePacifica is run-down, shabby, and poor.
Our ecology is out economy failed!
ReplyDeletePacifica has become one of those places that is pretty from a distance, but if you stop here you see it's a fixer-upper. Habitable, but really needs work. All the good intentions and volunteer efforts can't take the place of regular maintenance and progress. We're way beyond a coat of paint and picking up trash here. This town has that gritty, down at the heels look that used to invite redevelopment. Well we don't have to worry about that anymore, do we?
ReplyDeletePacifica is beautiful?? From certain angles and at a distance it has some pretty views, but the town itself is an ugly eyesore. What a shame we weren't smart enough to know that letting a sea side town deteriorate this badly really harms the environment, specifically, the visual environment.
If you think it is so ugly here, then leave.
ReplyDeletePacifica is a beautiful city with clean fresh air, lots of space, beautiful beaches and ocean. And the people are great.
If you want to live in poverty, move to Haiti.
ReplyDelete@451 That seems to be your standard superficial response. You should lose the rose-tinted glasses. If you care about this town and have seen the decline over years, you'd be saddened by its current state, not complacent or defensive. The truth is that Pacifica no longer enhances it's natural setting. It detracts from it. What a farce in a town that prides itself on its environmental awareness.
ReplyDeleteLong time Paciifca homeowners are selling and moving out in droves. Equity is back up and people are cashing out and leaving.
ReplyDeleteAs soon as you realize that the Hippies nobbees and nimbys won and bankrupted the city, cutting the cord is easy.
Why spend $800,000 to live in a broken down city that can not even pay for basic services? Other towns have new roads, newer housing, newer better schools.
You can spend much less and be in a better,newer city.
"homeowners are selling and moving out in droves"
ReplyDeleteMe thinks not. There are very few houses on the market. That's why you have 20 people bidding on each one.
And new owners are buying houses at these high prices , and they will pay much more in property tax than the old prop 13 owners.
$800,000? Not many of those in Pacifica.
Growing equity and an aging population will make for lots of relocations over the next couple of years. Why pay top dollar for suburban decay if you no longer need to be near a job? Take the money and run! The chumps that buy your house will pay big bucks and more property taxes than you did under Prop 13. It's all good.
ReplyDeleteHutch
ReplyDeleteI will post monthly sales data tomorrow am.
Hutch
ReplyDeleteWho told you this? A credible realtor?
20 bids is the realtors trying to created hysteria in the market.
How about 7 bids on a pretty basic LM rancher? Went for over asking on my street a couple months ago. Owners retiring to Oregon at age
ReplyDelete55.
I never believe when the realtors claim to have that many offers.
ReplyDeleteWhy do 7 times the work reviewing the offers?
That is just part of their hubris and salesman's puffery!
This house sold for a cool million.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/140-Blackburn-Ter_Pacifica_CA_94044_M19103-29301?row=1
http://sf.blockshopper.com/property/016172010/586_loma_vista/
ReplyDeletehttp://sf.blockshopper.com/sales/cities/pacifica/property/023602140/10_tioga/12517626
http://sf.blockshopper.com/sales/cities/pacifica/property/009680430/299_sycamore/12515301
@ 941. Because I was one of the 20 bidders. The house went for 90K over asking with an all cash offer. My neighbor just had 11 bids on a 1 bedroom that went for over 50K over asking.
ReplyDeleteIt's a sellers market. Haven't you read the news? There is a severe shortage of houses and a surplus of buyers, or as you call them "chumps"
Evidently Pacifica is still a desirable place to live.
The outlet people came, they saw,they performed their due diligence and left. The lack of completed entitlements on the Quarry space is what makes most future developers leave. That Don Peebles was willing to put the time, effort and most of all money into the legal process is rare for developers. The team he brought in did their due diligence, the plan would have worked. But, that story is over. Find someone who is willing to pick up where Don Peebles left off, and we can, in fact, grow our town using proven smart growth processes. There's your challenge.
ReplyDelete8:11
ReplyDeleteKeep eating up the realtor nonsense. Any market that is boised up by the government with low rates and control over shadow inventory, is not a healthy market.
June sales stalled and came to a halt due to rates going up 1.5%.
A very very very smart man told one of the Quarry developers not to buy the property.
ReplyDeleteGood thing the developer listened to this very very very smart man and ran.
SF and other Bay Area cities have added 10's of 1000's of new homes, condos and apartments to the inventory. All filled up.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile Pacifica added practically nothing and it's obvious there is a great demand by all the multiple bids and skyrocketing rents.
Hutch
ReplyDeleteA wise man once told me.
Buy when everyone is selling
Sell when everyone is buying.
The only way the quarry proposals would have worked were due to the Redevelopment laws allowing public debt to fund private development of California. Without public debt funding the quarry there will be no further proposals there for quite some time.
ReplyDeleteHouses for sale are being snapped up by investors who make all cash offers. Regular home buyers can't compete with all cash, especially when it's next to impossible to get a loan these days. Try financing a home purchase and see how far you can get. It takes months and you have to have a lot down or equity. There aren't many families buying homes to live in. They're trying to, but they can't compete with all cash offers by speculators.
ReplyDeleteNot in Pacifica, flippers have bought properties fixed them up and resold them but the hedge fund and big pension buyers are buying in the East Bay and Central Valley.
ReplyDeletePacifica, house prices vs rental rents do not make sense to buy and hold.
"The only way the quarry proposals would have worked were due to the Redevelopment laws allowing public debt to fund private development of California."
ReplyDeleteI don't recall Peebles asking for public debt to fund his quarry proposal.
11:09
ReplyDeleteOn what planet is this occuring?
Pacifica could have sold Star bonds to help build the quarry.
ReplyDeleteLet's all hope the next city manager knows what he is doing, and doesn't come from Mayberry RFD.
here is some interesting home building data:
ReplyDeleteSingle-family new house construction building permits:
1997: 36 buildings, average cost: $232,100
1998: 96 buildings, average cost: $230,100
1999: 45 buildings, average cost: $234,900
2000: 36 buildings, average cost: $261,200
2001: 31 buildings, average cost: $269,600
2002: 14 buildings, average cost: $341,400
2003: 7 buildings, average cost: $299,700
2004: 9 buildings, average cost: $427,100
2005: 9 buildings, average cost: $451,600
2006: 4 buildings, average cost: $400,500
2007: 101 buildings, average cost: $417,800
2008: 14 buildings, average cost: $509,700
2009: 8 buildings, average cost: $520,000
2010: 5 buildings, average cost: $626,100
2011: 2 buildings, average cost: $482,600
I think the number in 2007 reflects the 90+ homes in Cypress Walk. Amateur home buyer anecdotes aside, this is an alarmingly bad trend.
It will take another big-time developer like Peebles or Trammell Crow to take on that quarry mess. The little guys just don't have the money or access to money for a long, drawn out process. It still carries the poison pill of a public vote for any housing, and multiple regulatory agencies, some of which came with the WWTP. And how funny is that? Nimbys strike again! I think it will absolutely happen because of our proximity to SF. That's always been our only winning attribute. But first they'll move on all the easier builds everywhere else in the Bay Area. The quarry? Try 2020-2030 at the earliest.
ReplyDelete@1109 of the 4 recent (120 days) home sales I personally know of, all 4 are owner occupied and all 4 went for more than asking with multiple bids. One buyer had help from parents for the down payment, one is an extended family thing with multiple incomes, one is a traditional family with stay at home mom, and the last one is a divorcee who paid all cash. Other than the divorcee, all our first time homeowners. Two of the homes were regular sales, one was a probate, and one was a foreclosure. Previous owners were 55 to about 70 with decades in Pacifica. They bailed out, which happens in that age group, making way for younger homeowners. The earlier wave of investment buyers and all cash seems to have died down. Another flood of foreclosures would bring them back.
ReplyDelete12:27 - right here in the Bay Area. Read much?
ReplyDeletehttp://realestate.aol.com/blog/2013/06/28/all-cash-offers-healthy-for-real-estate-market-or-a-hindrance/
http://www.sfchronicle.com/realestate/article/Home-buyers-make-cash-offers-in-hot-market-4585115.php
http://blog.pacunion.com/rise-of-all-cash-offer/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pacunionblog+(Pacific+Union+Blog)
"I don't recall Peebles asking for public debt to fund his quarry proposal." He didn't have to *ask* for it. It was structured into the proposal. That's what redevelopment is and how it works. You're going to get tax increment money from the city to help finance the deal. Peebles knew that going in.
ReplyDeleteThe media gets the news from the realtors. The realtors job is to create a need to buy and sell homes. They make no money unless they are closers. Only about 5% of Pacifica brokers and agents can make enough money to support a family. Most have a spouse who makes a paycheck.
ReplyDeleteLook up the average income for realtor s.
Redevelopment funds are tax income, not debt. The city never offered Peebles financial help in developing the quarry, unless you're going to claim some kind of hidden, back-room deal that nobody knew about.
ReplyDeleteThe city never offered Peebles financial help because it didn't have to. It was understood. Again, that's what redevelopment IS.
ReplyDeleteRedevelopment agencies are history. The were set up to rebuild blighted areas. It gave the city a bigger piece of the tax bills. Lenders are forced to lend money in CRA loans, community reinvestment loans.
ReplyDeleteIt was a win win for the cities,developers and banks.
@445 well thank heavens after 5 years of struggling things are improving for realtors, sellers and buyers. there's not enough inventory. lots of realtors are busy and many of them are doing well. of course some people prefer bad news. it's always been that way.
ReplyDelete@249 trend? more like history and let's hope we don't repeat it. years of few housing starts in Pacifica reflects that anti-growth ideology that prevailed for decades. cypress was a blip, an anomaly. combine that moronic ideology with the recession and you get very few housing starts. looks like the housing market is doing a slow turn. let's just hope this council can change Pacifica's unfriendly to builders reputation. they could have done
ReplyDeletemore with that planning commission revamp, but let's be optimistic. baby steps.
I am happy that prices are retuning to their historic highs. I want to be able to leave a nice nest egg for my kids.
ReplyDeleteOoTom
ReplyDeleteBut with record low interest rates. Housing prices were down 50%. Most people who could buy already gave. If you haven't bought yet, there is something wrong. No downpayment, bad credit, job loss, short sale or a foreclosure.
They will immediately sell the place and spend the money
"The city never offered Peebles financial help because it didn't have to. It was understood. Again, that's what redevelopment IS."
ReplyDeleteVague, amorphous, weak.
I understand all that but But I will be giving my home to my kids so my only issue is net worth.
ReplyDelete923 gee that sounds sort of autobiographical or are you just determined to be a buzz kill?
ReplyDelete11:10 no sorry to inform you. The house is paid off and zero debt.
ReplyDeleteI don't think this mini sellers market has legs. Low inventory and the government forcing down interest rates has to give sooner or later. Talk to anyone who has money in the bank in a cd, they are not happy getting 1% return right now. That was why people rushed out and bought properties when prices were so low.
Tom, Nothing against you personally. You come across as the voice of reason in a town of unreasonable.
Going by financial stats that 2 out 3 people who come into money blow it all within 3 years with nothing to show.
That includes inheritence, signing bonuses, stock options, stock or property sales etc etc.
Yesterday after Horton’s negative earnings surprise and continued plunge in builder stocks I put the following chart together.
ReplyDeleteThat’s because lost in the ‘mega housing recovery’ headlines and daily upgrades of Bank of America, Home Depot and all the other high-flyer, housing “related” names is just how poorly the leading indicating builder stocks are performing on an absolute basis and relative to the S&P 500.
These stocks and their awful performance tell us clearly that something isn’t right in Nirvanaville; that the best is over in the housing sector.
Homebuilder Stocks as of July 25
To sum this up…everybody remains uber-bullish the housing and related sectors — and continue to upgrade the most loved names — despite leading indicating builder stocks telling us that something is very wrong, interest rates back on the rise and close to a break-out, and high-frequency housing data being a month or two from rolling over in earnest.
To me, this is the exact reverse of August to October 2011 — when housing sector stocks were obviously bottoming (on the Fed’s Twist program that pushed rates down from 5.25% to 3.50%, which was the largest housing market stimulus in history) and nobody wanted to hear anything positive — meaning despite a lot of damage already being done to “builders” we could still in the “early innings” of a multi-quarter housing sector reversal in which the builders are simply leading all the other high-flyer “housing related” names.
Remember, housing always responds well to stimulus. The Homebuyer Tax Credit that ended in 2010 was responsible for a surge in First-Timer buyer volume to levels never seen since. In fact, the month after the Tax Credit ended, house sales volume plunged 30%…in a single month in the middle of the summer busy season!
Then, at the end of the 2011 the Fed’s Twist operations made ALL houses 15% cheaper over the period of 2 months as mortgage rates plunged from 5.25% to 3.5%. This stimulus was an order of magnitude larger than the Homebuyer Tax Credit. It created yet another stimulus rush into the sector but this time led by investors flipping houses and buying them to rent as a bond replacement “trade”, regularly paying 10% to 20% over appraised value/listing price artificially forcing prices up on everybody. But now, as a result of “taper” talk bond yields and mortgage rates shot up over a short, 2 month period back to levels that wiped out most of the “Twist” benefit to affordability. As such, why shouldn’t we expect the same result as when the sector lost the stimulus benefit of the Homebuyer Tax Credit?
Let's see some quick math.
ReplyDelete100,000 people at the Gilroy Garlic Fest today. If 100,000 people spent $10 bucks each that brings in a lot of money to the city of Gilroy and the charities.
Pacifica, needs to do something other then the yearly fog fest.
Maybe the chamber can bring in something like this once a quarter to bring in some badly needed money.
Given the net home orders reported so far by publicly-traded builders, the Census estimates for new SF home sales for Q2/2013 seem surprisingly strong – 134,000 on an unadjusted basis, up over 30% from the second quarter of 2012. The estimated YOY gain in sales Q1/2013 was about 25% .
ReplyDeleteOf course, comparing home builder reports with Census SF home sales estimates is “challenging.” First, Census does not treat sales cancellations the same as do home builders. Second, historical data suggest that the timing of the recognition of a “sale” by Census lags that of home builders. Third, there can be substantial quarterly swings in market share. And fourth, preliminary Census estimates are subject to substantial revisions, partly because preliminary estimates include “imputed” data, because the survey data used to estimate sales are based on a permit being issued. Many homes may have a sales contract signed prior to a permit being issued, and Census must “guesstimate” such sales using some “historical trends” model (that has often been changed).
Nevertheless, I have found builder reports to be somewhat useful in projecting revisions in Census’ estimates of new SF home sales. Based on the builder reports so far, there is a better than even chance that Census’ new SF home sales estimates for last quarter will be revised downward, and I’d guess that the bulk of the downward revision will be in June sales. It’s worth noting that while Census’ estimated new SF home sales last quarter were up by over 30% YOY (on an unadjusted basis), estimated sales of homes not yet started were up 53%, compared to 24% for sales of homes under construction, and 20% for sales of completed homes. For June Census estimated that there were 18,000 sales of new SF homes not yet started, up from 11,000 last June, and the highest level since June 2007.
This was an excellent letter to the editor. It is time for our city attorney to shine and make this go away.
ReplyDeleteHighway lawsuit
Editor"
Well, it looks like Loeb, and his "gang of no" are at it again. File suit because this city council did not bow down to the all mighty ex-mayor and his "gang of no."
Mr. Loeb, and his cohorts have been secretly running city council from behind the scenes. Mr. Loeb, and Mr. Bohner, suddenly see the tides turning and council starting to distance themselves from this "gang of no" that crippled the city financially.
The City Of Paciifca, should immediately file a counter suit to dismiss this bogus, pseudo act of control and self importance, over the city council. The City should also ask for these two to pay all attorney costs and fees in regards to this despicable action.
Maybe the City can really turn things around and get some money back from this "gang of no" who have cost the city countless millions in lost revenue.
The "gang of no" have made many developers run out of money and abandon the city of Pacifica, over the last 30 years. Or they used the greatest trick in the book, stall a project till the developers loose the will to fight or run out of money. These projects would have brought badly needs revenue into the city.
Jim Alex
Park Pacifica
I agree Anon 745, we should have a clam chowder and chili cook-off, car shows, fishing derby's. We could have Friday nigh Fog on Palmetto with booths and of course fog cutters, beer and wine.
ReplyDelete10;22 we can even have a hippie fest. Bring in hippies from all over like burning man.
ReplyDeleteInstead of buring the big burning man thing on the playa, maybe we can burn off some city debt.
Yes, the chamber could create an event 4 times a year that brings in 100,000 people each time. The chamber could also put wings on pigs and then they could fly.
ReplyDeleteIf the Chamber understood business it could do a lot for Pacifica and Pacifica business. Unfortunately the Chamber does not understand business.
ReplyDeleteto July 27 @ 7:45 a.m.
ReplyDeleteWhat can Pacifica do other than the FogFest? Artichoke Festival; already taken by Castroville I believe; Garlic ? Nope, Gilroy does that one. Pumpkins; forget, too close to home, HMB already took that. Couple of surf fests annually that the City could get in on might bring in a few bucks.
Perhaps a MethFest would bring in a bunch of money. HELP ! Running out of ideas on this one.
The Pacifica Chamber of Commerce is two full time people and a lot of volunteers. They simple do not have the resources to create and managed Three or Four large events a year.
ReplyDelete"If the Chamber understood business it could do a lot for Pacifica and Pacifica business. Unfortunately the Chamber does not understand business."
ReplyDeleteThe people who say things like this are usually on food stamps.
Tom
ReplyDeleteThe previous director made over $100,000 for printing a phone book. The chamber is closed on weekends. Truckee is a very small town with a smaller chamber and yet, they manage to put on a PRCA rodeo that brings in over $250,000.
The chamber is a bunch of angry people who could never get elected for public office.
ReplyDeleteNow I hear the want to be a super pac. Good luck.
Not so sure the Truckee Chamber plays much of a role with the Rodeo. Tons of corporate sponsors and the Professional Rodeo group. 35 or 40 years it's been in Truckee. Truckee is about half the population of Pacifica but there's always something going on.
ReplyDeleteThe Truckee chamber has a huge role in the rodeo. Truckee is only about 15,000 or so.
ReplyDeletePacifica, had a rodeo and frontier days. Truckee also has flea markets and music in the park.
Truckee knows how to make money off the tourists. Pacifica does not.
That's no small town chamber rodeo. It's become big biz over the years and that's how it's run. Can you imagine the Pacifica hippies howling over the cruelty to all the livestock?
ReplyDeleteI think if anything deserves a committee and a private study it would be this. Don't depend on the chamber, the city should actively pursue setting up other festivals. Start small and build them up. Like I said, a clam chowder cook-off. Or Dungeness Crab or Salmon festival. Classic cars. Wine and Art festival at Sanchez. Even artichokes. There's a lot of possibilities.
ReplyDeleteBoston has a marathon. Calgary has a Stampede. New Orleans has a Mardi Gras.
ReplyDelete"That is why Pacifica sucks" says some complete idiot.
I have seen the cruelty to animals idiots at almost every Rodeo.
ReplyDeletePacifica is ok being poor broke and busted.
We've gone from outlet malls, ice skating rinks, and theaters to festivals and street fairs. Desperation will do that. How about we just hang that banner over the freeway "abandon hope all yee who enter here?" On the other hand, how about a shark derby?
ReplyDeleteIt's so easy to invent fantasy events with no people and no money to do them. Hutch just did a long list. FYI, the Fog Fest was originally a city-run event. Now there's no city money to do anything. The Chamber is stretched to its limits to do the Taste of Pacifica each year. There already is a chili cook-off coming up soon. And there's a classic car show at Terra Nova. Or is it the Sea Bowl? Sure, let's have a salmon fest or another art and wine fest. Who's going to organize that? Who's going to put up front money? Who's going to volunteer?
ReplyDeleteAnon 923 said "If you haven't bought yet, there is something wrong. No downpayment, bad credit, job loss, short sale or a foreclosure."
ReplyDeleteYou do realize there's a shortage of houses. If there's 10-20 bidders on each house that means most are out of luck.
Exactly 932. None of these things, although all are good ideas individually, can or should take the place of economic development. Given the alarming lack of city progress in that area, it's understandable we'd lose hope and look for substitutes. City Hall loves it! They envision an all-volunteer Pacifica toiling away to maintain our grubby little town.
ReplyDelete954 nononono according to you know who, there are no multiple bids. It's all realtor-hype. they're out to get us.
ReplyDelete@932 Almost all of the events that have been mentioned here including the Truckee Rodeo began as city, chamber or club events and grew beyond those groups abilities to manage and stage. They are businesses, professionally managed, with corporate sponsors, and profit oriented. Most also continue to contribute some funds to their home cities for a variety of programs as well as attract visitors to spend money in those cities. FogFest is our home grown, volunteer-run version and seems to have maxed out its potential.
ReplyDeleteWho said festivals should take the place of economic development? A festival can bring in a hell of a lot of money with a year or two of planning. Money from development is going to take five years or more to pay off. Nothing says we can't chew gum and walk at the same kind.
ReplyDeleteHutch, what economic development are you expecting to pay off in 5 years? A library? The rest of that OWWTP is looking like a con job. Try 10 to 15 if we begin something now and you know we haven't!
ReplyDeleteHutch, if you can pull off a festival that amounts to more than a pittance in revenue for the city, then YOU should be running this town and devoting your talents to economic development. You could not possibly do worse than those now in office. I think you are sincere and definitely not an oily politician. You'd probably have more common sense and play fewer games.
9:54 it's a lack of inventory. Not that many houses on the market. The hippies, nominees, and nimbies, wouldn't let any new housing stock to be built. When was the last New multifamily apartment building built? Nothing over 5 units that I can think of.
ReplyDelete10:10 LTE nailed it.
ReplyDeleteThat was an excellent LTE by the guy in Park Pacifica
According to ABAG Pacifica needs 413 new housing units.
ReplyDeletePage 29 talks about Pacifica. Oh wait the small apartment building by the golf course was built a couple years ago.
http://www.abag.ca.gov/planning/housingneeds/pdfs/2014-22_RHNA_Plan.pdf
ABAG is a bunch of commies.
ReplyDeleteLookie here. The town of Truckee pays it's employees well also.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.townoftruckee.com/index.aspx?page=278
22
9,321
10,953
12,584
E
Director of Public Works/Town Engineer
E
Chief of Police
24
10,066 11,827 13,589
E Town Attorney
25
10,424
12,249
14,073
E
Town Manager
Pacifica's sales tax revenue flat at around $1,200,000 to $1,300,000.
ReplyDeleteTruckee's sales tax revenue $3,500,000 Million up to $3,900,000.
See how that works a city that is less then half the size of Pacifica, off Highway 80 that knows how to make money of the tourists and visitors.
Why not pick a town we have something in common with other than a shared language and currency?
ReplyDelete5:41 you have to be a hippie, nooobeee,nimby who likes broken down poor bankrupt Pacifica.
ReplyDeleteThe point is Pacifica has lost the ability to govern itself. The only beach town on the West Coast that does not take advantage of being a beach town.
ReplyDelete@649 Sadly, the real point is we are governed by popularly elected individuals who don't seem to be able to do anything but talk and spend and tax. Do you think they know the damage is irreversible? The passage of time is always the politician's best friend.
ReplyDelete