Hesitant Council Opts for 34 Homes in La Tuna Canyon

A reluctant Los Angeles City Council on Friday approved a 34-home development in La Tuna Canyon after lawyers said the only alternative was to allow more building in the scenic canyon.

“Unfortunately, the city is between a rock and hard place,” said Councilman Hal Bernson.

The 10-1 vote was intended to end an ongoing dispute between the city and residents of the quiet rural community. Instead, neighbors immediately threatened to sue.

“This project would cut down one mountain in a scenic corridor,” said Manny Stucki, a 10-year resident of the area. “It would be a catastrophe.”

The site of the much-disputed development is home to an olive grove and a slew of rabbits, deer and other wildlife.

The case forced the council into a corner. If members had rejected the 34-home project, the developer could have built 50 homes under an earlier permit granted by the city.

What angers neighbors the most is that both projects would be illegal under current zoning laws.

“This is a Catch-22,” said Councilman Richard Alarcon.

Councilman Joel Wachs, who represents the area, said he supports the neighbors’ plans to sue the city. But he said the 34-home project is a much better alternative than the 50-home development.

“The modified map is not good because it does not meet today’s laws but it’s infinitely better than what can be built there,” he said, referring to an earlier agreement between the city and the developer.

For nearly half an hour, the council debated the matter and grilled city lawyers for a way to get out of the predicament. But in the end, the council agreed that the best alternative was to approve the 34-home project and hope the neighbors’ lawsuit would succeed in killing the project.

The origins of the dispute date back to 1985 when the city’s advisory agency--composed of representatives from several departments--approved a 50-home development on 52 acres of pristine hillsides north of La Tuna Canyon Road.

Although the project would have required grading and blasting a scenic hillside, neighbors failed to appeal the decision. Several later said they were not notified of the city’s decision.

In 1990, during a citywide review, the City Council changed the zoning classification for the project site to allow fewer than 10 homes.

The property developer sued, claiming the city could not change the zoning and ban the project after it had been approved.

To avoid a lengthy legal battle, the city reached a settlement with the developer in 1993. The developer agreed to scale down the project to 34 homes, and the city agreed to “initiate and consider” the 34-home development.

But under the settlement, if the council had rejected the 34-home project, the developer could have proceeded with construction of the 50-home project.

On Friday, Deputy City Atty. Jeri Berge told several frustrated council members and neighbors that the council could neither renege on that ’93 settlement or reconsider the 1985 decision.

“You cannot. That decision is final,” she said.

Some neighbors initially suggested that the council reject the 34-home project because they believed the developer could not afford the larger project.

But city Zoning Administrator Darryl Fisher told the council that the 50-home project would actually be profitable for the developer.

With that information, the neighbors switched gears, deciding instead to take their chances in court.

“The settlement was a bad settlement,” said Cheryl Greslie, who has lived in La Tuna Canyon for 41 years. “The council acted because it was afraid of losing.”

But Berge also told the council that the settlement is legally sound. “I think the city can defend that settlement in court,” she said.