Council Postpones Decision on Status of Fryman Canyon

The Los Angeles City Council voted Tuesday to postpone for 60 days a decision on whether to declare rustic Fryman Canyon a cultural-historic landmark, with proponents saying the extra time is needed to forge a plan to buy the 63-acre site in Studio City for parkland.

“We’re buying time to complete the acquisition,” said Councilman Michael Woo, who represents the area.

On a 10-4 vote, the council backed Woo’s motion to delay until Oct. 2 further consideration of landmark status for Fryman Canyon.

Woo also said additional time is needed to determine if city officials erred in 1986 in granting development approval to Fryman Canyon developer Fred Sahadi to build 26 luxury homes on the site, located in the hills above Studio City, before Sahadi had deeded half of the 63 acres to the state for parkland.

If such an error were made, it would call into question the legality of a grading permit issued to Sahadi for the Fryman property, said Tim Taylor, assistant general manager of the city’s Building and Safety Department.

Two weeks ago, the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, a state parks agency, voted to put up $8.7 million to help acquire Fryman Canyon, and urged the city of Los Angeles to appropriate any additional funds needed to complete sale of the land to the conservancy.

Sahadi has had the property appraised at $13.7 million, but state officials have estimated its value at $8.7 million.

Conservancy Executive Director Joseph T. Edmiston said Tuesday’s council vote to delay provides a “quieting-down period while the city seeks money for acquisition.”

Edmiston and the conservancy have proposed that the city’s Department of Water and Power sell surplus land it owns in the Santa Monica Mountains to raise capital to buy Fryman. Selling two DWP parcels totaling less than 10 acres--one in the Pacific Palisades, the other in Woodland Hills--would raise $2 million from developers, Edmiston has said.

Dan Waters, acting general manager of the DWP, said he and DWP Commission President Mike Gage have been asked by Mayor Tom Bradley to explore the proposal. A staff review is under way, Waters said.

The “bottom line for us is to look at this from the ratepayer’s standpoint,” Waters said Tuesday. “Does it make sense to ratepayers? We can’t just do something like this just because it might be a good thing to do.”

But Waters acknowledged that a legitimate question for the giant city-owned utility is whether it makes sense to retain ownership of properties that are now unused.

Another consideration would be the reaction of adjoining property owners to the sale of the properties to developers, Waters said. “I don’t want to get into more hot water” by selling parcels that people thought the city was “going to leave vacant forever,” Waters said.

Gage said he was skeptical of Edmiston’s land sale proposal. “There’s a need for a lot more data before I could support it,” Gage said. “I don’t see how it benefits the DWP or ratepayers, and unless I see that I could not support it.”

The council’s decision Tuesday to delay consideration of landmark status for the canyon appeared to be more a sign of support for Woo’s efforts to purchase the site than support for declaring the canyon a cultural-historic monument. Such status would delay development of the property for at least one year.

Council members Gloria Molina and Nate Holden, although voting with Woo for postponement, argued against landmark status, saying that declaring vacant land a monument would set an unusual precedent.

The council decision was sharply criticized by Sahadi’s attorney, Benjamin M. Reznik. Reznik said the delay is yet another attempt by the city to increase Sahadi’s expenses in order to force him to accept a price for his land from the conservancy below its value. Quoting a U.S. Supreme Court justice’s comment on a similar case, Reznik called the city’s actions part of an “out-and-out plan of extortion.”

To finally develop his property, Sahadi still must secure approvals from the state Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Both agencies are looking at Fryman Canyon to determine if it is a unique habitat or a home to any plant or animal life in need of protection.