County forced to consider increasing density in rural areas

The Ventura County Board of Supervisors has directed planning staff to evaluate 14 properties in the unincorporated areas of the county for possible higher-density rezoning, including seven lots near Simi Valley.

Three of the properties are in the hills north of Township Avenue, just off Ditch Road, and four are in the Santa Susana Knolls.

The study is necessary in order to meet state requirements for affordable housing, said Kari Finley, a senior planner with the county.

"We didn't anticipate having to do this and make this kind of change, but the state law is very specific," said Finley. "We've been . . . pushed back against a wall where that is the only option left."

In August, the county submitted to the state its fiveyear update to the housing element of its General Plan. The state responded Nov. 10 with a letter stating that further revision was necessary because the plan failed to provide enough sites showing that it could accommodate lower-income housing, Finley said.

While preliminary studies of the mostly vacant parcels are currently underway, the county is far from approving any rezoning, Finley said.

Still, the senior planner said, there's a good chance that at least some of the lots will be redesignated to allow for a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre in the county's unincorporated areas.

The majority of the Santa Susana Knolls area has an existing density of 3.37 dwelling units per acre, senior planner Dan Klemann said, however, that does not constitute the entire Knolls area as there are areas that are less dense.

The largest property being examined is located in the Knolls at the corner of Katherine Road and Pepper Tree Lane West.

The former horse ranch, already the site of a proposal to build 100 manufactured homes, has long been a source of controversy in the rural neighborhood. Residents are now worried that if the nearly 24acre site is rezoned to meet state requirements, it could be allowed to have as many as 471 units.

"We're concerned because right now there already is an active project on it that got an active EIR that's almost complete, so for them to consider rezoning at this stage in the game is very puzzling," said Sandy Capaldi, president of the Santa Susana Knolls Homeowners Association. "And to put a 471-unit number on the land was, in our opinion very, very high."

Capaldi said the Knolls has a long list of special circumstances, including the brush zone, limited access points, inadequate infrastructure and current water shortage. She said these issues could and should be enough to disqualify the four properties from consideration for higher density.

"To think that the proposal has 100 or 110 manufactured homes proposed, right now we are thinking there are going to be another 200 cars coming out at that exit (near the railroad tracks), and then they put the 471 number on it," Capaldi said. "It frightens the community when it sees those kinds of numbers and the possibilities. . . ."

State housing law includes the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), established by the Southern California Association of Governments.

Under the latest RHNA, the county must plan for a total of 880 units in its unincorporated areas by 2014. Of that number, 440 units must be designated as for lowerincome households.

Currently, the county has 254 units for extremely low to lowincome households and could have up to 361 if pending farmworker projects near Santa Paula and Piru are approved.

That leaves a deficit of at least 79 units, possibly more.

Finley said state law unfortunately does not recognize county laws which function to preserve open space and agricultural land in the unincorporated areas and prevent urban sprawl.

"It would make more sense to have people closer to services, especially at higher densities," she said.

Because the state's mandate goes against how planning has taken place in Ventura County, it is challenging to find properties that the county can get credit for, Finley said. And yet, if the county does not comply with the housing element law it would become ineligible for certain state and federal funds.

In addition, noncompliance would leave the county open to potential lawsuits.

Due to each parcel's individual constraints, Finley said, it's difficult to estimate how many of the 14 properties could be rezoned.

But going simply by the letter of the law—putting 20 units on one acre—it would take anywhere from four to 10 acres to make up for the county's deficit, she said.

"We're doing further research, but at this point it looks like we are going to have to rezone not a great amount of property, but a little bit to meet their requirements," she said.

Finley said the Knolls horse ranch property, although still on the list of sites to look at, could be excluded due to fire hazards or the current water shortage.

She added that the parcel is at the bottom of the list since it already has an application for development on it.

There is also the issue of annexation.

Normally, developments like the one in the Knolls that are within the city's sphere of influence would be annexed to the city, Finley said.

She explained that if the site is annexed when the homes are built, the RHNA credits would either go to the city or they would be negotiated and the county could receive partial credit. If it were not annexed, the county would get full credit.

Initially, Ventura Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) was concerned that the seven sites near Simi would not be able to receive sewer services unless they were annexed to the city. However, Simi's sanitation district extends outside the city's boundaries.

"The city in fact does have an obligation to provide service to those sites and in this case, annexation would not necessarily be required," said Kim Uhlich, executive officer for Ventura LAFCo.

"I would say that, at this preliminary point in time, the seven sites within and adjacent to the city of Simi Valley do not conflict with LAFCo policies, given the information we know thus far," Uhlich added.

All 14 properties will undergo a preliminary screening before an Environmental Impact Report is done on the sites most feasible for rezoning. The planning division is scheduled to present a draft of the recommended sites for an EIR to the board in June.