Mailbag

I was at the microphone in the hearing room used by the Glendale City zoning administrator during a hearing on a property at 2360 Pennerton Drive. I was trying to represent my homeowners' association by expressing its opposition to a proposal to build on a lot having a 65% slope, which looked like a cliff to me. Four residents who live adjacent to the lot were there. The owner of the lot was also there, along with his architect. We were all intimidated, and probably none of us, least of all me, was very coherent when we spoke to the zoning administrator. Was there a soil report or a stability analysis? How about a geotechnical investigation, whatever that is? Was that done? Had the major concerns by a half-dozen city engineers and other reviewing officers been adequately answered?

The owner of the lot assured the zoning administrator that he would build a beautiful house that would enhance property values in the neighborhood. No one, including the builder, seemed to understand what the city demanded before this project would be allowed to go forward.

After the hearing, a neighbor whose home would be directly underneath the proposed house told me she was particularly puzzled by the process she had witnessed. She said that the owner of the lot seemed a nice, well-meaning man, and he probably had spent a ton of money buying the lot, paying for architectural plans, trying to get the analyses required by the city, and all the rest.

But then she asked this important question: "Why were we in that hearing room, anyway, when there is a city code prohibiting building on a lot having a slope of more than 50%? His lot is 65%."

Good question. I too wondered why there should be any serious discussion about building on a lot that the hillside ordinance says is not buildable. Yet, houses in Glendale are being built on a number of lots with slopes more than 50%.

What is the point of a hillside ordinance when the rules established by the ordinance are routinely set aside? Is the hillside ordinance a mere gesture to make residents think the city is concerned about protecting the hillsides, when actually the builders are the ones who call the shots at City Hall? Apparently, the city's view is that the 50% standard is just one more rule to be violated with impunity. When did Glendale cease to be a city of laws? When did it cease to be a city that respects its own laws?

GERRY RANKIN

Glendale