Comments on: Weekly Poll: Affordable Housing in Dublin http://www.arounddublinblog.com/2008/08/affordable-housing-in-dublin-this-weeks/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=affordable-housing-in-dublin-this-weeks Dublin, CA (California) News & Online Community Thu, 09 Feb 2012 02:30:42 +0000 hourly 1 By: Anonymoushttp://www.arounddublinblog.com/2008/08/affordable-housing-in-dublin-this-weeks/#comment-627 Anonymous Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.johnzukoski.com/arounddublin/2008/08/weekly-poll-affordable-housing-in-dublin/#comment-627 DITTO!! DITTO!!

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.arounddublinblog.com/2008/08/affordable-housing-in-dublin-this-weeks/#comment-624 Anonymous Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.johnzukoski.com/arounddublin/2008/08/weekly-poll-affordable-housing-in-dublin/#comment-624 Dublin needs to stop building high-density multi-family housing; otherwise, Dublin will pay the consequences that come with "affordable housing". Dublin should develop with the same mix of housing that Pleasanton, Livermore, and San Ramon have. If not, we will risk becoming the "Antioch" of the Tri-Valley. Dublin needs to stop building high-density multi-family housing; otherwise, Dublin will pay the consequences that come with “affordable housing”. Dublin should develop with the same mix of housing that Pleasanton, Livermore, and San Ramon have. If not, we will risk becoming the “Antioch” of the Tri-Valley.

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.arounddublinblog.com/2008/08/affordable-housing-in-dublin-this-weeks/#comment-435 Anonymous Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.johnzukoski.com/arounddublin/2008/08/weekly-poll-affordable-housing-in-dublin/#comment-435 To add to my previous comment regarding BMRs. I do agree that we should make some available to our Teachers, Firemen, Policeman, City Employees. But based on the points systems, we are giving preferential treatment to out of towners that have outgrown their welcome in other towns. These are the folks earliers comments refers to. Go to the Tassajara Safeway on a late evening and you see. To add to my previous comment regarding BMRs. I do agree that we should make some available to our Teachers, Firemen, Policeman, City Employees. But based on the points systems, we are giving preferential treatment to out of towners that have outgrown their welcome in other towns. These are the folks earliers comments refers to. Go to the Tassajara Safeway on a late evening and you see.

]]> By: Scotthttp://www.arounddublinblog.com/2008/08/affordable-housing-in-dublin-this-weeks/#comment-434 Scott Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.johnzukoski.com/arounddublin/2008/08/weekly-poll-affordable-housing-in-dublin/#comment-434 A touchy issue for politician, balancing between what is right for the community and appeasing activist for housing. <br/><br/>Dublin has done more of its' share with BMR/Section 8. It is time to look at our 12.5% ordinance and put a halt to it until surrounding towns (Pleasanton, Danville, Alamo) put up their share. Dublin need not be the armpit of the Tri Valley and 680 corridor. <br/><br/>Removing the BMR requirement reduces the cost of building a residential unit in Dublin for developers thus may get them to stop pushing for the highest density allowed to help them recoup the high cost of building in Dublin. Maybe they wouldn't need to build such massive high density buildings or even single family that stacked on top of each other like sardines if the cost of building wasn't so high, removing the BMR requirement is a start. Rezoning remaining undeveloped land is another. <br/><br/>To save politicians personal grieve, how about putting the BMR ordinance and high density ban up for a public vote in coming elections. Thus politicians would need to abide by the people's will and not get flack for it. <br/><br/>Banning high density outside of the Transit Centers and repealing the BMR ordinance (to the dismay of Co. and State Official) but to the cheers of local residence which matters most should get a positive response at the polls. A touchy issue for politician, balancing between what is right for the community and appeasing activist for housing.

Dublin has done more of its’ share with BMR/Section 8. It is time to look at our 12.5% ordinance and put a halt to it until surrounding towns (Pleasanton, Danville, Alamo) put up their share. Dublin need not be the armpit of the Tri Valley and 680 corridor.

Removing the BMR requirement reduces the cost of building a residential unit in Dublin for developers thus may get them to stop pushing for the highest density allowed to help them recoup the high cost of building in Dublin. Maybe they wouldn’t need to build such massive high density buildings or even single family that stacked on top of each other like sardines if the cost of building wasn’t so high, removing the BMR requirement is a start. Rezoning remaining undeveloped land is another.

To save politicians personal grieve, how about putting the BMR ordinance and high density ban up for a public vote in coming elections. Thus politicians would need to abide by the people’s will and not get flack for it.

Banning high density outside of the Transit Centers and repealing the BMR ordinance (to the dismay of Co. and State Official) but to the cheers of local residence which matters most should get a positive response at the polls.

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.arounddublinblog.com/2008/08/affordable-housing-in-dublin-this-weeks/#comment-340 Anonymous Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.johnzukoski.com/arounddublin/2008/08/weekly-poll-affordable-housing-in-dublin/#comment-340 Thanks John for pointing us to this priority point system. I wonder who came up with this unintuitive weighting system. Based on the table on page 5, public service employees in Dublin like teachers and police officers who live in another city or have not lived in Dublin for more than one year get only 1 point, while able-bodied private sector employees who have lived in Dublin for more than one year get 6 points. I fail to see how the current priority points system is giving preference to people who devote their lives to the greater good of the community? Thanks John for pointing us to this priority point system. I wonder who came up with this unintuitive weighting system. Based on the table on page 5, public service employees in Dublin like teachers and police officers who live in another city or have not lived in Dublin for more than one year get only 1 point, while able-bodied private sector employees who have lived in Dublin for more than one year get 6 points. I fail to see how the current priority points system is giving preference to people who devote their lives to the greater good of the community?

]]>