PC 04/14/82 - Laserfiche WebLink

the lifetime of the ordinance and the ordinance could bend to political pressures. She said this is a function of the legislation. She urged preservation of slopes. She addressed the Federal Bulletin 139A, page 19. She said that 85~ of landslides have been on slopes steeper than 15~. She stated that Daryl Hird, USGS, Menlo Park, has reported that the Calaveras fault is an active one. Further she spoke to single family dwelling units having two paying guests. She stated she doesn't agree with this; further she requested that no properties be allowed to develop without sewerage and that no septic tanks be allowed. Mrs. Tracy felt that a hold harmless agreement should include liability for development in the event of a fire, earthquake or landslide and this would also apply to sewer and water lines. She further addressed road standards, and the implementation of solar design. She stated that aesthetic standards are essential. She stated that in Section 2-2.32.12b it allows the Planning Director to waive standards without making findings required. She said this is potentially dangerous. Bill Hirst, 478 Ewing Drive, addressed the density consideration stating that he has a problem with that. He said many of the pro- perties have participated in water and sewer assessment districts for 10-12 years and that to completely preclude or disallow any site of greater slope than 25~ would confiscate these parcels and that as a lawyer he would advise his clients to file suit. He said he did concur with Mrs. Tracy regarding the Planning Commission and City Council should be extremely careful not to invest too much discretion in the staff, but he was more concerned with the validity of the ordinance. Gil Barbee, 147 Bernal Avenue, gave an example assuming the ordi- nance would apply from I-580 to Castlewood, 2000 acres, approximately 75g is over 25~ slope. He said the Calaveras fault would wipe out development of a large part of the western portion of Foothill and that even if you eliminated the fault one is talking about 200 units using the current slope calculations there would not be much developable land in the entire region. He asked that the ordinance consider properties having over 25~ slope. He said no one is going to pay to put improvements in on property which will not yield developable parcels. Chairperson Getty asked Mr. Barbee if he was suggesting the ordinance apply only to the area west of Foothill to the ridge. Mr. Barbee said, yes, his proposal would be that the ordinance apply only to the pro- perties west of Foothill Road. Lee Henderson, 2870 Foothill Road, verbally presented his concerns as contained his written comments of April 10, 1982, which are part of the record. He addressed Section 2-2.32.08a(5). Mr. Harris stated that this section does have a loophole in it and will be -5- .. _.... . _.__.__._._ .,_ .. ._. __.... _..__.. _.._._ .__. _... _ ... .. ~ ._.. ..T_. _ _.