Opinion Opinion (April 29, 2005)

by Becky Dennis

The editorial regarding the California Department of Housing and Community Development's decision to rescind approval of Pleasanton's Housing Element contains a number of egregious factual errors.

First, our Housing Element is not part of the 1996 General Plan. The City Council adopted it on April 15, 2003, after a two-year process that included extensive community input as well as public hearings before the council, and Planning and Housing commissions. This new Housing Element was actually the first element of Pleasanton's old 1996 General Plan to be updated.

HCD certified the Housing Element conditional upon implementation of the re-zoning plan the Council voted to enact by June 2004. Your editorial is correct in this regard. The Housing Element does commit Pleasanton to rezone 30 to 40 acres the community identified as appropriate for high-density, affordable development. But that is all that HCD required. Pleasanton doesn't have to build any housing, but only to zone land to accommodate its fair share of regional housing need.

Furthermore, it is absolutely NOT TRUE that HCD and ABAG require Pleasanton to build 5,000 lower income housing units!

Most housing (76 percent) that ABAG identified as Pleasanton's 5,059-unit fair share are only for households earning above 120 percent of the median income (2,636 units - think Ruby Hill, Kottinger Ranch, Pheasant Ridge, Ironwood, etc.), and more moderate housing for families earning 80 percent to 120 percent of the median (1,239 units - think townhomes and condos). ABAG assigned only 24 percent of Pleasanton's total for more affordable housing: 455 units for households with incomes below 80 percent of the median (think apartments), and 729 units for households earning below 60 percent of the median (think senior housing at Pleasanton Gardens and Case Avenue, and some family apartments at The Promenade).

I have always found it ironic that, despite ritual official complaining about "ABAG's unfair housing numbers," Pleasanton has historically approved construction of almost three times our ABAG-identified fair share of housing for wealthy households. And, that was AFTER Pleasanton voters adopted a Housing Cap and Urban growth boundary!

The City Council should not risk legal challenges to these voter mandated growth controls just to avoid rezoning a few acres for affordable housing. It seems blatantly discriminatory, especially when Pleasanton has consistently approved housing for the wealthy so far in excess of what ABAG and HCD have required. Becky Dennis served on the Pleasanton City Council for over nine years before retiring in 2002 in order to spend more time with her husband and two teenage sons. In her spare time,she volunteers as an advocate for affordable housing, agriculture revitalization and open space preservation in the Tri-Valley. "Pleasanton doesn't have to build any housing, but only to zone land to accommodate its fair share of regional housing need."

E-mail a friend a link to this story.