Add to favorites Examiner Bio

Debate on Sharp Park Golf Course Continues

.

Regarding my March 26th column, "Snakes to inherit Sharp Park Golf Course" I have received numerous comments from environmental organizations discussing the merits of converting Sharp Park Golf Course in Pacifica into a biological preserve as proposed by San Francisco Board of Supervisors Ross Mirkarimi. ( San Francisco legislative item 090329) In fact, Brent Plater, a former staff attorney for Center for Biological Diversity and a leading proponent  of the biological preserve, prepared the following Op-ed "Save Pacifica Restore Sharp Park" in response to my column, and it is published below.  Following Mr. Plater's op-ed are my comments. 

The legislation to consider converting Sharp Park into a nature preserve as proposed by San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi is scheduled for a public hearing before the San Francisco Board of Supervisor's Government Audits and Oversight Committee on April 30th (this Thursday) in San Francisco City Hall (1 Dr. Carlton P Goodlett Place, San Francisco, CA,)  at 1:00 pm.

by Brent Plater

Pacifica needs to encourage retail and commercial development.  For too long Pacifica’s leaders have focused on an unpopular, twice-defeated commercial gambit to build-out the Pacifica quarry, using the nearby Sharp Park Golf Course to lure revenue-generating development to the site.  Even now with another developer leaving town and the quarry again up for sale, these leaders cling to this plan, encouraging development at the quarry and trying to purchase Sharp Park Golf Course from San Francisco. 

It’s time for a new economic vision for Pacifica: lets restore Sharp Park in partnership with San Francisco and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area.  With their help and expertise, we can integrate a restored Sharp Park into Palmetto Avenue and create a new destination center of retail, dining, and entertainment establishments. 

The story of Sharp Park Golf Course, located in Pacifica but owned and operated by San Francisco’s Recreation and Parks Department, is one of benevolence, hubris, and tragedy. In 1918, wealthy benefactors who required the land be used as a “public park, or public playground” deeded Sharp Park to San Francisco.   Unfortunately, Sharp Park’s vibrant lagoon—with its abundant wildlife, coastal access, and beautiful vistas—was violently reshaped in the 1930s by Alister MacKenzie, a landscape architect who spent fourteen months filling Sharp Park’s wetlands to create an 18-hole golf course along the coast.  But he failed to tame Sharp Park’s natural ecology: the course’s ceremonial opening day was delayed twice because of wet playing conditions; coastal storms destroyed all seven of the beach-side holes a few years later; and a separate storm brought sea water so close to the clubhouse that the City illicitly built a crude sea wall to protect the course’s remains.  The sea wall gambit backfired: it cut-off Sharp Park’s natural water outlets, and now the golf course floods almost every year—with fresh water—threatening homes in the surrounding communities.

More recently, government officials discovered that the golf course’s operations and maintenance are harming two of the Bay Area’s most wondrous and imperiled animals.  The endangered San Francisco garter snake—arguably the most beautiful and imperiled serpent in North America—and the threatened California red-legged frog—the largest frog native to the West, made famous by Mark Twain’s The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County—are being killed by mowing and pumping operations implemented in a Sisyphean effort to keep Sharp Park from reverting to its natural state. 

For this taxpayers take a net loss of nearly $300,000 each year on Sharp Park Golf Course.  A 2007 Recreation and Park Department analysis concludes that under current conditions the golf course will cost San Francisco taxpayers millions more by 2013.  But even with this massive subsidy golfers are leaving the sport, and more specifically leaving Sharp Park.  Rounds played at Sharp Park have declined nearly 40% since 2000, and it operates at 45% of capacity.

A new planning process for Sharp Park was recently proposed by San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors: partner with the Golden Gate National Recreation Area to transform Sharp Park from an environmentally destructive and budget-breaking golf course into a community-centered model for urban development, natural flood control, outdoor recreation, and endangered species recovery.  Restoring Sharp Park will allow Pacifica to integrate our natural resources into a destination urban center based along Palmetto Avenue with retail, dining, and entertainment that people from around the Bay Area can enjoy.  It will make Pacifica more livable, integrating our urban and natural areas more fluidly than the existing chain-link fence that separates the golf course from Pacifica’s communities.  It will also protect homes and structures from changes wrought by global warming: restored wetlands and natural, adaptable barriers will protect the surrounding communities more effectively than the inflexible, expensive coastal armoring necessary to strengthen Sharp Park’s failing sea wall.  And Restoring Sharp Park will preserve and improve habitat for Twain’s frog and the most beautiful serpent in North America.

Restoring Sharp Park is a sensible solution to Pacifica’s environmental, economic, and recreational problems: its time for Pacifica’s leaders to stop clinging to the past, failed development policies and start moving forward with a better vision that all Pacificans can enjoy.

Brent Plater can be contacted at bplater@yahoo.com

 

San Francisco Environmental activists working to turn the Sharp Park Golf Course in Pacifica into a biological preserve simply do not understand the community they are attempting to dramatically change.

Leading the charge is Brent Plater, a former staff attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity.

In his Op-Ed posted here, Mr. Plater claims that Pacifica’s leaders have attempted to develop the former quarry site – another environmentally sensitive area – in a gambit to establish revenue generating commercial enterprises and doing so by leveraging the existence of the Sharp Park Golf Course to attract interested developers to the quarry site.

Unfortunately, Mr. Plater demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of Pacifica’s internal politics. In fact, it has been the proposal by two successive developers to pave over the quarry site that changed the Pacifica City Council from a pro-development council to an environmentally progressive one.

In fact, in 2002, the Trammell Crow development company placed a measure on the local ballot in Pacifica to gain the zoning authority to max-out on residential development at the quarry site. Local activists mobilized against what was then known as Measure E which failed by a margin of nearly 2-1. The measure’s broad opposition coincided with a local city council election where two pro-development incumbents lost their seats and two environmental activists were elected and remain on the council today. Councilmembers Julie Lancelle and Sue Digre were known activists and endorsers of the No on Measure E effort.

The new council’s position has never really changed, even when a second developer attempted much the same thing in 2006. The suggestion that Pacifica’s leadership has supported development at the quarry site is simply erroneous.

The City currently has an environmentally progressive council that has worked to protect vast tracts of open space and put in place both policies and investments that have vastly improved and protected a great deal of critical coastal habitat.

The council has consistently made it a priority for Pacifica to succeed as a city financially on the basis of its natural assets including hiking, great views, beaches, surfing and yes, an interesting and affordable golf course – which is also host to an archery range and a highly utilized clubhouse and restaurant.

If the course is removed and made into a biological reserve it will undercut the work of the environmental community in Pacifica and the development pressures that have been a constant in Pacifica will only increase – imperiling such properties as the old quarry site which developers have twice attempted pave over.

It is this dichotomy which is of the most significance. If the current council fails, a new more pro-development council may emerge. This would be an immense set back for the proponents of a biological preserve. Despite the fact that the City and County of San Francisco owns the golf course property, the City of Pacifica, according to State land use law will have the authority to determine its land use and  zoning.

In addition, the property carries with it a deed restriction included by the wealthy benefactors who gave the land to San Francisco which requires the land be used as a “public park, or public playground” and, if not kept as a public park or playground, the property could revert back to the heirs of the original donors. While San Francisco activists insist that an ecological reserve will suffice in meeting that requirement, it is likely that a court may decide that issue and it may or may not work out in the way activists foresee.

Yet another rationale for the destruction of the course is that the course consistently loses money, as much as $300,000 annually. But Pacifica city leaders and course administrators have publicly stated that the course is self-sustaining and much of the debt load is due to administrative costs and diversion of funds from the course into the revenue stream for the entire Parks & Recreation Department. As a stand-alone, many believe the course could maintain itself.

While it is widely known that two endangered species are found in the course, many believe that the recreational activities and the species can co-exist. But what it will require is a willingness of all parties to explore those options.

For the activists who have never considered the broader picture in Pacifica, it is critical that they slow down, take time to understand what all of the implications and do what is best for the community and people of Pacifica and for an area of rare and precious habitat.

Bruce Balshone can be contacted at bruce.examiner@gmail.com