WITH THE POSSIBLE EXCEPTION of our battling state legislators, you couldn't find a group of people with more divergent opinions than Ventura's View Protection Task Force. Thrown together in one room are representatives from each side of the city's pro- and anti-development factions. Yet the group gets along so well that an observer might jokingly wonder if meeting at the police headquarters has something to do with it.
That's not to say it's not a very opinionated group. This 15-member committee is tasked with the nebulous goal of defining exactly what a viewshed is and how to protect it. A passel of new planning terms have been coined since Venturans started fervently worrying about their views. Viewsheds, solar fences, and skypaving are now in the vernacular.
Our city's General Plan spells out in very loose terms that we value our views and access to sunlight from our homes, yet it wasn't until a group of Midtown residents started making a fuss about proposed multi-story infill development along Thompson Boulevard that it became a real issue. Now, many City Council speaker cards later, the council is serious about it. While a ballot initiative pushed by the Ventura Citizens' Organization for Responsible Development to address the issue is slated for this fall, council members who are attempting to complete an overhaul of city planning decided they couldn't wait that long for this issue to be addressed, so the task force was appointed to get a jump start on it.
To explain further, VCORD is seeking to draw up its own view plan, based on input from its
own mostly hand-selected citizen's group, a move that our city attorney
has already said violates our City Charter. Legal issues plague this
initiative. If the council rejects VCORD's plan, it would go to yet another municipal election.
JUDGING FROM THE differing opinions surrounding the issue the night I visited the Task Force meeting, it is not an easy thing, this protection of views, and the focus that night was clearly on Midtown residents and their views. It was not until the end of the meeting that the east and west sides of the city entered the discussion. But for now, the goal just seems to be to protect views as seen from public areas throughout Ventura.
As it turns out, View Protection Task Force Chair Rob Corley said, the group has found that lowering building heights has little to do with protecting many public views. "A 10-foot building blocks just as many views as a 50-foot building. But taller buildings hugging the sidewalk really do cramp views of the hills and ocean."
Solar access has also been a touchy issue with many residents. The night I visited, Town Architects Torti Gallas and Partners ran their first-ever simulation program of how larger buildings at full build-out, following existing planning guidelines with cut-outs in the back, would impact the sunlight filtering into Midtown homes.
AND GUESS WHAT? Because of the way the sun travels in the sky, solar access in most of the city can be protected with some simple calculations and building guidelines, the models showed. Corley estimated the group will only spend perhaps $30,000 of the $110,000 allotted to them for professional services from Torti Gallas.
It would appear that designing buildings with clear setbacks from the sidewalk and cutouts in the back seems to be optimal for protecting flatland views of the ocean and Two Trees. The Task Force will report back with recommendations for adjustments to current planning guidelines some time next month.
But how this information will get incorporated into VCORD's initiative, should it pass, is still undetermined.
"Anybody who buys a house next to a commercial lot has some impacts," Corley said. "Protecting every inch of every lot in the city is unattainable."
It is clear to me that complicated tasks such as this are best left to planning professionals with appropriate citizen input and I hope VCORD takes the current Task Force's recommendations very seriously. But it is also clear that city officials need to better communicate with neighbors about the guidelines for adjacent projects and work harder to allay fears and mistrust.
It's obvious VCORD's real motives are to stop all development. Don't confuse them with facts.
Skip, you are wrong about VCORD. They are actually not against development at all, and are pro-development where it creates jobs. They just want "responsible development" where building heights are limited to where they do not block ocean or hill views.
In other words they are fine with one story businesses like Carls Jr. but not great on places for people to live or office space for high paying jobs? Sorry.. it doesn't pencil out for developers to work on such a small scale. They'll walk away. Like I said. Stop all development. You're drinking the kool aid, man.
You are taking things to extreme, skip. There is no one-story limit. Just development that is non high-rise. You must love Long Beach where you can no longer even tell where the ocean is? You also probably enjoy driving down the Victoria corridor, which is full of generic development and resulting traffic congestion. I think VCORD is more against the rampant high density, view blocking development you see taking place off Hwy 101 in Oxnard area. If you like that, then knock yourself out and do not support VCORD. Personally, I would rather make due with less "developer revenue" and maintain building heights as they are and enjoy the views. I seriously doubt there are many "high-paying" jobs being lost in Ventura due to not having high-rise development. That is nonsense just like Sarah Palin and her simplistic "drill baby, drill" philosophy! I actually like Kool-aid, I'll gladly drink some more!
VCORD initiative building moratorium at 26 feet means one story. Read the initiative. 26 feet and nothing will be built but you're great with that.
Midtown is dryin' up and blowin' away. Lucky for VCORD, the economy tanked so no building anyway.
Note of clarification for someone who asked: Blogger "Rob" here is not Rob Corley who I quote in the post.
The city's view task force is developing a valuable foundation for the work that will be done by the neighborhoods of Ventura when the VCORD View Initiative passes. This will allow VCORD's view committee members, elected by the entire VCORD membership,representing their own unique neighborhoods, to get the ordinance written in a timely manner. The former writer's emotional reaction to the temporary hold on tall buildings only while the initiative is being written is unfortunate. This will be the ideal time to write it..no one's building. However, the city has approved 4x the normal amount of approvals and the majority of them are in tall buildings that will not be subject to any view ordinance. Because of the downturn, the city has waived their fees and is extending the developers right to build for up to six years. So don't worry, there will be plenty of view-blocking buildings springing up when the market turns.
VCORD folks are very much in favor of development. They just do not believe it needs to result in a financial taking from either the residents or the commercial property owners, if is done with intelligence and care. A digital modeling will show us all where the high buildings are not a taking and transfer rights will compensate property owners who may be situated in a viewshed. The real fear is the fear of the special interest groups that the power will be returned to the neighborhoods. The cries of "is it legal" are just another irrelevant scare tactic. Courts decide those questions.
"Courts decide those questions." Darn right. Our taxpayer dollars go to keep our high priced city attorney busy defending your ballot measure if it passes.
Power to the neighborhoods. Midtown is dying on the vine. Enjoy your boarded up windows.