Posted by A resident since 1979, a resident of the Southeast Pleasanton neighborhood, on Jul 21, 2007 at 9:31 pm
So......first....... regarding the last commenter. What???
What's your point? Please be clear. Something about youth sports. After living 28 years in Pleasanton with now two adult daughters both living in the city and being a product of Pleasanton soccer and softball and the schools I am unclear about how youth sports will suffer regarding the Staples Ranch issue. Lack of sports fields? Hardly. Ice rink at risk? Yeah, maybe. A good addition.
More to the point on the real issue. Mr. Sullivan, compromise? Between whom and whom? Between elitest NIMBY neighborhood group and whom? The auto dealership? Alameda County, the primary owners of the land? Please be clear about this compromise that you see. Explain it to us, the greater constituency, Pleasanton citizens. How do we benefit? Sales taxes from auto sales? Is that all of it?
Suppose Alameda County were so stupid not to develop the property within the county or were to give it over to Livermore or Dublin? Pleasanton citizens get to jump onto I580, the second worst traffic nightmare in the Bay Area, so we can drive over to the auto dealership? Or to drive there to take walks in the fictitious, undeveloped park lands? Perhaps we can drive to the end of the expensive, taxpayer paid-for Stoneridge drive "cul-de-sac", park our cars, and walk over. (As an aside, I bet the locals will complain about the cars parking there!)
So, for this to be a compromise, it must be between the greater Pleasanton citizenry and the vested-interest group that is promulgating this initiative. I don't see how the issue of the auto dealership involves this other than to throw some sales taxes to Pleasanton. I believe the greater Pleasanton citizenry wants the already planned development entities to be put in place and they want to get to this location to benefit from them without having to get onto I580.
To be fair to Mr. Sullivan the Pleasanton Weekly article quotes him as saying this revised initiative "opens the door for further discussions", and therefore, is not a final compromise. However, the Stoneridge extension and the development of Staples Ranch has been thoroughly vetted. The greater Pleasanton citizenry wants our leaders to make it a done deal, not negotiate it further with elitest NIMBYs.
Finally, let's be clear on the reality. Scott Haggerty and Alameda County have a responsibilty to all county taxpayers to maximize the county's return on the land known as Staples Ranch. They will put in a commercially intensive development similar to Hacienda Crossings if they get the chance. If Livermore gets the chance, you can bet on it. There will not be one Livermore resident who gets up at their council meeting to object. Once Pleasanton is out of the picture, we have no leverage over what gets put there. When this happens, the greater Pleasanton citizenry will likely press more vigorously for the Stoneridge extension so we can drive there without getting on I580. More reasons to want to go there.