Agency Joins Dust-Up Over Development Plans

The ongoing clash between landowners and environmentalists over the largely undeveloped hills of Northeast Los Angeles intensified recently when the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy jumped into the fray.

Last month, the state agency unveiled its latest preservation plans: the purchase of as many as possible of the city’s last big empty parcels in six hilltop areas. The group is eyeing about 700 properties in Paradise Hill, Elephant Hill, Ascot Hills, Glassell Park, Mount Olympus and Mount Washington, all less than 10 miles from City Hall.

The conservancy wants that land to protect wildlife and plants from encroaching development, and to provide public open space, parks and hiking trails.

Just how much the conservancy could buy was unclear, said Paul Edelman, deputy director for natural resources and planning for the preservation organization. He said the conservancy has about $1 million. Although the market value of the land has not yet been established, it is clear the conservancy’s treasury would cover only a few of the 700 parcels.

Edelman said the group could receive more than $40 million if voters approve a state parks bond measure on the November ballot. That amount would probably be used not only for the Northeast Los Angeles parcels but also to buy land across Los Angeles and Ventura counties.

Even if the bond measure passes, the conservancy could probably afford to buy less than a quarter of the northeast parcels, Edelman said. Sales would be voluntary, because the conservancy would be prohibited by terms of the bond measure from using its power of eminent domain to force landowners to sell.

Nonetheless, some owners are upset about the conservancy’s plans, in part because of an intense, long-standing debate over development in the area.

And the conservancy didn’t help matters with the confusing -- some say dishonest -- way it handled the announcement of its acquisition plans.

Housing shortages, dwindling open space and the growing demand for housing have pitted developers against preservationists throughout the Southland.

In the fall of 2004, tensions over the hilly spaces of Northeast Los Angeles boiled over when the City Council, under pressure from environmentalists, considered adopting an interim ordinance that, among other things, would have limited new building permits for those areas.

Landowners were furious, because they feared that the restrictions would lower their property values. They fought back with petitions, and the measure stalled.

But environmentalists countered by lobbying to get at least some components of the ordinance -- including regulation of grading and limits on hillside development -- approved. The council has passed a separate but related measure that makes it more difficult to cut down certain types of trees citywide.

Now some of the northeast property owners accuse the city and conservancy of working together to strip them of their rights to develop. They view the proposed hillside regulations and the tree ordinance as evidence that the city is paving the way for the conservancy to buy land on the cheap. And some think they are being targeted because many of them are working-class Latinos and Asians.

“It’s an invasion by an outside dominating culture,” said Paula Bagasao, who is half Filipino. “The whole concept of open space is being defined by outsiders. It’s undeveloped private property. You can’t walk your dog on it. You cannot walk on my property legally.”

She and other property owners say environmentalist Clare Marter Kenyon, who lives in the northeast hills, is unfairly using her ties with the city and the conservancy to push her agenda.

Kenyon, a former member of the conservancy’s advisory committee and current chairwoman of the mayor-appointed Community Forestry Advisory Council, has successfully lobbied for an ordinance that will help protect Southern California black walnuts, California bays and Western sycamores. She is now lobbying for other growth restrictions.

“I would like to see all of the remaining open space in the public domain bought for a fair price and open to the public,” she said. But Kenyon dismisses the idea that she is pulling strings. “I think that I am generally tenacious and polite, and that goes a long way,” she said. “So if I have any influence, it’s due to the way I approach these issues.”

Councilmen Ed Reyes and Jose Huizar, whose districts include the hilltop areas, deny that Kenyon holds undue sway over them but acknowledge that they share at least some of her views on what should be done with the undeveloped lands.

“I definitely support preserving the hillsides in the northeast as open space,” Huizar said.

Reyes said his goal is to reach “a balancing point” between landowners and preservationists. “The ability to coexist is crucial,” he said.

The conversancy further antagonized some when it sent out a confusing letter about a public meeting April 24 to unveil its plans. The letter, mailed to about 600 property owners, said the conservancy would “not consider the proposed Northeast Los Angeles Open Space Project Plan” at the meeting. Only about 50 people attended, with others saying they stayed away because the letter’s wording led them to believe the topic would not be discussed.

“They’re very dishonest,” said landowner Cheryl Molina, who said she skipped the meeting because of the letter. She and her husband own a vacant, 7,500-square-foot lot in the project area, where they plan to build their first home. At one time, Molina said, she had hoped that a dialogue could be started between the conservancy and the landowners.

But now, she said recently, “I just don’t trust them at all.”

Edelman said the letter was to let property owners know that “no action would be taken” at the meeting. He acknowledged that it should have stated clearly that the plan would be presented.

Established by state lawmakers in 1980, the conservancy has preserved more than 55,000 acres of parkland across metropolitan Los Angeles and Ventura counties. The agency relies primarily on voter-approved bond measures and grants to provide cash for its land purchases.

The conservancy says it has been looking to buy areas of the northeast hills for the last three to four years.

“The momentum is building to where people are realizing the value of urban open space more than ever,” Edelman said. “The people with the land want to make the money, and the people who see the land and see its potential want to see it saved.”

The conservancy, he added, is not put off by the controversy.

“That’s our job: to provide open space for people,” Edelman said. “And we’re willing to jump into a battle like this.”