Town Square

Post a New Topic

PUSD to explore building new elementary school on Neal property

Original post made on Feb 15, 2017

The Pleasanton school board Tuesday night took a step forward in planning for a new elementary school in the district, directing administrators to explore building on PUSD's Neal property in the southeast part of the city.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, February 15, 2017, 7:52 AM

Comments (7)

21 people like this
Posted by Julie Testa
a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Feb 15, 2017 at 10:02 am

“Based on its projections, which were prepared with the help of city of Pleasanton planning staff, there is no need for any additional middle or high schools.”

What is not reported is that the report qualifies the statement by saying, there is no need for any additional middle or high school, “IF an average enrollment near 2,700 in Districts high school facilities is ACCEPTABLE” and “IF an average enrollment near 1,300 in Districts middle school facilities is ACCEPTABLE”. These are conservative projections which do not consider significant additional housing that is being considered and likely to happen given our city council's pro-growth agenda.

The report Does Not say no schools are needed to maintain Pleasanton’s identified enrollment standards. Pleasanton General Plan, the city’s planning constitution, identifies school enrollment at 600 for k5, 1000 for middle school, 2000 for high school.

PUSD is now allowing their campus enrollment to sink to the lowest possible bar, below State of California standards. Pleasanton school campuses exceed the MAXIMUM enrollment for California Department of Ed Site Requirements for Very Large Schools. 

Like this comment
Posted by Dave C
a resident of Old Towne
on Feb 15, 2017 at 10:03 am

Where s this Neal site located?

Like this comment
Posted by interested neighbor
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Feb 15, 2017 at 10:24 am

And where is the "Neal Property" that the city already owns? No mention in your article except for "southeast" part of the city.

Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Feb 15, 2017 at 10:33 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Neal site is on Vineyard before you get to Ruby Hill. The city doesn't own it; the district owns that land. It is valuable, either as a school or as a trade for other land, particularly in the North section where enrollment is particularly high and a school is already long overdue.

7 people like this
Posted by res
a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Feb 15, 2017 at 10:45 am

The district should sell the Neal site and purchase a site in a better location.

If you want to see the worst traffic mess in Pleasanton, put a school at the Neal site. That is a two lane arterial road. What is going to happen when parents need to drop off or pick up students? There is no place to stack the vehicles and this will cause Vineyard Avenue to come to a stop. Even if you put in traffic lights there, there is no room to stack the cars in a turn lane. A previous traffic engineer designed traffic circles there but that was a disaster and would bring everything to a stop should there be a school built there. That is expensive land as it is a prime spot for residential. Sell that site and go for another location that has better access and more centrally located to where the growth is. Perhaps the Valley Trails site. The Valley Trails site will be cheaper per acre, especially if the city does not rezone this from institutional into residential.

5 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Feb 15, 2017 at 11:44 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

I live off Vineyard and would be interested in a magnet school of some kind on the Neal site. There are usually ways to mitigate traffic. In fact, I think we could look at more than one of our current schools as magnet schools to alleviate enrollment (although it is harder to do with existing schools unless they are losing enrollment . . . Lydiksen?).

19 people like this
Posted by Julie Testa
a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Feb 15, 2017 at 2:38 pm

Julie Testa is a registered user.

The demographic reports from the year 2000 through 2012 under projected district enrollment by 3,252 students. Those are our kids, not cans of tuna that can be packed in. The current projections that suggest using the same failed justification as were used then, declining birth rates, is not even logical when two thousand housing units are being built and many more being discussed. Enrollments will be higher but everyone will pretend to be surprised and say it is too late to do anything about it.
So now we get to discuss another 1200 homes on the Eastside, where an offer of a K5 school does not resolve HS and middle school overcrowding.

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


To post your comment, please login or register at the top of the page. This topic is only for those who have signed up to participate by providing their email address and establishing a screen name.

A tax grab that likely goes no where
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 595 views

Nominations due Monday for TV30’s Tri-Valley ‘Coach of the Year’ award
By Jeb Bing | 0 comments | 185 views


2017 guide to summer camps

Looking for something for the kids to do this summer, learn something new and have fun? The 2017 Summer Camp Guide features local camps for all ages and interests.

Find Camps Here