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.
Planning Commission meeting, 6/6/16, pdf pages 111.
Open Session, 7:00 p.m. Administrative: Order of the Agenda; Approval of 3/21/16 minutes; designation of Liaison to City Council Meeting (none).
Continued Public Hearing
 |
| Proposed 1375 Livingston Avenue residence |
New Public Hearings
2. CDP-358-15. 1375 Livingston Avenue (APN 023-017-090), Tess Lai, applicant/owner. Construct a 3-story, 2,700 sq. ft. single family residence, with a 400 sq. ft. attached garage on a 5,000 sq. ft. vacant lot. CEQA status: Class 3. Approve as conditioned.
3. PSD-766-07, UP-68-15, CDP-294-07, PE-143-07, PV-517-16, SUB-228-15. 2105 Beach Blvd (APN 016-182-010), Brian O'Flynn, applicant/owner. Construct a 3-story, 2-unit condominium duplex on a 4,726 sq. ft. vacant nonconforming lot. CEQA status: Class 3. Approved as conditioned.
Communications: Commission, Staff. Public (oral).
Adjourn.
----------
Acronyms: CDP, Coastal Development permit; PSD, Site Development permit; UP, Use permit; PE, Parking exception; PV, Variance; SUB, subdivision. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), class 3: "Class 3 consists of construction of small structures. (Guidelines §15303) ."
Note: graphic of proposed 1375 Livingston Avenue residence by SF Armls, Hill & Co. lot listing, Pedro Point.
12 comments:
As long as we're on planning let's take a look at what a misguided, narcissis, blogger likes to call news. Stenik likes to pilfer things from other websites and then mold them into his version of "news". One day i'd love to see a new library for Pacifica. I'd like it to go through the planning process all the way through to final approval. We deserve one state of the art facility. Danny-boy believes otherwise. To wit:
"The new 30 minute Pacifica Library Bond survey reveals the median new homeowner will likely be asked to vote to tax themselves an additional $5451.00 each.
$790,000 = Median home sale price (per Trulia)
$23 per $100,000 of assessed property valuation
$35.5 million = Cost of new Library
30 Years = Term of Bond"
There's an old say
Figures don't lie, liers figure.
Take some partial numbers then draw a dumbass conclusion based on nothing. If Steink's against the library so be it, but to systematically try to bring it down with bullshit posts is morally repugnant. Oh, wait, same holds true for everything he dishes out.
Stengink Style News:
EXCLUSIVE! Median home cost in Pacific now over $1.5m
Median home sale price: $790,000 (per Trulia)
Estimated mortgage interest: $737,000 (6.0 APR, 25 year mortgage)
Average total cost of a home in Pacifica: $790K + $737K = $1,527,000.
We need rent control NOW, to fix this!
I'm trying to be sarcastic. Apologies if he's already actually posted a version of this somewhere.
You people are the very reason why Pacifica has turned into a cess pool
Nice to see 2 units going up on Beach Bl despite Steink's histrionics that sea level will rise 10 feet over the next 5 years. Isn't that what he said? Oh, who cares what he said, this works better for glam purposes. But I'm still glad we have a couple of things getting built in this town despite the Steink's or the worlk.
I see once again Dan that you have put your usual “spin” on Pacifica.
1) Can you please explain why the average sales price from Zillow is relevant? Any Bond Assesment is based on the ASSESSED VALUE not the current market price. Most of Pacifica’s housing ASSESSED VALUE is far less than $790,000. Once again you throw out a figure that is irrelevant to most of the property owners to support your “spin”. As you have said “you can make numbers say anything” Please cite your source for a $790,000 ASSESSED VALUE for Pacifica.
2) Where did you get the dollar amount of $23.00 per $100,000.00 can you please cite the source as I have not seen that mentioned in the articles I have read about the Library?
3) The figure you cite of $5451.00, if correct, accurate and not “spin”, should be for 30 years and not all in one year. I would assume that number is based on #2 which is $23.00 per $100,000 which is based on sources you have not yet cited.
I look forward to your response here on Next Door.
How long has this Dan character been in town? He knows nothing of the history of the town except for what he attempts to find old documentation on. It certainly has been peaceful that he has been absent from the last two Council meetings. Hearing him speak with such authority, based on nothing, is irritating.
"Where did you get the dollar amount of $23.00 per $100,000.00 can you please cite the source as I have not seen that mentioned in the articles I have read about the Library?"
That dollar figure was mentioned in the survey the city sent out to judge whether people were amenable to a new library.
LOL
We don't even know what the total bond amount will be for or how it will be financed until we see the language in the proposed measure. So...until that time, these dollar figures Stegink puts up are nothing but pure, concentrated, BS (aka "made up" or "pulled from my a**).
Also, a bond measure based upon assessed value is just that, based upon the CURRENT TAX ASSESSOR'S value of your property, not what you can sell your home for. That Stegink can't figure out the difference should cause you to question anything he posts.
Seriously, the dude is allergic to the truth.
Dan should shut his site down and stop posting nonsense until he learns to present facts in an unbiased fashion. A bond won't be based on a home's market value and a home's market value isn't the same thing as its assessed value. C'mon, this is basic stuff and posting this is harmful to those genuinely seeking correct information about the library project.
Anyone who uses Zillow to get a home value, isn't a professional in the business.
BTW, FYI, this market bubble is on it's last legs it will pop soon!
Both high quality projects got approved unanimously tonight, Bravo.
With the two (2) proposed residential developments (Items 2 and 3), there was thoughtful, intelligent, professional dialogue from both the Planning Commission and Staff, (with consideration for the developers, and the public comments as well).
Also good to see Tom Clifford return to the Planning Commission. He was a relevant component of Commission inquiry and understanding.
Having a Public Works representative (Ray I think) at the meeting for Item 3 (the Beach Blvd Condo project) was also smart planning from the City Planning Director/Tina Wehrmeister.
As you say 942, "Bravo" to all concerned!
Post a Comment