Town Square

Post a New Topic

Guest Opinion: Overdevelopment in West Pleasanton

Original post made on Mar 4, 2023

It would be bad enough if the impacts of this growth -- traffic, air pollution and quality of life -- were spread equitably to all parts of town. But most of this new growth regime has focused on Pleasanton's northwest area...

Read the full story here Web Link posted Saturday, March 4, 2023, 11:47 AM

Comments (6)

Posted by Mike
a resident of Val Vista
on Mar 4, 2023 at 3:16 pm

Mike is a registered user.

Pleasantons desire to limit growth and force builders to dedicate land to the single family home is why we are at this point.

California is 4 million homes short of demand. I support the growth of Pleasanton both commercial and residential. High density housing is the future. It is time to accept that and build the best future we can. The idea that this growth is going to harm more than help is unfounded and out of touch with reality.

The same type of people complained about the growth of Hacienda and the Mall. Claiming injustice and crime will go up. Its just not true.

Posted by resident
a resident of Danbury Park
on Mar 4, 2023 at 5:38 pm

resident is a registered user.

whaaa whaaa seriously Costco again Matt? smh. move on bro. not a good look.

Posted by Dave
a resident of Highland Oaks
on Mar 6, 2023 at 10:33 am

Dave is a registered user.

I hate to say this, but Matt is correct when he states that West Pleasanton is disproportionately impacted.

If the total Housing Element plan is roughly 6,000 Units. With the mall being targeted for roughly 2,000 units. Do the math. That is roughly 30 Percent on one site. And that does not include the other sites that are in West Pleasanton including but not limited to:

- Merritt property (Close to FHS)
- Signature Center (Hopyard Near Chilis)
- Hacienda Terrace (Hopyard Near Chilis)
- Laborers Council (Owens and Hopyard)

The distribution of units is not proportional. Not even moderately proportional.
Regards, Dave

Posted by Matt Sullivan
a resident of Stoneridge
on Mar 6, 2023 at 11:19 am

Matt Sullivan is a registered user.

Actually, the numbers are worse. Our RHNA requires a total of 5956 units to be zoned for various housing. However, the city already had 2792 units zoned or in the “pipeline” leaving a shortfall of 3173 units (see Staff Report page 9 here Web Link ) On 1/26 the Council approved 1150 units for Stoneridge, but there is currently 360 units in the review and approval process, so the actual total is 1510. With the Density Bonus provision, this number could easily surpass 2000 at Stoneridge. So 2000 divided into the 3173 shortfall is 63% of the needed new units will be at Stoneridge Mall. The Council is dumping all these units at Stoneridge to protect their own neighborhoods, and because of the election districts, they won't have to face voter backlash when they run for reelection.

Posted by Karl A
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 6, 2023 at 2:05 pm

Karl A is a registered user.

Time to start seriously looking at a plan for the east side.

Forget the Amazon mini warehouse and all the semis and delivery vans.

Come up with a plan for higher density housing along with lots of open space to offset it.

Better to have a plan that is acceptable to the community (while not perfect) than have the state plan it.

Pleasanton needs to go back to being the City of Planned Progress and the citizens need to accept the fact the city is no longer the little, remote rural town it used to be.

For once I agree with Mr. Sullivan - it’s not fair to load up the Stoneridge site with all the housing units required. The neighborhood should not have to shoulder the entire burden of Pleasanton’s shortsightedness and unwillingness to build an acceptable amount of housing for many decades.

Posted by Longtime Resident
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Mar 10, 2023 at 8:10 am

Longtime Resident is a registered user.

Plan for the east? The East Pleasanton Specific Plan was killed off a decade ago by the NIMBYs, including those currently on the council. That's how far behind we are. Now we get an Amazon Warehouse and dumping housing all into one area instead. No foresight at all. Reap what you sow.

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


Post a comment

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

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

California must do a better job spending cap-and-trade revenue
By Sherry Listgarten | 2 comments | 2,247 views

Tri-Valley Nonprofit Alliance grew from chance meeting
By Tim Hunt | 0 comments | 1,770 views

Making wine for 140 years merits celebration
By Deborah Grossman | 0 comments | 501 views