Planning Board Decision on ‘Dream’ House

* Re “Plan for Dream Home Is Couple’s Nightmare,” Aug. 21.

The arbitrary nature of planning board decisions continues to shock those of us who value the rule of law. In the Aronoffs’ case, the only legitimate issues before the planning board should be:

* Is the house’s square footage appropriate for the size of the lot?

* Do the plans comply with appropriate codes?

* If the area is zoned for single-family residences only, does the house comply?

* Will the house’s physical systems adversely affect adjoining properties?

If the house passes these tests, it should be approved. Board member David Brown objects to the architecture. Does Calabasas have an “official” architecture? If so, that fact should have been disclosed to the Aronoffs before they hired the architect. If there were restrictions due to the property’s proximity to the Mulholland Highway Scenic Corridor, they should have been disclosed beforehand. If the property cannot be developed because of its location on a significant ridgeline, that too should have been disclosed long ago. Finally, if the board is concerned that the property will be used commercially, it can always enforce illegal-use laws later in court.

If a government has legitimate reasons to abridge my rights, like those I’ve outlined, I am more than willing to accept them. On the other hand, when we allow any government agency to decide our futures on an ad hoc, after-the-fact or by-whim basis, we do ourselves a massive disservice.

ROBERT GREELEY

Sunland

*

What were [Pamela and Richard] Aronoff thinking? Trying to build a house in Calabasas that wasn’t beige stucco with a red tile roof, shame on them. Did they think they lived in a city where individual private property owners had any rights? In a city like Calabassas, where architectural (lack of) style is the rule, no one should be surprised.

I recently downloaded pictures of the proposed complex and found it stunning. Frank Lloyd Wright would surely love Eric Moss’s modern masterpiece; no one should be surprised that the architecturally impaired Calabassas is up in arms.

If the Aronoffs want to recoup their investment and satisfy the Planning Commission, they should put up 26 cookie-cutter-Stepford houses. Then they could buy some acreage in Malibu, where their vision of a dream house could be realized.

JIM SMITH

Sherman Oaks