Arcadia - Building Tensions Big Homes Change

Arcadia City Council meetings have become very contentious and vitriolic with tensions over residential development continuing to rise past the boiling point.  A number of very vocal concerned citizens have attacked three council members over their votes on large home construction approvals (in compliance with existing ordinances and codes) and the suspension of a city wide zoning code update process. A California Environmental Quality Act lawsuit was filed by an activist group against the City regarding residential development. The “appropriateness” of this action has been seriously questioned. A recall  action against certain council members has been threatened and perhaps has been initiated.

These tensions are very much about large homes and community/neighborhood change.  It is natural for homeowners to want to preserve their neighborhoods as they are.  Home and neighborhood engender strong emotions.  Home is the setting of most family memories and the launching place for future dreams.  It represents safety, security and a foundation.  It is usually a family’s largest investment/asset. Changing home surroundings can result in anxiety and concerns.

The City’s approval of the 29 E. Orange Grove and 1600 Highland Oaks projects went through the City’s appeal process; the Planning Commission voted 5 – 0 and Council voted 4 – 1 and 3 – 2 for approval. Arcadia’s 91007 zip code was the first zip code within the five southern most CA counties in which the median sales price surpassed the pre-recession median sale price high point. It doesn’t appear large home construction has hurt property values in Arcadia.  Building codes and ordinances reflect very specific 1^st and 2^nd floor setback requirements in addition to structure height limitations. I know of no existing home which has experienced a decline in value due to the construction of an adjacent or nearby new large home.

At Council meetings one hears a lot of conflicting concerns. Multiple families are occupying these homes and creating heavy traffic and tax limited City resources. Nobody is living in these homes destroying our neighborhood and creating safety/security concerns. Construction is everywhere and clogs streets at the same time the concerned citizen suggested developers be required to put all of the street home utilities underground.

Where do one owner’s property rights end and his neighbor’s rights begin? Does a neighbor’s right to build a 2^nd story prevail to the detriment of his neighbor’s view? Are views sacrosanct? Are HOA pronouncements subordinate to City ordinances and codes? Does the HOA really speak for all of the residents within the HOA boundaries? Are those residents vehemently expressing themselves a very vocal minority or do they reflect  the majority of residents?  Do those advocating reducing the size of new homes understand that the reduction will result in lower tear-down property values thus reducing the financial legacy left to heirs, further limiting retirement options and health care alternatives?  Are some  expressing  their  distaste for the larger homes also expressing their anxiety resulting from Arcadia’s ethnic transition?

The residential development issue is very emotional and extremely complicated. We are fortunate to live in a very well run city. The City should go forward with the residential building code and ordinance review process. Issues should be thoroughly discussed, reviewed and analyzed. And then, the citizens of Arcadia should decide how we address the residential development issues through the election of our elected representatives or voter referendum.  We have to keep faith in the process and the intelligence and fairness of our residents.