Smart Growth

Here in Ventura, we are striving to create a perfect world – or at least community. We want to encourage new investment in older neighborhoods, provide housing for our local workforce, discourage sprawl, protect the environment and make great places. By the way, we’d like to do all this without impinging on residents’ views of the hillsides.

High standards. Wednesday's joint Council/Planning Commission meeting was the first of a daunting set of tests for the City Council, City staff and for the entire community. Here's what's coming in the next few weeks:

Monday, January 19th: The Council considers the Sondermann-Ring proposal for 300 units of housing in the Harbor (along with 20,000 square feet of "neighborhood commercial." This project has been under consideration for nearly seven years, but design and traffic issues are still being debated.

Tuesday, January 29th: The draft plan for the Victoria Corridor goes to a special meeting of the Council and the Planning Commission. Our 2005 General Plan calls for gradually transforming that 8 lane boulevard full of rush hour traffic into a much more pleasant mix of offices, stores and places to live. The new plan is designed to achieve that goal over time.

Tuesday, February 6: The draft Wells-Saticoy Community Plan will be reviewed by the Council and Planning Commission, detailing new housing and retail development, while strengthening the existing neighborhoods and workplaces in the area.

Monday, February 12: Two projects come before the Council for public hearings -- one a controversial lot split on Mound Avenue and Citrus Place, a new neighborhood in Wells-Saticoy that will include detached homes, townhomes and apartments and a small park.

In Ventura, development projects almost always evoke strong emotions. Often residents are suspicious of change in their neighborhoods. Yet, as a whole, most Ventura citizens support new business, homes for our growing population and new investment in older areas of the City. Our citywide vision calls for most growth to happen inside our community instead of pushing outward to cover our hillsides and surrounding farms.

It is impossible to please everybody. With each decision on new plans or particular projects, the Council must find the right balance -- "smart growth."

Of course, not everyone agrees on that goal. Some simply favor no more growth, leaving the City exactly as it is today. And others aggressively push for unrestrained growth, complaining that government is limiting property rights, driving up the costs of homes and missing opportunities to add jobs and increase revenue for needed public services. But I've found the vast majority of Ventura citizens I talk to don't support either extreme. They support the 2005 General Plan vision:

"Our goal is to protect our hillsides, farmlands and open spaces; enhance Ventura's historic and cultural resources; respect our diverse neighborhoods; reinvest in older areas of our community; and make great places by insisting on the highest standards of quality in architecture, landscaping and urban design."

While these lofty goals are difficult to achieve, however, our efforts to reach them represent an historic opportunity. Recently, despite deep and abiding disagreements, the ten cities of Ventura County and the County itself, came to unanimous consensus on a formula for apportioning growth targets mandated by the State. The process was contentious, protracted and fraught with the potential for meltdown. But common sense prevailed, precisely because everyone was aware that without flexibility and collaboration, we would all lose by fighting each other.

If Ventura can work through the next few months and weeks of tough decisions, we can demonstrate that smart growth is not just an empty slogan, but a real force for achieving our lofty goals. We won’t find perfect answers, but if we can find workable ones, Ventura can move forward after years of stalemate.

What do you think?