CC MIN 2015-04-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

other restrictions. She stated that unnecessary restrictions can add years to the process for community members who are trying to build homes for their families. Brian Cervenska noted that a 100% slope is a 45 degree angle, so a 15% slope is a very small degree, whereas a 30 degree slope is unlikely to be built on. He noted that existing homes built many decades ago were built under different, less strict regulations and are still standing. He stated that in Laurel Way, homeowners are required to build two garages and two off-street parking spaces per home, which should provide plenty of parking for the area. Alice Kaufman, with Committee for Green Foothills, spoke about specific language in the ordinance and issues regarding creeks and a lack of specificity. Nancy Krosse stated that she has been coming to these meetings for many years for a hillside ordinance that is desperately needed. She asked the Council to have the Planning Commission make some changes so there is more concise language for steeply sloped lots. She spoke about hillside homes in Southern California that have been lost because of the slopes. David McKeever stated that a 15% slope is not very big, and there needs to be more specificity for steeper lots. He asked for the Council to work more on this item. He expressed concern that he won't be able to build onto his home. Rick Guinon stated that he likes many of the requirements but that there needs to be more specificity. He spoke about the need to keep natural trees and rock formations. Oded Haner clarified the difference between degrees and percentages. He stated that 15% is not very steep, but 30 degrees is quite steep. He spoke about the number of people he spoke to who didn't know about this item or who don't understand it. He spoke about issues with the data used in the Negative Declaration. Tom Tomquist stated that there is too much confusion for the Council to make a decision tonight with not enough informed residents. He spoke about ongoing projects in Laurel Way, and issues with the language in the ordinance. Maylen Valois noted that she received a notification about tonight's meeting and is more confused than she was at the beginning. She stated that there are important questions about how this ordinance will impact existing homes and accessory dwelling units. Linda Brouchoud agrees with having the reports upfront. She expressed concern with some unintended consequences of the proposal such as nonconformity, the ability to expand, and an overly difficult process. Lillian Wasserstein expressed concern with the lack of clarity in the ordinance language. She stated that she does not support a hillside ordinance. Tori Newman stated that his lot has a steep slope to the creek at the very back of a flat property, which places his lot under this ordinance. He stated that he does not support regulating lots that do not have a very steep slope. JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY BOARD/ April 13, 2015 PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING MINUTES PAGE 12 MINUTE BOOK NO. 65 Page No. 369