Home › Opinion › Opinion
View protection needed for Ventura's future
STORY TOOLS
More from Opinion
Re: Sandy Smith's Aug. 19 commentary, "Have faith in vision":
I agree with Smith on the importance of trust and vision. We entrust Ventura City Council with guiding the community's vision to reach its future goals. Our concern is when there are no detailed plans to reach those goals. In "building up" for increased density, there are no permanent protections to preserve existing neighborhoods, valued historic resources and beautiful natural setting. If Ventura citizens implement the view protection plan proposed by Ventura Citizens Organization for Responsible Development, we can ensure care and sensitivity to the environment will be key parts of the new development process.
Cities from Palos Verdes to Burbank recognize the value of their natural settings and have protected their viewsheds. We do not have such laws in place here in Ventura.
Our general plan does call for preservation of city-defining views and historic resources, but the current council chooses to ignore those policies. The city is being sued for allegedly disregarding historic preservation law. Legal fees alone would likely pay for the needed historic survey to prevent future lawsuits.
Venturans have a proud history of protecting by law our irreplaceable resources. Citizens have not left this to the vagaries of politics. Councils come and go; ordinances that protect hillsides, views and the ocean stay. Citizens stepped up to save agricultural lands with Save Open-space and Agricultural Resources and the hillsides with Measure P. There would not be much point in saving hillsides if we cannot see them. The view protection initiative we propose simply enables citizens once again to tell developers we, not they, determine where and how this next phase of development takes place.
The view protection initiative would allow us to say where and how high the taller buildings can go. Through digital modeling, we can identify those places where tall buildings would be compatible with existing structures.
VCORD's view ordinance is the critical protection that will serve to save our very sense of place, with mountains to the east, the hills on the north and west, and our south-facing beachfront. This setting is worth keeping in view. It's the reason people love coming to Ventura and it's the reason we love living here.
It's hard to understand Smith's negative reaction to such a reasonable plan. The view initiative gives Venturans a choice: Do you want a view protection ordinance written for Ventura? If the City Council rejects it, the ordinance goes to the voters for approval. If the citizens don't like it, they will vote it down.
This is, in fact, Smith's main objection — the VCORD initiative would put decision-making about height limits in the hands of citizens. Members of the proposed view resources board would include Ventura resident architects and planners, augmented by neighborhood advisory councils. We think their vision and input would be more reflective of their actual neighborhood needs than any "new urbanist" developer without citizen guidance and oversight.
Just as the developer who employs Smith would not dream of relying only on trust and vision without a detailed plan, neither can we.
If I were a developer, I would join with the community and get the VCORD ordinance written without delay. With digital modeling, it is conceivable that a view protection ordinance can be completed within a 90-day period. Then development would be predictable for both citizens and developers alike.
View protection is win-win for everyone. The 10,000 needed signatures to get this on the ballot will begin to make it a reality. The faster we get them in, the faster we get to the citywide vote. To sign or circulate a petition, please call us at 648-1902 or e-mail at venturacord@hotmail.com. VCORD's Web address is www.vcord.org.
— Camille Harris, of Ventura, is the volunteer chairwoman of the advisory board for Ventura Citizens Organization for Responsible Development.
Posted by schlederdecopan on August 30, 2007 at 1:05 a.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by schlederdecopan on August 30, 2007 at 1:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The 'View Protection Initiative,' thank you VCORD and Camille Harris, is Heaven sent.
It is the 'David' against the oncoming 'greed-motivated' city council and the many developer's 'Goliath.'
Mr. Smith's verbage of "trust and vision" holds just about as much water as that infamous Iraq WMD verbage of "shock and awe!"
Smith was the council person who walked out on the 83 years young Helen Yunker's testimony against the city's destruction of her property and home.
Smith was the first council person 'out-of-the-shoot' to deny a request by the living descendants and general public to restore the 3,000 desecrated graves at the 1862 St. Mary's/Protestant/Hebrew Cemeteries (aka Cemetery Memorial Park?) The city has illegally invented a "passive" park for dog duty on our fore-father's graves.
Smith has not left his sit on the council to work with the homeless or battered and abused women or island conservation. I think he has a job with a major developer.
TRUST and VISION?
The city council and the local major developers have a iron grip on our town from the marina to the hillsides and from the Ventura River to the Santa Clara River. This 'status quo' iron fist has been handed to them from the 'good ole boys' city council of the 1970's.
We need only 10,000 signatures to stop this madness and wrestle our town's future away from these carpet-baggers and scallywags!!!
Steve Schleder
www.restorestmarys.org
PS
Participate in our local "SHOCK & AWE!"
Posted by Tom_Johnston on August 30, 2007 at 7:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I did not, and likely will not sign this petition.
It's not so much that I want to lose scenic vistas, far from it. The inland hills and beach at the sea can be important factors in determining the charector of the City.
What I object to is the means of formation of the deciding Committee that will deal with this issue. I quote the initiative:
Section 4. Establishment of View Resources Board.
A. Within thirty (30) days following the effective date of this initiative ordinance, a View Resources Board shall be established comprised of 23 members of the Ventura Community.
members. VCORD's Board of Directors shall appoint the community representatives as follows: one representative from the Chamber of Commerce, one representative of Convention and Visitors Bureau, 3 representatives from the West Side View Overlay District; 4 representatives from the East Side View Overlay District; and 10 representatives from the Central View Overlay District, including 2 representatives from the Harbor (in the central district), 2 representatives from Pierpont Beach area, 3 representatives from Midtown South (below Poli), 2 representatives from Midtown North (Above Poli), and 2 representative from Midtown East (northeast of Telegraph.). The City Council shall appoint 1 Councilperson, 1 Planning Commissioner, 1 City staff member from the Community Development Department.
This initiative enables an interest group to pretty much "cherry-pick" the deciding body. This strikes me as un-democratic and likely to wind up being a majority of VCORD supporters.
Sure City Council and other elected officials appoint boards all the time, but we ELECT those council people. We did not elect the VCORD Board of Directors.
Why not give this authority to the Sierra Club or the Auto Club or maybe the Chamber of Commerce? Those are all similarly un-elected (by popular vote) special interests that could potentially weigh in on an issues such as this. Would you trust those organizations to be "representative" of the City as a whole???
I don't and that's why I will not support this initiative.
I don't think anyone should, as laudable as their goals may be.
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.