.

Malibu Road Property Owner Asks for More Time to Respond to Protest

Ardeshir and Tania Tavangarian are hoping to build a two-story home on Malibu Road near a popular surfing spot.

The husband and wife that own a Malibu Road property where they hope to build a new two-story home have asked for more time to respond to neighborhood protest over the plans.

A hearing on a coastal development permit and variance for the proposed 4,277-square-foot home at 24024 Malibu Road was originally set for the Tuesday, Jan. 22 meeting at Malibu City Hall.

The agenda for the meeting now requests that the plans be moved to "a date uncertain."

"They wanted more time to respond to the correspondence received on the project," said Joyce Parker-Bozylinski, Malibu's planning director.

The plans call for a two-car garage, concrete bulkhead, staircase to the beach, swimming pool and spa, view corridors and the installation of an alternative onsite wastewater treatment system, according to city documents.

The property, which is currently vacant and only houses a fence, guardrail and concrete retaining wall, is owned by Ardie and Tania Tavangarian.

A petition started by Malibu resident Oliver Damavandi in opposition to the plans has garnered 77 signatures as of this week. Neighbors are concerned that the proposed two-story home may compromise the stability of the slope and disrupt their views.

JEANETTE Fox January 22, 2013 at 11:28 PM
WHAT ABOUT THAT GIGANTIC HOUSE THEY ARE BUILDING TWO HOUSES DOWN FROM CHER ON PCH ? IT'S ABOVE MALIBU RD AND COMPROMISES THE MALIBU RD BELOW. OOPS,SILLY ME. I DID. THE NEIGHBORS LOST 1/3 OF THEIR GARDEN AND BURIED A HOUSE ON MALIBU RD IN THE PROCESS
Cece Stein January 23, 2013 at 12:54 AM
For the record... we are not necessarily for this "project" however, at least this house has plans to incorporate"an alternative onsite wastewater treatment system". Look at the picture of the house built out on poles behind the story poles. How is it possible that the property is on a big enough piece of coastal bluff for a septic system and enough actual land to provide for a leech field without it leeching through the strata before gravity and natural hydraulics direct it fluids towards the ocean. The front door of many of these ocean front properties are just inches from the street . No wonder low tide walks can have that wonderful Tijuana aroma .
James Madison January 23, 2013 at 04:11 PM
"They wanted more time to respond to the correspondence received on the project." I bet they did! And what the city's planning director has so conveniently omitted are the GROSS, BLATANT "errors" in the staff reports made by the city's planning department that were presented to the planning commission. This project is yet another example of the city bending over backwards to break rules and cater to developers (or whoever will pay them under the table) at the expense of the public and other residents who play by the rules. Hey 24024, nice try pulling those fast balls. City planning department, wake up and start doing your job or get one somewhere else. It's about time for city planners to start facing the consequences of their decisions, rather than getting in their cars at 5 pm everyday wearing smiles on their way home to a different city while they continue to ruin ours with their corruption and laziness. If they never have to face the consequences for their decisions, what incentivizes them to do their job to the best of their ability?
Larry Abbott January 23, 2013 at 08:53 PM
77 signatures qualifies as a "protest"?
James Madison January 23, 2013 at 11:49 PM
Larry, read Klobber Muse's comment in the last story on this project. It shouldn't take a protest or petition for the city to do its job. Why should residents have to spend money on attorneys to rectify project plans? They already pay the salaries of the planners who are supposed to be doing that! Klobber is right- you know absolutely nothing about this project. If you did, you wouldn't be saying what you're saying. Please educate yourself and think before you speak.
Terry January 24, 2013 at 01:47 AM
The people in the Planning and Building Departments are very well qualified and do a good job. U cannot deny the right of an owner to build in his property if he proves a degree of safety for the project. However over the years in Malibu a lot of people have built in areas of poor geology or in winter wave storm tracks. Cant say i agree with their choices. One last thing for consideration is the extremely high fees for malibu property owners even for doing an interior remodel. the public should be aware of these fees and be pretty upset as a community. i know your neighbors are when they apply for permits
Cece Stein January 24, 2013 at 02:54 AM
"A hearing on a coastal development permit and variance..." This word "variance" is huge. This implies that they purchased the property knowing full well that a coastal development permit is not allowed on that property unless one or more development restrictions are waived by the CCC. Many variances are routinely granted because building codes are so insanely restrictive. They often involve the height of a fence, a property line setback for constructing a deck or patio, and even the color a house is allowed to be painted. These typically present no health hazards and are agreed upon by adjacent property owners.. From what little we have read, it seems to me that this variance application involves installing an Onsite Wastewater Treatment system (OTS) in a location that does not qualify under current CCC, Malibu City, and County Health Dept. guidelines. This article states that they propose an "alternative onsite wastewater treatment system" but gives no details regarding the proposed "alternative" OTS. Many possibilities exist, from a mini "package plant" that thoroughly treats sewage and then discharges it into the ground, a mini "package plant" that thoroughly treats sewage and then utilizes the treated water in landscape irrigation, or a system that retains sewage effluent in a holding tank and has the effluent frequently pumped out and trucked to Tapia or Hyperion.
Cece Stein January 24, 2013 at 02:54 AM
We support these peoples' right to develop their property as long as public health is not threatened. Otherwise, it seems to me that there are many alternatives for a more appropriate use for that property that do not endanger water quality or public health.
Larry Abbott January 24, 2013 at 04:27 AM
Ah, I see James. Anyone who does not agree with your point of view is either uninformed or doesn't think before they speak. Got it. 77 signatures is a number that speaks for itself.....or shall I say whispers for itself. Perhaps, as you claim, i am uninformed about some aspect of this issue. but i know this much: This protest has gathered 3 new signatures since the last article. 3. People are not signing it because they do not agree with the premise.
James Madison January 24, 2013 at 06:08 AM
Actually, Larry, 77 signatures for one house is quite a few. Especially for a small town like Malibu. And it's not my opinion- read the staff report!!! Do the research!!! People don't sign petitions because they are hesitant to get involved with local politics, because of privacy issues, what have you. I'm sure you have come across a few petitions for causes in which you believed but refused to sign them. Please read the staff report and find out the details of this project.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something