Planning Commission upholds director's decision allowing limited 8-foot hedges at 1425 Sydney Street

The San Luis Obispo Planning Commission on a unanimous vote denied an appeal of the Community Development Director's fence-height exception at 1425 Sydney Street, upholding a decision to permit hedges up to 8 feet in a limited area where staff said an "overlook" created privacy impacts.

Neighbors Craig and Lisonbee Bridal appealed the director’s March approval, arguing the taller plantings would reduce natural light, increase moisture and mold risk, and block views into the setback area next to their home. The property owners, Lacey and Jake Minnick, sought a larger exception to allow hedges up to 9 feet but the director capped the allowed height at 8 feet and limited the extent of that additional height to the area abutting the neighboring windows.

Assistant planner Walter Etzel told the commission the director's modified approval balanced privacy and light. He said the fence itself already conforms to a 6-foot standard and that because the fence sits in front of a short retaining wall the hedge would be perceived by the neighbor as roughly 7 feet due to grade differences. Staff recommended denying the appeal and upholding the director’s action.

At the hearing the Minnicks presented story poles and a time-stamped photo series taken hourly from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. showing the extent of shading across the day; they argued the taller hedges would shadow the neighbor's windows only very late in the day and that existing conditions (including a tree at the neighbor’s office window and the applicant’s house massing) already produce shade.

The appellants said even modest additional height would darken the lower half of their windows and cited earlier plant die-off behind the fence. "We feel most people would agree that they wouldn't want a neighbor's hedge to block the bottom half of their windows," Craig Bridal said during public comment. The applicants countered that a 6-foot fence currently provides no privacy because the neighboring finished floor elevation is higher and that the proposed hedges are meant to address an actual overlook.

Commissioners asked staff about sunlight hours and enforcement; staff said the commission did not have a solar study but that the director had weighed shading concerns and narrowed the extent of the approval. Commission discussion focused on property rights, site topography and the narrow geographic scope of the exception. Chair Dave Houghton noted the compromise reached by staff and applicants and moved to deny the appeal. The city clerk recorded a 5–0 roll call in favor of denying the appeal (Vice Chair Tully: yes; Commissioner Flores: yes; Commissioner Khan: yes; Commissioner Munoz Morris: yes; Chair Dave Houghton: yes).

The denial preserves the director's condition that limits the hedges to 8 feet and restricts that extra height to the short, defined stretch where staff found an overlook issue; staff noted enforcement would be complaint-driven by code enforcement.

Clarifying details from the record: the applicant originally requested hedges up to 9 feet for a 65-foot length on the east side; staff modified approval to 8 feet for approximately 40 feet. The director and staff cited a roughly one-foot grade difference where the fence is installed and a finished-floor elevation on the neighboring property about three feet higher, creating the overlooking condition.

The commission also noted the appeal does not challenge exceptions the director approved on the west side of the house (where a fence atop a retaining wall reaches a combined permitted height under the code).