Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 03-13-1984 • • Continued Meeting - March 13, 1984 A continued meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on March 13, 1984, in the Multipurpose Room, Fredericksen School, 7243 Tamarack Drive, Dublin. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m., by Cm. Tenery, Chairman. * * * ~r ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioners Alexander, Vonheeder, Petty, Mack, and Tenery, Thomas P. DeLuca, Associate Planner, and Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director, and John Blayney, General Plan Consultant. * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Cm. Tenery led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN Mr. Tong briefly explained the procedure for development and implementation of a General Plan, and then began a brief overview of the Land Use and Circulation Section, which addressed Housing, Neighborhood Diversity, and Residential Compatibility. Mr. Dennis Anderson, 11611 Castillian Ct. asked about the increase in multifamily housing, and wondered what percentage of multifamily units neighboring cities have. He wished to know why Dublin would have such a high percentage of multifamily housing. Ms. Candy Larson, 11696 Corto Ct., queried the Commission regarding closure of existing schools and expressed concern about the future of those facilities. Ms. Karen Boyles, 7938 Alto Way, questioned the need for more affordable housing, and encouraged retaining a small-town tradition. Mr. Mike Hallen, 7841 Castillian Rd., discouraged the development of more housing on the Dolon School site. His comments stimulated a lively discussion regarding this site with relation to density, traffic, parklands, and open space, which resulted in the suggestion that the issue of the Dolon Site be addressed specifically at a later meeting. ~ • Mr. Dennis Ransdell, a Calle Verde resident, questioned whether or not the Planning Commission would make recommendations based on input from the Public Meetings. Cm. Vonheeder responded that the public's comments would definitely be considered, and Cm. Mack commented that the Planning Commission is an advisory board to the City Council and invites participation by residents. Mike Hussle, a Castillian Rd. resident, encouraged lower density and implored the the Commissioners to listen to what Dublin residents' are saying. There was a general agreement among the audience that the higher density classifications proposed in the General Plan were unsatisfactory. Mr. Don Regwick, owner of 160 acres in the eastern portion of the extended planning area, noted the great opposition to issues addressed by the Draft General Plan, with no alternatives offered. He went on to speak about environmental issues such as growth, air quality, and affordable housing, and concluded by requesting that the extended area be reclassified as Single Family Residential. After a short break, the meeting reconvened at 9:15 p.m., with all Commissioners present. Mr. Tong began by summarizing the Commercial and Industrial Land Use Section. Mr. Blayney expanded on the information given by Mr. Tong with graphics and illustrations. Mr. Rich Robbins, owner of Shamrock Ford auto dealership, objected to proposed locations of new on/off ramps for I-680, which appeared to affect his property. He noted that negotiations are currently underway to obtain additional auto franchises as well as to relocate his dealership on Crow Canyon Road. Mr. Dave Burton, 11396 Dillon Way, addressed the issue of the downtown BART station location, and suggested that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that 200 to 300 acres, near Tassajara Rd. and I-580, be set aside for C-1 zoning, and he strongly recommended protecting Dublin's commercial area. Mr. Don Babbitt, representative of Citizen's Coalition for a Better Community, encouraged more housing instead of commercial development. Mr. John DiManto, owner of San Jose Construction Co., and representing acreage near Tassajara Rd., explained a proposal for high-tech and residential development on his property. Cm. Vonheeder questioned why the General Plan cannot be more site specific on certain areas of the extended area.