Laserfiche WebLink
could easily get to the point of saying it would by putting down basic base rock, a <br />foundation for a road and a pavement overlay that he could see was not a structure, <br />basically because it could be easily moved, easily done, and not significantly <br />engineered, which is his kind of my criteria for structure. <br />Commissioner Balch stated that he also got to the retaining wall question quickly <br />because he saw the slope as well and used the four -foot measurement Mr. Dolan had <br />pointed out earlier. He noted that, on the other side, if it has to be engineered, if it's <br />90 degrees off the freeway such as the Altamont, or the Hayward Hotel road, those <br />would obviously be structures. He stated that he came down to how much engineering <br />is involved, and the first level of engineering came at the retaining wall question. He <br />stated that if a road could be built with basic base rock and pavement overlay and a <br />four -foot high qualified or non - engineered wall, he is comfortable saying that it is not a <br />structure because they are moveable without too much work. He then stated that the <br />intent of Measure PP is an interesting concept, and Commissioner Nagler had <br />commented that the intent of Measure PP is not to have mass hillside destruction. He <br />asked how much grading can be done then, so a retaining wall does not need to be <br />constructed. He asked Chair Allen and Commissioner Piper if this persuades either of <br />them to a go the other way. <br />Commissioner Piper said no <br />Commissioner Nagler stated that from his perspective, Commissioner Balch is making a <br />point he can support. He indicated that he can see building this road within the context <br />of the importance of Measure PP and what Measure PP intends to do which is <br />incredibly important, and this road is acceptable within that context. <br />Chair Allen stated that she can see building a road within the overall picture of what <br />people probably thought. She indicated, however, that she has to honor the wording as <br />she reads it, that the voters signed, and she just cannot legitimately say that a retaining <br />wall is not a structure or seeing huge grading instead of retaining walls. She pointed <br />out, on the other hand, that the Ventana Hills folks had agreements, just as important <br />for those people who voted for Measure PP. She noted that Pleasanton is a community <br />of character, and both are important in that respect. <br />Commissioner Nagler asked if a retaining wall one -foot high would still be a structure. <br />Chair Allen replied that she thought about that, but then she asked herself: "Where <br />does it end ?" She indicated that the other acid test she took was Measure PP, a <br />hillside conservation protection initiative, not a hillside expansion initiative. She stated <br />that she feels obligated to take a conservative view on this because it was an Initiative <br />related to conserving hills. <br />Commissioner Balch stated that one of the arguments he has listened to is the <br />agreement of upholding the City's community of character, based upon a much larger <br />project than the current proposed project. He indicated that he understands Junipero <br />Street's concerns and focuses in on them because they are the most impacted. He <br />noted that when they came to the table back then, it was for 150 homes up there, and <br />so if it is three times the number of homes, it would be three times the number of trips, <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, June 24, 2015 Page 39 of 54 <br />