Panel Refuses to Clear Path for Ahmanson

Creating a new roadblock for the Ahmanson Ranch development in eastern Ventura County, the Los Angeles City Council rejected a plan Tuesday to open a stretch of Victory Boulevard that is vital to the construction and operation of the 3,050-home project.

The road, which dead-ends at Los Angeles city limits, is seen as a major access point for construction vehicles, and will be needed as an alternative to the crowded Ventura Freeway when residents move in.

Washington Mutual, which is developing the project, believes it has legal rights to the street and can force Victory Boulevard to be opened when construction begins in 2003.

City Councilman Dennis Zine, who represents the west San Fernando Valley, acknowledged the firm appears to have some legal rights to the thoroughfare, but he said the council action shows that Los Angeles will oppose the project at every turn because of fear it will overwhelm city streets and the Ventura Freeway with traffic.

“They want Victory Boulevard for their main corridor east to west, but I made a commitment to the community that we would fight this tooth and nail,” Zine said. “The west San Fernando Valley does not have the infrastructure to support that type of development and the traffic it would generate.”

The development planned for the rolling hills southeast of Simi Valley has been approved by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors. But Washington Mutual has been directed to update part of the project’s environmental impact report after two endangered species were discovered on the ranch property.

By voting to keep the road closed, Zine said, the council is signaling its willingness to fight the housing project.

Two Ventura County supervisors contacted Tuesday said the latest dispute over the project is between the developer and Los Angeles officials.

“It’s not really a concern for Ventura County,” said Supervisor Frank Schillo, whose district includes the proposed housing development. “We didn’t get involved in any of the 21 lawsuits against the project, so I don’t see why we should get involved in this.”

Supervisor John Flynn, who approved the original plan in 1992, said the move does not surprise him considering the mounting opposition to the development.

A half-block section of Victory Boulevard, just west of Gilmore Street, was closed in 1995 at the request of neighbors and police, who were concerned that young people were driving into the undeveloped area to congregate and drink.

To keep the street closed, the Los Angeles City Council must adopt a new authorization every 18 months. The last authorization included a provision that the fence across Victory Boulevard would be taken down at the time the Ahmanson Ranch developers gave notice that they needed the street to begin construction in Ventura County to the west.

On Tuesday, the council authorized the street to remain closed for another 18 months and removed the provision that allows for the fence to be removed at Washington Mutual’s request.

The firm has rights to an easement along Victory Boulevard to Gilmore Street, a spokesman said, so it is confident the council action will not stand.

“It is our position that we do have a legal right of access, notwithstanding the council action today,” said Tim McGarry, a spokesman for Washington Mutual. “When it becomes time to be able to exercise our right of access, we believe we will be able to do so.”

Zine acknowledged Washington Mutual has an easement, but he also suggested the city has legal authority to keep the fence up for public safety reasons. The dispute could end up in court.

In arguing for the council action, Zine complained that Washington Mutual has refused to put together a completely new environmental impact report despite the demands of federal, state and local officials concerned about the project.

A letter demanding a new environmental study was signed last week by eight elected officials, including Zine, Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks), Assemblywoman Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills), state Sen. Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica) and L.A. County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky.

“We think a new EIR would show the project is not feasible because the infrastructure can’t support it,” Zine said.

McGarry said Caltrans has certified that the initial report remains valid with regard to its effect on traffic.