ABCDEFGHIJKL
1
TimestampYour nameEmail addressWhat questions do you have about these sections?Are any portions of district-wide regulations of particular interest or concern to you?
Please provide any written comment on Sections A-E and on District-Wide Regulations. Commenting here has no effect on your ability to provide public comment in the meeting.
2
5/26/2022 9:41:26William Grundfestbgrundfest@gmail.com1. PROPERTY RIGHTS LOST: Does the ordinance take away any homeowners current property rights to build and rebuild their homes? This is an existential issue to affected homeowners, it would destroy our property values, our ability to sell our homes, fund our retirements and college funds, refinance, insure. If it takes any of our current rights it cannot stand and will be the subject of organized legal action. It would be an illegal taking, and it would disproportionately impact a protected class, discriminating against homeowners over a certain age. We have invested in good faith into our community for decades.
2. PLAIN ENGLISH HEADINGS: The ordinance is written to prevent an average person from understanding it. Can the ordinance state in plain English that it does not take away such property rights and any portion of this ordinance that does is not to be in effect?
3. PUBLIC SAFETY DANGERS OF THIS ORDINANCE #1: LAPD was NOT consulted on the danger to human life and property such as home invasions and burglaries which will be enabled by "wildlife corridors" between each home, giving criminals easy - and UNSEEN - access to the back of our homes. Can we remove these "corridors" from the ordinance?
4. PUBLIC SAFETY DANGERS OF THIS ORDINANCE #2: These corridors will invite homeless people tom camp and make campfires - which could VERY easily burn down the entire neighborhood. These corridors must be removed from the ordinance.
5. BIRD WINDOWS: 2.5 times as many birds are killed by housecats allowed to roam outside as by birds flying into windows. Why not replace these bird window regulations with a regulation banning housecats from roaming outside? 		Setbacks, Fencing, Walls & Hedges, Grading, Residential Floor Area, Lot Coverage, Landscaping, Windows1. PROPERTY RIGHTS LOST: Does the ordinance take away any homeowners current property rights to build and rebuild their homes? This is an existential issue to affected homeowners, it would destroy our property values, our ability to sell our homes, fund our retirements and college funds, refinance, insure. If it takes any of our current rights it cannot stand and will be the subject of organized legal action. It would be an illegal taking, and it would disproportionately impact a protected class, discriminating against homeowners over a certain age. We have invested in good faith into our community for decades.
2. PLAIN ENGLISH HEADINGS: The ordinance is written to prevent an average person from understanding it. Can the ordinance state in plain English that it does not take away such property rights and any portion of this ordinance that does is not to be in effect?
3. PUBLIC SAFETY DANGERS OF THIS ORDINANCE #1: LAPD was NOT consulted on the danger to human life and property such as home invasions and burglaries which will be enabled by "wildlife corridors" between each home, giving criminals easy - and UNSEEN - access to the back of our homes. Can we remove these "corridors" from the ordinance?
4. PUBLIC SAFETY DANGERS OF THIS ORDINANCE #2: These corridors will invite homeless people tom camp and make campfires - which could VERY easily burn down the entire neighborhood. These corridors must be removed from the ordinance.
5. BIRD WINDOWS: 2.5 times as many birds are killed by housecats allowed to roam outside as by birds flying into windows. Why not replace these bird window regulations with a regulation banning housecats from roaming outside?
3
6/15/2022 15:20:39
Pat Zingheim and Jay Schuster
sz@schuster-zingheim.com
Several items from last week's 6/9/22 meetingResidential Floor Area
Please provide a definitive position about your recommendations about the ability to build on small properties--it appeared that it was passed over without a recommendation. We also hope other major issues like RFA won't be passed over because these are difficult issues to address but are critical to rebuilding and retaining any property value. Also, the trash enclosure was not included in consideration of all the concrete square footage count--all parts of the new Ordinance need to be considered for their impact on other parts of the Ordinance. When will the property examples be addressed for homeowners' ability to rebuild?
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100