Beg to differ, but spaces are smaller...

Beg to differ, but spaces are smaller

Yesterday, for the first time since the new parking stripes, I

went Downtown to the post office. I couldn’t believe how tight the

parking spaces were.

I thought, maybe it’s an optical illusion. Not. When I pulled out

of the space and drove away I was looking at how all the other cars

were squeezed in to these tiny little spaces thinking to myself how

all these expensive cars were going to need body work pretty soon.

Then I noticed that it looks like the spaces closer to Beach

Street seem wider. Did they start at one end of the street too wide

and end up having to squeeze spaces in at the other end on Forest

Avenue? Did the re-organizing of the intersections on Ocean Avenue

leave less space to park with the same number of meters? Was it too

dark to see when they were painting?

Something is definitely wrong. There’s going to be many, many

dings if they leave the paint where it is. I feel for the business

owners because even though I live in this town and try to shop here

as much as possible to support the community, I will not put up with

ridiculously small parking spaces in order to do so. I’m sure as soon

as people start coming out of the store to discover new dents and

dings in their cars they won’t want to come back either.

A new parking sticker costs $80 for two years -- and an additional

couple thousand dollars in body work depending on how many dings you

acquire? Wow.

Erase the stripes and start over -- in the daylight with a good

ruler. And, for crying out loud, would it be so bad if maybe one spot

had to be eliminated? The benches are a nice touch -- but it’s give

and take; not take take take.

CANDACE BIRKE

Laguna Beach

I go down to the Post Office daily for mail and generally am able

to get a parking space out front on Forest Avenue for the two to

three minutes it takes to pick up mail.

I always felt comfortable with the parking size as I’m pretty

particular due to my new car. I guarantee that the spaces are

considerable smaller now and I will not park out front, which is a

major irritation and inconvenience.

I can’t believe our city will do absolutely anything for a buck,

at the expense of its residents and their plentiful upscale vehicles.

So the city can make extra money we in turn will be spending money in

auto repairs, however minor, out of our pockets due to generally

higher deductibles.

By the way, everyone who drives illegally is still crossing the

double yellow lines for one of those tight parking spots. I don’t

understand why the city doesn’t install the 1/2-moon barriers all

along that section to alleviate the illegal turns. It’s so simple.

STEVE ARMSTRONG

Laguna Beach

I have been going to the Post Office for more than four years on a

daily basis and I can absolutely say that the parking spaces are much

narrower.

Actually, I will no longer park my car there, choosing instead to

park on 2nd Street and walk over.

There is no way anyone is going to convince me that these are the

same width as before repaving.

JACK GLAVIN

Laguna Beach

Family getting raw end of negativity

Regarding 550 Mountain St.:

Let me get this straight, the owner’s renovation plans passed both

the Heritage Committee and Design Review Boards with modifications to

appease the neighbors, and then at the last minute the neighbors

decide that they want to appeal what has been already approved. So

these neighbors solicit some of the council-meeting gadflies from

around town, who have absolutely no interest in this property other

than to hear and watch themselves talk on TV, to go to the appeal

meeting and protest the addition to an existing single-family

residence to make room for a growing family.

After looking at the plans on the front gate of their home, I’ve

concluded the Schenks are not trying to complete a project of the

scope of the Montage Resort, but rather trying to add enough room for

their two boys so that they don’t always have to sleep in bunk beds.

I understand the process of the appeal so that a project the size

and impact of the Montage is subject to extra review. That is a good

idea. This project, in my opinion, doesn’t warrant a second look. The

Schenks have created a split-level home so that the home wouldn’t

block any view that the neighbors don’t have anyway and the setbacks

are larger than required or what existing setbacks the neighbors

have.

What are these “six significant variations” that the neighbors use

for their objection to this project? Was it the inclusion of a front

porch so that the Schenks can enjoy the quite nature of this street?

Or was it something much more detracting like the white picket fence?

So now the City Council sends the project back to the Design

Review for suggestions for changes. From my understanding the intent

of the Schenks going to the Historic Committee in the first place was

to keep the project’s cottage nature and the reduce the size of the

overall project. Maybe they should request to have the house removed

from this status and the restrictions that come with it, so they can

build an even larger home based on the square footage of the lot that

would be even more beneficial to their family.

Unfortunately for the Schenks, their neighbors don’t want them to

really complete this project at all, even with all of the

modifications they have made. The neighbors cloak their motive with

this “abuse of the process” comment from their latest letter. When in

reality a recent comment from the neighbor to the homeowner reveals

their true motivation, “Why don’t you move to Laguna Niguel and raise

your kids in a big house over there like we did?”

ROBERT L. SHAW III

Laguna Beach

Clarification of Shack project

There appears to be a great misunderstanding of the position of

the Village Flatlanders Neighborhood Assn. attitude toward the

Pottery Shack “renovation” requested by architect Morris Skenderian

and developer Joe Hanauer.

It is not an objection to renovation of the Pottery Shack, but

strong objection to the extent of the project, the requested

reduction in parking and the ultimate request for an additional

4,750-square-foot office building on the property. The conditional

use permit indicates the requested “renovation” will include five

retail stores, a restaurant and office space in the Coast Highway and

Glenneyre Street buildings.

The city staff and the applicant state that the result would be,

for purposes of determining the parking space required, called a

shopping center. No indication has been given as to the type of

retail stores, the type of restaurant or what business will occupy

the office space. The best estimate, based on the limited information

provided, is that at least 40 employees would be needed to operate

the businesses indicated.

The city staff states that 82 parking spaces would be required for

a shopping center of this magnitude. The code states that the city

may (is not required to) grant a 75% reduction in the required

parking spaces because of historic restoration. The applicant has

asked for the 75% reduction along with three additional parking space

credits that would reduce the number of spaces to 17 (75% of 82 minus

three).

The city staff has stated that they would recommend a 55%

reduction in the required parking spaces without the three additional

parking space credits. This would reduce the number of spaces to 37

spaces (55% of 82) on the property. This, interestingly, is the

number of spaces the applicant indicates will be on the property

after it is re-striped. It is the Village Flatlanders opinion that

certainly the 17 nor the 37 would not be sufficient to accommodate

the employees and the customers of the retail stores, the restaurant

and the offices.

The developer has stated his plans are to include an additional

4,750-square-foot office building to be built over part of the

existing parking lot. These plans to be reviewed after the first

renovation gets started.

No parking requirement for this proposed buildings employees and

customers are included in the calculation of the 37 spaces. The

proposal of the architect and the developer is that 17 spaces be used

to satisfy the needs of retail stores, offices and the restaurant.

That would leave the balance of 20 spaces to be used to get approval

for the new office building. That philosophy is unacceptable to the

neighborhood association.

It is obvious to the association that the neighborhood streets

would be hurt by the lack of adequate parking on the property, and

the local streets, now suffering from the business parking from

employees and customers, would be further clogged to the over

saturation point.

It is the hope of the association that the residents of Laguna

Beach would understand the proposal and its implications. We respect

the attitude toward historic preservation but the extent of this

project goes much too far in its adverse effect on the neighborhood

as well as the city with traffic flow already a concern.

We would hope that anyone who would like to discuss this project

or to get further information on the Village Flatlanders Neighborhood

Assn. would contact us.

TOM AND DARRYLIN GIRVIN

Laguna Beach

Note: For the phone number to the Village Flatlanders Neighborhood

Assn., call the Coastline Pilot.

Still running; plenty of changes needed

Wow. Two weeks ago the Coastline Pilot printed my letter in which

I proclaimed myself as a write-in candidate for City Council. I had

no idea it would be met with such an overwhelming show of

indifference. Nonetheless, I will continue to fight on in the true

American spirit.

I did get three phone calls. Two were from telemarketers wanting

to sell me election material. The other was from a gent down at the

Marine Room who promised to campaign for me if I would establish an

account for him with the bartender. I am still considering his offer;

after all a vote is a vote.

My main focus as a council member will be to build a Downtown

parking structure before the new millennium and to see if the

millions of tax dollars we poured into the Montage Resort should

entitle the city to a partial ownership. City Manager Ken Frank won’t

talk about it.

Remember, a vote for Huston is a vote for action. We may not know

where we are going but at least we are not just sitting.

DAN HUSTON

Laguna Beach

Tide pool enforcement should be priority

I live adjacent to the Montage Resort and Treasure Island tide

pools. I have all-too-often seen people taking our precious living

creatures from the tide pools. The posted tide pool rules are hidden

and need to be more visible. The tide pool rules need to be visible

as people go down the steps and on the beach as people are leaving

the tide pools.

A marine educator and enforcement person should be a high priority

so we all can enjoy our precious creatures of the sea for our

children and grandchildren for years to come.

DONNA BLUE

Laguna Beach

The Coastline Pilot is eager to run your letters. If your letter

does not appear, it may be because of space limitations, and the

letter will likely appear next week. If you would like to submit a

letter, write to us at P.O. Box 248, Laguna Beach, CA 92652; fax us

at (949) 494-8979; or send e-mail to coastlinepilot@latimes.com.

Please give your name and include your hometown and phone number, for

verification purposes only.