Order in the County

Ever since 1973 Los Angeles County has struggled to develop a general plan that would bring some order to galloping urbanization in the 3,000 square miles of unincorporated territory within the county. Each time county planners and supervisors came up with a proposed solution, it was rejected as inadequate.

But finally there is a plan that should serve the county’s needs, in the form of proposed amendments to the 1980 general plan. It would prevent excessive growth in four specific regions that face particular development stress. And the proposed amendments would make certain that growth does not exceed a region’s ability to handle people in terms of available roads, utilities, schools and other facilities.

The amendments are scheduled to go before the county Board of Supervisors on Tuesday for a hearing and possible action. If it can, the board first should try to close, or narrow, a loophole that permits the county to approve projects that exceed capacity when the supervisors determine that the construction is necessary because of “overriding considerations.” Even if that is not possible, the plan still deserves board approval.

The amendments were drafted after Superior Court Judge Norman C. Epstein ordered the county to develop a means of avoiding unnecessary conversion of open space to urban use. He was responding to a lawsuit brought by the Coalition for Los Angeles County Planning in the Public Interest. The coalition of environmental groups and civic organizations had challenged the 1980 general plan as failing to keep growth in check.

At Epstein’s direction, the new proposal was worked out by James A. Kushner, a Southwestern University law professor acting as a court referee in conjunction with county planners and coalition officials. It would set specific growth limits for Malibu and the Santa Monica Mountains, the Santa Clarita Valley, the Antelope Valley and the East San Gabriel Valley. For example, the Malibu area would be limited to 30,700 dwellings by the year 2000--enough for a population of 79,000. The current population is about 63,000. There also would be limits on commercial and industrial expansion.

This is not a no-growth plan. Indeed, it has the support of many builders because it would bring more certainty to the development process. The major certainty is that Los Angeles County no longer can afford willy-nilly, leapfrogging development that overwhelms a region’s ability to support it.