L.A. Hillside Building Plan Sparks Hot Debate : Development: The measure would restrict construction of big homes on small lots along narrow streets.

A controversial plan to restrict development in hillside neighborhoods, where the latest fashion is to build bulky multimillion-dollar homes on small lots, drew praise and heated criticism at a Los Angeles public hearing Tuesday.

The measure was hailed by those weary of congested winding roadways and of an architectural aesthetic that has produced huge houses towering over narrow streets. Others, however, complained that the proposed restrictions erode property rights or contain too many loopholes.

The remarks were directed at the Los Angeles City Council’s Planning and Land-Use Management Committee, which has scheduled a second hearing on the proposed restrictions for Sept. 24. To become law, the measure must be approved by the full City Council.

The ordinance, in the making for 2 1/2 years, grew out of concerns that emergency vehicles have difficulty getting to hillside properties on narrow, winding streets that are often clogged with parked vehicles.

As Councilman Michael Woo told the committee, the ordinance is of “urgent public necessity” to prevent incidents such as one that occurred in his district when an elderly woman reportedly died “because an ambulance was delayed because of congested streets.” Fire crews fighting hillside blazes also need better access, he said.

As the ordinance moved through the planning process, it was broadened to include other goals. Ginny Kruger, planning deputy to Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, told the planning committee that Westside supporters of the proposal see it as an antidote to the “mansionization” of the hillsides.

The ordinance includes requirements that property owners widen the streets in front of their houses whenever they build a room addition; set new houses back at least five feet from the street; create additional off-street parking; reduce the size of houses that may be built on hillside lots, and limit hillside houses to 36 feet tall.

The areas affected are hillside neighborhoods with streets that do not meet current city width requirements--generally, those developed before 1970. They include blue-chip addresses such as Laurel Canyon, Benedict Canyon and Coldwater Canyon and rustic neighborhoods such as Mt. Washington.

“It’s Ventura Boulevard to Sunset Boulevard and everything in between,” said Cindy Miscikowski, chief deputy to Los Angeles City Councilman Marvin Braude, who represents the hillside areas of Encino, Woodland Hills, Tarzana, Brentwood and Pacific Palisades--all of which would be affected by the ordinance.

During the hearing, Alan Kishbaugh, a vice president of the Federation of Hillside and Canyon Assns., said he feared the ordinance gave “too much wiggle room” for planning officials to exempt individual housing projects from its controls. “We want an ordinance with teeth in it,” Kishbaugh said.

But there were property owners with development dreams and actual plans who claimed that the proposal goes too far.

Dick Poe, a spokesman for the Hillside Property Owners Assn., said the measure wrongly attempts to impose “modern-day subdivision standards on existing neighborhoods.” The result, Poe said, would be an erosion of owners’ ability to develop their properties. Poe’s association represents individuals and real estate companies with plans for developing hillside properties.

Caroline Hanson, a Tujunga resident, said the plan would prevent her from building a patio or room addition.

The ordinance would also require installation of fire sprinkler systems in new hillside houses and in existing residences expanded by more than 50%.

Chris Griffiths, a leader of a San Fernando Valley group of property owners who favor development, said the sprinkler costs would increase the price of a new home by $7,000.

Times staff writer Mayerene Barker contributed to this story.