Oxnard Faces Dilemma on Development : Transportation: Slowdown in projects means lack of funds for roads. Council debates what course to take.

The slowdown of development in recent years has left Oxnard without the cash to build new roads and fund other transportation projects needed to keep traffic moving easily through some areas of the city, the City Council learned Tuesday.

Scared off by a sluggish economy, few developers have broken ground in Oxnard as of late.

As a result, development-generated traffic revenues have declined from a projected $2.7 million to an actual $553,000 during the first eight months of fiscal year 1993-94.

And next year promises to be no better.

“We have seen over the past few years a decline in development in the city,” Development Services Director Tim Nanson told the council Tuesday. “Many of the dollars we saw coming in to support our vision are not materializing.”

The city’s vision included major projects such as new interchanges for the Ventura Freeway at Rice and Rose avenues and a new freeway bridge over the Santa Clara River.

Nanson said the idea was that developers would form assessment districts and collectively pay for needed road work. But while some big developments--such as the Shopping at the Rose complex anchored by Wal-Mart--have been built in the city recently, not enough new projects have been built to fund roadway improvements.

Now, Nanson said, the city is in a tough spot: Does it stay the course and wait for development to fund the road improvements? Or should the city scrape up the money to pay for the work, with the hope that development will follow and reimburse the city’s cost?

“First we were waiting for development,” Nanson said. “Now we’re thinking maybe we need the new roadway systems to attract the new development.”

Earlier this year, council members had approved a fee reduction for new development from $348 per added trip to about $174. The council reasoned that the one-time fees, which had more than tripled since 1988, were inhibiting development within the city.

On Tuesday, council members were expected to help Nanson sort it all out.

But the council stopped short of providing formal direction, instead ordering city staff members to do more homework on the subject.

“I welcome the opportunity to have this discussion,” said Councilman Mike Plisky, who blasted staff members for providing a sketchy report on the matter. “I think it is long overdue. But I think to sit here and deal with broad generalizations, without seeing the entire picture, is the wrong thing to do.”

Still, council members talked generally about the need to re-examine the city’s road development standards. By way of example, council members said perhaps narrower roads should be allowed for some projects as a way of lowering costs.

And council members stressed the need for city staff to more aggressively pursue grants and other sources of revenue to fund transportation improvements.

Above all, council members said the city needs to guard against ever again developing a plan for transportation projects without having a guaranteed source of money to pay for them.

“The current plan is not adequate,” Councilman Tom Holden said. “We kind of danced around this a little bit, but we don’t have the money to do the projects we promised to put in.”

Added Mayor Manuel Lopez: “The philosophy was that people who caused the need for the improvements would have to pay for them. Now we just need a way to make sure that happens.”