Lawyer Scorns Plan for Public Vote on Project : Newbury Park: In calling for initiative, Zeanah said Adventist development could have environmental impact.

By MATTHEW MOSK

Dec. 31, 1994 12 AM PT

SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

Firing back at opponents of a major Newbury Park development, an attorney for the Seventh-day Adventist Church released a letter Friday blasting a proposal to allow residents to vote on the project during a special election in June.

The letter, signed by Thousand Oaks attorney Charles Cohen, accused Councilwoman Elois Zeanah of attempting to hamstring the project after 10 years of delays.

“Ms. Zeanah’s late effort to end run ordinary city process must be the result of frustration” over the negligible opposition the project has generated to date, Cohen said.

The $100-million project, which would cut into 74 acres of pristine, church-owned land near Wendy Drive and the Ventura Freeway, has undergone intense scrutiny during 15 hours of Planning Commission review but has drawn little public criticism. The commission still has another session to review the project scheduled for early January.

Cohen said placing the proposal on the ballot would discard the guidance from the Planning Commission and city staff review, a circumvention he said would be unprecedented and unfair.

But Zeanah, who proposed a ballot initiative in a Dec. 16 interview, said Friday that she believes a special election will allow an added measure of public scrutiny of a project that could have significant environmental impact.

“This is not just an ordinary, everyday project,” Zeanah said. “They are asking for a major amendment to the city’s General Plan, and putting it on the ballot is being responsible to the community.”

Zeanah asserts that the project will slice ridges, fill canyons, cover scenic hillsides, violate grading ordinances, generate traffic and pollute the air. And she said the proposed shopping mall there would harm local businesses, including The Oaks mall, the Janss Mall and retail shops on Thousand Oaks Boulevard.

Those are claims that Cohen angrily refutes.

In his letter he lists, point by point, the reasons he believes the damage to the church’s long-held property will be minimal.

The project “does not destroy a wildlife area,” he wrote. “The church property is a minor part of that area and the developable portion is an even smaller part.”

Planning commissioners have not finished their review of the project, but they have concluded that there will be significant impacts on the environment--particularly earth movement, traffic and noise.

But the impact of the project may not be the motivation for the ballot-initiative proposal, Cohen said. He said he believes that Zeanah’s plan is a ploy to generate interest in the June special election.

The election is scheduled to select a council member to replace Frank Schillo, who was elected to the county Board of Supervisors.

The election--which could cost more than $100,000--has drawn vocal opposition from residents who believe Mike Markey, the fourth-place finisher in November’s City Council election, should be appointed to the vacant post.

“This is a shrewd move to gain support for and unleash a special-interest, low turnout special election,” Cohen wrote.

Zeanah said she would not respond to the allegation, but added that she feels the letter is a personal attack and should not shift attention from the development.

“It’s an emotional, personal letter,” she said. “He needs to sell the project, not focus on an individual. I think we all need to be paying closer attention to how this project gets addressed.”