Laserfiche WebLink
no grading can be done on that hillside to put a pad, but grading can be done in the <br /> valley below to put a pad in. Staff applied it to this project, and it seems to work in this <br /> particular case. There are no homes proposed that are going to be breaking a ridgeline <br /> or coming close to somebody's view or ridgeline, and that is really what it is all about in <br /> terms of Measure PP. Because measurement will be done on a case-by-case basis, <br /> this methodology could be applied to the topography on another project site to see if it <br /> seemed reasonable. <br /> Is a road a structure? Measure PP, in part, states: "Ridgelines and hillsides should be <br /> protected. Housing units and structures shall not be placed on slopes of 25 percent or <br /> greater, or within 100 vertical feet of a ridgeline. No grading to construct residential or <br /> commercial structures shall occur on hillside slopes 25 percent or greater, or within <br /> 100 vertical feet of a ridgeline." There have been very eloquent arguments on both <br /> sides, and reasonable people can come to different conclusions on this issue. Some <br /> people have reached out to other definitions of structures and said this definition of <br /> structure does seem to include roads, and, therefore, a road is a structure and is <br /> prohibited in these areas by Measure PP. Others have said that if Measure PP meant <br /> to prohibit roads, it would have listed roads. Because Measure PP does not address it <br /> directly, the City has the ability to decide what was meant by Measure PP, and the <br /> Commission gets to be a part of that decision. Ultimately, it is a City Council decision. <br /> Staff is proposing that the Commission interpret Measure PP as not prohibiting roads <br /> because it is necessary to implement staffs recommendation. <br /> Man-made slopes. This has not been terribly controversial in terms of the concept, and <br /> almost everyone agrees in the cases here on Lund Ranch: there is one little land form <br /> where a road was needed, and instead of going over it, a flat road was bulldozed <br /> straight through, resulting in steep slopes on either side. The same thing happened to <br /> create a flat pad to put the barn in by the creek. Some grading was done to create the <br /> usable farm area. Nobody seems to disagree that that concept is incorrect, although <br /> there were some questions about whether or not the natural slopes around here <br /> exceeded 25 percent. Staff asked the project engineers to take a very detailed <br /> technical look at it, so one can see a section taken that cuts across both of those <br /> man-made areas and the information done by engineers using the topographic map. <br /> The existing areas were never graded; the maximum is 18 percent. There is a <br /> projection of the area that was created before that went up to 21.9 percent, but none of <br /> it appears to have ever been 25 percent. <br /> Prior Council Commitments <br /> Mr. Dolan stated that as previously mentioned, back when Bonde Ranch was being <br /> considered, the Ventana Hills neighborhood was opposed to that project due to traffic. <br /> He indicated that the project was ultimately approved, with an indication from the <br /> Council that the intent in the long run is that the neighborhood will not have the traffic <br /> from Middleton Place because that will be sent out to Lund Ranch Road and connected <br /> to Sunset Creek Lane or Sycamore Creek Way, and the neighborhood will not have the <br /> Lund Ranch project traffic either. He pointed out that while that was part of the dialogue <br /> that was put into writing, as Conditions of Approval for the Bonde Ranch project, they <br /> unfortunately do not apply or have anything to do with the owner of the Lund Ranch II <br /> project. He noted that there were some private agreements that the Conditions of <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, June 24, 2015 Page 4 of 45 <br />