Effort to Find Zoning Accord Fails : Development: Bradley and key council members discuss effort to settle suit by developers whose Warner Ridge project is blocked. But no new initiatives are produced.

Two Los Angeles City Council members, fearing a spate of similar lawsuits if Warner Ridge developers prevail in their $100-million suit against the city, recently met with Mayor Tom Bradley and their council colleague Joy Picus to discuss a possible compromise.

The meeting, held Friday, produced no new initiatives to settle the Warner Ridge dispute, but it indicated that a crack may be appearing in council support for Picus’ hard-line opposition to large-scale development of the vacant 21.5-acre parcel in Woodland Hills.

The secret meeting was held as the city awaits a state Court of Appeal ruling in the lawsuit brought against it by Warner Ridge Associates, the development team that hopes to build a half-dozen mid-rise office towers on the parcel located in Picus’ 3rd District.

Picus’ vigorous opposition to the developer’s plans sparked the lawsuit.

The issue before the appellate court is a narrow one. Warner Ridge Associates claims that the city illegally rezoned the property for 65 single-family homes when the city’s community plan showed the property could be developed for commercial and office uses.

An adverse ruling by the appeals court not only could seriously aggravate the city’s already dire financial problems, but could undercut hundreds of previous city zoning decisions, said Renee Weitzer, planning deputy to Council President John Ferraro.

Ferraro and Councilman Hal Bernson arranged the meeting with Bradley and Picus.

Ferraro and Bernson fear a court victory for the developer could trigger lawsuits by other developers. It has been estimated that 8,000 properties in the city were downzoned under circumstances like those surrounding the downzoning of the Warner Ridge property.

Picus on Thursday insisted that the city’s case is strong, but acknowledged that a ruling in favor of the developers could produce new court challenges.

“It is a nervous time,” Picus said. “The case has very serious implications beyond Warner Ridge.”

An appeals court ruling in the litigation is expected in the next few days. The appeal was brought by the city after a Superior Court judge agreed the rezoning was improper. The judges on the three-member Court of Appeal panel that heard oral arguments in the case in June also showed irritation and skepticism about the city’s arguments.

But it was in October when the lawsuit won most of its notoriety after the release of depositions in which Picus unabashedly admitted that politics governed much of her opposition to the developers’ unpopular plans for a commercial complex on the site near Pierce College.

Weitzer, who attended with her boss, said the meeting was held because “John wanted to know if a compromise was possible.”

Bernson also was interested in seeing if a settlement could be reached. According to sources familiar with his views, Bernson is not happy with the developer or Picus.

Although talk of a settlement was conducted, Ferraro said Thursday that he sees no alternative but to press ahead with the lawsuit.

“Anytime we can get out of a lawsuit we should take a look at it,” Ferraro said. “But there’s nothing now that indicates that we can do anything but let the lawsuit take its course.”

The council traditionally defers to the wishes of the local lawmaker on land-use issues. Given the deference that the council has shown toward Picus on Warner Ridge, that means appealing to the state Supreme Court if the city loses in the appellate court, Ferraro said.

Last week, when first asked about the meeting, Picus sharply told The Times: “There was no meeting.” The same day Bernson also denied that the meeting was about Warner Ridge.

Later, however, both Bernson and Picus admitted the session was about the controversial Woodland Hills property. Bradley, through an aide, refused to comment.

The involvement of Ferraro and Bernson in the meeting is significant.

Ferraro is the council’s president and as such he is often a bellwether of council attitudes. Bernson is chairman of the council’s Planning and Land Use Management Committee.

Both also supported Picus in January, 1990, when, at her urging, the council adopted a zoning ordinance for the Warner Ridge property that would permit only single-family homes on the site.

Bradley, however, has shown sympathy for Warner Ridge Associates, and Picus has accused the mayor’s top planning adviser of being a “mouthpiece” for the developer.