Bradley Objects to Plan for Porter Ranch : Development: The mayor’s rejection of $2-billion San Fernando Valley project may impede its approval by the City Council.

Mayor Tom Bradley on Friday rejected plans for the huge Porter Ranch development proposed for the northwest corner of the San Fernando Valley--demanding that “quality of life” changes be made to the project.

Citing a range of environmental and economic concerns, Bradley said the plan falls “far short” of standards that should be met by responsible developers.

Bradley suggested that plans to include a shopping mall in the development be reconsidered, but beyond that did not call for a scaling down of the size of the overall project.

The mayor said he decided to intervene now, before the City Council considers the plan, rather than wait and exercise a veto if the plan is approved. The council is to begin considering the plan next week.

The Porter Ranch proposal is viewed by Bradley and his staff as an opportunity to plan a community correctly from its inception, taking into account the serious urban problems that have plagued other areas of the city. But Bradley said the proposal, as it stands now, “fails to grasp the opportunity at hand.”

The $2-billion Porter Ranch plan, one of the largest and most complex land-use proposals in the city’s history, calls for the construction of 2,200 single-family homes, 1,200 apartments and townhouses and a commercial complex with office buildings as high as 10 stories.

Proposed by developer Nathan Shapell, it would be built over a 20- to 30-year period on 1,300 acres of vacant land in the gently rolling foothills of the Santa Susana Mountains.

In a letter to the City Council on Friday, Bradley outlined a list of demands that would dramatically alter the development, including:

- A requirement that 20% of the housing be for people of low and moderate income. None of the units now planned are “remotely affordable,” Bradley said.

- A change to “mixed-use” development that would scatter commercial services throughout the area, thereby reducing automobile use and increasing pedestrian activity.

- Inclusion of an internal transit system to eliminate automobile trips.

- A cutback on office parking spaces to encourage the use of public transit and ride-sharing.

- Installation of dual plumbing systems in office buildings so that reclaimed water can be used.

- Establishment of a comprehensive waste recycling program.

- A land set-aside for a school in addition to the one already contemplated.

As the plan is currently drawn, housing, commercial and business areas are almost completely segregated, making it necessary to use an automobile to go just about anywhere in the development, according to Jane Blumenfeld, Bradley’s planning deputy.

Opponents of the project said Friday they were encouraged by Bradley’s announcement, but some said the mayor may not have gone far enough. They expressed disappointment that Bradley did not call for reductions in the overall size of the project’s commercial area.

“The root of the objections of this community is the large amount of commercial area,” said John A. Halpin, president of the Chatsworth Chamber of Commerce. “We’d like to see it scaled back down.”

Still, Deputy Mayor Mark Fabiani said Friday the changes called for by Bradley provide “a case study of what a development should be.”

If those demands are met, Bradley said, he will withdraw his objections.

“We’re asking a great deal from developers,” Bradley said at a press conference. “Developers no longer have carte blanche.”

Bradley’s action makes it tougher for the plan to get through the City Council, where the level of support for the proposal is unclear. In order to be approved over the mayor’s objection, the proposal must now win the votes of 10 of the 15 council members, rather than the simple majority normally required.

Bradley’s intervention at a relatively early stage of a development project is unusual, and is said by sources to be an indication of an increased willingness to get involved in slow-growth issues at the local level.

“If it takes earlier intervention in the planning process, the mayor is willing to do it,” one aide said.

But Bradley’s stand on the Porter Ranch proposal comes at a cost. Councilman Hal Bernson, one of Bradley’s staunchest supporters, has been shepherding the project through the council, and Shapell, the developer, is a major Bradley campaign contributor.

Shapell declined a request for an interview Friday. But Porter Ranch Development Co. spokesman Paul Clarke, who also serves as a part-time political adviser to Bernson, said the company was not discouraged by the mayor’s announcement.

“We appreciate the mayor’s comments and suggestions,” Clarke read from a prepared statement that described Bradley’s press conference as an “endorsement” of the project.

The statement did not specifically address the mayor’s demands, except to say that “many of his ideas are already part of the plan.”

Clarke disagreed with the mayor’s recommendation that neighborhood retail stores be scattered around the hilly residential area, saying the concept would not work because residents would have to walk up and down hills to get to the stores.

The proposal, which comes before the council’s Planning and Land Use Management Committee on Tuesday, is “on the same fast track that it was,” Clarke said.

Bernson, who met with Bradley early Friday, played down the significance of the mayor’s action. He said many of the mayor’s objections were “minor” and could be dealt with in the Planning Committee, which he heads. Bernson added that some of the things the mayor requested already were included in the plan.

However, at his press conference Friday, Bradley took issue with Bernson. “He felt that some of these items I had raised were already in the plan,” Bradley said. “I said, ‘No, they were not.’ My staff and I had looked at them and we didn’t find them there. That’s the reason I put them in my message.”

While some of the issues can be resolved, Bernson said, others cannot. In particular, he said, he will not accede to the mayor’s demand that parking spaces for businesses be cut back. The plan now calls for four parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of office space. Bradley wants that number cut in half to encourage car pooling and ride sharing.

A spokesman for PRIDE, a residents’ group whose name once stood for Porter Ranch Is Developed Enough, said the city’s need for affordable housing should not move the debate away from the nearly 6 million square feet of commercial space proposed by Shapell and supported by Bernson.

David R. Miller, a lobbyist and president of the Granada Hills Chamber of Commerce, predicted that Bradley’s affordable-housing suggestions might not be welcomed in all quarters of the relatively affluent Porter Ranch community.

“You’re going to have a number of people that don’t understand affordable housing and would oppose it because they think it’s going to lower their (property) values, which is not necessarily the case,” Miller said.

Bradley said Friday he was particularly concerned about the affordable-housing issue. “I found no indication of an assurance that there would be any affordable housing in this massive development,” he said. “Surely if we expect people to work close to where they live we’ve got to provide some affordable housing.”