Tuesday’s vote by the L.A. City Council to limit home sizes to 3,000 square feet on 5,000-square-foot flatland lots (a little larger on larger lots) was unanimous at 12 to 0.
But the responses by readers were more, shall we say, well rounded.
Are these restrictions a communist plot? Or necessary to preserve neighborhoods?
Some comments from L.A. Times readers:
"It’s all about restraining those whose selfishness exceeds their social conscience." — Rocky JS
"The fact of the matter is that these grotesque homes are ugly and that in a few year’s time they will fall into disrepair and hasten the decline of the neighborhoods they infest." — Ted Burke
"By the way, even 3,000 square feet is pretty darn large!" — Kirsten
"Awesome. Awesome. Awesome." — Stever R.
"It’s a sad state of affairs when property rights are considered meaningless, and the government starts taking on the right to limit, regulate, and control every last stitch of our lives." — Sad
"Excuse me!! Who paid for the land???" — Oscar Myer
"Los Angeles is the 2nd largest city of the richest nation on earth — and we’re suddenly limiting the size of new homes (teardowns) to 3000 sq ft? This is nuts!" — David in Los Angeles
"Stupid, Stupid, Stupid." — David H
POLL: Complete the following sentence:
(Photo: Building Green TV)