That being written, I guess it is okay to write things that may be relevant and things that are irrelevant.
www.pontevista.com is still 'Under Construction'. What is irrelevant is that the Web site was purchased by EMG Properties on April 28, 2004.
That original contract expired on April 28, 2009 but the site was showing 'Under Construction' just after the Planning Commission Meeting where the plans were denied.
Bob Bisno had the San Pedro site of Ponte Vista on his mind more than a year before his final bid on the land was accepted, it seems.
___________________________________________
I am still getting comments that perhaps, the Outreach Team will reach out to moving vans as the trailers may be vacated on or around July 20.
I consider that a shame for all of us if that becomes true.
No matter what our feelings were and are about the project, to have this particular venture fold is not good for OUR community.
I hope they stay and fight it out. But current economic conditions and "The Bob Years" may have wounded the processes to much to survive.
I am sure nobody in OUR community wants to start over with another over-developer or find out that the land is parceled out to a mish-mash of different developers.
We had enough trouble dealing with you know who and I don't want to see a number of you-know-who-like people clamor for the 22 or so existing parcels.
Unfortunately, the most likely outcome according to many folks who claim they know is that IF Mr. Fentin gets entitlements, he will simply put them up for sale rather than actually building anything like what is claimed to be planned now.
___________________________________________
It also seems mystifying to me that the Outreach Team hasn't provided information about how they and Mr. Fentin are working with the Planning Department to move along the project.
I think there should have been some marketing news from the Outreach Team expressing the progress they are having with the Planning Department.
For a group attempting to gain support for their project, I would expect some type of real progress reports forthcoming on their currently operational Web site.
Silence may not be golden in this case.
__________________________________________
The site as it was and currently is may continue to be the best thing for us.
I can't imagine what the Ponte Vista at San Pedro site would look like today if the opposition during "The Bob Years" hadn't done what it had to do.
At least we see today what we have seen for years and that may beat a conglomeration of sights at in a destruction and construction area that could have been abandoned just after it began.
If we are stuck with what we have been stuck with for so long, it means we don't have to deal with partial destruction and possible construction traffic, air, and environment.
It certainly looks like IF the current developer continues on and IF the team actually goes forward to create an approved Ponte Vista plan, it will take more years than expected to see the final move-in of the initial residents.
You know who claimed the final phase of construction was expected to be done in 2012 or 2013. Folks, that isn't likely to happen.
___________________________________________
I'm still sticking with my maximum number of units being 831-units. That is no matter who owns what land within the 61.53 total acreage.
That number is equivalent to The Gardens. If Ponte Vista at San Pedro includes any retail space, it is something that I don't believe The Gardens has.
So with retail it means Ponte Vista would actually have a slightly higher dwelling denstity compared to overall land area compared to The Gardens.
But again, 831 total residential units falls within the Planning Departments suggestions of between 775-886 total units.
Of course, if R1 remains on the site, don't look for me to complain one bit. Okay, just perhaps a slight frown about not having any senior housing at Ponte Vista, but I can easily live with that.
No comments:
Post a Comment