Support for Santa Clarita Development Plan Wavers : Ordinance: Officials face growing pressure from opponents of a city proposal that would impose strict hillside building regulations.

Santa Clarita city officials, faced with mounting pressure from developers, architects and construction workers, are wavering in their support for a proposed ordinance that would strictly limit development on the city’s many hillsides and ridgelines.

Some are now considering a less restrictive alternative, which was submitted to the Santa Clarita City Planning Commission by a coalition opposed to the city’s proposal.

Under the city’s proposal, which would impose some of the strictest hillside building regulations in Southern California, developers would be unable to build houses or shopping centers atop most of the city’s prominent ridges. They would also have to meet strict criteria before being permitted to build on hillsides with grades of 10% or more.

The proposal would replace less stringent Los Angeles County regulations that now apply within the city.

In contrast, developers are proposing that the city adopt the county’s standard, which applies only to areas with grades of 25% or more. They also oppose lowering permitted housing densities in some hilly areas, as suggested by city planners, and classify fewer ridgelines as “significant,” thus leaving the others free for development.

The City Council initially expressed support for the original proposal, which was developed by city planners and a consultant at the urging of residents, but members now appear to be reconsidering.

Council members Jan Heidt and Jill Klajic said Monday they still support the proposal, but Mayor Carl Boyer and council members Howard (Buck) McKeon and Jo Anne Darcy said it should be modified.

“We have to be realistic, otherwise developers won’t want to annex into the city and we’ll have a beautiful inner core, properly sculpted, and surroundings that are absolutely a mess,” Boyer said. “On the other hand, we have to push for the most we can because a lot of the development here has really been bad.”

Heidt said she is leaning toward support for the original proposal because “there has to be something saved for the future,” but added: “I’d like to hear a debate between both sides before I make a decision.”

Since it was unveiled in late September, the city’s proposal has been fiercely debated.

Developers and others in construction-related fields immediately formed the Technical Advisory Group to lobby city officials. Included in the group are representatives of the Newhall Land and Farming Co., American Beauty Homes, Monteverde Development Co. Inc., Pacific Crest Development Corp. and the Los Angeles County Building & Construction Trades Council.

Last week, 11 members of the group presented their proposal for a weaker ordinance to the Planning Commission, which will make recommendations to the City Council on the proposal in December.

“The city’s ordinance will stop growth in the city unless we do something,” Larry Rasmussen, owner of a grading company, told the commission.

“Density should be based on performance, not prescriptions,” said Tom Sutton, an architect and member of the group.

“Our strongest message is that density doesn’t conflict with hillside aesthetics. It shouldn’t be ‘Damn the developers, full speed ahead.’ ”

Monteverde Development has threatened to withdraw its request to have 75 acres in the Saugus area annexed by Santa Clarita if the city adopts the proposal.

City planners have countered the onslaught of opposition by placing ads in local papers featuring retouched photographs of a housing tract on a hillside, showing it as it would look with and without the city’s ordinance. In one picture, 10 houses are silhouetted against the sky atop a ridge. In the other, the houses have been removed from the photograph, providing an unobstructed view of the ridge.

Lynn Harris, assistant city manager in charge of planning, defended the ordinance Monday, saying many residents want to protect the city’s scenic topography.

“If we started the ordinance at slopes of 25%,” Harris said, “some very valuable hillside areas that are important to this community could be leveled.”