Opponents Lash Out at Newhall Ranch Plan

Led by officials representing Santa Clarita, opponents blasted the proposed Newhall Ranch housing development Thursday as a short-sighted plan that would hurt the entire region by contributing to urban sprawl.

“This,” said Mary Weisbrock, founder of the environmental group Save Open Space, “will be the goose that killed the golden egg of Santa Clarita Valley tranquillity.”

The proposal’s latest round of criticism came during a public hearing before the County Regional Planning Commission.

Newhall Land & Farming Co. is seeking to build the county’s largest master-planned housing development in history on a 19-acre site in the Santa Clarita Valley between the Golden State Freeway and the Ventura County line near Six Flags Magic Mountain.

Over a 25-year period, Newhall Ranch would house 70,000 people in about 25,000 apartments, townhomes, condominiums and luxury houses.

The city of Santa Clarita has expressed particular concern about the development because although Newhall Ranch would be outside city limits, residents of the massive project would rely on what Santa Clarita officials say is an inadequate system of roads, sewers, schools and parks in the city.

“You must understand that we are not merely bystanders,” Santa Clarita City Councilwoman Jill Klajic told the commission at Thursday’s hearing. “Unbridled urban sprawl is no longer acceptable. . . . We ask you to withhold approval so we can work with the developer.”

Earlier this week, the Santa Clarita City Council voted to reject the current plan for Newhall Ranch unless it is reduced significantly or Newhall Land officials address dozens of issues that range from securing long-term funding for mass transit to formulating a solid waste disposal plan and providing for electric car recharging facilities.

Thursday’s hearing was the third reserved for opponents of the development. A fourth hearing for opponents is scheduled for Feb. 18, and Newhall Land will get a chance to respond in late February or March.

In past hearings, opponents have focused on environmental concerns as their basis for opposing the development, but Thursday’s 18 speakers touched upon a variety of issues, including funding for schools and Newhall Land’s campaign contributions to state and local politicians.

Many of the speakers, however, teed off on the issue of urban sprawl.

“We need to rethink L.A.,” said Mary Altman, a member of the Resource Conservation District of the Santa Monica Mountains. “The center core of the city is dying, and we’re sprawling out to other areas.”

Added Michael Fitz, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council: “Regional developments are often a zero-sum game. The residents move there from other areas of the county, and money being invested there can’t be invested in older, inner-city areas.”

*

Arto Nuutinen, an attorney for the William S. Hart Union High School District, told the commission that difficult negotiations between the district and Newhall Land were at an impasse over funding issues, but agreed to continue talks in the presence of county lawyers soon.

An attorney from a second school group, the Castaic Union School District, which has also been at loggerheads with Newhall Land about school funding, testified that the district was likely to reach an agreement soon.

“We are reasonably optimistic,” said Clayton Parker, the attorney for the Castaic schools.

Several opponents concerned about the availability of water during drought years questioned whether there was sufficient water for the number of people Newhall Ranch would house.

“We do not believe you can let this project move forward unless you have a new water source,” said Lynne Plambeck, an environmental activist and director of the Newhall County Water District.

But Marlee Lauffer, a spokeswoman for Newhall Land, said the planned development would have a sufficient supply of water.

“It’s clear that people are still concerned about the plan,” she said, “and I hope we can clear up their concerns” during the company’s presentation before the commission in a few weeks.

And though the company’s draft environmental impact report was released several months ago, John Tommy Rosas, who represents the Ventura County town of Piru, complained that there are only two copies of the voluminous document in the entire county.

The commission staff agreed to try to resolve the issue by deciding whether to provide an additional copy. The two available copies in Ventura County are at the Ventura County Government Center and at Santa Paula City Hall.