My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 062415
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
PC 062415
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:49:59 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:39:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
6/24/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Balch stated that he would like to go a little further, that the applicant's <br />position is that the addition of a road is significant grading. He asked staff to go into the <br />definition of "significant ": "How significant is 'significant' on grading ?" <br />Mr. Dolan replied that he believes the applicant has estimated 11,000 cubic yards. He <br />indicated that the Commission could ask one of their team to come up because they <br />have done a little bit of work on it, although they do not have a design. He asked if that <br />number is going to mean anything to the Commission. <br />Chair Allen replied that it will not mean anything to her except if someone helps to <br />translate it. <br />Commissioner Balch stated that his concern is grading because if grading is significant, <br />it would violate his principle of upholding Measure PP, if the mass destruction of the <br />hillside occurs because of trying to put in a road. <br />Mr. Dolan stated that the applicant confirmed that it would be 11,000 cubic yards <br />without the retaining walls. <br />Commissioner Nagler inquired if the 11,000 cubic yards would start about 3/4 the way up <br />the hill and grades down to the base, but as far as up the hillside, it would stop at the <br />ridge of trees that is up towards the top. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that there would be some above and some below. <br />Commissioner Balch stated that he has no idea what 11,000 cubic yards of fill looks <br />like. He asked staff how much fill was put in for the Bernal Phase II project. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that he cannot tell that, but there is a graphic which shows the layout <br />and the extent of grading in the EIR when it talks about the alternatives: Figure 5 -3 on <br />page 5 -23. He indicated that the road is visible; there is a dash line that says "limited <br />grading" and talks about how much cut and how much fill. <br />Commissioner Balch asked staff what the scale is and if each significant major line is <br />50 feet or less, because 470 feet looks like towards where the retention basin would be. <br />Mr. Dolan said it is 10. <br />Commissioner Balch clarified that for each major line, it is 10 feet down <br />topography -wise; so it looks like they are altering approximately where the arrow comes <br />in with the preliminary earthwork paralleled on the right bound; and on the left bound is <br />approximately 1/4 inch from the property line on major line 470 on the left. <br />Mr. Dolan stated that it looks like grading will be over an elevation change of 70 feet. <br />Commission Balch asked that the graphic be displayed, showing where the grading <br />would be. He then pointed to the road that goes up to Sunset Creek Lane. <br />Commissioner Nagler inquired if this is to avoid a retaining wall. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, June 24, 2015 Page 45 of 54 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.