Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Chapman Corridor Revitalization topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents press Placentia council to slow Chapman Corridor revitalization plan

Placentia City Council · September 2, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Dozens of residents urged the council to pause or revise the Chapman Corridor Revitalization Project, saying outreach was inadequate and warning that allowed zoning could enable taller, denser development that would harm neighborhood character.

Multiple residents told the Placentia City Council on Sept. 2 that the Chapman Corridor Revitalization Project (CCRP) has not been properly explained to neighbors and could permit taller, denser buildings that would change the city’s character.

"I think it's still a suburban community... I believe the residents here value the suburban feel, and I'm very concerned that the CCRP, as it is now drafted, opens the door for us to create a very urban feel on Chapman Avenue," said Barbara Openshaw, who asked the council not to pass the CCRP in its current form and urged the plan be sent back for more outreach. Several commenters said they had not been personally contacted; one speaker, Jana Laborti, said her family owns multiple parcels identified in the plan and that estate plans would not allow sale or rezoning of the properties.

Residents and speakers pressed the council for clearer explanations of what the plan allows versus what it requires. "With the exception of a middle parcel, my family owns all of that property... Our family has made a clear and longstanding decision that these properties will not be sold to developers," Laborti said. Other commenters cited traffic, displacement of lower-income residents and strain on infrastructure if higher-density development proceeds.

Councilmembers responded that the CCRP is a revitalization program and not an immediate project, reiterated it does not force property sales or eminent-domain takings, and acknowledged the need for improved notice and community engagement. Councilmember Yamaguchi urged residents to point to specific plan elements they oppose so staff and the council can address them in drafting revisions.