NO on L: The campaign against Pacifica’s Measure L

Mr. Peebles' recent column in the Pacifica Tribune conveyed a veiled threat to Pacifica voters: Approve his proposed project of 355 residences and 500,000 square feet of commercial space or he will build our worst nightmare, a big box store or industrial/manufacturing center.

Mr. Peebles' column stated that a big box store is the easier path for him. He said the current commercial zoning allows him to "submit an application today without a vote by the people for more than 2 million square feet of big box development or same size industrial/manufacturing center along with all the parking needed" and implied Pacifica is powerless to stop him from this type of detrimental development. This is not true.

On July 12, 2006, the California Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal decision in favor of the town of Turlock to ban big box stores. This ruling sets a statewide precedent allowing cities to make their own land use plans and decide for themselves what's good for their communities. So far, 20 cities and counties in Northern California have passed ordinances limiting or blocking big box stores. Pacifica has the legal right to decide what kind of commercial development is good for our community. This state ruling also makes it difficult for commercial developers to file expensive legal challenges against cities and counties who decide to block them.

I doubt that Mr. Peebles intends to follow through on his big box threat. Commercial development alone would not be lucrative enough for Mr. Peebles. A Mercury News article said Mr. Peebles predicted his profit from his proposed residential project will be almost one half billion dollars. A big box store and a parking lot aren't going to yield that kind of profit. Besides, Pacifica doesn't have the market base to support a big box store.

Mr. Peebles' threats are empty, Pacifica. Don't let him use bully tactics to get his initiative passed in November.

Allison Thomas
Vallemar

The above was printed as a letter to the editor in the Pacifica Tribune on August 2nd, and is republished here with the author's expressed written permission.