Sprawling Santa Clarita Valley Studies Its Destiny : Growth: With 38,000 new housing units proposed in the county’s fastest-growing region, planners are beginning to wonder if expansion is outpacing public services.

Thousands of Angelenos fleeing the urban woes of Los Angeles have found a haven in the suburban Santa Clarita Valley in recent years, turning what was once lazy farmland into the fastest-growing region in Los Angeles County.

Development flattened hillsides and mowed down oak trees. The valley became an escape valve for rapid population growth in the metropolitan area.

But today, county planners are being asked to decide whether the time has come to hit the brakes. Has growth, the planners are asking, outpaced the ability of public agencies to serve the public?

Between 1980 and 1988, the valley’s population jumped from 79,015 to 132,700, according to county planners. And they say it could easily double within the next five years.

It’s not that the sprawling Santa Clarita Valley cannot handle thousands of new residents. Rather, the issue before county planners is how quickly the growth should occur--and where.

County policy is to allow the Santa Clarita Valley to grow to a ceiling of 270,000 residents by 2010. But currently sitting in county files are applications for enough housing projects to thrust the valley to that population ceiling by the mid-1990s.

The Regional Planning Commission, and ultimately the Board of Supervisors, can reject or scale down development plans to hold the population to 270,000, said county Planning Director James E. Hartl. They could phase in the projects gradually, rather than all at once.

Another possibility, Hartl said, is for the county to raise the growth ceiling past 270,000, provided that roads and public services are added to support such development. But that option faces opposition from local activists, schools and officials of the City of Santa Clarita, who fear that the growth will overwhelm public services.

Which route the county will take will not be known for months, when final revisions are made to the Santa Clarita Valley’s general plan--a broad blueprint for development in the region.

How that document is revised will set the tone for growth in the valley for decades.

“What you’re looking at is the destiny of the Santa Clarita Valley,” said Allan Cameron, a member of the Santa Clarita Organization for Planning the Environment, or SCOPE, a local activist group that monitors development. Because the general plan covers thousands of acres of vacant land, “this is a planning opportunity that is rarely seen,” he said.

To understand the intensity of the debate over growth in Santa Clarita requires a little history of the valley, which most Southern Californians probably know as the home of Magic Mountain.

Town Incorporated

Four communities--Saugus, Newhall, Valencia and Canyon Country--incorporated into the city of Santa Clarita 22 months ago in what many cityhood proponents called a backlash against unbridled building.

In February, planners said the valley had retained its title as the fastest-growing region in the county for the fourth straight year.

The development has provided affordable housing about 30 miles from downtown Los Angeles. If the county restricts growth in Santa Clarita, it will intensify the pressure on moderately priced housing elsewhere.

Eastern Ventura County, the only other large undeveloped area relatively close to downtown, has strict growth limits. The Antelope Valley, another region with ample room for housing, is at least 40 minutes farther from downtown than Santa Clarita.

Central to the current debate over the Santa Clarita Valley are 43 proposals to build a total of 38,000 housing units in the valley--enough housing to fill a city the size of Inglewood.

Cameron refers to the plans derisively as “the gang of 43.”

The 43 proposals require amendments to the general plan and would lie in 170 square miles of county land surrounding the young City of Santa Clarita.

Varied Impact Possible

In the Santa Clarita Valley, the proposed plan amendments would have varying impact. One proposal by Western Financial would allow 34 units to be built on land currently zoned for eight. But another amendment requested by Valencia Corp. would squeeze 1,215 units on 43 acres currently zoned for 32.

Two of the largest projects are a 5,100-unit development near Castaic by Northlake and a 4,326-unit project by Dale Poe Development west of the Golden State Freeway and south of Magic Mountain. The Valencia Corp. is proposing 13 different projects totaling more than 14,000 units, according to county records.

In reviewing the proposed amendments, planning officials will consider both the number of units and the potential benefits a development would provide the valley as a whole, Hartl said.

According to an analysis by county planners, for example, a 2,992-unit project by Valencia Corp. would offer the public affording housing, create a community park and allow the extension of a major road. By comparison, a small 292-unit project “does not provide for any additional community benefits,” the analysis says.

The debate over these 43 projects promises to heat up in coming months.

To Consult School Districts

SCOPE will review the projects, as will the valley’s five school districts. School officials have filed lawsuits against the county, which are pending, to slow the pace of growth in the valley. The City of Santa Clarita will try to exert influence over the 43 projects and the new general plan as well.

A consultant hired by Santa Clarita concluded that none of the projects should be endorsed by the council until their potential environmental impact can be assessed. Only projects by Valencia Corp., known for creating the “master-planned” community of Valencia, should receive what the consultant called “primary consideration” by the county, the consultant said.

The city has not taken an official position on the 43 projects, City Manager George Caravalho said. On Tuesday night, the consultant presented his findings to the City Council. Caravalho said the council, the city Planning Commission and a citizens advisory group would draft the city’s position on the projects.

Caravalho noted that the projects represent only a portion of the potential growth in the valley. Not included in the current debate over the projects and general plan are thousands of other units still on developers’ drawing boards, he said.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS Los Angeles County planners are reviewing more than 40 proposed housing projects that may only proceed if the county modifies its general plan to allow large-scale development on mostly agricultural land. The proposed projects lie outside the city of Santa Clarita:

1. Castaic Area: 5 projects, 6,539 units

2. Valencia-Northriver Area: 10 projects, 9,451 units

3. Seco-Bouquet Canyon Area: 14 projects, 6,629 units

4. Canyon Country Area: 7 projects, 3,596 units

5. Placerita Canyon Area: 4 projects, 3,991 units

6. Pico Canyon-Valencia Area: 3 projects, 7,807 units

Total projects: 43

Total units: 38,013

Source: Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning

Potential Growth in the Santa Clarita Valley