PC 032719 - Laserfiche WebLink

Community Development Director Gerry Beaudin responded there are other discretionary reviews that would be required, and there are considerations beyond Measure PP and QQ even with the proposed application. Chair Allen explained to the audience the purpose of the presentation is a workshop to make recommendations on what is being presented, but the Commission would not be voting on anything. Commissioner Balch inquired how the applicant developed the maps in determining the topography of the site. Ms. Amos responded the maps were based on City-generated aerial mapping. Commissioner Brown asked if any of the survey methods eliminate the variables associated with vegetation cover. Ms. Amos responded the City mapping did not eliminate this variable, which might account for some of the "anomalies" detected. Commissioner Brown asked if any of these anomalies relate to vegetation had not been shown. Mr. Beaudin stated staff has field reviewed many of the anomalies shown. There are depressions and different angles to the slope. The mapping is based on a 9x9 square; if the anomaly is less than that it will show up on the map, and if smaller it will not. The 9x9 dimension is intended to filter out the very small variations in topography. Commissioner Balch stated in regard to the Lund Ranch project, the process included grading 'in the bowl.' Discussion had focused on how many truckloads and how much fill was being placed to support the road, because it was the major infrastructure item on the slope. Regarding the proposed lots, he inquired if there would be grading of sloped areas to create building pads. Mr. Beaudin clarified his earlier statement to note the mapping method used a 3x3 square (i.e. 9 square feet), and not 9x9. For the Lund project a determination had been made that the road was not subject to Measure PP restrictions, but none of the parcels had involved grading on slopes over 25 percent, including grading beyond the boundaries of the parcel itself. Commissioner Brown inquired whether there was no private open space with a slope over 25 percent on the backside of any of those lots. Mr. Beaudin replied that the property was included in a Final Map and some of the lots on the backside were over 25 percent. Chair Allen confirmed there were no anomalies on a buildable pad where grading took place that were over 25 percent. She asked about the implications, if any, for anomalies smoothed out, if using a 9x9 or an 81-square-foot method. Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 22 March 27, 2019