Planning Panel Votes Down Subdivision Plan

In the first such action in recent history, the county Planning Commission on Wednesday turned down a developer seeking permission to build a stalled 20-year-old project in a rural canyon in the Santa Monica Mountains.

Citing fire safety and access concerns, the commissioners unanimously turned down a request by builder Brian Semler to begin construction of the proposed 50-home subdivision at the end of a winding, two-lane road surrounded by steep, wildfire-prone hillsides.

Semler’s attorney, Robert I. McMurry, vowed to appeal to the Board of Supervisors and blamed the commission’s decision on county politics and a recent series in The Times that detailed problems with long-lived development projects in the region.

“We think it’s very clear-cut that they can’t do this,” said McMurry, a well-known land-use lawyer.

The project was first approved in 1981, when the county planned to construct a major road through Triunfo Canyon.

At the time, county officials contend, they allowed the development despite access concerns because they fully expected the road to be built, providing a second means of escape in case of wildfire.

Since then, however, the city of Westlake Village has blocked extension of the road through its borders to prevent further growth in the area, which has exploded in wildfire many times over the past 20 years.

Although county approval was supposed to expire in 1984, the proposal stayed alive through court battles and a series of extensions granted by the county and the state.

Both county building officials and environmentalists have complained about the numerous extensions given projects, saying that Semler’s subdivision and dozens of others have escaped updated fire and safety regulations. Developers have a backlog of more than 1,500 unbuilt homes in the mountains that have been approved but not yet built, hindering efforts to preserve land in the region. Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky has called such projects “time bombs.”

McMurry, who said he knows of only one other project in 30 years denied an extension, seized on that record as proof that his client was being treated unfairly.

He noted, for instance, that county officials failed to raise fire safety concerns in granting the project an extension in 1984, even though the expansion of Triunfo Road already had been blocked.

McMurry also defended the site’s fire safety. He said the original approval contained an emergency route in the form of a dirt road between the property and the site of what is now a mobile home park. That dirt road, currently blocked at both ends by gates, could serve as an access for fire vehicles now. He also said homes in the development would be constructed so as to be nearly fireproof.

“The approval of this tract will improve fire safety conditions in this area,” he said.

In interviews after the hearing, McMurry said the decision to deny the most recent request was motivated by a desire to obtain the property as parkland by Yaroslavsky and the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, a state agency charged with preserving open space in the region.

The two sides entered into negotiations last year over the tract, but the deal never materialized.

Semler said Wednesday that the conservancy backed out of the deal at the last minute. But Joseph T. Edmiston, head of the agency, said the two sides were never close to agreement.

Both sides, however, agree that the conservancy, with limited funds, decided to buy land needed to create a wildlife corridor in the Liberty Canyon area off the Ventura Freeway instead of Semler’s property.

Edmiston said the decision was based on the relatively low ecological value of Semler’s tract in relation to the wildlife corridor.

“That property [is] a very low priority,” Edmiston said.

McMurry, however, said the conservancy realized that the tract would be worth much less if Semler wasn’t allowed to continue building his subdivision--meaning the conservancy could buy it at a lower price.

“The motive here is simple: sell it or we’ll kill” the project, McMurry said.

Yaroslavsky’s planning deputy, Ginny Kruger, denied any such scheme. She said that Yaroslavsky still hopes to be able to purchase the land, perhaps with proceeds from one of the four proposed statewide park bond measures currently under debate in Sacramento.

“Every piece of property, we’d like to see in public ownership,” Kruger said. Semler’s project “is nowhere near what could be approved today.”