The Quarry That Would Not Die

Marketing the Quarry

I wanted to start a community discussion by writing this piece for the Pacifica Tribune ("My Turn" op-ed, March 30). The Tribune had published several articles about the Quarry site development, but no one seemed to be responding to those articles. I would like the community to discuss why we keep having to have this election over and over.

Brian Grey

(Editor's Note: Brian's Tribune op-ed notes that he is a Pacifica real estate appraiser. We consider that this makes him uniquely qualified to comment on the quarry proposal. We encourage constructive feedback at the Comments link below this post.)

New Quarry Mailer: Smoke & Mirrors

It says, "Ensure Pacifica Voters have Final Say on the Latest Quarry Development Proposal" (their caps, not mine). If residential is proposed in the quarry, by law the voters always decide ... EXCEPT if this initiative passes because it amends the law to remove your right to vote on future residential in the quarry. Then it says, "Limit development on the Quarry site." Wrong. If the initiative passes, it will approve 206 residential units in the quarry. It will approve development, not limit it. This is George Orwell's 1984 doublespeak. (from NextDoor online forum)

Correction: Sharp Park Berm Not "Legally Mandated" to Be Maintained

Stan Zeavin Op-Ed

This "My Turn" column originally appeared in the Pacifica Tribune (May 4) under a headline presumably written by the editor ("Challenging responsibility of Sharp Park sea wall," which op-ed contributor Stan Zeavin says has "nothing to do with the article and, in fact, deflects from the article's intention." We are happy to post Stan's op-ed here with the author's correct headline.

Quarry Initiative Disinformation

Everyone in town seems to have been mailed a packet from Pacifica Residents for Preserving the Quarry. Whether or not you're in favor of having 206 apartments built right next to the Rockaway Beach area, the information that accompanies the enclosed petition is misleading.

Pacifica Residents for Preserving the Quarry is not a local environmental organization. Rather, it is funded by the people wishing to develop the quarry. They also fund astroturf-type solicitors who have been appearing at major grocery stores seeking signatures for the petition.

If you sign the petition, you're calling for an initiative on the November ballot that would allow up to 206 residential units (apartments) near the Rockaway end of the quarry property.

A vote of the people to approve housing in the quarry was democratically established years ago, hence a ballot measure is required to proceed. There have been several attempts in the past to develop the area with housing, but all of them were rejected by the voters of Pacifica.

The initiative also mentions a hotel with a conference center, and retail/commercial space, both of which would generate tax revenue for the city, although there is no commitment to build them, and the initiative is not required. The 206 apartments are the chief money-makers for the developer, and if the initiative passes, they are almost certain to be built. At least 36 apartments would be affordable to persons making less than about $99,000 a year.

The initiative provides that at least 75% of the quarry will be open space, but much of the area must already be protected or restored by the developer, with or without housing.

The most unusual provision says that no further public vote would ever be required to build housing in the quarry, so long as the development is consistent with what is laid out in the initiative. This would seem to allow a sale of the development rights for housing.

Among the objections to the initiative are traffic. Residents and customers of the apartments, hotel, and retail establishments would enter and exit either by a new quarry road that parallels the creek, or by surface streets in Rockaway Beach, which are poorly equipped to handle additional traffic. They would then access Highway 1 at either the Fassler/Rockaway or Vallemar intersections. This would add significantly to the congestion during commute times.

Another objection to the initiative concerns recreation. The quarry is a very popular space for walking, running, biking, and dog walking. Most of those folks would be traveling beside the new road through the quarry. With the hotel, housing, and retail establishments in the area, dogs would seem to be especially unwelcome.

If you have already signed the petition, but didn't realize it was for housing in the quarry, you can withdraw your signature. You must file a written request with City Clerk Kathy O'Connell, including your name, address, and signature. No reason is necessary, but you may wish to note that you found the materials or people circulating the petition to be misleading. Drop it off in person at City Hall, or mail it to Kathy O'Connell, City Clerk, 170 Santa Maria Avenue, Pacifica, CA 94044.

Concerned Pacifican


Ana Reepen DUI/Manslaughter Case

The People vs. Ana Reepen (case number NF437696): Jury trial begins June 20. Reepen faces three felony charges, including gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, resulting from the Highway 1 head-on collision that killed Pacifican Bruce Ross Bernor. Pretrial hearing is scheduled for April 27 and a jury trial is set to begin June 20. Reepen has pleaded not guilty and remains free on $250,000 bail. The two counts of felony DUI relate to Reepen having a blood alcohol level of more than 0.15 and inflicting great bodily injury or death in the commission of the offense. Her blood alcohol level was reported to be 0.21. Turning the wrong way from Sea Bowl Lane, Reepen drove southbound in the northbound lanes of Highway 1 on July 25. Reepen's car and Bernor's car collided there. Stay tuned here for more details as we get them. Follow this thread at the Comments link below, and join the conversation.


F-35s or 20 Years' Free College Education

"Mind-blowing fact of the day: The total cost of the U.S. military’s F-35 program, $1.45 trillion, could provide free college education to every student in the U.S. for 20 years. Oh, and by the way, the program has been a total disaster. Nine years into development, the F-35 fighter jets (the most expensive American weapons ever built) are still not ready for combat, and their software is so flawed that they may never be ready. Great." (Sources: Military Times, Motherboard; cited in The Hustle online, April 28)