Fact or Fiction
Conflicting statements are confusing citizens. Which are fact and which are fiction?
1. The Planning Commission fully reviewed this project. FICTION.
The Planning Commission voted against the certification of the Environmental Impact Report. They did not discuss or modify the development plan. The City Council then overrode the Commission and certified the Environmental Impact Report and then immediately approved the development plan the developer submitted instead of sending the development plan back to the Planning Commission. This is extremely unusual for the Planning Commission to not vote on a housing development.
2. Only 58 trees will be removed if Oak Grove is approved. FICTION
It is not clear how many trees will be removed. The developer doesn't state is that his tree count (58) doesn't include grading or building for a single house. It only includes building the infrastructure (roads). More trees would have to be removed for houses and the necessary "defensible zone" required by law.
3. The ridgeline initiative would prevent property owners from dedicating land to the City in the future. FICTION
The initiative is very simple, it prohibits large developments on ridges or mass grading of steep slopes. To view the initiative, click here.
4. PP allows any developer less then 10 homes to do whatever they want with no city controls. FICTION
The PP initiative does not change any existing City planning processes, it only puts restrictions on developments larger than 10 homes that are on steep slopes or ridgelines.
5. Save Our Hills implied Senator Feinstein was opposed to Oak Grove. FICTION
The ad in the Pleasanton Weekly stated:
"Local officials should start using zoning laws to keep residents from living in fire-prone areas." CA Sen. Dianne Feinstein. We agree. The Oak Grove project and the rest of the southern Pleasanton hills are classified as high risk for wildland fires.
6. The vote could force the City to give back a park. FICTION
The land has not yet been given to the City, it is still owned by the developer. Furthermore, the land is not a park now; it is open space. Should this project be voted down by the voters of Pleasanton, it will remain as open space until the developer submits a plan that is acceptable to the City. If the a new plan was submitted, it would almost certainly have the property not being developed donated to the City. The developer doesn't want to pay taxes or maintain the property after the development has been approved.
7. This project is supported by former Mayor Tom Pico. FACT
Tom Pico now works for the developer as a lobbyist/consultant. He is
paid to market this development. While we respect the work that Tom Pico
did while he was a mayor, he now represents the developer, not the
citizens.
9000 sq ft home in the Oakland Hills. Is this what we want on our ridges?
NO, this is not what we want!
We look forward to working with developer and the community to find a solution that is consistent with the general plan, PP and is acceptable to the Pleasanton residents.
8 Reasons to Vote NO!
The developer touts the 8 reasons to vote yes, but these are actual 8 of the many reasons to vote NO. Click here
Bulldozers are lined up
They will have to go elsewhere!
Sierra Club says NO Oak Grove
The local, regional, state and national branches of the Sierra Club urge you to Vote NO on Oak Grove because of the negative impact on the ridges and environment of Pleasanton's hills. Read their newsletter.
Learn the facts about the flyer
The glossy flyer sent Pleasanton residents shows the current hills, but what will happen to those hills and trees if Oak Grove is built? Click here
What can you do?
Visit us on Facebook
Get your T-Shirt!
Order now only a $10 donation!
Volunteer
If you are interested in helping save Pleasanton's ridgelines, please email us.
Donate to Save the Hills
We need funds to educate the voters about saving Pleasanton's Hills. If you would like to donate, please send a check to:
Save Pleasanton Hills
1246 Hearst Dr.
Pleasanton, CA 94566
or