Critics Assail Ahmanson Study

Opponents of the Ahmanson Ranch housing project turned out in force Monday to assail a follow-up study on the environmental effects of the proposed 3,050-home mini-city.

Critics called the report inadequate and demanded that further studies be conducted to determine how water, air, wildlife and traffic would be affected by the development, which would be built in Ventura County on the Los Angeles County line.

“This whole document is a whitewash,” said Mary Wiesbrock, an Agoura Hills activist and one of two dozen speakers who assailed the report during a three-hour public hearing.

The county’s Environmental Report Review Committee ultimately delayed a vote on the report until Oct. 30.

It then goes to the Planning Commission and finally to the Board of Supervisors -- although a proposal by Supervisor Judy Mikels could speed up that process.

Mikels is recommending that the board sit alongside the Planning Commission when it considers the report next month.

In a letter to her colleagues, Mikels said this “will not negate the need for the Board to hold its own public hearing,” but would save members of the public and other government agencies from having to return at a later date to restate their opinions.

Mikels’ request, which the board is scheduled to discuss today, prompted Ahmanson foes to question whether Ventura County officials are trying to push the project through before the end of the year, when the make-up of the Board of Supervisors changes.

Supervisor-elect Linda Parks, a critic of the project, replaces retiring Supervisor Frank Schillo in January.

Tsilah Burman, executive director for Rally to Save Ahmanson Ranch, noted that Mikels received a $5,000 contribution from project developer Washington Mutual in May.

“There appears to be a political agenda here,” Burman said. “There is no other reason why they need to rush this through.”

The comments reflect the controversy surrounding a project that would put homes on the largest remaining piece of undeveloped private land ringing the San Fernando Valley.

The Ventura County Board of Supervisors approved the development in 1992, but legal challenges stalled it for years. In 1999, biologists discovered a rare frog and flower species at the 2,800-acre site, prompting supervisors to order a follow-up environmental study.

The report found that the project would substantially affect the rare San Fernando Valley spineflower and the California red-legged frog, but that safeguards could be taken to reduce the loss to acceptable levels.

At the request of opponents, consultants also tested for contamination from the nearby Rocketdyne Santa Susana Field Laboratory. Planners said they found none. The report also found no need for further traffic studies.

During Monday’s hearing, critics called those studies inadequate. They argued that the project would dump thousands of cars onto local streets and the Ventura Freeway each day. And several speakers expressed concern that Rocketdyne pollutants have leached into the soil and could be stirred up by grading.

“I really hope this project is not built over my dead body,” said Calabasas resident Carol Elliott.

Several speakers also complained about omissions and errors in the three-volume document, and said that the public should have been given more time to respond.

Representatives of some government agencies were not present Monday because the hearing was held on Columbus Day, which is a state and federal holiday. The committee postponed its vote to give those agencies, which include the state Department of Fish and Game and the federal Fish and Wildlife Service, time to respond in writing.

After Monday’s hearing, actor Larry Hagman, former Ventura County Supervisor Susan Lacey and other community leaders gathered outside the meeting room and called for a halt to the Ahmanson Ranch project.