Picus Seeks Halt to Development of Ex-Beachy Estate

Los Angeles City Councilwoman Joy Picus asked her council colleagues Tuesday to order work halted on a massive Woodland Hills housing project pending investigation into whether the builder failed to comply with all conditions attached to city approval of the development.

Picus’ unusual request follows homeowners’ complaints that the developer of the former Beachy estate at Oxnard Street and Shoup Avenue violated an agreement made between the previous property owner and surrounding residents.

The 1986 agreement was critical to the City Council’s approval of the project.

Her request is expected to be approved by the council on Tuesday. The project is in Picus’ district, and council members customarily defer to a colleague on a project in his or her district.

“Recently, serious questions have been raised as to whether the grading of the land is being done in accordance with the conditions agreed to by the homeowners,” Picus said.

Complaints From Neighbors

Residents living next to the project recently complained that they never expected townhouses to be built on 25-foot-high pads of dirt, putting them high above existing homes in the neighborhood.

They said they expected the new homes to be the same height as existing residences.

“There also have been questions raised concerning the removal of trees on the property,” Picus said.

Homeowners have complained about the developer’s plan to destroy a dozen of the towering cedar trees that line Shoup to widen the street.

“At this stage, there is concern over the integrity of the project . . . which warrants suspending work on the site, pending detailed review by city officials,” she added.

The developer, Brentwood-based G.H. Palmer Associates, refused to comment on the controversy Tuesday.

Palmer is building 760 condominiums on the 48-acre former estate of the late west San Fernando Valley cultural leader Kay Beachy.

Usually, when a council member is concerned about whether a builder is complying with city-imposed requirements, the council member calls the Building and Safety Department and requests an investigation.

Unique Agreement

Picus said that because the agreement between the developer and homeowners is unique, “I need to deal with it in a different manner than I might have under ordinary circumstances.

“Because its integrity has been called into question, I need to deal with it in a very public way,” she said in an interview.

Picus’ motion asks the city attorney and Building and Safety Department to investigate whether the developer has complied with all conditions of the council-approved agreement and report back to her.

Stan Greenfield, a 28-year resident of the area who has complained about the project, was surprised to learn of Picus’ move.

“We asked Picus to take some action at least two months ago. She told me that she couldn’t do anything,” Greenfield said.

“Suddenly, she’s making a motion. That’s after two articles appeared . . . about how upset the homeowners were about the development.”

Greenfield complained that if the development proceeds as now planned, the condominiums will “look down into our homes.”

“It’s destroying our privacy.”