My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
050713
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2013 11:35:57 AM
Creation date
5/6/2013 11:37:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
5/7/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
"Develop a ridgeline preservation ordinance and scenic hillside design guidelines to improve <br /> safety and reduce the potential negative visual impacts of development in hilly areas." <br /> Central to this policy is the improvement of safety and the negative visual impacts of <br /> development. Nowhere in this policy is there any stated exclusion for roadways. <br /> Furthermore, there is no policy in either the 1996 Circulation Element or Public Safety <br /> Element that indicates building roadways on geologically unstable slopes, landslide areas, or <br /> terrain with slopes greater than 25% enhances safety in any way, shape, or form. <br /> Policy on Prohibiting Development or Construction on Slopes of 25% of Greater <br /> In 2005, the Pleasanton Planning Commission discussed safety hazards and collapsing <br /> hillsides and directed staff to have policies put in place to "prohibit major grading where existing <br /> slopes are 25% or greater" and that "development should not be encouraged on 25 percent slopes or <br /> areas prone to landslides."4 <br /> This corresponds to PARC positions on slopes and safety discussed at the City Council <br /> meeting 40 years ago: 5 "Develop only geologically stable lands of moderate slope (under 25% <br /> slope). This is the proposal which is closest to the Pleasanton Planning Staff and our Citizens <br /> Advisory Committee. It is also the alternative recommended by the County Planning Department. " <br /> PARC in a 2006 Joint City Council-Planning Commission meeting reiterated its position: <br /> "These policies did not allow development on hillsides of 25% slope or greater.... General Plan land <br /> use decisions made on a case-by-case basis for such a major area of the City, visually important to all <br /> residents, seems unwise. Case-by-case decisions lead to unreasonable speculation on land. PARC <br /> urges Council to go back to the previous General Plan designation, which does not allow development <br /> on slopes of 25% or greater and excludes these slopes from calculation." 6 <br /> 100 Vertical Feet from a Ridgeline <br /> PARC objects to the revised definitions of ridgeline. It also objects to the revised language <br /> concerning distance from the top of the structure to the ridgeline. <br /> The distance from the ridgeline to the structure must be 100 vertical, not from the ridgeline to <br /> the the bottom of the grading for the actual lot; otherwise, the structure will protrude over the <br /> natural terrain of the ridgeline (see diagram below). <br /> 4 Planning Commission Minutes/Pleasanton-7/25'2005 <br /> 5 City Council Minutes/Pleasanton-10/08/1973 <br /> City Council-Planning Commission Minutes/Pleasanton-4/25/2006 <br /> 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.