Home › News › County News
Oxnard OKs rezoning for condo project near the Santa Clara River
Download this story as a podcast!
STORY TOOLS 
More from County Newsshadly@ VenturaCountyStar.com
Despite earlier concerns about flooding dangers, the Oxnard City Council voted 3-1 Tuesday to approve rezoning land near the Santa Clara River where developers want to build 156 affordable condominiums.
Councilman Tim Flynn voted against overturning the Planning Commission's denial of the project. Mayor Tom Holden was absent.
The council was swayed by new information from the developer, RiverPark Legacy LLC, showing the 6-acre site is protected by a levee.
The property is actually above the level of a 100-year flood and more than three-quarters of a mile away from the levee that is along the south bank of the Santa Clara River.
"Even a 100-year-flood would not get to that level," Councilman John Zaragoza said.
The property is part of the sprawling mixed-use RiverPark development on the north side of Highway 101, bordered by the streets American River Court and RiverPark Boulevard.
In March, the city Planning Commission denied the effort because "there was insufficient evidence presented at the hearing to find that a levee that borders the Santa Clara River would protect the 6.15-acre site from floodwaters during a 100-year storm event."
A 100-year flood is the flood level expected to occur at least once every 100 years.
In any given year, there is a 1 percent chance of such a flood, and the designation is used for planning purposes.
The developer has an updated analysis that says the levee, finished in 1961 by the Army Corps of Engineers, is high enough to withstand extreme flood events.
The current height of the levee is from 4 to 9 feet above the predicted 100-year flood mark, according to the study completed by Hawkes and Associates.
The study says that the 1.5-mile-long levee is "more than adequate" to withstand a 100-year flood.
In separate business, the City Council voted 3-1 to spend $12 million in redevelopment money on a parking structure and other amenities as part of a planned upscale shopping center and cineplex at RiverPark. Flynn voted against the proposal.
In return for the funding, developer Shea Properties will give the city $9 million to aid redevelopment in the downtown core.
Work on the parking structure and shopping center is expected to begin soon and be finished sometime next year.
Posted by luv2sail on April 23, 2008 at 3:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Say what you will about Tim Flynn, but seems he is the only one with common sense.
Where do I get in line for this deal, I want to spend 12,000,000 on things that will increase my revenues and in return I'll give you 9,000,000.
Sweet.
How about the City going ahead and spending the 9 million and spend the other 3 million on the third world country roads I have to drive on.
Oh, silly me, that would mean the City has to do something that they should do and not subsidize an investors losing propostion.
Posted by CloudyDaze on April 23, 2008 at 5:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I've seen that whole area underwater in 1969 and almost underwater in 1978-79. Official flood designation or not, I certainly would not want to live anywhere near there when the river is roaring. Seems the council (Mr. Flynn excluded)suffers selective memory impairment along with complete abandon of common sense, most likely brought on by a "flood" of taxpayer's and developer's money.
Posted by Rob_Dawg on April 23, 2008 at 7:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This should have been front page and headlined:
In Complicated Tax Swiindle Oxnard Gives Riperpark Developer $3m and pours another $9m Down the Downtown Rathole
And that just for the second item. The first is nothing more than the usual bait-n-switch developer giveaway Oxnard is famous for. Look, this isn't even about affordable housing. The Riverpark disaster does not have the egress capacity for more dwelling units.
2800 dwelling units on "700 acres." Well... not really but 4DU/ac sounds so innocuous whilst the reality of 250 acres of "open space" aka unbuildable floodplain and surface runoff retention basins and "pocket parks" changes the calculation. You remember, there was a deal. Deals are made to be broken. Less open space more crowding now. But that's not all, there's a commercial component and a town square and a wine garden. All told we are talking effectively 16DU/ac as normally reckoned. 1800 "homes" and 1000 apartment type units are planned. So what about the traffic? 3 egress points for 10,000 people. Wait that was before the ccity Council Supersized their latest. Add another 500. The standard for the area is about 10vpd/person. Nice round number one hundred thousand vpd. Another standard; peak morning/evening hour load 14% of vpd. In one hour they are expecting to push about 8,000 vph. A primary collector arterial collector lane can possibly handle 1,600 vph so they'd need 6 lanes in each direction. They got three. Welcome to Oxnard.
That's okay because the tax increments will make it all better right? Right? In the two years I've been blogging about this egregious example of bad governance the low end prices have dropped from low $500s to low $300s. Lower tax base, more subsidies, more people, another loser for Oxnard.
Campaign slogan suggestion for someone brave enough to run; "Tim Gets It and So do I"
Posted by rjeremy on April 23, 2008 at 8:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Even a 100-year-flood would not get to that level." I was unaware of the folks with PhD's in geology on the council. I'm not sure if a Jr High earth science class qualifies.
I agree, Flynn has the most common sense.
Posted by SMITH on April 23, 2008 at 10:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
To all you Flynn Drones: So. Cal is supposed to break off into the ocean, so head for the hills!!! And the sky is falling, so hide!!
All you whiners who come with all these conspiracy theories, you should move out of Oxnard if you are not happy. Maybe move to Arizona. All Flynn is good at is suing the city and heading up nothing but failed initiatives. Like father like son, they have accomplished nothing but lawsuits and havoc! Vote them both out of office!!! Go O’Leary!
Posted by Optimist on April 23, 2008 at 11:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Vote John Flynn... He has more guts then anybody
Posted by shaver_one on April 23, 2008 at 12:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Even a 100-year-flood would not get to that level."
Isn't that what they said about New Orleans?
Posted by goaliegirl69 on April 23, 2008 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
rjeremy, not to be argumentative...but if a study was presented to the council, it would have had to be from a professional in that field.
Still, Riverpark seems a disaster waiting to happen and I hope that 1% never happens.
Posted by whatsup805 on April 23, 2008 at 1:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Build next to a river? Sure it's ok we are protected...go ahead and buy one! SUCKERS!
From USGS site.
Potential Sea-Level Changes....
If Earth's climate continues to warm, then the volume of present-day ice sheets will decrease. Melting of the current Greenland ice sheet would result in a sea-level rise of about 6.5 meters; melting of the West Antarctic ice sheet would result in a sea-level rise of about 8 meters. The West Antarctic ice sheet is especially vulnerable, because much of it is grounded below sea level. If the sea level rises by just one metre and in the US tens of millions will be affected particularly along the north east coast, Florida, Louisiana and California. Globally it is expected that hundreds of millions of people will need to relocate or emigrate.
RISING SEA LEVELS
Rising sea levels have already impacted hard on many island and coastal communities including the forced evacuation of their populations. Areas affected include Kenya, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, Bangladesh, Papua New Guinea, Micronesia, Maldives, Antigua and Bermuda. Sea levels have been rising for some time and predictions indicate further rises of between 200 and 600mm by the end of the century. In the US this would affect many coastal regions especially the coastlines of Florida and the Gulf of Mexico, cities affected would include Boston, New York, Charleston, Miami and New Orleans.
Posted by sslocal on April 23, 2008 at 7:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I know a few people that live around there. They are less than happy about this development.
Lets vote the current swine out of office this election folks. It's the only way to show them we don't like what they are doing.
Posted by imbetnonit on April 23, 2008 at 9:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
River Ridge used to be called River Bottom. How old are these youngsters on the city council?
Posted by Alex_Oxnard on April 23, 2008 at 10:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I hope the city can HEAR when people are yelling for help because of a flood on their street.
SAY NO TO THE COUNCIL & SENIOR CITY STAFF....
SAY NO TO THE PROPOSED SALES TAX INCREASE!!!!
Posted by SMITH on April 24, 2008 at 7:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Lets not build by the ocean, we are going to get flooded. No, lets not build where we have earthquakes. No, let's not build where there is a dam.
People wake up and get real, any where you live, there is always a potential for disaster.
The Flynns and their grandstanding is old news. They get no where and are totally in-effective.
VOTE both those useless politicians’ out of office. They are a waste of taxpayers money!!!!!!!!!!!
(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.