tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8126534433825399733.post5575818129875094710..comments2023-05-16T21:52:31.112-07:00Comments on San Ramon Tribune: "Save Our Ridges"San Ramonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18230453679344836393noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8126534433825399733.post-64585692258062479632007-08-02T16:13:00.000-07:002007-08-02T16:13:00.000-07:00Jim, excellent post!! For the most part, the artic...Jim, excellent post!! <BR/><BR/>For the most part, the articles here and the comments posted are one-sided, biased and the facts are just plain wrong. <BR/><BR/>Your facts are correct, for which I commend you!! I disagree with some of your recommendations, and I agree with some. <BR/><BR/>Your assertion that the General Plan 2020 twists Ordinance 197 out of shape is 100% correct.The exception to allow the develoment on minor ridgelines in the NWSP area created a loop hole big enough to drive a bulldozer through. And yes I am the anonymous poster that asked if anyone has approached Jerry Cambra about this 747 sized loop hole, because he WAS the driving force that created it. <BR/><BR/>But, alas, I suppose no one but me sees that. Paul, Jan or whoever is 'responsible' for this site better hope that Mr. Gibbon continues to post here and provide a modicum of correctfullness and truthfullness to this otherwise insignificant site.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8126534433825399733.post-396922839154079782007-08-01T12:38:00.000-07:002007-08-01T12:38:00.000-07:00Please read. It's a little technical but it is the...Please read. It's a little technical but it is the issue and the reason for the lawsuits.<BR/>Thank you,<BR/>Jim<BR/><BR/>‘The City of San Ramon should acquire the Faria property as ridgeline open space as mandated in the General Plan’<BR/><BR/><BR/>The 2020 General Plan for San Ramon was the result of voter approved of Measure G. This measure mandated the preparation of a new General Plan based on the principles of smart growth. A key component of this mandate was the preparation of a plan for the acquisition of ridgeline areas and agricultural lands contiguous to the City of San Ramon. These lands were to be preserved for open space purposes in perpetuity.<BR/><BR/>When the 2020 General Plan was approved by the voters in 2002 it instead created a loophole for development of our San Ramon hills. It had allowed an end run around voter initiative Ordinance 197 and the Resource Conservation Overlay District (RCOD) in effect since 1990. <BR/><BR/>Ordinance 197 amended the City’s then-current General Plan (a plan adopted in 1986) to require that all land within the City limits, or to be annexed to the City, above 500 feet in elevation be subject to the policies of the RCOD. “These policies include a prohibition of structures on most slopes greater than 20% and within 100 vertical feet of major ridgelines, a maximum allowable density formula for slopes between 10% and 20% (except that densities may be transferred on such slopes within a project area), and a building height limit of 32 feet. Ordinance 197 also provided that exceptions to such policies must be approved by the voters of San Ramon.” <BR/><BR/>The new 2020 General Plan allowed for the total disregard of the requirements and protects of Ordinance 197 when Section 8.4-I-15 of the 8.4 Measure G Open Space Preservation Action Plan exemptions apply. See below: <BR/><BR/>Sections 8.4-I-15 allow exemptions from the provisions of Ordinance 197, specifically the prohibition of development on or adjacent to Major and Minor Ridges, only where: <BR/>The area to be preserved as permanent open space includes upper ridges and visible hillsides with a total area that is at least four times the area to be developed. A portion of this 80 percent open space commitment, not to exceed five percent of the total site area, may be provided by dedication of permanent open space off-site on a 2:1 basis (two acres of off-site open space = one acre of on-site open space). Only land that is within one-half mile of the area for which the exemption is sought, is designated as a Ridgeline Protection Zone by Ordinance 197, or is on a hillside visible from Central Park would meet the City’s standards for a Specialized Recreation Area and qualify as off-site open space under this provision;<BR/> <BR/>• The area to be developed is within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB);<BR/> <BR/>• Trail connections to existing and planned trails are provided; <BR/><BR/>• Habitat protection for sensitive species is assured; and <BR/><BR/>• The development includes enforceable commitments to increase the City’s stock of <BR/> affordable housing, consistent with the General Plan. <BR/><BR/><BR/>With regard to the Faria Reserve property the provisions of Section 8.4-I-15 are being twisted out of shape so that, in my opinion, it constitutes a violation of the General Plan. The development reports to provide 75% of the developed land as being preserved as open space and 5% (x2) offsite land in order to meet the exemption from RCOD. The it’s proposal proposes to use 144 acres of land in Bollinger Canyon along Bollinger Canyon Road as offsite land to meet the 80% requirement of the section Below is the language in the Ordinance 197:<BR/><BR/>Only land that is within one-half mile of the area for which the exemption is sought, is designated as a Ridgeline Protection Zone by Ordinance 197, or is on a hillside visible from Central Park would meet the City’s standards for a Specialized Recreation Area and qualify as off-site open space under this provision;……<BR/><BR/>As stated in city report, the 144-acres of off-site open space, being contiguous to the plan area, is to be recorded under a permanent conservation easement in order to provide an overall ratio of open space and non-residential uses to the housing development on the Faria Preserve site to make up the 80% open space requirement. <BR/><BR/>• The problem with these 144 acres of offsite land is that it will remain outside of the city limits and in private hands. It will not be acquired by or placed into the city as part of this project. <BR/><BR/>• It does not qualify as a “Specialized Recreation Area” as required in Ordinance 197. In fact the ordinance requires the ridgelines on the Faria property be preserved. The RCOD mandate is the preparation of a plan for the “acquisition of ridgeline areas” for preservation as open space in perpetuity.<BR/><BR/>• Without the inclusion of this offsite land the Faria Preserve development would have to meet the requirements of the Resource Conservation Overlay District and Ordinance 197. This would require the ridges be preserved, that fewer units be built, and the other two property owners in the specific plan maintain their unit counts they deserve. <BR/><BR/>I recommend that the city look at the Fria property for acquisition as ridgeline open space as mandated and provided for in the General Plan. The General Plan calls for this ridgeline property to be acquire/purchased by the city so it could be preserved as open space in perpetuity. There are procedures in the General Plan for the acquisition of the property. Some of the property may still be developed not associated with the ridgeline. <BR/><BR/>'If' the city were to accept the Faria development as it is proposed, then they should receive the offsite property as part of the agreement for use as a rural public park. It would be considered as compensation for the lost of the ridgelines. I believe that it would not be a good trade for the lost of the ridgelines that the general plan calls for "preservation as open space in perpetuity". But it would be something.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Jim Gibbon, AIA<BR/>Resident of San Ramon.Jim Gibbonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17294345527635133389noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8126534433825399733.post-44413463121134005972007-08-01T06:59:00.000-07:002007-08-01T06:59:00.000-07:00How many sides of the story are YOU listening to? ...How many sides of the story are YOU listening to? Your comment seems really one-sided and biased to me. I thought 'news' was supposed to be impartially reported. <BR/><BR/>I looked at the San Ramon General Plan at the library and it shows a housing development in the Northwest Plan. Is this the same development we are talking about here? Wasn't this plan approved by the voters?<BR/><BR/>I'm confused, what are you against here? If the project is in the General Plan shouldn't it be built?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8126534433825399733.post-63122473609935081022007-07-28T15:52:00.000-07:002007-07-28T15:52:00.000-07:00To the anonymous person that keeps posting the sam...To the anonymous person that keeps posting the same thing here. If you want to contact him, you are free to do so. Anonymous, maybe you can even get an inside scoop on the situation.<BR/><BR/>I suspect, you don't have all the answers. I also suspect that you are listening to one side of the story, without really doing proper investigative work, and believing what you are feed.<BR/><BR/>The real issue comes down to the San Ramon City Council approving 800 homes on the ridgelines. If they wanted to, the City Council could have voted against this huge, overcrowded, ridgeline development.<BR/><BR/>Certainly this was not the will of the people in the first place. It seems as though the City Council thinks it can do what ever it wants to, without answering to the people.<BR/><BR/>Are there any independent thinkers on this City Council? Any vote of major consequence has been a 5 to 0 vote. This way, the San Ramon City Council ends up covering for each other. If one Council Member were to speak out, the person would be ostracized and vilified, as has been the case in the past with other members.<BR/><BR/>So, if you want to contact him, you are free to do so.San Ramonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18230453679344836393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8126534433825399733.post-5901255311970975772007-07-28T08:50:00.000-07:002007-07-28T08:50:00.000-07:00Has anyone here contacted Mr. Cambra?Has anyone here contacted Mr. Cambra?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8126534433825399733.post-25911441993599367802007-07-13T17:14:00.000-07:002007-07-13T17:14:00.000-07:00Please contact former Councilman Jerry Cambra for ...Please contact former Councilman Jerry Cambra for a detailed explanation of why the ridgelines were sacrificed for this project. The real trade-off was for a church/affordable housing in trade for a minor ridgeline. Your environmental supporters hard at work for the almighty buck. You got to love it!!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com