My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
08
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
120115
>
08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/1/2015 10:15:40 AM
Creation date
11/12/2015 11:11:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/1/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
08
NOTES
THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM 11-3-2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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
A sub-issue related to the definition of structure is whether a retaining wall is <br /> considered a structure. This is important as any road connection to Sunset <br /> Creek Lane will require significant grading that could be reduced with the use <br /> of retaining walls. Alternately, the City Council could determine that retaining <br /> walls associated with road construction are not residential structures. Finally, <br /> the City Council could determine that retaining walls of a certain size are <br /> structures. A possible threshold for such a determination would be retaining <br /> walls where the top of the wall to the bottom of the footing exceeds four feet, <br /> as that is the threshold at which an engineered retaining wall is required. The <br /> Planning Commission was supportive of this option. <br /> • Option Two: <br /> If the City Council decides that roads are structures, then any road connection <br /> from the project to Sunset Creek Lane cannot be constructed without grading <br /> areas of 25-percent slope, which would arguably not comply with <br /> Measure PP. A connection to Sunset Creek Lane via McCutchen Court could <br /> be designed to avoid 25-percent slopes but would require approval by the <br /> Sycamore Heights Homeowners Association. Because securing approval of <br /> the Homeowners Association is unlikely, this option is considered infeasible. <br /> All project traffic from the 50 lots of the Lund Ranch II development would <br /> then have to use Lund Ranch Road. <br /> 5. Including/Excluding Artificial Slopes Over 25 Percent <br /> Measure PP is clear that there shall be no grading to construct residential or <br /> commercial structures on 25-percent slopes or greater. It is not clear, however, if <br /> this prohibition includes artificial or manufactured slopes created before <br /> Measure PP. The interpretation of Measure PP in this area is important due to <br /> the proposed location of Lots 28 through 30 and 33 through 39, a total of 10 lots, <br /> and a portion of the project's public street and terminus cul-de-sac, all proposed <br /> on land that appears to have been previously graded to exceed a 25-percent <br /> slope. Figure 6, on the following page, illustrates portions of the site with artificial <br /> slopes over 25 percent. <br /> Page 14 of 26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.