Ventura Council Deadlock Effectively Kills Ocean-View Project

Following pleas from local planners to give a higher priority to tourism-oriented development, the Ventura City Council has balked at approving a plan to build 390 apartment units on one of the last undeveloped ocean-view properties in Ventura.

The issue of how best to develop a 12-acre site overlooking the Ventura Freeway was viewed as so critical to the city’s future by city Planning Commission Chairman Ted Temple that he dragged himself from his sickbed at 10 p.m. to join the debate.

“Try to visualize this,” Temple said. “You’re on vacation coming up from San Diego and San Clemente. After you pass San Clemente, you don’t see the ocean again until you hit Sanjon Road on 101.

“As you see the ocean and the beach, you look to the right and see the Pierpont Inn, you see the pier. . . . Now visualize four stories of 390 units of gated apartment complex. You think . . . I guess I’ll keep going to Santa Barbara.”

With Councilman Steve Bennett abstaining because he owns property in the vicinity, the council voted 3 to 3 on whether to allow developer Ed Easley of JPI to start processing the request to build the $30-million to $40-million complex on two parcels of land known as the Triangle Site.

The tie vote had the effect of killing the project at a preliminary screening stage, ensuring that no other developer can bring forward a similar project for 12 months, according to Community Services Director Everett Millais.

Voting against the project were Councilmen Jim Friedman, Gary Tuttle and Mayor Jack Tingstrom. Voting in favor were Ray Di Guilio, Jim Monahan and Rosa Lee Measures.

Friedman led the effort to kill the project at an early stage, arguing that it would be better to stake out a clear position now rather than string the developer along, only to later reject his plans.

“Everyone speaking in favor of this project has a financial gain,” he said before casting his vote. “Everyone against it is impartial.”

Among those supporting the project, Di Guilio argued that while it might not be ideal, it would still benefit the city.

“To turn it down is a missed opportunity,” he said.

Monday night’s late vote supported planning recommendations that the city should hold out for a more tourism-oriented development plan on the ocean-view parcels, such as a hotel or a beach village composed of touristy shops and residences.

The screening vote was necessitated because the proposed apartment complex would have required an amendment to the city’s Comprehensive Plan--Ventura’s blueprint for development. The developer cannot appeal the council’s decision, but can come back to the city with new plans.

The Triangle Site sits on a table of land west of the Chart House on Sanjon Road and south of the railroad tracks. The grassy tract suspended above the Ventura Freeway affords spectacular views of the pier, beach and Channel Islands.

The property has been designated part of the city’s downtown redevelopment district, which means that a portion of property taxes generated on the site is retained by the city to be funneled back into downtown redevelopment.

The site is one of the last three ocean-view properties available for development in Ventura. The other two are a plot at Harbor Boulevard and Seaward Avenue and a parcel in the Port District.

Southern Pacific Transportation Co. owns four of the Triangle Site’s 12 acres, now occupied by a sea-urchin processing plant. The remaining acreage is owned by Lloyd Properties, under option to purchase by JPI.

The property is zoned for commercial development, and zoning would have to be changed to urban residential if used exclusively for an apartment complex.

But city officials say the property is best suited for a hotel, but no hotels have come forward with proposals. With the hotel market in a slump and hotel vacancies abounding in the area, the city faces a difficult decision: whether to develop the land now with a project that was less than desirable or to let the land lie fallow--not generating any revenues--for years.

Before the meeting, several council members were undecided. But an appraisal by Millais that it would be difficult to convince the state Coastal Commission to support the zone change helped sway the council.

Also arguing against the apartment complex was Bill Fulton, a professional urban planner who warned that changing the zoning on the property would send a damaging message to landowners that they do not have to pay attention to city plans and policies.

Easley said he was surprised at the rejection, and Temple said he was amazed.

“If you can kill it at the first step, it is better than fighting it at the last step,” he said.