My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
120115
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/2/2015 2:37:51 PM
Creation date
11/13/2015 11:51:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/1/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
NOTES
THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 17, 2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
129
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
Staff Option <br />Translation <br />1) Agree that Measure PP prohibits the <br />culvert crossing and that a road connection <br />to Sunset Creek is not allowed by Measure <br />PP. <br />Honor Measure PP and conclude that <br />bridges and 8 -foot high retaining walls are <br />"structures." <br />2) Accept the ridges as mapped previously <br />and presented to the public and allow the <br />creek crossing to Sunset Creek as permissible <br />within Measure PP. <br />Ignore the error and pretend the ridgelines <br />are as previously incorrectly represented. <br />3) Conclude that the retaining walls <br />proposed as part of the creek crossing are <br />not structures prohibited by Measure PP. <br />Conclude, contrary to any reasonable <br />understanding of the word, that bridges and <br />8 -foot walls are not "structures." <br />4) Acknowledge that the ridgeline extends to <br />beyond the water tank but determine that <br />Measure PP does not prevent the creek <br />crossing retaining walls in this particular case <br />due to their location at one of the lowest <br />elevations of the site. <br />Redraft Measure PP as follows: "structures <br />shall not be placed ... within 100 vertical feet <br />of a ridgeline, unless they are at some arbitrarily - <br />determined `low elevation. <br />This should, practically speaking, end debate. There is no reasonable interpretation of <br />"structure" that does not include 8 -foot high walls and bridges. <br />At a minimum the Council should remand this matter to the Commission to gets its <br />recommendation in light of these changed circumstances. Several members of the <br />Commission believed that walls are structures and roads are not (more on this later), and so <br />it would appear that the Commission would arrive at a different recommendation if it knew <br />the true ridgelines. <br />Pleasanton Code and the Code of Neighboring Communities <br />Taking a step back, to focus on what is meant by "structure" in PP, it is helpful to begin with <br />what our own ordinances say about structures. The most relevant code is the Pleasanton <br />Municipal Code, which defines "structure" as "anything constructed or erected which <br />requires a location on the ground." (PMC § 18.08.535.) <br />Because roads, retaining walls, and bridges "require(] a location on the ground," they are <br />clearly included within the Pleasanton Municipal Code's definition of "structure." The <br />California Government Code on planning and land use similarly states: "`structure' includes, <br />but is not limited to, any building, road, ... ." (Cal. Gov. Code, Chap. 4.5, Review and <br />Approval of Development Projects, § 65927.) <br />Both the Pleasanton and the California formulations appear to have widespread adoption: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.