Planners Put Reins to Law for Saving Horse Areas

Legislation to help preserve the “horse country” of northern San Fernando Valley was thrown off course Thursday when the Los Angeles Planning Commission bucked at imposing regulations on development in horse-keeping neighborhoods.

Surprising both horse lovers and the two city councilmen who proposed the ordinance, the commission refused to endorse a law that for the first time would require new developments in horse-keeping areas to set aside enough level land on each parcel to accommodate such equestrian facilities as stables and corrals. The vote was 3 to 1.

Because the commission was making only a recommendation to the City Council, its vote was not a fatal blow to the ordinance. But the rejection casts some doubt over how far the city will go to preserve the dwindling number of places in Los Angeles where people can own and ride horses.

Councilman Hal Bernson, who proposed the ordinance with Councilman Joel Wachs, confidently predicted that the 10 votes needed to win passage by the council will be found.

The Planning Commission action “doesn’t matter,” said Bernson, who did not attend the meeting. “The council will have the final word.”

Minimum Lot Size Requirement

Wachs and Bernson represent the horse-keeping districts--concentrated mostly around Sunland, Sun Valley, Chatsworth, Granada Hills and Sylmar areas--that allow for the private ownership of horses. The only requirement by the city now is that the lots in such areas cover at least 17,500 square feet.

Horse lovers, who testified briefly before the commission, have been pushing for more regulations because they feel that, even at 17,500 square feet, some lots are not large enough for equestrian use because of the size and shape of the homes or the hilliness of the property.

Bernson, whose district includes the horse-keeping areas of Chatsworth and Granada Hills, wants to require that a minimum of 9,000 square feet of a property in a horse-keeping district be level and that 432 square feet of the level ground be set aside for a horse corral or stable.

Wachs also had included in the proposed ordinance a provision that 2,000 square feet of the level land be free of permanent structures, to make sure there is space for equine facilities.

Objections to that provision were raised by commissioners after the city Building and Safety Department concluded that the proposed development restriction would apply not only to the construction of structures on the 2,000 square feet, but also the building of swimming pools, tennis courts or other recreational facilities.

Planning Commissioner William G. Luddy, who led the opposition to the 2,000-foot proposal, argued that it would impose undue restrictions on people who buy homes in horse-keeping districts but have no intention of owning horses.

“I’m not prepared to say they can’t use their backyards for some other purpose,” Luddy said.

Commissioner Suzette Neiman of Encino and Commissioner Sam Botwin joined Luddy in rejecting the ordinance. Commission President Daniel P. Garcia supported the ordinance by voting against the motion to reject it. Commissioner Robert J. Abernethy was absent.

Arline De Sanctis, a deputy to Wachs, said the commission may not have understood that the proposal would not preclude any other uses. Patios, gazebos or barbecues would be allowed, she said.

It will be six to eight weeks before the council acts on the proposed equestrian preservation ordinance, said Dave Lessley, senior city planner. During that time, Lessley said, the 2,000-foot provision could be removed or the ordinance could be rewritten to specify what recreational uses will be permitted.