Editorial Editorial (May 28, 2004)

Council made right choice by rejecting moratorium

The Pleasanton City Council has wisely rejected a recommendation of the city's Planning Commission to impose a moratorium on specific development projects the planners don't like. Moratoriums, once a useful tool back in the days when many California cities operated under simpler and sometimes abused zoning rules, send a message to commercial, retail and housing developers that the city is shut down for future projects for an indeterminate time. Word spreads quickly at meetings where builders and investors congregate and in trade publications that serve the development community. For Pleasanton, a moratorium could become a public relations nightmare. Profits at many downtown businesses are razor-thin while vacancy rates remain high in Hacienda and other business parks. In national and regional business development publications, the city's Economic Development Department and organizations such as the Pleasanton Downtown Association and Chamber of Commerce are promoting Pleasanton. Word that the city has imposed a development moratorium could cause a new retailer, department store or corporate center that was eyeing Pleasanton to look elsewhere.

Besides, Pleasanton doesn't need the kind of development protection the Planning Commission sought. Moratorium legislation was enacted decades ago when cities required only a tentative map from a developer to show what was planned. Those hasty over-the-counter project approvals superceded any land use changes under consideration. Today, in Pleasanton and other California cities, development falls under Planned Use Development regulations that require extensive reviews, public hearings and approvals. And, there's no rush because an eager developer wants to build quickly. The Kottinger Hills site and Lund Ranch II, the two projects planners targeted in their proposed moratorium, have been on the planning books for years, including the 1996 General Plan, a document still in effect that lists both for future housing and open space development. They're not built yet because they haven't been subjected to the rigorous process that Pleasanton requires for approval. A moratorium would not have changed that process other than to add to the city's legislative burden, staff time and legal expenses, or possibly mislead opponents of the projects into thinking they had succeeded. Even the environmental impact reports, which the city is requiring for both projects, would continue during a moratorium, a process that now will include a broader involvement from those in adjoining neighborhoods.

The Planning Commission has tentatively scheduled a public meeting on July 12 in the City Council chamber to focus on Lund Ranch II, the Kottinger Hills site and other proposed and possible land use developments on the city's south side. This meeting, one of many being held to gain community-wide comments on the 2005 General Plan update, will give everyone a voice in determining land use policies. When completed, this new General Plan will guide Pleasanton towards buildout with what the public considers is the right mix of housing, office, commercial and open space uses.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.