High density housing complex planned for Hacienda won't have 'that Pleasanton look' Around Town, posted by Editor, Pleasanton Weekly Online, on Oct 19, 2011 at 9:19 am
Agreeing that a new affordable housing project won't have "that Pleasanton look," city planning commissioners nevertheless gave their thumbs up Monday to what is likely to be the city's highest density residential housing complex ever.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, October 19, 2011, 8:00 AM
Posted by taxpayer, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 9:46 am
Great, bring in more low income residents. Give them a huge break on rent and watch them turn their homes into trash in about 5 seconds. Even worse is the Section 8 crowd with their subsidised rent. You and I pay to build the housing, we pay for their rent, we get to watch them destroy the property. Yup, the American way.
Posted by Tango , a resident of the Vineyard Avenue neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 9:58 am
What is the " Pleasanton Look?" If my children decided to come back to Pleasanton to live, thay probably could only what this plan has to offer. That is why one is living in Oregon and another in modesto. One does live here in Pleasanton.
Posted by Pete , a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 10:38 am
PW... did Jerry and Jennifer really say "industrial look" ? How sad if true. I suspect that the Peets coffee meetings with certain elected officials are paying off for developers... and appointed commissioners.
Posted by mike, a resident of the Charter Oaks neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 11:02 am
The industrial look goes with a transit oriented development. These poeple have been watching way too much HGTV. Maybe what the developer is thinking is that since it's going to be "the projects" it may as well look like garbage from the beginning.
Cholo is right, the world is changing. We are being drowned by stupid people.
Posted by Sal, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 11:05 am
Boohoo! Looks like you local conservatives can't handle "different" people moving to Pleasanton. Sorry to burst your whitebred Pleasanton bubble. Cry me a river, then go move to the The Villages in Florida so you can live in your own homogeneous, right-wing world.
Posted by BRE Campaign Contributions, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 11:57 am
Think it will be any different when it gets to the Council? Check the campaign contribution reports on the city website and you'll see how much money BRE gave to Hosterman, Cook-Kallio, and Thorne in 2010. The fix is in!
Posted by factchecker, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 4:23 pm
People are forgetting that the City got sued and LOST in court. This high density housing in the business park is part of the settlement of the lawsuit. Prior councils ignored the housing requirements from the state and the City got sued and now has to allow building of a lot of these complexes.
Don't forget ONLY 15% of the units are income restricted; the rest are at market rate rents. On 500 units, that's only 75 that are so called affordable. Hardly a project.
Posted by taxpayer, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 4:46 pm
That will be close to a thousand more voters who pay not one dime in property tax and will likely vote to add a parcel tax to benefit their kids.
It has been suggested before that only property owners get to vote about increased property taxes. Talk about taxation without representation -- letting non-owners add to the tax burden of owners is exactly that.
Posted by factchecker, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 4:49 pm
BRE will have to pay fees to the school district for both sites. I don't know how those fees will be determined. My understanding is that they aren't expecting either of these sites to have a lot of children living in them but I don't know what assumptions/facts that is based on. I would hope that folks are looking at similar developments near BART such as Pleasant Hill and Dublin to get insight as to how many children could be expected to live at these two sites in Pleasanton.
Posted by czz, a resident of the Civic Square neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 4:58 pm
WTF so just because someone lives in an apartment their low income residents that cause burden? woow u pleasanton people really are judgemental if u dont like it then move. and they can build another school and will if they have to.
Posted by just so you know, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 5:06 pm
This project is the result of a lawsuit the city LOST! The housing cap was deemed illegal. Pleasanton had ignored state law for years. A previous city council launched an initiative that put a housing cap in place even though they were advised against doing it.
Posted by ?, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 6:12 pm
" woow u pleasanton people really are judgemental if u dont like it then move"
We did - we moved to Pleasanton that was an upscale community with good schools. I doubt this development will help with either the upscale or good school points.
So when we move to the next upscale/good school community, are you going to chase after and try to change the nature of that community so that all will have equal access?
And before you go there with your cheap moves, this has nothing to do with racism. It has everything to do with the desire to achieve a standard of excellence and benefit from that hard work - I'm more than happy to do this with like-minded people regardless of their race, nationality, sexual orientation, etc.
Let these people work hard like we did and earn the right and privilege to live in Pleasanton.
I look forward to hearing about all the affordable housing projects in Saratoga, Los Altos, Danville, Alamo ...
Posted by local, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2011 at 8:26 pm
They say that this project will not generate students in our schools. If they are convinced of this, we should charge them the normal school impact fees for residential and keep the difference between what they pay and the 'affordable housing' fee they feel they should pay in escrow. Then after a certain period of time, if the are no students in their development, as they say now, the get their funds back. I am tired of developers saying they will not produce students in our schools and they ask for school impact fee discounts, and then later they produce many students from the development but they never pay the appropriate school impact fees. Happen time and time again. Remember Signature Properties saying that Ruby Hills will be filled with older couples and not many kids? Look what happened. Too late after the fact to get them to pay,
Posted by Ben, a resident of the Foothill Place neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 8:36 am
Wow... really? You all seem to have the answers! Where were all of you when the city got sued? Just because a development is low income does not mean that they will destroy the property or cause a burden of some kind.
I welcome the diversity and all you naysayers can just except it or move! I can't believe some of the things I read on here. I bet if any of you were in a face to face conversation about this you would support the diversity as well. Two faced, high horse, supirior, cowards! You all amaze and embarrass me!
Posted by ca94566, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 8:56 am
"Police log: Stoneridge mall McDonald's robbed"
First BART to help the trash get here, then a direct stop to Stoneridge, how convienent. Now they can just live here in the affordable housing?
I moved to PTown because of it's Old town charm and to get away from living around "projects" aka diversity. Thanks a lot Planners & Counsel. Educated diversity does not need section 8, Educated diversity will contribute to Pleasanton, not the deadbeats looking for a handout.
Also, remember it was a Pleasanton resident who started this nonsense about having low income housing.
Doesn't the mayor live in Vintage Hills? That may be why the project was moved to Hacienda and away from her precious neighborhood. What happened to building this project by Stanley and Valley?
Lins: Please, please, build and do it low income, that is how you get back at the person who has given you such a hard time, and also get back at her supporters. Build the low income housing on those hills!
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 9:45 am
"ca94566" said: "First BART to help the trash get here, then a direct stop to Stoneridge, how convienent. Now they can just live here in the affordable housing?"
That's a rather simplistic stereotyping of the people who live in apartment in the Hacienda Business Park area. I used to rent an apartment in that area for many years before we bought a house in west Pleasanton and moved. Many of the people who live in those apartments are younger professionals. As for the apartments being "affordable housing", rents for a 2-bedroom apartment were around $1600 and up, not an insignificant amount of money. I don't know where you got this idea that the apartments there are all filled with section 8 high school dropouts and "deadbeats looking for a handout".
I, too, like Pleasanton for its old town charm, but let's fact it: The Hacienda Business Park area itself is a bit out of sync with the rest of Pleasanton in terms of its feel. If there was a mistake made here, then it was made many years ago when Pleasanton approved the Hacienda Business Park area in the first place. But now that the Hacienda Business Park is here, it's inevitable that it's going to be filled up with more businesses and more apartments. What? Why all the surprise about more apartments here? Are you all telling me that no one saw this coming when Hacienda Business Park was first approved?
Finally, a few words about demographics: When we moved out of our apartment and to a house in west Pleasanton, one thing that struck me was how much older most of the surrounding homeowners were than ourselves. Many of the surrounding homeowners were empty nesters. There were very few families with young children around. Is this the kind of Pleasanton that people want? I think that a little more diversity, particularly in regards to younger-vs-older would be a good thing in some of our neighborhoods.
Posted by Barbarar, a resident of another community, on Oct 20, 2011 at 9:47 am
A 3 story building and NO elevator? Are you NUTS? Even if it is for 'low income', schleping furniture, groceries, etc up and down 3 flights of stairs is inhumane much less the damage that can be done doing so. At least a freight elevator for move in/move out for gosh sakes. Who approves these things? Did you not have your morning coffee?
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 9:59 am
Barbarar said: "A 3 story building and NO elevator? Are you NUTS? Even if it is for 'low income', schleping furniture, groceries, etc up and down 3 flights of stairs is inhumane much less the damage that can be done doing so."
You need to get more exercise, Mr. Flabby. When we lived in an apartment in the Hacienda Business Park area, we were on the third (top) floor and there was no elevator. Taking groceries and most things up and down three flights of stairs was no problem. We were used to it. The only problem was when moving in or out of the problem, and even then the problem wasn't so much the vertical distance from ground level to the third floor, but the sharp turns in the stairwells which made maneuvering the bigger pieces of furniture a bit difficult.
Posted by Pox on Moonbeam, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 10:31 am
Don't you just love getting hosed by Gov. Moonbeam Brown, again?! He was responsible for forcing this on Pleasanton by suing the city when he was Attorney General. He has been hosing the people of this state for 40 years! The guy is like the Great Plague! It will cost the average Pleasanton homeowner about $50,000-100,000 in decreased valuation.
Posted by Marilyn, a resident of another community, on Oct 20, 2011 at 11:10 am
WOW, get your heads out of the hole folks. Let's give everyone a chance and stop complaining about what your community should look like. Have you ever seen a Uhaul hooked up to a hearst in your community? It is obvious that you know nothing about how this process works and how it is set up so that folks with poor or bad credit and jobless will never get the opportunity to even apply for the affordable housing program. The application criteria will most likely will require that you have a credit score of at least 650, and a job. Section 8 does contribute to folks that have a job to help meet their needs and most time these folks are first on the list to get a place. Let me share this with you, my daughter moved into affordable living complex and doing the screening which took approximatley two months they checked her credit report every two weeks, and she had to show steady employment over two years, established bank account for at least a year so they could get a rating on that and finally she got the keys. During these economical times everyone can use a little help, you think.
Posted by Gary, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 11:11 am
Pox on Moonbeam-
Where do you get the info that it will cost $50,000 to $100,000 in decreased property values?
I think you need your marijuana prescription decreased! Pleasanton is still a very sought after place to live and one appartment complex acrossed town will have very little effect on your property value.
Posted by Different Perspective, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 11:12 am
No use complaining, the State and Courts have said Pleasanton needs to have more affordable housing, unless you want to go to Sacramento and D.C. to lobby for changes, learn to live with what we have to do. At least we can go to the City Counsel meetings and have our say.
Barbarar said: "A 3 story building and NO elevator? Are you NUTS? Even if it is for 'low income', schleping furniture, groceries, etc up and down 3 flights of stairs is inhumane much less the damage that can be done doing so"
I'm pretty sure this will change before it's built - by an American's with Disabilties Act (ADA) lawsuit if not common sense. A 3-story apartment building without an elevator is not ADA accessible. As for being affordable, I'm thinking most of the few apartments that are "Section 8", will be given to families who are already part of Pleasanton and living in the old "motels" or seniors. My parents have been trying to retire here from the Midwest, and of course can't afford it. Affordable apartments would open up places to live for our children returning, and those who work at low paying jobs in Pleasanton.
As for schools, I happen to know that the neighborhoods around Donlon Elementary have been aging, so the district uses the school as "overflow" from younger neighborhoods to fill it. If there are children in these apartments they will probably be in Donlon or Lydikson, Hart and Foothill schools.
Posted by kim, a resident of the Del Prado neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 11:35 am
When we moved to CA 26 years ago, I would have loved to live in Pleasanton but it was over OUR BUDGET...So we lived in Fremont for a while so we could build up some equity and then AFFORD to live here. I guess I was too stupid thinking it was up to me to afford housing in a particular town and to look for a town I could afford to live in. SHould of had someone else pay for me to live in the town I wanted to live in but could not afford.
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 11:43 am Stacey is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
The look seems very contemporary/modern. It reminds me a bit of the development around the CalTrain station in SF and the new buildings in Berlin around the former wall. The site 1 location is surrounded by office buildings so the look would fit in there. The PDF doesn't show anything for site 2, which is next to existing residential of a more traditional style. The look definitely wouldn't fit in on site 2. The colors are high contrast and that makes it look like Disneyland. I hope they tone the colors down. Not even the surrounding office buildings have such high contrast colors.
Posted by Ben, a resident of the Foothill Place neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 12:00 pm
You could have done that but your place would not be as nice. Do you think the apartments will have all the same upgrades as the apartments that are not low income? Doubt that. So if you want to live in an inferior apartment then you should have done just that.
the ADA does not require them to have an elevator. That I doubt will change. The only thing the law says is that a certain percent of the total complex has to meet ADA requirements. They can all be first floor apartments. Nothing says they have to have an elevator or even ADA apartments on the second or third floor. Just have to have like 5 or 10% meet the standards.
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 12:43 pm
Looks like East Dublin....Let's cram as many people as we can in as small of space as possible and tell the people that traffic will be impacted 'minimal' at best.....and the people will believe because it's close to public transportation....but wait, the smart people don't believe and try to object, but alas the government tells the people that they know what is best for the people and to quit thinking on their own...
Posted by Bill, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 1:35 pm
What about the noise level from I580 and BART? Must be deafening at this Owens and Willow intersection during the times people are normally asleep.
What about the gunfire from target practice at Camp Parks that often times occurs during the evening hours?
Didn't a sound wall have to be built for the homes along I580 in the Fairlands area because residents could not sleep at night even with insulated walls and windows?
Doesn't an area have to be less then a certain sound pressure level before it can be approved for a residental area. I believe 65dB is the limit for most residental areas. A single truck traveling down the freeway will produce about 80dB in noise.
Posted by Ben, a resident of the Foothill Place neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 2:17 pm
Donít you think the city has had all that done? I mean they do not want another law suit. They can't just go zone an area because they want to. Come on! Traffic noise is not usually a serious problem for people who live more than 500 feet from heavily traveled freeways. Both sites meet this requirement. That noise study was done by an outside agency on noise control. You can find it with a simple Google search. And the gun noise from Camp parks is way too far away to bother someone living in either area.
Posted by John, a resident of the Old Towne neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 4:54 pm
Alot of good comments and then some comments by folks that think the subsidized way of life is right, so how about you move out, because Pleasanton wasn't broken...so don't try and fix it. Now as someone pointed out, this was not by choice, it was forced by the super bright individuals in our government offices. And if you don't think the crime rate will change, then document where it was 5 years ago, now and then 5 years from the completion of this high density government imposed fiasco. If you ever want to screw up a good thing, just get the government involved.
Posted by justa citizen, a resident of the Country Fair neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 10:21 pm
If you don't think that this overcrowded, ugly plan won't beget the "Pleasanton Projects", you are living in dreamland. It resembles the projects you can see in any urban environment. With it comes increased crime and urban blight. This is really sad for our city. At least the planning commision could have required a more pleasing look. I thought that they were employed or elected to look out for the interests of our citizens. Interesting comments about payoffs to the mayor and certain counsel members. We should look into that.
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2011 at 11:38 pm
Site 1, across from BART and 24HR Fitness, has 255 units, 411 parking stalls. Guaranteed to not be enough parking stalls. A few added street side spots and Willow Rd. narrowed to 1 lane heading north. I can just see them trying to park in 24HR Fitness, where parking is a problem already. But hey, they could use the free 24HR Fitness valet parking. That whole area will be a mess when completed. But again, all 'their' models and projections will show nothing out of the ordinary. All it takes is a little common sense sometimes.
Posted by life, a resident of the Mission Park neighborhood, on Oct 21, 2011 at 1:44 pm
I think there might need to be more discussion on the housing, but I am interested in anything that might help my kids live in Pleasanton. I know that all my Pleasanton friends have kids who won't be able to live in our own city. It'll just be filled with empty-nesters like me.
Posted by Slipping, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 21, 2011 at 3:08 pm
Life, they'll do what I did decades ago..save, buy a repo, both have decent jobs, etc...that's AFTER they have rented and saved, built a qualifying resume', and bought a starter home, THEN they MOVE-UP into Pleasanton. (along the way they don't have any more children than they can afford). Then, as you move into your senior housing, they get your home. Actually, sounds pretty sweet.
My first home in early 60s was both of us having proven ourselves with good employers, and working to find a no/low down repo, as they were then called....we had to look really hard and long, so that course is much easier/faster today.
Nobody should have a 'right' to start in Pleasanton. Our stupid 'entitlement' handouts today seem to have trashed the 'individual' responsibility part of our nation's founding. allowing ner'do wells to believe they have a birth right to home ownership. Wrong !
Posted by Facts, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 21, 2011 at 4:48 pm
"it was forced by the super bright individuals in our government offices"
Not completely accurate. It was a Pleasanton resident (Sandra De Gregorio) and the group Urban Habitat who started this lawsuit against Pleasanton in 2006. Later, then attorney general Jerry Brown joined in and sued Pleasanton. You know the rest: Pleasanton lost and it now has to build low income housing.
Read about it:
"Brown's motion, filed in Alameda County Superior Court, joins the suit filed in 2006 by Urban Habitat and Pleasanton resident Sandra De Gregorio that challenged the city's Measure GG, the voter-approved housing cap and growth management program that voters approved in 1996."
It was a Pleasanton resident who set this whole thing in motion. The government only got involved afterwards. And for those who donate to Urban Habitat: well, you cannot complain since they backed the Pleasanton resident and look where we are now.
Posted by David, a resident of the Vineyard Hills neighborhood, on Oct 21, 2011 at 5:04 pm
I think some people are a little too paranoid with who they think will move in here. I'm willing to bet most of the residents will be young professions who work nearby that will be happy they can walk/ride to work. There is the huge oracle complex here as well as many other businesses, but very limited choices for housing unless you move into the Dublin Sprawl. Also i think this looks much better then the mess they built in Dublin where its just miles of Apartment units. I think it actually looks better to disperse the apartment buildings amongst the office buildings rather then doing it the way they did in Dublin where its just a sea of apartments.
Posted by Long time P-town resident, a resident of the Pleasanton Valley neighborhood, on Oct 23, 2011 at 4:06 pm
OMG!!!! Let me start by saying that our family has lived in Pleasanton since 1967!!!!!! We've been here for a lot and have fought hard to keep Pleasanton as we know it today. Hacienda was a bitter battle, but compromises were made on both sides and Pleasanton was able to maintain it's quaint home town look while keeping up with the Corporate progress every town needs for their own survival.
I attended Walnut Grove, Harvest Park & Amador and now I live with my two children in Pleasanton who have attended Hearst and are now in Pleasanton Middle School. I know the school overcrowding first hand and have dropped kids off & picked up on the ALREADY over crowded city streets. When they first started building those "eye sore" apartment buildings in Dublin across the freeway I wanted to cry!! "What the heck were they thinking?" You can hardley drive on the 580 as it is.... But after voting for all those people who are running our proud city now, I feel sick to my stomach when I think about what they are about to allow happen. Have they lost their minds???? WTF!!!!!! Just because other cities have fallen prey to what ever preditor out there bent their arms or twisted their minds does not mean that we have to do so as well. 4-story, multi-colored??....come on people!! Have you no sense of pride or moral duty? Oh, and by the way, I am a single mom who works full time and could use some affordable housing. That's not the issue here folks!
Posted by why?, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 24, 2011 at 12:10 pm
The argument used by Brown when suing Pleasanton was that the long commute of those who worked in Pleasanton but could not afford to live here was not acceptable, that they needed to live closer to work.
Why on eart didn't the attorneys representing Pleasanton mention/argue that we already have plenty of affordable housing next door in Dublin? Come on, those buildings are very close and they are practically in Pleasanton, someone living in Dublin and working in Pleasanton would not even have to drive on the freeway to get to work. Why then do we need even more housing in Pleasanton? How many lower income jobs do we really have in Pleasanton? We do not even have the target, walmart, etc that Dublin has. I do not understand.
As for the decision to allow such buildings, well, voters why did you elect Hosterman in the first place a long time ago? She is imp, not qualified to be a mayor, maybe (again imo) OK to be the PTA lead, but Mayor? Now you see how voting for your friend is not such a good idea, right?
Posted by lisa, a resident of the Civic Square neighborhood, on Oct 25, 2011 at 1:44 am
I think pleasanton should also build, a rehab buliding because the kids in the city really have a drug and alchol problem and the high sucide rate in this city. You shouldn't be so concern about hard working low income people. Figure out way kids who have everything, choose to do drugs and alchol. This is really a concern of mine. All the below market rate homes in the city of pleasanton was all purchase by pleasanton resident. Don't freak out simply move if u r unhappy or scared.
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Oct 25, 2011 at 5:33 pm
This is a BIG mistake...I lived in Pleasanton, I want to move back to pleasanton where my family and kids can live in a safe place. Statistically speaking, high density housing complexes attract the, "Low rent" type people. This will ultimately change the look and feel of how Pleasanton used to be. I am a bit outraged and frustrated that the people we trust to make decisions for this great city are lacking judgement and are making poor decisions for another financial reason.
Go ahead, put in this high density housing complex and see what happens...for example, look at the groves in Dublin...who did that attract...what about the complex near the East dub/pleas bart station. Not saying that all are bad people, there a lot of great people in this area, but there has been a significant rise in criminal activity.
I am hoping for the best, but not expecting anything great. It sounds like the decision makers have made their decision.