Be it never humble

Re “The monstrosity next door,” Opinion, Feb. 17

I Googled the name Todd Gish, only to learn that he might be either a recent PhD graduate or a Midwestern angler of note. I’d rather have heard from the fisherman, whose skills of infinite patience might have teased out these truths about the explosive size of Los Angeles houses: Our municipal code contains no meaningful limits on the size of single-family homes -- oversized homes have not been of historical concern; the proposed city rules are deliberately more generous than similar regulations already adopted by our neighboring cities; our smallest 5,000-square-foot residential lot will be permitted to build a 3,400-square-foot home and garage, regarded everywhere as both modern and sizable (larger lots will be able to build larger homes); our bungalow neighborhoods will face this same updating even though their current homes are sized well below 2,000 square feet; and the environment, our pocketbooks, residents and future buyers will benefit from this tempered restraint on greed. We’ll catch the big fish by casting with the delicately crafted net that has been recommended.

Jane Ellison Usher

Los Angeles

The writer is president of the Los Angeles City Planning Commission.

Can Gish possibly think that the city’s proposed mansionization ordinance caps the square footage of most houses at 3,000? Not counting patios, loggias and other spaces open on two sides, these houses would be roughly twice the size of the median home -- in short, McMansions. Had he done his homework, Gish would also know that many Southern California communities have far tighter restrictions, and their property values are doing just fine. Gish says we just need homes created by skillful architects that sit “politely on their sites.” What we get are homes created by reckless builders that violate the scale and character of their neighborhoods. What we need are tighter limits on home size with a few simple, enforceable design incentives.

Shelley Wagers

Los Angeles

The original zoning laws in Los Angeles had, at their core, a simple premise: The home size should fit the lot size. If Gish wants to build 7,000-square-foot homes, do so on appropriate-sized lots. Go to the suburbs for those 12,000-square-foot lots or buy two adjacent tear-downs and build one large home. Stop building barns right up to the lot lines.

Larry Butler

Sherman Village

The City Council should endorse the proposal to limit new infill house construction and not compromise, as Gish suggests. Households in California have fewer family members on average than a decade ago. Gish’s suggestion that some people now need more than 3,000 feet is not supported by any evidence.

There is another urgent reason to take this action. Houses contribute a lot more to global warming than cars do in California.

I am a principal in a 105-unit project in the high desert, where the average single-family house size is 1,517 square feet, and they are not cracker boxes. If someone needs a house triple that size, they are trying to find a room to escape their families.

Michael V. Roddy

Yucca Valley