Laserfiche WebLink
no grading can be done on that hillside to put a ad, but grading can be done in the <br />valley below to put a pad in. Staff applied it toroject, and it seems to work in this <br />particular case. There are.no homes proposed that are going to be breaking a ridgeline <br />or corning close to somebody's view or ridgeline, and that is really :what it is all about in <br />terms of Measure PP. Because measurement will be done on a case -by -case basis, <br />this methodology could be applied to the topography on another project site to see if it <br />seemed reasonable. <br />Is a road a structure? Measure PP, in part, states: "Ridgelines and hillsides should be <br />protected. Housing units and structures shall not be placed on slopes of 25 percent or <br />greater, or within 100 vertical feet of a ridgeline. No grading to construct residential or <br />commercial structures shall occur on hillside slopes 25 percent or greater, or within <br />100 vertical feet of a ridgeline.' There have been very eloquent arguments on both <br />sides, and reasonable people can come to different conclusions on this issue. Some <br />people have reached out to other definitions of structures and said this definition of <br />structure does seem to include roads, and, therefore, a road is a structure and is <br />prohibited in these areas by Measure PP. Others have said that if Measure PP meant <br />to prohibit roads, it would have listed roads: Because Measure PP does not address it <br />directy, the City has the ability to decide what was meant by Measure PP, and the <br />Commission gets to be a part of that decision. Ultimately, it is a City Council decision. <br />Staff is proposing that the Commission interpret Measure PP as not prohibiting roads, <br />because it is necessary to implement- staffs recommendation. <br />Man -made slopes. This has not been terribly controversial in terms of the concept, and <br />almost everyone agrees in the cases here on Lund Ranch: there is one little land form <br />where a road was needed, and instead of going over it, a flat road was bulldozed <br />straight through, resulting in steep slopes on either side. The same thing happened to <br />create a flat pad to put the bam in by the creek. Some grading was done to create the <br />usable farm area. Nobody seems to disagree that that concept is incorrect, although <br />there were some questions about whether or not the natural slopes around here <br />exceeded 25 percent Staff asked the project engineers to take a very detailed <br />technical look at it, so one can see a section taken that cuts across both of those <br />man -made areas and the information done by engineers using the topographic map. <br />The existing areas were never graded; the maximum is 18 percent There is a <br />projection of the area that was created before that went up to 21.9 percent, but none of <br />it appears to have ever been 25 percent. <br />Prior Council Commitments <br />Mr. Dolan stated that as previously mentioned, back when Bonde Ranch was being <br />considered, the Ventana Hills neighborhood was opposed to that project due to traffic. <br />He indicated that the project was ultimately approved, with an indication from the <br />Council that the intent in the long run is that the neighborhood will not have the traffic <br />from Middleton Place because that will be sent out to Lund Ranch Road and connected <br />to Sunset Creek Lane or Sycamore Creek Way, and the neighborhood will not have the <br />Lund Ranch project traffic either. He pointed out that while that was part of the dialogue <br />that was put into writing, as Conditions of Approval for the Bonde Ranch project, they <br />unfortunately do not apply or have anything to do with the owner of the Lund Ranch 11 <br />project. He noted that there were some private agreements that the Conditions of <br />EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, June 24, 2015 ' Page 4 of 45 <br />