SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

Comtnissioner Posson ... added that he went back and looked at it, and then looked at the definition of "structure" in the Municipal Code when Measure PP was passed. He stated that regardless of whether or not this is the definition that the voters were relying on, this was what was in the Municipal Code at the time they were voting, and that is really all he has to rely on. He indicated that he carne to the same conclusion that the other Commissioners did: that a road takes up ground and it would be considered a structure. Commissioner Narum stated that she believes she is there too. She indicated that she empathizes with everybody and that these are always the toughest things and decisions to make. She noted that it is really difficult to read what the intent of Measure PP was and what people thought they were voting on, and like Commissioner Pearce said, it is conflicting; therefore, she had to go back to the text, back to the Municipal Code, and try to apply it. She stated that she believes she would have to make the recommendation that a road is a structure. Chair Blank stated that he is with his colleagues with this. The Commission was unanimous that a road is a structure. Planning Commission Minutes, Mar. 13, 2013, at 29 -30 (emphasis in original). What is actually required to build a road to Sunset Creek? Measure PP voters expected to look up at hillsides and ridgelines and see hillsides and ridgelines, rather than development. Which is to say, the voters did not expect to see grading and roads and sidewalks and streetlights and vehicle traffic on hillsides or ridgelines after Measure PP passed. Measure PP is a hillside protection initiative, not a hillside expansion initiative, and so Councilmembers should take a "conservative view" when interpreting PP. That is consistent with the first words of the Measure: "Ridgelines and hillsides shall be protected." And it is further supported by the citation, in the ballot materials, of "a mile long road spanning the top of many of our Southeast Hills" and the "Happy Valley by -pass road" as the sort of developments that PP would bar. Indeed, the City's own electoral analysis about the specific development at issue here indicated that, if Measure PP passed, the Lund Ranch project would be limited to 5 -10 homes.' This tips heavily in favor of considering roads as structures. Exhibit B to Mr. Dolan's August 25 memorandum paints a bleak picture of the impact of building a connector to Sunset Creek: • Between 1.5 and 2.7 acres of grading (equivalent to the size of 1.4 to 2.6 football fields) • Movement of 812 —1,234 truckloads of dirt 8 Analysis of the Impacts and Effects of the Save Pleasanton's Hills & Housing Cap Initiative, dated June 11, 2008, at Table 1 p.6, prepared pursuant to Elections Code 5 9212.