5487 / 43.5% Yes votes ...... 7117 / 56.4% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

• Offical WWW Site
• Full Text

First, it would require voter approval of certain land use decisions. Currently, City Council action is the final step in the development approval process. The Initiative would change that process by requiring voter approval of legislative decisions (a) involving ten or more residential units, (b) prezoning any unincorporated territory to a residential use, (c) changing two or more acres of open space use to non-open space use and (d) permitting commercial, office or industrial development plans that exceed 55 feet in height.

Second, the Initiative would modify the General Plan Land Use Map. The Land Use Map designates the proposed general location and distribution of land uses and indicates what areas of Pleasanton should be developed residential, commercial, open space, etc.

Currently, five areas identified in the Initiative are designated for residential/commercial development. These areas are Staples Ranch, the San Francisco Bernal Avenue property, the Busch property, the Vineyard Avenue Corridor, and the Merritt property. These five areas would be designated "Agriculture and Grazing" and could not be changed to another designation without voter approval.

Third, the Initiative would comprehensively redesignate allowed densities in existing residential areas. Currently, residential property is generally designated low density, medium density and high density. These would be replaced by seven new categories (R-2, R-4, etc.). Vacant properties that are currently designated medium density (2-8 units/acre) would be in the R-4 category (2-4 units/acre). Taken together, these changes would have the effect of reducing planned development in Pleasanton. Assuming that the five areas designated by the Initiative would remain Agriculture, (a) the number of residential units at build out would be reduced from 29,000 to 26,500, (b) fewer high density projects are likely to be built (thereby likely affecting the supply of affordable housing), (c) meeting future regional housing needs will be more difficult, and, (d) because the five areas were to house 85 acres of community park land, additional park land would need to be designated elsewhere in order to maintain General Plan park standards. The Initiative is not likely to have any direct effect on regional problems, e.g., traffic congestion on the freeways, nor reduce the need for additional school facilities. Because it was assumed (when the voters approved Pleasanton's participation in the LAVWMA sewer expansion project) that growth would occur as provided in the General Plan, less development could increase the risk that existing rate payers could be impacted by the cost of the expansion project.

It is not anticipated that the Initiative will have a significant impact on the local economy but the building industry could be impacted. It is also not expected that the Initiative will have a material affect on the City's General Fund, although the loss of development fees, due to less development, could require the General Fund to make up the loss of revenues to the Public Facilities, Traffic and Park funds.

s/MICHAEL H. ROUSH
City Attorney, City of Pleasanton

Contra Costa County Times

• Contest coverage

• Alliance Pushes Initiatives to Restrict Tri-Valley Growth 10/12/99

Measure D puts a final step in the development approval process. After Planning Commission and City Council review, Measure D will allow voters to make the final decision on whether new developments are good for the city and our Quality of Life. We have serious problems caused by poorly planned growth, including

• School crowding
• Commute nightmares
• City traffic congestion
• Air pollution
• Loss of hillside views
• Shortages of water and sewer capacity
• Shortages of sports fields, parks and open space These will not be fixed unless we change the system. The current political process does not ensure that residents' concerns are listened to and responded to, but instead follows the lead of developers' proposals. Measure D will change the system and let the voice of the people of Pleasanton be heard.

Measure D is one of four city CAPP initiatives in our Tri-Valley area and will be followed by a County Initiative to protect unincorporated areas. Measure D lasts for twenty years and is renewable. Measure D will allow voters to go to the polls up to twice a year and directs development proponents, not the city, to pay the costs of the elections.

We still have a chance not to become another Los Angeles. Measure D is another step toward better and more open government. Measure D will harness growth toward benefiting the city and its current and future residents and will demand that our city problems be solved. VOTE YES on Measure D.

s/BEN TARVER, Mayor
s/TOM PICO, Councilmember
s/KRIS M. KUMARAN, Chair, Planning Commission
s/STANLEY A. ERICKSON, CAPP Chairman
s/CAROLE A. VARELA, CAPP Organizer, Preserve our Pleasanton Founder, Referendum Organizer

MEASURE D DOESN'T SOLVE PROBLEMS. IT CREATES PROBLEMS.

• MEASURE D DOES NOT GUARANTEE VOTER CONTROL OVERLARGE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. In fact, it could force nearly 800 acres immediately adjacent to our neighborhoods, including the San Francisco, Staples Ranch, and Busch properties, to develop in Alameda County. Pleasanton residents would lose control of development and could suffer profound negative impacts. The City would receive no tax revenue or fees to fix the problems created by this new development. Remember, the County has already approved 2500 units and 550,000 square feet of commercial development on the San Francisco property!

• MEASURE D COSTS TOO MUCH!!! PLEASANTON RESIDENTS WILL LOSE . . . . PARKS: Cuts 85 acres of parks and sports fields from Pleasanton's Plan. Forfeits $9,000,000 in Park Fees. TRAFFIC: Increases freeway congestion, air pollution, and cut-through traffic in our neighborhoods. Makes this "nightmare" permanent by throwing away $61,200,000 in traffic fees and contributions. SCHOOLS: Less money for schools! School fees are paid only by new housing. FACILITIES: Forces residents to pay an additional $150,000,000 for needed public facilities. GROWTH: Invites more unrestricted growth in neighboring cities and counties. Subverts Pleasanton's voter-enacted Urban Growth Boundary and Housing Cap. Growth impacting Pleasanton escapes our stringent growth controls.

s/SHARRELL MICHELOTTI, City Council Member
s/ERIC `OTIS' NOSTRAND, Business Owner
s/DOLORES BENGTSON, Retired Parks Director
s/DAVID CHOY, Chair, Parks & Recreation Commission
s/TRISH MAAS, Planning Commissioner

It will increase traffic congestion, eliminate parks, cut school resources, and bring impacts from County development. Please vote NO!

Although claiming to protect Pleasanton's quality of life, the City's analysis shows Measure D does nothing to reduce growth impacts such as traffic, air quality, and school crowding. On the contrary, this analysis also shows that forcing our citizen planned growth out of Pleasanton to nearby communities means MORE negative impacts for us!

MEASURE D . . .

• SHIFTS THE BURDEN OF PAYMENT FROM DEVELOPERS TO RESIDENTS for Pleasanton's $67,200,000 sewer expansion. Voters overwhelmingly approved this project to service and be paid for by Pleasanton's planned growth. Measure D sticks YOU with the bill ! ! !
• WE LOSE OVER $80,000,000 IN IMPACT FEES: $13,200,000 in Facilities Fees, $22,800,000 in Traffic Fees. $9,000,000 in Park Fees, and $38,400,000 in developer contributions to traffic projects. Measure D forfeits this revenue, leaving Pleasanton relatively defenseless against the impacts of regional development on our quality of life.
• REMOVES 85 ACRES OF PARKS FROM PLEASANTON'S PLAN and provides a paltry 15 acres of parks - far below our General Plan standards.
• THREATENS NEIGHBORHOODS. Under Measure D adjacent County land will develop outside Pleasanton's control. County controlled development won't contribute to Pleasanton's treasury, or adhere to our high community standards. Significant neighborhood impacts will result if Staples Ranch, Busch, and especially the Bernal property develop in the County.

PROTECT YOURSELF FROM THIS MISGUIDED INITIATIVE.
Vote NO!

s/MARY L. ROBERTS, Pleasanton Planning Commissioner
s/GEOFF COOPER, Former Pleasanton Planning Commissioner
s/PAT LANE, Human Services Commissioner
s/DENNIS WINSLOW, Former Parks & Rec. Commissioner and Current Ballistic United Soccer Club Board member

The opposition is spouting phony threats and scare tactics. They use fantasy projections and numbers to make residents think they will face unwanted costs. This has no basis in reality. They want you to believe that Measure D will result in loss of impact fees, park land and lead to County development. Not so - if anything it will do the opposite

For too long, the City Council majority has ignored the bad effects of development. Just look around - over-crowded schools, commute nightmares, traffic congestion, limited park space, air pollution, flood control and water problems. Their only solution to our problems is more growth - and the loss of our quality of life

If we approve Measure D, and then tell developers we want improved traffic,and more schools, parks and sports fields before we allow development, we will get it. Otherwise, it will be more of the same empty promises that led us where we are today

We should all have the final say on what development is built on the last few open spaces in Pleasanton.

Pleasanton is a city of intelligent voters. We can and will approve what is good for the city, its businesses and employees, and its residents. We can and will approve development that not only pays for itself, but also offers something of value to our community.

VOTE YES ON MEASURE D for democratic, voter-controlled growth.

s/BEN TARVER, Mayor
s/TOM PICO, Councilmember
s/KRIS M. KUMARAN, Chair, Planning Commission
s/STANLEY A. ERICKSON, CAPP Chairman
s/CAROLE A. VARELA, Preserve Our Pleasanton Founder, Referendum Organizer and CAPP Coordinator