Officials to Consider 2nd Chatsworth Courthouse Site

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday instructed county officials to examine an alternative site for the proposed West Valley Municipal Courthouse that court officials are planning to build near a Chatsworth residential area.

At the request of Supervisor Mike Antonovich, the board told Robert Quist, a deputy court administrator, to discuss with the owner the availability of another parcel of Chatsworth land at 9200 Mason Ave., property that court officials previously had rejected.

“All we are asking for is for the court to seriously look at this site,” Antonovich said of the Mason Avenue location.

This is the second time the board has asked court officials to reexamine a piece of property that they had turned down for a courthouse site.

Quist has recommended that the county buy a nine-acre parcel at Plummer Street and Winnetka Avenue for the three-story courthouse. Last month, the board instructed Quist to enter into price negotiations with owner Alexander Haagen, who bought the property for $10 million last winter.

But a coalition of Chatsworth homeowners has mounted an intense campaign against the Plummer Street site, complaining that it would generate traffic congestion and graffiti, increase crime and reduce property values in a nearby residential neighborhood.

Antonovich has sided with homeowners and has been looking for alternative sites. Last month, he asked court officials to evaluate a lumberyard site on Topanga Canyon Boulevard, which was later rejected by the court because it was too expensive.

The owner of the Mason Avenue property sent a letter to board members last week complaining that his parcel was not thoroughly reviewed by court officials. In the letter, Stephen A. Farley, chief financial officer of Allegretti & Co., called his 11-acre parcel a “viable alternative” to the Haagen site and said he was perplexed that it was eliminated from consideration.

But Quist told the board Tuesday that the Allegretti property was too expensive and narrow and was handicapped by poor access. The county also would have to pay to demolish existing structures on the property, he said.

But after he left the meeting, Quist said he would be happy to meet with Allegretti representatives again.

“If they have earthshaking numbers, we’d be glad to entertain them,” Quist said.

In the letter, Farley alleged that the county was mistakenly representing that Allegretti’s selling price was $16 million. Farley said he told county officials that the property was appraised at roughly $16 million but that Allegretti was willing to sell for $12 million to $13 million.

Farley also said that the selection of his company’s property, located south of Prairie Street, would appease homeowner opponents who said they wanted the courthouse built below Prairie.

“I am genuinely perplexed at the seemingly callous disregard and inattention to the concerns of the local citizenry,” Farley said.

When asked about Farley’s statements, Quist, who had not seen the letter, declined to comment.

“I’m not going to negotiate this in the paper,” Quist said.