Anti development group hires new laywer Comments on Stories, posted by Editor, Danville Weekly Online, on Oct 28, 2011 at 2:06 pm
The group fighting a proposed development on part of the former Magee Ranch has hired an attorney to help its case. Save Our Creek retained Dr. Stuart Flashman as part of its effort to stop the proposed SummerHill Homes development.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, October 28, 2011, 12:41 PM
Posted by [clarification], a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Oct 28, 2011 at 2:06 pm
Anti Development Group is not an accurate "political label" to apply to those opposing Danville's process of approval, obvious traffic impact, and environmental challenges of Magee Ranch development. Such a term does not show journalistic consideration of the groups' actions in protection of our roads and environment and, with likely political purpose, illustrates an at-odds relationship by the Express with Danville's neighborhoods as prejudice favorable to development interests on the Danville council.
Certainly, Green Valley/Stone Valley corridor neighborhoods, supported by Alamo's objection to Diablo Road diversion of traffic onto that corridor, recognize this groups actions as protection of our region's environment rather than any general opposition to development.
Editors EDIT when information is inaccurate. Please consider.
Posted by fed up with Diablo Road corridor traffic, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 28, 2011 at 9:38 pm
Thank you for your insightful comment, [clarification]. I contributed to the fund to hire the lawyer on behalf of Save-Our-Creek. We are certainly not an "anti-development" group. Indeed, there are developers amongst us. Rather, we are for development in appropriate areas and on an appropriate scale. The Diablo Road corridor is no longer suitable for large-scale developments like the one SummerHill proposes due to the facts that both the Diablo Road corridor and the creek which drains the area are ALREADY OVER THEIR CAPACITY! Note to Danville Council Members and Planning Commissioners: when are you going to admit those facts!!!????
Posted by Michelle Erickson, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 29, 2011 at 9:21 am
Thanks for reporting on the new hire of our attorney Glenn! And to the posters above, I don't think we should get caught up on the semantics of the headline. My guess is that the reporter was merely referring to Save Our Creek's anti-development stance for this particular SummerHill project (in its current form).
Instead, residents who want to learn more about Save Our Creek should go to www.save-our-creek.com. There are also click throughs on the website to donate money to SOC's opposition efforts or to sign SOC's nearly 700 strong petition.
Posted by Concerned in Danville, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 29, 2011 at 9:29 am
Good point, [clarification]! I've contributed to the Save Our Creek cause as well and I don't consider myself or the cause "anti-development". I rather consider our cause as socially, economically and environmently responsible. I've lived in Danville for roughly 30 years and love it here. I want to preserve the wonderful lifestyle and beautiful scenic corridors and believe the SummerHill project is dangerous and destructive. That's not anti-development - it's anti-this-development in its present form. So Editor, please refrain from using descriptions that mischaracterize our efforts.
Posted by Derek, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2011 at 9:13 am
I prefer "pro-open foothill" myself. And I hope Mr. Flashman puts some bit of research into the legality of our town council's actions regarding SummerHill's various proposals. There seem to have been far too many loopholes employed along the way.
Posted by CDSI Research, a resident of another community, on Oct 31, 2011 at 8:47 am
In further clarification efforts, Diablo Road corridor neighborhoods from Blackhawk to Alamo are very aware that Supervisors Piepho and Uilkema are not taking public action to promote county review of Danville's approval process for Magee and Weber Ranches' development. In document discovery between Danville and the county, there is an agreed delay in any county traffic impact study until Danville has finished all impact studies due in December.
Clearly, there cannot be such a delay by the county because it was their primary responsibility to perform such studies on behalf of Blackhawk, Diablo and Alamo as impacted by such Danville development and traffic diversion.
This is a newsworthy story far beyond the announcement of retention of counsel by neighborhoods wanting fair and rational representation from the Danville government. There are few readers that will not be affected by traffic and infrastructure burden of these projects.
Posted by spinningwheels, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:08 am
I bet you could buy at least a quarter-mile of widened road for what this guy will cost -- and not resolve a thing. Lawyers are good at stopping things, not building things. Too bad -- it does reflect a clear anti-development bias.