Tierra Rejada Valley’s Future an Uncertain Road

A slice of greenbelt squeezed by three expanding cities, the Tierra Rejada Valley is surrounded by the future.

Waves of earth-colored homes in nearby Simi Valley end abruptly at the valley’s eastern entrance.

To the northwest in Moorpark, bulldozers on a hill overlooking the valley are laying the groundwork for a 552-home development, complete with a new road named Science Drive.

To the south is Thousand Oaks, a city of 110,000 where development has reached the city limits.

Amid all that sits the Tierra Rejada Valley, a protected area of horse ranches and rolling hills whose worried defenders are seeking stricter measures against development.

Thanks to a greenbelt agreement among the three neighboring cities and the county, valley property owners are limited to farming and other low-density operations. But that pact, which was signed in the early 1980s, is nonbinding and the suburbs are getting closer.

That is why county supervisors--mindful of the anti-development sentiments sweeping the county--are dangling Measure A before voters.

The advisory measure on November’s ballot would require no action even if voters approve it. It will, however, ask whether greenbelts should be protected by law, rather than by mere agreement.

Critics say the measure is an attempt to undercut the SOAR (Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources) ballot initiative, which would severely limit development on farmland. But backers say it’s a valuable tool for gauging public sentiment on the issue.

In either event, the 2,200-acre Tierra Rejada Valley is a place where land-use restrictions face increasingly stiff tests.

“It’s the same thing the San Fernando Valley was back in the 1950s,” real estate appraiser and open space advocate Vince Curtis said.

County Supervisor Frank Schillo, whose district borders the Tierra Rejada Valley, said he backs efforts to further restrict the type of developments allowed in the valley’s “open space” zone. County law allows driving ranges, golf courses and private airfields in such areas.

“There’s a lot of pressure to build out there, and we’ve got to resist that pressure because it’s such an important asset,” Schillo said. “I’d like to see it be a farm belt more than anything else.”

Some landowners see the situation differently.

Rick Brecunier, owner of the valley’s oldest ranch, said the drive for tighter land-use restrictions is unfair to farmers.

“We have to basically provide the scenery at our expense for the rest of the public to enjoy,” he said. “If the choice is to be a farmer or else, that doesn’t seem quite fair.”

Tierra Rejada landowner Lalezar Kavian fought the greenbelt and lost.

When Kavian purchased his property in 1979, it was zoned for one dwelling per acre. After the county changed the bulk of the valley’s zoning to “open space” in the early 1980s, Kavian was left with a 140-acre parcel zoned for one house per 40 acres.

*

In the blink of an eye, his daughter, Fariba Kavian, said, he lost the right to build more than 100 homes.

“It is an absolute taking,” Fariba Kavian said. “It’s unfair, and it should be illegal. This is something that my father bought for his retirement years, as his nest egg, and it has been destroyed completely.”

The Kavians are not the first to grapple with the politics of open space.

Years before the greenbelt agreement was signed, the county rejected a proposal by Watt Industries for a $200-million, 400-acre industrial and residential park.

Even without the force of law, the greenbelt agreement has headed off subsequent large-scale proposals, planners say.

“I think there is a natural fear that the rules aren’t very strong,” said Elaine Freeman, a Thousand Oaks land-use consultant. “But anybody who is working with them knows they are.”

Environmentalists are far from convinced.

“It’s beautiful, it’s unique, but it looks like it’s all going to be paved over in short order,” said Alan Sanders, conservation chairman for the Los Padres Chapter of the Sierra Club. “It’s being done incrementally, which is the way it’s usually done.”

Sanders and other critics cite a handful of recent developments in the greenbelt.

Two of the projects--a golf course and a lighted driving range--were approved by the county despite heavy opposition by local politicians and community activists.

“Because something is allowable does not necessarily mean it’s appropriate,” Sanders said.

Another major development, the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, also stirred controversy. The county approved it despite concerns over whether it was an allowable use and fears that it would encourage further development.

Those fears were realized years later when the county approved six luxury homes adjacent to the library in a development-for-open-space trade.

Los Angeles development firm Blakeley Swartz, which donated the land for the library, also revealed plans to build a hotel and convention center on property surrounding the library. Community opposition killed those plans but the company said it might someday return with other plans.

Not everyone, however, is scrambling to change the open-space agreement.

Jim Hagman, owner of Elvenstar Ranch and Riding School, said the current situation--compromises and all--is best for the valley’s long-term protection.

*

Golf courses and driving ranges stave off more invasive projects, he said.

“The only way to keep this valley open space is to allow developments like that,” he said. “If they say ‘no’ to everything, that will result in the valley getting paved over.”

Simi Valley Mayor Greg Stratton, who helped negotiate the greenbelt agreement, said more restrictive zoning would backfire and wind up encouraging more development. “The danger is the more you delineate [what can be built] the more you get exactly what you define,” he said.

Stratton acknowledged the greenbelt agreement has not worked exactly according to plan--he said the area was to be a “little Santa Rosa Valley,” full of 10-acre home sites--but that the agreement has done its job.

“No one has violated it yet,” he said. “So far I don’t see any problems with it.”

Even if that’s true, many are convinced the valley needs stronger protection.

Mark Burley, head of a community association in the nearby Santa Rosa Valley, outlined a domino theory of development.

“If you develop the Tierra Rejada Valley, then you’re going to develop the Santa Rosa Valley, and then you’re going to develop the Oxnard/Camarillo greenbelt,” he said.

“At some point the people in Ventura County have to decide what Ventura County is going to be like.”