Transcript Economic Development Plan

MORAGA HILLSIDES
AND RIDGELINES PROJECT
TOWN COUNCIL MEETING, MARCH 11, 2015
Project Background

Objective
 Clarify and improve Town’s hillside and ridgeline
policies and regulations

Process
 Background Analysis (Completed)
 Hillside Regulation Options (Mid 2015)
 Draft Regulations (Late 2015)
 Review and Adoption (Early 2016)
Final Background Report




Draft published in June, 2014
Clear, understandable summary of existing
regulations, physical conditions, and
technical background
Revised document incorporates
comments solicited from public
Final report will be published after
acceptance by Town Council
Draft Landslide Hazard Maps

Two maps
 Landslide inventory Map (detailed)
 Landslide Hazard Areas (simplified)


Provide planning-level data for particular areas of
interest in the town
Steering Committee, Planning Commission, and
Town Council will provide direction on future use of
maps
Draft Landslide Inventory Map
Detailed
Landslides
Inventory
Draft Landslide Hazard Map
Landslide
Hazard
Potential
Key Project Issues
Steering Committee Recommendation for Further
Study:
1.
Ridgeline Protection – How is “protect” defined? What
is the breadth/applicability of protections?
2.
Definition of Development – Do grading and limited
surface facilities qualify as “development?”
3.
Development on Steep Slopes – How do slope
limitations address slope variability within parcels and
the potential for re-grading?
Key Project Issues
4.
Calculation of Slope – Should slope calculation
methods be revised? If so, how?
5.
Remediation in High Risk Areas – Can “high risk” areas
be remediated to become lower risk areas in which
greater development is permitted?
6.
View Protection – What methodologies and standards
should be adopted to protect views?
7.
Hillside Development Permit (HDP) – Are HDPs
redundant? What projects should require HDPs?
8.
High Risk Area Map – Should the High Risk Area Map be
updated? How will it be used in the future?
Project Approach Moving Forward

Project is now at an important decision point:
 Move forward as currently scoped
 Take a different approach


Public input suggested desire for more
comprehensive General Plan amendments
Staff, Steering Committee, and Planning
Commission recommend continuing with the
current approach
Public Outreach

Public Meetings in Original Scope:
 Stakeholder Meetings
 Steering Committee Meetings (7)
 Public Workshops (3)
 Join Planning Town Council/Planning Commission Meetings (3)
 Review and Adoption Hearings (4)

Recommended Additional Outreach
 Steering Committee meetings (3)
 Community workshop to receive input on draft regulations (1)
 Presentations to community organizations (6)
 Focus groups coordinated with town surveys (4)
 Increased use of on-line tools

With Council direction, staff will return with revised project
scope containing additional outreach
Steering Committee





The terms of three Steering Committee members on the
bodies that appointed them expire this year
The Steering Committee charter requires these members
to step down from the Steering Committee
Staff is concerned about loss of continuity and project
delays if three Steering Committee members step down
Staff recommends amending the charter to allow
members to continue on the Steering Committee
Amended charter and draft resolution for Council
consideration is attached to staff report
Requested Council Direction

Steering Committee and Planning Commission
Recommendations:
 Accept the Background Report as complete
 Continue with the original project approach (focused amendments to
improve existing regulations)
 Focus on the eight issues recommended by the Steering Committee and
Planning Commission

Town Staff Recommendations
 Augment the original public outreach program and return to Council with
revised scope
 Amend the Steering Committee charter to allow existing members to
continue
MORAGA HILLSIDES
AND RIDGELINES PROJECT
TOWN COUNCIL MEETING, MARCH 11, 2015