Outgrowing the Neighborhood : Palos Verdes Estates Considering Passing Controls on Huge Houses
When advertising executive John Montandon purchased a run-down 60-year-old Palos Verdes Estates house with the idea of replacing it with a new home, he thought he was doing the neighborhood a favor.
“The house was totally dilapidated and the grounds overgrown,” Montandon said of the 2,100-square-foot home, which was built in 1924 as the third house in the community.
He began construction on a Monterey Spanish-style residence. But rather than sing his praises, many of Montandon’s prospective new neighbors on Via Montemar signed a letter objecting to what he was doing and sent it to City Hall.
The problem, they said, is the size of the house--more than twice the square footage of the one it is replacing.
“It’s so oversized in comparison to the surrounding area,” said Lois Maxe, who lives on Via Lazo above and behind Montandon’s property. “The roof size is what we object to. It spans three picture windows in my living room.”
According to the city, Montandon’s new home violates no city building ordinances, although some of the unhappy neighbors say otherwise. “We are doing everything to make it as sound a house of high quality as possible,” Montandon said.
But along with a handful of other homes--completed, under construction or planned--the Montandon residence has become an example of what city officials see as a growing threat to the open space and views that residents of this wealthy city value: homes that are too big.
“Most people have chosen to live in this city because of its ambiance, space, airiness and landscaping,” said Councilwoman Ruth Gralow. “People feel this is all disappearing, or will, if we don’t address it.”
Concern about oversized homes has been growing since last year, and a committee of City Council and Planning Commission members is looking at ways to make new homes compatible with their surrounding neighborhoods.
City officials say the situation, most visible in older neighborhoods with smaller lots, is the result of the increased value of Palos Verdes Estates property. People have started remodeling older homes--or tearing them down and putting up new ones--taking full advantage of heights, setbacks and lot coverage ordinances permit.
“People tend to want to maximize these limits to get the most out of the property,” said city Planning Director Gary Wynn. “They have not built to the limits in the past.”
These new places often turn out to be higher or longer or wider--or all three--than nearby homes, prompting complaints that light and views are impaired.
“Where the rest are more to scale with the property, they (the new homes) look like sore thumbs,” said City Manager Gordon Siebert.
Perhaps the most dramatic example of the Palos Verdes Estates “superhome” is the sprawling Via Visalia residence of Mary Ellen and Dennis Hardin, which looks like a European manor house with chimneys, turrets, pillars, leaded windows and imposing fence and gates.
Dubbed the “Visalia Sheraton” because of its size, its 15,072 square feet and 49 rooms include a ballroom, a billiard room, three guest suites, a gymnasium and an indoor racquetball court.
Like to Live Well
Hardin, a dentist, and his wife, an attorney, declined to be interviewed for this article, but when asked during a telephone conversation last year why a family of four would want such a large home, Mrs. Hardin said they like to live well.
The Hardins’ immediate neighbors--Virgil Pinkley, one-time editor and publisher of the defunct Los Angeles Mirror, and his wife, Beth--are not admirers of the home.
“I enjoyed not looking at all this,” said Mrs. Pinkley, gesturing toward the back of the Hardin home.
She said the home attracts “looky-loos” who drive by to gawk. “I don’t like the attention it has drawn to the neighborhood,” she said. “It puts us at risk.”
Wynn estimated the value of the Hardin home at $3 million, but said it may be higher.
Considering 2 Measures
The committee of council members and planning commissioners is looking at two measures, one that would base maximum square footage of a home on lot size and another that would require new homes to be compatible with the neighborhood.
“We are not denying the right of people to build as they see fit,” said Planning Commissioner Dorothy Flood. “The intent is to avoid a house that is totally out of character.”
Under the proposed ratio requirements, square footage would be limited to 30% of the lot area, plus an additional 1,750 square feet. This would apply to all living areas and garage.
Current regulations restrict the perimeter of the house to 30% of the lot area, but Wynn said that by putting in basements and a second floor, people can get a 90% ratio of floor area to lot size and still be within the 30% lot coverage limit. “By putting an upper limit on floor area,” he said, “hopefully we will be able to control the mass and bulk.”
The neighborhood compatibility proposal would establish a review process for new or remodeled homes that, among other things, would determine if they preserve natural land features, would “be reasonably compatible with the existing neighborhood character” and would preserve privacy and views of neighbors. The city would have authority to require modifications or deny projects that do not meet compatibility requirements.
Rolling Hills Ordinance
The measure is patterned after an ordinance enacted in Rolling Hills Estates in 1986 because of problems with oversized homes on rustic streets.
The Planning Commission will hold a special work session on the proposals on Wednesday at 7:30 p.m. Public hearings are expected in April.
Wynn said that the two proposals in tandem should handle the oversized house situation.
For example, he said, if the proposed floor area ratio had been in effect when permits for the Montandon home was issued, the house would be more than 1,000 square feet smaller because it is on an 8,779 square foot lot.
The square footage of the Hardin home would not have been affected because its lot is 54,092 square feet. However, Wynn said, “if we had used the neighborhood compatibility concept, there would have been a requirement to scale it down, put more of it on one level, so it would not be so stark.”
Violating Property Rights
Montandon and Ivano Stamigna, a commercial builder who is constructing a home on Via Zurita that the city has cited as too big for the lot, argue that tighter regulations would violate property rights and ignore the economics of building in an expensive area.
“My biggest concern is that the individuals who are pushing (new regulations) don’t fully understand the impact that this could have, not only on everyone’s property values but their rights to construction,” Montandon said.
He contends that reducing how much someone may build reduces the value of the property proportionately.
Lawndale builder Stamigna, who said he has built six Palos Verdes Estates homes in the last four years, said economics is creating the trend toward larger homes in the city.
sh 3,000 Square Feet Needed
“With the price of the land now, economically you’ve got to put up at least 3,000 square feet,” he said.
Stamigna said he paid $225,000 for a vacant 6,700-square-foot lot and is spending $300,000 to build the five-bedroom, 3,649-square-foot house. He said he hopes to sell it for $695,000.
“People like to see their values go up, but when somebody has to maximize to make a little profit, they complain,” he said.
Both Montandon and Stamigna believe the oversized-house issue has been blown out of proportion by a few people.
Said Montandon: “If you seriously look around the area, at all neighborhoods, you will see small homes sprinkled with what many people would consider oversized homes that have, over time, fit into the area without any problem.”
Fear of Future
Officials say that only a few homes are posing problems now, but they fear what could happen without new controls.
They also acknowledge that by considering limits on building, they are treading on the sensitive ground of property rights.
Councilman James Kinney warned against making major changes “just because of a few isolated abuses.” He said he would support new regulations if they are needed and reasonable, but said, “We ought to go very slowly and evaluate what we have.”
Said Councilman Ronald Florance: “My home is my castle, but what may in the interest of one may impact the whole city and in the long run, everyone loses.”
