My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN052008
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
CCMIN052008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/21/2008 4:09:35 PM
Creation date
8/21/2008 4:09:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/20/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN052008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
any grading on slopes of 25% or greater; would restrictions apply to the building pad or would it <br />apply to the entire lot; and, how a ridgeline should be defined. <br />Mr. Iserson presented a map of properties and described those that might be affected by a <br />hillside restriction, stating that all properties within the City were not included, but more of those <br />major properties yet to be developed in the hillside areas. He illustrated existing developments <br />and how they would relate to the slope on the site and overlays of proposed development, <br />noting there is also the question of style of grading, which is dependent upon the design of the <br />home, lot configurations, slopes, changes in topography, the desire for flat rear yards, split pad <br />lots, building on natural slopes. Another issue is FAR methodology, which can be based on the <br />entire parcel. Examples include reducing limits for highly sloped areas and discounting areas <br />over a certain slope percentage; or, creating a building envelope within the parcel allowing that <br />area to be graded and base the FAR on the building envelope and not the size of the entire lot. <br />There can be disagreements on measuring FAR, slope banks and the base of hills, and moving <br />to a hillside regulation would establish a formula or method for determining FAR and slope. <br />He said the hillside regulation process is dependent upon how the Council proceeds with the <br />Hillside Initiative; it may want to request staff to do further analysis; pursue hillside regulations to <br />implement, expand or clarify the potential Initiative; the Council might want to establish a <br />process through a task force involving citizens, commissions, or other alternatives used in the <br />past; it may want to consider what the final product the Council is looking for; and whatever is <br />adopted can always be placed on the ballot for voter approval. <br />Mr. Iserson said the recommendation is for the Council to consider issues relating to hillside <br />regulations and provide feedback and direction to staff, provide direction on the public process <br />and the context of the Initiative process, and also to take advantage of requesting more <br />information from staff on potential impacts of hillside regulations. <br />Mayor Hosterman said she realized after hearing the presentation that the City already has a <br />number of protections in place that previous Councils have acted on relating to development in <br />the hillsides. Regarding Mr. Iserson's presentation where potential development is proposed but <br />where this Initiative would likely not cover, she asked what properties would be covered. Mr. <br />Iserson said it may be very few, many properties are exempt due to having 10 units or less, and <br />it depends on remaining properties as to where they decide to propose the homes. <br />City Manager Fialho said the reason the item was placed on the agenda was in response to a <br />request by the Council to explore ways to initiate aCity-sponsored Hillside Protection Ordinance <br />or regulation. This provides good foundation for the next discussion which is either to call for the <br />election, adoption, or additional study. <br />Councilmember McGovern confirmed the Council has a priority to develop a hillside ordinance. <br />She believes there is a place in the General Plan that calls for a hillside ordinance to be <br />developed, and Councilmember Sullivan noted it was in the Open Space Element, 5.1. She said <br />many citizens set out that plan in 1996 and said it also included a grading ordinance. She <br />questioned if Mr. Iserson had an illustration of what Oak Grove would look like. Mr. Iserson said <br />he remembered having a sloped map, and Councilmember McGovern asked to obtain a copy of <br />the slope map prior to the discussion, as well as a copy of the PowerPoint presentation. <br />Councilmember McGovern said she remembers a discussion where in 1986 there was <br />something in the General Plan about 25% slopes which was removed, and there was discussion <br />that it had been there but removed by accident. She asked to see some of the staff reports from <br />those Planning Commission meetings to assist in her decision-making, and believed the policy <br />City Council Minutes 7 May 20, 2008 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.