Ahmanson Ranch Project

* Re “Ahmanson Ranch: A Mistake Benefiting Only the Developer,” Ventura County Perspective Aug. 8.

Calabasas City Council member Janice Lee’s definition of a “sustainable development” sets forth a standard--reduced population growth, improved air and water quality, and reduced traffic congestion--that no new development could conceivably attain. Her position clearly is one of no growth, not responsible growth.

Whether you measure water conservation, waste reuse, air quality management or efforts to preserve valuable habitat and protect endangered species, Ahmanson Ranch goes further than any other development in Southern California. We’ve solicited views from scores of governmental agencies throughout the environmental impact report process to address as many concerns as possible. Still, misperceptions abound. I want to set the record straight:

* The project is expected to add 37,540 daily car trips (not 50,000) to the surrounding street system. We have committed $14.4 million in roadway improvements, including $3.6 million in Los Angeles County, to fully offset direct impact on 21 of the 27 affected intersections.

* Far from ignoring the discovery of extinct species, we reported their discovery and we’re in the process of developing detailed plans to ensure their survival.

* Mitigation measures will completely protect those portions of the Malibu Creek watershed in the project area.

* At least 250 trees will be relocated and an estimated 5,672 new trees will be planted within the development and dedication areas.

* During grading, we expect to reduce dust by 80% by keeping areas watered down, seeding graded areas not under construction and halting grading when winds exceed 20 mph.

ADRIAN RODRIGUEZ

1st Vice President,

Washington Mutual

* Ahmanson Ranch would provide needed revenue and good jobs. The development would generate $1.2 billion in expenditures into Los Angeles city and county during construction, along with tens of millions of dollars in sales tax--all without the pricey capital outlays needed to support the infrastructure of a new development. The project would provide new, high-quality housing--something sorely needed if the San Fernando Valley is going to attract and retain businesses. The developer would pay millions of dollars to mitigate projected traffic impacts. Are these dollars sufficient? The state Supreme Court, having upheld the validity of the Ahmanson Ranch environmental impact report, says so. Therefore, rather than arguing over how much money should be coming to the city of Los Angeles from this development, the time has come for each of us to fight side by side at City Hall to ensure that Ahmanson Ranch’s trip fees will stay in the Valley and be used to address the additional traffic.

VICA [Valley Industry and Commerce Assn.] supports the project for the value it would bring to the Valley in economic development, environmental sensitivity and recreational services and for its creation of desperately needed housing.

BONNY L. HERMAN

President, VICA

Woodland Hills