North Plan - Statement in Support

Santa Monica Mountains North Area Plan

Statement by Supervisor Yaroslavsky

Thank you to everyone who testified today regarding the Santa Monica Mountains North Area Plan. In response to concerns that have been raised, and to incorporate features that I believe would be improvements in the document--I request that the Board consider and approve the following amendments to the Plan:

First, at one of their meetings last June, the Regional Planning Commission made a blanket change in maximum land use density over about 1500 acres. Even though much of this area is remote and adjacent to publicly-owned parklands, the Commission doubled the density, going from an average density of one unit per 20 acres to one unit per 10 acres. We have heard from the National Park Service and others today about the severe impacts to parklands that would result from these densities. Much of this land is also covered by steep slopes and has poor road and utility access. Therefore, I am recommending that these areas be changed back to a density of one unit per 20 acres.

In addition, one of the properties received a five-fold increase in density over that proposed by the Ventura Corridor Plan. This property lies just south of the Calabasas Landfill and adjacent to the Liberty Canyon Wildlife Corridor. The Commission increased one portion of the property to a density of one unit per acre, from its previous recommended density of one unit per 5 acres, and another portion of the property to a density of one unit per 10 acres, from its previous recommended density of one unit per 20 acres. Because of its proximity to the landfill and wildlife corridor, and the limited access to the area, I am recommending that the density be re-established at one unit per 5 acres and one unit per 20 acres. The landowner should be able to design a project that utilizes the flatter portions of the area, away from both the wildlife corridor and the landfill, without overly impacting traffic circulation.

A number of concerns have been raised today regarding the property at Kanan and Cornell roads known as Live Oak Ranch. Under the plan in effect today, this 320-acre property would be allowed a maximum of about 125 housing units. However, under the North Area Plan, the maximum density as recommended by Planning Department staff is decreased to 108 units. Keep in mind this number is the maximum, and does not guarantee final approval of any development. All development applications must still undergo public hearings and public review as mandated by the California Environmental Quality Act. Furthermore, any development is also subject to the provisions of the County Hillside Management Ordinance, which reduces the number of units allowed on properties with steep hillsides, as well as other County ordinances and policies protecting Significant Ecological Areas, watercourses, and natural areas. Because of these factors, and because the North Area Plan as proposed does enact a significant reduction in the number of allowed units, I am not recommending any further changes to the density allowed on the property.

I also want to acknowledge the concerns I have heard previously from our Public Works Department regarding the deletion of certain roads and highways from the Highway Plan. While the Department would prefer to maintain the planned road network, the incorporation of cities and acquisition of land by park agencies makes it impossible to construct the roads as previously planned. Therefore, the Highway Plan should remain as recommended by the Planning Commission.

There are also several changes I am suggesting to specific plan language. The proposed Watershed Ordinance, which was added by the Planning Commission, should be deleted from the list of implementation items, as the rationale given in the plan for such an ordinance is unsupported. While I certainly want to see water quality within the Santa Monica Bay improved and our groundwater remain pure, I believe the proposed Watershed Ordinance is overly restrictive of uses that have not been demonstrated to impact water quality in the area. Furthermore, the County has recently adopted new development regulations, called the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Program, which are designed to reduce the amount of polluted run-off that reaches our shores. Of course, if at a future time a demonstrated cause of water pollution is identified in the area, I will seriously consider implementing new regulations to combat the problem.

The Planning Commission also amended the membership of the Policy Committee, which is proposed to ensure continued coordination between the County, the cities and other area public agencies. This Committee was intended to be a technical advisory committee, not a Planning Commission. Therefore, the membership of the committee should reflect that proposed in the original version of the Plan, which would include representatives from the County, the cities of Agoura Hills, Calabasas, Westlake Village and Hidden Hills, the Las Virgenes Municipal Water District, the Las Virgenes Unified School District and the National Park Service.

A number of individuals have testified that they believe the Plan unduly restricts equestrian and recreational uses in the area. I support these uses which are compatible with the Plan’s overall goals and policies, and suggest the following amendments to the Plan:

The first sentence of the narrative under Chapter II, Section A., Guiding Principles, should be amended to read as follows:

"The overall goal of the North Area Plan is to maximize preservation of the area’s natural environment, recognize the opportunities and constraints that the land imposes, accommodate new uses that minimize impacts on the natural environment, ensure that new development is compatible with and enhances the quality of existing communities, and provide for a wide range of public and private recreational opportunities.

Goal IV of the Plan should be amended to read: "Protection and expansion of the wide range of public and private outdoor recreational opportunities serving residents of, and visitors to, the area."

Furthermore, the following language should be added at the close of the narrative following this goal: "This includes significant investments by private land trusts holding land for future transfer to public agencies, as well as entrepreneurial and family investments in private recreational facilities".

Amend Goal V to include protection of recreational uses.
Amend Goal IV-2 to include protection of viewsheds from trails.
Amend the first sentence of Section H., Recreation and Trails, to read as follows: "One of the most important functions of this portion of the Santa Monica Mountains is its ability to provide the Los Angeles Metropolitan region with a wide range of public and private recreational opportunities."
Subsections "b", "d" and "g" of Policy IV-48 should be amended to read as follows:

b. "Within natural areas intended for the protection of vegetative, habitat and scenic resources, regulate use to preserve resource values".

d. "Ensure that the routing and improvement of trails facilities is compatible with the resource values of adjacent lands".

g. "Preserve public rights by obtaining trail easements where the public has acquired the rights through use, or where the trail is depicted on Map 4 (Hiking Trails) of this Plan."

Amend policy IV-52 as follows:

"Allow the development of new, and the retention of existing, private recreational facilities, including equestrian rental and boarding facilities, low intensity campgrounds and conference facilities in rural and mountain areas . . . "

Amend policy V-31 regarding outdoor amplified sound as follows:

"Outdoor amplified sound for commercial activities shall be prohibited between the hours of 8:00 pm and 8:00 am anywhere within the North Area Plan, except where specifically regulated by permit."

Amend the definition of active recreation to delete "picnicking" and "fishing" from the definition, these uses are more reflective of passive recreation.
Amend the definition of passive recreation to read as follows:

"Passive recreation – recreational activity, usually unstructured, requiring little use of physical facilities. Includes such activities as hiking and horseback riding. Does not include activities/facilities such as baseball diamonds and soccer fields."

Add to the list of implementation items in Chapter IX, Part B, that an updated version of the County Trails Map for the Plan Area should be prepared, based on the recommendations of the SMMART report and on public input from recreational interests and residents of the area.

As part of the implementation of the North Area Plan, staff will conduct a zoning consistency study to ensure that the area’s zoning is consistent with the policies of this Plan. I would like staff to review the regulations for horse boarding in the area, to ensure they are not overly restrictive to "backyard boarders", residents who board a few horses in their own backyards. Additionally, I ask that staff review the regulations covering recreational and visitor-serving uses in the various zones to ensure they are compatible with the policies of this plan.

A few final amendments to the Plan that should be made are as follows:

Delete policy VIII-10, as septic systems are already regulated by state law as well as the County Health and Public Works Departments.
Chapter IX, Part B. lists the items to be undertaken by the County in order to implement the Plan. This includes the development of standards regarding vegetation and fuel modification for fire protection purposes, and the County Fire Department should be added to the list of agencies involved in the development of such standards.
Prepare technical clarifying changes to Figure 2, as recommended by staff in the attached document.

In conclusion, I want to thank the many people who worked on this plan over the years, including Hal Helsley who chaired the Policy Committee and Dave Brown, Chairman of the Pubic Advisory Committee. I am also appreciative of all the time put in by the Planning Commissioners, including my former Commissioner Esther Feldman, and the guidance provided by Jim Hartl, Pam Holt and Lee Stark of the Planning Department. Finally, I particularly want to thank the public who have followed the plan's progress, and provided very insightful suggestions that helped refine the plan to what it is today.