Town Square

Post a New Topic

Around Pleasanton: State housing push revives need for East Side planning

Original post made on Sep 8, 2017

Two years ago, the City Council halted the planning of development on Pleasanton's largely empty 400-acre East Side. Given the state's current determination to force more housing on cities, it might be time to restart that effort so that Pleasanton is ahead of the pack before state mandates hit us again.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, September 7, 2017, 2:13 PM

Comments (10)

40 people like this
Posted by Ellen
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Sep 8, 2017 at 12:25 pm

Please no. The growth is out of control. In some cases, 33 kids are packed in to classrooms built for 20 kids, 580/680 is total gridlock during and beyond commute hours and school neighborhoods are stressed to the max during drop off and pick up times.

The traffic due to the lights near the new development at Stanley and Bernal is terrible and I don't even think those apartments are at full capacity yet are they? This is happening all over town. I'm all for progress and steady growth but we need to calm it down a bit before we burst at the seams. Why are we trying so hard to become Dublin? ;(

29 people like this
Posted by Map
a resident of Del Prado
on Sep 8, 2017 at 2:17 pm

The city council and planning department are herded into the corral like obedient cattle by the developers and it looks like it's almost time for another "roundup"!! Still the same people in charge so can't expect any changes.

37 people like this
Posted by We have a voice!
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 8, 2017 at 2:23 pm

We don't have the infrastructure for any more housing, plain and simple! Plus the fact that the majority of these "housing projects" are not low income so our kids still couldn't afford to purchase homes (if you can call them that, more like "boxes"). We are buried under horrendous traffic, our schools are maxed out, we're losing what little open space we have left by building these huge monstrosities, our police and fire departments are over-burdened, and crime is on the increase. Mayor Thorne and our City Council needs to stand up against these thugs that are pushing this horrible housing agenda and listen to the community! We don't want or need anymore high-density housing projects. We still have a voice, don't take it away from us!

10 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 8, 2017 at 2:35 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@"We have a voice" and others,

No matter what is built, there is no way it is going to inexpensive to live in. That is the reality of the Bay Area. If your kids don't make much money, they won't be able to buy or rent here no matter what. The reason it is expensive -- Demand is greater than supply. The way to fix that is to build more.

Crime is not on the increase, that simply isn't true. Statistics are abundant on this. Pleasanton is less crowded than many Peninsula towns, and traffic is only bad right around rush hour and on roads near schools.

Of course Pleasanton isn't like it was 40 years ago, and thank goodness for that. That is called progress. I'm glad builders were able to build the house that I bought and now enjoy.

25 people like this
Posted by Linda
a resident of Birdland
on Sep 8, 2017 at 2:39 pm

Noooooo! Stop the growth as we are bursting at the seams! Been in Pleasanton for 21 years and cannot wait to leave. The growth and overbuilding is unbearable. Schools too full, (I work there and I see it), traffic outrageous and our beautiful scenery is gone. What has happened here over the last 2 decades is a crime.

16 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Sep 8, 2017 at 5:12 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

I'm fine with sustainable growth, I agree infastructure doesnt support it today though. I would think we coukd sue the state for mandating housing increases without making an equivalent investment in the infastructure they are responsible for to support the required growth requirements

3 people like this
Posted by Mongo
a resident of Laguna Oaks
on Sep 11, 2017 at 3:31 pm

Our future housing growth is not being controlled locally, its going to be dictated from Sacramento. Check out a few of the pending bills that are coming our way. Web Link

10 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Sep 11, 2017 at 6:04 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

In the meantime, there is minimal effort to build any new schools, usually a 3-5 year process. Along with this inaction is a group pushing to tear down Lydiksen, push it onto the current play area and back lawn*, and spending $30MM to do it, with very little of this qualifying for state matching funds. A new school could bring in $15MM (half the cost of a school). If we do not act soon, the state funds will be spoken for by other districts.

*Do residents now across the street and facing the lawn and playground at Lydiksen realize the plan is for them to look at the back of school buildings? If we do not speak up, if we do not attend tomorrow's meeting, the decisions will be made by other community members pressuring the board.

16 people like this
Posted by Marcie
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 13, 2017 at 5:43 am

This is beyond frustrating!

Basically, our council and elected officials buried their heads in the sand and sold us out to Sacramento and whatever state mandates ultimately dictate.

The city knew we needed to plan to maintain control of our beautiful city and the area around us, but the city council didn't hold onto the plan!! Karla Brown (A COUNCIL MEMBER) lead an effort against planning the East Side and now we are going to be stuck with "Streamlining the housing development process is an important part of addressing our housing needs."

Congrats. Your refusal to hear discussion and failure to take control (for what? fear of doing the wrong thing?) is foreclosing our option everyday.

"However, pending bills now being considered in the legislature could allow the state and developers to move more aggressively to meet California's housing shortages well before RHNA issues new numbers."

We obviously knew that this was the direction the state was heading.

"That followed a lawsuit the city lost to an Oakland-based affordable housing coalition over a 1996 voter-approved 29,000 housing cap which, the court ruled, discriminated against those who want to live here but can't find affordable housing."

Third parties have successfully forced us to build stack and pack housing when we don't move the ball forward on our own. Now what? Unbelievable.

Like this comment
Posted by Barry
a resident of Danbury Park
on Sep 13, 2017 at 10:25 pm

The poster Kathleen thinks a new school is needed so bad that she wants the East Area developed so more money can be obtained by the district as well as probably a new school site from the developers. Valley Avenue into that vacant area is gridllock already and a new El Charro Road would bring more commute traffic going to San Jose from InterState 580 in addition to the new houses. And more cars going to a new school is ridiculous especially when Amador HS, Harvest Park MS and Alsial Elementary are all within a short distance. The district should effectfully make use of ecisting school facilities instead if building more schools when enrollment levels will fluctuate. If the East Area is planned, please dont put super high density to address all the affordable housing shortages.

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

Wrapping up a 100-year-old detective job
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 1,533 views

Couples: “It’s Not My Problem. It’s Your Problem.”
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 864 views

Livermore's Marchand, aka the mayor of Seville, seeks re-election
By Jeb Bing | 6 comments | 464 views


Nominations due by Sept. 17

Pleasanton Weekly and are once again putting out a call for nominations and sponsorships for the annual Tri-Valley Heroes awards - our salute to the community members dedicated to bettering the Tri-Valley and the lives of its residents.

Nomination form