Vote Sought to Lift Lid on La Jolla Valley Development

The new owners of La Jolla Valley, a rural, 5,100-acre tract in the center of the city’s urban reserve, won an initial nod Wednesday from a City Council committee to put their development plans before the voters on Nov. 3.

Attorneys involved in the matter say that even a defeat of the development proposal could benefit La Jolla Valley’s owners, who are seeking $70 million in damages in a lawsuit against the city.

Three members of the council’s Rules Committee voted to forward to the full City Council the request by University Development Inc. for a public vote on removing its property from the city’s development deep-freeze.

The committee made no recommendation for or against the request, but asked the city attorney to rule on whether the city is required to place the issue before voters.

Spurred Prop. A. Passage

The La Jolla Valley development plan includes a 10,000-student Christian graduate university and a 750-acre industrial park. Initially approved in 1984 by a 5-4 vote of the City Council, the plan became a catalyst for a successful grass-roots campaign by growth-control advocates to require a citywide vote on removal of any property from the urban reserve before 1995.

Councilman Mike Gotch, noticeably upset that the council committee had little say on the issue, said Wednesday that he hopes “the voters of this city come to the conclusion that this project is just as growth-inducing as it was before.” He was referring to the overwhelming passage in 1985 of Proposition A, which placed the voter-approval restriction on development in the vast urban reserve area, most of which is on the northern fringes of the city.

Chief Deputy City Atty. Frederick C. Conrad said that attorneys in his office plan to confer today on whether the City Council is required by Proposition A to put the La Jolla Valley proposal on the ballot.

City Clerk Charles Abdelnour confirmed that City Council policy requires that the city bear the cost of such an election, which he estimated at $15,000.

Larry Marshall, attorney for the development group headed by Texas investor Glen Terrell, refused to comment Wednesday on the plans of the property’s new owners.

Property Changes Hands

However, he said that the request for the vote on the La Jolla Valley property--the first since Proposition A went into effect--was necessary to satisfy legal requirements that its owners had exhausted all possible attempts to develop their land before they can recover damages in a suit against the City of San Diego.

La Jolla Valley originally was proposed for development by Campus Crusade for Christ in a joint venture with Signal Cos. But, after several setbacks, Signal sold its interests to the religious group. Campus Crusade, facing default on a $23.7-million loan from the Teamsters’ Union Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund, sold out to Terrell in December.

The suit against the city, filed in the name of University Development Inc., contends that the La Jolla Valley property was not covered by restrictions imposed by Proposition A, and that the measure is unconstitutional and was improperly applied by the city because of lack of due process.

Environmental groups that mobilized opposition to La Jolla Valley and backed Proposition A have not expressed opposition to the ballot request. They are expected to fight it if is put on the ballot, however.