My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
121515
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/16/2015 1:26:09 PM
Creation date
12/11/2015 2:21:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/15/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
146
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
5. Delete the exemption to streets and roads that are part of a Specific Plan <br /> approved to November 2008. <br /> Mr. Dolan stated that he will go through each of these issues and summarize the results <br /> of staffs internal discussions. <br /> 1. Consider defining the ridgeline setback as a horizontal plane instead of a ground <br /> line. <br /> Mr. Dolan stated that staff discussed this at some length and staffs recommendation is <br /> not to do this for two basic reasons: the first, which is probably the most important, is <br /> that it seems to be more restrictive than the actual words of Measure PP; and second, it <br /> does create a very significant processing and reviewing problem. He indicated that it is <br /> much easier to define where the base of a building is rather than the height of any <br /> particular architectural component. He noted that it could be done, but it just makes it <br /> somewhat more complicated. He added that if the Commission does not agree with <br /> staff and would like to pass on a recommendation to the Council that this particular rule <br /> be adopted in the ordinance, staff is suggesting that the Commission provide for <br /> particular architectural elements like chimneys and other similar architectural <br /> components to be exempted from the restriction. <br /> Chair Blank noted Mr. Dolan's statement that it was difficult to measure the heights of <br /> the buildings as one of the reasons for not doing this. He pointed out that over the <br /> years, the Commission has spent a lot of time making sure that it knows exactly how <br /> high a building can be. He indicated that he is not quite sure he understands why it <br /> would be difficult in this situation. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that the height of a building at a particular site would have to be <br /> compared to a line that is drawn100 feet down from the ridgeline. He stated that <br /> because the ridgeline has a different elevation at any given point and is constantly <br /> changing, it sets up a whole complicated set of measurements and additional questions <br /> to answer, such as how frequently it should be measured against the setback line. He <br /> noted that it does not occur at just one elevation point, and it would be easy if it did; but <br /> that line moves because the ridgeline elevation moves, and so it would be quite an <br /> exercise. <br /> Chair Blank stated that Mr. Dolan indicated that there was language in Measure PP that <br /> supported staffs position and asked Mr. Dolan to point that out to the Commission. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that he is not saying that there is language in Measure PP that <br /> supports staff's position; he is saying that there is no language in Measure PP that <br /> supports the change. <br /> 2. Eliminate the exemption process for manufactured slopes, streets, and roads on <br /> slopes greater than a 25-percent grade, and for streets or roads to landlocked <br /> properties. <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 13, 2013 Page 4 of 35 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.