Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables rezoning for 3.5-acre multifamily proposal, asks developer for safety and amenity commitments
Summary
The Dublin City Council on June 18, 2026, voted to table Ordinance 2605 — a request to rezone 3.5 acres for a 59-unit multifamily project — while staff and the applicant finalize commitments on sidewalks, lighting, amenities, security and a potential bus shelter; the council said it expects to revisit the item by July 16 or at a called meeting.
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mayor Baird and the Dublin City Council on June 18 tabled a rezoning request (Ordinance 2605) for about 3.5 acres in Dublin after council members said they wanted a written agreement from the owner addressing pedestrian access, lighting, amenity space, security and a possible covered bus stop for children.
The rezoning would change Tax Parcel D 09 F 068 from B-2 highway-oriented business to R-4 multifamily residential for a proposed 59-unit development adjacent to an existing apartment complex. Blake McCray, who identified himself as the owner’s representative for MGVG2, said the project is intended “to match exactly what’s going on right next door” and that “the intent would be 59 units.”
Why it matters: Council members said the site is near an existing multifamily complex and want commitments so required safety and amenity features are not forgotten after approval. Mayor Baird summarized pre-council concerns and urged staff and the applicant to reach an agreement on six items; he said, “we think that we can have all that wrapped up by our next council meeting, which is July 16,” but also allowed for a called meeting if timing requires it.
Council questions focused on specific, enforceable items. Staff and council asked whether the project would add a sidewalk connection to an existing crosswalk, whether parking-lot lighting would be covered by a photometric study and local ordinance, what on-site amenity space (for example a gazebo or clubhouse) was planned, and whether the developer plans to include a security system. Councilman Jones also asked whether the developer would provide a covered bus stop for children; the applicant said civil design is not yet finalized but that he would raise these items with the owner.
The applicant told council the owner remains in a due-diligence period and cannot close on the property until rezoning is approved; that timing complicated committing to detailed design elements now. Council and staff discussed alternatives including making the items conditions of rezoning, carrying them into the building-permit process, or holding a planning-and-zoning pre-application meeting to nail down details.
Councilman Jones moved to table the rezoning to the July 16 meeting or to a called meeting if needed; the motion was seconded by Councilman Brown and adopted by voice vote. The mayor said staff will work with the applicant to document the commitments before the item returns to the council.
The ordinance will return to the council’s agenda once staff and the applicant reach the agreed terms or at the July 16 meeting if no called meeting is scheduled.

