Lund Ranch hearing back on Council's agenda for tonight

State commission gives OK for Councilman Jerry Pentin to participate, vote on issue

A public hearing that was twice postponed on a bid by Greenbriar Homes to build 50 houses on the now-vacant 195-acre Lund Ranch II will be held by the Pleasanton City Council tonight.

Councilman Jerry Pentin requested the delays while Pleasanton City Attorney Jonathan Lowell sought a determination by the state Fair Political Practices Commission if Pentin lives too close to the areas affected by Greenbriar's housing bid to participate in the discussion and vote by the council.

Last week, the FPPC determined that Pentin's home is not within the area that might have caused a conflict of interest if he participated.

The postponement was yet another delay in the consideration of a plan for a major housing development on the former Lund cattle ranch. The first plan was proposed in September 2002 when 113 homes were proposed for construction on 12,000-square-foot lots.

At that time, the city's Planning Commission expressed concern over that project's effect on hillsides. The proposed development then changed hands and it was not until April 2007 a new builder proposed 149 homes on 3,000-square-foot lots. Those plans again were delayed and, a year later, Measure PP became the law of Pleasanton.

Although Measure PP doesn't affect the latest 50-home development plan which would be built on a fairly flat bow of the old ranch, not on hillside slopes, it's the needed 50-yard extension of Sunset Creek Way that will have to cross a steep slope that falls under Measure PP's terms.

The city's Planning Commission approved the plan Aug. 26 in a 4-1 vote, ruling that the upscale home development could be accessed only by a new 24-foot-wide road that Greenbriar must build to connect to Sunset Creek Lane, which homeowners would then use to reach Sycamore Creek Way and Sunol Boulevard.

The public hearing will be held at the council's regular Tuesday night meeting that will start at 7 p.m. in the Pleasanton Civic Center, 200 Old Bernal Ave.

We can't do it without you.
Support local journalism.


6 people like this
Posted by AlamedaCountyNative
a resident of Foothill Farms
on Nov 17, 2015 at 9:58 am

Is anyone in Pleasanton government aware that we're in a drought and don't have water for new houses? Why not just say no?

4 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 17, 2015 at 10:05 am

"...and don't have water for new houses? "

Because it isn't true. The amount of water used by residences is negligible. The truth is some people are just NIMBYs, against all development and will use any excuse to try to stop all development.

12 people like this
Posted by Vicki LaBarge
a resident of Mission Park
on Nov 17, 2015 at 10:32 am

Residents of Mission Park, specifically Independence Drive and Junipero need to show up tonight to make sure that the traffic from this subdivision doesn't end up down our already too busy streets.

7 people like this
Posted by Map
a resident of Del Prado
on Nov 17, 2015 at 4:06 pm

"The amount of water used by residences is negligible"------WHAT!! Thank you Mr water czar. Starting tomorrow I'm going back to my 2013 water usage, who knew that the drought was never a reality so with your approval I want full reimbursement for all my dead landscaping and then go ahead and tell the planning commission "full speed ahead" there is no drought in this town !!

1 person likes this
Posted by Larry
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Nov 18, 2015 at 10:41 pm

I heard that Greenbriar submitted plans to the city in 2002, the city hired an EIR consultant in June 2003 and the city management refused to submit its plans to the Planning Commission for TWELVE years after the EIR consultant was hired in 2003 when Pico, Ayala, Brozosky, Campbell and Hosterman were on the city council.

There is no excuse for purposefully holding up a development plan.

It would make it seen that the bottleneck has to with who is managing the city. All of the fees collected for so called excess water usage need to be given to this developer. I never heard of Deborah Acosta holding up a developer for over a decade and refusing for over a decade to put the development proposal on calendar to move the process along. What ineptitude.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Don't be the last to know

Get the latest headlines sent straight to your inbox every day.

Castlewood members considering offer from Bay Club
By Tim Hunt | 0 comments | 636 views

Couples: Reading List
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 596 views