Malibou Lake Building Restrictions Approved : Growth: The supervisors’ temporary compromise is criticized by homeowners and those who want to develop vacant land.

In a compromise measure criticized by all sides, Los Angeles County supervisors Thursday approved tighter building restrictions for the Malibou Lake community, but only for a year so they can continue to study permanent solutions.

Owners of vacant land in the community south of Agoura Hills said the 4-0 board action was an unconstitutional restriction of their right to build on their own property. Their lawyer said he would sue the county for the loss of development rights, which could reduce their property values.

“The decision makes no sense whatsoever. It’s ridiculous,” said Samuel Reece, a lawyer for the Malibou Lake Vacant Landowners group. “I’m anticipating that we’re going to have to sue.”

However, those who already own houses at Malibou Lake called the compromise too lenient, saying the supervisors are taking too long to devise a permanent solution. Homeowners said the plan will allow too much development in what they said was an already overbuilt and fire-prone community, while making the sale or remodeling of their houses nearly impossible.

“It doesn’t address what we’ve been talking about for five years, all the fire and density problems,” said Karen Varney, board secretary of the Malibou Lake Homeowners Assn. “I see this as a way of sweeping us away and putting the decision off.”

In an action approving a Community Standards District, the supervisors voted to allow homeowners to build on 15% of their lots and to require them to seek a conditional-use permit to build anything larger. Owners of vacant land had proposed being allowed to build on 40% of their lots. A recent compromise proposal by Supervisor Deane Dana to allow development on 30% of the lots was scuttled during recent weeks of negotiations.

Under the approved plan, indoor sprinklers must be installed in all new houses and in houses undergoing expansion of more than 200 square feet. This has prompted outcries from homeowners and lot owners alike that sprinklers will cost too much money and accomplish little. County fire officials have said sprinklers are necessary to alleviate extreme fire danger in the remote canyon community.

Another controversial restriction supported by fire officials requires that roads in the area be widened to 20 feet before additional building or expansion can occur, to provide room for firetrucks and other emergency vehicles. Homeowners say the one small road leading in and out of the community is already overwhelmed by traffic, and that they could become trapped when trying to escape a wildfire. Homeowner Gordon Thomas said the plan “is better than nothing, but it is not enough. We don’t want to die in a fire.”

There are about 185 homes in Malibou Lake and 240 vacant lots.

Lot owners such as Madeleine Drolet said managed growth should be allowed, but added that the restrictions will make it prohibitively expensive for her to build.

“I’ve spent my life savings to build my little dream home here,” said Drolet, who bought her lot in 1990. “All I want is a little three-bedroom, and they won’t budge.”

During and after the supervisors’ meeting, Supervisor Ed Edelman said all sides would have to give a little to finally settle the longstanding dispute.

“I’m trying to be as fair as I can, but I have to be responsible too,” said Edelman, who represents the area and forged the compromise. “I could have just ignored the problem, which has been ignored for 70 years. I didn’t want to do that, and I’m willing to take some heat for it.”

Edelman said the restrictions fall far short of preventing development. “We’re not trying to freeze anyone out,” he said. “We just can’t allow people to build without any restrictions, which is what they want to do.”

Edelman and his staff said the restrictions would allow for a two-floor, 1,800-square-foot house to be built on an average 6,500-square-foot lot.

The restrictions become effective in 30 days.

Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke was absent during the vote. Supervisor Mike Antonovich said he supported the compromise, but only because it provides immediate guidelines for homeowners and lot owners while a permanent solution is found.

Antonovich said the plan does little to enhance safety, and said he was troubled by the fact that Malibou Lake residents would have to pay as much as $4,000 to obtain a conditional-use permit. He urged county planners to find a cheaper way of examining proposed developments on a case-by-case basis.

The supervisors instructed county planners to give them a progress report within 90 days on potential permanent solutions to regulating development in the area.