1

CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS

MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS

PLANNING COMMISSION

February 24, 2003

OPENING CEREMONIES:

1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER

Chairman Bruce Douglas called a meeting of the La Habra Heights Planning Commission to order at 7:07 p.m. at the Community Center, 1245 N. Hacienda Road, La Habra Heights,

California.

2. ROLL CALL

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

Bergman and Robert Wolfe. Also present Director of Planning Sheryl Brady, Planning

Technician Barbara Doppieri, City Attorney Ken Rozell and General Plan Consultant Marc

Blodgett.

3. FLAG SALUTE

Eloise Phillips led the flag salute.

4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF POSTING OF AGENDA FOR MEETING OF

February 24, 2003

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

PUBLIC HEARING

Mrs. Brady swore in those wishing to testify.

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

Mrs. Brady stated the Commission would continue taking public testimony on the final draft of the General Plan; she indicated public testimony would be heard again on 3-6-03.

ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC ON THE AGENDA

Chairman Douglas opened the public hearing.

Eloise Phillips, 2233 Hacienda – stated she had looked at the context of what the Commission had written, stated Goal 5 doesn’t make sense, Page 1-2 5th paragraph needs to be fixed; spoke regarding Land Use Policies 4, 5, 10, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20, 23, 30, 31, old policy 40 should not be eliminated, why was Policy 43 eliminated, spoke regarding Policy 46, 50, 54, 60 and 8.

 

Katie Martin, 557 Reposado – spoke regarding Land Use Policies 4, 5, 6, 15, 22, Circulation 39 and 35.

John Beau, 2278 Casalero - spoke regarding Land Use Policies 5, 6, 10, 13, 17, 20, 22, 23, 31, 41, 40, 46, 54, 55 and 64.

Gene Beckman, 374 Avocado Crest – spoke regarding Page 1-1 History of General Plan

should read 1920s not 1930s; page 1-2 first paragraph talking about the freeway, should read the proposed Beach Freeway; stated the word agricultural is very important to our community.

Seeing no one else come forward Chairman Douglas asked how the Commission would like to proceed.

Mr. Blodgett gave his presentation on recommended changes. Read how Goal 5 should read consistently throughout the document; Page 1-6 Goal 8, should read Citrus and avocado groves; Guiding Principles should be removed.

Commissioner Bergman asked to have Mr. Beckman’s changes added in.

Mr. Blodgett asked for spelling errors from the Commission.

Chairman Douglas asked the Commission to give their spelling changes to Mr. Blodgett.

Mr. Blodgett then covered the Land Use Element changes; asked to revisit Policy 4, Policy 5 should read “an economically”; Policy 8 City should be capitalized in the second sentence;

asked to revisit Policy 10, typographical error in the Box; asked to revisit the new text added

under Policy 12; Page 2-3 long paragraph on the right, 6th sentence from the bottom, should read would result in a taking; Page 2-4 Policy 15, typographical; Policy 17 typo; Policy 23;

Page 2-5 typo to Goal 1; Policy 31 should read Standards Modification instead of small; Page 2-6 end of 34 last sentence typo; Open Space Resource should add the word Production; Policy 41, should consider the language on public ally owned land; Page 2-9 typo in Policy 50; Page 2-11 middle of introduction under issue verbiage change; Policy 64 should read support the

protection of the ecology of wildlife habitat; typo on Page 2-12 Land Use Designation,

eliminate map diagram and replace with plan; Page 2-12 subtitle Residential/Agricultural Land

Use Designation that should be moved under the box; recommended on Page 2-13 right hand column replace guesthouses with second units; Page 2-14 typos; Page 2-14 right hand side, under the Land Use Map, in the third line reference to 2-2 should be eliminated; remove as well in the italicized section.

Chairman Douglas stated Margarita McCoy had some recommended title changes.

Chairman Douglas asked for the Commission’s comments on Land Use. The following are the changes the Commission requested.

Page 2-1

Change title to Issue-Residential Construction

Page 2-2

3

Land Use Policy 1 - should read “Residential development should only be considered if

it could be shown that the development of each lot will be in substantial conformance

with City ordinances.”

Land Use Policy 4 – should read, “No new structure shall exceed two stories in any

single vertical plane.”

Land Use Policy 5 – line 7 should read “necessary to allow an economically...”

Land Use Policy 6 – 4th line should read “area ratios, and/or other requirements such as

screening as setbacks shall be...”

Land Use Policy 7 – 2nd line should read, “plans for residential development shall be...”

Land Use Policy 9 – 6th line should read, “observed and implemented in residential...”

Land Use Policy 10 – should read, “A landscaped setback shall be required for parking

areas in residential development.”

Page 2-3

Issue should read “Issue – New Residential Development on Non-conforming Lots”

Introductory paragraph should be removed.

Goal 1 – should be removed

Land Use Policy 11 – should read “Development on lots that are smaller...”

Land Use Policy 12 – should read, “ Development on nonconforming lots shall meet the

same performance standards as conforming lots.

Land Use Policy 13 – this policy should be moved to City Wide Issues

Line 30 – should read, “development rights would result in a taking...”

Land Use Policy 14 – should be removed.

Issue – Grading and Landform – line 8 – should read “larger pads resulting in grading

that is even more...”

Page 2-4

Land Use Policy 18 – 5th line should read, “structures shall be placed at varying and

natural elevations from the primary structure to...”

Land Use Policy 19 – this policy should be removed.

4

Land Use Policy 20 – should read, “Prohibit hillside grading and development practices

that damage the aesthetic character of hillside areas in order to solely provide off-site

views.”

Land Use Policy 23 – last sentence should read, “The City will establish an ordinance

requiring that retaining walls be landscaped where necessary.”

Land Use Policy 24 – last line should read “soil instability, liquefaction, and landslide

and surface rupture.”

Land Use Policy 26 – should be moved to City Wide

Land Use Policy 27 – should read, “Limit impervious coverage to preserve the rural

character of the community and to allow for natural infiltration of run off water.”

Page 2-5

Land Use Policy 29 – should read ‘Permit remodeling, expansion, and/or improvement

of nonconforming residential performance structures so long as the nonconforming

standard is not acerbated by the requested changes. Should major extensions of the

existing nonconforming performance standard be requested, those extensions shall be

subject to review by the City’s procedures...”

Box – 4th line should read, “more lots. A specific plan...”

Page 2-6

Issue – Open Space for Resource Production – 1st paragraph, 2nd line should read,

“includes a number of sites located throughout the City...”

2nd paragraph – line 4 should read “This property is located in the western edge of the

City...”

Issue – Open Space for Recreation - Riding Ring should be capitalized throughout this

document.

Page 2-9

Land Use Policy 50 – should be moved to City Wide Issues and then strike Policy 61.

Land use Element Policy 54 – the last sentence should read “... cubic volume, and all

other requirements appropriate to the non-residential use.

Page 2-10

Land Use Policy 61 – should be removed.

Page 2-12

Land Use Designation – 11th line – should read “Land Use Maps (Exhibits 2-1)...”

Page 2-13

The title Residential – Agricultural Land Use Designation belongs directly below the

box on that page.

Chairman Douglas asked for a motion to continue the public hearing to March 6, 2003.

Commissioner Wolfe moved to continue the public hearing to March 6, 2003. Seconded by Vice-Chairman Skinner and approved as follows:

AYES: Douglas, Bergman, Skinner and Wolfe

NOES: None

ABSENT: None

ABSTAIN: None

ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC NOT ON THE AGENDA

John Beau, 2278 Casalero – asked the Commission to look at Goal 7.

Katie Martin, 557 Reposado – spoke regarding the alleged Brown Act Violations; stated she was please with the corrections; stated Mr. Colantuono agreed there was a violation because he agreed to a cure.

Norman Zezula, 2272 Canonita – stated the City Attorney was not here to defend his

remarks; gave his view on the General Plan and the election.

ITEMS FROM STAFF

Mrs. Brady stated the Commission was not going to reach their deadline, therefore she asked if the Commission would be available on Saturday March 8th; she asked that the Commission be prepared to discuss this date at the meeting of 2-25-03.

ADJOURNMENT

Commissioner Wolfe moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:28 p.m. to the regular meeting of February 25, 2003.

Seconded by Vice-Chairman Skinner and approved as follows:

AYES: Douglas, Bergman, Skinner and Wolfe

NOES: None

ABSENT: None

ABSTAIN: None

Robert Wolfe, Chairperson

ATTEST:

Sheryl Brady, Director of Planning