CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION
January 24, 2006
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Chairman Black called the regular meeting of the La Habra Heights Planning Commission to order at 7:43 P.M. in the Community Center, 1245 Hacienda Road, La Habra Heights, California.
2. ROLL CALL
Those present: Chairman Black, Vice Chairman Baroldi, Commissioners Grebbien and McCoy.
Also present: City Attorney Levin, Community Development Director Powers, Planning Technician Doppieri, Mayor Douglas, Consultant Blodgett and City Engineer Melicher.
Absent: Commissioner Garcia.
3. FLAG SALUTE
John Beau led the flag salute.
4. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC NOT ON THE AGENDA
Stephen Blagden, Citron Road, spoke about cumulative affect of changing the Ordinances.
0:7:06
5. GRADING MODIFICATION 2005-11 AND STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2005-27 (Jenkins) 1600 Kashlan Road
Commissioner McCoy recused herself as she lives across the street from this project; she then left the room.
Community Development Director Powers presented the Staff Report, noting that the request is for Grading Modification 2005-11 and Standards Modification 2005-27, utilizing Municipal Code Section 8500 & 9404 for excessive impervious coverage and for view preservation to exceed 500 square feet in size and 16 feet in height; that there is a slope easement running across the front of the property and a portion of Kashlan Road pavement, an equestrian easement that runs across the lower portion of the property and a flood hazard area that runs behind the horse trail; changing the driveway slope for parking will require more grading; the allowable graded area is 6,404 square feet and the proposed graded area is 6,670 square feet; the allowable impervious area is 3,202 square feet and the proposed impervious area is 4,870 square feet; consider the topography of the site and if the building is in the most appropriate location; view obstruction from the road is the only view obstruction by the building; the view obstruction does not exceed 11 feet above the road; there are no setback violations; proposed retaining walls in the front setback vary from 1 to 7 feet; there are no pool or accessory uses proposed.
The Commission discussed if the slope percentage listed is correct.
Commissioner Grebbien stated his concern about the correct slope number.
Chairman Black opened the meeting to Public Comment.
Ken Parsons, Architect, noted that they had been given different directions in how to figure this. He believes that 48% is the correct figure.
Commissioner Grebbien felt that it was closer to mid 30Õs slope percentage.
Mr. Parsons commented that although the numbers are important, he was not sure that the slope percentage figures necessarily affect the nature of the project; he thought the Civil Engineer subtracted the equestrian easement and came up with 54%.
James Jenkins, owner, stated that he obtained the slope figure from his engineer. Mr. Jenkins stated that he wants the house to be aesthetically pleasing and that he hopes to live in it.
Margarita McCoy returned for her public comment.
Margarita McCoy, Kashlan Road, spoke on the view from the road; that this is the only view remaining from the Public right-of-way in the area; General Plan is clear that the view from the Public right-of-way is very important; compromise is necessary and cannot be from the General Plan; she asked for a continuance of this Hearing.
Ms. McCoy then left the room.
Stephen Blagden, Citron Road, stated the story poles are not correct; there needs to be a variance to the code for the parking area; flat yard area is in conflict with the General Plan; Grading Plan should agree with the Elevation Plan; Landscaping plans should be provided to show how they will mitigate the 40-foot height of the house; conceptual drainage and SUSMP plan is needed; house is too large for the lot; parking needs to be in the flatter part of the land and lowering the house one story would eliminate most of the view obstruction from the street.
Ken Parsons noted that this house is just a little over 4,180 square feet. He stated that the severest constraint we had was how to get the cars from the road to the garage; in his experience this has been for handicapped people; they have done everything they could to place a reasonable home on this lot; his client shouldnÕt be penalized for the pavement that exists on the clientÕs property; we are not altering the watercourse in any way.
The Commission discussed the information.
City Attorney Levin noted that the driveway slope is not an issue with this application, but the 5% slope maximum for parking is not subject to a Standards Modification and would require a Variance and that is not before you tonight.
Commissioner Grebbien suggested that if they moved the whole house down it would possibly solve several of the issues.
Mr. Parsons explained that they did look into that and it raises garage height problems and that was the flattest place they could work out the garage and the garage is about to the height limit.
The Commission listed what they needed more information on.
City Attorney Levin added that corrections and additions need to be made on the Story Poles.
John Beau, stated that the General Plan encourages the view from the road, but also states that the right of view from the road cannot be materially detrimental to the property ownerÕs right to build on his property as long as they have picked the most optimum placement for the house; he stated that in his opinion the owner should not have counted the pavement as part of his impervious coverage.
Mr. Jenkins noted that they have kept the project within the City required envelope; Ms. McCoy is the only one that has complained about the view from the road; project only 11 feet above the road.
Chairman Black returned the meeting to the Commission for discussion.
1:28:09
City Attorney Levin listed the items that require follow up; information on slope easement; Title Report; corrected Story Poles; landscaping plan; definitive slope calculation consistent with the Code and verified by the City Engineer; drainage and SUSMP plan and some way to asses the parking slope requirement; there is nothing in the Code that requires you to exclude that from the impervious coverage calculations but it is an appropriate factor to consider when deciding whether or not to grant a Grading Modification that would allow the increase of the impervious coverage limit.
Commissioner Baroldi offered a motion that Grading Modification 2005-11 and Standards Modification 2005-27 be continued to the next Planning Commission Meeting on February 28, 2006. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Grebbien and approved as follows:
AYES: Baroldi, Black, and Grebbien
NOES: None
ABSENT: Garcia
RECUSED: McCoy
1:38:39
Commissioner McCoy returned to the dais.
6. STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2005-25 AND GRADING MODIFICATION 2005-16 (OÕKeefe) 2192 Papaya Drive
Chairperson Black stated that staff has requested a continuance on Item 6.
7. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 2005-01 – ARTICLE 7 – ZONING ORDINANCE
Chairperson Black called for an intermission at 9:24 P.M. Chairperson Black reconvened the Meeting at 9:42.
Consultant Marc Blodgett started his review of the redline version of:
CHAPTER 7.14 LOT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Commissioner McCoy noted that on Page 7-47 – 7.14.30 A., correct ÒCriteriaÓ to read ÒCriterionÓ.
Consultant Blodgett noted on Page 7-48 there were additions directed by the Commission on B and C. On Page 7-49 - 6 we added ÒGravel parking areas are not permitted within those areas where gravel could be transported onto a street.Ó On Page 7-50 there were some changes to the roadway design language. It had to do with the need to provide access infrastructure and also added; ÒModifications to existing roadways that would require a change in the roadway designation that would result in a significant impact or a change in the level of service, are not permitted.Ó On Page 7-51 ÒU. Slope Density RequirementsÓ information was added. Mr. Blodgett noted that they did modify the exhibit referred to. There is a new subsection W. Parcel Size and Dimensions. He noted that on Page 7-52 there is a new X. Limit on Variances and Modifications and Y. Non-Uniform Parcel Frontage.
Chairman Black opened the Meeting for Public Comment.
2:03:07
John Beau spoke regarding Accessory Structures and Uses, different levels will cause more grading.
The Commission agreed that the language should be changed.
Stephen Blagden, Citron Road, stated that the requirements for Accessory Structures are vague now and he suggested that you leave them as they are.
Chairman Black returned the meeting to the Commission.
The Commission and staff discussed 7.14.40 B.
Consensus of the Commission was that a 20 foot separation from the main house for an accessory building is a good thing, but it would be hard to have a number for the vertical rule as it depends on the topography.
The Commission discussed several typos and an addition to G. Trash Enclosures on page 7-49. They also discussed F.-6 under Storm Water Management about gravel hardscape. The Commission discussed the Exhibit 7-11 on page 7-51.
The consensus on Exhibit 7-11 was split 2 to 2 and remains an outstanding item for this Chapter.
Commissioner McCoy noted that on Page 7-52, Exhibit 7-12 the key to the formula is missing.
Mayor Douglas explained that the formula has not been written out yet.
Consultant Blodgett commented that Chapter 7-16 was previously on Subdivisions and now is a new Article.
Chairman Black continued the consideration of Article 7 – Zoning Ordinance to Wednesday, February 8, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. and Tuesday, February 21, 2006 for another meeting.
Commissioner McCoy suggested that they write a letter to the City Council asking them to appoint a Committee for arbitration.
City Attorney Levin noted that it has to be on the Agenda before they can discuss it.
Ms. McCoy asked that it be placed on the Agenda.
Mayor Douglas commented that Council is working on adding an Alternate to the Planning Commission.
8. PLANNING/BUILDING DEPARTMENT REPORT
Chairman Black moved to receive and file.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Baroldi moved to adjourn the meeting.
Chairman Black adjourned the Planning Commission Meeting at 10:49 P.M. to the Special Meeting on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 at 7:00 P.M.
Larry Black, Chairman
ATTEST:
_________________________________________
Justin Powers, Community Development Director