Report Fails to Calm Foes of Proposed Courthouse : Chatsworth: The review says risks of escaping criminals and greater traffic will be curtailed. Opponents still believe that alternative sites have not been considered.

Security at a municipal courthouse proposed for Chatsworth would curtail the risk of escaping criminals and a 775-space parking lot would keep cars out of nearby residential neighborhoods, according to a recently released 500-page review of the project.

But the draft environmental impact report did little to calm nearby residents who oppose the 16-courtroom building at the southeast corner of Plummer Street and Winnetka Avenue because they believe it would do exactly what the report says it would not: attract criminals and traffic.

On Monday, they repeated claims that Los Angeles County Municipal Court officials have refused to examine alternative sites seriously, and charged that the review is “a whitewash.”

The two-volume report contains little new information about three proposed alternative sites and reiterates many of the arguments court officials have used in the past to answer residents’ concerns.

“Much of the ground has been gone over before,” acknowledged Ken Nishi, Municipal Court capital projects manager.

But, he said, the arguments now are reinforced by details supporting the county’s position that the courthouse should be located at the Winnetka and Plummer site.

Residents complained that the county’s answers to their questions during public meetings were unsatisfactory and said the report does little to change their opinions.

“Every meeting we have had with those people has been like a canned speech,” said Harry Godley, chairman of the Chatsworth Homeowners Committee. “You hear it over and over and over again, and this is the same thing.”

The report examined crime statistics in residential neighborhoods with courthouses nearby and found no increase in the number of crimes. Even so, the area around the courthouse would be patrolled by law enforcement agencies.

Defendants released from custody would be transferred to other county jail facilities before being set free, the report said.

The 297,500-square-foot courthouse would mainly handle misdemeanor offenders and traffic violators. Some felony cases would be heard, but the report said that since most felony defendants would never leave the building unescorted, their presence would not be noticed.

A wall would restrict access on Winnetka and Plummer, forcing all vehicles and pedestrians to enter the facility from Penfield Avenue at the south end of the property--about a quarter mile from residential neighborhoods. Although county officials anticipate a morning peak of 611 cars in the parking lot, plans call for 775 spaces.

Since the 9.6-acre site was chosen last year, opponents have urged the county to look at other locations away from single-family neighborhoods. The two most popular alternatives were rejected for a variety of reasons.

The project is subject to final approval by the County Board of Supervisors.

A site supported by residents at Prairie Street and Mason Avenue was turned down because it was hard to find, less accessible than the proposed location and its odd shape would have limited the type of building, the report concluded.

Another site on Marilla Street between Topanga Canyon Boulevard and Owensmouth Avenue was passed over because it would have clogged intersections along Topanga and would have been more expensive because existing buildings would need demolition, the report said.

Godley, however, claimed that county officials already had decided where to put the courthouse and were unwilling to seriously look at alternative sites.

“They find everything wrong with the alternate sites and don’t pay any attention to the concerns of the people,” he said.