Your source?

Nevermind. Found this article in the Independent:

Web Link

So if the church sells the 4 acres for houses, what does the church plan to do with the other 2.2 acres. Would those end up with houses on those 2.2 also?? Actually, I think houses possibly cause the least additional 'rush
hour' traffic of anything on those 2.2 acres, I just want to know there will be restrictions of a non-traffic generating use. A small green park would not cause 'RUSH' hour commuter traffic, which must be avoided, no matter what. The street is full.

"A small green park" doesn't make big bucks for ponderosa homes or the realtors that are on the Pleasanton planning commission!! I'm wondering if this was the plan all along between the church and ponderosa homes when everything was first being developed?? Something fishy going on, any other developer wanting in on this or are they being kept out??

The 2.2 acres are where the approved daycare and private school will remain. A large unconstructed church campus is approved for the rest of the property but other than the green tent for temporary services and the 400 parking stalls, the rest of the buildings were never built because the funds were not raised by the congregation to do it. 27 new homes seems to me to be better than all the traffic a really big church will attract. If 400 parking stalls are installed, that is a good idea of what our neighborhood will have to deal with on weekends and weekdays.

A small green park also doesn't bring tax dollars. Build the houses. We need them.

Our community leaders approved Ponderosa's development of 300+ homes on the old Pumpkin Patch property with the assumption that there would be added Piublic and Institutional zoning for a school site for PUSD and now we have over 80 additional homes in that location. The P and I zoning for community facilities currently owned by Centerpoint Church on the corner of Valley and Busch was bought at a lower price than residential zoning demands. Now the Church is asking the Council and the residents of Pleasanton to approve additional changes of the City's General Plan for additional reduction of the areas around town where schools and facilities can be located. Our growing community (additional housing of 1700 in the process of being built) needs a place to worship, a school, a playground and open space or a daycare center. We need to keep the zoning as is, for community facilities not more houses.

the proposal is for 25 homes not 27. Public & institution zoning allows for a lot of other uses besides school and religious institution--be careful for what you ask for!

Information for the Oct 6 Council Meeting:

Agenda: Web Link

Staff Report for this item: Web Link

Attachments 1-6: Web Link

Attachment 7: Web Link

Attachments 8-11: Web Link

Mohr opinions don't count for much, since they manipulated themselves into to being sufficiently walled off from the city around them. Valley Ave voices should decide what goes anywhere around Busch. Nothing, including any school, where there is rush hour traffic. The Avenue is full. If and when alternate routes, and reopening of those walled off streets contribute to the Busch situation, then they can enter the discussion. Otherwise, they are just part of the cause of the problem,...which should be corrected. by reopening all dead-ended streets. Homes would be stationary and silent, few people, and fewer cars.

If the church can't afford their property, they should sell it and move, like any of the rest of us would be forced to do. If Ponderosa wants to buy it and at the same time assume the risk that they might be denied their 25 houses or any houses at all, that'd be fine too. But to act as though they are "coming to the rescue" of the church by purchasing their property pre-approved for 25 houses?
The church should have to honor their commitments, and Ponderosa should play by the rules...

DEAR NEIGHBOR, thank you for saying what many of my neighbors and I think. The Mohr area is blocked off from traffic and would not have to deal with traffic coming and going to a big church. I saw the spproved plans and it is a hugh church.

After reading comments from KELLY, I found out that public schools, governmental buildings, animal shelters and other undesirable things are allowed on the church property. KELLY, since you dont have to deal with this traffic, please dont preach about lhow we need a place to worshp or have more government buildings at this location next to our homes. Im sure if it was next to you, you would want 25 new homes instead.