Brea Residents Discover Good Fences Don’t Always Make for Good Neighbors

A 40-foot-long, 6-foot-high chain link fence was erected 10 years ago at Driftwood Avenue in Brea. It was only supposed to be there for about a year, enough time for a development company to complete nearby construction. Or so homeowners thought.

The fence was meant to protect the residents from the construction work and it was a welcome sight to some of the people who lived there.

But the subdivision went through several development firms, was subdivided again into three tracts, and what originally was to take one year has taken a decade to complete.

Now, the residents in the newer homes--what’s known as the Shadow Mountain tract--want the fence to come down as it was supposed to years ago.

They say it’s an impediment to emergency vehicles and an eyesore. But neighbors on the other side of the fence say they want the fence to stay. Those homeowners--from the older Heritage tract--say that to open their streets to the newer neighborhood would increase traffic considerably, create safety hazards and ruin their quiet cul-de-sac atmosphere.

Arguments over the fence were loud among residents 10 years ago, when the fence was built. And time has not mellowed this issue.

“I guess it’s like 1976 all over again,” Brea Development Services Director William Kelly said.

Kelly said he plans to hire a consultant to study the problem. And the City Council has ordered a new traffic and environmental review.

In 1976, there was considerable controversy in the area over whether to extend Driftwood Avenue north, into a new tract of homes, according to a city report. After public hearings, the council that year decided to allow the road to be extended, subject to the erection of a fence where the two tracts met. But the fence was meant to stay up for one year, the time estimated for the construction of the new subdivision.

“This is a construction fence. Construction is over. The fence should come down,” said Teresa Hampson, a resident on East Stone Canyon Way.

Frank Murillo, a resident on North Shadow Canyon Road, said the fence poses a danger. In case of an emergency, the residents from his side have only one main exit from the area. Agreeing with Murillo are 149 homeowners, who have signed a petition asking that the fence come down.

In a letter to the council, Hampson wrote, “Shadow Mountain homeowners . . . feel they are being denied vital emergency access to and from their homes as well as a safe and speedy route to their elementary school.”

But the issue of safety also was raised by the other side.

“For 20 years, we have enjoyed the advantages of a closed cul-de-sac-type street,” said Lue Rhymes, a resident on Driftwood Avenue.

More Traffic

Those advantages include not being subject to the traffic generated by the newer homes, Driftwood residents explained.

“We want to be able to back out of our homes without a car slamming into us at 45 m.p.h.,” Rhymes said. “We want it to be safe for kids to play in the streets. That’s where the children play--you try to keep them out of the streets.

“The people who live here want to keep it quiet. This is not a very large community, but we want to preserve our life style,” said Rhymes, one of 91 residents who signed a petition asking that a fence remain on Driftwood.

The issue has caused some friction between residents. But Rhymes emphasized that people living on the other side of the fence are, after all, neighbors. “I have friends over there.”

Hampson agreed. “Brea is a small town and these are our neighbors. Our kids go to school together,” she said.

Stacks of Paper Work

To support their respective positions, representatives from each side have stacks of paper work and reports dating back years. The residents’ information is as extensive--if not more so--than that of the city’s.

Asked about some of the studies that residents mentioned as proof that the fence should stay up or come down--depending on the group presenting the information--Kelly said he has not looked at the reports.

He said his staff will make a cursory review of the residents’ data. But he emphasized that the information probably is no longer valid because of changes in the past decade. The issue was expected to return to the council with a new consultant’s report within the next two months, he said.