Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Planning commission backs clearer minor‑exception path for front yard walls, tightens chain‑link limits
Loading...
Summary
The commission recommended council initiate a code amendment tightening front‑yard fencing rules: chain‑link would be banned for new construction and a 6‑foot solid wall over 42 inches would only be allowed via a minor‑exception showing street noise, safety/security or other reasonable concerns. The motion passed 4–1.
La Habra Heights’ Planning Commission on Tuesday voted to recommend a code amendment to tighten front‑yard fencing standards, limiting when a solid block wall may be permitted in a front setback and moving to prohibit new chain‑link front‑yard fences.
The commission instructed staff to advance language that would allow a solid portion of a fence greater than 42 inches (up to 6 feet) only where a minor‑exception application shows the property faces street noise, safety/security concerns or another reasonable, documented justification. The change is intended to preserve the city’s existing character of visible landscaping while giving property owners a defined, public process to request exceptions.
Why it matters: Commissioners argued the general plan emphasizes vegetation and frontage landscaping over blank walls; neighbors and commissioners who favored the change said solid walls become visually dominant and are often maintained poorly. Others warned the exception standard must not be so vague as to make denial impossible, and stressed notice to immediate neighbors via the minor‑exception process.
Key points in debate: Commissioners discussed whether to allow chain‑link fencing in front yards if screened by planting; most opposed chain‑link for new construction, but some members noted a chain‑link fence can be an inexpensive, functional option for pet containment if well screened. The recommended draft also proposes material and design standards for permitted walls (earth‑tone stucco or stone veneer and decorative cap) and suggests a 9‑foot setback from the roadway to allow space for landscaping in front of walls.
Outcome: Commissioner Jim Lucas moved the revision to the minor‑exception language and it passed (4–1). Commissioner Stephen Blagdon voted no. The recommendation will go to the city council as a request to initiate a formal code amendment; subsequent ordinance language will return to the commission for formal review and a recommendation to adopt.
What’s next: If the city council authorizes the code amendment, staff will draft ordinance language and return it to the commission for a public hearing on adoption. The commission asked staff to include procedures for neighbor notification and to clarify objective criteria (for example, measurable noise or documented security incidents) where possible.
Representative quotes from the meeting
"I kind of feel like we should either say yes or no to walls because I think that you're going to encounter issues where people are going to say, 'my neighbor has a wall, why can't I have a wall?'" — Chair Laura Hess
"I don't necessarily agree with chain link fence in the front, and I won't vote for anything that says that could be done." — Commissioner Rick Brooks
"Unless approved by a minor exception for properties with street noise, security and safety, and or another reasonable concern..." — Motion language moved by Commissioner Jim Lucas
