The former San Benito County Board of Supervisors’ last-minute
decision to approve the controversial Hillside Ordinance could soon
be overturned, with at least three of the five county supervisors
saying they will reject the ordinance if key changes aren’t
made.
Hollister – The former San Benito County Board of Supervisors’ last-minute decision to approve the controversial Hillside Ordinance could soon be overturned, with at least three of the five county supervisors saying they will reject the ordinance if key changes aren’t made.
Two of the five supervisors, Jaime De La Cruz and Anthony Botelho, have been against the ordinance that would limit the size and number of homes that can be built on the county’s hillsides since the beginning. And one supervisor, Reb Monaco, was the sole dissenting vote when the former board approved the ordinance in December.
As it currently stands, the ordinance restricts subdivisions of more than four homes on hillsides with a slope of 15 percent or more. It would also impose limits of 28 feet in height and 10,000 square feet in floor area on homes built on these hillsides.
The supervisors have said they will be keeping an open mind until the county planning commission comes forward with a recommendation, which won’t happen until after the last of four public workshops the commission has been holding since March. The final workshop on the issue will be April 20.
In the past, the planning commission has opposed the Hillside Ordinance, recommending to the old board that it reject the ordinance pending further review. The board, however, voted 3-1 to pass the ordinance anyway.
Supervisor Pat Loe, the only remaining supervisor who voted in favor of the ordinance in December, said Monday her past vote would not be affecting her next one, and that she would be waiting for the planning commission’s report just like everyone else.
“Basically I’m just kind of waiting to see what the planning commission is coming up with,” she said.
Supervisor Don Marcus, one of three new supervisors seated in January, put the Hillside Ordinance back on the board’s agenda for discussion just over one month after the old board voted 3-1 to give the ordinance its final approval. Because of the divisive nature of the ordinance and the large number of constituents who had been disappointed with the old board’s decision, Marcus said, he was able to convince Board Chairman Reb Monaco to put a rehashing of the ordinance on a January agenda.
“It was very important to me to make sure that the public felt upon conclusion that all of their concerns were heard in forming such a restrictive document,” Marcus said.
Monaco said yesterday he wanted to see several problems with the ordinance addressed before he would consider changing his vote, most notably the percent of slope that would qualify an area for hillside restrictions and a clear delineation between a hilltop and a hillside.
“I have some real questions about the grade issue itself. It’s not consistent to introduce the 15 percent grade when everywhere else in the county is 30,” Monaco said. “Also the definition between hillside and hilltop… it’s not clear. I think that hilltop and hillside construction should be looked at on an individual basis.”
Other supervisors have also expressed concern over the ordinance. Botelho has long been an opponent of the ordinance that would limit construction of homes on hillsides, and De La Cruz has said repeatedly he would like to see the ordinance disappear.
“This is a very important issue because it’s not a financial tool but it has a major economic effect on the community,” he said Monday. “If you stop growth, if you limit growth, does a house provide more dollars or less dollars? We’re going to revisit it, it will go through public sessions, but if it was before the board today and I had a vote on it, I would vote to kill it.”
Botelho was on vacation out of the country Monday.
Since a unanimous board vote on Jan. 25 sent the ordinance back to the planning commission for review, the planning department has held three public workshops to discuss the issue. According to Assistant Planning Director Fred Goodrich, the first workshop was well-attended, though only a few people showed up for the second and third forums.
Among those who did attend the meetings, Goodrich said, “It was sort of an even split” between those who supported the ordinance and those calling for an end to it.
Planning Commissioner Dan DeVries agreed the audience was split, but Planning Commissioner Mark Tognazzini said Monday most of the people he remembered attending the workshops had been opposed to the ordinance.
“My read on it was it was pretty much a consensus that it needs to be watered down more or not (happen) at all,” Tognazzini said of the last three public forums.
“After the planning commission compiles all the comments that were made by the public, they’ll set out what they want to do, whether it’s make adjustments or recommend the board rescind the ordinance,” Goodrich said.
Although the planning commission had recommended the old board reject the ordinance as it is written at a Nov. 3 supervisors’ meeting, all but Monaco and Supervisor Richard Scagliotti, who was absent, approved the ordinance anyway on Dec. 7.
While supervisors say they’ll be taking the planning commission’s recommendations to heart this time around, it’s still too early to say what their final decision will be.
“You’re talking about a different board and a different planning commission,” said Tognazzini. “So I guess they’ve got to evaluate it by the way they see it and the feedback they’ve gotten.”
Jessica Quandt covers politics for the Free Lance. Reach her at 831-637-5566 ext. 330 or at [email protected].
