http://www.cclr.org/news/article/id/40
OK, it's been over 10 years since the old WWTP was closed. When is the city going to do something more productive with it than utilizing it as a storage yard?
Another successful implementation of "Environment is our Economy!?"
6 comments:
The non-profit co. cclr sounds legit and something clearly needed for communities that are stuck with toxic lands. Pacifica's story was one of two that is not one of their success stories. Why? What happened. The article did mention for Pacifica, that you need strong leadership. What exactly did they mean by that? This sounds like a good company. Why was Pacifica not one of their success stories???????
Somewhere in the CCLR website there was something about working with "interested" communities. Must be this community isn't interested. Apparently city leadership thinks the big empty hole, one block falling apart undeveloped property, no city tax revenue is of better use "our (existing) environment is our economy". Who knows, maybe a rare ant, spider, bug, rat or RLF frog transplant will be found. Meantime, possibly this land must be kept "pristine".
Councilmembers years in office: Vreeland 11, DeJarnatt 13, Lancelle this time 7(total 9 or 10), Digre 7. One of them stated she is still "learning on the job" about 4 months back.
Multiple opportunities to re-develop the OWWTP site during the past 7 years. Why make that decision yesterday, when there's always tomorrow. Loss of millions of dollars tax revenue, services, jobs, money for the city, a better more civilized neighborhood. So? Maybe wait for the city general plan to be completed.
lovely use for a beach front property...
Thank you council for all the wasted time trying to make it your remodeled council chambers.
its important to remember that the Urban Land Institute, CCLR, a hired redevelopment consultant, and the city's own appraisal of the property (which the city refused to release to the public, stonewalling requests for almost 2 years) said that a mixed use development was the highest and best use.
Yet, despite the overwhelming evidence of these proposals, the city instead opted to borrow $2 million to "renovate" this facility into a new City Hall. I believe even a citizen with 20 years of construction management experience sat down with then mayor Pete Dejarnatt and explained why this $2 million figure was ridiculously low and wildly inaccurate, only to have the mayor react with disbelief and anger.
Only after a facilities study (again at a cost to the taxpayers) was completed did the city abandon the idea of making this site a City Hall.
I have counted at least 5 developers who had mad proposals for this property as a revenue generating facility, all of which were eventually rebuked by this City Council.
So $300,000+ later, and millions of potential revenue lost down that sink hole, Pacifica still has nothing, which is exactly what this City Council wants.
This was an issue where those of us who suggested that this was not the best and possible use for the property were vilified and told we were being "mean". I believe that is when the REALTOR bashing began because we continued to believe that there was a better use for a beach front property. It was also at this time that we were told it wasn't a beach front property...
They want nothing? Why? They must want something. What?
Post a Comment