Comments on: Back to Square One at The Promenade http://www.arounddublinblog.com/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-promenade/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=back-to-square-one-at-promenade Dublin, CA (California) News & Online Community Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:50:03 +0000 hourly 1 By: Anonymoushttp://www.arounddublinblog.com/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-promenade/#comment-2225 Anonymous Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.johnzukoski.com/arounddublin/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-the-promenade/#comment-2225 Not to say you can't sue at anytime, but if I was a judge on this case the first thing I would look at would be the history and the dates from all the meetings and ask if and why no one from Toll ever objected or raised questions until the project had already started.<br /><br /><br />WE SUE for SPITE, Judge Not to say you can't sue at anytime, but if I was a judge on this case the first thing I would look at would be the history and the dates from all the meetings and ask if and why no one from Toll ever objected or raised questions until the project had already started.

WE SUE for SPITE, Judge

]]> By: John M. Zukoskihttp://www.arounddublinblog.com/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-promenade/#comment-2224 John M. Zukoski Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.johnzukoski.com/arounddublin/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-the-promenade/#comment-2224 Hi Anonymous on June 9, 2009 1:35 PM - as you note above, there were many public hearing and meetings discussing the revised plans for the Promenade. For a list of all the Aroun Dublin articles covering these meetings please check out this link - http://www.arounddublinblog.com/search?q=promenade<br /><br />Thx, John Z. Hi Anonymous on June 9, 2009 1:35 PM – as you note above, there were many public hearing and meetings discussing the revised plans for the Promenade. For a list of all the Aroun Dublin articles covering these meetings please check out this link – http://www.arounddublinblog.com/search?q=promenade

Thx, John Z.

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.arounddublinblog.com/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-promenade/#comment-2221 Anonymous Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.johnzukoski.com/arounddublin/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-the-promenade/#comment-2221 To the person who thinks that there were no public meetings on this should go look at the records. On the city website, or on this blog. People were made aware of all the planning meetings, in fact I believe after the project was approved there was another meeting because someone filed a complaint regarding the parking study. To say this was done without anyone knowing is not true. See all the posts below. I can probably find more, but I didn't have time. All I know is that Toll never complained anywhere. Maybe John can also find his past links<br /><br />October 14 planning com<br />http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us/DepartmentSubLevel2.cfm?PL=gov&SL=comm&dsplyID=1140<br /><br />November 12 planning com<br />http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us/DepartmentSubLevel2.cfm?PL=gov&SL=comm&dsplyID=1146<br /><br />December 9th planning com<br />http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us/DepartmentSubLevel2.cfm?PL=gov&SL=comm&dsplyID=1152<br /><br />Mayor meetings where individual complained go down to the promenade section<br />http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us/DepartmentSubLevel2.cfm?PL=gov&SL=maycc&dsplyID=1162 To the person who thinks that there were no public meetings on this should go look at the records. On the city website, or on this blog. People were made aware of all the planning meetings, in fact I believe after the project was approved there was another meeting because someone filed a complaint regarding the parking study. To say this was done without anyone knowing is not true. See all the posts below. I can probably find more, but I didn't have time. All I know is that Toll never complained anywhere. Maybe John can also find his past links

October 14 planning com
http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us/DepartmentSubLevel2.cfm?PL=gov&SL=comm&dsplyID=1140

November 12 planning com
http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us/DepartmentSubLevel2.cfm?PL=gov&SL=comm&dsplyID=1146

December 9th planning com
http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us/DepartmentSubLevel2.cfm?PL=gov&SL=comm&dsplyID=1152

Mayor meetings where individual complained go down to the promenade section
http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us/DepartmentSubLevel2.cfm?PL=gov&SL=maycc&dsplyID=1162

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.arounddublinblog.com/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-promenade/#comment-2220 Anonymous Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.johnzukoski.com/arounddublin/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-the-promenade/#comment-2220 Can we stop with the name calling already?<br /><br />Anonymous June 9, 2009 12:39 PM sounds like a project manager. If Toll wants to sway public opinion their way, they should just upload documents that support their case. Residents like me are anxious for information. The more the better. Let us decide who is right and wrong for ourselves.<br /><br />John, excellent reporting on this litigation. I look forward to what you have to say next. Can we stop with the name calling already?

Anonymous June 9, 2009 12:39 PM sounds like a project manager. If Toll wants to sway public opinion their way, they should just upload documents that support their case. Residents like me are anxious for information. The more the better. Let us decide who is right and wrong for ourselves.

John, excellent reporting on this litigation. I look forward to what you have to say next.

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.arounddublinblog.com/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-promenade/#comment-2219 Anonymous Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.johnzukoski.com/arounddublin/2009/05/back-to-square-one-at-the-promenade/#comment-2219 I want to follow up on the development on the south side of dublin blvd: the big high-rise condo & office project that is now delayed. <br />To clarify: the city of Dublin did not delay them..in fact they were more than willing to entertain & approve the plans until there was a public meeting where owners at the Terraces voiced concerns & noted that zoning in the area did not allow for the projects to be built as proposed. Because statements made at these meetings are public record, once in the public record they become an item that later on can be used in litigation. IE The project had to stop because the public pointed out that the developer's proposal did not meet zoning designations & exceeded reasonable height restrictions, would exacerbate traffic & impact pedestrian safety along dublin blvds sidewalks (what sidewalks: exactly my point). <br />Without statments in the public record: you have no means of recourse. <br />HOw this relates to the Promenade: If a public meeting is not held = THERE IS NOTHING IN THE PUBLIC RECORD that can force the hand of the city to take action & can give home owners material for future litigation against the Promenade developer. <br />So why wasn't there a public meeting for the promenade? Perhaps the developer saw what happened to the Lins re the property south of Dublin Blvd & 'convinced' the city that no public meeting was needed.<br />Now you ask why Toll is suing? Perhaps because the City of Dublin did not do its due diligence & provide the public it serves with the ability to voice its opinion/concerns as part of the public record. In such a meeting: FAR would have come up & certainly forced the developer to lower the # of floors, excessive shadows & vehicular traffic patterns/plans/parking as they relate to safety would have changed the developers plans as well. <br />I may not always agree with Toll....but we, home owners & tax paying citizens of the City of Dublin deserve better...& if Toll's actions force the city to initiate a public meeting & forum, I'm all for it. <br />This is our city, these are our homes, & it is our right to be heard! I want to follow up on the development on the south side of dublin blvd: the big high-rise condo & office project that is now delayed.
To clarify: the city of Dublin did not delay them..in fact they were more than willing to entertain & approve the plans until there was a public meeting where owners at the Terraces voiced concerns & noted that zoning in the area did not allow for the projects to be built as proposed. Because statements made at these meetings are public record, once in the public record they become an item that later on can be used in litigation. IE The project had to stop because the public pointed out that the developer's proposal did not meet zoning designations & exceeded reasonable height restrictions, would exacerbate traffic & impact pedestrian safety along dublin blvds sidewalks (what sidewalks: exactly my point).
Without statments in the public record: you have no means of recourse.
HOw this relates to the Promenade: If a public meeting is not held = THERE IS NOTHING IN THE PUBLIC RECORD that can force the hand of the city to take action & can give home owners material for future litigation against the Promenade developer.
So why wasn't there a public meeting for the promenade? Perhaps the developer saw what happened to the Lins re the property south of Dublin Blvd & 'convinced' the city that no public meeting was needed.
Now you ask why Toll is suing? Perhaps because the City of Dublin did not do its due diligence & provide the public it serves with the ability to voice its opinion/concerns as part of the public record. In such a meeting: FAR would have come up & certainly forced the developer to lower the # of floors, excessive shadows & vehicular traffic patterns/plans/parking as they relate to safety would have changed the developers plans as well.
I may not always agree with Toll….but we, home owners & tax paying citizens of the City of Dublin deserve better…& if Toll's actions force the city to initiate a public meeting & forum, I'm all for it.
This is our city, these are our homes, & it is our right to be heard!

]]>