Community Commentary:

I want to thank the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, and in particular Supervisor Michael Antonovich, for his support of our community in the decision to deny the conditional use permit for the five-unit apartment project on Glenada Avenue in Montrose.

To recap, several years ago, the developers on this project bought a Craftsman-style house on Glenada Avenue that had the distinction of having been one of the very first homes built in Montrose. Despite the structure’s historical significance, there is no historical protection offered in the county portion of Crescenta Valley, so there was no way to prevent its destruction if the owners so desired.

It became obvious that the owners bought the property with the intention of demolishing the nearly 100-year-old house, as they allowed the home to fall into disrepair.

The property was zoned R-2, which would have allowed them to build two units by right, but they asked for a conditional use permit to build five instead. This proposal was vigorously opposed by the neighbors and the community at large, but when it went to a hearing at the county’s Regional Planning Board, it was approved, despite several instances of (to put it politely) “inconsistencies” in the testimony at the hearing by the developers and their paid consultants.

Fortunately, after many community members’ letters and calls to Antonovich and a strong protest by the Crescenta Valley Town Council, the supervisor appealed the decision. Despite this pending appeal, the developers demolished the historic home anyway, which made front-page headlines in this paper (“Montrose relic gets razed,” Oct. 28).

I’m happy to report that on Feb. 24, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors heard the appeal and voted to deny the conditional use permit on this property. This sends the developers back to the drawing board to develop the two units they are allowed by the zoning code.

In my opinion, the developers shot themselves in the foot on this project. They insisted on pushing for five units, which raised eyebrows in the community. When the historic potential of the existing Craftsman home became an issue, they demolished it, removing it as a bargaining chip, and further angered neighbors. They now own an empty lot that brings them no income, and the neighborhood is blessed with a new vacant lot that will undoubtedly become a weed-choked eyesore.

So why was this seemingly small development fight so important? Several communities around us, like South Glendale and Sunland/Tujunga, have seen their quiet streets aggressively overdeveloped with multifamily units, ruining entire neighborhoods.

As the development target shifts to the Crescenta Valley, it’s up to our community to decide how far we want to go with this push from the development community. It seems silly to fight so hard to prevent three extra units.

But if we allow exceptions, particularly ones that only maximize the short-term profit of a few, we set a precedent that is hard to reverse.

I welcome developers that are willing to work in harmony with our community and that are willing to follow the codes set down.

Reasonable, measured development is a positive for us, and will boost all of our property values and quality of life.

 MIKE LAWLER is a La Crescenta resident.