Backers, Critics Lay Groundwork for Continuation of Land-Use Battles : Ahmanson Ranch: Much of the fallout from the vast Simi Hills project will be felt by residents of L.A. County. Negotiations--and perhaps lawsuits--are next.

For most of the past year, Los Angeles County officials felt no one was listening.

Time after time, alarmed officials stood before crowded public hearings and outlined in unequivocal terms their opposition to the mammoth Ahmanson Ranch housing and commercial development north of Calabasas. They lamented that the project would pour thousands of cars each day onto Los Angeles County’s already crowded roads.

And time after time, they were thanked for their concern and dismissed by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors, who earlier this month approved plans for the 3,050-dwelling project on the rolling hills of a former sheep ranch.

Ventura County officials said the project’s benefits--including the donation of 10,000 acres of public parkland--outweighed negative effects such as traffic and smog. Besides, they said, Los Angeles County has been ignoring the development complaints of Ventura County for decades, and turnabout is fair play.

But with that 4-1 approval, it is now Los Angeles County officials who have the power to decide how quickly the project will proceed and how it may ultimately look. So long as the project was being considered by Ventura County officials, opponents could express their concerns at hearings and demonstrations. Their role now has shifted from one in which they react to one in which they must act--and act quickly.

In the face of lawsuits from several public and private agencies on this side of the county line, the Ahmanson Land Co. has expressed its willingness to negotiate over touchy issues such as how much traffic its project will dump onto local streets.

The question asked by the project’s myriad opponents is, now that they have the developer’s ear, who will take the lead?

“The game is afoot,” said Janice Lee, a Calabasas resident who opposes the project, which calls for a 400,000-square-foot commercial center and two golf courses as well as the houses and apartments.

The approval ended nearly six years of occasionally rancorous debate over the fate of the pristine acreage in the Simi Hills north of Calabasas. At one time the developer sought annexation to Los Angeles County, but that idea was scotched after Ventura County officials objected.

What emerged as the Ahmanson Ranch project was actually the product of combining plans for two controversial developments into one. In late 1991, plans to develop the nearby Jordan Ranch were incorporated into plans for Ahmanson Ranch.

Part of the plan included selling 10,000 acres of parkland to the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy for a below-market value of $29 million. Even with the open space, the plan was vilified by environmentalists. Ventura County officials put the proposal on a fast track, approving the project in about half the normal time.

Opponents of the project have until Jan. 15 to file suit against Ventura County and Ahmanson challenging the Board of Supervisors’ approval.

But the procedure is complicated by the fact that there are at least five groups and each has a specific gripe about the project--from traffic congestion to air quality to the destruction of wildlife habitat. Los Angeles city and county, the city of Calabasas, environmental groups and a coalition of homeowners’ associations each are waiting for the others to take the initiative and either spearhead negotiations with the developer or pursue the hardball approach of a lawsuit.

But none is particularly keen on spending thousands of dollars and thousands of hours in litigation that may not bring success.

Many are looking to Calabasas, which has been vociferous in its opposition to the project, to take the lead once again. Indeed, the city would be among the most severely affected by traffic from the project, and officials have said they are prepared to sue if their concerns are not addressed.

“I would hope the lawsuit would be filed by Calabasas,” said Los Angeles City Councilwoman Joy Picus, who opposes plans for the project’s eastern access road to connect with Victory Boulevard.

Picus, too, has threatened to sue unless safeguards are put in place to prevent traffic from streaming onto Victory. But, she said, she has yet to consult city attorneys on the question and added that a small city such as Calabasas could act more quickly than Los Angeles, with its unwieldy bureaucracy.

Los Angeles County Supervisor Ed Edelman, who represents the area, likewise opposes the project. But he could not be reached for comment last week to discuss what path he would suggest the county take.

Calabasas officials acknowledge that they are at the center of the storm.

“It seems that everyone is hoping Calabasas will take this on,” Councilwoman Lesley Devine said. But since there are so many aspects of the Ahmanson plan to challenge, she added, it would behoove the various groups to fight the project on various fronts.

In fact, she said, any suit filed by Calabasas would be intended to protect the city’s interest and might not coincide with the goals of other groups. Acknowledging that sentiment, Siegfried Othmer, a director of the San Fernando Valley-based environmental group Save Open Space said his organization has begun serious discussions about suing.

“We’re certainly considering legal action because that is our only remaining channel,” Othmer said.