Judge Says City Must Zone Area for Project : Warner Ridge: In a setback for Councilwoman Picus and some homeowners, the council is ordered to let a commercial development proceed in line with the General Plan.

In a major blow to Councilwoman Joy Picus and her homeowner allies, a Superior Court judge Friday ordered the Los Angeles City Council to grant a developer the zoning needed to build a commercial complex on the controversial Warner Ridge property in Woodland Hills.

The ruling by Superior Court Judge John Zebrowski unraveled a two-year campaign by Picus and the Woodland Hills Homeowners Organization to prevent developer Jack Spound and Johnson Wax Development Co. from building an office project on Warner Ridge.

Zebrowski gave the council 60 days to zone the property, between Pierce College and Warner Center on De Soto Avenue, for commercial development.

The judge held that a council decision Jan. 24 to impose residential zoning on the property violated a state law that requires that zoning agree with the community plan. The plan designates Warner Ridge for commercial use.

“No reasonable person can seriously believe that a zoning ordinance which prohibits all commercial uses in an area designated in the General Plan for commercial uses is ‘consistent’ with the plan in any meaningful sense of the word ‘consistent,’ ” Zebrowski wrote.

In his four-page decision, the judge dealt only with the question of whether the city violated a state law that requires plans and zoning to be in sync. Zebrowski did not address several other legal challenges posed in the lawsuit filed against the city by the Spound-Johnson Wax partnership.

Robert McMurry, attorney for the developer, said Zebrowski’s ruling served to warn that there are limits to the broad discretionary powers the council wields in land-use matters. “While the council has great discretion, it is not unfettered,” McMurry said.

“It’s extraordinary for the council to have taken eight to nine years of its own planning and . . . toss it out the window,” McMurry said. In its lawsuit against the city, the Spound-Johnson Wax partnership alleges that Picus engineered the zoning barrier in a desperate bid to appease politically potent homeowners. “We allege that she was politically motivated,” McMurry said.

Picus and her staff refused comment on the judge’s ruling.

Deputy City Atty. Anthony Alperin said he was assessing the ruling and preparing to discuss it with the council in executive session. Alperin declined to say whether he would recommend that the city appeal the ruling.

“We would expect the city to appeal this,” said Robert Gross, president of the Woodland Hills Homeowners Organization. Gross also said that the organization may consider intervening in the case to protect its interests.

“We’re ecstatic,” Spound said of Zebrowski’s ruling. “All I know now is that I’m going to do everything I can to vest my rights as soon as possible.” Once a developer’s project is vested--meaning construction has actually begun--it usually cannot be stopped.

Spound also indicated that, even after his victory, he intends to keep the legal pressure on the city. “We’re going to continue with the rest of our case, including our case for damages,” Spound said. “That’s the only way to work with guys who’ve been beating me on the head all this time.”

The partnership claims it pays $330,000 per month in carrying costs on outstanding loans on the property, now vacant.

Zebrowski heard oral arguments in the case Thursday. In his remarks from the bench, the judge strongly indicated that he found the discrepancy between the community plan designation and zoning for the property illegal. But he did not specify whether he would order the city to bring the plan into conformity with the zoning--as Picus and the city wished--or the zoning into conformity with the plan, as the developer wanted.

In his ruling released Friday, Zebrowski settled that issue, warning the city that it would be an “illegal backwards approach” for it to amend the plan to conform with the zoning. The plan is superior to the zoning, the judge indicated.

Since 1984, the community plan that includes Warner Ridge has called for neighborhood, office and commercial development on the site.

Despite the community plan designation and the fact that it certified an environmental impact report that deemed residential development on the site financially unfeasible, the council on Jan. 24 zoned the property for low-density residential development.

Although he ordered commercial zoning for Warner Ridge, Zebrowski pointedly said his ruling did not bar the city from amending its General Plan and switching the commercial zoning to residential zoning after it had complied with his fiat.

“The court makes no ruling regarding what procedures the city may undertake after amending the zoning ordinance to bring it into consistency,” Zebrowski said.

Spound and McMurry questioned whether Picus could muster the political support needed to undo Zebrowski’s ruling. To quickly amend the General Plan, which would be one of the first tasks in restoring residential zoning to Warner Ridge, would require the close cooperation of the Planning Department, the Planning Commission and Mayor Tom Bradley.

Any one of those entities could hang up or block a proposed amendment indefinitely.

The commission, for example, previously backed the Spound-Johnson Wax commercial project. The mayor, if he chooses, can review a proposed plan amendment for up to 30 days before referring it to the council. Likewise, the City Council’s Planning Committee must give the public 10 days notice before taking up a plan amendment.

Typically, a plan amendment takes nine months to a year to be processed.

Zebrowski’s ruling also raised questions about what happened to a motion, introduced by Picus and approved by the council in January, 1989, to amend the community plan to designate Warner Ridge for residential use. Because this amendment was never finally enacted, the city’s defense was weakened.

Asked about the fate of her proposed amendment, Picus said: “It’s in the Planning Department.”

She said she would meet with planning officials soon “to make certain it moves forward.” The delays in getting it approved must be “due to the bureaucratic nature of the Planning Department,” she said.