City Must Build New Housing for the Elderly : Hidden Hills: A judge warns officials to stop delaying the start of construction of lower-cost housing for senior citizens.

A Los Angeles Superior Court judge sternly warned the city of Hidden Hills on Thursday that it must proceed with a court-ordered lower-cost housing plan for senior citizens, but stopped short of holding the city in contempt of court.

Judge R. William Schoettler Jr. said he is prepared to order City Council members into court and keep them there “eight hours a day, five days a week” until they approve the housing plan.

Schoettler left open the possibility that he would hold the city in contempt, saying he would enforce a Feb. 5, 1992, deadline for the start of construction.

Warning against unreasonable delays by the city, the judge said: “I want to see this accomplished the way it was agreed to be accomplished. If it seems to be coming to a halt or not moving with the rapidity that it should be moving, then I’ll nudge it along myself.”

Hidden Hills plunged into controversy last year when the City Council announced support for a plan for 46 units of senior housing on land the city later annexed from Los Angeles County.

The project was part of a court order issued by Schoettler last July, when the city agreed to settle a 6-year-old lawsuit by Los Angeles County and a private attorney over the city’s formation of a redevelopment agency to fund a flood-control project. The attorney’s suit pointed out that state law requires that 20% of redevelopment funds be spent on lower-cost housing.

Tarzana developer Danny Howard is proposing residential and commercial development on 25 acres. Howard would build nine luxury homes on 20 acres inside the town gates. The commercial construction and lower-cost housing would be built on five acres outside the gates. No details on the lower-cost housing--such as whether it will be sold or rented, and at what prices--have been determined.

Amid opposition from residents, the council delayed the annexation, polled city residents and discussed disbanding the redevelopment agency. Council members have said they believe they have committed the city only to consider--not to approve--the Howard project.

In light of those developments, Howard last week asked Schoettler to find the city in contempt of court.

Schoettler declared Thursday that he believes the settlement agreement binds the city to approve the lower-cost housing. If Hidden Hills wishes to change the court-ordered agreement, the judge said, “I don’t throw this down as a gauntlet, but I don’t think they can do it without going over my head” to an appellate court.

“The City Council is not going to be in a position to change this judgment,” he said.

The Feb. 5, 1992 deadline the judge set is two years from the day the city annexed the Howard property and is in accord with a schedule included in the court order.

City Atty. Wayne K. Lemieux noted that three of the five City Council members are seeking re-election and that the housing project is an election issue.

At least three of the four challengers for seats on the five-member council have opposed the Howard project.

The judge replied: “I’m not overly concerned one way or the other about new members of the City Council, so long as the judgment is carried out.”

Two City Council challengers, David Stanley and Howard Klein, were in the courtroom but declined to comment afterward. They and challenger Susan Porcaro are among a group of residents opposed to the Howard development plan.

Mayor Chris K. Van Peski, who is among the council members seeking re-election, said he will continue his support for the lower-cost housing plan.

The full council was told of the judge’s declaration at a special meeting convened Thursday night.

“Obviously he means that we should pay attention,” said Councilwoman Colleen Hartman.

The city’s Planning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on the Howard development next Wednesday. The proposal could reach the council sometime in April.