Theme Park Expansion Plan Hailed, Criticized

Homeowners and business executives took turns praising and condemning Universal Studios’ proposed 25-year, $2-billion expansion before a standing-room-only crowd Tuesday night in a sometimes raucous hearing before the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission.

“We don’t want another Disneyland in our backyard,” said Gerald Silver, president of Homeowners of Encino. “We don’t want a large work force of hot dog and hamburger salesmen [drawn by] a worldwide tourist attraction.”

Silver’s remarks triggered an ovation from audience members opposed to the Universal project.

Universal is asking for city and county permission to more than double its office, theme park and studio space by adding 5.9 million square feet of buildings. It wants to turn its property into more of a destination resort by building themed hotels in sight of its studio lots.

Some homeowners complained about a private meeting held in a nearby hotel room an hour before the public hearing. Universal provided free food for about 100 members of a pro-development citizens group called Universal City Tomorrow at the private meeting.

The company also offered free food at the public hearing.

Of those who signed up to speak at the hearing, 43 registered as supporters of the project and 70 as opponents.

Jack Rubens, an attorney representing the Toluca Lake Residents Assn., told the hearing that the key issue in the project is added noise. He attacked Universal’s proposal as seeking blanket approval for the next 25 years, with no chance for residents to make changes in the future if the project is permitted.

“There is zero opportunity for a quarter of a century for the public to have any say,” Rubens said.

Sally Stevens, who has lived in Toluca Lake for 20 years, complained of what she called horrendous noise now coming from the Universal complex. “I don’t trust Universal MCA,” she said. “I don’t think too many people do.”

But Wayne Burnette, a Studio City resident, supports the project. With “important civic growth projects, there are always critics who resist change,” Burnette said.

“You may recall the objections to O’Malley’s Dodger Stadium. Universal is the Valley’s benevolent rich uncle, [ready] to take a giant cultural step forward . . . and providing jobs . . . that would receive a warm welcome in 49 other states.”

Universal Studios has said the project would add 13,000 jobs at its complex, and increase local and state tax revenues by $25 million a year.

Economic growth, increased tourism and new jobs were often cited by backers of the plan.

Gloria Gold, a Studio City resident, told the planning group that “I can see CityWalk from my backyard,” but said her support for Universal’s project is “absolutely unconditional,” triggering applause and boos.

Gold said “the Universal City plan promises to fill a poignant need for a wide variety of jobs,” including entry-level jobs for young people that would help them “develop a variety of skills in the No. 1 industry in the area, entertainment.”

But Renee Weitzer, an aide to Los Angeles City Councilman John Ferraro, called for Universal’s project to be carried out in phases. “It would also help to know what Universal is planning to build first and when,” she said.

Universal City covers more than 415 acres, with about 70% of the land in an unincorporated area of the county; the rest falls under the city’s jurisdiction. Therefore, both the county and the city Department of Planning are reviewing the project.

Tuesday night’s meeting was the second in a long series of public hearings, comment periods and governmental reviews of the project. Universal is hoping to win approval for the plan by the end of this year.

More than 300 attended the hearing, and so many wanted to speak that the commission said it would hold another public meeting March 3, at an as yet undetermined location in the Universal City area.