Planning Commission approves rezone for townhome complex Around Town, posted by , a resident of , on Dec 20, 2012 at 9:05 pm
The San Ramon Planning Commission has agreed with a rezoning and accepted an environmental report that will allow a 48-townhome project to go forward. However, some commissioners said they're still concerned about whether to accept in-lieu fees of more than $110,000 or instead to find some mechanism to bring affordable housing to the site.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, December 19, 2012, 5:57 PM
Posted by Resident, a resident of San Ramon, on Jan 7, 2013 at 8:59 am
Keep in mind that land owners have rights too. If the Commission completely denies their rights then the city might be required to buy the land because of 'takings' laws. They can force developers to make substantial changes to their plans to meet the City General Plan and City Zoning. But if the project meets zoning, code and the provisions of the General Plan then they have little latitude to deny the application.
Posted by Bob P, a resident of another community, on Jan 11, 2013 at 7:39 am
John Madison, the development that is being discussed in this article is on Ryan Court, not on a hillside. Smart growth advocates (remember those?) used to call this type of development "in fill". San Ramon makes very deliberate decisions regarding any development on hillsides, I'm not sure Dublin does the same.
Resident is correct. The public has a common misconception that development decisions are made arbitrarily. That is no the truth, decisions are made based on laws and regulations. Failure to follow the law can and does lead to very expensive litigation, both civil and criminal.
Posted by Dirka_dirka, a resident of San Ramon, on Jan 11, 2013 at 12:53 pm
The Dirka would appreciate the politicans use every legal means possible to curb development of high density housing in San Ramon.
San Ramon can and will loose its charm and appeal with this type of growth. Dirka thinks we are well on our way. It is all about the quality of living and encouraging property appreciation. Those that think high density housing does not affect quality of living and property values are sadely out of touch with the reality. Dirka Dirka does not care what is politically correct by socialist points of view. Only socialists want high density housing in the city. Dirka Dirka
Posted by Bob P, a resident of another community, on Jan 11, 2013 at 10:41 pm
Dirka, you have some misconceptions about housing that I believe a lot of people not in tune with planning and development share. The purpose of planning is not to 'legally' curb any development, but it is to ensure that the development and growth that occurs is in compliance with laws and a communities general plan and other planning guidelines.
Unfortunately, cities in California have very little control over the amount and type of new housing that comes into their communities. The state has effectively wrestled that away from individual cities. If blame needs to be placed then it should be placed on the 'slow growth' advocates who advocated higher density development on smaller parcels of land in areas redeveloped from prior industrial or commercial uses. This "smart growth" was/is the environmentally friendly solution to the states affordable housing crisis.
Posted by Dirka_dirka, a resident of San Ramon, on Jan 12, 2013 at 12:16 pm
Bob P, you are a condecending-know-it-all. Are you a politician? It sure sounds like you are. There are all sorts of legal means to curb this type of development and suggesting, or asserting that the state control this is not true. Affordable housing crisis is just another socialist dogmatic term. The Dirka urges all property owners to vote politicians out, who do not activly resist "affordable" hosuing projects in San Ramon. Most of these developments are bundled as a package for larger single family home deevlpoments, as a quid pro quo deal. And yes, it can be part of state law, but there are ways to resisit. Towns, like Atherton, Moraga and many others have been doing it for years. Stop spreading misssinformation. The general plan of San Ramon has been screwed up for years. Vote the politicians out ASAP!
Posted by Bob P, a resident of another community, on Jan 12, 2013 at 4:12 pm
Dirka, I'm not going to get into a 'who knows more' battle with you. While the first two lines of your writing style was amusing, the laughing stopped when you started acting like you know what you are talking about.
I don't believe I am spreading misinformation, but I would invite you to tell me what you are talking about. I also would love to hear what parts of the San Ramon General Plan are screwed up, having worked on many of them.
As far as 'resisting' affordable housing, ask Pleasanton how that works out.
Posted by Dirka_dirka, a resident of San Ramon, on Jan 12, 2013 at 7:42 pm
Bobby P the politician is up to some verbal trickery. The bottom line is he has no answers to the Dirka's assertions that other towns have been quite effective at managing thge socialist housing creep. The San Ramon general plan has been put together by a bunch of tired useless long time community politicians that need to go. The Dirka says vote them all out. The Dirka also does not give a goats butt whether you are laughing or not. Out with the old tired retreads and in with some new agressive blood, this is what the town needs.
Dirka has to get his goats inside, it's cold out tonight.
Posted by Bob P, a resident of another community, on Jan 12, 2013 at 8:37 pm
Dirka,per the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Regional Housing Need Allocation numbers (Draft Numbers) Atherton must plan to accommodate 106 affordable housing units and Moraga must plan to accomodate 228 (draft numbers). All communities are on the hook for affordable housing.
Posted by Dirka_dirka, a resident of San Ramon, on Jan 12, 2013 at 10:28 pm
Weasle Bob plays a silly statiscis game, just like a politician. The Dirka does not bite. And yet Moraga and Artherton don't have socialist hosuing issues and have not added socialist housing. There are many more examples, but Bobby Politician your story is sooo tiresome. Bobby doesn't like it when there is a voice against his little retread council. The Dirka rides again.
Posted by The_Dirka_Dirka, a resident of San Ramon, on Jan 13, 2013 at 10:01 pm
Nothing but double speak Bobby. Looks like Dirka has made some friends here. Politician Bob no likey, Dirka asks how much affordablesocialist housing has been built in Moraga in the last 30 years? Dirka will continue to point out Bobby's goat poop.
Posted by Bob P, a resident of another community, on Jan 15, 2013 at 10:32 am
James, I suppose you are correct. I'm not sure I understand the significance of the question. I do know that in most, if not all of the developments that have been approved, the plan that the Planning Commission approves looks nothing like the plan that was submitted.
There are very few ways to legally deny a development plan.
Posted by Bob Stinson , a resident of San Ramon, on Jan 15, 2013 at 2:34 pm
Dirka for mayor! I am not going to sight case law here, but that is not true Bob P. How long have you been practicing real estate law? Private propert rights are something any reasonable and prudent person should want to protect, but there are countless legal ways to protect neighborhoods from overdevelopment.
Posted by Bob P, a resident of another community, on Jan 15, 2013 at 5:01 pm
Mr. Stinson, please read what I said again. To quote me, "There are very few ways to legally DENY a DEVELOPMENT PLAN" (emphasis is mine).
I said nothing about over development. This was in response to a question about denying a developer.
There are many ways to prevent over development, with zoning and planning being the primary ways of guiding development in ways that the community desires. A property owner, wishing to gain the best and highest use from his property, who brings forward a development plan that conforms to the general plan, zoning plan and area specific plans, will more than likely be approved. That's not to say that the property owner won't have to make concessions and revisions to that plan during the planning process to gain final approval.
And to your point, I don't practice real estate law, but I have some experience in urban and city planning. In these cases, real estate law doesn't apply, anyway.
Posted by Dirka_dirka, a resident of San Ramon, on Jan 15, 2013 at 9:27 pm
The Dirka is flattered by Mr. Stinson. But, how would I tend my goats if I was mayor. Bobby is not very polite person, especially when someone dissagrees with him. It looks like Bobby does not have any formal qualifications to offer a legal opinion on anything. If he has planning expereince with San Ramon, then Dika thinks he should go away go with the rest of the city politicains. Vote them out! More goat poop speak from Bobby. Bobby thinks he is the only person who undestands this issue and his opinion is the final and last on everhthing. Well, lah, di dah. Dirka Dikra!