Peaceful Pacifica: The Calm Before the Storm
Grammarly: How Good Is It?

Developer Proposes Commercial/Residential Project @ Waterford & Monterey

Applicant Javier Chavarria on behalf of Miramar Enterprises has filed a planning development application to develop a vacant parcel with a three-story mixed use development consisting of 1,752 square feet of commercial space on the ground floor and five (5) residential units above the ground floor at the northwest corner of Monterey Road and Waterford Street (on the corner next to the Highway 1 northbound onramp, before the car wash).


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Commercial development doesn't pay in Pacifica.

Isn't this the same Javier Chavarria who was on the dead-in-the-water project currently scarring Fassler hill?

After approximately a year of discussions about that project, it turned out he was unclear on the fundamental feature agreed on for that project: LEED.

Previously scheduled Trustee Sale today 05-16-2017 postponed till 05-30-2017.

Javier is the guy drawing up the plans who is bringing the project to the city Planning Department.

He isn't a realtor or broker, nor does he work for the City of Pacifica.

We had confusion over this a couple weeks ago.

I think Todd's right. After Breslin sold the property, Mr. Chavarria was the agent shepherding the (then) proposal through the process. There are (or were) three or four owners. I don't know how different this proposal is from the last one. I don't remember that being three stories tall, but it was mixed-use, which died for lack of financing.

The order is:
*They build the thing.
*They sell the condos.
*The developer skips town.
*The new condo owners can't stand the all-night car wash and petition to have the hours limited or have it removed altogether, leaving Pacifica with less of the industry that we need and more residential that we don't.

Sounds similar to one of the last proposals that was "approved" but was still too big. Hopefully, it is better designed for the condos than the last one was. And I also should mention: Who wants to live next to a 24-hour car wash that anyone can use at 3 a.m.???

Who would want to live there with all the traffic?

No, the multi-story sacrificial mixed-use proposal by Javarre was put forward around 2004-2005. When I first saw it, I thought it was a parody because of the massiveness of the proposal. This current proposal sounds like the same thing. I have no idea who or what owns the small speck of land, but if anyone is interested, drive out of town from Manor and you will see a very small triangle of iceplant-covered land across from Oceana School and next to the self-serve car wash. Imagine five condos, each standing three stories high on that itty-bitty plot. If it doesn't make you laugh...

The late Andy Breslin owned this parcel for a while and proposed a building on this site. Is that what you are talking about, Todd?

This project went through hell and back to get approved about a decade ago. It did finally pass the Planning Commission, if I remember correctly. There were at least two study sessions after three failed attempts at approvals. It was WAY too much structure for the site. Of course, our current Planning Commission will approve anything. And I mean anything.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)