PC 09/22/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

! to established oak trees needs to be clarified. The limits of irrigati time between 6 a.m. and 10 a.m. would be another problem for golf courses. ~ Commissioner Finch directed Mr. Chadbourne to Page 14, Section 4.18.070 B, which states a possible exemption for golf courses. Mr. Chadbourne is assumin that in a worst-case scenario, if the exemption isn't granted, golf courses must adhere t the guidelines. A discussion ensued among the Commissioners of how golf courses were irrigated during previous drought conditions. No figures were available, though it as noted that watering was significantly reduced and the courses stayed green by using site specifIc watering practices. In fact, Crow Canyon was awarded twice by East Bay D for conserving water. Mr. Swift advised that during the last drought, the Pleasan Sports Park was watered close to the 20 gallons per square foot per year requiremen. The park didn't look perfect, but it was certainly usable and green. The speaker is corr t in thinking that the exemption is up to the City Council, and if the exemption isn't gran ,they must follow the ordinance. Commissioner Finch noted that new landscaping would require mor water for seeding start- up. Mr. Swift indicated that the ordinance speaks to when the deve pment is mature and not during installation and a grow-in period. The speaker indicated that a typical grow-in period for a golf course would be a full year. Mr. Swift stated that the ordinance had not been drafted to make go course usage very clear, however, even if an exemption were granted, there probably ould be a limit or target amount for water usage. The speaker indicated several golf courses are currently being retrofi to use recycled water, which could be something to think about for the future in Pleasanton PUBLIC HEARING WAS CWSED. Commissioner Hovingh feels this is a good ordinance, with perhaps me future fIne-tuning, but feels the Commission should recommend to the City Council tha it be adopted in total. He is in opposition of removing the requirement of using a certifIed d licensed landscape architect (14.18.100 B2). Commissioner Wright concurs; he would also like to see Section 14. landscape and irrigation system installation has been certified by the the project landscape architect to be in compliance with the approv 8.110 A to read" ...the ertified installer and! or plans. " In response to Chairman McGuirk, Mr. Swift stated that the ordinan was so written that if a landscape company provided all services (landscape design and ins lation), they can sign it off even though their company performed the installation. Commi sioner Hovingh stated he is opposed to this. Commissioner Wright feels that if a licensed i staller certifIes that it is installed according to specifIcations, the landscape architect doesn' need to inspect it. Commissioner Finch advised that the City must sign off on the ins tion as well. Commissioner Hovingh believes the City should be able to recover e cost of signing off the permit from the project. Chairman McGuirk concurs. Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 September 22, 1993