CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 28, 2006
OPENING CEREMONIES
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Chairman Larry Black called a meeting of the La Habra Heights Planning Commission to order at 7:43 p.m. at the Community Center, 1245 Hacienda Road, La Habra Heights.
2. ROLL CALL
Those present: Chairman Larry Black, Vice Chairman Layne Baroldi, Commissioners Brent Grebbien, Margarita McCoy and Stephen Garcia. Also present City Attorney Sandra Levin, Community Development Director Justin Powers, City Engineer John Skeith, and Planning Technician Barbara Doppieri,
3. FLAG SALUTE
Mike Bagwell led the flag salute.
4. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC NOT ON THE AGENDA
Norm Zezula noted that residents care about the community and how it looks and it has to have rules to keep it like we want it.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 18, 2005, October 25, 2006, October 27, 2005. November 22, 2005, November 30, 2005 and December 20, 2005.
Vice Chairman Baroldi offered a motion to approve the minutes listed. Seconded by Commissioner McCoy: Vote: 5-0
0:5:50
6. GRADING MODIFICATION 2005-11 AND STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2005-27 (Jenkins) 1600 Kashlan Road
Commissioner McCoy recused herself because she lives within 500 feet of the address and left the room.
Community Development Director Powers presented the Staff Report. He stated that Ken Parsons is requesting a Grading Modification 2005-11 for excessive impervious coverage and a Standards Modification 2005-27 for view preservation to exceed 500 square feet in size and 16 feet in height for a single family residence and attached garage. We have taken out all of the questionable easements to obtain the net figures. He stated that they refigured the average slope and came up with a figure of 34%. The proposed impervious coverage is still over the allowable. They have changed the garage to meet the code. The retaining wall has increased, but will be screened. He recommended approval of the Grading and Standards Modification.
Chairman Black asked how many properties the equestrian easement covers.
Community Development Director Powers answered that it covers several properties. He also explained that in the past they have allowed retaining walls in a slope easement. Mr. Powers stated that we have been approached about possibly getting a grant to help with trails.
Chairman Black opened the meeting to Public Comment on Item 6.
Margarita McCoy, Kashlan Road, noted that her objection was to the obstruction of the view from the road as it is against Circulation Element 2 of the General Plan. She noted that they would need to redesign the house or place it further down the slope.
Norm Zezula, noted that the proposed grading and impervious coverage is still considerably over the allowed amounts; suggested make the plan for the house smaller.
James Jenkins, owner, noted that the view is only partially blocked from the road. He asked for a balance between the view and his property rights; he stated that the size of his home was quite reasonable in these times and noted that they spent many months considering different possibilities.
Ken Parsons, architect, mentioned Circulation Element 2; different levels; views from the road; steepness of driveway and parking area; retaining walls and keeping moisture from draining to the house.
Commissioner Garcia stated that the Grading Plan is hard to read and he listed the items that would help him. He noted that there is much that the Civil Engineer had not put on the plans.
Vice Chairman Baroldi and Commissioner Grebbien spoke on the drainage system.
Ed Borrowe, Reposado, noted that the application is not ready to come before the Planning Commission; drainage; view should be protected; application should be continued; violates many General Plan policies; if it is a difficult property, applicant should make it fit the CityŐs goals; exceeding impervious coverage creates more drainage problems; plan needs contours.
Chairman Black closed the Public Hearing and returned the meeting to the Commission.
The Commission discussed Item 6 and made suggestions that might solve some of the issues.
Chairman Black reopened the Public Comment to question Mr. Parsons.
Commissioner Grebbien asked for the elevation drop at the retaining wall in front of the home.
Mr. Parsons answered that it is about five (5) feet high. The rest of the walls are taken straight into the contours.
City Engineer Skeith stated that dropping the house three or four feet would make the driveway impossible to comply with the CityŐs requirements.
The consensus of the Commission was that the main problem was the obstruction of the view from the road; the plans are hard to read; should study dropping the house; different type of dissipation device for drainage; there is a landscaping and safety issue on ingress and egress to Kashlan Road.
Chairman Black noted that the obstruction of the view did not bother him that much and there has been much work to bring it into compliance. We have a number of issues and I donŐt think we are ready to approve the project tonight.
Commissioner Garcia offered a motion to continue Grading Modification 2005-11 and Standards Modification 2005-27 to the next meeting on April 25, 2006. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Baroldi.
Vice Chairman Baroldi stated that the applicant needs to consider the driveway and try to get the roofline down.
The motion was approved. Vote 4 – 0.
Chairman Black noted that Commissioner McCoy will return to the meeting and he called for an intermission to set up the next Item.
2:19:50
7. STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2005-24 AND GRADING MODIFICATION 2005-16 (OŐKEEFE) 2192 Papaya Drive
Community Development Director Powers asked for a continuance.
Vice Chairman Baroldi offered a motion to continue Standards Modification 2005-24 and Grading Modification 2005-16 at 2192 Papaya Drive. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Grebbien and approved. Vote 5 – 0.
There were no Public Comments on this item.
8. STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2006-09, GRADING MODIFICATION 2006-02, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2006-01 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2006-02 (Smith) 707 Dorothea Road
Community Development Director Powers presented the Staff Report, stating that this is an initial review for Standards Modification 2006-09 for View Preservation to exceed the 750 square foot building area and 16 feet in height, Grading Modification 2006-02 to exceed the allowable graded area, Conditional Use Permit 2006-01 to export more than 2,500 cubic yards of soil to correct an illegal condition and Tree Removal Permit 2006-02 for tree removal by the former owner. We will have a second Hearing on April 25, 2006. Tonight we will provide an overview of this project, listen to public input, discuss concerns and supply input for the applicant to insure that the packet will be complete at the next meeting.
Chairman Black opened the Public Hearing for comment.
Norm Zezula, stated structure dwarfs every other home in the neighborhood; violates the General Plan; 2,000 square feet bigger that the original proposal. Who will pay for the cost of correcting the illegal grading and other violations?
Jerry Shipman, Dorothea, noted that he felt it was possible to bring this project to a successful conclusion; we donŐt want a compromise; follow the codes; house too big for the neighborhood; we donŐt have a complete plan to look at; screening and type of trees is important.
Mike Bagwell, Dorothea Road, asked that there be a third party review of geotechnical reports to make sure they are done properly; stated that the project is dangerous; soils report failed to contemplate more than half the grading and half the fill of this project; does peer review make these facts O.K.? We need to consider a mitigated negative declaration; drainage issues; plan not practical and percolation tests are needed.
Ken Parsons, Architect, thanked the neighbors for their input at study sessions.
Commissioner McCoy expressed her concern for how the previous undercutting of Cypress Street would be handled.
Mr. Parsons noted that they had lowered the ridgeline of the house one-foot and the foundation was dropped as well. Lowering the house additionally and moving it forward on the lot would affect both Cypress and additional problems relating to the driveway access to Dorothea. The Civil Engineer will have to answer Commissioner McCoyŐs question on correcting Cypress StreetŐs problem. Mr. Parsons explained that he has responsibility to the owner also.
Chairman Black called an intermission to change tape.
3:17:34
Peter Gambino, Civil Engineer, explained that they intend to use some of the fill being removed to strengthen and support where Cypress Street was undercut. We intend to build up a two to one slope. It will be properly handled.
Commissioner McCoy mentioned the danger noted in the soils report and asked if he has seen that?
Mr. Gambino noted that he did not think there would be a problem and we will correct any problems we find as we do our work; that they would probably tear down the wall first and remove the dirt and proceed from there; agreed that by the time they have corrected everything they would probably have 90% of the lot graded as the lot has already had about that much graded. It is hard to figure how much earth was originally moved.
Chairman Black closed the Public Hearing and brought the meeting back to the Commission.
Vice Chairman Baroldi commented that when we first considered 707 Dorothea we only had the old Municipal Code and the General Plan. Now we have a new Draft Municipal Code, which has changed some things as more consistent with the General Plan. The Municipal Code isnŐt complete yet and hasnŐt been adopted by the City Council, so how do we square that with decisions we make now?
City Attorney Levin noted that the Draft proposed Code has no legal force; you may have learned something from the educational process you have gone through in coming up with the partial recommendations to the City Council; some of the figures are modifiable coming to the Planning Commission; we need to look at this under the existing Code with the General Plan being the top authority; the Code is the implementation of the General Plan; we canŐt use the numbers in the new Code as a constraint.
Commissioner Grebbien commented that in deciding if a home is too large, he would think that following the General Plan he would have to take a sampling of the neighborhood and the new home would have to fit in with that sampling.
The Commission discussed this idea and also how limited we should be on grading amount since the grading has already been way over the allowed amount. Certain things can be made better if possible.
City Attorney Levin explained that as far as the grading goes, there are two possibilities; one possibility is to remediate the former grading and start new with the present application; the second option is that the remediation and the project go forward together; this could speed things up, be less costly and only have to be done once; we want this to be a well thought out project; the neighbors in their meetings did not ask for the size to be reduced, and the Commission and City Council had previously approved the size, no effort has been made to reduce the size; we need to be very clear on this.
The Commission noted that they heard tonight that the house was too big, does not fit the community character and that there is a potential safety issue. They asked if the safety issue affects the remedial work? We need a complete new and different start.
Chairman Black noted that they would reopen the Public Hearing and leave it open as we will have another meeting on this project.
Mr. Gambino noted that there is a City owned easement so they used the net measurement to figure the impervious coverage.
Jerry Shipman, stated that the neighbors at their meetings were not necessarily approving of the house size, but were told that it was already a done deal and to work on other elements.
The consensus of the Commission was that regardless of whether the neighbors approved of the size of the project, the Commission needs to follow the General Plan on size and character of the project.
The commission discussed the drainage and the possibility of moving the driveway further to the east.
Commissioner Grebbien noted that he did not think the General Plan was in favor of a house being as big as you want as long as you screen it. Follow natural terrain. Fit the character.
Chairman Black stated that he was concerned that Land Use Policies 1-7 were followed. The story poles were helpful and the house is beautiful, but still too large.
City Attorney Levin noted that she felt that their discussion has given the information the applicant and Staff needs and Staff will see if it can be handled in April or not.
9. A DISCUSSION ON FORMING AN ARBITRATION COMMITTEE
Vice Chairman Baroldi moved to continue Item 9 to the next Planning Commission meeting due to the late hour. Seconded by Chairman Black. Vote 5-0
10. REPORT ON PLANNING/BUILDING CASELOAD
Vice Chairman Baroldi moved to receive and file the report on the Planning/Building caseload. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia.
Vice Chairman Baroldi moved to adjourn the March 28, 2006 Planning Commission meeting to the next scheduled meeting at 12:07 p.m.
___________________________
Larry Black, Chairman
ATTEST:
____________________________________________
Justin Powers, Community Development Director