Ahmanson Plan Draws Criticism, Praise : Development: The project’s environmental report is the focus of a four-hour hearing in Thousand Oaks. Ventura County audience members generally back it; L.A. County attendees oppose it.

Two dozen critics of the proposed $1-billion Ahmanson Ranch project told Ventura County supervisors on Wednesday that an environmental study of the new mini-city is seriously flawed and that the development should not be built in the rolling hills near Calabasas.

But an equal number of speakers at the four-hour hearing in Thousand Oaks supported Ahmanson Land Co.’s plan to build a 3,050-dwelling community on 2,800 acres inside Ventura County at the Los Angeles County line.

Generally, critics and supporters split along county lines, with residents of Ventura County and Los Angeles County on opposite sides of the debate.

“This is a situation in which the county of Ventura will reap the financial benefit . . . while dumping traffic” into Los Angeles, said Los Angeles Councilwoman Joy Picus. “We must protest this lack of concern for your neighbors.”

Ventura County speakers overwhelmingly favored the proposal because of what they saw as Ahmanson’s environmental sensitivity and a provision that would turn over more than 10,000 acres of parkland to state and federal agencies as part of the deal.

“Look at the benefits of having that open space in our county,” Westlake resident Fred Priebe said.

And Richard Bromser, representing a Ventura County electrical union, said:

“Los Angeles County built right up to the Ventura County line. If this project was in Los Angeles County, it would be built already.”

About 200 people packed a Janss Road hearing room to comment on the study of environmental effects of the massive project.

Of the 49 who took a position, 24 favored the project and 25 did not.

Los Angeles County residents opposed the project by 2 to 1, while Ventura County residents backed it by 4 to 1.

Despite numerous requests for more time to respond to the 3,000-page environmental study, the Board of Supervisors closed the public-comment period and set Nov. 24 for a final vote on the adequacy of the study.

Once certified, the report will be forwarded to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors for hearings and a final vote, scheduled for Dec. 15.

A majority of the five supervisors--who have said they favor the project in concept--said they heard nothing Wednesday that sounded like a fatal flaw.

“In general, I do think that the open space that the county would acquire is a tremendous asset that, once lost, may never be regained again,” Supervisor Vicky Howard of Simi Valley said.

The project would transform part of the ranch into an upscale mini-city with 8,700 residents, a 300-room hotel, two professional-quality golf courses and a town center of dozens of shops and government buildings.

The environmental analysis, released in September, finds that the Ahmanson project will have unavoidable and significant impacts on air quality, traffic and the rural environment of the Simi Hills.

The new community would eventually dump 37,540 cars a day onto nearby roadways, help extend the blanket of smog that frequently covers the nearby San Fernando Valley and destroy mature oak trees and rare grasslands on the sprawling cattle ranch, the report says.

The project’s approval could also set a precedent for the development of rural open space in Ventura County, consultants who studied the proposal for the county said.

On the other hand, supervisors must weigh what the county would get from Ahmanson in return for allowing the development, Supervisor Maria VanderKolk said.

VanderKolk suggested last year that Ahmanson Land Co. and developers of comedian Bob Hope’s nearby Jordan Ranch consolidate their development proposals at a single location.

As part of the deal, 10,000 acres of mountain land would become public.

Hope would be paid a below-market $29.5 millon for his share of the land.

In December, the supervisors put the joint project on a fast track to enable them to make a quick decision and retain multimillion-dollar state and federal park commitments to the deal.

The supervisors would have to find overriding considerations to approve the project because it violates county policy that requires construction in or near cities and prohibits projects in designated open space.

Several speakers argued Wednesday that the parkland deal is just such a special consideration.

“This project could stand as a model for future projects which strive to balance the needs of the community, the region and the natural environment,” Simi Valley resident Cheryl Carrillo said.

The project also drew support from Ventura County labor unions and business organizations, as well as from hikers and conservationists who said thousands more public acres will help preserve the shrinking wildlife corridor that links the three mountain ranges that ring the San Fernando Valley--the Santa Monica Mountains, Simi Hills and Santa Susana Mountains.

But Los Angeles County residents, who will bear the brunt of the project’s traffic and smog, said the additional traffic will cause gridlock at freeway intersections and further erode the area’s rural flavor.

“It will destroy this area,” Martin Atkinson-Barr of the Malibu Canyon Homeowners Assn. said. “In many ways it is a cuckoo project . . . in that a cuckoo’s egg is being laid in our area.”

Representatives of Los Angeles County and the cities of Calabasas, Malibu and Los Angeles expressed strong concerns on the project--particularly its effect on the Ventura Freeway, which is already jammed at rush hours.

Chumash Indians said the mesa on which most housing would be built probably contains an old tribal cemetery, which is not discussed in the environmental study.

Environmental groups, including representatives of the Conejo Group of the Sierra Club, criticized the environmental study, saying it was rushed and incomplete.

They were among the 55 individuals and groups that asked without success that the public-comment period be extended beyond the allotted 45 days.

Mary Wiesbrock, director of the Agoura-based Save Open Space, said the project is a bad deal for the public, allowing Bob Hope to sell his least developable properties for $29.5 million while moving “San Fernando Valley smog to the Conejo Grade.”

Wiesbrock and other speakers asked that the environmental study evaluate whether Ahmanson Ranch has been contaminated by nuclear materials from the adjacent Rocketdyne site, which has had toxic contamination problems. Howard and VanderKolk said county consultants will check on that possibility.

Proposed Ahmanson Ranch Project

The proposed Ahmanson Ranch project includes 3,050 dwelliings, two golf courses and 400,000 square feet of office and commerical space on 2,800 acres. The project would be located int he Simi Hills in southeastern Ventura County on the border of Los Angeles County. Approval by Ventura County officials would trigger the donation and sale to park agencies of about 10,000 acres of mountain property for the below-market price of $29.5 million.

Proposed Ahmanson Ranch Project