James Larson submitted an editorial published in your April 2 issue that needs a response. The new project at the northeast corner of Mission Boulevard and Pacific Beach Drive is a mixed-use, sustainable design located on a transit corridor. Since the mid ’70s, the Pacific Beach Community Plan has included incentives for these types of projects. The city’s new general plan, adopted less than a year ago, continues to promote this type of redevelopment. Neighbors to the project have moved a majority (not “unanimous”) of the Pacific Beach Community Planning Group to oppose the project. But at every hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council there have only been unanimous votes to approve the project because the project is consistent with the community plan, municipal code and council policies. Larson alleges that 29 of the 48 parking spaces are not up to code. He neglects to recognize that the spaces meet the dimensions in the code while some have concrete support columns between the spaces near the rear tire. Many of you reading this response probably live in an apartment or condo complex that has columns like this project. These columns do not represent an obstruction to opening car doors, so they are consistent with the code. The director of the Development Services Department wrote a letter to the PB Planning Group explaining the parking, but the planning group and Larson continue to be dissatisfied with their own community plan and interpret the code as they see fit. The project includes 18 three-bedroom condos and retail along the street frontage. The sidewalks will all be replaced around the property and palm trees will be planted along the street, plus public art and a clock tower will be included. The building is 25 percent smaller than the Floor Area Ratio allows; the setback on the east side is increased by 12 percent, plus there will be a solid row of evergreen trees on the east side. The project will generate fewer auto trips than the previous uses on the site and improve the storm water runoff by 75 percent by installation of underground drainpipes, which will prevent storm water from flowing onto Mission Boulevard. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were also spent removing contaminated soils from under an old gas station that sat on the corner, removing that hazard from our community. I am a lifelong resident of Pacific Beach. I grew up here; went to the schools here; and I have built dozens of homes and business properties here. I am one of the largest employers in Pacific Beach and the largest sustainable builder in the county. The building is “sustainable” and will generate at least 50 percent of its own electrical energy from solar panels. Sustainable projects are important to San Diego and our community – so important that the San Diego Coastkeeper supported this project. In fact several original members of the PB Planning Group, who wrote the community plan in the ’90s, showed up to voice their support at the Planning Commission hearing because this project meets the intent of the original plan. Doesn’t it seem strange that after four hearings – one hearing officer, two Planning Commission hearings and one City Council hearing – that no decision-maker has ever voted against this project? I can’t continue to do sustainable projects if I cannot rely on the community plan and zoning regulations: there must be consistency and some certainty to the process when a project conforms to the regulations. What is the point of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a community plan if the PB Community Planning Group decides not to follow it? The building will generate five times more property taxes than the previous uses of a contaminated gas station site and the largest liquor store in town. Instead we will get public improvements and add a beautiful gateway to Pacific Beach.