1

REVISED

CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS

MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS

PLANNING COMMISSION

November 19, 2002

OPENING CEREMONIES

1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER

Chairman Bruce Douglas called a meeting of the La Habra Heights Planning Commission to

order at 7:05 p.m. at the Community Center, 1245 North Hacienda Road, La Habra Heights,

California.

2. ROLL CALL

Those present: Chairman Bruce Douglas, Vice-Chairman Ginger Skinner, Commissioners

Brian Bergman, Stephen Blagden and Robert Wolfe. Also present Director of Planning Sheryl

Brady, Planning Technician Barbara Doppieri, City Attorney Ken Rozell, General Plan

Consultant Marc Blodgett.

3. FLAG SALUTE

John Beau led the flag salute.

4. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC NOT ON THE AGENDA

John Beau, 2778 Casalero – spoke regarding being good neighbors; Appendix A; CEQA;

invasion of private property rights.

Katie Martin, 557 Reposado – stated she wanted to remind the Commission; Douglas &

Beckman removed question from survey; city revenue decreasing; this General Plan is asking

for more money; higher taxes; asked that all open space be removed from ERME.

Steve Coonen, 2287 Ahuacate – stated he was opposed to what was going on; this General

Plan affects property rights; asked Commission to remember Goal 1 is Protect and Preserve;

urged the Commission, Council and the residents to reject this plan.

Chairman Douglas gave an overview of what is mandatory in the General Plan based on

County and State Laws.

5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF POSTING OF AGENDA FOR MEETING OF

November 13, 2002

2

Ms. Brady stated the agenda had been posted in accordance with the state law.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Mrs. Brady swore in those wishing to testify.

6. General Plan Amendment 2002-01 (City of La Habra Heights) Citywide

Mrs. Brady explained the Planning Commission was scheduled to starting discussion of the

ERME (Environmental Resource Management Element). She stated there are two items she

would like to discuss before starting on the ERME Element. She asked the Commission if they

wanted to keep the Objectives in this element, explaining that this is the only element in the

General Plan to have Objectives, she felt for consistency purposes possibly the objectives could

be incorporated in the narrative. She then explained the Commission would need to make a

decision whether to keep the Overlay Zone in the General Plan or to move them into the

Zoning. She stated traditionally in the Planning Inudstry they are kept in the Zoning

Ordinance.

The Commission decided to give these items some thought and would discuss this further when

ERME is discussed the second time.

ERME Element

Mrs. Brady then explained the following Policies are the ones the Planning Commission determined

needed further discussion.

The Commission then discussed Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 21.

PUBLIC HEARING

Chairman Douglas then opened the pubic hearing.

John Beau, 2778 Casalero – stated he objects to the objectives; mature trees; has problems with the

words in policy 8; define open space; eliminate hillside and ridgelines in policy 12; has trouble with

14, policy 17; asked to have Policies 18, 19 and 20.

Mohamed Seirafi, 16419 Canarias Drive, Hacienda Heights – stated he is the most affected by this

General Plan; he stated you want everything, but you donÕt have the money to pay for it; senior

housing.

Linda Smith, 3900 Hacienda Road – spoke regarding natural planting; overlay zones; asked the

Planning Commission to clarify the intent of Conservation Overlay Zones.

Julia Higgs, 2010 El Cajonita – asked to keep the overlay zones in the General Plan; policies are

more stable in the General Plan; asked to keep Goal 5 in.

Katie Martin, 557 Reposado – spoke regarding Mr. SeirafiÕs property; stated the General Plan must

be consistent with the Housing Element; Policy 12; Policy 15; stated the overlay zones are zoning

3

mechanizism and belong in the Zoning Oridinance; asked them not to be in a hurry for judgement;

stated 2 meeting a week is too much.

Break taken at 10:00 – 10:04 p.m. to change the video and audio tapes.

Norman Zezula, 2272 Canonita Drive – opposed spending of additional funds; property rights; asked

for a legal definition of property rights.

Mr. Rozell defined property rights and the process of the General Plan.

Alan Boege, owner of 1892 N Cypress – asked questions of the conservation overlay zones and laws;

asked if the City was going to buy land or borrow money to buy land.

Seeing no one else come forward Chairman Douglas continued the public hearing and brought the item

back to the Planning Commission for deliberation.

Mrs. Brady then reviewed the agenda for the next meeting, explaining the Commission will again be

discussing ERME on November 21st at 7:00 p.m. She stated subsequent Special Meetings are as

follows: December 3, 2002.

Mrs. Brady asked the Commission to bring their calendars to the November 21, 2002 meeting and be

prepared to discuss dates for the December Meetings. She explained it was the City CouncilÕs desire

to have the General Plan through the Planning Commission by the end of December.

ADJOURNMENT

Commissioner Blagden moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:31p.m. to the special meeting of

November 19, 2002. Seconded by Chairman Douglas and approved as follows:

AYES: Douglas, Bergman, Blagden, Skinner, Wolfe

NOES: None

ABSENT: None

ABSTAIN: None

Bruce Douglas, Chairperson

ATTEST:

Sheryl Brady, Director of Planning

Recapitulation of Changes Recommended During Course of Meeting

ERME Element

4

Policy 1 Cooperate with state, federal and regional agencies to monitor water quality and protect

it from contamination. Encourage the La Habra Heights Water District to provide an

adequate supply of high quality water for local and regional needs. Encourage water

conservation.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as written

Policy 2 Preserve and protect blue line streams, both from pollution, including contamination

from liquid and solid waste disposal, and from streambed alterations such as change in

course.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as written.

Policy 3 Encourage practices that stress soil conservation as a means to retain native vegetation,

maximize water infiltration, provide slope stabilization, allow scenic enjoyment, and

reduce flood hazards.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as written.

Policy 4 Preserve adequate open space areas for major habitat types, so as to maintain

ecosystems in a natural balance for recreation, scientific, conservation, economic,

educational, and scenic purposes.

The Planning Commissioners did not raise any issues regarding Policy #4.

Policy 5 Work with appropriate land owners and government agencies to rehabilitate abandoned

resource oil fields. or encourage the rehabilitation of these lands within the planning

area for open space, recreation, or other beneficial resource conservation uses after site

reclamation.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as amended and to

readdress when the Commission get to the Land Use Element.

Policy 6 Encourage property owners to preserve and enhance areas with native vegetation,

wildlife habitat, and visual beauty.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as amended.

Policy 7 Preserve mature trees and establish requirements for the replacement, if necessary. with

more than one tree for every mature tree removed.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as amended.

Policy 8 Protect and preserve endangered species and sensitive native plant communities.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as written.

Policy 9 Encourage energy conservation measures in existing and new developments, whether

public or private, within the City.

5

The Planning Commissioners did not raise any issues regarding Policy #9.

Policy 10 Encourage residents and new developments to take advantage of energy conservation

programs.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as written.

Policy 11 Protect existing wildlife habitats through the preservation of open space.

The Planning Commissioners did not raise any issues regarding Policy #11.

Policy 12 Future hillside development should have will be permitted only if it involves minimal

adverse impacts on the environment and natural topography, and does not affect natural

ridgelines more than necessary to allow economically viable a reasonable economic use

of privately held land.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as amended and for staff

to expand and fix the introduction and bring this item back to the Commission.

Policy 13 Participate with the County of Los Angeles, the Southern California Association of

Governments, and other responsible agencies on all open space planning matters to the

extent necessary to implement the CityÕs General Plan policies regarding open space,

construction, and wildlife preservation within its planning area.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as written.

Policy 14 Establish and enforce mitigation measures for projects that have the potential for

significant or irreversible adverse environmental effects.

The Planning Commissioners did not raise any issues regarding Policy #14.

Policy 15 The City shall encourage the dedication of open space land for public use and/or

conservation purposes whenever possible.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as written.

Policy 16 Retain existing open space in public ownership, wherever possible, including surplus

land within the City limits offered for sale or transfer by other public agencies,

including easements and rights of way.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as amended.

Policy 17 Encourage the retention of privately owned outdoor recreation uses and consider the

public acquisition of such land when the open space uses located thereon may be

discontinued by the owners.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as written.

6

Policy 18 Evaluate the Actively pursue acquisition of open space areas not only to provide areas

for recreation activities, but also to preserve environmental features that are valuable for

their scientific, educational, conservation, scenic, and cultural values.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as amended.

Policy 19 Evaluate Pursue the use of open space land used for public and semipublic rights-of-

way for possible multiple use that would complement the continuity of other designated

open space areas, with the consent of the owners and other appropriate agencies.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as amended.

Policy 20 Make every effort to locate funds for the acquisition of open space, including, but not

limited to, Federal, State, County, and private sources.

The Planning Commissioners did not raise any issues regarding Policy #20.

Policy 21 Upon subdivision of large undeveloped parcels in the City or upon the approval of

Conditional Use Permits for non-residential uses, the City may require the development

of equestrian and pedestrian routes to provide access to the Skyline Trail and the

Wildlife Corridor Trails where appropriate nexus can be shown between this mitigation

and the impacts of the proposed development.

It was the consensus of the Commission to accept this policy as amended.