Laserfiche WebLink
___________________________________________________________________________________ <br />JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY BOARD/ April 13, 2015 <br />PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING MINUTES PAGE 14 <br /> <br />Council Member Bain asked why 15% slope was chosen as the minimum. Mr. Aknin <br />described briefly how the breaking point was chosen, which was based on staff’s <br />experience reviewing homes in this area, and the number of homes this will impact. He <br />noted that the Council could choose a different breaking point. <br /> <br />Council Member Seybert noted that the application of setbacks on the buildable area of <br />a sloped lot essentially functions like an FAR would by limiting the size of the home and <br />also utilizing the residential lot coverage ratio. Mr. Aknin noted that all cities with FAR <br />requirements still have discretionary review because a small home could still be built <br />incorrectly. <br /> <br />Council Member Howard asked for clarification on why Staff chose to measure based <br />on slope percentage. Mr. Aknin stated that it is typical to use percentages for a slope <br />formula. Council Member Howard noted the comment that this ordinance treats a 15% <br />slope the same as a 29% slope. She noted that these lots still require the appropriate <br />reports to ensure safety. <br /> <br />Mayor Gee asked how many communities on the peninsula do not have a hillside <br />ordinance. Mr. Aknin stated that all cities somehow distinguish hillside development <br />from flatland development, in a variety of ways. Mayor Gee asked how this hillside <br />ordinance proposal changes the Laurel Way group that are under litigation. Ms. <br />Thompson stated that they will be required to comply with new regulations if they are <br />set. <br /> <br />Mayor Gee noted the public comments about constantly changing regulations and <br />codes. He noted that he does not recall the City changing its municipal code regarding <br />RH-1. Mr. Aknin stated that there have been no recent changes on this matter. Mayor <br />Gee noted the comment about Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) and asked how this will <br />affect that. Mr. Aknin replied that this will not affect ADU rules and regulations. He <br />noted the concern about lots that were essentially flat but had a drop-off to the creek. <br />Mr. Aknin stated that there was an additional finding, related to the creek, that will <br />protect that area, and those lot owners will still have to follow this process. <br /> <br />Mayor Gee asked Mr. Aknin about the assertion that most homes in the hillsides will be <br />nonconforming. Mr. Aknin replied that since there is no cap on Floor Area Ratio, there <br />will not be nonconforming homes. Council Member Seybert noted that he wished there <br />was some kind of clarification 15 years ago. He spoke about his experience developing <br />property on a slope and his thoughts on some comments he has been hearing about <br />this ordinance. He noted that the County has had much stricter ordinances than this. <br />This ordinance makes sense for safety and increasing objectivity on hillside <br />development. He asked for a delay of 6 months to put this ordinance into effect after <br />adoption. <br /> <br />Council Member Howard agreed with the 6-month delay. She stated that the standards <br />in the ordinance are clear. She noted that in the future if the Council feels this is not <br />strict enough, it could be revisited. Council Member Bain thanked staff for the work on <br />this project. He stated that his main concern is the 15% break point and the unintended <br />7.1.J. - Page 14