Laserfiche WebLink
Under this Interpretation #1, if a property owner wanted to develop more than 10 housing <br />units by subdividing the legal parcel to create more than 10 parcels, such subdivision <br />would be subject to Policy 12.3. Sentence 2 would be interpreted as preventing the serial <br />subdivision of 10 or fewer parcels consecutive times. <br />Interpretation #2: A literal reading of the sentences could result in a severe, and perhaps <br />unintended, restriction on subdivisions in hillside areas of the City. The language in <br />Sentence 1, which discusses "10 or fewer housing units on a single property" and uses <br />the term "legal parcel" (singular rather than plural "parcels"), could be read to mean that <br />no subdivision can occur in order to be exempt from the Initiative's Policy 12.3. <br />Effectively, this approach would mean that no more than 10 housing units could be built <br />on just one parcel, most commonly seen in situations like aten-unit apartment complex. <br />Under this reading of Sentence 1, if a property owner wanted to subdivide property to <br />create 10 parcels for 10 housing units, or even 2 parcels for 2 housing units, then the <br />development of the units would no longer be on a "single property" and therefore subject <br />to Policy 12.3. That reading would result in severe subdivision restrictions on hillside <br />properties, and appears to be contradicted by Sentence 3, which reflects the proponents' <br />intent to exempt 10 or fewer housing units on "legal parcels" (plural). <br />Interpretation #3: Another interpretation of the language in Sentence 2, "... sub-dividing <br />... to approve more than 10 housing units is not allowed", could be read to apply to all <br />property within the City, not just those in the hill areas. A person supporting this <br />interpretation might claim that the Purpose statement language about "uncontrolled <br />growth" and "overall quality of life" reinforces such an interpretation. <br />Such reading, however, is strongly discredited by the normal rules of statutory <br />construction where all provisions of the statute should be read together. Here, Sentence <br />also uses the term "legal parcel" and states that housing developments often of fewer <br />units on a legal parcel are exempt from Policy 12.3. In that Policy 12.3 is expressly <br />directed at properties with slopes of greater than 25% or within 100 vertical feet of <br />ridgeline, the restriction on subdividing is not applicable city wide. Additional support <br />for that position lies with the title of Policy 12.3, "Ridgelines and hillsides shall be <br />protected."; as well as the statement of reasons to "Protect our scenic hills..." <br />Overall, the plain language of the text of the Initiative could lead to difficult practical <br />application (Interpretation #2), or an application that runs contrary to the normal rules of <br />statutory interpretation and the statement of reasons (Interpretation #3). A broader <br />reading, which gives equal weight to the initiative and statement of reasons, provides an <br />approach which harmonizes all three sentences (Interpretation #1). This is the <br />interpretation used in the preceding analyses. <br />20 <br />