| |
Posted Jan 15, 2009, 7:01 PM
|
|
BANNED
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
|
|
Quote:
THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 2009
Not Enough Green in Hunters Point Plan, Report Says
A report by two enviro/planning outfits says megadeveloper Lennar's designs on Superfun Superfund site Hunters Point don't give enough priority to the area's natural wildlife and "ecological assets." For one thing, they'd like a bridge connecting two land parcels across Yosemite Slough to be reconsidered because of its potential impact on the environment. Plus, they say, there's not enough space in Lennar's plan for natural habitat, and if that 49ers stadium gets built, there'll be even less. In a perfect world, the two organizations say a rejiggering of the Hunters Point development to have denser housing would provide more open space. The city appears to be more or less meh on the issues raised in the report, though they will seek the authors' endorsements to get the monster project moving along. If all goes well, approval might happen as soon as fall of this year, with completion in 15 years.
|
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/
Quote:
City's Candlestick plan under fire
Robert Selna, Chronicle Staff Writer
Thursday, January 15, 2009
A plan for turning San Francisco's Candlestick Point and the Hunters Point Shipyard into a neighborhood and business district twice the size of Treasure Island - one that could include a new 49ers stadium - fails to focus enough on the area's natural ecology, according to a report due today from environmental groups.
The 133-page report by ARC Ecology and Bionic, both environmental and planning organizations, suggests that the city and Lennar Corp. have tried to force their development ideas onto an area that includes important wildlife habitat instead of building a project that prioritizes and protects nature.
The result, according to the report, is less parkland, fragmented habitats and a bridge traversing a natural waterway - as well as a large stadium near parkland that will be used only eight to 10 times annually for football and infrequently the rest of the year.
"We are looking at the natural configuration of the land and its ecological assets, and we are interested in having a dialogue with the city about it," said Saul Bloom, executive director of ARC Ecology. "We are using the same ingredients as the city and have a lot of the same objectives, but we see a different way to do it."
The city's complete plan is scheduled to get a public airing before two public advisory groups tonight. The city will seek the groups' endorsement of the plan in the next couple of weeks, a significant step toward completing the massive development that 61 percent of city voters endorsed in June.
City officials say they believe their approach combines the best design with the most public benefits, while also being financially realistic for Lennar and its partners.
"We've done an immense study on all of the opportunities and constraints of this project," said Michael Cohen, director of the city's Office of Workforce and Economic Development. "We've looked at how much retail and housing there should be and how much research and development the market can absorb. The mix of the housing is based on a very sophisticated analysis of the market's ability to absorb the units."
A finance plan released in October showed that Lennar and its partners would invest $618 million in the project. In exchange, the city would provide the land. An additional $1.4 billion would be raised mainly through tax-exempt government bonds.
Approval possible by fall
Some of the plan's details may change before it is presented to the Board of Supervisors and other city commissions for approval, which could happen as soon as fall 2009. Construction could be completed in 15 years.
As it stands, three- and four-story townhomes, midrise buildings and towers would accommodate 10,000 residential units. The housing would be both connected and separate from 900,000 square feet of retail space, and buildings dedicated to research-and development-companies and other businesses would occupy an area equivalent in size to 44 football fields.
A 900-foot roadway
Sixty-two acres of sports fields would sit adjacent to parkland and, possibly, a new 69,000-seat football stadium. If the 49ers move to Santa Clara, additional research and development space would be built in the stadium's place.
The city's vision also calls for building a 900-foot roadway across Yosemite Slough to connect the two major land parcels.
Among other concerns, the ARC report argues that the city's approach takes away 23 percent of existing parkland. If the development were built more densely, not as much parkland would be lost, Bloom said.
And while city officials see a Yosemite Slough bridge as the best way to connect Candlestick and the shipyard, Bloom argues that it cuts people and wildlife off from the waterway. Traversing the slough with a man-made bridge detracts from the environmental experience and could subject wildlife to harmful pollutants, according to Bloom.
Cohen and development adviser Dean Macris acknowledged that the environmental impacts of the bridge needed more study. But they argued that it was the best way to connect the two sites and improve transportation.
Parks to be 'infinitely better'
City officials say their plan for 300 acres of parks and open space is based on the desires of existing neighborhood residents, citywide needs and the interests of the state parks department.
"I think we've made the overwhelming case that the parks will be infinitely better than they were before," Cohen said.
Macris said that if the stadium is built, it makes most sense to place it near the fields that will also serve as parking.
Team spokeswoman Lisa Lang said Wednesday that Santa Clara remains the team's first choice for a new home, even though a stadium deal there is not assured.
The ARC report suggested several alternatives for the stadium, including moving it to a site closer to the bay that is slated for housing.
"I strongly disagree with that," said Macris, the city's former planning chief. "You wouldn't be taking advantage of the bay views, and where would you put the parking?"
Get involved
The city's design plan for the development will be discussed in front of two advisory groups tonight, from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at 1800 Oakdale Ave. For more information on the project, go to links.sfgate.com/ZFWG.
E-mail Robert Selna at rselna@sfchronicle.com.
|
Source: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...BA1U15ADDM.DTL
|
|
|
Prev
Plus, the Santa Clara site is more transit-friendly than Hunters Point. Can that be changed? Perhaps. But as it is now, the SC site has a light rail line that connects to Caltrain right in front of it - Hunters Point, eh, not so much.
Linear Mode
