|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Even as legal arguments continue over the city’s refusal to approve their bid to build 51 custom homes on their hillside Oak Grove property, the owners of the 562-acre site will go before the Pleasanton Planning Commission tonight seeking to build only 10 homes there.
Landowners Frederic and Jennifer Lin, represented by developer James Tong, are seeking to subdivide the property into 10 large lots for single-family custom homes with no commonly held property or open space dedication. The lots would vary in size from 16 to 214 acres and would be accesses by way of a 25-foot-wide gated private road extending from the end of Hearst Drive, which is now barricaded.
Another gated emergency vehicle access road is proposed to connect the site to Grey Eagle Court in the Grey Eagle neighborhood, also a gated community located at the end of Crellin Road.
Tonight’s meeting, which will start at 7 p.m. and is open to the public, is an informal workshop session where no action will be taken by the Planning Commission. It will be held in the City Council chambers in the Pleasanton Civic Center, 200 Old Bernal Ave.
Sad we missed the 51 beautiful homes..PLUS open space opportunity, so 10 beautiful homes will have to do. I like top national rankings of beautiful Pleasanton……we need something to offset the massive subsidized apartment projects that will tarnish the reputation we spent decades creating. An American community should have the right to be grand. I’m glad the landowner wants to keep Pleasanton beautiful…..isn’t that why we work?
We all see through your Lin family propaganda. First you are the slow growth mayor then you and Hosterman go all ga-ga for developer money. Who knew money could corrupt so effectively? The Lin family, that’s who.
I’ve been saying all along that to keep Pleasanton beautiful and grand, we should build a wall around of all the city with big signs posted every hundred feet or so telling poor people (as well as you know who else) to stay the heck OUT!
Can’t we just let hillsides be hillsides?
Can’t we just allow and afford property owners their constitutional rights?
Harriet, They can stay hillsides. All you have to do is buy the land at fair market value and then don’t build.
Markets are way better than hillsides. 🙂 Hillsides don’t contribute positive revenue.
I assume you don’t want to trivialize the issue, so I’ll treat your question seriously. Since the Lins own the property they should be able to do whatever they want with it. I worry a little bit about traffic flow difficulties, but a Walmart would give us P-towners greater freedom of choice when it comes to shopping for tee shirts, frozen White Castles, and those cute Chinese made chemistry sets they market as little girls’ make-up kits. After all, shoppers’ freedom is what the Constitution is all about.
Ten houses on the hilltops is what the citizen of Pleasanton determined were in their best interest through a vote.
edit:citizen/citizens
I have a “semi-” serious question. If Planning Commission give the okeedokee on the 10 homes, does that mean P-town gets let off the hook in the law suit? I mean, after all, they are building on the land then? Since we (the citizens) can’t go back in time to correct the mistakes now costing P-town litegation fees, would this be another way to stop the leak in the money bucket?
I’m OK with the 10 homes as long as each home does not have 40 acres of property zoned as *agricultural* at a MUCH lower property tax rate.
Is anyone checking on this?
To take this forum to the ends of the earth direction that it usually goes I thought I would offer this comment:-)
Harry – are you suggesting a Walmart on the Lin property?
Harry – I was just playing with you a little bit. Sometimes I like to follow these forums just to see where they end up compared with where they started. It amuses me.
I agree with you and like the open atmosphere of free enterprise – let the market sort out what stays. I frankly like the White Castle – it reminds me of my youth so far away:-)