Commission OKs Growth Blueprint for Warner Center : Development: A compromise on builders’ fees to pay for traffic improvements clears the way for approval of the plan.

Los Angeles planning commissioners Thursday approved a blueprint to guide growth at Warner Center into the next century after resolving the final and most contentious component of the plan: how much developers will pay for traffic improvements.

Fighting over the fees, which will help finance improvements such as street widenings and new public transportation, had been the major sticking point since the Warner Center Specific Plan was released last summer. Developers complained that the fees--charged for each afternoon car trip generated by their projects--were too high and discouraged building, especially during a weak economy.

So the commission lowered the fees after developers promised to make up the shortfall with state and federal transportation funds. If the developers are unable to obtain enough public funding to finance the improvements, then construction in the center must stop until the money is raised--either from the developers or through a city-imposed fee increase.

“Now we’ve got to roll up our sleeves and get the job done,” said David Grannis, a development consultant who last month suggested using public transportation money to finance the improvements.

Traffic engineers initially balked at Grannis’ proposal because they said it threatened to rob the city of money earmarked for desperately needed improvements. But on Thursday, they said that their concerns had been eased because the city retained the ability to raise fees if developers do not fulfill their promises.

The planning philosophy behind Warner Center, which is in Woodland Hills, is to concentrate commercial and industrial developments to prevent them from intruding into residential neighborhoods in the west San Fernando Valley. The increased density is to be offset by public transportation improvements.

Under the plan approved Thursday, development in the 942-acre Warner Center would increase during the next two decades to 35.7 million square feet from the existing 15 million square feet. Construction would proceed in four phases, and the plan requires that key traffic improvements be completed before a new step could begin. Each phase also would be reviewed publicly to assess its effect on the center and surrounding community.

Thursday’s version of the plan is different from the one proposed last summer and represents a year of give and take among developers, homeowners and city planners. It can be changed still further when it reaches the Los Angeles City Council, which has the final say.

Last summer, builders complained that a proposed development cap of 26 million square feet was too low and that a onetime $14,990 fee for each afternoon car trip generated by their projects was too high. Homeowners bemoaned proposals to build super highways that would crisscross Warner Center with overpasses.

Since then, planners mollified most of the plan’s harshest critics by cutting traffic fees and eliminating all but one overpass at Topanga Canyon and Victory boulevards.

The other overpasses were deemed unnecessary because Warner Center is now scheduled to be connected to a commuter rail network, a transportation option not considered in the earlier plan. The plan also mandates tough restrictions on the number of parking spaces for solo drivers to encourage more car-pooling.

Despite the lower fees, developers continued to complain that they were too high, turning the issue into the most divisive element of the plan. The city responded by dropping the fees to $7,500, but Grannis proposed cutting them by another $4,500.

City transportation officials determined that figure was too low and set the fees for the first phase of development at $4,907 per car trip. That fee would increase to $6,720 per car trip in subsequent phases unless developers are able to raise money for transportation improvements from other sources.

Residents who have followed the plan since its release last year said they thought developers likely would work diligently to make the necessary traffic improvements because to do otherwise would cause gridlock and make the center unattractive to prospective tenants.

“If it takes you half an hour to go half a block, you are not going to want to go there day after day,” said Robert Gross, president of the Woodland Hills Homeowners Organization.