Home › News › County News
Hillside residents dispute high-rise medical clinic
Homeowners say building will block views
Download this story as a podcast!
Dana Rene Bowler / Star staff John Brooks said he bought his hillside home in 2004 almost solely for the ocean view, which he considers one of Ventura's strongest attractions "Why would you take your best asset and destroy it?" he asked.
STORY TOOLS 
More from County NewsA fight pitting adequate public notice, ocean views and home equity against a 90-foot-tall medical clinic for Ventura County's poor and uninsured could turn on whether the project has changed dramatically from when it was approved 14 years ago.
A group of Ventura County hillside residents say they've collected enough money from neighbors, in donations as large as $5,000, to sue the county over ongoing construction of a five-story clinic next to the Ventura County Medical Center. They believe the project — part of an expansion voted down by county residents in 1996 — was sprung on them without notice, will block vistas and scar property values.
"People are focusing on the residents' complaining about the views," said the neighborhood group's leader Jackie Moran. "I'm much more upset about the process they went through to get this building across. A 91-foot building should not be a surprise, should not pop up out of nowhere."
Contending people were notified through a 2005 newspaper report, hospital officials said the structure is needed to replace cramped, inadequate clinics and facilities for training doctors, urgent care and outpatient treatment. They're assessing the costs of cutting the building's peak height as much as 45 feet to appease neighbors' concerns, but note that work has already begun on preparing the site for the foundation.
"At this point in the process it would be very expensive," said Mike Powers, director of the Ventura County Health Care Agency, noting the change would cost millions.
Hillside residents say they hope for a resolution. But they've also hired lawyers and pledge to file court action to stop construction within the next 10 days unless the hospital agrees to lower the building.
"It's the only remedy we have," Moran said.
Courtroom arguments could hinge on whether a judge says the state's Environmental Quality Act dictates more study and public scrutiny of impacts.
"Once you've done an environmental impact report, you don't have to do another one unless there's really a compelling reason," said Terry Rivasplata, a Sacramento environmental consultant. But a judge could be swayed if evidence shows a project's impacts are much different from when it was first approved.
"If it's not the same project, you have to start the process over," Rivasplata said.
When the clinic was approved by county supervisors in 1994 in a process that included an environmental impact report, it was part of a larger expansion plan that consolidated county healthcare services.
That project was opposed by Ventura's other hospital, Community Memorial.
Completion set for 2010
The battle led to Measure X, which asked voters to approve funding for the county expansion. Community Memorial Hospital spent $1.6 million on the campaign and the county project was rejected.
Some of the hillside residents upset over the clinic construction say they didn't even live in Ventura 14 years ago. Those who did or learned about Measure X thought the expansion was gone for good.
But the referendum expired after one year, allowing the county to build the project later using the environmental impact report from 1994, said Ventura County Counsel Noel Klebaum.
Several weeks ago, hillside residents saw a large, orange construction boom on the hospital property and were told a five-story clinic would be completed in the summer of 2010.
"It was like Oh, my God, it's going to take out all of Santa Cruz (Island).' It's gone," said John Brooks, adding he later learned the construction would not eliminate but likely block most of his view of the island. He bought his hillside home in 2004 almost solely for the ocean view, which he considers one of Ventura's strongest attractions.
"Why would you take your best asset and destroy it?" he asked.
Powers said most of the building will be 70 feet tall, with a utility corridor that cuts across the top of the building adding another 20 feet. He said the construction boom is more than 90 feet above ground, much higher than neighbors originally thought.
More people affected
The construction site has moved about 200 feet from the east side of the hospital campus to the center, Moran said. That changes the impact, meaning some homeowners who weren't affected by the original proposal will be hurt now. She said about 250 homeowners will be affected, including homes that look up into the foothills.
"Our strongest argument is that they didn't follow (California Environmental Quality Act)," Moran said, arguing the changes should require a second environmental review.
Klebaum said the shift in location is only a "small or modest change." That was assessed in a 2005 process known as an addendum, which is not as intense as an environmental impact review.
Powers said a vote on the project three years ago by the county Board of Supervisors that followed the site change was announced in The Star story and should have alerted residents to the planned construction. The board approved the project again in 2007.
"We went to the newspaper to tell them what we're doing because we wanted to be transparent about it," he said, later noting the complaints have made him wonder if enough was done.
"Now that I see how many people didn't know about it, it makes you feel like we could have done more."
Clinic called necessary
Hospital spokeswoman Sheila Murphy noted there were seven presentations made over 15 months beginning in February 2007, which included at least a reference to the clinic, to groups ranging from the Ventura County Grand Jury to the Ventura Lions Club.
Powers said the need for the clinic has grown over the past 14 years. The structure will house an urgent care facility, the hospital's family residency program and clinics for children, pregnant women and families. There will also be specialized programs for heart and kidney patients among others.
The program will cost about $54 million, about half of which will be covered by state funding for safety net hospitals that treat patients who might not get care.
Hospital officials said they're checking with the state to ask whether modifications to the building that reduce the height could jeopardize the state funding.
Hillside residents don't dispute the need for the clinic. They just want a shorter building.
"How many places in the world have ocean and island views?" Moran asked. "These things are worth protecting."
Posted by mikeinsocal10 on June 27, 2008 at 5:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh boo hoo. So you would rather have your overpriced homes lack a view or have people get medical treatment they need? How shallow are these people?
Posted by vc1977 on June 27, 2008 at 7:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The view is only a small issue the building when complete will be close to 100 ft and it will look into may residents homes. How would you like a 100ft building next door to you? And there is a 5 foot + parking garage planned that is next door to neighbors who have to now inhale all the exhaust, listen to the noise of cars and people at all hours. How can this be healthy? The building and or buildings since there is some speculation they are not stopping at just this one building will be lit up with lights all night so that will be shinning into peoples homes. Now I am sure if it was you and it was being build next to your home you would not be very happy either. The residents are just asking the hospital to lower the building and go through proper channels like they should have to start with. Also if the hospital can build a 100 ft building with out notifying neighbors then so can other builders and that might be right next to you and why stop at just a few we could build a whole city of them.
Posted by LivinInPoorMansPV on June 27, 2008 at 10:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Why on earth would they build a COUNTY facility for poor uninsured citizens, in a middle class neighborhood? Where i grew up, they put the low class facilities in low class area's. Personally i think this is BS, but i guess when they originally made the plans, this area probably was considered low class. Bakersfield by the Sea!
Posted by BeaHappi on June 27, 2008 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is right next to the existing Ventura County Medical center which already exists to serve the poor and uninsured.
Posted by Comments on June 27, 2008 at 1:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't live in Vta (I'm in Simi), but I don't blame the residents for fighting this one. No one seems to be protesting the expansion of the hospital to add these needed clinics, they're simply protesting the height of the building. Every one of us should be concerned about this. This is not merely about protecting property values (though I don't blame home owners for having that concern!), but perserving the view of the beautiful coastline for everyone. I personally would rather not see high raises in this area.
And, it seems as though there was a lot of sneakiness going on. These plans were approved in 1994. Cripes, a lot changes in 14 years. And, they say that they were transparent because they placed a notice in the newspaper. What newspaper? And, no offense intended to the Star, but I suspect that a good majority of Vta residents do not read the local newspaper. Very sneaky indeed.
Posted by danp on June 27, 2008 at 1:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Bea hapi is right. Even if it were 1 story, wouldn't there still be cars with "exhaust" wouldn't there still be "lights"? Or should we build a hospital with no lights and no parking? How about accepting the fact that you live in the very center of a growing city. If you don't like it, move to the ACTUAL hillside or to Ojai where they don't allow anything to be built. Yet another case of so few trying to control so many. I saw we scratch the hospital idea and put in a single story sewage processing plant! No lights, no parking, little noise.
Posted by LivinInPoorMansPV on June 27, 2008 at 1:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Honestly, I dont think it is going to look all that bad. I live near there, it may even be an improvement. JM is right, it is a growing city/county/country, why fight it?
Posted by SouthernExile on June 27, 2008 at 2:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Speaking as a new arrival, I think it's hard to understand Californians sometimes. You all build Highway 101 just a few feet from the breakers (also dividing downtown from the beach), and train tracks up and down the beach, and powerplants just behind the sand-dunes, and oil-derricks and pumps all through the bay and all along the hillsides, but suddenly this hospital is going to ruin the environment. My favorite example is Morro Bay...that gigantic ugly powerplant sitting right there on the water. Why is all that infrastructure fine, but this hospital is going to ruin the community?
Posted by swtnsassy on June 27, 2008 at 3:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The funny thing is that it is being label as for "poor and uninsured" however many county workers and law enforcement officers utilize the facilities for their own medical care. CMH is planning to build a new hospital and I dont hear many complaints regarding that. But this is a county facility so there is a problem, is the way I am hearing it. I may be wrong and I am sure many will race to tell me so, even if I am not.
Posted by vcsexplorer11 on June 27, 2008 at 4:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Our tax dollars at work. We cut cost to schools and layoff governments workers. We stop improving our highways and streets. We tax all Americans to death awhile provide perks for the poor and illegal aliens. California alone spend 11 billion dollars on social services.
Got to love this sanctuary state. I am sure the freeloaders will bash me for this comment and lie and say they are perfectly happy spend their taxes on this (even though they are not paying any)
Posted by Tom_Johnston on June 27, 2008 at 4:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The Ventura County Medical Center does in fact specialize in care for the poor and uninsured. We also care for the under-insured, and even the insured ( and not just County employees).
Folks should keep in mind, in challenging economic times, having a sound "safety net" health care system is a good thing. This clinic building will in an integral part of that system of care.
Again, Kisken gets some of it wrong. Measure X was not whether this or any project should be approved, it was about how the County of Ventura financed the project, that being what it took to get Federal matching funds for disproportionate share hospital construction. The project was about "expansion" only in the sense of having adequate facilty space appropriate to the needs of our time..not the 1920-1960's era that much of the VCMC campus and surrounding rented facilities the clinics still inhabit.
Posted by vtanative on June 27, 2008 at 5:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Just think of it if we all could review our own work. What a magical place we would be in; Our Dreams. Anywhere else, a 14 year old EIR would be thrown out and new one required to build. Doesn't anyone else think that there is a huge conflict of interest here. Can we say Self Serving.
Besides a new EIR, what is needed is an independent audit to see if the expansion of VCMC provides the most economical services and is in the best interests of the citizens of this county. I would bet that it is not. Most people would greatly appriciate a lower tax burden especially in these very slow growth times.
Additionally, I wonder how much of that 11 billion comes from our county's coffers?
Posted by kenclubber on June 27, 2008 at 5:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
you people better be aware, you b---- about the poor and uninsured. You might be next!!! Down-sizing is going on everywhere. You might be next, or you find a new job after being laid off, that has no health insurance. Then what!
Posted by Tom_Johnston on June 27, 2008 at 6:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
uhm..."vtanative"
The local contribution, that being the portion of the Ventura County General Fund budget that supports VCMC and Santa Paula Hospital is about $15 million. The current project, according to the article, should cost about $54 million....
Nothing even close to $11 Billion (Wish I could do a "Dr Evil" sort of sneer right now).
Again, this is not an "expansion" it is an effort to provide the kind of accomodations that EXISTING services need in these days and times.
And "vtanative", I can tell you that your "safety net" system strives to be very efficient and cost-effective all the time, there is no other way to operate these days.
As to the EIR...given how many regulatory bodies oversee any major construction, especially that of Public facilities, hospitals at that...I doubt very much anything was overlooked.
Posted by ConcernedCitizen805 on June 27, 2008 at 10:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
don't forget that this is the same "neighborhood" that complained a few years ago when an African American woman was buying a house. They were worried about their property values declining at that time too. Seem like a "nice" bunch of people living over there... not.
Posted by Vhoytec on June 28, 2008 at 12:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Steve Bennett has ignored the people who voted him into his seat on the Board of Supervisors; he could have stood up on our behalf years before building commenced. The neighbors effected were ignored, we've just been dismissed from the process.
People living above the county's 90-foot clinic are upset over not being informed. We only found out once construction began.
It blocks our view of the islands that we've had from the first day living here; a prominent reason for purchasing in the first place.
We support having a clinic, but with a broader footprint!
Bennett is consistent with ignoring the voting public's wishes. He, too, thoughtlessly voted for a 70' tower on Silverstrand Beach that the neighbors didn't want.
What are constituents supposed to do with someone in charge like Bennett?
Posted by Justme on July 2, 2008 at 7:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I find it interesting that many of the residents blame Bennent who was not a supervisor in 94... and he does not only represent those on the hills with a million dollar view.. but those in apts and smaller homes, who are the lower income population who rely on this facility. I am not disputing that it will impact the view... but I wonder how much grief and time a few people have put up about their view, but probably do not put this much effort for the 'good' of the community... I say stop whining...
Posted by Justme on July 2, 2008 at 7:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I find it interesting that many of the residents blame Bennent who was not a supervisor in 94... and he does not only represent those on the hills with a million dollar view.. but those in apts and smaller homes, who are the lower income population who rely on this facility. I am not disputing that it will impact the view... but I wonder how much grief a few people have about their view, but probably do not put this much effort for the 'good' of the community... I say stop whining...
Posted by vc1977 on July 3, 2008 at 7:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Just Me
This project not only effects people with a view who also have smaller homes, but more so people in apts and smaller homes in the surrounding area who will now have a huge building looming above them, lights on all night and decreased sunlight. It affects all those smaller homes and apts in the neighborhood that do not have a view but the people in the building will have a view inside their yard and house. If anyone else tried to use plans from 1994 that were changed dramaticly and after 14 years not get a new EIR they would not have been allowed. So why should the county be able to? How do you know how much effort anyone in the surrounding neighborhood put into the community? You don't. Many of the people that are effected are elderly and have lived in their home since it was built.
(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.