17 - Laserfiche WebLink

not have it fought out in front of the Planning Commission after he has already put a lot of work into developing a proposal. He added that if he were a citizen and cared about ridgeline protection, he would not want to have to come and fight every application. He stated that the fight should be done now, once, so everybody knows where they stand; then applications can go forward because developers would know what a ridge is, and citizens will not have to come and battle every application. Justin Brown, representing a number of Mission Hills residents, stated that he just wanted to speak in favor of the proposal from the City to exclude roads as structures and not take the ultra-conservative approach. He indicated that the General Plan, which governs the Planning Commission, refers to roads as part of the transportation infrastructure, and "infrastructure" means below the structure. He deferred to legal counsel for the definition of "structure" and noted that the basic dictionary definition of "structure" implies that a structure is a building for accommodation; it does not make reference to roads. He agreed that infrastructure certainly includes roads, beneath the structure and interconnecting the components that make up the community. Mr. Brown stated that he does not believe it was the intention of the voters, in voting for Measures PP and QQ, that roads would be considered a structure. He added that if Measure PP meant for roads to be a structure, it would have specified and spelled it out in the Measure before the general public. Cindy McGovern, former City Councilmember, stated that, first of all, the reason why Measure PP was actually put on the ballot in the beginning was because of Oak Grove at one point, plus saving the scenic hillsides. She noted that the road was one mile long and actually cut 40 feet off the ridgeline in some places, and this was deemed inappropriate by the people putting the Measure together as it was going through sensitive areas and against the idea of clustering homes the way the General Plan talks about. Ms. McGovern stated that she has true concerns about possible unintended consequences if roads are deemed non-structures. She indicated that, first of all, she thinks the loss of the protection of Measure PP, if the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) is overturned, is a really major thing that needs to be considered. She noted that the City lost its housing cap with State law changes, and the same thing can happen with the UGB. She added that this is not just these two pieces of property being talking about but multiple pieces of properties with ridgelines and scenic hills. She indicated that she thinks the use of the roads to grade 25-percent or greater slopes to get tip flatter areas for property development through sensitive areas is something everyone needs to consider, what that really means and what that could really do to the hillsides and the elongation of roads. She added that the use of roads to go over ridgelines and into valleys to build and flatten areas with the protections that are mentioned by staff are really not safeguards, and that is because they are not a vote of the people. She stated that these can be changed by three members of the Council, and developments can be approved by three members of the Council; but the true protection comes in PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 13, 2013 Page 11 of 35