|
From Our Readers
Peninsula News – Thursday, February 7, 2008Truth and accuracy
To the Editor:
By now, I believe that most people know where I stand on redevelopment of the Rolling Hills Estates downtown.
I am a merchant and therefore I look forward to growing my business, but I know that this will not happen without people. Therefore, I fully support the current and proposed residential development for our downtown.
I am also a resident of RHE and as such I have a deep desire to maintain the nature of the community I moved my family into almost 30 years ago.
I am also a realist and recognize that all things must and do change over time.
Our downtown is withering and needs revitalization. Our merchants are struggling and need customers. Many of our residents, especially those who raised their families in our traditional single-family homes, are now "empty nesters" and are looking for alternative housing in our community.
Capable and qualified developers have sensed this need and are endeavoring to provide for both the redevelopment of our downtown and the supply of this alternative housing.
Much has transpired with respect to this development. RHE council rejected the proposed Peninsula Village Overlay Zone project and is now evaluating all development under RHE’s general plan. My evaluation of this process has shown me that all proposed development is subject to significant and exhaustive requirements. The RHE council has committed to this process and has assured residents that it will be complied with without exception. I believe them to be persons of their words and actions.
it is for this reason that I am so disturbed by the letter in the Jan. 26 PV News, which asserts that the council is in violation of the California Environmental Quality Act on a currently proposed project. Further, a member of the RHE Business Owners Association has circulated an e-mail amplifying this assertion.
I've done some checking. This assertion is completely false.
I urge the RHE council to publicly respond to this letter and set the record straight.
These are difficult enough times, and we shouldn’t have to deal with false statements and "sound bite" e-mails on such a critical topic.
Mike Giglia
Rolling Hills Estates
Golden opportunity
To the Editor:
This seems like the time for the Rolling Hills Estates City Council to take a deep breath, sit on their hands and rethink their plans for Peninsula Center Wait until the buildings now under construction are completed and see what their impact will have on the area.
Traffic congestion: Will the added traffic cause the congestion on PV Drive North to become completely unacceptable, and will RHE be faced with the necessity for widening PV Drive North by pressure exerted by its new citizenry residing in Peninsula Center?
Building utilization: Will there be sufficient demand to fill the buildings already in the works, or will Peninsula Center have more capacity than tenants and end up having derelict, underutilized housing to add to its already underutilized commercial property?
Ambiance: Will the new residents living in Peninsula Center be regarded as full citizens of RHE or relegated to second-class citizenry? I assume the answer to that question would be, “No, the new residents would have all the amenities that the rest of RHE has.” Therefore, is RHE willing to expend the money and effort it would require to add the city's famous “country charm” to Peninsula Center? I'm picturing a pleasant park for relaxing, a playground area for children, tennis courts and bike paths.
With the downturn in real estate, RHE has a golden opportunity to change directions and come out with a more community-friendly plan.
Ruth Hattersley
Rancho Palos Verdes
Object to development
To the Editor:The letter from Julie Reynolds printed Saturday, Jan. 26 expressed well my long-held concerns about the proposed further development of Peninsula Center. She seems to have the credentials and the knowledge to challenge the advice that's being given to the RHE City Council.
While there is still time, more of us must step forward and object to this development!
Concerned residents can help by writing to the editor of this paper and e-mailing members of the RHE City Council directly at :
www.ci.rolling-hills-estates.ca.us.
Quintus (Bud) Guthrie
Rancho Palos Verdes
'Wake up, Stoltz'
To the Editor: Last week the owners of the "Avenue of the Peninsula" in RHE announced they intend to alter the laws of economics. That's right. Stoltz Real Estate Partners of Philadelphia are planning to change the mall’s name, and they want you to participate in the re-naming.
This nullification of the “old” name is, of course, designed to produce more revenue from the operation. That would warm the hearts of the RHE tax collectors whose latest goal of modifying the entire shopping area of their city to include live-in consumers was met with indignation from the public.
Now think about it: If a mere name change would produce more revenue, a lot more of that would be going on throughout the economy. Stoltz, like the prior owners, has found out that they bought a pig in a poke, and they are probably trying to boost performance so that they, too, can unload it to another (how do I say it?) ... “sucker.”
The location of the mail, as many retail-savvy people have commented, is out of place. Over half of the potential customers in the mall's drawing area live either in the Pacific Ocean or downhill, where equivalent shops are abundant ... and without a hill to climb.
No, a name change isn’t listed as one of the laws of economics. I doubt that Sears, Roebuck and Company (and many others) are still around because of their name; its because they satisfied the customers' wants with fair prices and with very customer-oriented policies.
Wake up, Stoltz!
Barry J. Hildebrand
Rancho Palos VerdesVisit the PV News website at: http://www.pvnews.com/local_news/