Divided Oxnard Council Delays General Plan Approval

After four years of testimony and reviews, a bitterly divided Oxnard City Council voted Friday to delay until the end of September approval of a General Plan to guide development for the next 30 years.

The delay was adamantly opposed by Mayor Nao Takasugi and Councilman Manuel Lopez but supported by Councilwomen Dorothy Maron, Ann Johs and Geraldine (Gerry) Furr, who said they need to study the document further before adopting it.

The council, which had considered the document for four consecutive days, will continue consideration of the plan on Sept. 27 after Furr returns from a three-week vacation.

The suggestion to delay adoption of the plan, already two years overdue, caused considerable debate and caught Takasugi and Lopez by surprise.

“I thought we were moving to close on the General Plan right now,” Takasugi told the council.

Maron, who is running against Takasugi for mayor in November, responded: “I’m not ready to vote on this.”

Takasugi replied: “If we wait until after the November elections, we’ll have to let the next council take care of it.”

“If we rush this, we are not doing justice to the citizens of this city,” Johs said.

“Rush?” Takasugi responded. “We’ve been at this for four years.”

The Planning Commission spent more than a year listening to public testimony on the plan. Before that, the General Plan Advisory Committee, a 22-member citizens panel, spent more than 2 1/2 years drafting the document.

Maron, Johs and Furr said they want to put off final adoption pending staff presentations on three matters: the residential development of Ormond Beach, the development of high-rise buildings and a new mixed-use zoning designation for certain commercial areas.

“I still have a lot of questions,” Maron said.

Richard Maggio, community development director, said the staff can complete presentations on the three matters by Oct. 1.

Last month, the Oxnard Area Chamber of Commerce said it feared Maron would try to extend the hearings close to the November election in an effort to make a stand on growth and bolster her mayoral campaign.

The chamber supports the plan and has asked the council to approve it without further delay.

On Friday, after the council decided to delay adoption of the plan, chamber spokesman Stephen J. Maulhardt suggested Maron supported the delay to politicize the plan. “It’s a self-fulfilled prophecy,” he said.

Takasugi agreed, saying, “There is a lot political posturing going on.”

In an interview, Maron rejected the accusations, saying she was only one of three council members who supported delaying the plan.

The dispute was the latest controversy surrounding the so-called 2020 General Plan, which allows a population increase of 40,917 and a 130% increase in commercial development over the next 30 years.

Slow-growth advocates have raised many objections about the pace of development allowed under the plan.

Scott Weiss, the founder of a slow-growth movement and a candidate for council, said earlier this week the plan would “try to pave over the city and drown us in smog.”

Planning officials have countered by citing statistics that show Oxnard’s population grew by 18.3% between 1980 and 1989, compared with the county average of 23.5%.

Maron has repeatedly asked why the plan allows for more commercial growth than residential growth. “The plan is out of balance,” she said Friday. “I’m not finished with this.”

The plan allows for the construction of 13,462 housing units and the addition of 73,768 jobs.

Maggio has said the plan provides more commercial development because the city has about 30,000 more workers than jobs.

The most significant modification approved by the council was the addition Thursday of a measure designed to ensure that the pace of residential and industrial development is consistent over the 30-year life of the plan. The measure says no more than 25% of the growth may take place during any five-year period.

Among other modifications by the council is a decision Friday to keep 440 acres of agricultural land between Victoria Boulevard and Patterson Road undeveloped until at least the year 2000. The land was previously zoned as part of a greenbelt between Oxnard and the city of Ventura.

On Monday night, about 250 members of a housing-rights group called Via Campensina protested before the council, saying the General Plan does not provide for an adequate amount of low-income and farm-worker housing.

In response, Lopez asked staff members to study several low-income housing projects in the county and draft a report so the council can consider such projects.

The plan allows the number of housing units in the city to increase by 32%--from 41,857 units today to 55,319 in the year 2020. It also allows a 130% increase in the amount of commercial development, to 16 million square feet from the current 7 million.

Industrial development would increase by more than 215% under the proposal, with 28 million square feet added to the current 13 million.

Most of the growth would come from the conversion of 3,684 acres of agricultural land to urban use.

Under the plan, the city would generate more than 1.2 million vehicle trips a day by the year 2020. As of 1986, the city generated 854,500 vehicle trips a day.

To keep track of growth, the planning staff has added several growth-management measures, including an annual report to keep the council apprised of the pace of development in the city.

The staff also added to each zoning designation a new floor-area ratio, which requires that the floor area of a building not exceed a specified percentage of the lot site.

To maintain current levels of police and fire protection, the plan calls for the addition of 55 officers and 29 firefighters by the year 2020.

The plan also adds to the 706 acres of parkland an additional 205 acres by the year 2020.

In addressing the Oxnard Airport, the plan limits the airport to its current service level and supports the development of a regional airport in west Ventura County, preferably at the Point Mugu air station.

The plan sets aside 86 acres of vacant land at Pleasant Valley Road and Pacific Coast Highway as a replacement site for a dilapidated, overcrowded mobile home park in the southeast section of the city.

Much criticism was raised during the Planning Commission deliberations about a proposed marina-based development on a large undeveloped site at Ormond Beach in the south end of the city.

The commission ruled against the proposal after hearing of safety concerns from the nearby missile-testing center at Point Mugu and of environmental concerns from residents who support the preservation of wetlands at Ormond Beach.

Although the Orange County developer who proposed the Ormond Beach development is still considering a much smaller project, the commission’s decision has substantially reduced criticism over the plan.

The county of Ventura, which had previously been critical of the Ormond Beach proposal, sent a letter to the council this week supporting the adoption of the General Plan.

“Based on actions by your Planning Commission, and based on our meetings with your city staff, we believe the county’s major issues and concerns have been resolved,” the letter said.