CCMIN12052017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Brown stated with the newly found information regarding using the traditional methodology of 100 vertical feet from the ridgeline eliminates the need for the definition of "spur" and asked whether it will be left out of the discussion. Community Development Director Beaudin responded affirmatively, adding staff recommends the ridgeline definition coupled with the slope mapping resulting in the composite map. He stated land elements that come off in a perpendicular fashion from the ridgelines are rendered undevelopable. Staff does not recommend additional definitions now. Councilmember Brown noted it makes sense that staff is trying to provide clarity to land owners in the southeast hills and throughout the City, as Measure PP might be in effect. She commented positively on the methodology, mapping, and colors, but expressed concerns regarding language that "City Council accepts the methodology and mapping of the southern hills, pursuant to Measure PP, and finds that it can be employed in other parts of the City whenever mapping of the hillsides is desired", wondering why "can" is used, when the City is looking to provide clarity and definity. Community Development Director Beaudin reported Measure PP applies broadly, but the Council workplan item focused on the southeast hills. Staff expects other development applications that are subject to Measure PP. follow the recommended methodology. The staff report speaks to the fact this is a "birds eye" view and additional mapping would be required with any development application, which would be detailed and site-specific. He confirmed the methodology is being used to follow what the voters put in place, not to change it. Councilmember Pentin added Council directed staff to map the southeast hills. If someone brings forth a development in another area of the City, and falling under Measure PP, their land will need to be mapped using the same methodology. City Manager Nelson Fialho reported the workplan item was narrow, in terms of southeast hills, but if Council wants staff to map other areas, staff can do so. Councilmember Pentin felt staff has done what Council directed and if anyone else applies for a development, under Measure PP, they can pay for the additional mapping. In response to Councilmember Narum regarding whether property owners of the southeast hills were notified and provided an opportunity to comment, Community Development Director Beaudin responded, affirmatively. Staff would require detailed mapping if a property owner intended on building ten units, as staff would need to ensure Measure PP is adhered to. Gaining access to some of the development sites in the southeast hills would likely require navigating restricted areas and the definition of structures and roads will be Council's purview and will likely require some amount of mapping, even for a ten-unit project or less. If an applicant can show clearly that structures and roads required for access to a development of ten or fewer, staff could waive the mapping requirement. Councilmember Narum wondered if the City would not look to the policies of the General Plan in terms of prohibiting building on ridge tops, and Community Development Director Beaudin stated the way the composite map played itself out, it is difficult to imagine a situation where getting access to many of the sites would not involve the protected Measure PP areas as shown on Attachment 8. City Manager Fialho added if a development is ten units or less, it is exempt from Measure PP and staff would refer to the General Plan requirements in terms of protecting hillsides, view sheds and other natural features; it would take precedence over mapping. Mayor Thorne noted there were no speakers wishing to address Council. Councilmember Olson stated, considering the methodology in place, he doubts a project will get past the Planning Commission or Council without considering the technology. City Council Minutes Page 4 of 7 December 5, 2017