My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
15
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2008
>
121608
>
15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/10/2008 4:37:43 PM
Creation date
12/10/2008 4:26:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
12/16/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
petitioners of Measure PP, advised the City Council that: "Assisted living units have <br />large central kitchens or kitchenettes and not individual FULUComplete kitchens and <br />would not be counted against the housing cap." (Emphasis in original.) Thus, with the <br />definitions from the State of California and U.S. Census Bureau, as well as information <br />provided by petitioner Ms. Brown, Measures PP and QQ are not in direct conflict as to <br />assisted living facilities. <br />Overall, for purposes of the General Plan, the definitions of housing unit in Measures <br />PP and QQ coexist using definitions from the U.S. Census Bureau and State of <br />California, as directed specifically by the Measure PP petition, as well as information <br />submitted into the public record by a petitioner of Measure PP. <br />Implementation Options. With the passage of both measures, and the lack of conflict <br />between the two measures, consideration is next focused on implementation. <br />Measure QQ describes a process for the development of a hillside and ridge protection <br />ordinance and design guidelines, but this process is effectively advisory, as voters were <br />clearly told that this was a process setting forth how an ordinance and guidelines "might <br />be developed" and "there is no provision requiring the City to enact" the resulting <br />regulations.s <br />However, with the passage of Measure PP, its specific restrictions on hillside <br />development have become law, and therefore the process to develop the ordinance <br />envisioned by Measure QQ has effectively been fulfilled by the regulations enacted by <br />Measure PP. Therefore, while the advisory process outlined in Measure QQ is <br />generally discussed as Option 4, below, the other options are instead focused on more <br />immediate and practical application of Measures PP and OO. <br />1. PP and QQ policies into the General Plan. <br />The most straight-forward approach is to incorporate the policies of Measures PP and <br />QQ into the General Plan (as well as the proposed General Plan update), and then <br />require each proposed project' to be consistent with those policies. As projects are <br />processed, City staff would use its best professional judgment to apply the broad <br />principles of Measure OO to the project and then the more specific requirements of <br />Measure PP. <br />In context of Measure PP, staff would determine if the exemption applies and, if not, it <br />would calculate slope, determine ridgelines, measure 100 feet from such ridgelines, <br />define housing unit and structure, determine if the property is a 'legal parcel' (as of Jan. <br />1, 2007) subject to any subdivision restrictions, and then ensure the application <br />conforms to these requirements. The final decision about whether a proposed project <br />complies with Measures PP and QQ would be made by the City Council, with a <br />recommendation by the Planning Commission, following noticed public hearings. <br />e See City Attorney Impartial Analysis of Measure QQ, paragraph 5. <br />Except projects with vested rights under State law. <br />Page 5 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.