Comments on: Weekly Poll: Should There be Additional Parking at Phase I of the Promenade?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

Dublin Ranch Villages will never be close to Santana Row, a combination of poor planning and greed. The end product is devaluation of home values for all of Dublin.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

Developers already do run the City, look at the track record of City Hall and Planning Commission the past 8 years, siding with developers time and time again. Whatever they say should fly, will fly in Dublin.

No one is saying to force Charter to build more parking than the minimum called for by City Ordinance, we are just saying build your fair share, not 41 less as being proposed. A little less hear, a little less there and we will have a nightmare years from now and dropping home values for Dublin Village Residents. Once news is out in the open about the parking problems there wouldn’t you think people will shy away from plucking down $400 – $700K for a condo or townhouse there?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

Anonymous on December 10, 2008 3:10 PM clearly does not live in the Dublin Ranch Villages. Charter has invested too much in this area for them to simply walk away. Let’s not lose sight of that. If we don’t push back on the developers and insist on quality, why even bother having a City Council or a Planning Commission? Wouldn’t the City be run more efficiently, if the developers were running the show? Maybe they already do.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

Why don’t we all tell our new mayor that he needs to park his car in his garage in the Villas and get all the HOAs in the area to enforce the parking policies, so only non-residents park on the streets? What should be the penalties levied against the HOAs, if the HOAs refuse to comply? How would that affect the property values in that area? Also, why do people automatically assume that more parking lots mean more black asphalt? If Charter Properties wants to create an upscale ambiance, they can easily do interlocking concrete pavement. Charter will more than recuperate their cost in the high rent they will charge to tenants, so let’s not worry about how much underground parking will cost them. What we need to worry about really is the cost to Dublin if we do NOT insist on underground parking. If the developer of the Terraces can do two underground parking garages, Charter should be able to do the same.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

First of all, if the residents in the East Dublin high density residential areas parked in their garages instead of using them for storage units, there would be no parking problem. Second, the added cost of adding underground parking to these developments ($35K-45K per underground stall) simply because the residential HOA's won't police their own parking policies, would render these projects uneconomical and the East Dublin residents would loose the great amenities that are being proposed.

I struggle to understand why it is a developers obligation to fix the problems of surrounding developments.

As for Shared Parking, this is a great concept. It gets us away from massive sea's of blacktop parking lots and saves more land for development of things that we all can enjoy.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

Very interesting if you check out today's Contra Costa Times, there was an article about the Neiman Marcus project slated for Broadway Plaza.

The project was approved by the City Council and Planning Commission against popular sentiments of residents. They were able to do a petitiion drive to gather 4000 verified signatures that would have qualified them to place the project up for a special election. This prompted the developer/landowner to scrap their current unpopular plan and offered to redo it to appease resident concerns.

For a city of about $60K "WC" they needed 4000 signatures, Dublin at 43K would need less signatures. Don't know the actual formula though as to what is required to qualify a petition.

Maybe if we have enough passion here something similiar could be done to turn back Wallis Ranch (medium and high density), The Promenade (inadequate parking), Schaefer Ranch (12 estates to 140 cluster SFR), Sorrento East (High Density Apartments), The Grove (2nd Phase of more High Density), High Density Housing in General away from Downtown and BART.

I believe this could be disruptive and may cause some developers to shy away in the future if we become too political like say "Berkeley". But at the same time any future developer coming to town knows that they won't have a cakewalk regardless if City Hall rolls out the red carpet for them or not. Residents will be a second set of eyes to offset City Hall who sometimes loose focus of who they represent.

Walnut Creek though does have the luxury of having Neiman Marcus walk away and not hurt a bit as compared to Dublin where we can't afford the Promenade to walk away.

Just a thought!!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

The lack of parking in a residential area such as the Villages is not prosperity nor a sign of success. It is the absolute anti quality of life when one spends nearly a half million dollars on a home but cannot park anywhere near it nor can they have guests as there are no parking for them.

Schaub Schaub Schaub you are embarassing us as representative of our beloved town by making P. Hilton like comments or rationale.

Poor planning on top of poor planning is the right answer.

By: Around Dublin Team

Around Dublin Team — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000

Hi Anonymous – for this project,
“shared parking” refers to the sharing of parking between customers/employees at Club Sport and the Mercantile Building. The developer’s assumptions exclude the usage of street and garage parking by residents living at the Dublin Ranch Villages.