CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS

 

ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING

 

OF THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL

 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2006

 

 

OPENING CEREMONIES

 

1.              CALL MEETING TO ORDER

 

Mayor Millsap called the September 27, 2006 La Habra Heights Adjourned City Council Meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. in the Multi Purpose Room, 1245 Hacienda Road and stated that this is a continuation of the Regular City Council Meeting.

 

2.              ROLL CALL

 

Present: Mayor Tela Millsap, Mayor Pro Tem Brian Bergman, Councilmembers Stan Carroll, Bruce Douglas and Fred Klein.

 

Staff: City Attorney Sandra Levin, City Manager Ronald Bates, Community Development Director Justin Powers, Planning Technician Barbara Doppieri and Consultant Marc Blodgett.

 

3.              FLAG SALUTE

 

Mayor Millsap led the flag salute.

 

0:00:50

 

PUBLIC COMMENTS

 

            Larry Black, El Terraza Drive, spoke of the challenges that staff and the Commission face in interpreting the Codes; he stated that the proposed Codes are easier to understand, interpret and implement. There have been triggers built in that start review processes when the project contains developmental and conformity issues.

 

            Stephen Blagden, Citron Road, spoke about slope density as the slope increases, the instability and hazards increase; we have four large parcels that remain and they are in steep and geologically loaded terrain; he noted that the Council can leave things as they are or make the slope density chart a straight line, many cities are much more stringent in their requirements than we are. Mr. Blagden suggested that the parking setbacks in front and other yards be 25 feet; extended foundations should be limited in height to 5 feet and up to 8 feet for limited structures; views need protection; many Codes from the General Plan have been deleted and we need them restored. Table 12 - staff and Commission thresholds need to be increased.

 

            Albert Myers, Reposado Drive, spoke of the difficulty for engineers to interpret figuring the slope density; has been considering making some modifications in his structure and the proposed changes to the Code seem to make this unfeasible; having to rectify past nonconformities in order to remodel seems unfair and this would bring a lowering of property values. He felt that it would be possible to develop a code that meets all of the requirements to keep La Habra Heights like we want it and still allow building and improvements.

 

            Joyce Jensen, Carrie Hills Road, explained that one reason she is coming to speak on this as is that people she was relying on to speak have moved. She stated it is possible that the City does not have the pulse of the people and is tightening restrictions; she noted that she does not see all of the Council at City events; she stated her concern that the Council is so decided on items that they are no longer hearing the voice of residents; she spoke about nonconformity making upgrades difficult to do.

 

            Raphael Hernandez, East Skyline Drive, spoke on the 4000 square foot building footprint limitation; this Ordinance allows only 9% coverage of a lot. He cited many other cities, showing that all of the cities allow much more than we do. This Ordinance is not in the City’s best interest.

 

            Pam McVicar, Hillside Court, spoke of her concerns about the 4000 square foot footprint limitation, small allowance for hardscape and what people with homes that will become nonconforming will have to go through to get permits. She felt that these ordinances are invading her personal rights and need to be more reasonable. She asked the Attorney what has to be done for a referendum.

 

            Faith Grimm, noted that the new Codes limit grading and hardscape much more than the present ones and limits selling of homes because new buyers will not be able to modify their property at all. She presented a PowerPoint presentation with suggestions how 7.17 and 7.18 can be improved and also 7.5.

 

            Mayor Millsap explained that the present Code only requires that the nonconformity is not exacerbated when remodeling or modifying something. She stated that she does not see the proposed code being any different in that area.

 

            City Attorney Levin noted that a nonconformity does not make you tear anything down, change your lot size, prevent you from maintaining or improving or interior remodel of your home, it puts constraints on how much you can modify or expand your home. The lot is not nonconforming.

 

            Councilmember Klein questioned whether the proposed new Codes would create new nonconformities to be considered.

 

            City Attorney Levin explained that there would be a category of homes that would become legal nonconforming now and some that would go the other way.

 

            Mayor Millsap suggested that they continue the discussion when they get to that point in their consideration of Article 7.

 

            0:43:14

           

4.              LHH MUNICIPAL CODE ARTICLE 7 DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ZONING ORDINANCE

 

RECOMMENDATION: That City Council continue to review, comment and make changes, and direct staff to finalize Article 7 for subsequent Council action.

 

City Manager Bates explained that there is no simple answer to some questions, as each case is individual. We need specific facts to know which properties would become nonconforming and which ones would stop being nonconforming. We have tried to make this document more parallel with the General Plan.

 

Community Development Director Powers presented a comparison of two different projects under the current Code and the proposed new Code.

 

Mayor Millsap started the consideration of Article 7 with Exhibit 7-13, Page 7-58.

 

City Attorney Levin noted that there is a corrected copy of Exhibit 7-13, recommended by staff.

 

0:56:30

 

The Commission discussed how far the allowable grading amount and the 4000 square foot footprint limit for the structure could be increased. They also discussed the grading being the same for a flat lot and a sloped lot.

 

Councilmember Klein stated that this was too big of a change from the current Code. He stated that he was also against the present allowance of 20-foot retaining walls. He did not want all of these set numbers, but wants the house to adapt to the lot size and circumstances.

 

Mayor Millsap stated that she had some concerns about the footprint for single stories.

 

Councilmember Carroll stated that he could not agree with Exhibit 7-13. He felt it was too restrictive on grading and hardscape.

Councilmember Douglas stated that the current Code does not solve the problems and the proposed new Codes simplify the process.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Bergman stated that the Planning Commission struggled with the current Code on these items and a lot of work has been done to simplify it. Find out what the Community wants and find the thresholds that are comfortable, but don’t throw the work out.

 

The consensus of the Council was three (3) to two (2) to continue with the proposed new code on grading and hardscape and not go back to the current code with slope consideration.

 

1:42:03

 

City Attorney Levin explained that because of the interaction between some items, you couldn’t go page by page. Exhibit 7-13 and 7-21, Pages 7-58 and 7-67 go together. She passed out a suggested change for Exhibit 7-21 to include single story footprints. She noted that these numbers can be adjusted, and according to the adjusted numbers, other related numbers would be changed.

 

Councilmember Douglas stated that limiting house size was part of the General Plan.

 

The Councilmembers discussed house sizes and how they are controlled.

 

City Attorney Levin stated that staff asked to remove the word “net” from both Exhibit 7-13 and 7-31 due to the problems there has been in figuring the net area of a lot and concerning easements and the reason for removing the word “net”. She suggested that net be used in figuring the lot size, but not for figuring the gradable or hardscape areas..

 

Raphael Fernandez, stated that mansionization is a problem in some areas with 7200 square foot lots but he didn’t think it would be here. He stated that several cities have gone through mansionization decisions, and on an average their allowances for lot coverage percentage would be about 30%.

 

Mayor Millsap suggested that the Council consider the suggested Exhibit 7-21 and make decisions tomorrow night.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Bergman and Councilmember Douglas agreed to Mayor Millsap’s suggestion.

 

City Attorney Levin stated that if keeping Exhibit 7-21 the Council would add two lines on the corrected Exhibit 7-13 indicating grading and hardscape for single story homes that will be 3500 square feet higher than the two story lines.

 

The Council continued their consideration of Article 7 with page 7-58 C.

Attorney Levin noted the Planning Commission change in Table 7-10 to match the earlier change that “Erosion Control measures required on completion of wall or slope”. “Landscaping” word removed. Staff changes clarify total maximum height of retaining walls.

 

City Attorney Levin explained that the Planning Commission modification to the language on Page 7-66 on 7.18.30 E is the same as 7.14.40 B, which the City Council struck entirely. She explained that the chart on what can be modified is shown on Page 7-79 under Accessory Structure Location.

The Council asked that on Page 7-79 on Accessory Structure Location, third column, the CDD may reduce offset to “10 feet” and leaving Planning Commission reduction “10 feet”. The Planning Commission additions shall be kept for 7.14.40 B and 7.18.30 E.

 

The Council accepted the Staff changes in 7.14.40 L and S.

 

Mayor Millsap called for an intermission at 10:14 P.M. and reconvened at 10:28 P.M.

 

2:58:30

 

            City Attorney Levin explained that on Table 7-12 on Page 7-78 the Planning Commission recommended reducing the amount of discretion afforded staff and the Commission to issue standards modifications with respect to setbacks. Staff recommends reinstating the Planning Commission’s discretion to approve standards modifications for setbacks.

 

            City Attorney Levin suggested to set a number, below which applicants have to get a variance. If the City Council thinks the Planning Commission is not holding to the setbacks they can call for a review by the Council.

 

            After discussion the consensus was to keep the setback discretion as it is at 10 feet limit for Administrative and 5 feet for Commission limit.

 

            The Council discussed Lot Line Adjustments.

 

            City Attorney Levin stated that she wants to check on the requirement that Lot Line Adjustments can only be handled by Administrative approval. She will check if there can be an Appeal and if there may be she will place the wording there.

 

            City Attorney Levin commented on staff changes on 7.2.20 A – Zoning Map; 7.3.20 E – Prohibited Uses on the R-A Zone; 7.5.30 A – Legal Nonconforming Nonresidential Structures and B – Legal Nonconforming Residential Structures, 2. and 3. Planning Commission changes, 7.6.50 E – 4 Lighting Levels Standards, 7.9.40 Maximum Total Sign Area, A-3, Exhibit 7-2 and Exhibit 7-5.

 

 

            3:50:55

 

            City Attorney Levin noted the changes the Planning Commission has made on Article 9 at 9.2.50 – 6 and 9.3.20; 9.2.60 for information only; 9.4.30 J; 9.8.60 – 6.

 

            The Council chose to leave 9.8.60 – 6 to say “impracticable or impossible”.

 

            City Manager Bates went over the possible agenda order for tomorrow night.

 

            Stephen Blagden, Citron Road, noted that “impracticable” will lead to developers using it as an excuse; he spoke of the loss of a free appeal; lot line adjustments; permanent and temporary encroachments.

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

            Mayor Millsap continued this Adjourned Regular City Council meeting at 11:36 P.M. to the next Meeting on September 28, 2006 for a Closed Session at 7:00 P.M. and an Adjourned Regular Meeting at 7:30 P.M.

 

 

            ATTEST:

 

 

_____________________________

RONALD BATES, CITY CLERK