My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
041613
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2015 3:00:43 PM
Creation date
4/15/2013 11:14:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
4/15/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Document Relationships
10
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2013\040213
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
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
ATTACHMENT B <br /> Background: <br /> 1. Planning Commission members attend Ridgeline Preservation Ordinance sessian at League <br /> of California Cities conference where they receive several ordinances from several cities. <br /> 2. March 1, 2006 - In a joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting, Margaret Tracy <br /> from Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee discusses excluding slopes over 25% from the <br /> density calculation for housing. <br /> [excerpt from Meeting Minutes] <br /> http://www.ci.pleasanton.ca.us/pdf/cc-minutes-060301.pdf <br /> Margaret Tracy, 1262 Madison Avenue, Livermore, speaking on behalf of the Preserve Area <br /> Ridgelands Committee, complimented the city planning staff for the well-organized staff report. <br /> She wondered which of the listed properties had been under the Williamson Act arid their current <br /> status. She believed the Lester property was one. The Committee supported the proposal to <br /> exclude slopes over 25% from the density calculation. In addition, there is support for not having <br /> more housing west of Foothill Road. The USGS information on Alameda County has maps <br /> showing landslide potential on Pleasanton Ridge. Most of the eastern side of the Ridge indicates <br /> landslide potential and she urged the planning staff to consult the USGS information regarding <br /> landslide potential west of Foothill Road. She felt it was important to the liability of the city for <br /> approving development with known landslide potential and known seismic activity. She believed <br /> the city assumed financial liability for any effects from an earthquake. Mayor Hosterman noted <br /> that Mrs. Tracy was part of an organization that was founded years ago in an effort to save the <br /> ridge lands. If it were not for her good work and the other members of the organization, the ridge <br /> might not look like it does today. <br /> 2. April 18, 2006 - Planning Commission (Anne Fox) requests that development of a ridgeline <br /> preservation ordinance be agendized and Planning Commission agrees. <br /> 3. April 25, 2006 -City Council and Planning Commission have a joint workshop. Margaret <br /> Tracy from Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee speaks and walks through the previous <br /> Pleasanton General Plan policies in place regarding no development on hillsides of 25% slope or <br /> greater. <br /> [excerpt from Meeting Minutes] <br /> http://www.ci.pleasanton.ca.us/pd:f/cc-pc-minutes-ws-060425.pdf <br /> Margaret Tracy, 1262 Madison Avenue, Livermore, speaking for Preserve Area Ridgelands <br /> Committee, indicated it is important to return to the General Plan policies in place before passage <br /> of Measure F. These policies did not allow development on hillsides of 25% slope or <br /> greater.These slopes were excluded in density calculations. In the past months there have been <br /> many articles regarding the 100th anniversary of the action on the San Andreas Fault. Land <br /> slipped up to 21 feet along the fault line. Knowing that similar action is expected on the Hayward <br /> fault within the next thirty years and anticipating similar action possible on the Calaveras fault <br /> west of Foothill Road, it seems wise to exclude development in that area to lessen the liability to <br /> the city. General Plan land use decisions made on a case-by-case basis for such a major area of <br /> the City, visually important to all residents, seems unwise. Case-by case decisions lead to <br /> unreasonable speculation on land. PARC urges Council to go back to the previous General <br /> Plan designation, which does not allow development on slopes of 25% or greater and <br /> excludes these slopes from calculation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.