By the Greater Antelope Valley Association of REALTORS, Board of Directors
On Saturday, September 27, the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission is conducting a hearing that could be of consequence to property owners in the unincorporated portions of Antelope Valley wishing to develop their properties.
The hearing will be held at the Antelope Valley College Performing Arts theatre at 10:00am. The location is 3041 W Avenue K. Lancaster, CA 93536.
Why is this meeting so important and why are we encouraging citizens to attend? Decisions made on the AV Area-wide Plan and draft environmental impact report will largely determine the Valley’s economic direction for decades. Of particular concern is what GAVAR, AVBOT and a Blue Ribbon Task Force see as ‘over-reaching’ in its designation of Significant Environmental Area’s (SEA’s) to the plan.
BACKGROUND
Los Angeles County, an area of approximately 4,083 square miles, is served by an oversight master policy document called the Los Angeles County General Plan. This document is used to guide future development and conservation throughout all the unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County. Within this umbrella plan, there are many “area plans” that further detail land use planning.
Much of north L.A. County is unincorporated and includes over two dozen communities. The Antelope Valley accounts for approximately 1800 square miles and, by area, accounts for approximately 44% of L.A County. Some 75% of the unincorporated area in L.A. County is located in the Antelope Valley. For this reason, area-wide plans and the rules derived from their adoption are of utmost importance to the region.
The existing Antelope Valley Area Plan (AVAP), called “Town & Country” was last adopted in 1986. A new area plan update is being developed to more accurately reflect regional growth, resource protection, state law, local ordinances and community vision.
THE PROBLEM
While the AVAP has always had an overlay of SEA’s applied to approximately 250,000 acres, the new plan adds approximately 150,000 additional acres, designated SEA’s, over the current plan. This has only been shown on the AVAP map since June of this year, with no community meetings held since that time, to explain, discuss or obtain local input regarding the expanded boundaries. Further, too many other plans are undergoing review simultaneously to adequately review and comment in a timely manner. (Examples: AV Area Plan; Significant Ecological Area ordinance (SEA); Hillside Management Area ordinance (HMA); Renewable Energy Implementing ordinance (REI), Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) and the General Plan (GP) update).
For this reason we request the removal of expanded SEA boundaries from the AVAP maps and recommend that there should be no SEA overlays in EOA set asides. Indeed, we’d like the Department of Regional Planning and the Planning Commission to focus solely on the AVAP at this time and place a hold on all the above ordinances, pending plan approval by the L.A. County Board of Supervisors.
OUR SUGGESTION
So, what is an EOA? It’s an Economic Opportunity Area. By applying this designation to key sections of north L.A. County, we concentrate potential development, appropriately, in key areas while preserving the rural nature of the region. Roughly, the Economic Opportunity Areas correspond to the High Desert Corridor, the Fox Field Industrial Corridor and the northwest/Tejon corridor in L.A. County. Setting aside these EOA’s and exempting them from SEA’s is a balanced approach between preservation, appropriate growth and visionary land use planning.
We anticipate many fiscal ramifications or consequences if the current plan is adopted, as is. Preserving the Antelope Valley by ‘down zoning’ can have the effect of reduced property values, reduced tax roll revenues and reduced development opportunities. Further, complying with the new SEA’s will likely result in higher permitting costs and more complicated permitting procedures.
We acknowledge the complexity of the issue being discussed in this letter but feel the outreach by county officials, regarding the SEA maps on the AVAP, to date, has been wholly inadequate. But for the fact that the consequences can be significant for many property owners, this issue warrants a full and open hearing and far greater community input. The current plan, at its heart, seems to pit ‘property rights’ against ‘resource conservation’. There is no reason these two interests can’t be fully reconciled.
Once adopted, rules codified in both the General Plan and Area Plan will impose standards that many property owners in unincorporated areas will find surprising or cumbersome or both. For this reason we’re trying to apply the brakes. We understand and approve of wise land use planning. But there’s a difference between textbook planning and reality-based planning. At the least, issues and consequences should be fully vetted before implementation. The current schedule is not fully embracing that concept.
An old Japanese proverb notes that vision without action is a daydream, while action without vision is a nightmare. Our preferred course is vision and action in balance.
We encourage everyone to attend the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission hearing on Saturday, September 27.
sees says
GOOD OR BAD EVERYTHING COMES TO AN END.
William says
I used to work in an ER and recall one of the sayings among the nurses “All bleeding eventually stops”.
How true. How true.
Concerned says
In some ways the 1986 Town and Country zoning helped rural communities like Littlerock avoid the type of expansion seen in Palmdale and Lancaster. However it still provided the opportunity for modest expansion, including several neighborhoods of tract homes near U and the addition of several businesses. None of this development would have been able to occur under the new Town and Country, which effectively ends all development outside Palmdale and Lancaster. This well-meaning but poorly conceived plan effectively renders useless many subdivisions which already have water, power and roads. These parcels were all legally purchased and often improved upon by investors, retirees, citizens, immigrants, and people just like you with a passion for the American dream. Now without recourse the land will become worthless, in a similar bureaucratic and systematic way we took land from the Native Americans. 75% of LA County’s land is here. We will expand and this is where it will happen (and you won’t profit from it). You can see in the map proposed high speed corridor there are many exits going into fully divided subdivisions with water and power.. of which the current tax-paying owners will never be able to build on. Full subdivisions in HiVista with in-ground utilities waiting to go, and During a housing shortage we are rendering them all useless? Lets take all the RL20 designated land and call it what it is.. an environmental corridor. Then lets remove the rural towns from this land-grab zoning scheme so that they can decide how to best develop their community. Otherwise you disagree you will be intercepted by “Nuisance Abatement” for “zoning violations” with lethal force as they currently do.
BigRick says
The county cant even govern itself, let alone try to govern all these little cities.
Myrle McLernon Architect says
The LA County planning commission developed the expanded SEA’s in conjunction with the residents of those areas. The areas are well thought out and reflect the sensitive nature of our desert environment.
It is the intention of the county to prevent wonton development of currently rural areas and adversely affecting the quality of life of those residents.
The points above are all valid. Expanding the disturbance of our desert environment is simply irresponsible and poor planning.
The persons who benefit the most from this type of growth are the very realtors opposing this issue. Once they buy, sell, develop the land, they are gone and we have to live with the consequences, while profiting from the destruction of our desert.
I appreciate the hard work and thorough analysis the LA County planning commission has put into this plan and the supporting designations of SEA’s, neighborhood development areas, and the various other elements of the plan. This plan creates smart growth with minimized effects on the most fragile areas of our environment.
Larry says
This article never mentions that were live in a desert with limited access to water. Developers have been building based on all too generous estimates of water availability. This is true of the general plan developed in the 1980’s. What will really hurt property values is the lack of water. We need a plan that addresses realistically what development is appropriate. The proposed General Plan seems to aims to do this.
William says
I agree with limiting development appropriately but, for example, if Palmdale limits it, developers will simply build in Lancaster or the county areas.
Even if we tear out all of our lawns and install water conserving devices in every single home, agriculture still uses 80% of California’s water and grows crops such as almonds which a majority are exported.
A gallon of water to grow 1 almond and it’s exported around the world. I question the wisdom of that. Jason will point out that it would cost thousands of, y’know, high paying, high tech jobs* if something like almond production were to be cut back. (*sarcasm alert for Jason. He always has a counter-argument that is pretty lame.)
So, the limitations would have to be fairly apportioned throughout the state to eliminate that from happening.
And, I want to add some perspective to the familiar refrain that WE LIVE IN A DESERT. Well, up and down the coast and I mean, the coast as in right up against the Pacific Ocean, many such cities as San Francisco, Santa Cruz, the Monterey Peninsula, Santa Barbara and many others have had water shortages for many years and they don’t get their water from the ocean but from dams and reservoirs far inland. I think Santa Cruz might already have a desalinization plant, so don’t argue just to be arguing with me, Jason. I doubt that it supplies a majority of Santa Cruz’s water or it would be headline news everywhere.
In fact, when there was a big fire last year near Yosemite, I believe, it threatened the water supply of San Francisco. (It may have been some other area, if not Yosemite, as I’m going from memory.)
So, don’t let those on the coast tell US that we live in a desert and yada, yada, yada. We know it and we have to be mindful of our use but we’ve got an aquifer and San Fransisco and Santa Cruz don’t.
Does even Los Angeles and Santa Monica have their own natural water sources although they are right up against the largest ocean on the planet? We have Little Rock Dam too.
It funny how that information is left out of most discussions.