Santa Clarita Responds to Growth Study, Makes Proposals for Coping

Santa Clarita city officials will send two strongly worded letters to Los Angeles County planning officials expressing concerns about a new report that warns that the area is growing at a much faster pace than previously believed.

The City Council on Tuesday unanimously approved the wording of a letter composed by Santa Clarita Planning Commission members and Community Development Director Kyle Kollar proposing controls on development. Council members also authorized Mayor Pro Tem Jan Heidt to prepare a response to the county Regional Planning Commission on their behalf.

Population Projections

Two weeks ago, the county planning staff released a report based on pending development applications that showed population in the Santa Clarita Valley could reach 358,000 by 2010. County planners had estimated a population of 270,000 by 2010. Most of the proposed projects would require amendments to the area’s general plan.

County planning commissioners asked Santa Clarita officials and residents to respond to the report by Monday. A discussion on the potential growth’s effect on public services is scheduled by the county planning commission on June 2. Betty Fisher, chairman of the county commission, said commissioners have sent out “an SOS.”

“They asked for our input and I think it’s time to give it to them,” Mayor Howard P. (Buck) McKeon said. “We want them to know we’re really concerned.”

Some Regional Planning Commission members may favor high-density apartments and condominiums, McKeon said, because “where they’re living is a whole different place. We need to let them know we don’t want that kind of life style.”

Santa Clarita Planning Commissioner Connie Worden said that local commissioners felt strongly that they should reply to the report.

“The magnitude of these developments, if allowed to proceed, would result in disaster,” she said.

The local commission’s letter to county Planning Director Norman Murdoch said Santa Clarita commissioners are concerned about the cumulative effects of the development applications that would require changes to the general plan.

“The county’s procedures for processing general plan amendment proposals must be modified,” commissioners said.

The merits and benefits of the proposed developments should be considered cumulatively and approved only when public services are adequate to handle them, the letter said. The local commissioners urged the county to adopt controls on development.

Santa Clarita commissioners also asked the county for more regular updating of the Santa Clarita Local Plan, more rigorous monitoring of the effect of development on public services through the Development Monitoring System and the establishment of an areawide organization to identify and address potential growth problems. The organization would include representatives of the county and the cities of Santa Clarita, Lancaster and Palmdale, Worden said.

“They do not have to listen to any of this,” Worden said of the letter. “They might, indeed, ignore it.”

Heidt said the City Council’s response to the county planning commission will support the policies contained in the Santa Clarita Planning Commission’s letter.

“What we’re doing is developing a process for working together,” she said Wednesday. “The council’s letter is basically going to say we welcome the opportunity to address mutual problems.”

‘A Step at a Time’

“I’d like to take this one step at a time,” Heidt said. “This is the first time we’ve gotten our foot in the door.”

Heidt suggested that the city send Kollar to meet with the county planning staff before the June meeting. “Maybe we can come up with some sort of consensus before June 2,” she said.

Several residents spoke about the city’s responses to the population report.

Robert Lathrop, who served on the Santa Clarita City Formation Committee, said he would like to see a moratorium placed on developments requiring general plan amendments.

Gloria Casvin, a vice president of Newhall Land & Farming Co., said she agrees with most of the city Planning Commission’s response, but does not favor controls on development.