Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Letter: 3 reasons for 'no' on D

Dear Editor,

Three reasons to vote "no" on D:

1) Look up to the hills surrounding you from Bernal at Valley. No houses on our ridgeline. Let's keep in that way. Vote "no" on D.

2) The developer sued your city and its citizens to keep Oak Grove off the ballot. We won in court after two years and thousands of dollars. Vote "no" and send the message, we will not be intimidated.

3) The voters passed ridgeline protection in November 2008 and this subdivision doesn't follow the rules.

Vote "no" on D in June. For more information: www.savepleasantonhills.com.

Kay Ayala

Posted by YES on D, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 16, 2010 at 12:29 pm

I think YES on D is a good thing.

Perhaps the self-serving people against this should come out and tell people where they live, that would explain why they are against it.

Doesn't Steve B. live on a road with his last name? That is okay but it is not okay for others to build a nice home close by?

YES on D.

Posted by Joe, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Apr 16, 2010 at 5:18 pm

"IF YOU BUILD IT, THEY WILL COME."

Posted by Anonymous, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 16, 2010 at 6:21 pm

Kay Ayala lives near Harvest Park.

Posted by Iwastheretoo, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 16, 2010 at 7:56 pm

Yes, but what's her real motivation here? If she really wanted to save the hills why didn't she do it when she was on the Council for 8 years? This is more about her loss to the current Mayor a few years ago. For some reason, she thought she was the logical candidate for Mayor and would in fact be the next Mayor. Problem is residents didn't agree with her positions and elected someone else and she has never gotten over it.

And her co-chair happens to live near the top of Hearst Dr. so we're talking about NMBYism.

Posted by Pleasanton Parent, a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Apr 17, 2010 at 8:25 am

Self serving I know, but I prefer the appearance of a non-developed ridgeline.

Posted by Sharon, a member of the Walnut Grove Elementary School community, on Apr 17, 2010 at 9:06 am

My mother said if you can't say anything nice, then don't say anything at all. Guess that doesn't apply to the Yes on D people.

You all sound like a bunch of bitter old cronies.

Posted by Laura, a resident of the Ruby Hill neighborhood, on Apr 17, 2010 at 11:47 am

iwastheretoo, Seems more like according to the courts that Kay and Karla were right about ridge-top protection and some of the Yes on D folks can't quite get over THAT if you ask me.

Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Apr 17, 2010 at 12:19 pm
Stacey is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com

Laura,

Not sure what you mean by "according to the courts". The case was about the referendum process, not about ridge-top protection.

Posted by anonymous, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 17, 2010 at 7:38 pm

You can't see the Oak Grove Development from Bernal and Valley. Another misstatement by Kay.

Some of the houses in Kottinger are actually higher than some of the proposed homes in Oak Grove.

Posted by Patriot, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 17, 2010 at 9:43 pm

This is truly a silly issue. Let them build the houses. There is no sane reason to oppose the development. They will look fine. I know people who have lived in this community for over fifty years. They've been building houses on the hills and elsewhere all the while, and we've all done just fine. This sounds like a bunch of scare tactics again.