MAILBAG - Dec. 8, 2006

Senior center project is in wrong place

Thank you for writing about the divisive proposed community/senior center project. Your first statement is correct: City Hall/City Council says every day in every way that the community/senior center is “a done deal.”

To me, this stance is not saying much about their regard for the options of the residents and the city’s planning documents, namely the general plan. This attitude, my way or the highway, flies in the face of their campaign promises.

In our election just completed, each cannadate stated they would honor our planning documents, which in turn reflect the will of the voters.

Our General Plan is hopefully used by our City Council as a road map to our history and the long-term ramifications of new projects on residents and business owners namely: traffic, pedestrian safety, air pollution, quality of life, start-up cost and the cost to tax payers now and into the future.

You wrote “mostly adjacent residents” are making the claim that the project will ruin their area and destroy an irreplaceable neighborhood of historic homes.

This statement is not true or has not been true up to about two months ago.

Here is a brief history. When the idea of the community/senior center started to take shape, we formed Downtown Neighborhood Assn. The association made a deal with the city. We would accept and support the community/senior center in return for no or low negative impact.

For a few members, this meant no windows on Loma and no skylights, and one-half acre of asphalt flat-top roofing in the view shed of about 30 homes. This concept would be a warehouse look-alike on three sides and the roof.

At that point, I had a falling out with Downtown Neighborhood Assn. I love beautiful, charming buildings that have timeless architecture. I love windows.

We started to organize for a plan that would be more lovable, greener, friendlier, etc. In response, the city tacked on some unoperable skylights and some baby non-opening windows way up high. We lost the battle of having a nice building. This dilemma is referred to as “site restrictions.” Our response was [that] this is not the right place for this project.

“Recycled for use as a senior center” referred to in your editorial “as laughable” is news to me. Who told you that? Who does not want the community/senior center placed on Third Street besides me, my wife and a few other residents on Loma Terrace.

Your editorial says the new community/senior center will be a “huge public benefit.” On a daily basis 25 to 30 seniors use the lunchroom at Legion Hall. Will the new senior site bring in a larger crowd? I think the two new exercise rooms placed in the community side will have a higher daily usage; that said, the exercise rooms are placed in the back with no opening windows, like closets. Is this a huge public benefit?

You state “historic homes must give way to progress.” Let’s define progress. Here is my idea of two good plans for a community/senior center on Third Street.

Plan one: The exterior would look like the Water Company building. There would be well-placed second story rooms or wings with balconies and doors opening to outside and opening windows on two or three sides of each upstairs room, topped off with red tile roofs.

There would be a large plaza in the center where public events would occur.

Plan two: Rezone this site to a Historical District. Place building and use restrictions, sell land, fast-track the proceeds to the proposed Village Entrance 500-space parking structure. Place the proposed community/senior center on top of this structure. This concept will create stunning views on four sides.

These concepts and perhaps others yet to appear would work for this NIMBY.

MICHAEL HOAG

Laguna Beach

‘Eyesores’ should be razed

Thank you for the spot on editorial. I have lived across from the alleged “historic cottages” for eight years. They are nothing but a collection of ramshackle termite-infested eyesores. A strong wind will level these blights.

I find it very interesting that their “historic value” was never mentioned until the Hoags and their downtown neighborhood association ran out of stalling tactics. Where were these concerned people when the houses were being used by drug dealers for years?

Are you telling me that these fine citizens did not notice the drug dealing right in front of their beloved Loma Terrace “country lane” homes? Please. What is it about the Senior Center that has these people in such an uproar?

Is their existence really so threatened by the sight of people who actually enjoy being alive and are happy? Enough already! Raze these shacks and let’s get the Senior Center started!

SKIP HOUSTON

Laguna Beach

Loss of homes would be tragic

Concerning the proposal to destroy classic historical architecture such as the Sear’s Kit House and replace it with a civic building you state, “These quality of life concerns are real” but solving them would require the halting of a “huge public benefit for the city”.

As it is, “all” the citizens with residency status that define “the city” and given that a strong contingent of those so described do not see the destruction of an historical neighborhood as any kind of a benefit, one is hard pressed to understand how you came to such a conclusion.

Yes, there are some seniors who might personally benefit from this project. There are a great number of seniors, including myself, who will not and find the idea of sacrificing our historic past to create it is tragic beyond measure.

CINDALEE PENNEY HALL

Laguna Beach

Donations become trash

The Goodwill dropoff that used to be located behind the Neighborhood Congregational Church has been closed since June. Ever since, there has been a sign reminding potential donors that this is no longer a dropoff site. The sign, however, doesn¹t seem to deter these pseudo do-gooders.

Each week, there are more and more rubbish piles left by people at the old site. Honestly, I can¹t understand why people would think they were doing a good deed by donating their used items when they are simply dumping them into an unsightly rubbish pile.

On Monday mornings when I drop my child off at the Laguna Beach Montessori there are always new couches, strollers, toys, clothes, and numerous other goods.

What these people don¹t seem to understand is that they might as well just toss their old stuff in the trashcan, which is essentially what are they doing. If people want to feel good about making a conscious decision to donate then they should take their items to a location that accepts them, of which there are many.

It just takes a few minutes to do the research and they might have to drive a few more miles, but at least those goods will go to a place where they can either be resold or donated. Isn¹t that the point?

WINTER BONNIN

Laguna Beach