Loading...
2500 Planning - Landscape Plan Requirements for Administratively Approved Projects & LandscapingNEW BUSINESS CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION RELATIVE TO THE REQUIREMENT OF A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR SWIMMING POOLS APPROVED OVER THE COUNTER. City Manager Nealis presented the staff report providing background regarding this matter and the Planning Commission's recommendation that staff require a landscape plan for swimming pools approved over the counter. Discussion ensued regarding this recommendation. In response to Councilmember Black, • City Manager Nealis explained that pools are usually landscaped along with the construction of the pool and that staff will inspect the landscaping I -year after planting to assure that it is planted and being sustained. Councilmember Black also commented on the height of trees. City Manager Nealis explained that trees would be required to be maintained at 25 feet in height .and not grow past the roofline of the residential structure. Hearing no further discussion, Mayor Pernell called for a motion. Councilmember Heinsheimer moved that the City Council approve the recommendation from the Planning Commission relative to the requirement of a landscape plan for swimming pools approved over the counter. Councilmember Hill seconded the motion; which carried unanimously. ITEMS FROM STAFF REPORT ON LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS. Commissioner Witte provided written comments regarding the options for discussion noted in the staff report. Planning Director Schwartz presented the staff report providing background regarding the City Council's request that the Planning Commission study landscaping requirements for administratively approved projects and outlining the current Planning Commission practice of imposing landscaping conditions on discretionary approvals, current staff practice relative to over the counter approvals and options for discussion that would serve to incorporate landscaping requirements on administratively approved projects. Commissioner Witte reported that he likes the idea of a "compliance statement" if in staff's judgment a landscape plan is not needed. He also indicated that he concurs with all of staff's comments outlined in the items for discussion. Commissioner Witte indicated that he would prefer that staff used the words to screen in lieu of to obscure when referring to an effect of landscaping. Discussion ensued regarding the items for discussion noted in the staff report and the follow- up inspection to ensure that landscaping requirements are adhered to. Planning Director Schwartz commented on the time it would take to inspect the over the counter approvals that required landscaping and asked the Commission for direction on how extensive plans and follow-up they would like staff to implement. Commissioners concurred that a bond and post planting inspections should not be required for over the counter approvals. Commissioners discussed landscaping, requirements for swimming pools that are approved over the counter. Commissioners also discussed hardscape features that are associated with swimming pools. Following discussion, Commission recommended that the City Council direct staff to require landscaping plans for pools that are administratively approved. ITEMS FROM STAFF REPORT ON LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY 'APPROVED PROJECTS. Commissioner Witte requested that the item be continued to the next meeting. Hearing no objection, Chairman Sommer so ordered. LANDSCAPING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS AND LANDSCAPING CONDITIONS FOR RESOLUTIONS. Mayor Heinsheimer introduced the item. Commissioner Witte commented on his suggestion that landscaping plans be required for administratively approved projects with water conservation and views in mind. He stated that he would also like to see that administratively approved projects meet development standards imposed by the Planning Commission. Minutes City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting 10-11-04 -2- In response to Mayor eimer, Commissioner Witte stated that the scape plan would be an attachment to tiie uasic plan submitted for over the countcL approval. Mayor Heinsheimer commented on this proposed process and indicated that he feels that it may undermine the idea of an over the counter approval. Commissioner Witte expressed that a landscape plan should be required for swimming pools that do not require grading because the Commission would impose landscape requirements for swimming pools that come before them that do require grading. Discussion ensued regarding imposing landscape requirements on administratively approved projects. City Manager Nealis commented on the memorandum from the City Attorney relative to this subject that had been placed before the Council and Commission this evening. He reported that the memorandum indicates that if staff were to require a landscape plan to be submitted for an over the counter approvals such as a swimming pools or barns that do not require grading, that staff could condition or require certain types of landscaping but not beyond the scope of the proposed development. Discussion ensued regarding the difficulty in determining what constitutes the development site on these types of projects. Discussion ensued regarding the standard conditions for landscaping that are placed in Resolutions by the Commission. Councilmember Lay commented on the City's Landscape Committee that reviews the landscape plans when they have been required by the Commission to make sure that they are consistent with the provisions set forth by the Commission. He indicated that the feels that staff could have the authority and responsibility to review landscape plans for over the counter projects if they feel that one is required. Discussion ensued regarding the challenges in determining the extent or impact of the project in determining the extent of a landscape plan submitted for over the counter approval. Councilmember Black commented on the memorandum from the City Attorney and indicated that he would like to make a motion. Commissioner Witte indicated that he would like to further discuss this subject. He commented on certain types of trees that may block views and also the development standards that are imposed by the Commission. He indicated that he would like staff to review over the counter projects with the development standards in mind. Discussion ensued regarding the over the counter review process administered by staff and the Commission requirement for a landscape plan on specific development projects. In response to Councilmember Lay, City Manager Nealis explained that in addition to the standard landscaping conditions, the Commission has started to limit vegetation associated with the development to the ridge height of the proposed structures. Councilmember Lay suggested that staff apply the standard landscape conditions to a landscape plan requested for an over the counter approval project. In response to Councilmember Hill, Commissioner Witte explained that his suggestion that staff require a landscape plan for over the counter projects is driven by the desire to limit future view impairment issues. He also explained that he feels that the normal development standards should apply to over the counter projects. Commissioner Witte commented on the requirement that staff determine that a property can sustain a future stable during administrative approval. City Manager Nealis explained that this requirement is proposed in the draft Zoning Code which is currently under review by the City Council. Further discussion ensued regarding the proposal that staff require landscape plans during administrative approval. City Manager Nealis explained the process of reviewing administrative plans and that sometimes these plans are submitted by residents or their representatives with the expectation of taking them to the County for their building permits that same day. Those in attendance discussed how to best require landscape plans for over the counter projects and the discretion that staff would have to require a landscape plan. They discussed concerns about how extensive these plans should be. City Manager Nealis explained the sign -off certifications related to erosion control and roofing material and suggested that staff could create a similar statement for landscaping for over the counter projects. Councilmember Black commented on types of landscaping that residents may desire which may included trees that may block neighbors views in the future and indicated that for this reason he feels that a landscape plan for over the counter projects should be required. He stated that a landscape plan could cost $180.00. Discussion ensued regarding the suggestion of requiring a landscape compliance statement for administratively approved projects. City Attorney Jenkins summarized the issues and indicated that a statement could reflect if a resident does not have a landscape plan or does not intend to provide one then they cannot plant anything that violates the standard landscaping Minutes City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting 10-11-04 -3- conditions such as native, drought resistant and not exceed a certain height. He said that this would be enforceable in the same manner as requiring a landscape plan. Commissioner Hankins commented on screening of swimming pools and indicated that she feels that this should be required. Mayor Heinsheimer indicated that he feels that there should be a clear indication to the public regarding these requirements and suggested that staff prepare a report incorporating the suggestions regarding landscaping for administratively approved projects discussed this evening. Mayor Pro Tern Pernell suggested that landscaping requirements should take fire safety into consideration. After discussion, staff was directed to prepare a report for the Commission to consider for recommendation to the City Council, regarding landscape plan/landscape compliance statement submittal procedures adhering to standard Commission landscaping plan requirements for projects that are administratively approved. ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION 'Commissioner Margeta suggested that the Commission consider meeting at 6:30 p.m. instead of 7:30. p.m., Commissioners discussed their meeting time and directed that staff prepare the appropriate documents to change the Commission meeting time from 7:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. ''CONSIDERATION OF MEMORANDUM FROM PLANNING COMMISSIONER ARVEL WITTE REGARDING LANDSCAPING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS. \n t Commissioner Witte commented on the suggestions outlined in his memorandum dated July 28, 2004 related to his desire to have landscaping plans for administratively approved projects. Commissioner DeRoy indicated that the Commission might want to wait to discuss this issue further after the RHCA Landscaping meeting in September. Commissioner Margeta indicated that he feels that landscape review for over the counter projects is not necessary because of the nature of the projects that are administratively reviewed. Commissioner Witte commented on the administrative approval of a recent pool and the subsequent landscaping that occurred and expressed concern about future view impairment that may occur due to trees that were planted. Commissioner Witte commented on the view obstructions that have occurred in the City over the years. In response to Chairman Sommer, City Manager Nealis commented on the upcoming meeting with two members of the Planning Commission and two members of the RHCA Board of Directors. He indicated that there would be also an upcoming joint meeting of the Planning Commission and the City Council. He explained that the City Attorney has always reminded the Commission that landscaping requirements must have a nexus to the development that is being reviewed and approved. He explained the provision in the Municipal Code to address view impairment. Commissioner DeRoy indicated that she feels that in the case of an administrative approval of a pool that a condition could be attached that indicates that any landscaping associated with screening the pool cannot obstruct views. There being no further discussion, this subject was continued to a later date following the Planning Commission Ad Hoc Subcommittee/RHCA landscaping meeting in September and the City Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting in October. 4 DATE: TO: ATTN: FROM: SUBJECT: Cii 0/ ie0f/LS J�PP INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 8A Mtg. Date: 4/25/05 APRIL 25, 2005 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION RELATIVE TO THE REQUIREMENT OF A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR SWIMMING POOLS APPROVED OVER THE COUNTER. BACKGROUND A Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission was held on October 11, 2004. At that meeting the attached staff report regarding landscaping requirements for administratively approved projects was presented. The minutes from that meeting are also attached for reference. As a result, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to further consider this subject and make a recommendation to the City Council. Prior to presenting this subject to the Planning Commission, meetings were held between Commissioners Witte and DeRoy, staff, the City's landscape consultant and two members of the Rolling Hills Community Association Board of Directors, at the request of the RHCA. The Planning Commission considered this subject at their February 15, 2005 meeting. Attached is the staff report presented to the Planning Commission, and minutes from that meeting. After discussion and deliberation, the Planning Commission suggested that staff require landscaping plans at the time an over the counter (administrative) approval is sought for a swimming pool. Pursuant to the recently amended Zoning Ordinance, pools which are 800 square feet or larger (water surface area) require a Site Plan Review before the Planning Commission, and therefore the landscaping would be addressed at the Commission level. Pools that are less than 800 square feet will continue to be approved over -the counter. Pursuant to aD ®Pnnied on Recyr-.Irdd P.rt ir:r the Planning Commission recommendation, staff would require that a landscaping plan be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit for the construction of a pool. Staff and City landscaping. consultant would review the plan. The Commission left the implementation of this process to staff's discretion. Staff is proposing to place a condition on the swimming pool approval for building permit and on the landscaping plan that was submitted and approved that the landscaping scheme be completed within one year of completion of the. swimming pool, (from the receipt of a final inspection). The applicant would be able to submit a landscaping plan at the time he/she submits plans for staff's review for plan check, or at the time the final plans are submitted for staff's approval for the purpose of obtaining the actual building permit. This will allow the applicant time to prepare a landscaping plan between the plan check and the final building permit review period. A year after completion of the swimming pool, staff would inspect the property to verify compliance with the landscaping plan. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council consider this report and provide direction to staff. City efi? PP,,.S Jd,PP INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com TO: HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS DATE: FEBRUARY 15, 2005 BACKGROUND At the January 18, 2005 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission continued this item to tonight's meeting. Attached is the staff report provided to the Commission at the 1/ 18/05 meeting. TO: City 012 P?„y NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD (3101377.1521 ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: 1310)377.72aa E mad: cilyolrhl� aol.com FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS DATE: JANUARY 18, 2005 BACKGROUND A Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission was held on October 11, 2004. At that meeting, the attached staff report regarding Landscaping Requirements for Administratively Approved Projects was presented. The minutes from that meeting are also attached for reference. As a result, following discussion, the Planning Commission was requested to further consider this subject and make a recommendation to the City Council. Additionally, prior to presenting this subject to the Planning Commission, discussions were held between Commissioners Witte and Deroy, staff and members of the Rolling Hills Community Association Board of Directors at the request of the RHCA. The idea of landscaping requirements for administratively approved projects is a new concept and would serve to provide appropriate direction to staff when approving land use projects that do not require review and approval by the Planning Commission. CURRENT PLANNING COMMISSION PRACTICE Currently, the Planning Commission may impose landscaping conditions on discretionary approvals, such as Site Plan Reviews, Conditional Use Permits, and Variances through the. Resolution of approval. Landscaping requirements are normally specified when the project involves grading, is visible from the road, is of large scale or otherwise warrants landscaping conditions. The Commission regulates the height of new vegetation in connection with a project under consideration by limiting the height of the vegetation, for example, not to exceed the ridgeline of the structure, or by specifying certain height, such as 20 feet or 25 feet. The Commission may also require that a security deposit be deposited with the City in the amount of the estimated cost of the landscaping, including labor, material and irrigation cost plus 15% for time allowance. The bond is refunded to the applicant two years after the planting is completed, or at such time (after the two years) when it is determined by staff that the landscaping meets the requirements of the Resolution and that it is well established and in a good condition. Following are examples of the landscaping conditions that have been imposed during the discretionary review process: "Landscaping shall De designed, using mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the sports court". "The landscape plan shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water efficient landscaping requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code". "Prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit two copies of a preliminary landscape plan shall be submitted for review by the Planning Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of the views of neighboring properties. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. A security in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a drainage, grading and building permits and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained security will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition". "All graded areas shall be landscaped. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing trees and shrubs and provide for natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed stable and corral building pad". "Landscaping for the project shall be designed using native trees and shrubs. The trees, when planted, shall be mature and which at full maturity shall not obstruct views of neighboring properties but, obscure the stable". "A landscaping plan for the graded and disturbed areas must be submitted for review by the Planning Department prior to issuing grading or building permits. To the maximum extend practicable, native trees and other native plants shall be utilized. If trees are to be used in the landscaping scheme for this project, they shall be mature when planted and which at full maturity shall not exceed 25 feet in height; shrubs shall be planted so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the stable and residential structure on site". CURRENT STAFF PRACTICE Currently, there are not any requirements to submit landscape plans in conjunction with administratively approved projects (over-the-counter). Administratively approved projects generally consist of smaller additions to the residence (less than 1,000 sq.ft. or not to exceed 25% of the size of the structure, whichever is greater), reconstruction of structure damaged by fire or by other natural casualty, stables and/or corrals that do not require grading, swimming pools less than 800 square feet in size, outdoor structures, such as barbeques, fire places, gazebos, playground equipment, hardscape, drainage devices, driveways, maximum 3' high walls and similar construction that do not require grading. An opinion from the City Attorney on whether or not staff may require landscaping plans and/or place conditions on developments approved over-the-counter supports the suggestion that stall inc., exercise the same power as Hie Commission. However, the landscaping requirements would have to be related and limited to the subject development, not to the entire property, and specific criteria could be imposed on new landscaping in connection with the development under consideration, not on already existing landscaping. • OPTIONS FOR DISCUSSION There are several options available to the Commission to discuss that would serve to incorporate landscaping requirements on administratively approved projects. Below are some suggestions for discussion by the Planning Commission. The Commission is free to entertain any or all of these suggestions, or to make other suggestions for discussion as deemed appropriate. 1. Upon submittal of a project for administrative approval project, staff would identify the limits of the area affected by the construction and affix a stamp to every over-the-counter approval with specified landscaping conditions. 2. Staff could develop a written statement, which would have to be signed by the person seeking the administrative approval. The statement would list specific landscaping conditions for the affected area. If the signatory were not the property owner, staff would mail a copy of the signed statement with a form cover letter to the property owner informing them that these conditions must be met. 3. Require that a landscaping plan be submitted with the proposed project for the affected area subject to specific conditions. In considering any of the above options, or others that may be suggested at the meeting, it is recommended that the Commission consider which of the following conditions should be implemented with the above landscaping plan notification and/or plan requirement: • "Planting is required to screen the proposed development" and/or • "Any new planting in connection with this approval, to the maximum extent feasible, shall be drought and fire resistant and consist of native vegetation" and/or • "Any new planting in connection with this approval shall include water efficient irrigation system and utilize means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray" and/or • "Any new planting in connection with this approval shall at full maturity not exceed the ridge line of the residence". RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider this matter and provide direction to staff. b TO: c14, o/12ffi„g iiM NO 2 PORTUG1IESE EEIsD ROAD ROLLING HILLS. CLLIF 90274 (310i277-1 21 FAX. t2:21577.7?&8 E mad. Ohplth.. acI Corn Agenda Item No: 4-B Mtg. Date: 10-11-04 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE -PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS AND LANDSCAPING CONDITIONS FOR RESOLUTIONS. DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2004 BACKGROUND At the Planning Commission meeting held August 17, 2004, Planning Commissioner Arvel Witte presented the attached information relative to requiring landscaping plans to be submitted for projects that are administratively approved over the counter. At that meeting, Commissioners briefly discussed this subject but elected to continue the discussion to the Joint Meeting with the City Council. Currently, the Planning Commission requires property owners to submit formal landscaping plans for the majority of discretionary land development projects (Site Plan Review/CUP/Variances) after a project has been approved. Generally, the Planning Commission requires landscaping plans when projects involve grading or large areas of disturbance. Bonding for labor and all material, plus 15%, is usually required by the Commission. Currently, there is no authority for the City staff to require a resident to submit a formal landscaping plan for development that is administratively approved over the counter. These projects generally include barns that do not require grading, swimming pools, or additions that fall below the threshold of Site Plan Review and also do not involve grading. The landscaping determinations for these projects are left to the discretion of property owners. Additionally, Commissioner Witte has submitted the attached email relative to landscaping language for resolutions. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the City Council and Planning Commission discuss these subjects and provide appropriate direction to staff. CRN:mlk 10-11-041nnd scnhr-s tn.,inr Q_j. TO: Gig /JLa JIft NO 2 POR1UGpi`.E EEND POLO R011.1146 HILLS. CAI. F. Kt: 7 4 1310)3:7.1521 FAX. 13101377-72E6 E•ma,I C i>o ""aoI corn Agenda Item No: 12-A Mtg. Date: 08-17-04 HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF MEMORANDUM FROM PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRMAN ARVEL %VITTE REGARDING LANDSCAPING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS. DATE: AUGUST 17, 2004 BACKGROUND Attached to this staff report is a memorandum from Planning Commission Chairman Arvel Witte regarding requiring landscaping plans for projects that are administratively approved "over the counter" by City staff. Currently, landscaping plans are only required when the Planning Commission makes a determination to require a landscaping plan as part of a discretionary review approval (Site Plan Review/Variance/CUP). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the Planning Commission discuss this and provide appropriate direction to staff or an appropriate recommendation to the City Council. CRN:mlk 4 09:25 1G:3-07cS2 POSr [1 7/28/04 Craig: Regarding our conversation this morning. I like the idea of having the Administrative process empowered to impose a tree height limit in a "landscape plan" as a necessary condition. What 1 don't like, is that it ma not be sufficient. By this I mean, if 15 feet blocks a neighbors view, then} we may be shooting ourselves in the foot, so to speak, in the implementation of the View Impairment Process when we tell the offender that they've got to cut back to 12 feet. I think I like better, "15 feet or less depending on the potential for obstructing the viewscape Verdes / Catalina Island ecosystem is is aldvised,�� alive plants of the some limits on the tree varietiespermitted.) )be we need to set Specifically: In our present Administrative approval process, landscaping is not required, for example,_for a pool. This situation may not adequately support the Planning process. We need to consider how this process can be improved_ Besides tree height, we may have to requires that the existing slopes supporting a pool pad be protected by plants to minimize erosion. A restriction on watering design may also be a consideration. More generally: Explore whether or not the Administrative a process is adequate to support the overall Planning Ppro�al areas other than landscaping.. Cite possible areas for improvement objectives P g-• discuss and propose solutions. I think we have enough here to discuss at Planning Commission meetin . cf.1i g Arvel Subj: For the joint meeting agenda Date: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 1:26:42 PM From: Witte A B To: Cityofrh Craig: I would like to have placed on the agenda for discussion, what I might call a minimum restriction on landscaping on the Site Plan boundary, in the form of a Standard Condition for resolutions, something worded as the following: "that future landscape development, whether approved or not shall not obstruct neighbors" scenic vistas." I believe that other more restrictive Standard Conditions are being. reviewed by our Ciiy attorney following. issues raised recently by the Landscape Committee meeting with the Association. I trust that those considerations will also be open to discussion. Regards. Arvel 9/29/04 America Online : _ Cityoirh Page 1 Q 4 r 3-6 ITEMS FROM STAFF REPORT ON LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS. Commissioner Witte provided written comments regarding the options for discussion noted in the staff report. Planning Director Schwartz presented the staff report providing background regarding the City Council's request that the Planning Commission study landscaping requirements for administratively approved projects and outlining the current Planning Commission practice of imposing landscaping conditions on discretionary approvals, current staff practice relative to over the counter approvals and options for discussion that would serve to incorporate landscaping requirements on administratively approved projects. Commissioner Witte reported that he likes the idea of a "compliance statement" if in staff's ' judgment a landscape plan is not needed. He also indicated that he concurs with all of staff's comments outlined in the items for discussion. Commissioner Witte indicated that he would prefer that staff used the words to screen in lieu of to obscure when referring to an effect of landscaping. Discussion ensuea .._barding the items for discussion noted in thr .staff report and the follow- up inspection to ensure that landscaping requirements are adhered to. Planning Director Schwartz commented on the time it would take to inspect the over the counter approvals that required landscaping and asked the Commission for direction on how extensive plans and follow-up they would like staff to implement. Commissioners concurred that a bond and post planting inspections should not be required for over the counter approvals. Commissioners discussed landscaping requirements for swimming pools that are approved over the counter. Commissioners also discussed hardscape features that are associated with swimming pools. Following discussion, Commission recommended that the City Council direct staff to require landscaping plans for pools that are administratively approved. C. LANDSCAPING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS AND LANDSCAPING CONDITIONS FOR RESOLUTIONS. Mayor Heinsheimer introduced the item. Commissioner Witte commented on his suggestion that landscaping plans be required for administratively approved projects with water conservation and views in mind. He stated that he would also like to see that administratively approved projects meet development standards imposed by the Planning Commission. In response to Mayor Heinsheimer, Commissioner Witte stated that the landscape plan would be an attachment to the basic plan submitted for over the counter approval. Mayor Heinsheimer commented on this proposed process and indicated that he feels that it may undermine the idea of an over the counter approval. Commissioner Witte expressed that a landscape plan should be required for swimming pools that do not require grading because the Commission would impose landscape requirements for swimming pools that come before them that do require grading. Discussion ensued regarding imposing landscape requirements on administratively approved projects. City Manager Nealis commented on the memorandum from the City Attorney relative to this subject that had been placed before the Council and Commission this evening. He reported that the memorandum indicates that if staff were to require a landscape plan to be submitted for an over the counter approvals such as a swimming pools or barns that do not require grading, that staff could condition or require certain types of landscaping but not beyond the scope of the proposed development. Discussion ensued regarding the difficulty in determining what constitutes the development site on these types of projects. Discussion ensued regarding the standard conditions for landscaping that are placed in Resolutions by the Commission. Councilmember Lay commented on the City's Landscape Committee that reviews the landscape plans when they have been required by the Commission to make sure that they are consistent with the provisions set forth by the Commission. He indicated that the feels that staff could have the authority and responsibility to review landscape plans for over the counter projects if they feel that one is required. Discussion ensued regarding the challenges in determining the extent or impact of the project in determining the extent of a landscape plan submitted for over the counter approval. Councilmember Black commented on the memorandum from the City Attorney and indicated that he would like to make a motion. Commissioner Witte indicated that he would like to further discuss this subject. He commented on certain types of trees that may block views and also the development standards that are imposed by the Commission. He indicated that he would like staff to review over the counter projects with the development standards in mind. Discussion ensued regarding the over the counter review process administered by staff and the Commission requirement for a landscape plan on specific development projects. In response to Councilmember.Lay, City Manager Nealis explained that in addition to the standard landscaping conditions, the Commission has started to limit vegetation associated with the development to the ridge height of the proposed structures. Councilmember Lay suggested that staff apply the standard landscape conditions to a landscape plan requested for an over the counter approval project. In response to Councilmember Hill, Commissioner Witte explained that his suggestion that staff require a landscape plan for over the counter projects is driven by the desire to limit future view impairment issues. He also explained that he feels that the normal development standards should apply to over the counter projects. Commissioner Witte commented on the requirement that staff determine that a property can sustain a future stable during administrative approval. City Manager Nealis explained that this requirement is proposed in • the draft Zoning Code which is currently under review by the City Council. Further discussion ensued regarding the proposal that staff require landscape plans during administrative approval: City Manager Nealis explained the process of reviewing administrative plans and that sometimes these plans are submitted by residents or their representatives with the expectation of taking them to the County for their building permits that same day. Those in attendance discussed how to best require landscape plans for over the counter projects and the discretion that staff would have to require a landscape plan. They discussed concerns about how extensive these plans should be. City Manager Nealis explained the sign -off certifications related to erosion control and roofing material and suggestedthat staff could create a similar statement for landscaping for over the counter projects. Councilmember l3lack commented on types of landscaping that residents may desire which may included trees that may block neighbors views in the future and indicated that for this reason he feels that a landscape plan for over the counter projects should he required. He stated that a landscape plan could cost $180.00. Discussion ensued regarding the suggestion of requiring a landscape compliance statement for administratively approved projects. City Attorney Jenkins summarized the issues and indicated that a statement could reflect if a resident does not have a landscape plan or does not intend to provide one then they.cannot plant anything that violates the standard landscaping conditions such as native, drought resistant and not exceed a certain height. He said that this would be enforceable in the same manner as requiring a landscape plan. Commissioner Hankins commented on screening of swimming pools and indicated that she feels that this should be required. Mayor Heinsheimer indicated that he feels that there should be a clear indication to the public regarding these requirements and suggested that staff prepare a report incorporating the suggestions regarding landscaping for administratively approved projects discussed this evening. Mayor Pro Tem Pernell suggested that landscaping requirements should take fire safety into consideration. After discussion, staff was directed to prepare a report for the Commission to consider for recommendation to the City Council, regarding landscape plan/landscape compliance statement submittal procedures adhering to standard Commission landscaping plan requirements for projects that are administratively approved. • n Ci1y �l? Pf,. JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityotrh@aol.com TO: HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS DATE: JANUARY 20, 2005 Pursuant to the request of the Planning Commission, listed below are projects that were administratively reviewed and approved since the last report. Additional reports will follow. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for your support. Date approved Address Type of request 10/6/04 6 Eastfield Interior remodel & add 16 sq.ft. 10/12/04 25 Crest Rd. E. Addition 2,312 sq.ft. (less than 25% of size of house) (No grading required) 10/19/04 r 6 Middleridge Ln. Re -roof 10/19/04 2740 PV Dr. N 396 sq.ft. addition . 10/20/04 7 Poppy Trail Re -roof 10/25/04 25 Port. Bnd. Rd. 1,290 sq.ft. addition (less than 25% of size of house); 770 sq.ft. basement; remodel house, driveway & landscaping. (No grading required) 10/28/04 7 Acacia Rd. Re -roof barn 11/12/04 26 Eastfield 138 sq.ft. addition, remodel house 11/12/04 92 Crest Rd. E. Fill in pool 11/30/04 10 Eastfield 332 sq.ft. addition, remodel house 12/1/04 11 Roadrunner Replace drwy., landscaping„ fountain, & deck 12/14/04 • 33 Chuckwagon Rd. 1,500 s.f. pool, 88 s.f. spa, 300 s.f. trellis, step down terraces w/less than 3'walls„ new patio area, and barbecue area. (No grading required) 12/14/04 2958 PV Dr. N. 607 s.f. addition & 364 s.f. pool,(exst. pool to be filled in), re -do patios 12/21/04 6 Crest Road E 1,000 s.f.pool,80 s.f. spa, landscaping, attached trellis, re -do patios 1/5/05 7 Outrider Interior remodel cc: Craig Nealis, City Manager ®Prii ecf on lR- :yclurf PaPe' TO: City We/tiny Jd,F? INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS DATE: JANUARY 18, 2005 BACKGROUND A Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission was held on October 11, 2004. At that meeting, the attached staff report regarding Landscaping Requirements for Administratively Approved Projects was presented. The minutes from that meeting are also attached for reference. As a result, following discussion, the Planning Commission was requested to further consider this subject and make a recommendation to the City Council. Additionally, prior to presenting this subject to the Planning Commission, discussions were held between Commissioners Witte and Deroy, staff and members of the Rolling Hills Community Association Board of Directors at the request of the RHCA. The idea of landscaping requirements for administratively approved projects is a new concept and would serve to provide appropriate direction to staff when approving land use projects that do not require review and approval by the Planning Commission. CURRENT PLANNING COMMISSION PRACTICE Currently, the Planning Commission may impose landscaping conditions on discretionary approvals, such as Site Plan Reviews, Conditional Use Permits, and Variances through the Resolution of approval. Landscaping requirements are normally specified when the project involves grading, is visible from the road, is of large scale or otherwise warrants landscaping conditions. The Commission regulates the height of new vegetation in connection with a project under consideration by limiting the height of the vegetation, for example, not to exceed the ridgeline of the structure, or by specifying certain height, such as 20 feet or 25 feet. The Commission may also require that a security deposit be deposited with the City in the amount of the estimated cost of the landscaping, including labor, material and irrigation cost plus 15% fortime allowance. The bond is refunded to the applicant two years after the planting is completed, or at such time (after the two years) when it is determined by staff that the landscaping meets the requirements of the Resolution and that it is well established and in a good condition. Following are examples of the landscaping conditions that nave been imposed during the discretionary review process: "Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the sports court". "The landscape plan shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water efficient landscaping requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code". "Prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit two copies of a preliminary landscape plan shall be submitted for review by the Planning Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of the views of neighboring properties. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. A security in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a drainage, grading and building permits and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained security will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition". "All graded areas shall be landscaped. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing trees and shrubs and provide for natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed stable and corral building pad". "Landscaping for the project shall be designed using native trees and shrubs. The trees, when planted, shall be mature and which at full maturity shall not obstruct views of neighboring properties but, obscure the stable". "A landscaping plan for the graded and disturbed areas must be submitted for review by the Planning Department prior to issuing grading or building permits. To the maximum extend practicable, native trees and other native plants shall be utilized. If trees are to be used in the landscaping scheme for this project, they shall be mature when planted and which at full maturity shall not exceed 25 feet in height; shrubs shall be planted so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the stable and residential structure on site". CURRENT STAFF PRACTICE Currently, there are not any requirements to submit landscape plans in conjunction with administratively approved projects (over-the-counter). Administratively approved projects generally consist of smaller additions to the residence (less than 1,000 sq.ft. or not to exceed 25% of the size of the structure, whichever is greater), reconstruction of structure damaged by fire or by other natural casualty, stables and/or corrals that do not require grading, swimming pools less than 800 square feet in size, outdoor structures, such as barbeques, fire places, gazebos, playground equipment, hardscape, drainage devices, driveway maximum 3' high walls and simiiau construction that do not require grading. An opinion from the City Attorney on whether or not staff may require landscaping plans and/or place conditions on developments approved over-the-counter supports the suggestion that staff may exercise the same power as the Commission. However, the landscaping requirements would have to be related and limited to the subject development, not to the entire property, and specific criteria could be imposed on new landscaping in connection with the development under consideration, not on already existing landscaping. OPTIONS FOR DISCUSSION There are several options available to the Commission to discuss that would serve to incorporate landscaping requirements on administratively approved projects. Below are some -suggestions for discussion by the Planning Commission. The Commission is free to entertain any or all of these suggestions, or to make other suggestions for discussion as deemed appropriate. 1. Upon submittal of a project for administrative approval project, staff would identify the limits of the area affected by the construction and affix a stamp to every over-the-counter approval with specified landscaping conditions. 2. Staff could develop a written statement, which would have to be signed by the person seeking the administrative approval. The statement would list specific landscaping conditions for the affected area. If the signatory were not the property owner, staff would mail a -copy of the signed statement with a form cover letter to the property owner informing them that these conditions must be met. 3. Require that a landscaping plan be submitted with the proposed project for the affected area subject to specific conditions. In considering any of the above options, or others that may be suggested at the meeting, it is recommended that the Commission consider which of the following conditions should be implemented with the above landscaping plan notification and/or plan requirement: • "Planting is required to screen the proposed development" and/or • "Any new planting in connection with this approval, to the maximum extent feasible, shall be drought and fire resistant and consist of native vegetation" and/or • "Any new planting in connection with this approval shall include water efficient irrigation system and utilize means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray" and/or • "Any new planting in connection with this approval shall at full maturity not exceed the ridge line of the residence". RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider this matter and provide direction to staff. City o/ JlilL .*-1 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityolrhPaol.com Agenda Item No: 4-B Mtg. Date: 10-11-04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS AND LANDSCAPING CONDITIONS FOR RESOLUTIONS. DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2004 BACKGROUND At the Planning Commission meeting held August 17, 2004, Planning Commissioner Arvel Witte presented the attached information relative to requiring landscaping plans to be submitted for projects that are administratively approved over the counter. At that meeting, Commissioners briefly discussed this subject but elected to continue the discussion to the Joint Meeting with the City Council. Currently, the Planning Commission requires property owners to submit formal landscaping plans for the majority of discretionary land development projects (Site Plan Review/CUP/Variances) after a project has been approved. Generally, the Planning Commission requires landscaping plans when projects involve grading or large areas of disturbance. Bonding for labor and all material, plus 15%, is usually required by the Commission. Currently, there is no authority for the City staff to require a resident to submit a formal landscaping plan for development that is administratively approved over the counter. These projects generally include barns that do not require grading, swimming pools, or additions that fall below the threshold of Site Plan Review and also do not involve grading. The landscaping determinations for these projects are left to the discretion of property owners. Additionally, Commissioner Witte has submitted the attached email relative to landscaping language for resolutions. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the City Council and Planning Commission discuss these subjects and provide appropriate direction to staff. CRN:mlk 10-11-041andscape-stn.doc n City ot l2 PP.�g Jd f! NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (3101377-7288 E-mail: cilyolrh@aol.com Agenda Item No: 12-A Mtg. Date: 08-17-04 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF MEMORANDUM FROM PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRMAN ARVEL ,WITTE REGARDING LANDSCAPING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS. " `' . - DATE: AUGUST 17, 2004 BACKGROUND Attached to this staff report is a memorandum from Planning Commission Chairman Arvel Witte regarding requiring landscaping plans for projects that are administratively approved "over the counter" by City staff. Currently, landscaping plans are only required when the Planning Commission makes a determination to require a landscaping plan as part of a discretionary review approval (Site Plan Review/Variance/CUP). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the Planning Commission discuss this and provide appropriate direction to staff or an appropriate recommendation to the City Council. CRN:mlk 08-17-041a ldscnpr.sfn 12t;i 'z'b64 69: 25 • :,16976;492 ROSE PAGE Si 7/28/04 Craig: Regarding our conversation this morning. I like the idea of having the Administrative process empowered to impose a tree height limit in a "landscape plan" as a necessary condition. What I don't like, is that it may not be sufficient. By this I mean, if 15 feet blocks a neighbors view, then we may be shooting ourselves in the foot, so to speak, in the implementation of the View Impairment Process when we tell the offender that they've got to cut back to 12 feet. I think I like better, "15 feet or less depending on the potential for obstructing the viewscape of neighbors.". (Native plants of the Palos Verdes / Catalina Island ecosystem is advised. Maybe we need to set some limits on the tree varieties permitted.) Specifically: In our present Administrative approval process, landscaping is not required, for example, for a pool. This situation may not adequately support the Planning process. We need to consider how this process can be improved_ Besides tree height, we may have to requires that the existing slopes supporting a pool pad be protected by plants to minimize erosion. A restriction on watering design may also be a consideration. More generally: Explore whether or not the Administrative approval process is adequate to support the overall Planning areas other than landscaping.. Cite possible areas for improvement and discuss and propose solutions. I think we have enough here to discuss at Planning Commission meeting. Gam. Arvel Subj: For the joint ....eeting agenda Date: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 1:26:42 PM From: Witte A B To: Cityofrh Craig: I would'likelo have 'placed on the agenda for discussion, what I might call a minimum restriction on landscaping on the Site Plan boundary, in the form of a Standard Condition for resolutions, something<worded as the following: "that future landscape development, whether,approyed or not shall not obstruct neighbors" scenic vistas." +t4,=0.. I believe' that other more restrictive Standard Conditions are being reviewed by our City attorney following issues raised recently by the Landscape Committee meeting with the Association. I trust that those considerations will also be open to discussion. Regards, Arvel 9/29/04 America Online : Cityofrh Page 1 LANDSCAP PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINI' LTIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS A .ANDSCAPING CONDITIONS FOR RES( -IONS. Mayor Heinsheimer introduced the item. Commissioner Witte commented on his suggestion that landscaping plans be required for administratively approved projects with water conservation and views in mind. He stated that he would also like to see that administratively approved projects meet development standards imposed by the Planning Commission. In response to Mayor Heinsheimer, Commissioner Witte stated that the landscape plan would be an attachment to the basic plan submitted for over the counter approval. Mayor Heinsheimer commented on this proposed process and indicated that he feels that it may undermine the idea of an over the counter approval. Commissioner Witte expressed that a landscape plan should be required for swimming pools that do not require grading because the Commission would impose landscape requirements for swimming pools that come before them that do require grading. Discussion ensued regarding imposing landscape requirements on administratively approved projects. City Manager Nealis commented on the memorandum from the City Attorney relative to this subject that had been placed before the Council and Commission this evening. He reported that the memorandum indicates that if staff were to require a landscape plan to be submitted for an over the counter approvals such as a swimming pools or barns that do not require grading, that staff could condition or require certain types of landscaping but not beyond the scope of the proposed development. Discussion ensued regarding the difficulty in determining what constitutes the development site on these types of projects. Discussion ensued regarding the standard conditions for landscaping that are placed in Resolutions by the Commission. Councilmember Lay commented on the City's Landscape Committee that reviews the landscape plans when they have been required by the Commission to make sure that they are consistent with the provisions set forth by the Commission. He indicated that the feels that staff could have the authority and responsibility to review landscape plans for over the counter projects if they feel that one is required. Discussion ensued regarding the challenges in determining the extent or impact of the project in determining the extent of a landscape plan submitted for over the counter approval. Councilmember Black commented on the memorandum from the City Attorney and indicated that he would like to make a motion. Commissioner Witte indicated that he would like to further discuss this subject. He commented on certain types of trees that may block views and also the development standards that are imposed by the Commission. He indicated that he would like staff to review over the counter projects with the development standards in mind. Discussion ensued regarding the over the counter review process administered by staff and the Commission requirement for a landscape plan on specific development projects. In response to Councilmember Lay, City Manager Nealis explained that in addition to the standard landscaping conditions, the Commission has started to limit vegetation associated with the development to the ridge height of the proposed structures. Councilmember Lay suggested that staff apply the standard landscape conditions to a landscape plan requested for an over the counter approval project. In response to Councilmember Hill, Commissioner Witte explained that his suggestion that staff require a landscape plan for over the counter projects is driven by the desire to limit future view impairment issues. He also explained that he feels that the normal development standards should apply to over the counter projects. Commissioner Witte commented on the requirement that staff determine that a property can sustain a future stable during administrative approval. City Manager Nealis explained that this requirement is proposed in the draft Zoning Code which is currently under review by the City Council. Further discussion ensued regarding the proposal that staff require landscape plans during administrative approval. City Manager Nealis explained the process of reviewing administrative plans and that sometimes these plans are submitted by residents or their representatives with the expectation of taking them to the County for their building permits that same day. Those in attendance discussed how to best require landscape plans for over the counter projects and the discretion that staff would have to require a landscape plan. They discussed concerns about how extensive these plans should be. City Manager Nealis explained the sign -off certifications related to erosion control and roofing material and suggested that staff could create a similar statement for landscaping for over the counter projects. Councilmember Black commented on types of landscaping that residents may desire which may included trees that may block neighbors views in the future and indicated that for this reason he feels that a landscape plan for over the counter projects should be required. He stated that a landscape plan could cost $180.00. Discussion ensued regarding the suggestion of requiring a landscape compliance statement for administratively approved projects. City Attorney Jenkins summarized the issues and indicated that a statement could reflect if a resident does not have a landscape plan or does not intend to provide one then they cannot plant anything that violates the standard landscaping conditions such as native, drought resistant and not exceed a certain height. He said that this would be enforceable in the same manner as requiring a landscape plan. Commissioner Hankins commented on screening of swimming pools and indicated that she feels that this should be required. Mayor Heinsheimer indicated that he feels that there should be a clear indication to the public regarding these requirements and suggested that staff prepare a report incorporating the suggestions regarding landscaping for administratively approved projects discussed this evening. Mayor Pro Tern Pernell suggested that landscaping requirements should take fire safety into consideration. After discussion, staff was directed to prepare a report for the Commission to consider for recommendation to the City Council, regarding landscape plan/landscape compliance statement submittal procedures adhering to standard Commission landscaping plan requirements for projects that are administratively approved. C1iyo/ ie0ti 4 �rPe INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No: 4-B Mtg. Date: 10-11-04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS AND LANDSCAPING CONDITIONS FOR RESOLUTIONS. DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2004 BACKGROUND At the Planning Commission meeting held August 17, 2004, Planning Commissioner Arvel Witte presented the attached information relative to requiring landscaping plans to be submitted for projects that are administratively approved over the counter. At that meeting, Commissioners briefly discussed this subject but elected to continue the discussion to the Joint Meeting with the City Council. Currently, the Planning Commission requires property owners to submit formal landscaping plans for the majority of discretionary land development projects (Site Plan Review/CUP/Variances) after a project has been approved. Generally, the Planning Commission requires landscaping plans when projects involve grading or large areas of disturbance. Bonding for labor and all material, plus 15%, is usually required by the Commission. Currently, there is no authority for the City staff to require a resident to submit a formal landscaping plan for development that is administratively approved over the counter. These projects generally include barns that do not require grading, swimming pools, or additions that fall below the threshold of Site Plan Review and also do not involve grading. The landscaping determinations for these projects are left to the discretion of property owners. Additionally, Commissioner Witte has submitted the attached email relative to landscaping language for resolutions. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the City Council and Planning Commission discuss these subjects and provide appropriate direction to staff. CRN:mlk 10-11-04landscope-sta.doc ®Prurietl<)r IR.•cyctr=d City NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cilyolrh@aol.com Agenda Item No: 12-A Mtg. Date: 08-17-04 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION - -- - FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF MEMORANDUM FROM PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRMAN ARVEL WITTE REGARDING LANDSCAPING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PROJECTS. DATE: AUGUST 17, 2004 BACKGROUND Attached to this staff report is a memorandum from Planning Commission Chairman Arvel Witte regarding requiring landscaping plans for projects that are administratively approved "over the counter" by City staff. Currently, landscaping plans are only required when the Planning Commission makes a determination to require a landscaping plan as part of a discretionary review approval (Site Plan Review/Variance/CUP). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the Planning Commission discuss this and provide appropriate direction to staff or an appropriate recommendation to the City Council. CRN:mlk 08-17-041nndscnpcsta @ /28/2004 09:25 X103707492 ROSE PAGE 01 7/28/04 Craig: Regarding our conversation this morning. I like the idea of having the Administrative process empowered to impose a tree height limit in a "landscape plan" as a necessary condition. What I don't like, is that it may not be sufficient. By this I mean, if 15 feetblocksa neighbors= view, then we may shooting ourselves in the foot, so to speak, in the implementation of the View Impairment Process when we tell the offender that they've got to cut back to 12 feet. I think I like better, "15 feet or less depending on the potential for obstructing the viewscape of neighbors. ". (Native plants of the Palos Verdes / Catalina Island ecosystem is advised. Maybe we need to set some limits on the tree varieties permitted.) Specifically: In our present Administrative approval process, landscaping is not required, for example, for a pool. This situation may not adequately support the Planning process. We need to consider how this process can be improved. Besides tree height, we may have to requires that the existing slopes supporting a pool pad be protected by plants to minimize erosion. A restriction on watering design may also be a consideration. More generally: Explore whether or not the Administrative approval process is adequate to support the overall Planning process objectives in areas other than landscaping.. Cite possible areas for improvement and discuss and propose solutions. I think we have enough here to discuss at Planning Commission meeting. d41. Arvel Subj: For the ,_.nt meeting agenda Date: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 1:26:42 PM From: Witte A B To: Cityofrh Craig: I would like -to -have placed on the agenda for discussion, what I might call a minimum restriction on landscaping on the Site Plan boundary, in the form of a Standard Condition for resolutions, something worded as the following: "that future landscape development, whether approved or not shall not obstruct neighbors" scenic vistas." I believe that other more restrictive Standard Conditions are being reviewed by our City attorney following issues raised recently by the Landscape Committee meeting with the Association. I trust that those considerations will also be open to discussion. Regards, Arvel 9/29/04 America Online : Cityofrh Page 1