The Home-Building Issue: Your Letters

As a matter of good public policy, the BMO/BHO Code Amendment should be applied to all the Palisades neighborhoods. It will result in providing more affordable homes, as well as a greater variety of homes.

In 2008, the city adopted the Baseline Mansionization Ordinance, which applied to non-hillside properties and in 2011, the Baseline Hillside Ordinance.

Because of many loopholes in the ordinances, neither ordinance achieved the purpose of limiting mansionization and the demolition of existing housing as well as eliminating construction racket.

To close those loopholes, the city proposes to amend the ordinances.

The Amendment is receiving overwhelming support throughout the city but there is strong opposition in the Palisades. The opposition argues that the Amendment is a “one size fits all” and that it will hurt property values.

Neither argument has any merit.

All the R1 properties in the Palisades are currently subject to a “one size fits all” zone that applies equally to every R1 property in the city. Therefore, the proposed amendment will not change this.

Every study has shown that down-zoning does not result in a reduction of property values in single-family residential areas.

Some residents want the Alphabet Streets placed in a zone which had regulations similar to the Civic League Guidelines. On first blush that would appear to be an acceptable alternative, but on closer examination, it defeats the purposes of the Code Amendment.

Experience has shown that although the guidelines are more restrictive than the current city regulations, there is so much profit in demolishing homes in the Alphabet Streets and building to the limits allowed under the guidelines, that adopting the guidelines as the zoning would not in any way remedy the problems that need to be fixed.

If the city adopts the amendment, that will mean that there will be a larger variety of homes available on the market and it will mean that more homes will be affordable to a larger number of buyers. It will mean a more diverse population. The Palisades should be home for many, not just the wealthy. That is good public policy.

—Jack Allen/Alphabet Streets

I did not appreciate being compared to Donald Trump by the writer of the letter to the editor (“Balanced Coverage,” Thursday, July 21). My comments to the press: Presentations to the PPCC and attendance at meetings with the planners were intended to make the community aware of what was being proposed, and to expose the parts of the proposed Amendments that would make any type of development impossible. Members of the Palisades community can now decide what they want for their neighborhoods and express that to the planners during the Palisades re:code LA process.

The planners made it clear at the July 13 meeting at Gilbert Hall that the rezoning process will take at least three to four months longer to implement than the BMO/BHO Amendments

After the BMO/BHO Amendments become effective, the Palisades will be subject to those Amendments until the rezoning of the Palisades become law.

For the rezoning effort, they will be sending out notices to all property owners, scheduling public hearings and creating the new Palisades zones.

The BMO/BHO Amendments will now be going to the PLUM then to the City Council for approval. For R1 zoned properties, the maximum structure area will be 45 percent of the lot area with an additional 200 sq. ft. penalty if the house has an attached garage facing the front, and the requirement that 25 percent of the width of the front facade must be set back a distance that equals 20 percent of the structure depth.

The exemption for covered porches, patios and breezeways has been eliminated, which will lead to more boxy designs. The Amendments include an Encroachment Plane that will be measured from the finished grade at the building perimeter, and the requirement for an additional five ft. side setback if walls are over 14 ft. high and 45 ft. long. The R1 zoned properties will lose approximately 25 percent of what is allowed to be built now.

That translates to the following: For a 5,200 sq. ft. lot, the maximum area would be 2,140 sq. ft.; for a 6,000 sq. ft. lot, the maximum area would be 2,500 sq. ft.; and for a 7,500 sq. ft. lot, the maximum area would be 3,175 sq. ft. above ground. Basements are still excluded if they meet the city’s requirements.

—Richard Blumenberg

RLB Architecture 

In response to “Planning Victory for Homeowners Over City Building Restrictions” from the July 14 edition: Let’s be honest here for once. These “McMansions” are not homes. They are spec. houses that do not become homes until a family moves in. Of course, with the size of houses, you would expect someone with lots of kids, not lots of ego.

Of course, builders and Realtors want to go big for the lot houses built. The builder wants a big profit, and the Realtor wants a big commission.

These houses are border to border, but that doesn’t matter. Nor does it matter that some have industrial size air conditioners—not one, but two. And that family: only husband and wife, no kids plans.

And what about the building department? They, of course, make more money the larger the permit cost. And yet we are constantly told there is never enough money in the city coffers. Funny thing, when both my husband and I were literally growing up in the Palisades, the city had the money to spend on the things it was responsible for. Now it seems no one in government has any responsibility at any level. Maybe an investigation of the department is needed.

How many more “personal” letters do smaller homeowners need to receive from a Realtor who has a “family” that really wants to buy our home? These letters are so dishonest on their face. It only reinforces the dishonesty that this whole situation has created.

Greed has won. The Palisades can now live by the same rules as Washington, D.C. Only obey the laws that suit you.

This is a very sad time.

—Maureen McKenzie

Pacific Palisades