Attend in person, 2212 Beach Boulevard, 2nd floor. Or, view on local television or live feed Pacificcoast.TV, (formerly pct26.com). If you miss civic meetings, view on PCT 26 You Tube! The planning commission meeting begins at 7 p.m., or shortly there following. Planning Commission updates, archives are available on the City website/Planning Commission.
| 135 Stanley Avenue, Pedro Point |
Closed Session, 6:30 p.m.
Govt. code 54956.9 (d)(2), significant exposure to litigation, 1 case.
Open Session, 7:00 p.m. Administrative. Closed session report. Public Oral Communications. Consent items, none.
Study Session
1. Rockaway valley neighborhood, north and south boundaries development policy options, parcels designated Very Low Density Residential (VLDR). Discussion and direction continued from Planning Commission meeting, 2/16/16.
Public Hearings
2. CDP-348-15-UP-70-16. Construct a 993 sq. ft. addition to 135 Stanley Avenue (APN 023-035-040), an existing 1,962 sq.ft. lawful nonconfirming single-family residence. Agent Eric Jacobsen for property owners Samuel Casillas and Andrea Masters.
Planning Commission communications. Staff communications. Adjourn.
----------
Note: Acronyms: CDP, coastal development permit. UP, use permit. Photograph from Zillow.
Posted by Kathy Meeh
53 comments:
Wait a minute, is that the same Casillas who is the bane of anyone who wants to build something on Pedro Point? He wants to create a monster house?! Can anyone say hypocrite.
Isn't Sam Casillas one of the NIMBY stalwarts? If this was a regular Joe, the NIMBYS would be out in force trying to stop him.
Hal Bohner speaks, from Riptide post December 26, 2007
Monster homes are defined bigger than 2,800 sq feet...
I assume Bohner will attend to righteously oppose.
December 26, 2007
What to Do About Monster Homes in Pacifica
How do you feel about Mega Homes, sometimes called Monster Homes or McMansions? Personally, I don’t like them much. They often have adverse impacts on their neighbors, affecting access to daylight, sunshine, and views; compromising privacy; and representing disproportionate contributions to climate change and consumption of material resources in comparison with more modest homes.
I live in Vallemar, and Monster Homes are springing up all over the neighborhood and elsewhere in Pacifica, much to the dismay and shock of many residents. Neighbors of these Monster Homes ask what can be done to control them. Right now there’s almost no control, and neighbors are not even notified before they are approved by the planning department. They are not subject to review by the Planning Commission, and are routinely approved by the planning department without a public hearing.
There’s an answer in sight. The Planning Commission recently developed an ordinance providing that when a house over a specified size is proposed, the neighbors be notified and a public hearing be held to determine whether it should be approved. That’s the good news. But this is not the law yet. Rather, the proposal will go to the City Council, which must approve the ordinance before it becomes law.
I urge all concerned Pacificans to contact City Council members and ask for speedy consideration and adoption of the ordinance.
HAL BOHNER
- See more at: http://www.pacificariptide.com/pacifica_riptide/2007/12/what-to-do-abou.html#sthash.ZM3aJofM.dpuf
This MONSTER HOME owned by a greedy developer must be stopped now.
I live up on Pedro Point and Mr. Casillas doesn't speak for all of us, and that is the problem with PP.
Casillas opposes monsters houses unless it's his!
http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_15112472
City Council adopts megahome ordinance Tribune 05/20/2010
"Sam Casitas, a Pedro Point resident, said his neighborhood has been compromised by large homes, which he called "monster homes. We are not seeing effective setbacks. These homes are energy hogs. Almost every one of these homeowners have asked for in-law units. They are virtual apartment complexes. All this drives the cost of construction up, as well. Parking is a problem. We're not taking in to consideration aesthetics and views being damaged for our neighbors," he said.
Trust all his set-backs and maximum green building standards are proper! Bummer...
Appeal. Appeal. Appeal. Appeal. Threaten. Sue. Smear. Appeal. Appeal. Do everything you can to delay this project so that it becomes a nightmarish project and the greedy hypocrite developer runs out of money.
Come on guys you know how to do this. You wrote the book.
Where's Bohner and the gang of merry nobies in their outrage! This monster house even needs a variance for height for, not one, but two carbon spewing fireplaces.
How big were those houses Casillas called monsters?
Hey Toddler, where's your righteous indignation now? This project will expose once and for all the true nature of the NOBIE's and NIMBY's. If they don't fight this MONSTER CARBON SPEWING HOUSE they will have forever lost their legitimacy and let it be known that they are truly the biggest hypocrites in Pacifica. I think I recall Toddler saying that everyone is for sale. No truer words ever spoken.
"I don't understand why anyone needs any more than 1,200 square feet to live in." - Councilmember and former Mayor Pete DeJarnatt. There will come a time when we will regret taking away people's personal liberties like we have with this arbitrary and capricious "Monster Home Ordinance". When is too far, too far? I suspect the day when it affects you, personally. Maybe we permanently ban "grey" as a color option for painting your home? Maybe we ban dogs entirely from the city? The founding fathers, the framers and those who gave up their lives for liberty and freedom,I wonder what they would think? Can't wait for the socialist trolls to weigh in...
I say let this Monster House, variances and all, rip through the planning commission in record time. Let it be built as an irrefutable monument to the NIMBY hypocrisy that has destroyed our town. It will take away the phony anti-growth propaganda they try to foist on everyone else to live like cave people in little hovels. This is just as hypocritical and even more pathetic than the clown show Republican race to the Whitehouse.
I love how all you "anonymous" folk on "Fix Pacifica (Not)" never have all the facts and then start making baseless accusations of hypocrisy.
FACTS:
1. The current house I am remodeling is on an 11,000 sq ft lot. The house currently on the property is falling in and will be remodeled to improve the WHOLE neighborhood not drag it down. (I have had more than one eager-beaver developer ask me to subdivide it into four lots sell it to them so they can then build 4 homes on it.)
2. We actually had a planning committee study session that we advertised over a year ago to share our plans with the city and our neighbors to assure everyone had a say in what we were doing and we incorporated many suggestions from them. The planning commission actually let us know we could go to about 3,500-4,000 sq.ft. because of the size of our lot without triggering the mega home ordinance. Our house is 2,900 sq.ft. with the the vast majority on the existing footprint
3. The house was originally built in 1933 (remodeled in 1955) meaning the streets came later and encroached on the properties right of way---that is where the variance comes in..
4. We are not increasing the footprint of the house on the down-slope because there are two majestic cypress trees right behind the house that we will not cut down (although we could have) because I am a full on tree-hugger and I hug those trees at least once a week...and talk to them too (all are invited to hug the trees as well because trees always need more love in my estimation), but sadly we did have to cut down some Monterrey Pines because they had canker and were in danger of falling on the neighbors houses...but I asked them for forgiveness first
5. There is nothing that even resembles an illegal in-law unit in the plans as we actually respect our neighbors and don't want an extra ten cars parked right in front our our neighbors houses.
6. We have actually improved the views and sunlight for all our neighbors and they have thanked us for what we are doing and I encourage you to come look at the property at 135 Stanley and also go and actually look at the plans before lobbing accusations...
7. The issue we had in our neighborhood was at 1267/71 where they built an apartment complex with zero setbacks under the guise of having mixed use commercial on the property. Please come and look at the property and tell me how it was justified...
Finally, if any of you would actually like to have a discussion on how to really "fix Pacifica" please call me; I'm not hard to find, but I doubt you will...and do ask yourself: How did Pacifica end up with a Taco Bell on the best beach in the Bay Area and HMB end up with Sams' Chowder House and HMB Brewing Co? Its not about being a "NIMBY Stalwart" its about seeking what is best for the City of Pacifica and seeking development that will move our city forward beyond being a bedroom community for San Fran. I live in Pacifica because I love the city, the wonderful open space, the majestic hillsides & beaches, the wildlife that needs our protection and all the people who care for its future; why do you live here?---Sam Casillas
Yeah, this kerfluffle was more a personal attack than real evidence of any so-called Casillas hypocrisy on this issue. You think it was maybe one ranter? Two, tops? Ya wanna attack someone on a such a specific issue, you should get your facts straight. You got small hands or somethin'?
Sam, I hope you get approval, as I think the monster home ordinance is ridiculous to begin with. (That's not to say homeowners should be able to do anything they want with their houses, and the neighbors be damned.)
I was sitting in the council chambers the day it was debated, watching DeJarnatt pull square footage numbers out of the air at random until something passed. I remember the NIMBYS arguing that the ordinance was necessary because nobody needed a big house, big houses destroyed the character of the neighborhood, and big houses increase traffic and global warming. It is hypocritical to say that big houses cause all kinds of problems, but not MY big house. I have zero doubt if it was just some regular Joe who wanted to increase their house size, and they presented the same list of justifications you did, the gang of NIMBYS would reject them outright.
everything fine here, nothing to see. Move on...
Well, if house is "falling in" you can do what's right, not compromise the neighborhood (your words in 2010)and put in required setbacks. Time to walk the talk.
Thanks, Sam, for improving a real eyesore without creating another. Isn't that what we all want?
Sam,
Thank you for the lovely letter of justification.
I'm sure if a non-member of your circle wrote the same letter it would be torn to bits by you, Bray, Loeb, hell Nancy would even write little sappy song about it.
Just curious, how many people are planning to live in this 2,900 square foot home?You must have a lot of kids and extended family needing shelter.
If it's just you and your significant other wouldn't it be more in keeping with your proselytizing to downsize the structure to about 900 square feet and then dedicate the excess land to a habitat or community garden?
"baseless accusations of hypocrisy"....can you say faux-enviro?
Please listen to us.
Don't use us as camouflage on a "monster".
On page 14 of the staff report: landscaping plan..inadequate for the project. The increase in building height and mass require some amount of new landscaping to compliment the structure and soften its visual impact. prepare..a plan..effectively soften the structure mass of the project and result in an improved site aesthetic."
Translation: house too big and needs to be hidden behind trees.
Gee, I think someone wasn't hugged as a child. Sam, do your thing!
Casillas' pathetic logic torture and word twisting is exactly why people refer to us as Pathetica. He doesn't even see that he has made it very obvious that there are multiple sets of rules for living in this town and the only thing that really matters is what club you call your own.
It's time to put a stop to the wrecking of our town by these faux-enviro hypocrites.
It's shameful that we put a fast food restaurant on one of the most beautiful beaches in America.
Taco Bell doesn't pay any sales tax to the City of Pacifica.
It's a state owned beach.
Wrong 538, Taco Bell is always in the top 25 of city sales tax producers.
You can put anything on the beach in Pacifica if you pay enough sales tax.
I'm concerned about Sam's home. Very concerned. You see, I'm worried about the traffic. Lord knows there will be huge traffic issues if he expands the size of that home of his. And how about runoff? Certainly there will be runoff from a project of that size that will utterly destroy the habitat of the riparian life downhill/downstream from his home, in addition to that of the steel-head salmon, Western Snowy Plovers and Pacifica Pot-bellied Paramecium, not to mention a dozen others. This has all the ear-marks of Ecological Armageddon. Thumbs down. Next...
It's operated by the city of Pacifica and it's within the boundaries of the city. Just because it's a state owned beach doesn't mean they don't pay sales taxes. The city, county, and state all get a share.
Honestly, I cannot think of anything that exemplifies the "I've got mine but you don't get yours" attitude of the Pacifica Nimbys/Faux-Enviros than Sam Casillas post @3:03. Wait a minute...He didn't honestly post that, did he?
It's also shameful that Palmetto Avenue between IBL School and Manor looks like a junk yard. The fragile bluffs are covered with filthy polluting industrial businesses and the street looks like a storage yard for junk vehicles and industrial equipment. Interesting how it follows the example set by the yard surrounding our ocean front Council Chambers.
The faux-enviros have no clue how to run a city and should not be allowed to further run our precious town over the cliffs. We need revenue generation and enlightened planning and development to lift ourselves out of this malaise. We need people who care more about just themselves and their phony causes to rise up and help Pacifica achieve it's rightful place in this beautiful and economic powerhouse part of the world.
Wake Up Pacifica.
Cathy, I doubt Taco bell generates anything near the tax revenue that Sam's does. I took my family to Sam's on a Monday night and the place was packed, and what I spent on meals for three people could have brought tacos for a couple hundred at Taco Bell.
The happy neighbors you mention meeting are not in the staff report. No mention of prior meetings, consultations and all sorts of stuff. Staff report says nothing about suggestions incorporated into anything. Sam, how do you explain none of this is in the official record? We can't read your mind, Sam.
Tom, I withdrew that comment, not paying enough attention, I thought Sam Casillas was talking about the seafood restaurant on Princeton wharf, rather than the Sam's Chowder House, a destination.
If the Sam's Chowder House proposed replacing Taco Bell at our beach, those of us who are not anti-development NIMBIES (Daly City through Half Moon Bay) would be screaming "traffic"!
Sam Casillas has probably been given a bad time by some anonymous comments because he has shown he does not support fixing this City-- not through development, and not through infrastructure updating (namely Highway 1 widening).
Hey Sam, Ain't KARMA a bitch?
You made your own bed, now it's time to lay in it.
I don't think these people are faux enviros, I think they are genuine environmental crazies who believe in the myth of global warming and fall asleep listening to Al Gore's books on tape.
Same people will tell you dogs deserve to vote and frogs need their own lobbying group.
Please. Animals were put here to eat. Haven't any of you ever read the bible?
7:15
Thanks Ted. Give Marco a call and commiserate on the Donald.
Forget it, Sam. It's Chinatown.
IN RESPONSE TO:
Sam Casillas said...
I love how all you "anonymous" folk on "Fix Pacifica (Not)" never have all the facts and then start making baseless accusations of hypocrisy.
RE: My name is David Blackman and I would like to respond.
1. The current house I am remodeling is on an 11,000 sq ft lot. The house currently on the property is falling in and will be remodeled to improve the WHOLE neighborhood not drag it down. (I have had more than one eager-beaver developer ask me to subdivide it into four lots sell it to them so they can then build 4 homes on it.)
RESPONSE: Sam thanks for not subdividing, but you would have discovered lots in Pacifica on slopes of 30% like yours need to be around 12,000sq.ft. each (Table 4 PMC). So your 11,000sq.ft. lot cannot be subdivided. Yes, I agree that the house needs to be rebuilt.
2. We actually had a planning committee study session that we advertised over a year ago to share our plans with the city and our neighbors to assure everyone had a say in what we were doing and we incorporated many suggestions from them. The planning commission actually let us know we could go to about 3,500-4,000 sq.ft. because of the size of our lot without triggering the mega home ordinance. Our house is 2,900 sq.ft. with the vast majority on the existing footprint.
RESPONSE: The megahome ordinance requires large homes on smaller lots to come before the planning commission. But since you’re in the Coastal zone and you are requesting a use permit for special permission to build in the front setbacks you have to come before the planning commission anyway.
3. The house was originally built in 1933 (remodeled in 1955) meaning the streets came later and encroached on the properties right of way---that is where the variance comes in..
RESPONSE: Again you are mistaken. Your property lines were defined in 1908 +/- when Pedro Point was subdivided. Your existing house was built 2’1” from your front property line and your garage is 1’8” from the front property line. Please refer to your survey by Savior. Not only are you tearing down your house per your plans, you are requesting for special permission to rebuild back as a non-conforming structure. You are also asking for special permission to add a 3rd story that will also be in not conformance. You are even asking to reduce your setbacks to ZERO! Never been done in Pacifca. Good luck.
4. We are not increasing the footprint of the house on the down-slope because there are two majestic cypress trees right behind the house that we will not cut down (although we could have) because I am a full on tree-hugger and I hug those trees at least once a week...and talk to them too (all are invited to hug the trees as well because trees always need more love in my estimation), but sadly we did have to cut down some Monterrey Pines because they had canker and were in danger of falling on the neighbors houses...but I asked them for forgiveness first
RESPONSE: You’re misinformed or deceptive. The new footprint is built on 14’ deep piers and increases the footprint by 80%-120% depending on if you consider your vestibule part of your house. I shaded in your pg A1 showing the new footprint in RED at www.DBConstruction.com/A1.pdf
Your also were required to include an arborist report in your application which is public record. The arborist report states you must install a TRP (tree protection zone) fence around the two majestic cypress tress right behind the house. Your report also say no construction or grading in the TRZ. Your plans show massive destructive grading and filling that is prohibited. You might need to consult with your architect about the feeling you have for your trees. You might need to hug them goodbye. Your current proposal will kill those majestic trees. Please refer to pg A1 of your plans. www.DBConstruction.com/A1.pdf
If you don’t’ place this height limit circumventing fill your house is over the 35’ height limit. Somewhere between 37 and 44ft. Never been done in Pacifica.
Continued……………
Continued……………
6. We have actually improved the views and sunlight for all our neighbors and they have thanked us for what we are doing and I encourage you to come look at the property at 135 Stanley and also go and actually look at the plans before lobbing accusations...
RE: I have closely looked at your plans. And here are the major bullet points that alarms me.
Building in the front setback, which is typically prohibited, will block your neighbor’s views and light. This will also result in a much higher visibility of your house from public viewing area.
The shear mass of this house might be the largest in Pedro Point if not the top ten of Pacifica. Weren’t you quoted in the newspaper demanding smaller homes with greater setbacks recently? Amazing.
The house is a complete teardown. Your own geological report states that all the foundation must be replaced. Your structural engineer says you might be able to keep only the 1938 retaining wall in the front setback to support your three story house. I can only speculate why you are fighting to call it a remodel. Hopefulness to rebuild in the front setbacks, cheat property tax, cheat permit fees?? You tell me.
You are filling 6’+/- of dirt behind the house to circumvent the height limit. Please refer to PG A6. I highlighted the dirt scam for you. This hasn’t been legal in the past. I am curious how the planning commissioners will deal with this. www.DBConstruction.com/A6.pdf
And yes, you just appealed my small one story 4 unit visitor serving Tax generating motel for no valid reason and I am resentful. Cost me another 12K to Pacifica and two months.
Good luck with MEGAHOME..
David Blackman, Resident since 1968 who cares.
Open your mouth in this town about corruption or best practices and the realtors try to pound you back into the ground.
No wonder every one wants to remain anonymous.
Sales tax revenue by itself doesn't even pay one percent of the total budget.
Never has and never will.
Between The study session on the very Low Density Housing issue in Rockaway & Mr. Casillas project I would not miss Monday's Planning Commission meeting.
You think Sam will hug the commissioners before the meeting? After?
Dave Blackman is truly a local hero. Thank you you for shining light on this scumbag. If it wasńt so disgusting it would be the funniest story in Pacifica in decades. These are the true colors of the Pacificans for Sustainable Development shining brightly. These hypocrits have destroyed Pacifica's economy in the name of frogs, snakes, plovers, trees, butterflies and anything else they can dream up to stop anyone but their small circle of selfish friends from enjoying life in Pacifica. They have entitlment mentality but it is only for them. This attempt to circumvent basic building codes, honesty and decency also exposes their arrogance and complete disdaine for fairness. They don't care about the pain they cause others. They only care about themselves.
Dave 747, thanks for a structural analysis and your professional opinion of the 135 Stanley Avenue project. Appreciate your integrity always.
Sorry to hear Sam wasted time and cost you 12K by his NIMBY (without cause) appeal of your project.
Wake Up..1043 makes makes the valid point that such repeated obstruction against productive development in this City is "disgusting". And over time, the trail of such tactics have greatly limited the potential of this City and it's future.
The future of this town is out there floating in the flooded Linda Mar streets. Mother Nature has no pity and accepts no excuses.
Dave Blackman 6
Sam Casillas 0
Sam
You truly are what everyone hates about NIMBY's. Serves you right for getting all your Pedro Point people down to council to bitch about the Carlson Property. Obviously you like fields of dog shit instead of revenue producing projects.
If Dave Blackman doesn't appeal your project for the reasons listed above, I will.
Karma is a fickle bitch my friend.
Hey, Sam, you going to let Calson build on HIS property!?
send comments to PC today for tomorrow's meeting! Send this thing back to the drawing board or dust bin.
email:
campbellr@ci.pacifica.ca.us ; gordonj@ci.pacifica.ca.us ; evansc@ci.pacifica.ca.us; cooperj@ci.pacifica.ca.us; nibbelinj@ci.pacifica.ca.us ; vaterlauss@ci.pacifica.ca.us ; wehrmeistert@ci.pacifica.ca.us ; murdockc@ci.pacifica.ca.us
As the self-proclaimed mayor of Pedro Point. Sam should be able to get plenty people that love and trust him for support. Let’s see, there’s him and his wife and ahhh ……………
Sam I can tell your concerned about hugging your trees on your property because actually you wanted to remove all the tress but the city made you keep those three trees. You just recently trimmed them because you wanted to bing your dripline in and that was not an arborist decision. And if you really cared about the trees you would not build so close to the tree. Your a hipacrit and a liar. If you count all those roofed in porches that will be closed after the project your house is closer to 6000 sq.ft.
we can tell you care so much about the meadow you call wetlands and delicate it is. yet you are there with your buddies every day with your dogs pissing and shitting and never see you walk away with a dog bag. if it is so delicate why are you letting your dogs run around and have it smell like a dog park. your such a hipacrit. go back where you came from. Pedro will be happier with a new major. maybe that guy Dave Colt.
Poor Sam. He just can't figure out why everybody is all worked up. He can't believe that people don't see the world the way he and his selfish buddies see it. He can't understand why just plain old average citizens don't agree with him that he knows everything and they know nothing. He thought he was going to get away with feathering his own nest while denying anyone else (except his buddies) the same opportunity.
It must be lonely living in that little (soon to be bigger), self righteous, ivory tower of his. Hypocrites are the worst kind of people. They love to look down their noses at everyone else and act superior when the truth is, they are the scummiest of all.
Do you think Loeb, Bray or Hall will pass up the opportunity to make top dollar profits on their hovels when they finally sell? Not on your life. They might even (gasp?) use a realtor in the process.
HYPOCRITES - ALL OF THEM!!!!!
Post a Comment