By Whose Standard Is Slide Area Stable?

I read with riveted attention the article (Times, Oct. 13) about Seth Baker, publisher of our local Peninsula News, aiding the developers in our area by sending out thousands of free papers extolling the virtues of building in the Portuguese Bend landslide area now under a moratorium.

He states the area is geologically stable. By whose standards? The geologists hired by developers?

If Mr. Baker owned a home here in Portuguese Bend and lived with the uncertainty of what predicted heavy rains might do (exacerbate the landslide), I wonder if he would be as anxious about letting this possibly unstable land go to development.

A portion of the coast has geologic stability problems, and as land becomes scarce to build on, the developers have purposely purchased fragile land at minimum cost, hoping to develop and make millions at possibly the present homeowners’ expense.

The Abalone Cove landslide stabilization hasn’t even started, except for minor drainage on Palos Verdes Drive South, and already the “vultures are landing.”

I feel Mr. Baker, as a publisher, owes it to the public to thoroughly investigate issues as important as this before he “unabashedly” supports development in an ancient landslide area.

I also wonder if Mr. Baker has read the 1971 Rolling Hills Flying Triangle geologic report that declared that area free of landslides and safe to build? Can he explain that to the people who lost their homes 10 years later due to landslides?

The Peninsula News has shown maps of the moratorium area, but has not shown that portion of the Flying Triangle slide directly southeast of the proposed development that extends down into the Portuguese Bend area moratorium, contiguous to the Portuguese Bend landslide. That has always puzzled me.

Thanks to the Los Angeles Times for bring this prejudicial situation to light.

MAUREEN GRIFFIN, Rancho Palos Verdes