Town Square

Post a New Topic

City, school officials talk about state response to housing crisis

Original post made on Feb 3, 2019

Pleasanton city officials led a presentation at the school board's regular meeting Tuesday evening to discuss state and local housing trends and what residents can expect in terms of growth mandates in the not-too-distant future.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, February 1, 2019, 1:03 PM

Comments (22)

14 people like this
Posted by Pete
a resident of Downtown
on Feb 3, 2019 at 8:09 am

Isn’t anyone concerned about water? It’s a huge problem now.


13 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Feb 3, 2019 at 12:21 pm

Good thing we added a new fourth and fifth grade.....im sure those new housing units wont add a student population in the other grades.

State needs to focus on infastructure. How about fixing Bart instead of building houses on Bart parking lots


Like this comment
Posted by sjd
a resident of Livermore
on Feb 3, 2019 at 12:46 pm

"State law is really going to take away a lot of our ability to manage growth." otherwise known as "outsource problems to Tracy"

"the potential impact on Pleasanton schools largely wasn't addressed." CA's own imposed tax structures with housing means you can't improve this without constitutional amendments. Consider the impact on Hayward or Tracy or Stockton if we do nothing.

Housing units grew by 9,000 over 27 years but the overall percentage shifted 3%? Please, that's not significant. Get out of Pleasanton for a day.

"but the market does what the market has always done, which is come and build things." Nah, the market demand for housing has been through the roof for years but cities don't allow it to be built (and the TriValley is by no means the worst here, but it is part of it).

""We own a significant amount of property and I'm actually wondering if it is appropriate, for sometime soon, if we had a housing task force or something."
You're a little bit late on this! People have been struggling for quite a while now! A task force is a bit belittling honestly.


5 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Feb 3, 2019 at 2:43 pm

James Michael is a registered user.

What, me worry? The state has a budget surplus...they will fix everything. Just like they always do. Oh, wait...now I'm worried.


13 people like this
Posted by Rob
a resident of Mohr Park
on Feb 4, 2019 at 9:58 am

Build Costco before it turns into 500 condos


Like this comment
Posted by Rose
a resident of Parkside
on Feb 4, 2019 at 10:27 am

Need to aggressively move on our Eastside Plan now before it is not our choice! Pleasanton hasn't really built any affordable housing - even the apartments are not that. I think it's Karla Brown's idea to look at some multi-family dwellings like duplexes.


13 people like this
Posted by Juanita
a resident of Alisal Elementary School
on Feb 4, 2019 at 11:04 am

Juanita is a registered user.

Pleasanton has been NIMBYs kicking the can down the street for decades. Residents wanting to stay in the 1950’s and local politicians whose egos were bigger than vision is what got us in this mess. Being located at a major interchange, within close proximity of major employment centers, and frankly just being in desirable California makes it real plain population growth will continue and we needed to build housing along the way. I’m mad because our failure to build a mix of housing over the years throughout town will now result in super high densities and cramming all the affordable housing into a few remaining locations. I shutter to think what the East Side density will become (as the NIMBY panacea) not to mention it’s not near BART, transit, and its next to industrial (yeh, corral all the affordable units for poor people in a toxic area).


5 people like this
Posted by Doug
a resident of Birdland
on Feb 4, 2019 at 12:46 pm

@Rob : "Build Costco before it turns into 500 condos"

Doesn't work that way. The reason that Pleasanton was ordered by the courts to build more housing was that the ratio of Pleasanton jobs to Pleasanton residents was too high. According to Jerry Brown's memo, I recall that the ratio was around 1.6 Pleasanton jobs for every adult resident of Pleasanton, which was astoundingly high. The courts said "no" to Pleasanton's strategy of inviting more and more businesses into Pleasanton while at the same time trying to throw the responsibility for housing all of those new workers off onto surrounding communities. More jobs in Pleasanton mean more responsibility for providing more housing by Pleasanton.


3 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Feb 4, 2019 at 1:57 pm

James Michael is a registered user.

"More jobs in Pleasanton means more responsibility for providing housing by Pleasanton"

Except...it doesn't work that way because "if you build it they will come" and move here and keep their jobs in Silicon Valley, or San Francisco or San Jose and contribute to the commute nightmare. Nobody can be denied the purchase of a dwelling simply because they don't work in that city.


Like this comment
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 4, 2019 at 2:35 pm

BobB is a registered user.

James Michael,

Are you saying we shouldn't build more housing? If so, why not?


3 people like this
Posted by Doug
a resident of Birdland
on Feb 4, 2019 at 3:50 pm

@James Michael: "Nobody can be denied the purchase of a dwelling simply because they don't work in that city."

Not sure what that has to do with the court ruling against Pleasanton. What the court was basically saying to Pleasanton was very simple: If you (Pleasanton) are going to encourage business development within your boundaries, then you also have to carry your fair share of the housing burden in proportion to the number of jobs associated with those businesses.


2 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 4, 2019 at 5:03 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@Doug,

And they are right to say that. We should be doing both.


7 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Feb 4, 2019 at 6:03 pm

The property tax paying citizens in the community have the exclusive right to determine, through their elected representatives, what type of community they want. The low-level state court has false authority to interfere with the community's majority right, to determine what they, the majority want. Had this case got into federal court, Pleasanton would have won.


4 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 4, 2019 at 6:39 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@Pete,

Residential water use is not at all a problem.


4 people like this
Posted by Rick
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 4, 2019 at 9:06 pm

BobB. If residential water isn’t an issue why did the state mandate Cities require residents to restrict usage several years ago. Water is an issue.


11 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 4, 2019 at 9:48 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@Rick,

It was about awareness. Like not offering water at restaurants without being asked. It was to make us aware that farmers were struggling and the Sacramento San-Joaquin ecology was threatened due to the drought conditions and agricultural activity. Residential water use is negligible.

Residential water is not an issue.


9 people like this
Posted by sjd
a resident of Livermore
on Feb 5, 2019 at 5:57 am

"The property tax paying citizens in the community have the exclusive right to determine, through their elected representatives, what type of community they want."

You can't run around disregarding how one citiy's actions (like attracting businesses without housing) affects everyone else, especially given the disparities in the resources communities have as a result of that. Yes, this goes double for NIMBY pininsula cities too. Your property taxes are not enough to make up for all the externalities and those taxes are only enough in concert with business taxes to keep the city afloat.

Want proof? Look at Moraga - they can't even afford their street repair anymore.


6 people like this
Posted by David
a resident of Alisal Elementary School
on Feb 5, 2019 at 10:57 am

David is a registered user.

How many taxpaying residents live here and then relocate elsewhere within 2-5 years. People don’t live in the same house or town like past generations and we are now more transient or mobile. In 15 years, we and one other neighbor are the original owners on our street while everyone else in the neighborhood has moved for jobs, retirement, or other. We have to look at the long term planning of the city and not just what the current taxpayers think is right.


7 people like this
Posted by Mike
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 5, 2019 at 1:00 pm

The worse part of the housing crisis is that first time buyers are priced out of the market. Unless I help my kids with a huge downpayment, they will be forced to move out of our community.


There is no room to build new entry level starter homes. Even if there was, lower priced houses are purchased by investors for rental income and middle class families cannot afford to upgrade their homes in the communities they live in because of astronomical property taxes.


1 person likes this
Posted by MM
a resident of Parkside
on Feb 6, 2019 at 8:02 am

comment to "Build Costco before it turns into 500 condos".."Doesn't work that way."

I would like to see the number of residents living in Pleasanton Vs the number of those residents that actually work in Pleasanton or are retired in Pleasanton. Isn't that what we should be providing housing for and not those that commute out of Pleasanton to work? Why would access to Bart be a requirement for affordable/high density housing projects if they reside and work in Pleasanton?


2 people like this
Posted by Doug
a resident of Birdland
on Feb 6, 2019 at 8:24 am

@MM :”I would like to see the number of residents living in Pleasanton Vs the number of those residents that actually work in Pleasanton or are retired in Pleasanton. Isn't that what we should be providing housing for and not those that commute out of Pleasanton to work?”

I think that trying to micromanage housing requirements to that level is not practical or desirable. Ultimately you’re talking about a system in which every person would be required to live in the very same town or city where they work, and a new government bureaucracy would have to be set up to track and enforce that requirement. As for Pleasanton, such a requirement would cause Pleasanton property values to plummet because Pleasanton housing prices are kept at high levels due to the many highly paid Pleasanton homeowners who work elsewhere in the Bay Area in high tech and other industries.


2 people like this
Posted by Juanita
a resident of Alisal Elementary School
on Feb 7, 2019 at 9:55 am

Juanita is a registered user.

Get the City of San Jose, Mountain View and Santa Clara County to build the housing for tech workers which are generated at Google, Apple and other major employers and housing problem solved!!!


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields


Be the first to know

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

Sandia Livermore continues growing
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 1,089 views

Couples: Mirror, Mirror on the . . . Fight?!
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 852 views