City Council Examines Alternatives to Disputed Flood Control Project : Thousand Oaks: Planners, county officials withhold support for measures to handle runoff from Lang Ranch development.

With the threat of an expensive lawsuit hanging over their heads, Thousand Oaks City Council members Tuesday night explored seven new alternatives to a flood control project that could uproot as many as 80 oak trees.

But neither city planners nor county flood control officers could give their endorsement to any of the new options for handling the runoff expected from the Lang Ranch development.

The ideas ranged from building several small basins for catching floodwaters to revamping the city’s entire flood channel system--an option that would require tearing up city streets at major intersections and rerouting traffic.

“Anything is technically feasible, if you’re willing to pay for it,” said Alex Sheydayi, deputy director of the Ventura County Flood Control Department. “But the impact to the life of the city would be horrendous.”

Greg Smith, the city staff member who presented the new proposals, said he still believes that the best alternative is the one brought forward several weeks ago. That alternative calls for constructing a dam on one side of Westlake Boulevard and a debris basin on the other.

That solution was considered more attractive to environmentalists because it spares some trees and part of the wildlife habitat, which neighbors say attracts owls, coyotes, hawks and bobcats.

Originally, Lang Ranch Co. engineers, working with flood control officials, had proposed a massive dam and basin project that would require destroying as many as 140 trees.

But in January, flood control officials scaled back their requirements, saying that they may have overestimated the amount of water and debris expected to run off from the 2,257-home development, and that the basin could be scaled back as much as 25%.

The council balked at approving any version of the flood control project earlier this month, prompting the developer to take legal action.

On Friday, Lang Ranch Co. filed a lawsuit in federal court asking Judge Dickran Tevrizian to award the company more than $1 million in damages and force the city, rather than the developer, to build the project.

Because Tevrizian has ruled in favor of the developer before, in a 1986 judgment limiting the city’s interference with the project, he is considered likely to be sympathetic to the developer.

The legal brief accuses the city of grasping at straws and intentionally causing interminable delays. “The city is simply paralyzed by the thought of having to make what is a politically uncomfortable decision,” it states.

In the brief, attorneys for Lang Ranch Co. offered to bring videotapes into Tevrizian’s courtroom to illustrate what they call an impasse between council members on the issue.

At the council’s Feb. 7 meeting, council members Andy Fox and Judy Lazar voted to approve the modified project, saying they believed that the city was legally obligated to give approval because of Tevrizian’s 1986 judgment.

But Zeanah and Mayor Jaime Zukowski would not approve the project because they said another less environmentally damaging alternative might still exist, despite the testimony of many experts that all other options had been exhausted.

After the 2-2 split, the council then voted 3-1, with Lazar dissenting, to return to the issue in two weeks and discuss sending it back to the Planning Commission.

As the meeting ended--the third lengthy session on the project--Lang Ranch Co. attorney Karen Lee informed city officials of the developer’s intention to appeal to the judge. In less than two weeks, she filed the request and was given a March 13 court date.

Fearful that the city would once again face losing a huge settlement to a developer, City Council members decided to resolve the matter before March 13. Last fall, a state court ruled in favor of Newbury Park developer Albert Cohan in a case that is now under appeal.

Although no representatives from Lang Ranch Co. attended Tuesday’s meeting, some residents again spoke out for further environmental study of the plan.

“It is a monstrosity,” said Mary Weisbrock, representing Save Open Space. “A redesign is feasible. Please ask for an addendum” to the previous environmental review.

But Robert Johanson, who said he lives less than a mile from the site, asked the city to go ahead and make a decision as quickly as possible.

“It seems to me, we in the city have the least say in this matter, and we are spending the most time on it,” Johanson said. “Continuing to relentlessly analyze this is not doing any good.”