John Wildermuth, Stephanie Lee, Michael Cabanatuan
08/05/11
The city Planning Commission, in the nicest possible way, told San Francisco's civil grand jury Thursday that they were full of it when they objected to the way the commission and the Board of Supervisors approved plans to remake and enlarge the Parkmerced apartment complex on the city's southern border.
The commission unanimously approved a letter, which Commissioner Kathrin Moore described as "softened" from the original legal response, gently slamming each of the points in the grand jury's May report, "The Parkmerced Vision: Government-by-Developer."
No, the development does not conflict with state law and yes, it protects the rent-controlled units, the commission answered. Yes, there are plenty of penalties if the director doesn't follow through on his promises and yes, the developer (and the commission) have paid plenty of attention to the impact any future sale will have on nearby residents and businesses.
And when it came to the grand jury's recommendation that the city pull a key section of the development agreement, the commission said that just isn't possible because the whole purpose of a development agreement is to guarantee construction rights to a builder in exchange for a variety of public benefits and services. Without that guarantee, the commission said, nothing gets done.
The unanimous vote was a change from the commission's hotly contested 4-3 vote earlier this year to recommend approval of the project.
- John Wildermuth
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/05/MNGI1KJFR8.DTL
No comments:
Post a Comment