Woo Criticized Over Project in Hollywood Hills : Development: Some homeowners question the councilman’s action in obtaining an exemption from the Mulholland plan for a campaign contributor.

Councilman Michael Woo has come under sharp attack by some Hollywood Hills homeowners for his efforts to help a corporate campaign contributor obtain special environmental exemptions for a $192-million project to build mansions overlooking the Hollywood Reservoir.

Opposition to Woo and the project appears to be increasing, according to several area homeowner factions. They say that, so far, they have collected signatures from more than 1,300 residents and visitors to the reservoir area who oppose Woo’s actions on behalf of the Jefferson Development Corp.

The opponents’ objections are numerous. They say the massive development project will bring traffic and pollution to the wealthy neighborhood and that it will encroach on wildlife habitat and mar the scenic views.

Most of all, they object to the developer’s plan to flatten a portion of a ridge, reducing its elevation by 80 feet, to create home sites.

Such a cut in the ridge would be in direct violation of a sweeping environmental ordinance, the Mulholland Scenic Parkway Specific Plan, which after 17 years of preparation is expected to come before the City Council for a vote within weeks. Early this year, however, Woo introduced an amendment to the Mulholland plan that would exempt the Jefferson development.

Jefferson executives say it would be feasible to build the subdivision without the exemption but that building it on a flattened ridge would make it more attractive and, in many respects, more sound environmentally. They also say they have taken pains to seek the opinions of nearby homeowners and to address their concerns, and that the project as a result is extraordinarily sensitive to the environment.

Indeed, some area homeowners have rushed to the defense of Woo and Jefferson. They say a few disgruntled homeowners with hidden agendas and a well-organized propaganda machine are attacking the councilman and the developer.

Meanwhile, one of Woo’s colleagues on the City Council, Zev Yaroslavsky, has accused Woo of “stooping to the very gutter of politics.” He said that one of Woo’s aides solicited and accepted a campaign contribution from Jefferson. Seeking contributions from developers who have major projects pending is not illegal, but Yaroslavsky has said he and several other council members try to avoid establishing such relationships with developers who have projects in their own districts.

What is so sharply dividing the affluent neighborhoods high in the Hollywood Hills is a project being touted by Jefferson and its Japanese backers as “Bel-Air East.”

Jefferson wants to build 64 estate-sized houses, to be priced as high as $3 million each, on a 172-acre parcel. The site, to the north of the reservoir south of Wonder View Drive, is not far from Universal City and is the largest and last remaining open canyon in the hills surrounding the reservoir, which also is known as Lake Hollywood.

Heated disputes among homeowner factions have erupted at meetings. Neighborhood organizations have been snooping on each other, trying to determine who is allied with whom. Flyers put out anonymously are being slipped under doors and windshield wipers. Groups are accusing each other of circulating misleading propaganda and unfairly worded surveys and of engaging in smear tactics.

But neighborhood activist Victoria Cubeiro says the opposition can be boiled down to one simple complaint: They “are trying to cut our ridges,” she said of the developer. And Cubeiro said the homeowners don’t understand why Woo is “sticking his neck out so far to help them do it.”

Woo’s intervention on Jefferson’s behalf occurred March 27, as the council’s Planning and Land Use Committee was wrapping up discussions on the Mulholland ordinance before passing it on to the council. Woo successfully inserted an amendment to exempt the Jefferson project from the plan.

Jefferson’s original development proposal called for knocking more than 100 feet off the ridge. After negotiations with Woo and local homeowners, the company scaled back its grading plans to require removing 80 feet of the ridge. Jefferson officials contend that they have redrawn their plans for the project more than a dozen times in attempting to respond to homeowner concerns.

“It would be folly for us to despoil the ridge,” the developer said in a letter to area residents. “Who then would want to purchase our homes, or yours?”

If the ridge cut is not permitted, Jefferson executives argue, the houses would be built on the steep hillside. This would cause the houses to be built closer together and would substantially reduce the overall aesthetic appeal of the development, they contend.

Some of the homeowners who oppose Woo’s intervention have joined forces to form Save Our Ridges and the Hollywood Hills Homeowners Coalition, and they are pressing Woo to withdraw his amendment exempting the Jefferson project from the Mulholland plan.

Such special treatment, they maintain, never could have come about without Woo’s help. “We didn’t know you could do that--cut such a ridge,” Cubeiro said. “But if you’ve got a councilman behind you, you can.”

City records show that Thomas P. Sullivan, Jefferson’s president, personally contributed $500 to Woo’s reelection in the spring of 1989 and $500 to Proposition H, the ethics reform bill spearheaded by Woo that was designed to curtail influence-peddling in City Hall. The ballot measure was approved by Los Angeles voters in June. In addition, Jefferson itself gave the maximum $1,000 allowed to Woo’s 1989 campaign, and $4,500 to support the ethics measure.

Sullivan has also acknowledged being a longtime friend of the parents of Woo’s top aide, Gary Townsend. Townsend said in a recent interview that he had had little contact with Sullivan over the past 20 years until he became Woo’s top assistant a year ago.

Since then, Townsend said, he has spoken several times with Sullivan regarding the Jefferson project. He solicited a corporate campaign contribution from Sullivan for the ethics bill, and following the discussion, the development company on May 10 donated $4,500 to the Proposition H campaign.

In all, developers and other corporate givers donated nearly $100,000 to the initiative. Another link between Woo and Jefferson is Steven Afriat, a well-connected lobbyist who has been retained by Jefferson to help guide the Hollywood Hills development through the city approval process. Afriat also works for Woo as a paid fund-raiser.

Afriat said he believes Woo is helping the developer not because of any political favors but because the project is a good one.

“Mike has voted against my clients more than he has voted for them,” said Afriat, who has argued Jefferson’s case in meetings at Woo’s office. “I don’t get favorable treatment from him. He’s real careful about what he supports.”

Woo vehemently denies being influenced by campaign donations or political relationships. In fact, despite his sponsorship of the exemption from the Mulholland plan, Woo contends that he has still not decided whether to support the project as it goes through the City Council approval process.

Proof of his independence, he said, lies in the fact that he is taking heat from all sides.

“While some homeowners think I’m doing too much for Jefferson,” Woo lamented, “Jefferson doesn’t think I’m doing enough for them.”

Sullivan agreed, complaining that Woo has demanded too many concessions. “He has been tougher than anybody,” said Sullivan, “in trying to get something done that is environmentally sensitive.”

Woo, some homeowners and the executive board of one area group, the Hollywood Knolls Community Club, say the community’s interests are best served by exempting the Jefferson project from the Mulholland plan, because it encourages Jefferson to continue “good-faith negotiations” with homeowners.

Such negotiations, they said, have led to major concessions, including the agreement to decrease the amount of grading, and promises to install a $250,000 gating system and to build public hiking trails in the area.

Four board members of the Hollywood Knolls Community Club, including President Dan Riffe, have issued a statement saying they “have supported--and continue to support--Councilman Woo’s prudent amendment.”

“Please don’t be swayed by the histrionics of those who haven’t bothered to put their efforts into serious, thoughtful planning for the betterment of our neighborhood,” the statement said.

But some members of the Hollywood Knolls group complained that their leaders threw their support behind Woo and Jefferson without consulting with the membership.

After objections surfaced, the group’s board of directors met in emergency session and approved Woo’s actions unanimously.

Another supporter of the exemption for the Jefferson project is Terry Canfield, president of the Lake Hollywood Estates Homeowners Assn. She contends that, if the exemption is withdrawn and Jefferson is prohibited from making the ridge cut, the result would probably be more environmentally destructive.

But her group’s rank and file, she admits, said in survey responses that they are split “right down the middle” on whether they support Woo and the project.

Less divided are two other community groups, the Hollywoodland Homeowners Assn. and Hollywood Hills Improvement Assn. They have called on Woo to rescind his amendment.

Woo says he is now asking all neighborhood associations to poll their members and report back to him on where they stand prior to the final vote by the council.

“If I am going to stick my neck out,” said Woo, a media-conscious politician who is widely regarded as a prospective mayoral candidate, “I want to see if the neighbors really want this.”

Meanwhile, two independent, outside groups--the 54-member Federation of Hillside and Canyon Associations and the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy--have weighed in against Woo. Leaders of the groups say his actions undermine the landmark Mulholland plan and its mandate to preserve the views along the 26 miles of scenic roadway from Lake Hollywood to Topanga Canyon.

“I think the people who worked 17 years on the Mulholland plan are getting kicked in the face” by Woo’s exemption effort, said Carole Stevens, chairwoman of the conservancy, a state parkland acquisition agency.