RANCH SETBACK OFFICIAL.

Byline: Heather MacDonald Staff Writer

LOS ANGELES - The county Board of Supervisors set aside six portions of the Newhall Ranch environmental study Tuesday, a move compelled by a judge's order.

In June, Kern County Superior Court Judge Roger D. Randall ordered the developer, The Newhall Land and Farming Company, to answer further questions about the water supply for the proposed minicity and the probable effects of the massive project on Santa Clara River area biology and Ventura County traffic.

Stretching to the Ventura County line, the 21,615-home minicity on 12,000 acres west of the Six Flags California amusement theme parks would be the largest planned development in Los Angeles County.

Earlier this month, Randall ordered Los Angeles County supervisors to withdraw land-use approval and certification of the required environmental report that had been issued in March 1999.

It will take the developer and consultants about a year to complete the additional processes ordered by the judge, Newhall Land spokeswoman Marlee Lauffer said. A supplemental environmental report will be presented early in 2001, she said, and groundbreaking is likely in 2003, one year later than originally planned.

The judge acted on lawsuits filed last year by Ventura County government, the United Water Conservation District, the Sierra Club and other groups challenging the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors' unanimous approval of the residential and commercial project.

Randall ruled that the environmental study was ``inadequate in its approach to the availability of water resources to supply (the) project.'' He also accepted the plaintiffs' arguments that Santa Clarita Valley water users can rely on only 50 percent of the supplies usually imported, an interpretation that could have a significant effect on planning decisions in the city of Santa Clarita and throughout Los Angeles County if it stands.

Randall's ruling did not take into consideration a policy change made in March by United, a Ventura County water district. United's board of directors endorsed Newhall's plan to to divert and store storm water from nearby Castaic Creek, but this information was not part of the official record considered by the Los Angeles County supervisors in approving the project. In his ruling, Randall cited the water district's lack of approval as a sticking point.

Some analysts say confirming United's endorsement of the storage plan in a supplemental environmental report could be enough to satisfy Randall's demand that the developer demonstrate ability to guarantee water to 60,000 more people - the number who could live in Newhall Ranch upon its completion in 30 years - without damage to those already using local supplies.