My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01 ATTACHMENTS
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2012
>
112712 Special Meeting
>
01 ATTACHMENTS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/16/2012 4:42:30 PM
Creation date
11/16/2012 4:42:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
11/27/2012
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
ATTACHMENTS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Gene_ r__ al Plan. <br /> Land se. The Land Use Element may need to be clarified regarding the <br /> definition of ridgeline in order to coordinate with policies(adopted by the voters in 1993) <br /> applicable to the Pleasanton Ridgelands. <br /> Housing Element. Housing inventory tables will need to be modified to <br /> reflect changed densities due to development restrictions imposed by the Initiative's <br /> Policy 12.3. 7 Additionally,the Growth Management discussion must change to reflect <br /> the new definition of housing unit, and its application. <br /> Public Facilities. The discussion about the school impact feel would need <br /> to be revised to address potential lost revenue. (See Section 7,below.) The description <br /> of the water distribution system may need to be revised if the transfer of units from the <br /> hillside to infill areas results in system modifications, including less demand for new <br /> water pipes and connections.19 <br /> ,..._..d..vati.., a Oo <br /> nd 010--Sc . Program 13.1 of this element,which <br /> currently limits properties comprised of land with no slope of less than 25% to only one <br /> unit,would need to be harmonized with the proposed Policy 12.3 to determine if the <br /> Initiative's exemption from its prohibition on construction on slopes of 25%or greater <br /> for ten or fewer units would increase development potential on properties restricted by <br /> Program 13.1. <br /> llannv Valley Sueci Pan: <br /> IsLILK. As noted in Section 4.1,above, the application of the <br /> Initiative's Policy 12.3 could shift housing units away from the Spotomo Upper Valley, to <br /> potentially e n or possibl e <br /> would at an iconsistencywiththeL d Use Element of the Happy Valley Specific <br /> Plano <br /> B = Rod. The Initiative's proposed Policy 12.3 provides that <br /> "[Mousing units and structures shall not be placed on slopes of 25 percent or greater..." <br /> and also prohibits "grading to construct residential or commercial structures ... on hillside <br /> slopes 25%or greater,or within 100 vertical feet of a ridgeline." It would appear that a <br /> the�case cof <br /> h as the Bypass Road, the golf course and surrounding residential lots)could be in <br /> " State law requires properties to be specifically identified when density is transferred. See Government <br /> Code§65863. <br /> On page VI-9 of the 1996 General Plan. <br /> On VI-4 of the 1996 General Plan. <br /> 20 The page sppotorno Flat itself would appear not to be subject to the 25%slope limitations of the Initiative,but <br /> its development could be impacted if the Initiative's application prohibited the construction of the Bypass <br /> Road as proposed by Greenbrier Homes. See discussion following. <br /> S <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.