Judge Won’t Order Officials to OK Razing of Shops

A judge refused Wednesday to order Los Angeles city building officials to issue a demolition permit to a developer trying to begin construction of an 85,000-square-foot commercial project before the proposed Ventura Boulevard specific plan can curtail it.

Superior Court Judge John Zebrowski’s refusal to order issuance of the permit to Jama Enterprises, Inc.--owner of a block-long strip of one-story stores in Sherman Oaks that included the popular Scene of the Crime Bookstore--was hailed as a victory by Tom Grant, a director of the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn.

But Zebrowski also invited Jama’s attorneys to provide him with proof that the city Building Department is delaying its review of the project for political reasons.

Zebrowski earlier this year sharply attacked the Los Angeles City Council for using its land-use powers for political purposes in a case involving a proposed development on the site of a Studio City carwash. Homeowners opposed to the development asked the city to declare the 1950s carwash a cultural monument to delay its demolition. Zebrowski’s caustic ruling cleared the way for the Studio City project to proceed.

Jama wants to raze the empty stores to make way for a 3-story, $20-million retail-commercial complex. At stake ultimately is whether Jama will be able to begin work on the project in time to avoid the growth-cutting effects of the proposed Ventura Boulevard specific plan.

The Ventura Boulevard plan, as presently proposed, would reduce the allowable size of the Jama project by about one-third, from 85,000 square feet to 53,000 square feet and from three to two stories. The council is expected to approve the plan, in some form, by early fall.

Jama attorney Benjamin Reznik argued in court that it was unreasonable for the city to deny the demolition permit until completion of an environmental review now being conducted by the city’s Building and Safety Department.

But Zebrowski agreed with Deputy City Atty. Susan Pfann that withholding the demolition permit served a legitimate land-use policy. If the assessment concludes that a full environmental impact report is required, the EIR would have to compare the effects of the developer’s project with those of retaining the existing buildings. If the buildings were demolished, such a comparison would be meaningless, Pfann argued.

Reznik said in an interview that his client is seeking to get the project under construction before the Ventura Boulevard plan takes effect.

The attorney also claimed that the Building Department is dragging its feet on reviewing Jama’s environmental assessment document to satisfy what he said is Councilman Michael Woo’s politically inspired desire to see the project limited by the Ventura Boulevard plan. The proposed project is in Woo’s district.

But Grant, the homeowners representative, said Jama’s own failure to provide the city with adequate environmental documents caused the delays.

Meanwhile, a top Building Department official predicted that his agency will order Jama to file a full environmental impact report. “This is a controversial one, and Councilman Woo wants a full EIR,” assistant department chief Tim Taylor said in an interview.

Reznik said Taylor’s remarks only bolstered his conviction that the Building Department’s review of Jama’s project is being handled in a political fashion. The city cannot determine if a full report is needed until the environmental assessment is completed, Reznik said.