CITY LOSES ROUND IN ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP'S LAWSUIT.

Byline: Teresa Jimenez Daily News Staff Writer

A Superior Court judge this week rejected the city's request to throw out the Santa Clarita Organization for Planning the Environment's lawsuit against Santa Clarita without a trial.

Judge Robert H. O'Brien on Monday denied the city's motion for a summary judgment in the case SCOPE filed about road-expansion plans. The trial is scheduled for Sept. 9.

SCOPE spokeswoman Lynne Plambeck said the judge's decision confirms there are valid issues to be decided in a trial.

Cheryl Kane, serving as city attorney, said the judge's ruling was based on procedure.

Municipal officials and SCOPE disagreed about whether the organization failed to raise its objections to road plans during the city hearing process and thus effectively waived its right to take the case to court. Because of the disagreement over procedural facts, the judge said SCOPE could take its case to trial, Kane said.

SCOPE sued the city over the traffic circulation element of the Santa Clarita General Plan, a portion that outlines road plans. The lawsuit came soon after the City Council approved the document in November.

Key issues during the trial are expected to be whether the city used accurate traffic figures in recommending that several roadways be widened and whether the city should remove any reference to The Old Road extension in its environmental impact report.

Members of SCOPE say the council agreed to expand several roads based on traffic anticipated from Newhall Ranch. The Newhall Land and Farming Co. has proposed developing at least 21,000 homes at the ranch.

Plambeck said traffic generated by Newhall Ranch should not have been included in city estimates because the development has yet to be approved.

``We don't think the council was given all the information,'' Plambeck said. ``Without Newhall Ranch, there's no reason to approve widening the roads.''

She claimed traffic projections used in the city document may have misled council members into believing that more lanes on Newhall Ranch Road, Valencia Boulevard and McBean Parkway are needed with or without Newhall Ranch development.

``If you say that the traffic is there because it's already there, then Newhall Land doesn't have to pay for it (road expansion),'' Plambeck said.

But Kane said the city followed state environmental procedure by anticipating development of Newhall Ranch.

City officials believe the California Air Quality Act requires them to take any foreseeable development into consideration in planning, Kane said. ``Newhall Ranch certainly is foreseeable.''

The council already voted not to support an extension of The Old Road between Valencia Boulevard and McBean Parkway because it would run through an area known for its valley oak savannah.

SCOPE members applauded the council decision, but said they also want all references to the road extension eliminated from the environmental impact report. They said they fear any mention in the report's conclusions eventually could be used to justify the extension.

Kane disagreed. Any agency that so used the report ``could be looking at another lawsuit,'' Kane said.