YOU ARE HERE: Glendale HomeCollections

Readers Respond -- Charles Laulette

October 31, 2001

This commentary is in response to the commentary by Richard R. Robbins

Jr. concerning the Oakmont V project.

At the second public hearing, a real estate agent spoke in support of

the 572-unit project, claiming that the fair-market value for each of Mr.

Gregg's undeveloped lots would be about $350,000. She added, "It was

atrocious that the city of Glendale had only raised $8 million for a

recreational alternative."


Mr. Robbins, by no coincidence, is a real estate agent also, and Mr.

Robbins chose to include his occupation right under his name on his

commentary. Nice try, Mr. Robbins.

What is the value of the Verdugo Mountains to the Verdugo Woodlands?

The Gregg family claims that his land is worth more than $40 million. But

his project proposes blasting, ridgeline cuts and 100-foot-high retaining

walls, while other units will be built on 100 feet of fill. It will bury

a riparian stream, calls for a million-gallon water tower in plain view,

and will fill our air with soot and debris from grading for a decade or

more to come.

Mr. Robbins claimed that his concern was that the city of Glendale

would be responsible for having to pay damages if the 572-unit project

was voted down. He stated that his concerns arose once the judge ruled in

favor of the Greggs after a motion to dismiss was filed by the city. The

significance of this early ruling merely means that the Greggs might have

some merit to their lawsuit.

Mr. Robbins claims that it's a fight for a few at the expense of many.

The Glendale Hillside Ordinance was passed in 1993, and it's significance

limits any hillside development to only 12 units. Well ... this is the

last hillside project of such enormity that upon stipulation qualified

for the pre-1993 hillside ordinance standard.

Mr. Robbins stated in his commentary that there are 200,000 residents

of Glendale and only 200 to 300 people showed up at the public hearing.

(Glendale News-Press approximated that there were 400.) Still, this

statement is misleading. Last year, there was a hearing and around 800

people showed up to rebut the inadequacies of the first environmental

impact report only. The second hearing, which was the result of the first

hearing, was to address the revised environmental impact report only, and

like the first hearing was not to discuss the merits of the project. The

first EIR presented only five significant and unavoidable impacts, where

the revisions revealed more than 30.

Mr. Robbins commented that at the hearing there were parties arguing

Glendale News-Press Articles Glendale News-Press Articles