CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
LA HABRA HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Chairman Black called a meeting of the La Habra Heights Planning Commission to order at 7:15 p.m. at the Community Center, 1245 North Hacienda Road, La Habra Heights, California.
2. ROLL CALL
Those present: Chairman Larry Black, Commissioners Brent Grebbien and Margarita McCoy.
Absent: Vice-Chairman Baroldi and Commissioner Garcia.
Also Present: Assistant City Attorney Kathy Paspalis, Community Development Director Justin Powers, and Planning Technician Barbara (Doppieri) Feeler
Vice Chairman Layne Baroldi arrived at 7:17 p.m.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Chairman Black led the flag salute.
4. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC NOT ON THE AGENDA
Katie Martin stated that she has been hired by several concerned residents to speak on whether or not favoritism and discrimination are involved in approval of building projects. Ms. Martin spoke about several projects that were deemed incomplete due to lack of time. She stated that the Douglas project seemed to be approved unfairly without being complete.
Alison Pigott stated that it is the Commission and Staffs job to see that the residents of this town are represented and that their projects are completed. She requested that the employees have a 5-day workweek and that the Planning Commission and City Council have their meetings twice a month so that residents can meet with officials more often.
Stephen Blagden, Citron Road, spoke about the use of ÒCall for ReviewÓ in the case of large houses that were approved but did not go through the Planning Commission and he asked if it takes one or two Commissioners to Call for Review?
Chairman Black noted that it takes two Commissioners from Planning Commission or two Councilmembers from the City Council to Call for Review.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR September 19, 2006, September 26, 2006 and October 26, 2006
Commissioner McCoy moved to approve the listed minutes as presented. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Baroldi and approved as follows:
AYES: Baroldi, Black, Grebbien and McCoy
NOES: None
ABSENT: Garcia
Commissioner Stephen Garcia arrived at 7:25 p.m.
6. APPROVAL OF LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR 1404 LA RIATA
Alison Pigott noted that they have been working on this project for three years. Ms. Pigott explained that at the October 26, 2006 meeting their project met all of the envelopes and guidelines. We were sent back to redo our landscape plan, whereas the previous project at that meeting was passed with only some direction about trees. We were tabled until the next-door project was considered and promised a special meeting to consider our corrections. This did not happen. When we re-submitted the landscape plan we found that they would have to send it out for a third party consideration and it would take two weeks and cost $300, we were able to make the November meeting and had to change plans already made, and then the November meeting was cancelled. We were also told it would fall under the new ordinances which were the opposite of what we were told at the October meeting. She stated that The Planning Commission should be consistent in their decisions and should direct staff as to what they are to do. Our cost has escalated tremendously. Ms. Pigott asked that they agendize their project and approve it.
Community Development Director Powers stated that they have the updated landscape plans and explained that the reason the November meeting was cancelled was that the servers went down and he spent many hours per day for seven or eight days to fix them.
Commissioner McCoy stated that on the last report, 1404 La Riata was listed as approved by the Council, when we only approved the house and pool, but not the barn and arena and she was concerned that approving the landscape plan would include the barn and arena area.
Vice Chairman Baroldi noted that he had talked to staff and they did not ask for a third party review.
Vice Chairman Baroldi moved to approve the landscape plan with the condition that if something changes with the arena and barn, the landscape plan will have to be amended. Commissioner Grebbien seconded the motion.
Commissioner Garcia confirmed that their concern that some of the trees were too tall had been corrected.
The motion was approved as follows:
AYES: Baroldi, Black, Garcia, Grebbien and McCoy
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
0:25:30
7. STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2006-29 (Douglas) 1114 Milmac
Community Development Director Powers noted the applicant, Ernie Ibarra, requests a Standards Modification for view preservation and a Setback Encroachment to encroach 30 feet within the front yard setback and 20 feet into the side yard setback, for construction of a single family residential addition. This is a legal non-conforming home. No Grading Modification is needed. There is an even swap for a lot line adjustment. Recommendation is to approve the project.
The Commission discussed proposed changes to be made in impervious coverage.
Chairman Black opened Public Comment on Item 7.
Katie Martin stated that according to Mr. Douglas he would need additional Grading. Ms. Martin stated that the residents she is representing believe this project should be under the new Codes and that special privileges were given because he is a Council Member and that he has pushed the envelope in every area. She stated that staff allowed the applicant to provide all of the figures. She suggested he add to the garage length rather than making it wider and place the laundry facility on the left side of the garage. In her opinion the impervious coverage numbers are incorrect. There are many issues including those that do not comply with the General Plan. She stated the residents she is representing suggest the Planning Commission continue the project until they get further information and have the City Engineer figure out the impervious. If you canÕt continue this project, deny it.
Jean Good Lietzau thanked the Planning Commission for the work they do. Ms. Lietzau stated that she had written Community Development Director Powers, asking him to have the Douglas project go to the Planning Commission and not get an Administrative approval. She stated that this project pushes the limit in the General Plan and Code compliance, and ethical issues arise. Ms. Lietzau noted that when he voted on the fee and appeals and the Municipal Ordinances he should have recused himself as his project was already in the Planning Department. She also noted that in order to appeal this project it would cost her $700 or more. Mr. Douglas stated that the old code was broken and the new code was better, but he sent his project in under the old code. She asked that this project be considered on its own merit.
The Commission and the Community Development Director discussed the fees for appeals and noted that these did not have anything to do with old or new codes. They went into effect in September, 2006.
Ginger Skinner, Kanola, stated that she thought the new Ordinances were to make the process easier. Most of us have non-conforming homes and she felt the wording of the new codes was not clear enough and there would be too much discretion allowed. She stated that this project would be a perfect one for a study case to compare the old and new codes. Ms. Skinner noted that in her opinion there are a lot of items that would not pass under the new ordinances. The new Ordinances do not allow making the non-conformity any worse when remodeling. This project does not comply. The Code now can even ask that they tear down the non-conformity.
The Assistant Attorney explained that additional parking comes in if the addition is more than 1000 square feet.
Stephen Blagden, Citron Road, stated that the appeal fee schedule is chilling. He stated that this project would be easier under the new code. He stated that this is a small project. There are not alternatives on this lot.
Ernie Ybarra, designer for the project, spoke in favor of the modest remodel. He stated that the plans went to the Planning Department when he finished them. He addressed some of the issues.
Alison Pigott stated that the project at 1404 La Riata is one of three homes on three lots that her father purchased. Her father tore down a house to build his and he did not subtract the old impervious from his project so she did not think it was fair to do that on the Douglas project.
Chairman Black closed the Public Comment.
The Commission discussed the possibility that some of the non-conformities have been exacerbated and concern that the lot-line adjustment is not complete, but is essential.
The consensus of the Commission was that the lot-line adjustment must be made in order to do the project.
Commissioner McCoy moved to continue this project to the next regularly scheduled meeting until there is more data on grading and impervious coverage and a clear agreement on the lot-line adjustment.
Assistant Attorney Paspalis explained that to record the lot-line adjustment with the County takes six months to one year.
Community Development Director Powers noted that no development of that site would be allowed until the lot-line adjustment is recorded.
Commissioner Garcia stated that he felt very little grading was needed.
Commissioner Grebbien noted that the grading amount does need to be checked.
The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Baroldi and approved as follows:
AYES: Baroldi, Black, Grebbien and McCoy
NOES: Garcia
ABSENT: None
1:47:03
8. STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2006-26, GRADING MODIFICATION 2006-06, AND A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2006-03 (Hoyt) 2124 Sapota
Community Development Director Powers noted that the applicant, Phil Edmondson is requesting a Standards Modification for view preservation to exceed the 750 square foot building area and 16 feet in height, Grading Modification for alterations to the natural terrain and a Tree Removal Permit to remove 22 trees for the construction of a single family residence at 2124 Sapota. He stated they are under the allowable gradable area and impervious coverage. Mr. Powers stated that they concentrated on the View Preservation. There is a large amount of cut and fill and it does impact the adjacent property-owners primary view and privacy. He recommended that the Commission should deny without prejudice the residential development and swimming pool at 2124 Sapota.
Janice Slattery, Sharpless Drive, stated that the house is invasive and suggested that by lowering the pad 5-8 feet it could be wider and not so invasive.
Phil Edmondson, Architect for the project, explained their ideas and views and noted that they disagree with the negative findings by staff. He stated that due to the steep lot they have a very small area to build on. We have lowered the area that will be in the neighborÕs view.
The Commission discussed with Mr. Edmondson different ways he might change where the house is located and the height of the second floor. They discussed how the applicant might minimize some of the problems.
Lily Moniz, neighbor, asked that any Commissioners that have not come to the site, should look at the view and what impact it will have for them, including their privacy. It looks different than what has been shown tonight. She stated that in her opinion there can be some modifications made.
Bob Moniz noted that their primary view is wider than is being shown. He stated that the description of ÒPrimary ViewÓ is much broader than what Mr. Edmondson stated. He suggested they grade it so the housetop will be further down.
Tedd Goldstein, East Skyline, spoke in favor of Lily and Bob Monise and stated that the story poles easily show what impact the new home will make on the view and privacy. The primary view is to be protected. Do not approve this development as proposed.
Will Slattery, Sharpless Drive, stated that he is concerned with the project and suggested they make some changes to make it more acceptable.
Stephen Blagden, Citron Road, spoke about views and stated that the lot tells you what to do. He stated that he is more concerned with the grading, which should be minimized. The grading could be lessened by changing the driveway and also flipping the house and pool would solve many problems.
Brian Hoyt, owner, stated that they disagree with some of the findings based on General Plan finding 17, and he noted how they have complied with the various items for building their home.
Renee Hoyt, owner, stated that they intend to live in this home for the rest of their lives.
Craig Moniz, son of Bob and Lily Monise, spoke of the Primary View as being a larger area than has been shown tonight.
Chairman Black closed the Public Comment on Item 8.
The Commission considered the sizes of the surrounding homes to see how it applies as far as Community Character is concerned. The Commission asked that staff make a copy of this information for the record. The Commission discussed the pros and cons of the project.
Chairman Black moved to deny without prejudice Standards Modification 2006-16, Grading Modification 2006-06 and Tree Removal Permit 2006-03. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Garcia and approved as follows:
AYES: Baroldi, Black, Garcia and McCoy
NOES: Grebbien
ABSENT: None
Chairman Black called for an intermission at 10:15 p.m. and returned to the meeting at 10:31 p.m.
3:00:16
Chairman Black moved to continue Item 10 for Standards Modification 2006-29, Grading Modification 2006-13 and Tree Removal Permit 2006-08 (Lim 2368 Lupin Hill) to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting on January 23, 2007 due to lack of time. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Baroldi and approved as follows:
AYES: Baroldi, Black, Garcia, Grebbien and McCoy
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
9. STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2006-12, GRADING MODIFICATION 2006-03 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2006-07 (Veyna) 1508 Coban
Commissioner McCoy recused herself as she lives within 500 feet of the subject address.
Community Development Director Powers stated that applicant, Anthony Massaro, requests Standards Modification 2006-12 for view preservation to exceed the 750 square foot building area and 16 feet in height limitation, Grading Modification 2006-03 for alterations to the natural terrain and a Tree Removal Permit to remove 16 trees for construction of a single family residence. Mr. Powers noted that they are under both the allowable grading area and the impervious coverage. There is a large amount of cut and fill. It impacts the view and privacy of the neighbor. We recommend that the Commission deny without prejudice the development and pool and work with staff to minimize alteration to the natural terrain and view impacts, focusing most on the privacy.
Chairman Black opened the meeting for Public Comment.
Richard Veyna, owner, gave a power point presentation and noted that they have tried to follow the contour of the land. There are objections to the size of the house. We have tried to keep the house from bothering anyoneÕs view and we have also been careful with what we will use to screen the house. He showed examples of how he had screened various homes.
Anthony Massaro, Architect, explained that the large amount of cut was due to the basement. If we had to do without the basement, we could. The one area that might block someoneÕs view we would be willing to do something different there. We are very willing to do anything we need to do so we do not cause a privacy loss by the second story.
Margarita McCoy, Kashlan Road, stated that the structure looms over their neighborhood. She noted that the average size of homes in this area is 3000 square feet, whereas this home is 11,000 square feet so it does not fit the character of the neighborhood. She noted that several homes would lose privacy. She asked that this project be denied.
Monty Patridge, Kashlan Road, stated that in his opinion the house is too large for the area and he will not get late sun in the summer that heats his pool.
Red Walterman, Coban, stated the house looms close to his back yard and is not in the neighborhood character for size. Privacy is a concern.
Chairman Black closed the Public Comments and brought the meeting back to the Commission for discussion.
The Commission discussed the concerns brought up by the Public Comments, including the large size of the home as to Community Character. Part of the privacy problem is due to many homes in this area being non-conforming and very close to property lines.
Chairman Black explained that getting part of the information at the last minute (landscape plan) makes it hard to fully evaluate the project.
The Commission gave suggestions that might help bring the project closer to the Community Character and control the look of being so massive.
Richard Veyna, owner, asked if he moved the house closer to Coban and tried to confine it to one story, wouldnÕt it be moving into Mr. WaltermanÕs view? He stated that he understands about the massing.
Chairman Black noted that staff will help guide you how to help on the massiveness.
Mr. Veyna explained that the Landscape Plan was so late because at first they were screening the house just from the public, not from the neighbors and they had to add that landscaping for the privacy for the neighbors. He stated that he wants to meet the neighbors needs and fit in to the neighborhood.
Anthony Massaro, Architect, asked for more specific information on how to make two stories look less imposing. Do I have to make a one-story house?
Chairman Black stated that they need to fit the house to the lot and try to keep it more in the character of the neighborhood by somehow reducing the bulk of the house.
Vice Chairman Baroldi moved to deny Standards Modification 2006-12, Grading Modification 2006-03 and Tree Removal Permit 2006-07 without prejudice. The motion was seconded by Chairman Black and approved as follows:
AYES: Baroldi, Black, Garcia and Grebbien
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
10. STANDARDS MODIFICATION 2006-29, GRADING MODIFICATION 2006-13 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMITS 2006-08
Item 10 was continued to the January 23, 2007 Commission Meeting.
ITEMS FROM STAFF
10. REPORT ON PLANNING/BUILDING CASELOAD
Community Development Director Powers stated that he had nothing to add.
11. CANCELLATION OF DECEMBER 26, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Chairman Black invited more to apply for Alternates for the Commission and stated that they are hoping they will have a new alternate.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Black adjourned the meeting at 11:23 p.m. to the January 23, 2007 Commission Meeting.
___________________________
Larry Black, Chairman
ATTEST:
__________________________________________
Justin Powers, Community Development Director