SANTA PAULA GETS OK FOR GROWTH.

Byline: Cecilia Chan Staff Writer

SANTA PAULA - One of Ventura County's smallest and poorest cities narrowly won approval Wednesday for a plan to triple its size - a move critics fear will bring big-city problems to the primarily agricultural community.

By a 4-3 vote, the Local Agency Formation Commission gave Santa Paula the go-ahead to expand its sphere of influence by 7,737 acres. Officials envision an upscale residential and commercial development northwest of the city - projects they hope will boost the city's sagging economy and enrich Santa Paula's coffers.

``I think this is going to enable the city to grow into the future and enable the city to solve some of its financial problems,'' said city Planning Director Kathleen Mallory. ``The city is virtually built out at this time and it is not able to attract businesses to the city because it doesn't have a large amount of available land for development.''

But resident Michael Miller said the LAFCO approval means an end to any hopes of revitalizing the six-block downtown area.

``I think that it's regrettable people just don't understand the opportunity that is lost doing this kind of development,'' he said, citing fears of urban sprawl.

``What (the vote) says is yes to that type of development and no or `caution' to developers who may want to redevelop the city.''

According to Miller, this push for growth runs counter to the desires of residents.

``People want a simpler way of life,'' he insisted. ``They want a small town.''

Granting the expansion of the city's sphere of influence is the initial step toward future annexation.

``It's just a sphere of influence request first,'' Mallory said. ``If a project is contemplated and the city OKs it and LAFCO OKs it, it leads to future annexation.''

There are no projects proposed on the land now but developers have expressed interest in building houses in Adams Canyon and a commercial and light industrial development in West Area 2, located between Highway 126 on the north and the Santa Clara River on the south, Mallory said.

She said the sphere of influence may appear large but ``there are areas not feasible for development.''

``The city wants to bring the whole thing in so it can have a large amount of acreage dedicated for recreational purposes,'' she said. ``The issue is there are areas, a large amount of acreage, that is not going to be useable to build on but is possible to be used for recreational purposes.''

Commissioners Jim Acosta, Judy Mikels, Jim Monahan and Robin Sullivan voted yes. Commissioner Kathy Long, alternate Commissioner Jack Curtis and Chairman Jay Scott voted no.

``I felt it fit the parameters,'' said Mikels, who also is a Ventura County supervisor. ``My biggest, biggest, biggest reason (for voting yes) is the community is going to grow and has to grow. It's just going to burst at the seams or get overcrowded because there is no land left and that is going to put extreme pressure on (agricultural) land.

``I felt that was the right decision to make, to protect (agricultural) land in the future and give the city some planning room for the future,'' she said.