A Standoff in the Parking Lot War : ‘Big A’ Courtroom Battle Ends With Something for All

The California Angels claimed victory Tuesday in the battle of Anaheim Stadium, saying that they have blocked plans for high-rise development on the parking lot that they contend would have irreparably damaged the franchise.

The decision ends Angels owner Gene Autry’s threat to move the club and secures the stadium as a home of baseball in Southern California.

But a lawyer for a partnership including Los Angeles Rams football owner Georgia Frontiere also claimed partial victory Tuesday, stating that a high-rise development on 20 acres of the lot can go forward “with minor alterations.”

The conflicting claims of victory came in a lawsuit pitting the Angels against the city of Anaheim and the partnership including Frontiere in a struggle over rights to the 146-acre stadium parking lot.

Thought It Was Given Rights

The Frontiere partnership, created by Carroll Rosenbloom, Frontiere’s late husband and owner of the Rams, thought it had won development rights as a major inducement to bring professional football to Orange County. The deal to expand the stadium and move the football team was signed in 1978.

But Autry claimed that rights to the parking lot had already been granted by the city to the Angels in 1964, when the team agreed to play in Anaheim Stadium.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Frank D. Domenichini, in a 56-page opinion, issued a permanent injunction barring development on the lot without the Angels’ advance approval. Domenichini ruled that the Angels have an absolute right to 12,000 surface parking spaces into the 21st Century.

But Domenichini, in what he called a tentative ruling, also stated that any land that is left over after meeting the Angels’ needs may be developed legally by the city or used for any other purpose, leaving Anaheim Stadium Associates, the Frontiere partnership, with its victory claim.

The muddle has cost both ASA and the Angels up to $10 million in legal fees, according to lawyers for both parties. Another $5 million to $7 million has been paid by the city of Anaheim, also a defendant in the suit filed by the Angels’ parent company, Golden West Baseball Co.

Autry said Tuesday that he saw in Domenichini’s ruling vindication for his position: that the city, in giving parking-lot rights to both baseball and the football development group, “sold the same horse twice.”

“This is a great day for the California Angels,” Autry said at a stadium press conference. “It’s also a great day for our fans. The judge says we have a lease on the parking lot. There will be no high-rise parking on our lot. The developers have been stopped.”

In an interview, Autry said the decision should be welcomed by all sports fans.

“If I were a Rams fan, I would be delighted. I can’t imagine why a Rams fan would want to park up in an 18-story high-rise any more than an Angels fan would,” Autry said.

For the city, which has sought for more than 20 years to find new, productive uses for the 146-acre stadium site blessed with superior freeway access and an Amtrak station, the decision is “a partial victory and a partial defeat,” according to spokesman Sheri Erlewine.

“According to the ruling, the Angels parking requirements must be met by providing ground-level parking spaces, however the judge also confirmed the city’s contention that the remainder of the lot outside that needed to provide 12,422 ground-level spaces could be used by the city for any purpose its deems proper,” Erlewine said.

ASA lawyer Alfred E. Augustini said he has been “counting parking spaces” since receiving the opinion. The decision should leave just about 20 acres available for development after the Angels’ parking spaces are reserved--enough to build ASA’s original first phase, 20-acre group of high-rise structures with little modification, he added.

“We certainly are pleased with Judge Domenichini’s decision. He split the baby in half. It was the only sensible thing to do,” Augustini said.

Autry firmly opposed reducing surface parking in favor of multilevel garages, an option that ASA and the city had counted on. Baseball Commissioner Peter Ueberroth, testifying two years ago, said that high-rise garages would deter fans and that if they are built, the stadium should be “plowed under.”

Erlewine declined to comment on what the city now plans for the area of the lot that is left after the Angels’ parking needs have been met.

ASA has also filed a lawsuit against the city, claiming that city officials hid the Angels’ opposition to the building plans and misled Frontiere’s development partnership. The suit was filed in 1985 after a number of sworn statements had been taken. ASA claimed about $2.5 million in damages, the cost of planning which has been halted since the Angels filed suit in 1983. That lawsuit, a backup for ASA, has remained largely dormant while the main legal struggle focused on the Angels’ lawsuit.

The city over the past 20 years has considered--and rejected--proposals for an airstrip, jai alai fronton and a drag strip on the parking lot.

The Angels contended that in each case, which occurred before the Rams’ involvement, the city had sought formal approval from the baseball team.

The decision means that no development on the lot can take place, insisted Angels lawyer William B. Campbell. No construction has taken place as a result of the lawsuit, and Campbell said no lender would provide financing after having read Domenichini’s opinion.

ASA, half owned by Cabot Cabot & Forbes, a noted East Coast development firm, had announced plans to build dozens of buildings on the lot, which would house 10,000 workers. High-rise garages were integral to the building plans, the company said, and the project was touted as a new Century City.

Both sides agree that Domenichini’s ruling wipes out ASA’s long-term development plans, envisioned as covering at least 66 acres in two phases of development. About 46 acres along State College Boulevard--the second phase of the ASA plan--cannot be developed under the ruling.

But ASA’s Augustini maintained that the details of the ruling mean that after 12,000 spaces are set aside, about 20 acres will remain--nearly enough to build virtually all of the planned first phase, along Orangewood Avenue.

In addition, Domenichini found several tracts on the periphery of the lot to be free of Angels’ control, including an unpaved, 7-acre tract on the northwest fringe of the parking lot.

Asked what the city will do with that land, Erlewine said: “We haven’t made any determination at all.”

In final court papers filed in the lawsuit, each side made bitter accusations against the others. Anaheim claimed that the Angels tried to “lay a trap for Anaheim and ASA by which the (Angels) would later profit.”

The city argued consistently that the Angels did not voice objections until the project was well under way, although the baseball team was aware of the Rams move from at least 1978. The Angels suffered “a serious credibility gap” in the litigation, according to the city.

ASA alleged that “Autry let out the rope knowing the city and ASA would get hanged when he later yanked the rope and belatedly asserted his present claim.” ASA also alleged that Autry wanted to be allowed to participate in the lot development, not to block it.

On Tuesday, Autry denied the claim. “They offered us at one time a part of the development. But that was never the question,” the 80-year-old owner said.

For its part, Angels attorneys accused the city of “turning its back on the Angels” and transforming a relationship of “candor, cooperation and trust into surreptitiousness, indirection and deceit.”

Both ASA and the Angels hinted that they might appeal portions of the decision--a process of legal extra innings that would inevitably consume years. A spokesman for the Angels said he believes that the club ought to be able to recoup the $5 million in legal costs from Anaheim and ASA. Augustini acknowledged defeat on ASA’s long-range development plans, and also suggested the possibility of an appeal.

Even as the dust was settling Tuesday, all sides formally called for cooperation.

For the city, Erlewine said the ruling, “along with the spirit of cooperation that has prevailed, will hopefully bring all the parties together to come to final settlement that everyone can support.”

Augustini said ASA simply wants to go forward with the development and would welcome ending the litigation.

Autry made it clear that he was tired of enormous legal bills, and the constant fight with the ity.

“I now call upon the city of Anaheim and ASA to bury the hatchet and stop the fight,” Autry read from a prepared statement, calling for “a harmonious, constructive relationship for the benefit of all.”

BATTLE OF THE ‘BIG A’

April, 1964--Angels’ board of directors votes to move from Los Angeles to Anaheim, which pledged to build a stadium.

April, 1966--Anaheim Stadium opens, and California Angels begin first season.

July 25, 1978--Los Angeles Rams owner Carroll Rosenbloom says the Rams will move to Anaheim Stadium in 1980.

July 26, 1978--The Rams’ move to Anaheim Stadium is tied to an agreement that calls for developing 95 acres of stadium parking into a business complex.

Sept. 25, 1978--After marathon negotiations, Anaheim persuades the Rams to accept 90 acres of parking lot development instead of 95.

Aug. 8, 1983--California Angels file $100-million lawsuit against Anaheim to block high-rise development.

Dec. 9, 1985--Non-jury trial begins before Superior Court Judge Frank D. Domenichini.

June 14, 1988--Domenichini issues a permanent injunction barring development on the lot without the Angels’ advance approval.