04 - Laserfiche WebLink

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