Planning commission recommends Weber approval

The planning commission held a public hearing on Tuesday to review the Weber residential development project, including the final environmental impact report (EIR) and proposed development plan.

This story contains 599 words.

If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.

If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.


Like this comment
Posted by Shannon
a resident of Alamo
on Jun 15, 2011 at 4:38 pm

I don't know that the Town can trust Davidon to follow through with its efforts to mitigate impact on the neighborhood, like adding the sidewalks it promised. Where is the crosswalk across Stone Valley Road that Davidon promised to build when it was approved to build Alamo Crest? Their houses are for sale, yet no crosswalk was ever provided. The residents dart across traffic to get to the park or high school. Where is the pedestrian access point to the open space it "reserved?" There isn't one.

Like this comment
Posted by [removed]
a resident of Alamo
on Jun 15, 2011 at 4:54 pm

Dear Editor,

Clearly, Alamo neighborhoods feel this project is dangerously close to Alamo and will impact Green Valley/Stone Valley corridor. It might be well for Danville planners and Davidon to recognize that Alamo neighborhoods are only waiting for final approval to determine regulatory, legislative and legal actions.

Further, Diablo will likely see traffic impact on Diablo Road. Thus, corridor neighbors in that region will seek actions beyond those controlled in Danville.

Like this comment
Posted by Derek
a resident of Danville
on Jun 15, 2011 at 5:07 pm

In other surprising news, the sun also came up today and the sky appeared to be blue-ish yet again.
When exactly has our dear planning commission NOT approved a development? If you can find an instance Jessica, I think that would make for interesting reading.
What fines will be in place if Davidian fails to keep to their word? Any at all? No, I didn't think so.

Like this comment
Posted by Mark
a resident of San Ramon
on Jun 16, 2011 at 8:39 am

Looks like it would have made a good park instead. *from the photo.

Like this comment
Posted by jan
a resident of Alamo
on Jun 16, 2011 at 9:14 am

Let's cut down more trees, build more homes so we can "improve" the quality of the air we breath..........What's wrong with this picture?

Like this comment
Posted by concerned citizen
a resident of Diablo
on Jun 16, 2011 at 11:40 am

Those that oppose Summerhill Homes' Magee East and West projects should take note. Unless experts and a lawyer are hired to wage a legally credible fight, Danville will approve those projects in their present form. The EIR currently being prepared is mere windowdressing to avoid an easy legal challenge. By allowing the projects to get to the point of preparing an EIR, Danville officials have already shown that they approve them.

Like this comment
Posted by John Tanner
a resident of Danville
on Jun 17, 2011 at 11:54 am

This is an infill project that the surrounding owners of the houses don't want because they have become accustomed to land that does not have houses and the people that go with them adjacent to their fence lines or in the way of their viewsheds. If they want to preserve this land, perhaps each of the affected neighbors can contribute a few hundred thousand dollars each and buy it back from Davidon.

If they were smart they would negotiate to reduce heights of the as well as limit the heights of trees that homeonwners will plant. Existing native trees do not typically obscure views of Mt. Diablo, but when neighbors go in and plant redwoods or other tall trees, say good bye to your views. But there is no current recourse for tree view obstruction.

The traffic argument will fall on deaf ears, and is incredulous at best due to number of surrounding homes in comparison and farther out developments.

It is an infill within existing city limits and within city infrastructure. There are far more ecologically damaging projects that get proposed than this one.

I do support neighbors input into the process to make sure their needs are considered. Hopefully the two sides can negotiate a good deal for both sides.

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


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Cook-Kallio handlers running curious campaign
By Tim Hunt | 6 comments | 653 views

Pride in the Profession, 1
By Tom Cushing | 1 comment | 318 views