Homeowners Lose Round : L.A. Panel Says Condos’ Greenbelt Is Right Width

In a partial defeat for a group of Woodland Hills homeowners, a Los Angeles City Council committee ruled Tuesday that city inspectors properly interpreted zoning maps when they measured the distance between a controversial condominium project and neighboring homes.

Homeowners have protested that the nearly completed complex at 20700 Ventura Blvd. was illegally constructed because it is too close to their houses and too tall.

The building permit specified a 134-foot-wide greenbelt between the 24 luxury units and the adjacent single-family homes. The homeowners complain that the width of the irregularly shaped greenbelt should be measured at its narrowest point, but the builder measured at the widest point.

The homeowners have contended that the measurement was incorrect, allowing the developer to build a portion of the complex in the greenbelt.

However, the Planning and Environment Committee voted 2 to 1 to accept a city Planning Department report that said the greenbelt was measured properly and is wide enough to meet conditions on the building permit.

Appeal Planned

Homeowner representative Sidney Perry said his group mainly wanted the city to admit that the complex had been constructed in error, but did not necessarily want the portion built on the greenbelt to be torn down. He said he will appeal the ruling to the City Council, which must also approve the finding.

“The issue here is the intent” of the conditions written into the building permit, Perry said. “In our opinion, this interpretation clearly breached the intent of those conditions.”

However, the homeowners are still waging a separate battle over the building height, which may require the developer to lop about two feet off the top. That issue will come before the city’s Board of Zoning Appeals in August.

In accepting the planning staff report, the council committee also agreed with an earlier decision by Chief Zoning Administrator Franklin P. Eberhard, who determined that the structure is too tall to meet a 45-foot height restriction imposed on the site 10 years ago. Development partner James R. Gary said he is appealing that decision.

Councilman Hal Bernson, committee chairman, dissented, saying the committee should not take a stand on the height dispute until the Board of Zoning Appeals has considered it.