Thursday, November 3, 2016

Preserve Sierra Madre: Thursday Planning Commission Meeting at 7:00 pm

Mod: Tonight is the big show at the Planning Commission, and there are a number of things at stake here. The most important being - in my opinion - the willingness of the City of Sierra Madre to actually enforce some of the many positive changes recently made to the planning and development process.

Will the city once again render much of that meaningless by simply caving in to the desires of a connected few, people who apparently do not believe that any such laws apply to them? Do updated city development codes actually matter, or are they simply lip service created for political purposes? Does the updated General Plan even count?

Here is what went out from Preserve Sierra Madre late yesterday:


sierramadretattler.blogspot.com

39 comments:

  1. The PC has not been the problem. The problem has been the CC, I will attend and am willing to listen to what the owner of the house has to say. He has not acknowledged that he broke the law. He has not mentioned what he did with the inside and why that had to be taken down. At lease I haven't seen it.I have faith in the PC to back the changes they have made. It's the CC that renders the final decision and usually in favor of the law breaker.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We will see what everyone says but the pictures tell a lot. Even if the Kevales's are able to skate away on this they and their realtor Luther Tsinoglou should have proceeded much more cautiously in remodeling a house that had such a degree of sensitivity in the community. The threat to demolish this very house by a previous buyer is what prompted the City Council to pass the emergency demolition ordinance which saved the house the first time and then later a permanent demolition ordinance. The home gets sold again and the new buyer basically demolishes the house. You can't make this up. Absolutely outrageous that this could have happened.

      Delete
    2. The Staff Report states that City Staff and the Applicant determined that this 1907 Craftsman known as the Henry A Darling House has no historical significance. They are not qualified to make that determination. How can we trust the applicant who wants to tear the house down to dig up information on why the house can't be torn down. Give me a break! The domolition ordinance calls for an independent architectural historian to make that determination and provides a list of experts who can do that. This ordinance is triggered when you have a home built more than 75 years ago and when you propose to demolish more than 25 percent of the building. In this case 90 percent was demolished and now City Staff is proposing that we gather up a few old photographs of this magnificent home and store it in the public library. This is outrageous.

      Delete
  2. Nothing thing was more flagrant than what Salisian did over on Highland. Not only did he show no remorse he repeatedly lied to the Planning Commission about what he did. Several Planning Commissioners said as much to him. Then Salisian meets with Councilman Haribedian who then tries to convince other Councilmembers to look the other way. The Felikians meet with Harabedian and suddenly he's changing all the rules to benefit them on their project to build a larger home. Word gets around on this. If people do something wrong they can just find a Councilmember to clean up the mess. It's cronyism at its worst and corrupt as well. It emboldens more people to disregard the building rules in Sierra Madre and that's probably how the Mira Monte case turns out.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 4:44, only favor the law breakers who they share common grounds with or are friends with.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Is there a reason why the Planning Commission has to enforce these kinds of laws? Isn;t this a function for city staff? It seems like they have handed this thing off to the Planning Commission rather than doing the job themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  5. There will be no enforcement. The city has no laws that give them the ability to punish people who demo illegally. All the city can do is refer this to the DA's office (and their swamped with serious crime, so it will be ignored).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps that is what the attorney on the city council tells these scofflaws.

      Delete
    2. The commission can fine the owners one thousand dollars and stop work for 2 years.

      Delete
    3. Nope. The whopping $2,000 fine is a criminal penalty. Only happens with prosecution and conviction. Neither PC nor CC can impose.

      Delete
  6. In the very least, the "Preserve" group will receive more information on the various codes, ordinances etc.
    This group may have "emotional" intentions on saving that build, but this group has very limited understanding of Codes and Ordinances ; etc.
    The more often a person attends City meetings, or watches "Cable"; for a follow up ;the clearer their understanding of the "Nuts and Bolts" or in this case; the Studs and Nails, of how and why the" City" reaches a decision.
    Yes ; there has been "corruption " of various Codes and Ordinances, Zoning; in the not to distance past, along with favoritism from Management on down.
    The Management and Councils now are serving in a more proactive time of the being held accountable; not just through Court decisions; but from Watchdog members of the town.
    It is wiser to have all information beforehand.
    Anonymous comments are just as "guilty" ;the as the City ,that has been exposed over time for favoritism. Many of the clicks" in town are no longer existing or have moved out.
    The timing on this house and what is being presented , just fell into the muddle !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not sure you understand what is going in here. Which is funny since that is what you are accusing people far more knowledgeable than you of lacking. Take a look in the mirror.

      Delete
    2. 7:47 seems to live on another planet. You don't think there are reasonable grounds to ask what went wrong here? The pictures speak for themselves. If what happened here did not trigger the historical review as called for in the demolition ordinance, explain to everyone what would. Before you answer that question read the demolition ordinance.

      Delete
    3. I think the scofflaw owner has lawyered up, and someone is spinning for him. He probably knows the kind of trouble he is in.

      Delete
    4. Hey, you're the trump guy!

      Delete
  7. One Hundred and Eight stiches in a baseball; as one Sports reporter said; and One Hundred and Eight years for the Cubs!!!
    Congratulations; Great World Series.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's difficult to enforce laws that take away property rights and curtail civil liberties to please NIMBY's. You can pass all the restrictive laws you want,but you will pay millions to prove their validity in courts.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This house is gone folks. Nothing to do but hand wringing.

    We need to make sure this doesn't happen again. The demo ordinance needs to be fixed, and we need a citywide historical survey.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The owner needs to be put through the same wringer as the Hildreths. The situations are not that different. Sierra Madre either has laws or it doesn't.

      Delete
    2. I agree. Pick up the book and throw it at him.

      Delete
    3. There is no book to throw. Read the demolition ordinance. It was carefully crafted by Harabedian to sound like it helped preservation (a PR victory for him), but not have actually have any teeth.

      Delete
    4. Mealy mouthed lawyer.

      Delete
  10. Actually if you look to see who is on the Steering committee at Preserve Sierra Madre you see an odd assortment of realtors,old men,and the regular gadflies, nobody with any knowlege of renovation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let's face it, you have a lot of hate.

      Delete
    2. That's why I'm voting for Trump! To make America great again.

      Delete
    3. America is great. But what would a Putin loving traitor like Trump know about that?

      Delete
    4. He's good at tearing down stuff "renovating."Let's see if he can rebuild despite these pesky laws.

      Delete
    5. I am not sure a "do over" is warranted here.

      Delete
    6. Really 8:15A? Where do you get your info?

      Delete
    7. His dog told him.

      Delete
  11. The Hildreths "dug there own hole".
    That example has zero to do with the Darling house.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bah ha ha!! What is the one thing both of them said? "We have proof the city approved what we did!" Except they didn't. Bring your checkbook!

      Delete
  12. Trump "will rebuild" and restore.
    "Lock her up Hillary "; is what has happened in the past; and what has happened to this town. Cronyism; obvious Pay to Play; Lies, Lies, Lies; Cover ups. ABH; anyone but Hillary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure. Chump on, chump.

      Delete
    2. Give me "free dumb" or give me death.

      Delete
    3. 12:52, it's about time we had a strong, positive woman like Hillary running this mess.

      Delete
  13. Screw the FBI and their HooverEsque dangerous antics trying to influence our election to coincide with their alt-right oppressive cheating lies. Clinton will win big despite their bigoted meddling.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Well. When all is said and done I will tear down my house whenever I desire.You may not like it,and I may not be able to rebuild,but I am not held accountable by my so called neighbors,community,or government this ain't Russia yet... You can control what I build but not what I un-build. I don't own this former house,just sayin'.........

    ReplyDelete