17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Discussion The following discussion responds to the Planning Commissions comments. 1. Ridgeline Setback as a Horizontal Plane Planning Commission Comment Consider defining the ridgeline setback as a horizontal plane instead of a ground line. Staff Response Defining the ridgeline setback as a horizontal plane instead of a ground line makes the ordinance more restrictive than the previously proposed language of Measure PP. This wording would not prohibit the City Council and the Planning Commission from exercising its design review authority through the development review and public review processes with visual analyses to locate proposed structures, limit their maximum building height, lower their building pads, etc., to mitigate a potential impact to the view of a hillside or ridgeline. Staff recommends no change to the Section 18.70.070 B. of the proposed code chapter. If the Planning Commission disagrees, staff suggests that the following language be included: No structure (except cupolas, chimneys, or similar appurtenances) on the subject property shall extend above the horizontal plane of the closest ridgeline setback. 2. Exemption Process Planning Commission Comment The Commission is not comfortable with the proposed exemption process for manufactured slopes, streets and roads on slopes greater than a 25-percent grade, and for streets or roads to landlocked properties. Staff Response Staff supports the Planning Commission's direction and has revised the proposed code chapter to remove the exemption process and has also changed the proposed code chapter sections on manufactured slopes and landlocked properties as described below: 2.a. Manufactured Slopes Staff Response Staff revised Section 18.70.070 E. of the proposed code chapter to reflect the Planning Commission's comments as follows: Page 2 of 5