3B Public Hearing 2012 0416 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Excerpt of the Draft Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of March 1 S, 2012 Page 3 of 4 Commissioner Reed asked who on staff would be able to discuss the ordinance requirements if a homeowner approached with questions. Secretary Barros said that the planners have all been briefed on the ordinance and would probably handle that, but from a practical standpoint, very few single - family properties in the City are large enough to come under the ordinance. She said in her 10 years at the permit counter, she's not yet seen a resident coming in to do 5,000 square feet of landscaping projects on a single - family property. Commissioner Reed commented that the ordinance seems over - complicated, with a lot of provisions that could cause mischief. He said that he's concerned about recommending something that will come back to haunt us. He also said that he personally would not want to have to hire a licensed landscape architect. Commissioner Dlugosh asked whether landscaping included swimming pools. Commissioner Rennie asked whether landscaping is the same as planting material, or whether it includes decks and hadscape areas. Checking Zoning Code Article 3 Definitions, Planner Barros said that landscaping includes planting materials as well as decorative outdoor landscape elements, pools, fountains, water features, paved or decorated surfaces of rock, stone, brick, block or similar material and sculptural elements. Chair Collier said then that all concrete patios would be included as well. Planner Barros reassured the Planning Commission that there have been no issues with any residential properties, whether developer - installed or private. She recalls only four projects that have been subject to this ordinance in the past two years, including Kaiser and some large commercial properties on Teagarden Street. All had licensed landscape architects who readily interpreted the code and worked with staff with no problems. Commissioner Dlugosh said that considering all that's covered by the term "landscaping," the triggers are relatively low. As a consequence, people would have to hire a landscape architect in those cases. He said that under those circumstances, hiring that professional would drive the cost high enough to hit the trigger. He said that bothers him, as does over - burdening residents by making simple projects very complicated and overly expensive. Planner Barros said the Planning Commission and the City Council reviewed the triggers before the ordinance was passed in 2010, and because they are part of the State mandate, the triggers are not something over which the City has any discretion in any case. At this time, Alameda County Waste Management Authority is asking all local jurisdictions to use the same triggers. Commissioner Rennie went back to applicability of the ordinance to a single - family property. He said that it's not hard to hit the trigger point, if a homeowner with a 6,000- square -foot lot has a home with a 1,000- square -foot footprint. That leaves 5,000 square feet on the lot. He said questions may not come to the counter because people don't think they have to come to the City to change their garden or plant some trees. Chair Collier said most projects that affect coverage of a lot require submission of plot plans. Upon reviewing a plot plan, the Building Department staff would be able to advise whether the project requires conformance with the landscape ordinance. Commissioner Rennie said he understands the plot plan requirement, but he's not talking about a building. Planner Barros said the scenario he described would not trigger the ordinance. She also noted that most single - family homes in San Leandro are on 5,000- square -foot lots, and most houses have footprints of about 1,500 square feet. She said staff reviewed this data while working on the draft ordinance in 2009, including discussions with the Planning Commission. Again, she reiterated that these triggers are mandated by the State.