More Debate Scheduled on Tujunga Wash Golf Course

The fate of a proposal to build a golf course and equestrian facility in Tujunga Wash may come down to last-minute arguments at a City Council meeting here today.

Informal polling of council members Monday showed that neither side of the debate had a lock on the vote.

Today’s council meeting is at 10 a.m. at the Lake View Terrace Recreation Center, 11075 Foothill Blvd.

The Planning Commission approved a conditional-use permit for the Red Tail Golf and Equestrian Facility in December 1996, but the council voted 10 to 4 against the project last July.

The developers, Foothills Golf Development Group, filed a $215-million suit against the city, claiming that the city did not have a legal reason to deny the permit and that the company had complied with all city requirements in seeking approval of the project.

In an effort to settle the suit with the developer, the council agreed to revisit the issue at today’s meeting.

The council would need two-thirds of the members or 10 votes to approve or deny an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to grant a permit for the project.

If the council cannot muster 10 votes, the Planning Commission’s permit will stand.

*

The conditions placed on the permit by the commission are not as tough as those proposed by Councilman Joel Wachs, in whose district the wash lies. Wachs’ proposal could require the developer to keep 200 of the site’s 350 acres as open space for a wildlife preserve and create a 300-foot buffer to protect the spine flower preserve.

Arline DeSanctis, Wachs’ chief field deputy, said the councilman would be disappointed if the Planning Commission’s decision were upheld because of insufficient votes.

“We want our conditions there,” DeSanctis said.

Some council members who opposed the project in July, including Rita Walters, Jackie Goldberg and Ruth Galanter, said they would wait to see the evidence presented at today’s meeting before deciding on their vote.

But some, including Mike Feuer, Mike Hernandez and Nate Holden, remained firm in their opposition.

Councilwoman Laura Chick said she hoped alternatives would be found to enable the council to legally deny the permit.

She said two such options would be for a nonprofit agency to buy the land to preserve it as open space or reducing the project’s size.

“We would be standing on firmer legal ground if we could say we are turning down the request because [the developer has] other options,” she said. “That hasn’t seemed to have happened.”

*

At least one councilman said that although he opposes the project, he will wait to decide which way to vote until today’s hearing.

“I’m leaning toward no,” said Councilman Richard Alarcon. “[But] if we’re faced with a golf course with limited protections versus a golf course with protections, I would lean toward option two.”

Richard Alatorre, the only dissenter who said outright in February that he would change his vote, is on medical leave following abdominal surgery and will not be at today’s meeting.