Ahmanson Project Faces Challenge in Court Again : Land use: Consolidated lawsuit argues against Ventura County’s 36-month extension of the development.

Opponents of the $1-billion Ahmanson Ranch project will be back in court Monday to challenge Ventura County’s decision granting the developer a three-year extension to build the mini-city in the Simi Hills.

The city of Calabasas and two other community groups filed the lawsuit against the county in December, saying it should have required another environmental study of the 3,050-home, golf course community before granting the extension last fall.

The suit also argues that if Ahmanson Land Co. cannot meet its obligation to turn over thousands of acres of mountain property to park agencies by December, 1995, then its development agreement with the county should be canceled.

“All we’re saying is that they should stick to their deadline,” said Steve Quintanilla, Calabasas deputy city manager. “If the county had not approved the extension, the project would be dead.”

Attorneys for the county and Ahmanson declined to comment on the Ventura County Superior Court case. But they have argued in the past that the county granted the extension because a number of lawsuits filed against the developer had stalled the project.

But Quintanilla said this is not a satisfactory reason for approving the 36-month extension on the massive development, which is expected to dump much of its traffic on Calabasas and other Los Angeles County communities.

“Ahmanson’s argument that they needed the extension because of unforeseen litigation is hogwash because Calabasas and a number of other petitioners had indicated early on that they would sue if the project was approved,” Quintanilla said.

Calabasas Councilwoman Lesley Devine agreed.

“For the Board of Supervisors to say that they didn’t know there would be such extensive litigation is so out there,” she said. “To me, that was doublespeak.”

In addition to Calabasas, the Mountain View Estates Homeowners Assn. and the Agoura Hills-based environmental group Save Open Space are also plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the county over the Ahmanson extension.

Quintanilla said a new environmental review should be required because of changes in surrounding communities since the Ahmanson project, which would be built on the border of Los Angeles and Ventura counties, was first approved in December, 1992.

*

But Supervisor John Flynn, who supported the housing development, said there has not been enough significant change to warrant a new environmental study.

“There hasn’t been that much development in the last three years,” he said. “That sounds like a smoke screen to me.”

Ventura County supervisors approved the Ahmanson project on condition that the developer turn over to park agencies 10,000 acres of mountain land--most of it owned by entertainer Bob Hope--by December, 1995. So far, only about 3,000 acres--including Hope’s 2,308-acre Jordan Ranch--have been acquired as parkland.

Ahmanson, which plans to dedicate 2,633 acres of its ranch as open space, must deliver two other Hope properties to park agencies before it can go forward with its development. These include Hope’s 4,369-acre Runkle Ranch near Chatsworth and his 339-acre Corral Canyon tract in Malibu.

After supervisors approved the project, a number of lawsuits were filed against the developer by surrounding communities, including Calabasas, the city of Malibu and the county of Los Angeles. The lawsuits were eventually consolidated into one case.

The plaintiffs contended in that suit that the environmental report on the Ahmanson development did not adequately address the impacts on their communities.

But in March, 1994, a Ventura County Superior Court judge ruled that the supervisors had complied with all state environmental laws when they approved the housing project. The plaintiffs in turn filed an appeal, which is expected to be heard later this year.

Because of the continuing litigation, Ahmanson officials requested the three-year extension on the development agreement with the county. The board approved the extension in October, prompting the current lawsuit.

*

Meanwhile, environmentalists and park officials said they are hoping that a bill now making its way through the state Legislature that would give large tax breaks to wealthy landowners may entice Ahmanson to drop its development plans altogether.

The bill, which was recently approved by the state Senate and now goes to the Assembly, would provide tax credits that would equal 100% of a property’s full market value when combined with federal incentives. Unlike mere deductions, the credits would be applied directly to taxes owed.

“It’s an exciting opportunity if it would work for the Ahmanson company,” said Joseph T. Edmiston, executive director of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, a state park agency that stands to benefit from the proposed legislation.

“If the company would see it as financially beneficial to take the tax credits that would be a win-win for everybody,” he said. “But whether they do so or not is another matter.”

Mary Trigg, a spokeswoman for H.F. Ahmanson & Co., said company officials are following the legislation but declined to comment on what impact it could have on the housing development.

“We are aware of the bill, and we’ll see what happens,” she said.