Commentary in the Press
The following are letters that were published in the Glendale News-Press regarding this property. Full names are not included here for privacy reasons.
Mailbag - September 28, 2007
OK, here's how I see this issue with Hazbeth Lane. I know the owner of the property. I know that she is a good person, considerate of others, concerned for the environment, takes pests outdoors instead of killing them. She just wants to build a nice house — not a mansion
Oprah Winfrey's Mansion. Want to see a mansion? Google Mansion Oprah.Based on what I have been reading on the Internet and hearing being discussed, there are a few possible scenarios. This is what could happen:
- a) The property could be acquired by the city, and the city could make it a public open space.
- That might sound good at first, but think about it, people would be trudging up Hazbeth Lane to get to it. Once they got there, they would be bringing their snacks and water bottles and whatever else they might litter with. They might be loud or play loud music. They could blast music from their cars. Some person, despite lots of signage to the contrary, would inevitably start a campfire (remember Griffith Park?).
- b) The property could be used for drug rehabilitation.
- Yikes. The Federal Housing Administration prohibits discrimination against the disabled, including alcoholics and drug addicts. That means that there is nothing the city could do if the owner decided to put a rehab house on the property. A good percentage of people in rehab are there because the court put them there - not because they want to be there. Imagine addicts walking up and down Hazbeth Lane looking for a way to fund their next fix.
- c) Adel Luzuriaga could build her dream home.
- She wants a house with a profile and colors that blend into the hillside. She wants to install water stations to invite the local fauna for a nice drink on a hot, dry day. She wants to plant indigenous flora that blend in with the hillside and give birds and animals a nice place to live (after all, her business is providing housing). She wants to build something that everyone will enjoy - family, friends and neighbors.
I don't know about you, but I think C is the best choice. I understand the neighbors feel they are losing something — what? A dull, barren-looking plot of brown dirt with a few straggly bushes — nothing to write home about. What could they gain? They could gain a road that would help prevent mudslides, more flora and fauna, increased property values. Not a bad deal, I would say.
Of course, this is my opinion, and I could be wrong
Adrienne B. - Glendale, CA
Change to neighborhood isn't very neighborly - September 25, 2007
This letter is in response to the Glendale News-Press Mailbag letter on Thursday "Property owners deserve support."
In response to Mark A. Grzelak's letter, I suggest that Adel Luzuriaga's dream home is her neighbors' nightmare.
I will never understand why buyers pick the lovely, charming, beautiful and quiet neighborhoods to buy a home and then turn around and try to change the whole character of that same neighborhood. It is disrespectful of the neighborhood and shows utter disregard for the neighbors. And why would you alienate all your neighbors right from the start? One of the best things about home ownership is the friendliness, courtesy and cooperation of your neighbors. That is more important and more valuable than any amount of brick and mortar.
I suggest that Luzuriaga dream in a neighborhood that doesn't care about anybody or anything. That may open her eyes to what is truly important about home ownership.
Jeannie C - Glendale, CA
Mailbag - September 22, 2007
The Glendale News-Press Mailbag is the best way to take the temperature of the residents of the city. Most people are at their boiling point with out-of-control reckless driving and the schizophrenic growth of the city.
I don't like the out-of-control growth of the city either, but recently the reporting and letters to the editor regarding Adel Luzuriaga's proposed new home on the Hazbeth Lane property she has owned for 20 years brings another looming community anxiety to the forefront ("Owner offers a concession," July 4).
The Hazbeth Lane neighbors' brouhaha over the proposed 4,800-square-foot home plus other features on a 6.8-acre property and zoned R-1 is a display of "not in my backyard" mentality at its finest.
NIMBYism is an old, well-established and fairly reputable cultural custom. It rejects any and all intruding elements upon their space regardless of the rights of the property owner. However, even when the Hazbeth neighbors seem to understand they can't stop the project, they seek to control it by making demands on the owner and appeals to the city.
The neighbors admit Luzuriaga has involved the surrounding homeowners as the plans developed, in an effort to be a good neighbor with a home design that is unobtrusive and a complement to the surrounding landscape.
Glendale residents are sensitive to any and all changes. Some objections are warranted and others are simply people exercising that "not in my backyard" mentality. In the current climate, no good idea goes unopposed. And no bad idea either.
Luzuriaga's project will be temporarily unpleasant for the neighbors for several months as construction proceeds and concludes.
Phronie S - Glendale, CA
Hillside building codes need to be consistently enforced - September 22, 2007
After watching the Zoning Appeals Board hearing on 1650 Hazbeth Lane on Monday on TV, it is clear that another hillside and neighborhood is in the process of being destroyed by a proposed massive building project.
I saw the property owner present a case for a 5,000-square-foot home on a steep hillside lot requiring a 1,100-square-foot driveway to get to the top of the hill. The proposed driveway will cut into a hillside, zigzag on the property and wrap around the hill. The home will be more than twice the size of any home in the area. advertisement.
This lot is 6.8 acres of steep hillside except for a flat pad at the bottom, where a house could be built. The zoning administrator indicated that because the lot is so big, this project is small in comparison to its size. But does size really matter if the majority of the lot is too steep to build upon?
Many trucks will have to remove the dirt from the hill and driveway. Just imagine all the noise and dust the neighbors will endure constantly for at least two years, not to mention Brand Boulevard and the path to the freeway. Oh, but it will be only temporary. Ear plugs and dust masks, anyone?
The driveway alone is another unusual aspect of this project, as it seems it would cost about $1 million to build with all the retaining walls that would be required. The driveway really should be called a street, as it is longer than some city blocks in Glendale. But something doesn't add up: Why would someone go through that enormous cost for one home unless they have future plans to subdivide the lot and add many more homes off that driveway. Maybe the lot will be sold to developers if this project gets passed.
The owner stated that she had a dream team to help her build this house and parkland.
Given our current California and Glendale water crisis, just how will this beautifully landscaped 1,100-foot driveway be watered.
Should one property owner be allowed such an extravagance and deplete the resources we are told daily to conserve?
The owner also had another consultant who came up in favor of the project who identified himself as someone who worked on drafting Glendale city codes.
It makes me wonder whether this property owner is getting preferential treatment in the city? El Tovar relived. I would hope that Zoning Appeals Board members would remove themselves if they think their decision could be influenced by their association with anyone working on this project.
The people in favor of this project were the owner, consultants, relatives and friends who seemed to not be close neighbors of the project. Those who opposed the project were surrounding neighbors, a petition signed by 16 neighbors and neighborhood associations that opposed the project.
After some research online, I see that the Hillside Design Guidelines were created to address the concerns raised by the community about hillside development, in particular the loss of natural hillside character and transformation of land through mass grading. It appears that this is a project that will cause a significant alteration of natural terrain and hillside. It should be seriously scrutinized under the current codes to protect this hillside and the neighbors.
Rebecca C - Glendale, CA
Property Owners Deserve Support - September 19, 2007
I am writing to express my support for Adel Luzuriaga and her quest for gaining approval from the city of Glendale to be able to build her dream home on Hazbeth Lane.
Being a longtime friend and associate of Adel, I have known of her dream to build a home there for many years.
I have visited the site and found it a beautiful location for the home.
With ample space and ample distance from other neighbors, I believe the home would bring value to the neighborhood without disturbing the natural environment or upsetting other neighbors.
I strongly encourage the city of Glendale to look past the apparent self-serving objections of certain neighbors and approve all building permits.
After all, it is the right of the property owner to develop property in a fair and appropriate manner. Help Adel keep her dream alive.
Mark G - Newington, CT
Opposition to hillside home is unfounded - September 17, 2007
One would think that since "good fences make good neighbors", good distance would make better neighbors.
Well, apparently not good enough for neighbors around the Hazbeth Lane lot opposing the homeowner's lifelong dream of building a very reasonable 4,800-square-foot home, on a 6.8-acre lot after her paying for it, maintaining it and being taxed on it for 20 years.
It is unfortunate that after enjoying the open space for so long at absolutely no cost, the project opponents seem to have developed a sense of entitlement to the "non-use" of the property.
It is easy for someone fair, reasonable and open-minded to notice that the aspiring homeowner's proposal has painstakingly incorporated care and sensitivity in the project's design, from the building size, height, lines, colors and massing, to landscaping.
In the same manner that percentages and statistics are relative, so is "building context".
Though at first glance moving 2,000 trucks of dirt for access to one house might appear too much, had the owner proposed 12 homes for the parcel based on the average density in the immediate neighborhood, of two houses to an acre of land, the conditional-use permit request would have been equivalent to 166 trucks per dwelling. This is most likely much less than the average for each of the surrounding hillside houses when they were built.
That begs the rhetorical question: Would 12 proposed homes, maybe even just six, then make the conditional-use permit request more acceptable?
I think I'd take one sensibly and sensitively designed home any day, with genuine enthusiastic support.
Wouldn't you?
Diane L - Glendale, CA
Response to Review boards' power stripped on Aug. 30 - September 11, 2007
The City Council should be commended for the action they took with the Design Review Board .
Hopefully, the change will be for the better. Although, it is too late on my street where a home is being remodeled with a second story, and at twice the size of any home here. All this thanks to the Design Review Board's approval despite surrounding homeowners' protest. It was this type of complete disregard for the neighborhoods that has called for a change in how the city will look at projects.
I am also concerned about pending projects like the one at 1650 Hazbeth Lane brought up at the City Council meeting.
The zoning administrator has granted a conditional-use permit to build a 7,100-square-foot home that would require bulldozing several feet off a top of a hill changing the ridgeline to make a pad for the home. It will also require an 1,100-foot driveway to be carved out of the side of a hill get to the top.
I thought the Zoning Department needs to take into consideration the hillside ordinance of minimal alteration to terrain before granting a permit.
This is another project like Esmeralda Drive, where a hillside would be bulldozed down to create the large lot to build upon. The neighbors have filed an appeal to be heard on Sept. 17. Interested people should attend or write in and lend support to the neighbors' concerns.
Hopefully, the city Planning Department and zoning will look at the ramifications of their decisions and the effect they have on neighborhoods and hillsides as well.
Erica P - Glendale, CA
Approval is no boon for the neighbors - September 9, 2007
This roadway will allow for the construction of a project to include a two-story mansion
Oprah Winfrey's Mansion, pool, patios and four-car garage, on an average current slope over 66%, and removal of 14,400 cubic yards of earth material, which estimates indicate will need 2,000-plus truckloads up and down narrow Hazbeth Lane to move this material.So another hilltop, hillside and ridgeline is destroyed here in Glendale despite the pleas of neighbors to the zoning administrator and applicant for a project on an existing pad at the end of Hazbeth Lane that was never used for a home. Deaf ears heard nothing at the zoning administrator's office, which is not unusual here in the city of Glendale.
Many Glendale residents want hillside, hilltop, privacy and view protection. They do not want more mansions and more hillside destruction. And this is exactly what the zoning administrator has again approved for Glendale. Another mansion
Oprah Winfrey's Mansion, and another hillside destroyed.Glendale is apparently trying to catch up with its neighbors, Burbank and Pasadena, issuing permits to many developers to build high-priced houses that will pay higher property taxes.
I am sad to say it's time for homeowners with lower property taxes on Hazbeth Lane and Glenmont Drive to move. Owners should put their property up for sale on a "blue light special" and start packing up fast, if not, start wearing a hard hat, ear plugs and a dust mask, as you will be miserable for at least a couple of years. This huge project is coming to your neighborhood, and no one will stop the building of this two-story mansion from destroying open space, hilltop, ridgeline and hillside. Certainly the zoning administrator or Glendale city planning will not stop this landowner's destruction in your neighborhood.
Your quiet, safe and peaceful neighborhood is about to be destroyed. Pray for your children's safety that one of the construction trucks does not run over your child on narrow Hazbeth Lane.
Maybe, just maybe, by the time this senseless project is appealed to the Glendale City Council there will be hope that it will be rejected by councilmen who actually and truly represent Glendale neighborhood citizens.
Todd S - Glendale, CA
