Discovery of our economy through observation

Pacifica Tribune, My Turn Guest Columnist, 8/7/12.  "Why our environment IS NOT our economy" by Frank Vella

Visit the beach, buy a taco, leave trash

"I agree, our town's stunning beauty directly impacts the quality of all of our lives! I was born, grew up in and spent my life living and recreating in Pacifica. We do have some of the most stunning landscapes in Northern California, with the exception of the old sewer treatment plant and the old quarry. I think sometimes people forget that it is in fact "an old quarry" and not just a name. I have heard the claim to make our city economically sustainable through our environment too many times. I don't agree that we lost our way because we became a bedroom community to San Francisco. We have lost our way because we are and have been at a standstill for far too many years. I've heard these same arguments all my life here in Pacifica. The economy is our environment has not happened and as long as people want to keep arguing and fighting for no growth, then it will never happen. Our city will not sustain itself because people come here to surf, or walk our trails.

Fish all day, load up the freezer 

The public has voted for commercial developments here and have turned down many. Through people like the "Friends of Pacifica" development has continually been a financial disaster for most proposals, even those voted for by the citizens. Remember Mori Point? I don't think anyone in Pacifica has suggested that we turn it into an "asphalt desert," however a profit on undeveloped land of 46 cents on every dollar, was quoted in last week's paper? Interesting, I would like to meet someone who is making money on undeveloped land. Where is that money coming from? How do they get it? Approximately 50 percent-plus of Pacifica is open space, 5.5 square miles of open space of which generates no property tax or other income.

Pacifica has leasehold rights to Linda Mar Beach yet we can't even charge for parking there, although we get the privilege of cleaning up the Taco Bell and other trash that these tourists leave behind! Now, that was a great deal! Let's add in Mori Point, which was turned over to the Golden Gate National Recreation area, no money for Pacifica there either. What's left?

Trash pick up festival

Now let's address the unauthorized in-law units. I have been a real estate broker in Pacifica for well over 20 years. I have had the privilege to view and sell vast numbers of homes in Pacifica and have to say there are, in fact, very few homes that have illegal in-law units. I'm not sure where they are all of a sudden cropping up, but let's pretend they were (which they are not); It would not be because it is a cheaper alternative to living in San Francisco. That statement doesn't even make sense, since the supposed people adding these units are already living here and own the home. I don't think their main objective would be to help the people of San Francisco find cheaper housing. Their main objective would be to increase the revenue of their own household income or possibly to have a place in which to house aging parents. I know... instead of the Planning Commission constantly fighting people, why not allow people to actually have permits to add an in-law unit? No, that would make sense! Then we would have permit fees coming in, we would be able to reassess the value and raise the property taxes, we would have some more housing units for people to rent and live here without actually building any new houses, the value of the home with the in-law might increase... that would just make no sense at all!

  Economy to-do list:  ocean rise, vacate

This same writer then goes on to state that additional housing would not have saved Pacifica Lumber or other like businesses. The encouragement for remodeling, expansion and development spurs a multitude of businesses. City imposed restrictions do not. Instead, we want to continually prohibit any new growth, even in old "quarries" where these "tourists" are not hanging out. Wouldn't it have been better to get them there spending some of their recreational funds, even if the project did include some evil housing units? Maybe if these tourists loved it so much, they might actually want to live here because they want to recreate every day (not just on the sunny days) and help pay some of our exorbitant sewer fees and other outrageously high parcel taxes. They may even do their grocery shopping here in Pacifica, they may occasionally use our bike shops, they may even dine at the new Surf Spot.

Right now, where are these tourists who supposedly come to hike and add revenue to our city? Where are they spending their money? Lets calculate that revenue result to the city. I've heard it all before, yet this statement only comes with a "vision" but no reality. I agree, let's do a better job of promoting our natural beauty to more potential tourists and yes, find ways to keep them here once they arrive. However, the only true bold vision I have seen from dedicated city officials is "no"! The groundwork has been laid to move forward with this endeavor? The tourists that come to hike in the Pedro Point Headlands and take in the views from Devil's Slide, will not be adding any revenue if there isn't anywhere of interest in which to spend their money. They will shop at the Pedro Point Shopping Center? Isn't that one of those dreaded strip malls mentioned earlier in the article?

I must commend the writer in their mention of preserving the Golf Course, but hoping they will spend the rest of the afternoon at the "planned Palmetto streetscape" will only happen if someone has the money to move forward with this project.

Economy to-do list:  traffic, can't build

The old waste water treatment plant in Sharp Park, The Pedro Point five acres, and the Quarry property, are the only real locations for some economic growth for Pacifica. Should we talk another 15 years about these properties? Should we spend more money on consultants and meetings to discuss what we should do there? Can we have a City Council who will actually make a decision on something without hiring another company or consultant to tell us to have another meeting on their findings? Can we open up property to (OH NO!) investors or developers who may have actual experience in developing properties and economic revenue generating businesses? 

I don't think anyone has ever suggested or would suggest that we build out Pacifica in such a way as to remotely resemble Daly City. Developing the old waste water treatment plant and the quarry would hardly be considered "carving up the green hills;" whereas truly carving up the green hills to add more trails for people to stomp through wildlife is not nourishing.

Safety to-do list:  no traffic, why fix?

I have the feeling that anyone talking about our environment being our economy is someone who wants what so many people want, nothing. They want their city to be the place that they first came to and do not want it to change. I understand that and have the same feelings as they do, yet I realize that I live in a home where at one time it was an open field where no business or homes existed. Things change. People should just say that they want no growth or change and be honest about it.

My vision of Pacifica improving its economic base would be modifying Highway 1 for a safer traffic corridor and easier access for local as well as tourist traffic, developing the quarry into an economic engine of Pacifica, utilize the old waste water treatment plant to possibly a nice hotel and restaurant, and reducing the restrictions on property and business owners who want to improve their property or business.

We must change our thinking and be more realistic with what can be done with the least impact on our beautiful city, while expanding to keep our city financially healthy, vibrant and yes, a place people want to come visit, play and stay — spending their money here."

Posted by Kathy Meeh