Board Sets Stage for Final Vote on Mini-City Near Simi Valley

The Ventura County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday approved the environmental study of the proposed Ahmanson Ranch project, setting the stage for a final vote next month on the mini-city planned for the rolling hills south of Simi Valley.

At the urging of Supervisor Maria VanderKolk, the board voted 3 to 0 to approve the environmental impact report--a move that came under sharp criticism by environmentalists who said the study underestimates the damage to the region’s open space.

“This is a mockery of the public process,” said Mary Wiesbrock, director of an Agoura-based environmental group, Save Open Space. “It’s the Maria VanderKolk development, and it will only embarrass the county.”

The environmental analysis concludes that the $1-billion Ahmanson project will have unavoidable and significant effects on air quality, traffic and the rural environment of the Simi Hills.

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

The new community would eventually add 37,540 cars daily to nearby roadways, increasing smog and traffic on both sides of the Ventura-Los Angeles county line. It would also destroy mature oak trees and rare grasslands on the sprawling cattle ranch, the report says.

However, supervisors who support the project said the benefits of gaining 10,000 acres of public parkland--a key component of the project--outweigh any environmental costs.

Last year, at the suggestion of VanderKolk, Ahmanson Land Co. and developers of comedian Bob Hope’s nearby Jordan Ranch agreed to consolidate their development proposals at a single location. As part of the deal, 10,000 acres of mountain land would become public and Hope would be paid a below-market $29.5 million for his share of the land.

Joining VanderKolk, Supervisors John K. Flynn and Maggie Kildee agreed Tuesday that the study has analyzed all significant impact on the environment, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act.

Supervisor Vicky Howard was out of town on a family emergency, and Supervisor Susan K. Lacey did not vote on the issue. Lacey said she did not have enough time to review the lengthy study, which was released in September and amended last week to include public comments.

“I do not feel comfortable with my review of the document for making a decision,” Lacey said. “At this point . . . I’m going to abstain in the process.”

Lacey’s concerns echoed the complaints of dozens of critics who said at an October hearing that they did not have enough time to study the 18-pound report.

“Basically, their comments have been dismissed,” said Virginia Pollack, a member of Save Open Space.

The city of Calabasas was so irritated with the supervisors’ refusal to delay their vote that it has sent a letter to Gov. Pete Wilson asking him to intervene to prolong the review. The governor has not responded.

“The city has made every effort to comprehend the impacts of the project, but our efforts have been thwarted because of the time frame,” said Steve Craig, Calabasas environmental coordinator. “My concern is there will be errors (in the report).”

But VanderKolk said she is very confident that the report addresses the major environmental problems.

“I had two staff members and myself reviewing it all weekend long and all day yesterday,” VanderKolk said. “I feel comfortable.”

The report will be forwarded to the county Planning Commission for review Dec. 10. The Board of Supervisors is set to take final action on the project five days later.

“I’ve been looking at this whole issue for a long time,” Flynn said. “The report is adequate.”