Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Dolan stated that the exemption process was kind of a theme, and it just did not feel <br /> right to the Commission to have various exceptions granted to the ordinance. He noted <br /> that staff supports that direction and has removed the exemption processes that were in <br /> the initial draft related to landlocked properties and manufactured slopes. He added <br /> that staff thought that the direction provided by the Commission was very good: instead <br /> of going through an exception process, just build into the ordinance a way of measuring <br /> slopes that refers to what can be determined to be the previous natural slope and use <br /> whatever evidence is available to determine that. He added that as a matter of course, <br /> whenever there is that situation, this would be a part of the dialogue on the development <br /> review, and the Commission can confirm its conclusions in that regard. <br /> 5. Delete the exemption to streets and roads that are part of a Specific Plan <br /> approved to November 2008. <br /> Mr. Dolan noted that the Commission had asked that staff delete this exemption. He <br /> indicated that staff had a different conclusion in the memo that the Commission never <br /> got to discuss at the last meeting; but at this point, staff believes that its previous <br /> recommendation may not be defensible, and it goes back again to the specific language <br /> in Measure PP that states that Measure PP overrides the existing General Plan, and <br /> Specific Plans are a component of the General Plan. He noted that it is difficult to justify <br /> that exemption, considering that very direct language in the Measure. <br /> Mr. Dolan noted that this does have some implications in the real world to items that <br /> may be before the Commission and the Council. He indicated that primarily, it has <br /> implications relative to the Bypass Road which is called for in the Happy Valley Specific <br /> Plan, and to road connections to the proposed Lund Ranch II development and the <br /> connection called for in the North Sycamore Specific Plan to Sunset Creek Lane, <br /> primarily because both of these street connections would cross areas that have <br /> 25-percent slopes. He pointed out that in the case of the Bypass Road, it is a very <br /> extensive area of 25-percent slope, and it is more modest but still exists in terms of the <br /> Lund Ranch connection to Sunset Creek Lane. <br /> Chair Blank asked Mr. Dolan to quantify "extensive" versus "modest." <br /> Mr. Dolan stated that he will demonstrate that in a few slides he will display shortly. He <br /> then continued that because of these implications, staff is really proposing a different <br /> approach, and it revolves around the definition of structure as referenced in <br /> Measure PP because that is what is prohibited in the areas where development is <br /> prohibited: in the 25-percent slope area and within the 100-foot setback line from the <br /> ridgeline. <br /> Mr. Dolan stated that the Pleasanton Municipal Code does have a definition of <br /> "structure": "`Structure'means anything constructed or erected which requires a <br /> location on the ground, including a building or a swimming pool, but not including a <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 13, 2013 Page 5 of 35 <br />