Dublin Townhall » Jimmy Huang

Mayor Tim Sbranti's 2008 Campaign Contribution Map

Jimmy Huang — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 08:00:00 +0000

According to the Schedule A Summary from the California Form 460 filed by his campaign, Mayor Tim Sbranti received a total of $26,800 in itemized monetary contributions and a total of $7,574 in unitemized monetary contributions of less than $100 during the 2008 election cycle. This detailed disclosure of campaign contributions is in accordance with the Political Reform Act of 1974, which won overwhelming support from voters that year as Proposition 9. The map widget below is modeled after the one seen from the Huffington Post and other similar political websites. For a complete listing of contributions received by our newly elected councilmembers and mayor, please refer to the City of Dublin Fund Race 2008 Google Spreadsheet.

Councilmember Kevin Hart's 2008 Campaign Contribution Map

Jimmy Huang — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 08:00:00 +0000

According to the Schedule A Summary from the California Form 460 filed by his campaign, Councilmember Kevin Hart received a total of $16,900 in itemized monetary contributions and a total of $1,225 in unitemized monetary contributions of less than $100 during the 2008 election cycle. This detailed disclosure of campaign contributions is in accordance with the Political Reform Act of 1974, which won overwhelming support from voters that year as Proposition 9. The map widget below is modeled after the one seen from the Huffington Post and other similar political websites. For a complete listing of contributions received by our newly elected councilmembers and mayor, please refer to the City of Dublin Fund Race 2008 Google Spreadsheet.

Councilmember Kasie Hildenbrand's 2008 Campaign Contribution Map

Jimmy Huang — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:00:00 +0000

According to the Schedule A Summary from the California Form 460 filed by her campaign, Councilmember Kasie Hildenbrand received a total of $21,387 in itemized monetary contributions and a total of $2,894 in unitemized monetary contributions of less than $100 during the 2008 election cycle. This detailed disclosure of campaign contributions is in accordance with the Political Reform Act of 1974, which won overwhelming support from voters that year as Proposition 9. The map widget below is modeled after the one seen from the Huffington Post and other similar political websites. For a complete listing of contributions received by our newly elected councilmembers and mayor, please refer to the City of Dublin Fund Race 2008 Google Spreadsheet.

Responsible City Planning

Jimmy Huang — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:00:00 +0000

On December 9, 2008, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application by Charter Properties to adopt the Shared Parking model for calculating the required number of parking spaces at Phase I of the Promenade. Charter Properties was not responsible for the poor planning of the ill-conceived parking arrangement at Dublin Ranch Villages, so it is definitely not obligated to resolve a problem that cannot be fixed by a garage alone. All that the nearby residents are requesting is for adequate parking as defined by Dublin’s Zoning Ordinance to be provided, so Phase I at the Promenade does not exacerbate the parking crisis that neither the City nor the HOAs have the political will or sufficient jurisdiction to confront directly. Dublin has good standards; we just need to be better about enforcing them. Given the parking realities at Dublin Ranch Villages, allocating at least 541 parking spaces as mandated by code is not only the responsible way to start the Promenade but also in the best interest of the Promenade tenants, nearby residents, and, most importantly, all of Dublin. If the City allows one developer to disregard Dublin’s Zoning Ordinance in an area with known parking shortage, it will send the wrong message to other developers with similar mixed-use projects elsewhere in Dublin. Once this bad precedent is set, those other developers can reasonably demand the City to relax its parking requirement for their projects and challenge the City in court should the City refuse. The City of Dublin cannot afford to spread this parking nightmare beyond Dublin Ranch Villages.

Responsible planning should not rest on theoretical use by idealized people alone. Up to now, residents and their guests have enjoyed what essentially amounts to exclusive use of the street parking within Dublin Ranch Villages. Charter Properties has no basis for believing that patrons beyond walking distance from the Promenade will always use the garage. Just like the Planning Commission’s postulation that the Promenade will never come close to needing 500 parking spaces, the developer’s optimistic assumption fails to take into account that diners, shoppers, office workers, and gym members will park wherever they feel is most convenient. The 14 allotted parking spaces on the streets around the Promenade will not be able to absorb parking overflow from the Promenade into the neighborhood streets nearby. The parking overflow will adversely affect residents in the vicinity, but the City has an opportunity now to mitigate the negative impact by insisting that at least 541 parking spaces be planned. Second chances do not come by that often, so the City should not let this one slip by its fingers.

Dublin Ranch Villages Parking Challenge

Jimmy Huang — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 08:00:00 +0000

On December 9, 2008, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application by Charter Properties to adopt the Shared Parking model for calculating the required number of parking spaces at Phase I of the Promenade. At the time, the majority of the Planning Commission felt that the extreme parking shortage at Dublin Ranch Villages is brought on by the residents alone, but that assessment is incomplete at best. While residents who do not park their cars in the garages are partly to blame, the fact that the developers built up to the maximum of a given density range without regard for basic human behavior also contributes to the challenge. Many of the floorplans in Dublin Ranch Villages feature tandem garages. In a two-car household with a tandem garage, the first person to leave home is usually the first person to come home. Unless both drivers depart at the same time, the first person to take off will invariably park on the street. As the developers came up with innovative designs like tandem garages to cram more units into their high-density projects, they also converted land that should have been reserved for surface-level parking to subdivisions with the City’s blessing. According to former Councilman George Zika, allowing developers to count street parking towards the number of visitor parking as required by Dublin’s Zoning Ordinance is one of the reasons for the “absolutely ludicrous” parking crisis in Dublin Ranch Villages.

Everyone has the right to park on city streets, and current parking regulations do not restrict select groups of the public from parking on the streets at Dublin Ranch Villages. The Home Owner Associations (HOAs) can control those few private parking spaces within their jurisdiction. They can also enforce the rules of the covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&R) through periodic inspections to make sure residents do not use their garages for storage. The HOAs, unfortunately, simply do not have the legal authority to stop their residents from parking on city streets. To date, no study has been conducted to establish the percentage of residents who refuse to use their own garages. Whether that percentage is more or less than what is observed in neighborhoods with primarily traditional single family homes is also unknown. In addition, the degree to which that percentage contributes to the parking crisis in Dublin Ranch Villages remains undetermined. All planning done in the absence of hard data should, therefore, be considered speculative and not evidence-based. As former Councilman George Zika advised, “the solution is don’t let the problem begin.”