ECOLOGY GROUPS ASSAIL PLANS FOR NEWHALL RANCH : DEVELOPER DISMISSES CLAIMS.

Byline: Sherry Joe Crosby Daily News Staff Writer

Saying ``it's the wrong project in the wrong place,'' environmentalists denounced Thursday plans to build 25,000 homes in the Santa Clara River Valley, the site of Los Angeles County's last unspoiled river.

Activists from Los Angeles and Ventura counties also asked for more time to review the environmental impact report for Newhall Ranch, the largest master-planned community proposed in Los Angeles County.

Holding aloft signs reading ``Save our river'' and ``Newhall Ranch needs a sludge alternative,'' critics said the project would destroy the Santa Clara River, increase air pollution and threaten wildlife which inhabits the 12,000-acre site west of the Golden State Freeway.

``This is a classic example of resource intensive, environmentally destructive and economically inefficient development,'' said Michael Fitts, senior project attorney for Natural Resources Defense Council, a national environmental group. ``It's the wrong project in the wrong place.''

Developer Newhall Land and Farming dismissed the criticism, saying half the site is devoted to open space, including 3,592 acres of the Santa Susana Mountains, oak woodlands and the Santa Clara River.

Supporters also said about 59 percent of residents will live within a quarter-mile of shopping centers, making cars largely unnecessary.

``This is an environmentally sensitive project with over nine square miles of property being retained as open space,'' Newhall Land spokeswoman Marlee Lauffer said. ``The river is being retained as a natural river system and we're carefully planning around oak trees.''

If approved by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, the proposed community would stretch west of the Golden State Freeway to the Ventura County border, just south of Val Verde and outside Santa Clarita city limits.

It will require an amendment to the county General Plan and will feature five distinct villages, each with its own shopping center containing a mix of shops, restaurants and business offices.

Although the project provides space for businesses and a Metrolink station, critics said it is isolated and would have irreversible impacts on the environment.

The project will have ``a severe economic impact on our environmentally rich agricultural land as well as our river,'' said Catherine Myers, representative of Ventura County Supervisor John K. Flynn.

Opponents also criticized Newhall Land's plans to build in a flood plain near the Santa Clara River.

``A natural river is a nature preserve all by itself,'' said Sandy Wohlgemuth, a board member of the Los Angeles Audubon Society. ``It's a sanctuary. The idea of building in a flood plain is absolutely crazy. Homes are destroyed and people killed.''

Protesters demanded the county double the public comment period to 180 days from 90 days. They said the 48-pound environmental impact report is more comprehensive than the one for the proposed Elsmere Canyon Landfill and requires careful thought.

``We're asking Los Angeles County to give us a decent review so we can give decent comments,'' said Michael Kotch, president of Santa Clarita Organization for Planning Environment.

But supporters said they already have increased the state-required 45-day public comment period. Newhall Land said it also held 55 meetings during the past two years, giving people plenty of opportunities to comment on the project.

``We already doubled the public review period,'' regional planner Lee Stark said. ``One-hundred-eighty days is half a year and that's a pretty long time.''

But activists needn't lose hope. Stark said the project is likely to elicit many comments, forcing the county Regional Planning Commission to extend the public comment period past its Nov. 6 deadline.

``If they feel there is justification to warrant additional review time they would extend the review period,'' he said.

CAPTION(S):

Photo

Photo: (color) Mike Kotch of Santa Clarita Organization for Planning Environment says a home development would destroy the Santa Clara River.

Hans Gutknecht/Daily News