Draft Report Cites Benefits of Ventura Redevelopment District

A study has found that establishing a redevelopment district in the city’s aging midtown corridor would cause no major environmental damage and would benefit the area by upgrading blighted buildings and encouraging private investment.

The draft environmental impact report released this week identified five potential problem areas: traffic, noise, preservation of historic sites, school crowding and poor air quality during periods of construction.

But the report concluded that those concerns could easily be mitigated.

“It was a positive report,” said David Kleitsch, the city’s economic development manager. “There are no surprises. It’s a cleanup and fix-up project.”

The state created redevelopment districts two decades ago to help cities transform blighted areas. Using a complex process called tax-increment financing, cities are able to set aside property tax revenue collected in designated areas that would otherwise be used to pay for city services and programs.

Cities are able to use the increment--any increase in property taxes in those designated areas--to borrow against, to finance development or to provide low-interest loans to property owners to make their own property improvements.

Ventura’s only existing redevelopment zone is in the downtown area, where redevelopment funds have been used to construct a $4-million parking garage on Santa Clara Street and help build a $6.5-million movie theater and retail complex on Main Street.

As proposed, the midtown redevelopment zone would look like a giant pair of tweezers running along Main Street and Thompson Boulevard from Ash Street to Mills Road.

The redevelopment area would also include the Buenaventura Mall and portions of Loma Vista and Telegraph roads.

Preliminary studies have shown that redevelopment could help raise as much as $12 million for midtown improvements. And the environmental report released this week supports those findings.

The study found that redevelopment status would allow the city to reverse a pattern of blight by sprucing up business facades, adding parking and improving roadways.

In addition, it concluded, creating a redevelopment zone would encourage business owners on Main and Thompson to reinvest in their own properties and encourage new residential development in the surrounding area.

“You have this section of midtown which is tired-looking and really needs some sprucing up, and that is the entire idea behind the redevelopment project,” said Mayor Jim Friedman.

Friedman called the redevelopment plan “a natural continuation” of the multimillion-dollar revitalization of the Buenaventura Mall, which was approved by the City Council in 1996.

Because the midtown revitalization plan does not propose paving over orchards or open space, Friedman said it falls in line with the desires of a growth-sensitive community.

“I think that it is in keeping with the will of the citizens of Ventura,” he said. “By definition, a redevelopment project is going to be an in-fill project. We are not going out into the outskirts of the city; we are redeveloping something smack in the middle.”

Unlike other development projects, the redevelopment plan does not propose any change in land-use policy, and there are no foreseen environmental impacts on water or biological resources.

But the study did find that during construction of building improvements or new structures--including the massive upgrade of the Buenaventura Mall--air quality, noise and traffic congestion would worsen.

But according to the Pasadena consultant who prepared the report, those effects could be minimized by creating new parking areas before any construction gets underway and by using air-filtering and noise-muffling equipment.

The only opposition voiced so far to the environmental impact report has come from the city of Oxnard, which has sparred with Ventura over development and redevelopment issues for years.

A Los Angeles attorney hired by Oxnard to review this Ventura study wrote a letter June 17 questioning whether Ventura’s consultant properly evaluated the potential impacts of the redevelopment plan on the city of Oxnard.

Specifically, the letter raises concerns about air quality, traffic, flood control and population growth.

Kleitsch said the neighboring city’s concerns will be addressed as the environmental review process goes forward.

“We’ll answer the questions raised by the city of Oxnard,” Kleitsch said. “There really is nothing in there that they should see as a threat.”

The environmental report will be discussed by the City Council, sitting as the city’s Redevelopment Agency, on Monday night.

That discussion will launch a three-month public review period, including a public hearing on the report scheduled for 2 p.m. Aug. 26 at Ventura City Hall, 501 Poli St.

The 145-page report is available for public review in the city’s planning department and at local libraries for the next few weeks.