Opponents Criticize Topanga Canyon Project

For many, the most eloquent opponent of a gated housing tract and golf course in Topanga Canyon ended six hours of testimony Wednesday without a word, not even a “brrr-deep.”

The green tree frog, fished out of Topanga Creek by a local artist, just sat there, silently reminding Los Angeles County planning commissioners of the wildlife that opponents say is threatened by the proposed 97-unit project just south of Woodland Hills.

The frog’s reticence contrasted sharply with the 30 or so voluble Topangans who spouted poetry and technical jargon alike to prove that the Canyon Oaks Estates project, with its luxury homes and gates to keep out intruders, would ruin their unique lifestyle.

Being a fair man, commission Chairman Richard Wulliger took statements from nearly all quarters. (The developer and supporters, who testified during lengthy hearings earlier this year, will have an opportunity for rebuttal Sept. 22.)

“Does the frog want to make a statement too?” he wearily asked, not realizing that he was about to add to the already voluminous record of the project, which dates back 14 years.

“We are the froggies of Topanga,” responded poker-faced performance artist and longtime Topanga resident Rabyn Blake. “Brrr-deeping through the millenia/Nurtured by this our creek/In 2001 we’d still like to keep.”

The commissioners were also regaled with snippets from Wordsworth, hints of a pending lawsuit against the project, and a host of statistics about its negative impact on traffic, flood control and air quality by some of the 100 people who attended Wednesday’s hearing.

The commission’s decision carries little weight. Both sides have indicated that if they lose, they will appeal the decision to the Board of Supervisors.

First proposed in 1978, the project has died and been resurrected, drastically changed in scope and undergone more scrutiny than almost any other development proposal in county history.

All along, it has been the subject of bitter debate among Topanga residents. Opponents include the Topanga Assn. for a Scenic Community, Heal the Bay and the National Park Service.

“We in Topanga have a sense of place as deep as the oak tree,” testified Mimi Smith, a resident for 35 years. “If you pass this, you will be killing Topanga’s spirit.”

“We do not want our children to be exposed to a social class that favors ostentatious displays of wealth and locks out the rest of society,” added Chester King, an anthropologist whose family has owned land in the canyon since 1946. “People here are not interested in acquiring wealth.”

But project supporters, including residents and members of construction unions who plan to turn out in full force next week, disagreed.

“I wish to accumulate wealth; I can’t imagine not wanting to,” said Deborah Stern, a housewife who lives across the street from the proposed project. “My feeling is the developers have been very, very conscientious . . . and the project will improve property values forever.”