10-ACRE-LOT PLAN CRITICIZED REALTORS, LANDOWNERS OPPOSE RESTRICTIONS FOR EASTERN A.V.

Byline: Charles F. Bostwick Staff Writer

LANCASTER - A Los Angeles County proposal to limit home building to one house for every 10 acres across a large portion of the eastern Antelope Valley drew criticism at a public meeting.

More than 30 real estate agents, property owners, business leaders and others showed up Wednesday night for a preliminary meeting discussing a proposed update to development guidelines for the unincorporated Antelope Valley.

``We asked for the workshops so we could understand what they are proposing,'' said Alis Clausen, Antelope Valley Board of Trade president.

A similar meeting, aimed at rural town council members, was held Thursday night. A third meeting, aimed at farmers, is scheduled for 6 to 8 p.m. Tuesday at Fire Station 129's North County Training Center, 42110 6th St. W., Lancaster.

Much of the comments at Wednesday's meeting, which was geared toward business people, was focused on a proposal to designate more than 222,000 acres east of Lancaster and Palmdale as ``significant ecological areas.''

That proposal was actually released more than two years ago but it is now being considered for implementation in an update of Los Angeles County's general plan, the county's overall guide for development.

People at the meeting questioned how property owners could develop their land if the one-home-per-10 acres limit is adopted. They also worried that the environmental designation will force land owners to pay for costly studies looking for endangered species before they can build a house.

Antelope Valley Building Industry Association executive director Gretchen Gutierrez questioned whether the limitation conflicts with the county's housing plan, adopted last year to accommodate a growing population.

But some were in favor of restricting development to help the environment.

``Of course, we like the expansion of the SEAs - that's our view at this point,'' said Antelope Valley Trails, Recreation and Environmental Council member Debbie Stevens, though she worried whether the designation might keep horses out of dry washes and other areas. She was told it won't.

Leona Valley Town Council member Alice Wollman-Benoit, though, suggested that the designation might have an unintended effect on landowners seeking to avoid the restrictions. Those landowners may simply seek annexation by the cities of Palmdale and Lancaster, where county land-use regulations do not apply.

``With the county, we have at least a little bit of hope,'' Wollman-Benoit said.

County officials told their audience that the one-home-per-10 acres proposal came from county consultants and that the general plan revisions themselves have not been drawn up.

The community meetings were held to get people's comments on what the county should study as it prepares the new general plan and an environmental impact report on it, officials said.

``It's really the beginning of the process. It is not the general plan. It is not the EIR,'' George Malone, a supervising regional planner, said about the ``significant ecological area'' study.

If the proposal were to be adopted, he said, it would cover new subdivisions. Existing legal lots, even if smaller than 10 acres, could still be developed with a single family home. The ecological designation also does not prohibit farming, he said.

The revised general plan is unlikely to come before the county Board of Supervisors for adoption for at least 18 months, Malone said.

Planners hope to release a draft of the proposed general plan revisions this summer, then hold meetings over September and October to take public comments.

The preliminary general plan proposal incorporating those public comments and a draft environmental impact report then would be released by the end of the year, Malone said.

Hearings are likely to take place over several months in 2004 before the county's Regional Planning Commission, which is considering an update for all of Los Angeles County, not just the Antelope Valley. The plan is unlikely to go before the Board of Supervisors until fall 2004 at the earliest, Malone said.

CAPTION(S):

map

Map:

PROPOSED BOUNDARIES