Advertisement

Officials From 2 Counties Meet Over Project

Share
TIMES STAFF WRITER

Looking to cool tensions and avoid a court fight, Ventura County officials met privately with Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich on Thursday to discuss their concerns over the massive Newhall Ranch housing project proposed for Antonovich’s district.

Ventura County Supervisors John K. Flynn and Kathy Long requested the meeting because of fears that the 25,000-home development is being rushed forward without a proper environmental review. The project would be built along the Ventura and Los Angeles county border.

Although the meeting did not result in any significant breakthroughs, Long said she was pleased that elected officials from both counties could at last discuss the issue face to face.

Advertisement

“I thought it went well,” she said following the 45-minute meeting with Antonovich in his Los Angeles office. “I always feel better when I can sit across the table and look someone in the eye when talking about issues that I don’t feel we’ve been treated fairly on.”

Long said she and Flynn told Antonovich that the environmental report on the Newhall Ranch development does not adequately address the project’s impact on local traffic, water supplies and flood control. They also noted that the report does not include information on a new state law that limits the ability of local governments to impose new taxes on property owners to pay for services.

Long said they told the Los Angeles County supervisor that the project’s environmental report should be expanded to include more information on these issues, then recirculated for additional public comment.

But while Antonovich listened to their concerns, no promises or commitments were forthcoming.

Antonovich told his visitors that he remains neutral on the project because it could change dramatically before it ever reaches the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.

As for the project’s environmental report, Antonovich said the county Regional Planning Commission would have to decide whether it is flawed. The commission is scheduled to review the report April 23.

Advertisement

“Certainly, Mike doesn’t want to do anything to drive the farmers out of business downstream,” said Dave Vannatta, the supervisor’s planning deputy who attended Thursday’s meeting. “But whether or not the project is going to do that, we don’t know. The planning commission will have to decide.”

Asked if Antonovich would contact commission members about Ventura County’s concerns, Vannatta said: “We’ve got too many other things to do than to be telling the commission how to run a hearing.”

Antonovich could not be reached for comment.

During their meeting, Long said, Antonovich and Vannatta raised concerns about the traffic impacts that the 3,050-dwelling Ahmanson Ranch housing project east of Thousand Oaks could have on Los Angeles County. The Ventura County project--which remains stalled in the courts--would also be built along the county line.

*

But Long said she and Flynn argued that there was no comparison between the two developments. They said the Ahmanson Ranch project is significantly smaller than the 25,000 homes planned at Newhall Ranch. And they noted that the developer of the Ahmanson project has agreed to pay for major road improvements in Los Angeles County and in neighboring cities.

“The difference between the two projects is night and day,” Long said.

Meanwhile, the Ventura County officials said they would still consider filing a lawsuit against Newhall Land & Farming Co. and Los Angeles County if they believe that their environmental concerns are being ignored.

“No one wants a lawsuit,” Long said. “But that [possibility] is still there.”

Ventura County contends that three parcels within the proposed Newhall Ranch project extend over the county line. If this is the case, they said, Ventura County would have to give its approval before the project could go forward.

Advertisement

Ventura County Assistant County Counsel Noel Klebaum said his office is still reviewing land deeds to determine exactly how the parcels in question were subdivided as well as where they were legally documented.

But Los Angeles County Deputy Counsel Charles J. Moore has said his office has concluded that Ventura County has no grounds for a lawsuit.

In a memo earlier this month, Moore stated that even if the three parcels cross the county line as alleged, Ventura County would still have no legal authority because no portion of the project would be built within its boundaries. The land in dispute would remain vacant.

He also wrote that the parcels to be developed have been legally documented by Los Angeles County, which he said means that the project can be developed without Ventura County’s approval.

Advertisement