Gosh, Honey, You Bought Me a Crumbling Cliff?! You Shouldn't Have!
April 12, 2010
First item on Pacifica City Council meeting agenda, April 12:
6:30 PM Closed Session Item:
1. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Conference with Real Property Negotiator
Discussion concerns price and terms of payment.
Agency negotiator attending session: Stephen Rhodes
Negotiating parties: City of Pacifica and 330 Esplanade, LLC and Aimco Esplanade Avenue Apartments, LLC
Property: APN 009-131-030
6:30 PM Closed Session Item:
1. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Conference with Real Property Negotiator
Discussion concerns price and terms of payment.
Agency negotiator attending session: Stephen Rhodes
Negotiating parties: City of Pacifica and 330 Esplanade, LLC and Aimco Esplanade Avenue Apartments, LLC
Property: APN 009-131-030
(Riptide correspondent Lionel Emde spotted this ticking time bomb in the council agenda.)
Drilltech has a crane at 380 Esplanade today. They've laid geogrid and will be surfacing with concrete tomorrow.
The city had a drain pipe going under the property at one time that was capped and moved farther south.
City Council voted Saturday to spend $400K to demolish 330 Esplanade.
This will be a non-competitive bid funded by excess Educational Revenue Augmentation Funds.
Even though this apartment building has a private owner who is technically responsible, the city is concerned it may or may not contain asbestos and will cost up to 20 times more for the city to remove if it falls off the cliff onto our beach.
Posted by: www.Pacifica.city | December 22, 2015 at 03:12 PM
My first take on this: Aimco is considering buying 330 Esplanade and Steve Rhodes wants to discuss with City Council the requirements for recertifying the building as habitable. I have to check into this further, i.e., what Section 54956.8 pertains to. I can't imagine how Pacifica could afford anything, but perhaps it might if it could immediately sell 330, and Aimco or Millard Tong (owner of 310 and 320) are the most logical purchasers.
Posted by: Chris Dant | April 10, 2010 at 10:35 AM
If this means what I think it does, it's unfreakin' believable.
Posted by: Dave Yuhas | April 10, 2010 at 09:08 AM
I'm concerned that if Pacifica buys the property, we are then naturally responsible for the cliff. Maybe that is the motivation. If the city owns it, it can get federal grant money for armoring that was denied the private owner.
Posted by: todd bray | April 10, 2010 at 07:52 AM