Loophole Puts Height Law to Test : Development: A measure approved last year limits buildings to 56 feet. But a Sony Pictures Studios project may challenge the law.

Culver City voters thought that when they passed a 56-foot building height limit last year, they really meant it. But did they?

That the question is even being raised angers some community activists.

“If the City Council was really out for what the citizens want,” said slow-growth advocate Robin Turner, “they wouldn’t be thinking twice about this.”

Because the drafters of the initiative overlooked a legal loophole, three large tracts of land known as redevelopment areas could be exempted from the height limit.

Sony Pictures Studios, formerly Columbia Studios, is located on one of those tracts. The studio’s expansion plans are in the works and could be the first challenge to the height-limit law.

The loophole is this: A section of the city’s Zoning Code gives the City Council the power to override height limits in redevelopment areas, according to City Atty. Joe Pannone. Although the initiative clearly stated that studio zones were to be covered by the 56-foot ceiling, it failed to address the law allowing the exemptions.

Turner and others admit the initiative could have been clearer, but they maintain that the intent was perfectly clear.

Also, supporters say they have plenty of legal advice saying that the height limit does, in fact, supersede the Zoning Code provision for exemptions, and that Pannone’s interpretation is wrong.

“That’s just the opinion of one attorney,” said Jacqueline Powell Pachtman, whose late husband, Richard Pachtman, drew up the initiative. “And we disagree with it.”

The studio property at Overland Avenue and Washington Boulevard is steeped in movie history. It was the home of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer for more than 70 years, until 1986. Among the movies made there were “The Wizard of Oz” in 1939, “Singin’ in the Rain” in 1952 and Tarzan movies with Johnny Weissmuller, starting with “Tarzan the Ape Man” in 1932.

Sony plans to transform the 44-acre site into the movie-making center and corporate headquarters for Sony Pictures Entertainment. Plans call for several buildings in the development, including two 11-story office buildings, to soar well above the 56-foot, or four-story, height limit.

The studio lot lies within a 526-acre redevelopment area known as the Washington-Culver Redevelopment Area, named for the major intersection at its heart. It covers all of downtown Culver City, and several other commercial, industrial and studio-zoned lots, according to Jody Hall-Esser, director of the Redevelopment Agency.

The city established the area in 1975 to take advantage of state laws designed to cure urban blight. Under the program, part of the property taxes generated in redevelopment areas are funneled back to the Redevelopment Agency instead of going to the county, local government and school districts. The agency reinvests the money into the same area the taxes came from.

The city has two other redevelopment areas, both established in 1971. One is in Fox Hills. The other is centered on the intersection of Overland Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard.

Ken Williams, senior vice president of corporate operations for Sony Pictures Entertainment, said that based on Pannone’s opinion, the company decided to include the tall buildings in the plan. This would enable Sony to build all the studio and office space it says is needed, but still preserve open space and wide setbacks from residential areas, Williams said. It also will make it feasible to spare several charming, but inefficient, old buildings on the property, he said.

“I think a lot of people equate building height with density and traffic,” Williams said. “We will deal with height as an issue with the community after they have read the EIR and understand what the trade-offs are.”

The environmental impact report should be finished in early November, according to Colleen Egbert, the redevelopment department official who monitors compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. It will address traffic circulation and parking, smog and noise, aesthetics and water usage, among other things.

A 55-day public review period will follow. Public testimony may be incorporated into the report and can trigger further study, Egbert said. The final environmental document should come before the City Council for approval in February. City officials said the City Council’s vote on the expansion plan itself is likely to occur later in 1992, almost certainly after the City Council elections in April.

Council members are split 3 to 2 on the issue. Mayor Paul A. Jacobs, Jozelle Smith and Mike Balkman oppose imposing the height limit on the studio plan. James D. Boulgarides and Steve Gourley favor imposing the limit.

Three seats are up for election in April. Jacobs has announced that he will not seek reelection, while Gourley and Boulgarides are expected to run again. If the two incumbents win reelection and Jacobs’ seat is filled by a supporter of the height limit, the studio expansion could be in trouble.

Jacobs said regardless of what voters may have thought they were voting on, the legal interpretation of the initiative is the right one. And the interpretation he will go by is Pannone’s.

“I’m going to judge the project on its merits and impacts on the community,” he said, “not on height alone. It might be 56 feet high and still be an awful project.”

Balkman said he is not sure whether voters intended to include redevelopment areas in the height limit, because Pannone’s analysis included in the ballot clearly explained they would not be covered.

“For them to say, ‘We wrote it up wrong, but they knew what we meant,’ just doesn’t sit well with me,” he said.

On the other side, Gourley, who said he voted against the height limit because it was too restrictive, said he will uphold the initiative because that’s what people want.

“I think people assumed that whoever wrote up the initiative put everything necessary in it to make the height limit 56 feet,” he said. “I heard the people talking at the polls. I was there. What they were saying was they didn’t want any tall buildings.”

He said another ballot initiative, either clarifying the first, or specifically outlining the studio plan, would have to be passed before he will change his mind.

Boulgarides could not be reached for comment, but has been an outspoken supporter of the height limit. More than once, he has voted against routine matters concerning the studio plan, such as searching for a consultant to prepare the environmental impact report, because he opposes the tall buildings.

The city’s largest political group, the 200-member Culver City Democratic Club, asked the City Council several months ago to uphold the height limit throughout the city. The 75-member Fox Hills-Ladera Culver City Democratic Club, did the same a few days later.

The 150-household Culver City Home Owners Assn. also recently voted to uphold the height limit.

Pachtman, president of the Democratic club, said the community would have to raise a lot of money to prosecute the city if the plan is approved.

“Why are they trying to do this?” she asked incredulously. “If they approve (Sony’s plan), it’s a total violation of what the city voted for.”