My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
6a
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
03-27
>
6a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/3/2019 1:03:29 PM
Creation date
3/20/2019 4:53:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
3/27/2019
Document Relationships
6a - _Exhibits A and Exhibits C-J
(Attachment)
Path:
\BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\AGENDA PACKETS\2010-2019\2019\03-27
6a - Exhibit B - Plans
(Attachment)
Path:
\BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\AGENDA PACKETS\2010-2019\2019\03-27
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Figure 16: EBRPD Pleasanton Ridge Land Use Trails Plan (Project Area Detail) <br />Project Site <br />✓�. <br />Tao &# k <br />owl J <br />Trail -;and Reads <br />�f .r I„'xlstong M011 -Use nlarrOw frail <br />..�.... <br />PropoW Multi -use Narrow 1 rad <br />i <br />Exrstmg Mull -use Service Road Trail <br />....... <br />Proposed Multi -use Servim Road Trail <br />....._.. <br />Ewstrng Muth -Use Service Road Trail f Modified) <br />Existing Hiking -Equestrian Trait <br />,/� swwwsss <br />Pra�� I' iking-t:questrian t rail <br />— <br />Elimuidted Tiail And Restuied Site <br />•rte <br />Non -System Service Road (EVMA Access) <br />Discussion Question 3: Does the Planning Commission support the applicant's <br />proposed location of the staging area? <br />ALTERNATIVES <br />Applicant -Proposed Alternative Site Plan <br />As an alternative to the proposed development plan being discussed at the Work Session, the <br />applicant has provided a plan illustrating development of the project site that it believes would <br />be completely exempt from Measure PP (Figure 16) because it includes only 10 units each on <br />the Shriners and Lester properties. Whether or not this interpretation is valid would need to be <br />confirmed, since, similar to the proposed project, the Shriner property is used to access and <br />therefore facilitate development of the Lester property, with a total of 20 lots across the two <br />properties that are being developed together. (Other, earlier proposals have included access to <br />the Lester property without using the Shriners property.) <br />Nonetheless, even if the interpretation was made that the project was exempt from Measure <br />PP, the project would still be required to adhere to the City's other development regulations, <br />including General Plan policies and zoning requirements that are intended to ensure <br />sensitively -designed hillside developments, and respect environmental constraints. As such, <br />modifications to the layout shown would most likely be needed. This project would also not <br />provide the EBRPD staging area, which was among the potential community benefits <br />considered by the City Council when consideration of the project was placed on the 2016/17 <br />Work Plan. <br />P18-0078/P18-00791P18-00801P18-0081/PUD-130 Planning Commission <br />10807, 11021, and 11033 Dublin Canyon Road and the parcel west of 11021 Dublin Canyon Road <br />24 of 26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.