City Backtracks on Effort to Protect Scenic Ridges

The Thousand Oaks City Council has backed away from a proposed county General Plan amendment that has angered residents in the unincorporated hills south of the city.

Council members, in a 5-0 vote Tuesday night, agreed to ask the county to eliminate the most controversial elements of the proposed plan aimed at protecting the scenic ridges above the Conejo Valley from unbridled development.

A citizens committee appointed by the city and Ventura County had proposed in October, 1988, that county planners draft the amendment. And since that time, residents of unincorporated areas around the city have complained that they had no say in the proposed amendment.

After the vote Tuesday night, council members said they backed away from the amendment to appease those property owners. The Ventura County Board of Supervisors is scheduled to consider the amendment Jan. 28.

Emily Habib, a county planner, said supervisors will have to decide whether to reject or approve the plan as it stands, since there is not enough time to redraw it before the scheduled vote.

“The original impetus for the plan was the city, and they asked us to adopt their standards,” she said. “If there are portions they want taken out, it shouldn’t be a problem.”

The amendment already has been rejected by county planning commissioners on a 3-2 vote, she noted.

Council members said they favor some sort of plan restricting development in adjacent unincorporated areas but admit that there are strong objections to the amendment’s restrictions on building colors, heights and types of architecture.

The city first tried to gain control over development in unincorporated pockets in 1983, when a developer, with county permission, bared a hillside by grading it to build houses in an area called Kelly Estates.

Then, a year later, problems created by septic tanks in a nearby area called Ventu Park prompted county health officials to declare a potential hazard to ground water.

But despite what the city sees as problems in such areas, Ventu Park landowners have railed against the city’s attempts to impose restrictions.

Dozens of Ventu Park landowners complained to the county Planning Commission last year after learning that the county, at the city’s urging, was considering tightening its building rules and changing zoning requirements to create a scenic protection area.

Some of the landowners said they bought land in Ventu Park to escape Thousand Oaks’ restrictive policies on building and therefore objected to the county toughening its restrictions.

For example, the city requires houses to be painted in earth tones, whereas no such restrictions apply in Ventu Park. One house is painted blue and pink in that neighborhood.

On Wednesday, Ventu Park residents said they were pleased that Thousand Oaks recognized their widespread opposition to the proposal. But they vowed to continue fighting the plan.

“They’re trying to toss us a bone,” said Harman Rasnow, who owns 200 acres of ridgeline property above the city. “The basic question still is, what right has the city to put these restrictions on me and my property so that they can preserve their view?”

Another landowner agreed that residents will not be happy unless the city drops any attempt to regulate adjacent unincorporated areas.

“They’re just throwing crumbs to us. They just think people are going to be stupid and say, ‘Maybe this is good,’ ” said Jackie Croom, a Westlake resident who owns three acres in Ventu Park.