|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Like it or not, affordable housing is coming to Pleasanton, and with it, as is nearly always the case, come questions about four issues: crime, schools, housing values and traffic.
All four of those concerns were brought up at a workshop in March; then in July, the Pleasanton City Council approved a preliminary plan to rezone 17 sites, totaling 105 acres for more than 3,000 affordable high-density housing. Those sites include 10 acres in the Gateway Center between Valley Avenue and I-680 for up to 300 new apartments behind the new Safeway, a 16-acre site at the southeast corner of Stanley Boulevard and Bernal Avenue, across from McDonald’s, and on the Kiewit site across Stanley on Valley Avenue, where 49 acres could be available for up to 300 high-density housing units.
That’s not counting a 350-unit apartment complex near the new West Dublin/Pleasanton BART station near Stoneridge Shopping Center that city officials approved in 2008. That project will include 70 apartments for very-low-income households, which means they earn 50% or less than the area’s median income, which is $64,600 for an individual and $92,300 for a family of four.
Developer BRE is moving ahead with its plan to build 498 apartments on two sites in the Hacienda Business Park, and of those, under city regulations, 15% must be affordable, meaning residents can qualify if they fall under certain income guidelines. That means about 74 apartments for the current development, with other sites in the future.
Some residents at the March workshop worried about the potential for a spike in crime and possible gang-related activity. Others were concerned about a drop in property values, school overcrowding and lower test scores, as well as worries about increases in traffic, whether the location was the best, and the look of the multi-story units.
Crime
Studies, including one by New York University released in September, show crime doesn’t increase for even very-low-income residents who are typically issued housing vouchers commonly known as Section 8.
“In brief, we find no evidence that an increase in the number of voucher holders in a tract leads to more crime,” that study says.
Pleasanton police have recently instituted a program to give unwanted tenants the boot and to keep potential problems from moving in. The crime free multi-housing program has been up and running for nearly two years, according to Ken McNeill, Pleasanton’s crime prevention officer.
“It’s a fully volunteer program for apartment communities in the city of Pleasanton,” McNeill explained. “Basically, the (rental) contract says the tenants agree not to get in trouble with the law.”
In short, if someone with a crime-free lease agreement is arrested — on or off the property — management has the right to evict him or her. If a visitor gets in trouble while at the complex, the tenant who invited that person can also get evicted.
“We don’t have to wait for a conviction,” McNeil said, adding the program has withstood court challenges that ran all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In Pleasanton, there are already 26 complexes that have 10 or more units. Seven complexes have been fully certified in the program, going through all three phases, and another seven are in the process of completing it.
McNeill said the first phase is an eight-hour training open to everyone employed by a complex: owners, property managers, maintenance staff and sales staff. It addresses everything from crime prevention theory to gangs and drug activity to the crime-free lease agreement.
The second phase is a survey by the Police Department.
“Crime prevention through environmental design is a way of making the property more inviting to the people who should be there and less inviting to the people who shouldn’t,” McNeill said.
Police look at unlit areas and bushes that could hide a potential burglar, as well as door locks and peepholes. They make suggestions to improve security, then check to see that the recommended improvements have been made.
The third phase is a social event for tenants, to give residents the opportunity to get to know each other better and introduce the lease addendum.
“Most people are very good. They say, ‘Yeah, that’s a good idea,'” McNeill said. “It absolutely does work. … We’ve served eight notices to evict.”
Statistics back up McNeill. Archstone Apartments, in the 5600 block of Owens Drive, has 540 units, and over the last few years, calls for service — which include crime calls as well as complaint calls — have gone from 426 in 2007 to 256 in 2010. Stoneridge Apartments, in the 100 block of Stoneridge Mall Road, with 520 units, has dropped from 190 calls in 2007 to 182 calls last year. Both complexes are trending lower for the current year as well.
Schools
Just the number of apartments, low income or not, will have an impact on the school district. School board Chairwoman Valerie Arkin was on the Hacienda Task Force, which looked at increased housing from every angle. Arkin said the three projects could mean 350 new students moving in and going to Donlon Elementary and Hart Middle schools.
The overall impact aside, children from lower income families — what the Pleasanton Unified School District describes as socio-economically disadvantaged — typically don’t do as well as other students.
In Pleasanton, 54.6% of low-income students were proficient in English in 2010-11, up from 51.7% in 2009-10, and 52% were proficient in math, up from 46.2% in 2009-10. By comparison, the district’s average for English was 83.7% in 2009-10 and 84% in 2010-11 and 81.7% in math for 2002-10 and 81.4% in 2010-11, according to Cindy Galbo, assistant superintendent of education services.
Raising those scores has been the subject of a yearlong push by the PUSD, and Superintendent Parvin Ahmadi is adamant in saying the district is committed to educating every child.
“Regardless of their economic background, they are able and capable of learning and it’s our responsibility to serve them,” Ahmadi said. “Philosophically, we don’t have an issue with students who don’t have the same resources as everyone else. They’re all students.”
Home prices
Two studies, one from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and another from Virginia Technical University, show that affordable housing and apartment complexes in general do not lower home prices in their area.
The MIT study, released in 2005, found that “high-density mixed-income rental developments in single-family neighborhoods do not affect the value of surrounding homes.”
The Virginia Tech study, in fact, says “a well-located apartment building with attractive landscaping and entranceways raises the overall value of detached homes compared to having no apartments nearby.” That study was released in 2003.
David Stark, public affairs director of the Bay East Association of Realtors in Pleasanton, pointed out that affordable housing is not something new to Pleasanton.
“It is unlikely that these developments will have an effect on residential property values. There are simply too many other factors that impact sales prices,” Stark said. “Residential real estate sales prices in Pleasanton are among the highest in the Tri-Valley due to its location, employment opportunities, school performance and community amenities.”
He added that the city of Pleasanton has “extremely high standards” for design and construction.
Traffic impact
One of the main concerns from Pleasanton residents who spoke out against plans for the Hacienda sites was traffic. Those two sites and the already-approved Stoneridge site are to be what’s called transit-oriented, with people using public transportation to get to and from work. The city estimates more than one car for each of the families, and those alone could mean additional traffic, especially for people who drive to work or commute elsewhere.
“Yes, it will increase traffic,” said Pleasanton Planning Manager Janice Stern. “However, development of that site for residential use will generate less peak-hour traffic than the previously approved office uses.”
Some people have objected to what’s been called “Dublin-style development,” meaning multi-story apartments, some with stores on the ground floor. Residents at the housing workshop also said the two Hacienda complexes are in the wrong place, suggesting they should be closer to BART, such as on Dublin Canyon Road, or on Vineyard Avenue, near other existing apartments.
One of the two Hacienda sites is at the intersection of Willow Road and Owens Drive, slated for 247 apartments; and the other, at the corner of Hacienda and Gibraltar drives, is planned for 251 apartments. While the project at Stoneridge has already been approved, the two Hacienda properties are still under review by city planners with an eye toward breaking ground next year.
Is it just me, or do these buildings like college dormitories or maybe public housing projects? Something looks off. Maybe they’re trying for a Bauhaus look? I hope they re-work it.
I wasn’t all for it but after reading this article and all of the studies to back it up I’m now 1000% “all-in” for more low-income housing. In fact, because the article indicates that low-income apartments can actually RAISE the value of nearby homes per a Virginia Tech study, I for one would like to see them put low income housing on every possible square inch that isn’t already built on in Pleasanton. Dublin and Livermore too just to totally boost the Pleasanton home values. I think this is the boon we’ve needed after several years of home prices going down. Can’t wait to see my home price shoot up with all of this low income housing nearby. Thrilled, in fact!!! Finally getting MY bailout in the form of low income housing-induced housing price boosts.
I just looked at the Pleasanton city website and those horrendous buildings on the front cover of the Pleasanton Weekly need to be scrapped immediately. They must be kidding, I hope.
They look nothing like the attractive apartment buildings that look to have been envisioned for this location that are in this PDF on the city’s web site here http://www.ci.pleasanton.ca.us/pdf/HacTF-agenda-100527-item3-prelimplan.pdf
When children grow up and cannot afford to live in their hometowns, you know you have a problem.
Kevin, I agree that if your goal is to live in a house just like your parents, that there is a problem, especially if you are just starting out.
The problem is with expectations of people just entering the workforce, which is not a problem for the govt to ‘solve’.
Many of us started out renting apartments or duplexes in adjacent cities until we worked long enough to save up for the house located where we wanted to live. While it would be nice to think govt can regulate housing ‘equity’, when is the last time govt ran anything efficiently? They typically propose solutions that are looking for problem and waste lots of money in the process.
It is one thing to get rid of the housing cap and re-zone an area. But do we really have to go ahead and build? Does anyone know? Wouldn’t it have been sufficient to just re-zone and get rid of the housing cap? Amador is already very crowded: its own attendance area plus all the Foothill students that apply (and get in despite the lack of space for them), so where are these low income folks going to go?
And why are we building so soon if it is not required we do so? (re-zone, yes; get rid of cap, yes; build, NO)
This is rediculous and not good for Pleasanton…We should gather together and press our politicians to vote this out…As for this article and studies, one can always find or develop a study to support even the outlandish causes…
I have never seen in the Constitution a caption that says everyone has the right to live antwhere. Many people have worked their butts off to afford higher home prices. Now our government says that does not matter, we will force you to create low cost housing. Before anyone says I am racist, which is the normal response to any issue whats so ever, I am 2nd generation hispanic. There are numerous studies on every issue and they come back with a variety of results. Many times the results are based on bias, so I give no credibility to any government studies. We need to refuse all government aid and become self sufficient so we are not forced to accept things like this.
“When children grow up and cannot afford to live in their hometowns, you know you have a problem. ”
I bought recently and my house is better and bigger than my parents’ (and theirs is quite nice). Did I buy right out of college? NO, I saved and worked hard and finally bought (and I did not have to borrow from my parents, who were more than willing to help)
It is not a given right to be lazy and say: I want what mom and dad have, without having the means or having to work hard.
Ridiculous!
Those folks whose parents were able to afford a house just because it was cheap back then (not because the parents are well off), need to understand that times have changed and if you want a nice house in a nice town you must have the income to do so. Why should the govt and the rest of us taxpayers have to suffer because of people who do not do well in life want to have the upper middle class lifestyle that they obviously cannot afford?
Remember that before, some people were able to get OK paying jobs without a HS diploma, but now the good paying jobs require at least a bachelor’s, master’s preferred. Are we going to try to change that too? NO…. adapt to today’s standards and stop whining and stop asking others to make things happen for you!
This is all our fault as residents of Pleasanton.
If we would have just all agreed to vote Democrat, then Urban Habitat wouldn’t have had to sue us into including more high-density and low-income housing.
Isn’t it funny that towns in Marin County, Piedmont and Palo Alto weren’t sued even though their housing prices are about twice that of Pleasanton with way less affordable housing? But look at how those geographies vote.
Urban Habitat is out in the open with their political agenda of ensuring the entire state votes Democrat, and that no town has good schools or a decent quality of life. It’s just too bad that our local Pleasanton politicians are two-faced – they’ll feign concern about the negative impacts of affordable housing (crime, school impact, housing values); but then do whatever the construction unions and their developer contributors (BRE) tell them to. Question is, well Pleasantonians be dumb enough to fall for it come election time? I know two mayoral candidates who sure hope so.
As for all of the studies quoted – they’re laughable. I’m sure there are studies that “prove” the sun is ice cold, and that water isn’t wet. If affordable housing was so good, then housing values in the ghetto parts of East Oakland would be off the charts, and Pleasanton’s would be down in the dumps. But like any good liberal propaganda, we should suspend our common sense and historical record in favor of academic “studies” performed (and/or funded) by those with a vested interest in the outcome.
Remember when idiot Moonbeam Brown was Governor the first time and he stopped freeway construction dead in its tracks. We got to look at unfinished interchanges, like the I-680 and 101 interchange in San Jose, for decades. Now because of that moron, we will get to look at the dormitories forever. The guy is a joke, and the voters of California are an even bigger joke for putting him back in as Governor.
What kind of high-density attrocity do you suppose is going to spring up at I-680 and Bernal?
Maybe we could make it a gated community and they have to get a pass to get out for an hour or two before going back. We could put ankle bracelets on all the new buyers….just in case.
Swiftian idea don’t you think?
Schools:
How does the discussion not include the fact that all of Pleasanton schools are already over-capacity? By PUSD’s own reports Pleasanton Schools are 113.1% over classroom capacity, 1,847 unhoused students today, 546 in K-5, 553 in middle school, 748 in high school. Using campus acreage the site overcrowding is even more severe.
After the damage is done to our quality of life, existing residents will be left with the burden to pay to fix it.
I am so irritated at the number of negative comments regarding low income people. Being poor does not mean you are a piece of trash! It doesn’t mean you steal! It doesn’t mean the children or parents are stupid! It doesn’t mean you are a parolee! It means that one is low income period!!!!!!! Perhaps they have not had the opportunity that the “wealthier” or “entitled Pleasantonian” has had. They should still be given an opportunity to live in a nice neighborhood. NO, it doesn’t mean your property values will suffer or your children will do drugs. It means that they are low income! Perhaps it would do many of you some good to see that there is another world besides the Pleasanton one. You and your children should be exposed to someone other than the wealthy (or pretend wealthy) people that inhabit most of Pleasanton. I am surprised “Occupy” hasn’t invaded Pleasanton the 1%. I was very low income growing up. I am now a business owner in Pleasanton. I have never been arrested, had 4.0 in school, quit college because I was making $300K a year at 28 without a college education and yes, it was totally legal! YES, I am moving out of Pleasanton and moving towards the silicon valley so my children are exposed to the real people in the world!
What a bunch of hypocrites. Just because someone is
in low income doesn’t mean they’re criminals. Some people have higher standards for themselves and want to live somewhere nice. Not all renters are slobs. Home owners have been known to be slobs. Now if you want to talk about schools, and where the children will go from these high density housing. That is an issue. My son is in the 4th grade and there is barely enough room for those students to walk. The only solution would be to get the contractors to build 3 more schools. Our children don’t get enough one on one time in class.
It is true the only real impact here is to the schools. What is the funding model for the expansion that will be needed?
A huge problem that no one seems to be addressing is that this ‘planned development’ is a clear violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
None of these apartments are accessible. None of the existing rental housing units (apartments – higher density housing) are accessible. They are talking about three and four story buildings – with no elevators! And the city is ready to approve this awful project! Planning needs to be re-visited – quickly.
I have owned very high end houses for rentals for more than 30 years. What I can say, without exception, is that no renter will ever take care of the property as if they care about it. Because they don’t. Now, add the element of section 8 and low income renters and you increase that problem exponentially. There is no low income housing project anywhere that shows anything but abuse from the renters.
For you people who think we should all make it a right for your children to buy their first home in Pleasanton — what are you smoking? People EARN their homes and have no predetermined right to live where they grew up. I grew up in Palo Alto and even today would not want to pay the price to purchase there.
The schools will be the major problem. We will have more kids and more voting renters who will be duped into a parcel tax. Of course, they will never pay it so the rest of us will support their kids as well.
Poor planning, bad execution, once again those of us who earn a living and pay our taxes will support those who choose not to.
The only thing it does mean is that the low-income housing program is a fraud, a fraud from many points.
First the income isn’t that low, and with reasonable effort and time, the occupiers could do it on their own…I won’t call them owners, that right would be reserved for the providers, not the occupiers.
It’s a fraud about LOW-income, when in the same breath some political wxxxxx say they should include all our public employees…. you know, the ones whose benefits and retirements are a major reason for our budget woes, and shortages….those whose futures we are forced to provide for them, tho our own futures are not secure, with no’retirements’ in sight.
Most of the occupiers could provide their own; it doesn’t benefit us; I’m stuck with the school costs even tho I will for sure vote NO parcel tax; and the program is for the financial benefit of builders who hit the jackpot with our money our politicians transfer to them.
And, as usual, it’s the middle-class taxpayers who again get screwed,
even tho most of US started with older than wanted, smaller than wanted, farther than wanted, when we started ‘working’ our way up, and are now the ones who have ‘lost’ our own retirements, working more for less, and we have tried to keep the house, which means we’re too well off for our kids to go to the college the free-lunch crowd gets to attend. Once they win that free-lunch lottery it stays with them so the benefits continue thru college. Suckers who did things ‘right’ and on their own, get punished by the political class who who want to pick and choose, and rearrange. Politicians win, builders wins, kids who don’t know their father win. Piling on more wrongs, won’t make things right.
low income housing stinks,
There’s an actual market for very high end rentals?! You’d think that people who can afford that kind of rent can afford to buy…
Once the school scores drop with the addition of thousands of poorly performing students, all of Pleasanton home prices will drop. Then we will have even more affordable housing in this town!
When you vote in Democratic politicians, this is what you should expect. Let’s get all that dirty wealth in Pleasanton redistributed, just like our Federal government is busy with.
Dense affordable housing is fine with me, as long as it is well built, well maintained and City provides sufficient parks and public transportation nearby.
I grew up in a middle class blue collar neighborhood in Oakland, now it is relatively easy to be shot in that same area, why, the poor moved in.
It may take awhile but I imaging it will be relatively easy to get shot in Pleasanton some day. I worked hard and sacrificed to get out of that city, who says you can’t go home again?
You people make me sick. I’ll bet everyone of you have lost your homes because You were stupid enough to sign loan papers that you lied about your income to qualify for a house you don’t belong in and you’ll be first in line for an application. That’s right, you don’t belong here.
You know it scares me to think you people are my neighbors and raising children to be just like. I am curious, were you all born with a silver spoon in your hand that says you belong here? I think not.
Jessie, you talk about hypocrites? You say there’s barely room for your 4th grader to walk around, and one-on-one time, yet you want to bring in masses of more kids ? ?
You know it scares me to think you people are my neighbors and raising children to be just like. I am curious, were you all born with a silver spoon in your hand that says you belong here? I think not.
I did mention the contractors would be responsible for building 3 more schools. So,but, make sure you read all.
What set of morons relied on housing appreciation data from 2003-2005 to inform this decision? Did ANY housing markets decline in that period? The impact on the school system will be severe. Pleasanton will be Concord Junior in five years wait and see…
“The MIT study, released in 2005, found that “high-density mixed-income rental developments in single-family neighborhoods do not affect the value of surrounding homes.”
“The Virginia Tech study, in fact, says “a well-located apartment building with attractive landscaping and entranceways raises the overall value of detached homes compared to having no apartments nearby.” That study was released in 2003.”
Low income or not….it is just ugly.
Pleasanton is looking more like Dublin everyday.
Affordable housing in P-town? now everyone that lives here lives in million dollar homes. some of us still live in homes valued at $500,000.00 according to zillow and taxes!
and not all renters don’t take care of their homes-I know many that rent homes and take better care of them that homeowners.
They need to re-design the exterior of these buildings. There are no architectural details on them at all. Totally out of character for Pleasanton. They are absolutely awful!
I agree they are extremely awful. The style of these boxes looks like something you’d imagine in Vallejo or Richmond.
Dublin’s apartment complexes look much better than both of these.
As many of you know, you can be a “Millionaire Next Door” (read the book) with incomes stated here that are so “low” many think crime-ridden neighborhoods are in Pleasanton’s future.
I read through all of the comments on this story and many of them are very disturbing in 2011 when most of us know that luck and good fortune are 90% of life (where you were born, your parents, your health, etc.) I hope the editors at the Pleasanton Weekly pass this story and posts to the pastors and rabbis in town for their congregations’ discussion.
Wow, weekly, not much faith in your fellow man there…..if you really believe that luck and good fortune and not hard work and determination help determine your outcome, you are a sad, hopeless person who must rely on your inept govt to bail you out. But, I’m sure you still manage to donate money to your local clergy since you so concerned for your fellow man. Go back to school and make something of yourself other than just another whiner.
The day of the nice white neighborhood is dead. It’s one of the fastest decaying aspects of America today according to recent studies. Neighborhoods are becoming integrated and as a result the elite status of cities dwindles to zero. In my neighborhood I live next door to an nice Asian couple, a Baptist Bible thumper who thinks anyone who isn’t Baptist is Beelzebub, a Christian Biker who loves Hitler and hates Obama, an Hispanic family that has family parties with hundreds in attendance and music blaring at the highest levels humanly possible, 3 renters and a park for pot smokers. All this has occurred in 10 years. It’s the future.
Puzzled why PW wants to discuss our attitudes. Churces USE to discuss those sort of things. In fact, the churches not long ago actually PROVIDED and contributed to needy housing, and if it’s not for needy, why on earth would we be forced to pay. These days those who think of themselves as dogooders, not for getting the church to do god’s work, OH, NO, they think they are doing something good by cramming costly crap down the throats of OTHER taxpayers ! ! They are lucky to survive mandating what I will spend, and what I can do without. In a free country, shouldn’t that be MY decision? I contribute to those who I DEEM WORTHY…I’m confident I’ll be paying for most I won’t approve of, for a number or reasons. Will I get to review the list of lottery winners, to see if I think they more worthy than my family ? ?
I suggest the church MYOB and CONTRIBUTE….ooops, forgot for a moment they don’t even PAY TAXES ! ! ! That is really a disgusting problem… I’d think they would want to keep thy mouth shut, unless they have something to contribute.
Ironically, the architects who designed the BRE project that everyone seems to think are so ugly, Dahlin Group, have their main office right across the street on Owens Drive from the site.
I am not for this at all. Affordable housing is a horrible idea. This brings in crime and thugs from all over the area. You work hard to live a good city and this is what you get? People that feel entitled to live in good cities “just because they think it’s fair”? Work your way up the ladder and then you can live in a good city. Keep it up Pleasanton and you’ll see how quickly this city goes down the toliet.
This reminds me of the “Projects” in Oakland and Hunters Point. We need to protect Pleasanton fron becoming another Oakland.
Does everyone understand that this is only the beginning of new growth? The housing cap has been removed and there will be mandates from the State for thousands of new housing units every few years. The east side of town will be the equivalent of another city. By the time you figure it out it will be too late.
Push back Pleasanton!
Stan – who cares? A city is either growing or dying. The city has grown a lot since I moved here, but it grew a lot before I moved here. What are you afraid of happening? If you are so concerned, go buy a few thousand acres in the middle of the desert and don’t let anyone on your land. Problem solved.
Citizens of Pleasanton care about the quality of life that we all value. Our concerns of unmitigated grow are valid.
Beyond that your post does not warrant a response.
The issue is that if the monolithic box-like buildings are approved as depicted on the Pleasanton Weekly cover in Hacienda, this sets a precedent for the rest of Pleasanton and what the rest of Pleasanton will soon look like.
That means that everywhere all over Pleasanton that it is required to build high density housing in the new Housing Element (and there are sites throughout Pleasanton), this type of dormitory looking structure will be the norm, meaning this type of thing will be in many parts of Pleasanton.
My neighbor is quite opposed to change/growth, without realizing that her property has gone up a lot in value because of it (she paid 40K a long time ago and could sell it for about 750K right now).
She also complains about her “huge” property taxes. I reminded her that I pay more than 10 times as much as she does (she pays less than one thousand per year!). She was quite disappointed when I bought my house (I am in a mixed race marriage) even though through my taxes (quite high) I subsidize her! (yeah, both through income and property taxes)
It seems to me that the older folks against change are the ones “riding along” and being subsidized by the newcomers. (my neighbor btw is on a fixed income, a pension and has been in retirement for about 20 years and uses medicare – so who is the “lazy bum” here? The “low income” young people who will work to keep subsidizing the older folks, pay taxes etc or the older white folks who are against change and wish they did not have to see people of other races around?)
One more thing:
Many of the older white folks complaining about the low income housing do not realize that these “low income” families probably earn more than them…. and that they (the older white folks against change) could not afford to buy in Pleasanton right now even if they sold their properties – they simply would not have enough money to pay the current property taxes.
I know my neighbor could not afford to buy my house even if she sold hers, and has never made a six figure income like mine.
Many of the “low income” people who will move in are probably making more money than all those Pleasanton folks who bought a long time ago, are retired and on a fixed income, use Medicare (but complain about national healthcare), etc
Pickin’ on old ladies are ya?
When you’re her age, some young buck next door will be making more money than you ever did and your situation will be no different from your neighbor’s.
Ah. Yes, you will be old someday too…too old to work (or keep your job) and you will want to stay in your home, near your family, but you will not be able to if your property taxes are as high as the young guy’s next door.
And if you don’t have Medicare, you will not be able to pay much in Dr. bills so you will probably be around 10 years less.
Ah. Yes, you will be old someday too – even though you don’t think so right now…
And if your wished-for scenario plays out, you will probably suffer for it.
“When you’re her age, some young buck next door will be making more money than you ever did…”
The trouble is that a lot of these same people will say pay for my Medicare, but don’t raise taxes. But you can’t have it both ways. Medicare and Medicaid the most expensive entitlements we have, and they are getting more expensive every day. We have to make some cuts and raise taxes if we are to keep these programs.
To “Something to think about”,
I have no problem with people of any race moving to Pleasanton, and I don’t agree with the zero growth people either. I also have no sympathy for the people who want to keep people of other races out of Pleasanton. I just think the proposed buildings are ugly. I wouldn’t want to live in them or work or shop around them.
“When you’re her age, some young buck next door will be making more money than you ever did and your situation will be no different from your neighbor’s. ”
WRONG! When I retire, social security will be broke, the pension system is already running out of funds, etc. Medicare will be broke as well. I have a retirement (private) account that will allow me to live quite nicely when I get old. Unlike the older generation already relying on government assistance (while at the same time complaining about government assistance for the young such as universal healthcare), I have planned, from the very beginning, how to retire WITHOUT government help.
My parents are retired but are not collecting government assistance – they are well off thanks to their lifetime of hard work.
I am saving for my retirement and do not plan to rely on government assistance because all of that will be gone!
The point is: my neighbor is very quick to criticize the low income housing – well, she is low income herself: did not plan well enough for retirement and relies on governemnt subsidies (pension, medicare), and she does not have the ability to buy a house in Pleasanton. What is she complaining about?
I’d rather have the low income, tax paying folks that will move into the affordable housing, living in Pleasanton, than people as bitter as my neighbor who are themselves, a burden on the taxpayer. At least the low income folks work and pay taxes. What does my neighbor contribute other than her complaints? And believe me, the taxpayer is paying quite a bit for my neighbor as her health needs are quite high and she has a limited fixed income.
“I just think the proposed buildings are ugly. I wouldn’t want to live in them or work or shop around them. ”
But what about buildings already like that, have you seen the new development off of Bernal and Valley? I think they are building a shopping center or something, but the buildings do not seem to match the “Pleasanton look”
And that area (by Willow/Stoneridge) already have office buildings that are not necessarily that much different from the proposed ones. And what about the area by the Home Depot? We already have some not as good looking stuff around, and no one complains about that.
“Something to think about”, race card really???
The only racist remarks I see are from you others who identify as ethnic, openly taking shots at “older white folks”.
The concerns that I see are from residents who are concerned about forced development that does not mitigate it’s impact (schools, traffic) and does not fit in to the existing community.
Rather than divide, unite to protect Pleasantons Quality of Life.
Something to think about, you are not only apparently clairvoyant, (social security will be gone when you are old), but you are also the most bigoted, racist poster I’ve seen in some time.
You obviously hate white people and want more of your kind here to comfort you and surround yourself with those of your ilk.
Rather than disparaging an older person who obviously worked hard and long enough to afford living here when you were just an afterthought, you should keep saving so you can one day earn your way into our town (as opposed to having your govt mandate your inclusion in our community, not unlike school busing)
Can’t say I’m proud to report I live in Pleasanton based on all the stereo-type comments here. Sorry not everyone can live up to the Pleasanton criteria. Remember, not everyone that provides services to Pleasanton residences early 6-figure incomes. When my aunt was alive she was in low-income housing – she didn’t deal drugs and didn’t steal. A family of military personnel I met are struggling to get by on a miltiary family – they are using low income housing. So who’d I like for my neighbor – the bigots commenting here or these two examples of low income households?
Glad to hear that Something is able to sock away 50% of his/her income for 25 straight years for retirement..
HALF your continuous income for 25 years…
Because that’s what you will need to fund retirement from the age of 65-85 since the cost of living will be amazingly higher by the time today’s 30-somethings are 65.
Oh – and be sure invest it wisely (and luckily). Do not allow any kind of recession or depression to intervene.
And put a couple of kids through college somewhere in those 25 years of saving your own money for retirement.
Otherwise, you might need some help from the young guy next door with an eight-figure income. 😉
Oh. I forgot. Your parents have money to leave you. Unless they use it up first.
Incidentially, it occurs to me that your elderly next door neighbor was probably not low-income when she purchased her home…just a guess.
Good Luck with ageing.
I say downsize. There is something to be said for smaller houses. Your carbon footprint is reduced with you think of a smaller home as you age: http://www.designboom.com/contemporary/tiny_houses.html
A smaller home works for me! HOORAY!
“HALF your continuous income for 25 years…”
Actually, I put away all of my income and we live on my spouse’s income, who also puts a bit toward retirement.
Yes, I know how expensive retirement will be (it already is)
“When my aunt was alive she was in low-income housing”
That is exactly my point: the people who will live in the low income housing will be honest people, and most of them will still be working and paying taxes. That is why my neighbor bothers me so much because she feels that we should not have affordable housing because of the “low income” designation. My neighbor does not realize that people in those low income places may have the same, if not more, income than she does.
So my neighbor rejects low income people but she is low income herself. There is something wrong with that.
“so you can one day earn your way into our town”
Did you not read my posts? I already bought a house in Pleasanton (not a low income property). Earn my way into your town? Wow! What does that mean? You are like my neighbor. She did not like it when I moved in, when I bought my house even though my property taxes and my income taxes subsidize my neighbor.
tell her where to get off…duh…
….or move…..there’s not enough room in this town to hold you and the big chip on your shoulder. Go pick on someone closer to your age (and race).
Don’t you have a Tea Party to go to Steve? My neighbor goes to those.
“….or move….”
I don’t have to, but it is good to know I can if I want to.
I have the feeling that people like you and my neighbor will want to move when the low income projects are a reality. My neighbor will stay out of financial need (can’t afford to sell and buy again), but you will probably move, right? Reading your posts, it seems like you are quite bothered by the low income housing. Well, be mad all you want because they will be built and people will move in, regardless of how you feel about it. And your only option to avoid the whole thing will be to move – the Parkside neighborhood is not that far from where the low income housing will be.
My neighbor is well aware of it and is quite bothered by it, but her hands are tied. How about you? Will you stay and keep complaining about the low income housing or move?
When the Superior Court judge found in favor of Urban Habitat, the Pleasanton city council could have appealed the ruling to the Appellate Court division.
Many Alameda County Superior Court judges have found in favor of one party. Then when it is appealed, the Appellate Division reverses the decision.
Since the city did not appeal, it seemed like it had no problem with allowing all 3000 of those additional housing projects to be built.
Everyone should be asking the city council why they never appealed the original Superior Court decision.
But the buildings don’t have to be ugly, and we are already stretching are schools’ facilities and class sizes have been increasing. This will make matters worse for the schools.
Low income housing is simply not right.It is not a right to own a home in the USA and pick the city that you want to live in.People work hard and buy a home where they can afford one or rent one.My son cannot afford to buy a house in Pleasanton.He can afford one in the older part of Dublin or San Leandro and many other places.My neighbor wants to live in Ruby Hill but he cannot afford a home there.You live where you can afford to live based on your success in life earning money.You overcome odds,you work hard or get an education.We do not need the gov’t deciding who gets to live where.It is not discrimination to deny renting or selling a home to someone who cannot afford it on there own merits.If a person can afford to buy a 550k home in Pleasanton he should not be on some gov’t program to allow him to buy a 700k house.If someone can only afford a single family home for 300k then they should buy in a city that has that or a rent they can afford.Period.
WORD Hoops, well said.
@Hoops
“If a person can afford to buy a 550k home in Pleasanton he should not be on some gov’t program to allow him to buy a 700k house.”
You do understand this is about RENTAL housing, right?
We bought here 20 years ago, just after the earthquake. We could not afford to buy in P-town now. My parents, who saved most of their income and worked well into their 70’s, have lost the majority in the last 10 years. Yes, they had a diverse portfolio and had hoped to live off the income during retirement. Now they find they are living off SS and just able to make ends meet. We have been trying to find a place in P-Town to buy for them (our investment, their retirement), nothing we and they can afford. Since they own houses in a very depressed state, they cannot sell their houses at a price that allows them to buy one outright here or pay the taxes.
I agree that the exterior of the buildings are UGLY, but have no problem with the “affordable housing”. My only worry right now is the impact on our schools. With budget issue, overcrowding, etc. the district does not have money to run 3 new schools that “developer fees” may build.
Something, I think we must live in the same neighborhood…I’m glad you’re my neighbor 🙂 I hope your kids and mine can move back here after they graduate college.
Yes I understand it is about rental housing.The cities also have regular housing they subsidize to lower income buyers.I was mixing the 2 together.
This is a joke, Just ask Oakland, Richmond, Livermore.. neighborhoods around Lahey Square how’s that working for them. Ask Springtown homeowners how’s the low income working out for them. Ask Stockton. “Nations… “WORST PLACE TO LIVE!!!”How is that low income housing working out for their not so lovely little community .They were all once nice communities too. Go talk to a Pleasanton police officer and ask them how the low income housing on Vineyard Ave. is affecting the town. Some MIT moron thinks bringing this element into our community will enhance our community for the better. What a bunch of ignorant fools. All this does is shorten the drive for the criminal element to our front doors.Give the criminals a whole new turf to breed their drug and gang wars into.Sure,,,There are some folks, elderly, disabled who truly are in need of help and would benefit from low income housing however, they are the only ones who deserve the help, unfortunately they are far outnumbered by the riff raff,lazy,welfare,illegal entitlement crowd that will take advantage of this opportunity. I am not rich, I don’t live in a gated community. I work hard to live here and I like my town. I like the fact that my child got a good education in our schools, I like the fact that my town is clean safe and friendly. I can walk down main street without fear of being robbed, raped or shot. So some people cannot afford to live here, Oh well, that’s life.you don’t get to have everything you want. That’s just how it is! I’d like to live in some Island paradise, but,I cant afford that. So I live here, This is what I can afford, It’s great, I work hard and I love it here. I make the best of what I have. Oh and before you go thinking you know me or who I am or what I think, let me set you straight.I am sure there are a those of you already calling me a racist, hypocrite, hater, don’t waste your time or mine , you’re dam right I am a racist, a hypocrite and a hater too!!!I don’t want my community destroyed, I don’t want my schools destroyed,I don’t want my town over run with gang banger kids ,drugs and crime. I don’t want my roads anymore crowded than they already are. I don’t want home prices to go down in my town ,I don’t want anymore of the lazy entitlement crowd moving into my town…I don’t want my tax dollars wasted low income housing when my schools, town and community need the money more. No one is owed anything, NOTHING!!! Not the poor, not the lazy, not the illegals not even me or you. So you can’t afford to live in a place like Pleasanton, then find a nice place you can afford and make the best of it. I worked hard for what I have, a nice safe place to live and raise my kid. Someone wants to live in Pleasanton then do it the way all the rest of us have, hard work. So as for low income housing in Pleasanton. Bad,,, Very Very bad idea , and you all know it, You’re just too afraid to say it, scared of the finger pointers, labelers name calling politically correct crowd or your just too ignorant to understand it.
Aside from the you saying you are a racist,which I doubt that you really are….you pretty much speak the truth in terms of the reality.So many people are so concerned with being politically correct and full of themselves.They think low income housing is a good thing for Pleasanton…but of course not in THEIR neighborhood.This is America,not a third world country.You can find a safe,decent place to live where you can afford.PERIOD.I would like to see a show of hands by all of those responsible for passing these laws that want to live next to a low income subsidized neighborhood….Gee,I do not see any hands being raised…what a surprise.
Pleasanton already has low income subsidized housing. We already live next to it.
You can’t blame people who recently paid betweek $700K-$1M for a house during the boom who want to keep Pleasanton nice; or families who have lived here for years who don’t want their quality of life to sharply go downhill.
Pleasanton’s attractiveness is predicated on its good schools – low-income housing will mean school overcrowding (the district has admitted they have no plan for building more schools and high-density housing doesn’t pay enough in impact fees to offset the impact); and most likely the new housing will attract a lower caliber of student (think Section 8 crowd from the East Bay and the ESL crowd).
All of the liberals think that Pleasanton is different – somehow it won’t become the urbane ghettopia that the rest of East Bay has and won’t have any of the problems. It most certainly will!
I guess the good news is for for-profit private schools and charter schools – which will start to thrive in Pleasanton once the public schools deteriorate. And don’t forget about the private security firms as Pleasanton’s grocery stores and shopping areas will all need to hire private security during business hours as is common in the East Bay. So I guess BRE, construction unions and the Democrat party won’t be the only winners in this deal. Too bad the losers are Pleasanton homeowners.
Let us get real!
America is based on laws.
The Courts have ruled that Pleasanton has violated California housing laws.
The Court ordered Pleasanton to build low-moderate housing to comply with the State law.
According to the objectors to compliance with the Court order, the schools are overcrowded, this additional housing will create a school crisis. This failure of the PUSD to provide public schools for all present eligible residents is a problem that the School Board has chosen to ignore for a long time. To blame this school shortage on proposed low and moderate income housing is ridiculous.
All these rantings are quite surprising in the face of Pleasanton’s Congressman is a Democrat. Maybe those who are so offended by Pleasanton having to adhere to State law, should move before their property values decline. Something that they are sure will happen-
Their alternative is agree that we are a notions of laws.
Low housing brings drugs? Where have you people been, drugs are all over Pleasanton have been for twenty years. You think somehow drugs are only in Dublin and Livermore, look around you open your eyes Pleasanton your town is not drug free……one of your teachers’ was just arrested for drugs….
I grew up middle class but later lived in low income housing in San Jose. When I moved to Pleasanton as an adult with my children it had been because I EARNED IT. We graduated, attained respectable jobs, saved our money and EARNED IT.
Yes there is a place for low income housing but does it have to be Pleasanton? I’m sad to say that we have already planned to move to a different community in the next few years, a city that has a local government willing to maintain certain standards through responsible city planning.
Dear Golden Eagle resident –
You will have to move out of State, since all cities in California are required to provide their fair share of housing affordable to households earning less than 50% of their county’s median income. Fair share is substantially based on existing and planned commercial development, of which Pleasanton has a lot.
Don’t blame the City Council. They really and sincerely tried to avoid this requirement in deference to Pleasanton residents who feel they have “earned” the right to live in a community that consists exclusively of wealthier families. The Council spent well over a million taxpayer dollars testing California’s affordable housing law on your behalf, and lost a landmark decision. Pleasanton is now under court order to facilitate provision of its fair share of affordable housing, as the majority of other California cities already do. The Council is doing its best to comply in a way that’s good for Pleasanton.
It sounds like you are unaware of the many examples of attractive, well maintained, affordable housing that already exist in Pleasanton, built as recently as ten years ago. That includes Section 8 housing that was probably here when you purchased your dream home in Golden Eagle. I’m glad our affordable housing didn’t scare you away! I think our community, with people of diverse incomes, increasingly able to live close to where they work, adds immeasurably to Pleasanton’s small town feeling that everybody seems to like.
For more about California affordable housing law, here’s a link:
http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/hrc/plan/he/ca_plan_law_affd_hsg0506.pdf
Merry Christmas, and have a happy, prosperous 2012,
Yes, it is very sad that I cannot live and work in the same community. I have worked hard,finished my college education but still cannot afford to live in Pleasanton. Yes, I am considered Low Income. If I were a home owner in Pleasanton, where I work, I too would be contributing to the tax base, the community and the diversity of this community. Even if I could afford to rent in Pleasanton, I would still contribute to the economy of this town. I would be keeping the income I have earned, in this town.
There has been lots of talk about what type of person “Affordable Housing” brings in, well it would bring me back into Pleasanton. I can guarantee I am not a gang banger,drug dealer, or any of the other terms used here to describe people who make less than 65k a year. Why shouldn’t the people who work in the service industry be able to live in Pleasanton? The manor in which a lot of the posters on this discussion reminds me of living in the 40’s and 50’s with segregation. Sad, just Sad.