Planning & Development Feed

The Quarry & Fair Political Practices

FPPC 410

Above is the California Fair  Political Practices Commission (FPPC) Form 410 filed by the "preserve the quarry" folks. This is the initial statement of organization. The San Rafael address is the same as that of the law firm that wrote the initiative, Nielsen Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leoni LLP. The only Pacifica mention (besides the quarry) is P.O. Box 1223. They mention that the major funder is a real estate developer, with the same address as Paul Heule, owner of the quarry. One thing that isn't on this document is their FPPC ID number (this is basically their application for that number). It is useful for searching the FPPC site for further statements. We think the next one is due at the end of July. The FPPC ID number is 1384849.


Resist Density: MidPen in Denial

Resist Density

"MidPen, in league with Supervisor Don Horsley, has clearly not listened to our community’s concerns. They have decided to push forward with this project, which will overwhelm our limited infrastructure and compound traffic problems on the coast. For MidPen to ask for our input on trivial factors like building aesthetics without first addressing issues such as traffic, lack of walkability or public transit, isolation from groceries and community-oriented services, and environmental impacts, is putting the cart before the horse. It is disingenuous for MidPen to purport it has received any meaningful design contributions from the community, when the vast majority of residents are opposed to building this out-of-scale development in a location which makes no sense." (ResistDensity.org)


Rockaway Quarry Again a Battleground

Rock rear - copy
Quarry Owner

Quarry Story

Land Use Plan

The proposed Rockaway Quarry development may be on the November 2016 ballot if the petition drive succeeds. Pacifica Planning Commission took its first look at the proposal at an April 4 study session. Stay tuned here on Riptide for further details and discussion on the quarry proposal. Add your voice to the conversation by clicking the Comments link below this post. (Bob Pilgrim photo)

 

 


Quarry Petition: Won't Be Fooled Again

"California Elections Code 9602. A voter who has signed an initiative or referendum petition, and who subsequently wishes his or her name withdrawn, may do so by filing a written request for the withdrawal with the appropriate elections official that includes the voter's name, residence address, and signature. This request shall be filed in the elections official's office prior to the date the petition is filed. A written request made under this section shall not constitute a petition or paper for purposes of Section 104."

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.


Rockaway Quarry Owner Information

Good research by a Riptide reader:

I found the website for the company that wants to develop the quarry:

http://thepacificaquarry.com/

I don't see "Preserve@Pacifica, LLC" (LLC name on the above website) on the California Secretary of State website. "The Preserve@Pacifica, LLC" is listed on the Michigan LARA (Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs), but I don't find that on the California Secretary of State website. It is in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and was apparently formed on September 2, 2014. You can supposedly access the Articles of Incorporation and 2015 Annual Statement from the following site, but no information pulled up for the 2015 annual statement when I hit it for XML. Same for Articles of Incorporation. I don't know what "JSON” means:

https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_mi/E50882 Michigan

Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA):

http://www.dleg.state.mi.us/bcs_corp/dt_llc.asp?id_nbr=E50882&name_entity= 

John J. Rosloniec is apparently an agent for 117 companies. Bizapedia:

http://www.bizapedia.com/mi/THE-PRESERVE-PACIFICA-LLC.html

Here is a report from Eenhorn:

https://issuu.com/eenhoornllc/docs/pacifica_project_description_w_atta 

(if link doesn't work for you, copy and paste this URL into your browser: https://issuu.com/eenhoornllc/docs/pacifica_project_description_w_atta)

Eenhoorn is out of Grand Rapids, Michigan.


Website Questions Quarry Development

Don't let developer ruin quarryPoster on Rockaway Beach kiosk. Meanwhile, at various locations around Pacifica, several uninformed, out-of-town "volunteers" are circulating petitions favoring quarry development, as locals challenge their facts and tactics. (Please see and comment on our related quarry stories. Also, head over to Pacifica.city to see "Fact-Checking the New Quarry Website," April 27. It's an eye-opening list of Eenhoorn housing projects around the country.)

S.F. Examiner Story

That OTHER Quarry Website


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)


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

Op-Ed PDF


Say NO to High-Density Housing & Traffic

F3674170-b838-43b9-8fd3-7ed4e034ecf3-1Midcoasters jammed Farallone View Elementary School in Montara on March 16 to say NO to MidPen Housing's high-density project, and YES to creating a new Montara Point Park. As if Highway 1 traffic weren't bad enough already, multiply MidPen's proposed 148 units times the typical number of vehicles per unit, and that gives you some idea of the transportation nightmare this would create on Highway 1. MidPen aims to develop a vacant 11-acre lot bordered by Carlos, Sierra, and 16th streets (between Moss Beach and Montara). In the photo below, you can see where Carlos and 16th streets spill into Highway 1, the scene of many traffic accidents over the years.)

735e6e21-8487-44b3-a871-14dc1af11ba1

Neighborhood group Resist Density (email resistdensity@gmail.com) asks residents to email MidPen representative Felix AuYeung at fauyeung@midpen-housing.org and San Mateo County Supervisor Don Horsley at dhorsley@smcgov.org. Also, please join the effort to turn this scenic hillside into Point Montara Park. Click the links below:

Let's Make a Park

Tell Supervisor Horsley

HMB Review Story

MidPen Developer

Email Addresses