Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember McGovern restated that the City has been doing this for 22 years without a <br />lawsuit, it is a historical practice, and referred to Section 5.4, stating that GIS technology could <br />be used to calculate slopes and to designate areas that equal or exceed 25%. <br />Councilmember Sullivan questioned how the analysis was determined for up to 224 houses to <br />come off of the hillside based on the 25% slope criteria. <br />Mr. Iserson said staff has an understanding of what a 25% slope is and these methods have <br />been in place for many years. The stakes get a bit higher when you are talking about the <br />number of units and how they are exactly defined. Staff did not intend to say this is an <br />insurmountable issue, but it would be a matter of using GIS and identifying the methodology <br />used across the board. In the past, other methods have been used by looking at different <br />projects proposed or under consideration. In arriving at the number, staff used the GIS <br />methodology as well as other criteria of the Initiative, such as 100 vertical feet to the ridgeline. <br />There were some assumptions they had to make and they used existing development plans and <br />best estimates of the likely impact based on slope and elevation. <br />Councilmember Sullivan believed that this was therefore aline-tuning issue of how to nail it <br />down and not an unknown of what it means. <br />Mr. Iserson agreed and that if there is fine-tuning, staff would recommend it be done through an <br />ordinance and for all parties to get together so no disagreement occurs in the future. <br />Councilmember McGovern said GIS has been used for projects. She received a copy of what <br />Oak Grove looks like and to her; the City knows what a 25% slope is and she has difficulty in <br />understanding why it must be defined. <br />Mr. Iserson said the GIS technology assumes a certain methodology in its definition of slope. <br />Staff would need to agree that is the way to do it, but he did believe this should not be a <br />problem. <br />Councilmember McGovern said she went back to the 1993 Ridgeline Measure passed by the <br />community to protect the Pleasanton ridge lines, and she was concerned about the report <br />talking about 4 ridges, as it would make more definitions than what is necessary. She preferred <br />the definition in the staff report which makes more sense. <br />Mr. Iserson said there is a definition in the General Plan of what a ridgeline is, but it has never <br />had to come into play because staff has never had to measure against the actual ridgeline. <br />When looking at a topography map and a piece of property, there are instances where there <br />could be an arguable question as to whether the feature is a ridge, a knoll, or a slope. Staff is <br />suggesting that if the Initiative passes, that there be some mechanism to determine what a <br />predominant ridgeline is, sub-ridgelines, etc., as it does make a difference. He confirmed there <br />was already a definition of a ridgeline in the General Plan. <br />Councilmember McGovern referred to the assisted living facility to be built on commercial <br />property and asked why this would be changed with the Initiative. <br />City Manager Fialho said it is specific as to how to count a unit. The Initiative defines the <br />characteristics of housing units. Staff's concern is that if an assisted living facility comes <br />forward that has those characteristics; staff would have to count it. He confirmed the Initiative <br />was not retroactive, so the City would not count what has already been built towards the cap, <br />Special Meeting Minutes 8 June 26, 2008 <br />