Stand Firm on Newhall

Can Ventura County play immovable object to the irresistible force of Newhall Ranch? How hard should it try?

Those are the questions facing the Ventura County Board of Supervisors as it steps up lobbying efforts to further delay and downsize that huge project.

As Newhall Ranch took two more steps toward groundbreaking last week, the board voted to enlist the governor and a platoon of state and federal agencies to make sure Ventura County’s concerns are addressed. It deferred until April 6 a decision on whether to reinforce its lobbying with litigation.

As battles go, this is a big one. Newhall Ranch is the largest planned development in Los Angeles County history. It would create a 21,000-home city with seven schools, a 200-acre business park, a golf course and an eventual population bigger than Camarillo’s, just east of the county line. The 19-square-mile development would straddle California 126 and the Santa Clara River, Southern California’s last wild river.

The project was proposed five years ago by Newhall Land & Farming Co., and has been fought vigorously ever since. The biggest issue is water. Because the developer has not identified a source of water for Newhall Ranch’s projected 70,000 thirsty residents, Ventura County officials fear that they could suck the fertile Santa Clara Valley dry, jeopardizing citrus orchards that produce 400,000 tons of lemons and oranges each year.

Los Angeles County officials apparently are satisfied with the developer’s assurances that it will buy more water as it is needed; Ventura County officials remain skeptical.

Opposition from Ventura County and environmental groups has won some concessions. Before giving their blessing to the project last summer, the Los Angeles County supervisors made Newhall agree to reduce the number of houses and condos by 15%; to add more low- and moderate-income housing; to avoid building on environmentally sensitive areas; to keep built areas at least half a mile from the Ventura County line and at least 100 feet from the river and to make explicit that the project would not depend on ground water.

Last Tuesday the Los Angeles board voted to rezone 12,000 acres for the project and to accept an environmental impact report declaring that Newhall Ranch would have no serious environmental consequences. The same day the Ventura board ratcheted up its opposition.

Although some further downsizing may be won, it is unlikely that Newhall Ranch can be stopped altogether. High employment rates plus low interest rates plus a growing population equal the hottest demand for new homes since the 1980s. And although Ventura County is at the forefront of a national revolt against urban sprawl, Los Angeles County continues to approve such growth quite happily.

As with Ahmanson Ranch, a mirror-image situation in which Ventura County approved a development that benefits itself while sticking Los Angeles County with the traffic and pollution, Newhall Ranch offers design features that are better than they might be. Homes would be clustered in communities, with shops, affordable housing and parkland throughout.

The Ventura County supervisors are right to do whatever they can to ensure that Newhall Ranch complies with all laws and mitigates its impact on this side of the county line. We hope that can be done through political and regulatory means, without draining the public treasury into a long-shot legal battle.

Growth is going to continue throughout Southern California. Efforts to limit it in some areas will simply direct it to other areas. Accommodating it and managing it wisely is the trick.

The sooner officials across Southern California begin to act as if they understand that decisions made in Los Angeles affect residents in Ventura County--and vice versa--the sooner we can move toward planning based on logic and good sense rather than political payback and a willingness to “do unto” a neighboring county.