My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
14
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2017
>
120517
>
14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/29/2017 12:13:27 PM
Creation date
11/29/2017 11:40:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/5/2017
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
BACKGROUND/HISTORY <br /> With the stated purpose to "...protect our city from uncontrolled growth and the impact it <br /> has on ridgelines and hillsides, traffic, schools, water supply, and our overall quality of <br /> life," Pleasanton voters in November 2008 passed Measure PP, the "Save Pleasanton's <br /> Hills and Housing Cap Initiative."' Measure PP resulted in the addition of Land Use <br /> Element Program 21.3 to the General Plan, which reads: <br /> Program 21.3: Ridgelines and hillsides shall be protected. Housing units and <br /> structures shall not be placed on slopes of 25 percent or greater, or within 100 <br /> vertical feet of a ridgeline. No grading to construct residential or commercial <br /> structures shall occur on hillside slopes 25 percent or greater, or within 100 <br /> vertical feet of a ridgeline. Exempt from this policy are housing developments of <br /> 10 or fewer housing units on a single property. Splitting dividing, or subdividing a <br /> "legal parcel" to approve more than 10 housing units is not allowed (Measure PP, <br /> Nov. 2008). <br /> After Measure PP qualified for the ballot, the City Council commissioned a report about <br /> the effects of the initiative, which noted that some key terms in the initiative, including <br /> "structure", "ridgeline" and "slope" were not specifically defined. The ballot materials <br /> submitted to the voters preceding the November 2008 election, including the City <br /> Attorney's Impartial Analysis, also highlighted that such key terms could be subject to <br /> differing interpretations. <br /> Measure PP issues (including the interpretation of key terms in the measure, particularly <br /> "structure") were at the forefront of discussions related to the Lund Ranch II Project, <br /> which was approved on January 5, 2016, and the subsequent referendum (Measure K), <br /> which sought to halt the project. Measure K was approved by the voters, meaning that <br /> the Lund Ranch II project was able to proceed. In 2016, out of a desire to provide clarity <br /> regarding hillside considerations on lands in the Southeast Hills, the City Council placed <br /> slope mapping of the area on the City Council work plan as a priority project. <br /> SITE DESCRIPTION <br /> The Southeast Hills, comprising approximately 1,520 acres within the City and just <br /> outside City limits in unincorporated Alameda County, is a landform that functions as a <br /> visual boundary and important feature to the southeast of the developed portion of the <br /> City (see Attachment 5, Project Location Map). Ridgeline elevations tend to increase as <br /> one moves towards the southeastern portion of the area, ranging from about 500 feet in <br /> the southwestern portion of the area to approximately 1,170 feet in the extreme <br /> southeast corner of the Foley Property. Although the Southeast Hills have a long history <br /> of livestock grazing, they have been subject to limited development, contain large <br /> expanses of native vegetation, and serve as a wildlife corridor between Pleasanton <br /> Ridge Regional Park and the wildlands around San Antonio Reservoir. The Southeast <br /> 'The provisions of Measure PP related to the City's Housing Cap were invalidated by the Alameda <br /> County Superior Court as being in conflict with State law mandating that communities meet regional <br /> housing requirements. <br /> Page 2 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.