Chick Urges Appeal of Ahmanson Ruling

Los Angeles Councilwoman Laura Chick said Thursday that she will ask her council colleagues to appeal a Superior Court decision that affirms an environmental report for the $1-billion Ahmanson Ranch development.

The city of Los Angeles was one of nine plaintiffs that sought to overturn the Ventura County Board of Supervisors’ 1992 approval of the 3,050-home golf course community on the southeastern corner of Ventura County, near Chick’s west San Fernando Valley district.

Chick, whose district would bear the brunt of a massive increase in traffic generated by the project, has in the past talked about appealing to force the developer to reduce the traffic impacts on adjacent streets.

But in her March 4 ruling, Ventura County Superior Court Judge Barbara A. Lane wrote that in approving the project, supervisors decided that the prospect of receiving nearly 10,000 acres of public parkland as part of the deal, along with other economic and recreational benefits, “outweighed the environmental costs.”

Chick said she hopes that the other plaintiffs will join the appeal. The City Council has scheduled a private session April 26 to discuss litigation against Ventura County on the project.

“The court decision on Ahmanson Ranch cannot be allowed to stand,” Chick said in a statement Thursday. “The Ahmanson project must adequately take into account its severe impacts on the quality of life in the city of Los Angeles.”

Chick’s major concern is that the project proposes to link Thousand Oaks Boulevard in Ventura County with Victory Boulevard in Woodland Hills, increasing daily vehicle trips on Victory from 1,250 to an estimated 19,200.

In a related matter, Chick and Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, a candidate for the Los Angeles County supervisor’s seat representing most of the Valley, sent a joint letter to Harry Stone, new director of the Los Angeles County Public Works Department, asking him to reconsider the department’s support for the connection of Thousand Oaks and Victory boulevards.

“With new leadership . . . in your department and imminent changes at the (Los Angeles) Board of Supervisors, we encourage you to revisit this issue,” the letter said.