Pacifica Tribune, Letters to the Editor 7/25/12."Not a lie" by Peter Loeb
"Editor, I thought it was strange to run Jim Wagner's announcement of the Chamber's political action committee as the lead "article" on the front page without even bothering to make it an actual article. It's just the announcement with no explanation. It's not in quotes, yet it refers to "we." Is that the editorial we or the Chamber we? Or have the Tribune and the Chamber merged? I'm not faulting Jim Wagner or the Chamber. They're doing their job. What I'm commenting on is the complete lack of editorial direction.
 |
| 25 years city council failed to make this quarry dog hunt |
As one of the key people who made redevelopment happen, and who put my own neighborhood in it along with the quarry and paid some serious prices for doing so (some other people paid far more serious prices, such as the loss of their business), I deeply resent being called a liar. The main reason for creating the redevelopment area was to put the quarry in it. The fact that later city councils did not have the vision or the will to make redevelopment happen in the quarry resulted in them fruitlessly waiting for the Developer Savior to come down from the sky and propose a perfect project, when the councils and staff should have been taking the lead and saying what the city wanted in the quarry and what the city was prepared to give to get it. That's how redevelopment was supposed to work. Instead, what we got was developers wanting approval for hundreds of houses. Twice, the voters had to tell them "No, that's not what we want."
 |
| "... too late for ANY development"??? |
You call the "overlay" on the property that required a public vote on housing, a "brilliant anti-development move." I call it a way to protect the quarry from being entirely covered with a huge housing development. That is surely what would have happened unless there was a way to preserve the quarry's visitor-serving commercial potential. The requirement for a vote on housing did exactly that. But because the city wouldn't take the lead in redevelopment, it now looks like it's too late for any development. The regulatory environment changed, the economy collapsed, and the state budget crisis eliminated redevelopment.
Saying that quarry redevelopment is a "serious lie" is a serious insult to the city staff and council members who worked to create the redevelopment area and a plan for the quarry. Do you think the people who implemented redevelopment were intentionally trying to prevent development in the quarry? That's just dumb.
It was not a lie. It was inaction, ignorance of redevelopment, no guts and no forward thinking that resulted in no development in the quarry. It was people expecting an appropriate project to be handed to them rather than going out and making it happen, people with their heads stuck in the sand ... or somewhere else."
****
 |
| Okay not developing the quarry is outrageous, but let's call the housing vote a Pinocchio overlay |
What Elaine said about Quarry development. ".... This is the most outrageous situation I've encountered. The Friends of Pacifica slate put a voter "overlay" on the property to ensure there wouldn't be too many houses. In short, they made sure that the public could always say "no" to any sort of development that involved houses. Even if there would be analysis and oversight beyond the public's knee-jerk reaction. That was a brilliant anti-development move because it's always easy to say "no" to housing before any hapless developer agrees to spend any sort of dime figuring out what can be built. Let's call a spade a spade: the notion that the quarry development was going to be the "crown jewel" of redevelopment was a serious lie that I repeated over and over as a young reporter. Well, it's a lie. Former Tribune Editor/Publisher Chris Hunter called it right: that once the city put the wastewater treatment plant on the site (which is still poorly functioning, I might add) that would guarantee there would never be development due to Fish and Wildlife involvement."
Related - Fix Pacifica reprint of Jim Wagner's Pacifica Tribune article, "Pacifica Chamber of Commerce forms Business and Community Political Action Committee."
Submitted by Jim Alex
Posted by Kathy Meeh
50 comments:
Yeah, yeah, whatever, same old back and forth. Ad nauseum. Gets us nothing. The land is privately owned and it is for sale, yes? It is also very heavily regulated and the economy is still sucky. And so, again, Pacifica waits.
I do agree that once the WWTP went in the options for development grew more regulated and they shrunk. And stunk. So who, pray tell, decided to locate the WWTP there? Right next door to a prime piece of real estate. That seems to have been a pivotal decision. Anyone remember how that came about? Was there opposition from the previous landowner? Facts?
Mary Ann takes credit for that. At least she used to boast of the grass roots effort that put it there, maybe she wont take credit anymore. To be fair the city tried to put it up by the archery range up SF said NO WAY.
This situational re-write cloaked in phoney umbrage is a pathetic cover for the devastation caused by Pacificans For No Development.
Mike, describe in as many words possible what you mean by "devastation caused". You are being vague. What IS your problem, Buddy?
Thanks, Todd. Guess that grassroots group she was part of got it out of their neighborhood anyway, improved the air quality, property values, etc. So, it was in fact a NIMBY plot all along...just a different group of NIMBYs.
Wonder if there are any regrets among that group? I've heard Ms. Nihart comment on the numerous regulatory barriers to development in the quarry. Indeed!
Oops, did you all need to develop that quarry? Oh dear. Can we interest you in another big hole in the ground over here on Beach Blvd?
No explanation neccessary. It's all perfectly understandable because we are all NIMBYs.
Pete should have left it all alone. Quarry is privately owned. That's a fact. The Loeb was instrumental in devising the "poison pill" that requires a vote of the public to put any housing there. To say anything else is to validate Elaine's Op Ed. The "FOP" then orchastrated a negative, emotional, tirade of death and destruction against any attempt to do anything in the quarry. Yet, they continued to maintain that they "had a plan" that would work. Ah, where is that plan Curtis, Verbhy, Shoemaker, Hall, Bohner, LOEB, et al? I call bullshit on all of it. Yes, Toddy, your FOP has devastated Pacifica's future economic base.
Well we know the village idiot position is taken
751, Ten minutes shifts, ok? Don't you sit there all day.
I've never smelled the treatment plant in Rockaway, only in Vallemar so it doesn't seem to be a problem.
Sucky economy Anon 520? That hasn't stopped every other Peninsula city from out building us 10-1. There is a housing shortage you know and rents have skyrocketed because of it.
I vote for Elaine's version of this mess. It's perhaps not as colorful as the posts on here, it lacks villains and certainly has no heroes, but she has nothing to gain by telling it and her story rings true.
"Anyone remember how that came about?"
The city wanted it in Fairway Park, and neighborhood activists didn't. Judging by the smell, they were wise to not believe the hype about "state of the art" sewage treatment plants.
I think the council of the 1980's took a gamble towards redeveloping Rockaway, trouble was, the money wasn't there. Any development projects would have had to include large numbers of houses, because, until recently, that was all that would make it financially feasible.
The two public votes since then (2002, 2006) have shown that Pacificans don't want a massive housing development in the quarry. It's just the way it is.
What a little whiner Loeb is. Waaaa you called me a liar. Waaa I'm not the bogeyman. And waaa there was no plan for the Quarry.
I agree with Hutch. I don't care if it stinks up Vallemar. Bunch of tree huggin', skirt twirlin', NIMBYs. Just don't put that plant in my neighborhood.
Lionel the last vote by the people for housing at the quarry was almost 50/50, so a lot of people did want it. I believe now with all our financial problems it would pass.
I meant a problem in Rockaway Anon 826
Interesting, Lionel. Those damn NIMBYs are everywhere... Sharp Park, Fairway...Guess they knew crap always stinks even if somebody convinced the experts at city hall otherwise. Who'd get sued if some hypothetical resident or business didn't like the aroma? The developer? The city? Countersuits? We don't have to worry much about that.
anon 824 that's very cerebral, quite impressive
The city was just as broke and disfuctional under Peter Loeb, as mayor as it is today with sneaky Pete as mayor.
The hippies won by losing!
The two public votes since then (2002, 2006) have shown that Pacificans don't want a massive housing development in the quarry. It's just the way it is. Lionel Emde 8:21pm
Lionel, just to keep the record straight, the main verbalized complaint in developing the quarry was TRAFFIC, not housing. And, the 2006 vote was close even with the usual negative NIMBY campaigning. Also, there were some irregularities at the Vallemar voting center, which may have made the vote even closer.
TRAFFIC was the #1 complaint in Peebles Corporation polling, confirmed by SMCTA studies and first hand observation while stuck in traffic during peak hours. That's the reason Peebles Corporation was interested in doing what they could to fix the traffic issue (developer mitigation and improvement).
I volunteered during the last 3 weeks of the Measure L campaign, and mainly telephoned families in our community. My findings confirm the #1 complaint in developing the quarry was already clogged up TRAFFIC on highway 1.
All those NIMBY variations that rich people would be living there, with 355 toilets flushing at the same time, were secondary and for the most part inconsequential. People seemed to like the 2006 Peebles concept much better than the 2002 Trammell Crow concept. But then, I liked both for the economic and civic value to this community.
Agree to build all retail/commercial in the quarry, fine but plan it and build it. 25 years later, this city need jobs, cash and an improved highway. The quarry is the 88 acres which MAY be available. The custom retail outlet, the 2006 village concept, whatever the studies show as viable - all good. And fix the highway.
Not likely in our lifetimes, Ms. Meeh, but we can keep the dream alive. Remarkable that we would stick a malodorous WWTP smack dab next to our "crown jewel". Big oops. Voting irregularities at Vallemar? Shocking. Noxious nimbys/noxious fumes? Thanks for the great laugh about 355 rich people flushing their toilets simultaneously. Who knew? And, mourn with me, would ya, the unlikelihood we'll have Premium Outlets in the quarry? I'd change political parties for a Coach store here.
It's a lie that traffic was the main concern in Peebles developing the quarry. It was 355 houses.
Peebles lied. He said if the houses weren't approved, he'd build all commercial. Then he walked away and defaulted on the loan. Con artist.
TRAFFIC was the #1 complaint in Peebles Corporation polling, confirmed by SMCTA studies and first hand observation while stuck in traffic during peak hours. That's the reason Peebles Corporation was interested in doing what they could to fix the traffic issue (developer mitigation and improvement).
Traffic is the number one battle crty of the hippies. I find it quite funny that now that Caltrans wants to fix Highway 1 the hippies say..Why there isn't enough traffic.
Go over to Tanforan Mall and 1000 housing units were built across the street. Traffic flows thru the area better now then before these apartments and condo's were built.
I love how the hippies disregard the truth!
Anon 829 - No, it's already been established that Loeb was the one who lied.
Mr Peebles is a world renowned developer who's track record is impeccable. Awards from Obama, world class projects in Miami, NYC etc.
Is it because he is a successful black man that you call hin a con artist?
Our little town was lucky to have such a man interested in building another world class project here. But the hippies blew it for us and convinced a little more than half of us that this man was evil.
Nice job Peter Loeb and the rest of you NIMBY's.
The voters said no to 355 houses in the quarry. Very old news. Get over it and move on.
Peter can you repeat after me "I am not a crook"
"It's a lie that traffic was the main concern in Peebles developing the quarry. It was 355 houses." Anonymous 8:09 am.
No, it was TRAFFIC. And as stated prior, I heard it for myself.
Peebles Corporation only walked away from commercial when the City Council subcommittee (Vreeland, Lancelle) failed to "negotiate" in any meaningful way after 1 year of not many "talks".
With all the preliminary studies Peebles Corporation made and advertising, its clear to me Peebles intended to build the quarry. Peebles Corporation could have sued the city for an artificial wetland created by the city on the quarry property (similar to Half Moon Bay), they didn't do that.
Again, the then NIMBY city council and city NIMBY spin machine with their outside city friends prevailed. The city and the people of Pacifica lost this major economic advantage, in favor of nothing positive and a limited future. That's why we talk about it, Anonymous 9:49 am. Such folly should not be repeated.
From No on L, 2006, here's some NIMBY support groups against quarry development:
Sierra Club, Copmmittee for Green Foothills, Greenbelt Alliance, San Mateo County League for Coastside Protection (LCP), Green Party of San Mateo County, Surfrider Foundation San Mateo County, Committee to Save the Fish and Bowl, Pacificans for Sustainable Development. Plus then Pacifica Mayor Sue Digre, Assembly Speaker Pro Tem Leland Yee, and Concerned Manor Residents.
The NIMBY groups mentioned above seem to show-up anywhere in San Mateo County where there is any significant development.
The voters said no. Several years ago. That was the end of that chapter and the collapse of the housing market closed the book on Pacifica.
Peebles stiffed his attorney Tim Tosta for his substantial fees. There's your crook.
And you know that how anon1213?
Nobody stiffs Tim Tosta. Santa Cruz native, Princeton and Boalt super shark in the world of land use attorneys.
"Peebles stiffed .. Tim Tosta."
Really, Anonymous 12:13 PM? What an interesting Anonymous comment, with no background information or substantiation.
Stiffing an attorney, doesn't that sound counter intuitive? If there were an actual problem, Tosta would probably know how to deal with it.
So would Peebles.
Todd,
If this is the type of city you and your faux enviro, anti-development buddies want to live in, that's your business. Unfortunately you've wrecked it for everyone else. Now that the wheels are coming off, the silence and the spinelss attempts to re-write history are sickening, but not surprising.
Your gang has delayed, crippled or derailed every opportunity for structural and economic development ever presented to Pacifica.
Your NIMBY mantra has devastated our local economy and brought us:
impending bankruptcy,
slashed services,
failed infrastructure,
ocean and aquafer pollution,
failed businesses,
inadequate tax revenue,
fantastic frog habitats! ribbett ribbett
I kind of agree with Anon 944. Peebles was a highly acclaimed honorable developer.
He did not deserve the mud slinging vilification put forth by Peterr Loeb and others on the no on L side.
Is it because he's black that you slandered him?
Or was making him out to be an evil out of town developer just a way to defeat a project you were against?
Thought so.
Peebles "honorable"? That's a laff.
Come back Don, come back!
The NIMBYs vilify all developers, whether they're from out of town or not. Remember the crap they gave the Houmams?
Was that the project on Palmetto Steve?
There maybe another reason why Pete Loeb may not want the Quarry built. He is a renter, not a homeowner and lives right down in Rockaway near the beach. Hmmmm. If the Quarry was built and I was his landlord, I certainly would be looking at the newly increased value of my rental property. I would either raise my rent or even better, sell my property to make up for the loss of my hard earned and pitifull 410K.
Nor did they care about a local developer, Tait Cowan!
"Was that the project on Palmetto Steve?"
Yep.
Anonymous said...
There maybe another reason why Pete Loeb may not want the Quarry built. He is a renter, not a homeowner and lives right down in Rockaway near the beach.
Loeb, is the one of the lead hippies in charge of the bankruptcy of Pacifica.
He has been a homeowner in Rockaway a long long time.
Without parcing it out too-too much I think the overall point should be of concern to us all, too much of what I see lately in the Trib is verbatim text instead of independent 4th Estate editorials and publications. It's also like the old "rip and read", the "quick and dirty" means the old radio announcers pretended to get the new out from the AP/UPI Teletypes. That article in the Trib about the City Council special Sunday "Study Session" was virtually just a summary of the documents the submitted by the Departments Heads, the meat and potatoes of the front page article, I think that could have been better placed inside with more what the public wanted the Council Members to hear, for instance my "3-Minutes" wasn't even mentions, and I made some valid points of how interaction, cooperation and joint operations with the Water Department, GGNRA, City and Council of San Francisco and the adjacent City of San Bruno, and use of the Vallemar Police Station for placement of fire equipment to better serve the Central and Southern Parts of Pacifica, that San Bruno Engine-52 Could come over from the end of Sneath Lane from the San Francisco Jail Site by-passing ALL traffic on a possibly jammed Coast Highway-1, and that those self-same back roads of the San Francisco Watershed could double as an emergency escape route for both Linda Mar, Fassler and the Valleymar areas in the event off a necessary earthquake-tsunami evacuation. I's just basic geography, but why the coverage of my many recommendations was omitted I guess you will have to ask the new publisher.
Thank you,
Gary J. Mondfrans,
Pacific Passions at Barely Worn Consignments
35 West Manor Drive
Pacifica, California 94044
(650) 355-8888
eMail:Elect.Gary.Mondfrans@USA.com
Maybe because you're a declared candidate for public office? I'm sure they'll publish every word when you speak at a candidate's forum. Don't assume a plot. Go ask Elaine Larsen.
Gary, it's the economy....
That's a nice idea to extend sneath lane over the hill to help with fire response time. But this would cost millions.
Do you understand we're ready to go under?
Being that you are in the SF police union and an employee would you be willing to cut your comrades pay and benefits here?
I haven't heard anything from you to think you would. Nor have I heard specifics that will save us from bankruptcy.
Yeah, I'd be leery of any candidate with income/family ties with any public employees union, particularly police and fire unions. Impossible choices. Once on council would they have to recuse themselves from voting? Mondfrans is not the only one running with this baggage.
Who else Anon 225?
Must I do everything for you?
Are you talking about a new 380, Honorable candidate? I lived in San Bruno in the 70's and I still have the old EIR for the 380 route. And I would pay to see one of those engines come over those dirt roads to Fassler then go to work. Oh, and, you have quite the rep over there. I still know a lot of old farts over there. Let's see your resume. Please.
Post a Comment