Council conflict clear on Glenoaks property

Not so long ago, the majority of homeowner letters to the Glendale News-Press addressed Oakmont V and the pros and cons of street calming. What a difference a few years makes. Today, preservation of neighborhoods, homes, quality of life and home values are the central theme of homeowner letters to the News-Press.

Thank you to the Glendale News-Press for providing the homeowners of this city with a forum to express their concerns about the City Council’s decisions affecting Chevy Chase Canyon, District 14 and Montrose.

The majority of the City Council refuses to enforce the hillside ordinance.

The majority of council refused to address the concerns of hundreds of Montrose residents about the future of Montrose.

The majority of council refused to listen to many residents of District 14 (North Central Avenue area), who asked the council to align the zoning in the neighborhood with the current density and deal proactively with the traffic, noise and parking problems in that neighborhood.

If all of the above was not enough to make homeowners lose confidence in the will of the majority of council to protect their neighborhoods, one member of the council, in my opinion, has gone one step further by seemingly using the zoning code to provide special benefit for one constituent ? not by variance, the weapon of choice in Chevy Chase Canyon ? but by actively promoting the rezoning of residential property to commercial. The property located at 702 E. Glenoaks Blvd. is an R-1 ? low-density residential ? home in a neighborhood that is not blighted, where young couples have moved in to establish their homes and raise their children, where retired couples desire to spend their golden years in a peaceful environment. It is an R-1 home where the proposed commercial use would not provide a service for the neighborhood, such as a doctor’s office.

The owners of 702 E. Glenoaks Blvd. want to continue commercial uses. The city, doing its best imitation of an ostrich with its head in the sand, refuses to admit the obvious ? if 702 E. Glenoaks Blvd. is rezoned, it is only a matter of time before the rest of the street is also rezoned to commercial.

If you are interested in watching Councilman Rafi Manoukian contort the rationale for rezoning to benefit a property owner, for whom he once worked as a certified public accountant, watch City Council on July 11. Better yet, attend the hearing. The last time the matter was on the agenda, Manoukian put on quite a show by trying to continue the hearing on the rezoning to December and, only after Councilman Bob Yousefian interceded, agreed to a continuance to July 11. Why did Manoukian want the matter continued? One reason, I believe, was to allow the owners of 702 E. Glenoaks Blvd. time to rebut the city attorney’s opinion that all five council members must agree to change the zoning to commercial. Manoukian must fear that at least one of the council members will uphold the law and apparently is willing to do whatever he deems necessary, including undermining the city attorney, to win.

Be prepared to listen to Manoukian defend the owners of 702 E. Glenoaks Blvd. and state that they are not being treated fairly. They spent a lot of money, Manoukian told me, on fees paid to the city to process their application for the zone change. He told me that the property abuts the wash and is on the edge of a commercial district and should be rezoned. Neither are reasons for rezoning the property. The historic boundary between the C-1 and R-1 zone is Howard Street. Manoukian told me that the entire south side of Glenoaks Boulevard from Howard Street to Geneva Street should be rezoned to commercial.

The council can legally rezone property only after making a finding that the rezoning promotes health, safety or general welfare. The rezoning may promote Manoukian’s welfare, but certainly not the general welfare and safety of the neighborhood.

Manoukian seemingly does not understand that the neighbors of 702 E. Glenoaks Blvd. are the property owners not being treated fairly. They bought their properties to use as homes. Their choices are to put up with the rezoning or sell their homes. The owners of 702 E. Glenoaks Blvd. can move their business to a commercial district and use the property as it is intended to be used ? and not lose a dime.

For those readers who are not yet engaged because they think their homes and neighborhoods are safe, get engaged. The negative impacts of the council’s recent decisions affect us all ? more traffic, longer drive time, more noise, increased demand on services provided by the city, increased potential for City liability when houses are constructed on steep, substandard lots (remember the houses perched on steep slopes that slid in Coldwater Canyon as a result of the 1994 quake?). Drive through the west side of Los Angeles at 5 p.m. to get a taste of what is to come if the current council majority does not change course or get voted out of office.