Ventura Citizens for Hillside Preservation has joined a coalition of committed organizations to promote plans for a parkway along the lower reaches of the Ventura River.

The Ojai Valley Land Conservancy has already made great strides toward opening the upper stretches of the river to public recreation.  Friends of the Ventura River hopes to be equally successful in opening up the lower river for public enjoyment.

Years ago the Ventura River was a centerpiece of the community.  Over the last 50 years decisions have been made, including the construction of Highway 33, which have cut the community off from the river, denying the public access to recreation on and around the river that was enjoyed by past generations.

Friends of the Ventura River will be working to restore public access to the river for hiking, biking, and picnicking,  among other pursuits.

The Westside Community Plan includes the goal of improving recreational access to the river and the beach for all Venturans.  Together we can make our river the centerpiece of our community once again.

We are also compiling stories from people who lived along the river in the past.  If you (or a family member) have fond memories of growing up near the river and enjoying outdoor experiences at the river, we’d like to hear your story and be able to share it with others.  Please share a blog entry here or at www.friendsofventurariver.org or email us at info@vchp.org.

Ventura City Council Approves Westside Plan without Annexation at the April 19, 2011 Meeting

Ventura Citizens for Hillside Preservation wishes to thank you for your support during our year-long campaign to prevent the annexation of Cañada Larga Valley to the City of Ventura.

By a vote of 6 to 0, on April 19, the City Council voted to move ahead with the Westside Community Plan within the city’s boundaries.  Cañada Larga and North Avenue will not be annexed.

At the meeting, Diane Underhill, president of Ventura Citizens for Hillside Preservation, and leader of a coalition of eight organizations, presented an informative power point presentation which we hope to soon have available on our website (www.vchp.org).  The Coalition includes the Sierra Club, SOAR, Surfrider Foundation, Santa Barbara ChannelKeeper, Wishtoyo Foundation, VCCool, and the Ventura Audubon Society, EDC and represents hundreds of members.

Residents and members of our coalition filled the Chamber.  More than 30 Ventura residents and members of our Coalition provided over 90 minutes of testimony addressing the negative repercussions of the annexation plan.  Many people submitted comment cards or sent email comments to Council prior to the meeting.

This was a true example of Democracy in Action.  Venturans from all parts of the City worked together for a year to achieve this result.  Thanks to all those who sent emails, attended meetings, contributed financially, and followed our progress throughout the year.

A very special thanks is due to the Environmental Defense Center which we were able to retain due to your contributions and the many pro bono hours they gave to our cause.   Its letter to the City Planning Department provided expertise we volunteers were lacking.

We appreciate your support and promise to keep you informed on future changes which surface in regard to Cañada Larga Valley, the Hillsides of Ventura, City Council elections in November, and the important discussion of the proposed Ventura River Parkway Plan to restore the Ventura River and make it accessible to all residents.   Stay tuned for more to come.

Please share our message with your environmentally concerned friends who would wish to hear from us.  They can join our email list.  Word-of-mouth is the most effective way for us to increase our supporter list.  VCHP does not have membership dues.  Your friends would simply receive occasional email alerts when local environmental preservation is threatened.  Thank you again for your support.

Sincerely,
Diane Underhill, President
Ventura Citizens for Hillside Preservation

Ventura drops annexation efforts due to costs

By Christopher Stolz, Special to The Star, Ventura County Star

After receiving a discouraging report on the costs of annexing unincorporated areas along Ventura Avenue and in the Cañada Larga area north of the city, the Ventura City Council dropped all efforts to further pursue the proposal Tuesday.

The report, from consultant Michael Wright, found that if the city annexed the unincorporated north Ventura Avenue area, and encourage development at the adjoining Brooks Institute and Petrochem sites, it would cost the city $314,000 at the time of annexation and about $233,000 by 2020, but generate more than $700,000 for the city by 2030.

If the city chose to annex the rural Cañada Larga canyon north of the city and allow landowner Shull “Buzz” Bonsall to build about 90 pricey equestrian estates in what is now pasture land, it would cost the city about $767,000 by 2020, while generating an additional $200,000 in revenue by 2030.

By contrast, if the city went ahead with an existing community plan to develop the Westside area already within city boundaries, it would generate a surplus of $184,000 for the city by 2020 and $392,000 by 2030.

“Even if you look at the best possible interpretation of annexation, which is annexing only the North Ventura Avenue area,” said Mayor Bill Fulton, “we would still be in the hole for a long time.”

Nearly 40 speakers addressed the City Council on the issue, including county Supervisor Steve Bennett. Nearly all the speakers, including Bennett, opposed annexation on environmental grounds, but many spoke in favor of going forward with the Westside plan.

Even Bonsall, who represents the family who owns the Cañada Larga property, ultimately told the council that they should forego annexation and development at this time in favor of the long-promised plan.

“I recommend to the council that you proceed with the Westside community plan as it’s agendized this evening, and return to the other items in the future, in order that you not hold the Westside community plan hostage to these other considerations,” he said, drawing applause from the audience.

After hearing speakers for more than three hours, the council spent 30 minutes debating the details of the Westside plan. On a motion from Councilman Karl Morehouse, the council directed Community Development Director Jeff Lambert to work with the planning and design committees to include community comments to prioritize parks, housing for active seniors and local shopping.

The next step in the Westside plan is the preparation of an environmental impact report, estimated to cost $186,000. The council voted unanimously to order the report prepared, agreeing to pay for it out of the city’s contingency funds instead of from money set aside for development of the neighborhood, including a long-delayed community pool.

“For clarity, for momentum, and to keep the Westside moving forward we need a plan to be adopted,” said Fulton. “I remember sitting in a Westside planning workshop with my daughter when she was in third grade. I think my goal now is to see that this plan is adopted before she graduates from college, and I want you to know that’s going to be really soon.”

© 2011 Ventura County Star.
Read more: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/apr/20/ventura-drops-annexation-efforts-due-to-costs/#ixzz1KBXwoXbk

Cañada Larga (VC Reporter Photo)

Westside/Cañada Larga plan examined

Short-term negative fiscal impacts vs. long-term overall benefits divide officials, property owner

By Shane Cohn, Ventura County Reporter        04/14/2011

If all the ticks and tocks of the proposed Westside and North Avenue/Cañada Larga Area Community Plan click into place like a Swiss clock, the newly completed Market Overview and Fiscal Analyses predict a fiscal drain for more than 10 years, then recovering more than $1 million of annual fiscal surplus for the city of Ventura’s general fund by the year 2030.

But does anything in this life or, more appropriately, does anything in Ventura go exactly as planned?

On Jan. 24, the City Council appropriated about $60,000 for a consultant to conduct a fiscal report showing various potential economic impacts of annexing the North Avenue, as well as 650 acres of the Cañada Larga valley floor, to the Westside Community Planning Area boundary.

If the City Council decides not to annex the North Avenue or Cañada Larga, and sticks with the original Westside development plan, the report shows a yearly positive fiscal surplus of $184,000 by 2020, and about $392,000 by 2030.

Projected development in the area will result in approximately 524 jobs over the 20-year period.

Annexing only the North Avenue area into the community plan area, assuming the Brooks Petrochem project (1,105 residential units) is built out according to plan, would generate $1 million for the general fund, but require $1.3 million in municipal services, bringing a fiscal deficit of $314,000 yearly but would shrink to a deficit of $233,000 by 2020.

Finally, by 2030, the area would generate a fiscal surplus of about $707,000 annually, assuming additional developments in the area occur without a hitch. Over the 20-year study period, projected development will result in 4,105 new jobs for or in the area.

The report, completed by Illuminas Consulting and now posted on the city’s website, was completed assuming that redevelopment funds would not be available as Gov. Jerry Brown aims to dissolve redevelopment agencies.

“When I came to Council,” said Deputy Mayor Mike Tracy, “I understood the attraction of adding North Ventura Avenue is what we could do with redevelopment fees and that the light industrial pieces could invigorate the economy, but with it in question, it puts the whole thing in limbo.”

Tracy further acknowledged that without redevelopment monies, the North Avenue area is indeed a fiscal drain for 10-20 years.

Mayor Bill Fulton agreed.

“This is a big financial loser for a lot of years under even the most optimum scenario,” Fulton said.

What needs to be understood in the study, cautioned Fulton, is that projects for the proposed planning area would need to be built on the schedule that is assumed in the report.

“It’s an educated guess as to when and whether the other stuff may be built that turns the fiscal around,” noted Fulton.

The addition of the Cañada Larga valley floor to the Westside Community Plan Area has been subject to contentious debate within the Council, as well as the community. Council members Tracy, Christy Weir, Neil Andrews and Jim Monahan have contended that as long as studies are being done to annex the North Avenue, it would be beneficial to also look at the impact of possibly annexing the 650-acre valley floor.

Environmental and fire concerns aside, the fiscal study showed that annexing Cañada Larga and attaching it to the Community Plan would be a plus. Since the area is largely undeveloped, roughly the same fiscal deficit would accrue as in the Westside/North Avenue combination. If, by 2030, the proposed build-out of up to 99 executive houses with price tags estimated at $3 million occurs, the city’s annual fiscal surplus could rise to about $1.6 million.

“The largest financial surplus in this annexation occurs by including Cañada Larga to the North Avenue,” said Cañada Larga property owner Shull “Buz” Bonsall.

The study considers, however, the risk the area poses to wildfires. If annexed into Ventura, approximately 200 acres would be considered for development, leaving nearly 450 acres for the riparian corridor and open space. The costs of suppressing a fire would fall heavily on the city. The study figured that it would cost the city about $2.8 million, should one catastrophic fire on the property occur in the 20-year analysis period, an annual risk allocation of $141,700 annually.

“It will be interesting to see how the rest of Council interprets all of this,” said Tracy.

The City Council will meet Tuesday, April 19, at 6 p.m. in Council Chambers at 501 Poli St., Ventura.

shane@vcreporter.com

The Ventura City Council will meet on Tuesday, April 19, to discuss the fiscal viability of annexing the Cañada Larga Valley and North Avenue. A fiscal analysis commissioned by the City shows that annexing these areas to the City will create an immediate budget deficit and that operating a new fire station and infrastructure upgrades in these areas will cost the community millions over decades before ever becoming profitable. Join us in urging the Council to focus the Westside Plan on the existing Westside community rather than growing the City and encouraging development in the Ventura River floodplain and the meadows of Cañada Larga Valley – the key sites being promoted by those hoping to profit from development.  The Council needs to hear from residents throughout the City who care about fiscal responsibility, good planning, and the environment.

Your presence at City Hall is critical, but if you can’t attend please e-mail the Council at council@cityofventura.net.

City Council Meeting
Tuesday, April 19
501 Poli Street
6 PM

Diane Underhill, President
Ventura Citizens for Hillside Preservation
www.vchp.org

Cañada Larga Valley

Organizations opposed to annexation of Cañada Larga Valley:
Sierra Club, SOAR, Surfrider Foundation, EDC, The Ojai Valley Green Coalition, Santa Barbara Channelkeeper, VCCool, Ventura Audubon Society, Wishtoyo Foundation, & Ventura Citizens for Hillside Preservation.

Why is Annexing Cañada Larga & North Ventura Avenue a Bad Deal for Venturans?

1) Waste of Taxpayer Funds: Upon annexation of North Avenue and Cañada Larga, the City would face a $333,000 annual deficit. By 2020, the annual deficit could climb as high as $950,000. It could be two decades before the City realizes a positive cash flow from annexation, but only if all the best case scenarios succeed in the economically uncertain future.

2) Poor Land-Use Planning – The annexation plan would promote sprawl, destroy wildlife habitat, and facilitate the construction of houses and businesses in a flood plain and in areas at risk of wildfires and mudslides. Annexing new lands on the edge of town contradicts the City’s General Plan which has a focus on in-fill development near existing services. The area’s remoteness from schools, shopping, and services would increase traffic trips along Highway 33 and Ventura Avenue.

3) Extreme Fire Hazard – The Cañada Larga Valley is in an extreme fire-hazard area and the County Fire Department has said that no more than 20 houses should be built in the valley due to the fire risk. By shifting the land from County to City jurisdiction, the landowner can circumvent County fire regulations and seek approval from the City to build more estates than is safe to do so. Costs of fighting wildfires would be shifted to the City of Ventura.

4) Citizens Denied SOAR vote – As County land, Cañada Larga is under SOAR protection and requires a vote of the citizens for zoning to be changed. By annexing the land into the City, the landowner can sidestep a SOAR vote by citizens. Approval by a citizen vote would be challenging for a developer given that the valley is an important wildlife corridor with many special-status plants, birds and animals.

To Donate: Make donations out to VCHP and mail to: P.O. Box 1575, Ventura, CA  93002.

Ojai council opposes development north of Ventura

By Anne Kallas, Ventura County Star

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

The Ojai City Council made it clear this week that it opposes any development plans for areas north of Ventura city limits, an idea currently being studied by the Ventura City Council.

Voting 4-1 Tuesday night to oppose the idea and send a letter to Ventura, the Ojai panel expressed concern about proposals to build upscale homes in the Cañada Larga Valley and areas along North Ventura Avenue.

“It is very appropriate for us to take a very strong stand against any development,” Councilman Paul Blatz said.

Councilwoman Sue Horgan cast the lone no vote, saying she was worried such action would be seen as “just another knee-jerk Ojai reaction. I think it’s premature to do anything, but I agree we need to follow the situation very, very carefully.”

While acknowledging the Ventura City Council had postponed discussion of annexation until after a $45,000 study of the fiscal impacts, the Ojai resolution made it clear any encroachment on unincorporated land will be opposed.

“While (Ventura) has removed these two extensions from its environmental review process, the concept of this change remains very real for the citizens of the Ojai Valley. The city of Ojai has gone on the record as calling for a very complete environmental review of impacts on the city of Ojai,” the letter reads.

“This resolution is our formal statement of opposition to any project that includes those two areas that extend beyond the current boundaries of the city of San Buenaventura.”

Ojai Mayor Carol Smith proposed having the letter adopted as a resolution “to give it more weight.”

Several people spoke out Tuesday against any proposed development of the area, including Jim Hines of Ventura Citizens for Hillside Preservation. He said development would lead to rechanneling of the Ventura River and affect air and water quality in Ojai.

“I urge you to pass a resolution opposing annexation of land,” Ojai resident Suza Francina said. “For those of you who haven’t (spent time in the affected area), you will have a real passion for the day if you spend a day there.”

The Tuesday council meeting was the first for new Ojai City Manager Rob Clark, who answered questions on a number of issues, including lighting for the new skate park and funding for the Ojai Visitors Bureau, both of which were approved.

“I’m very appreciative of the City Council and its faith in me and I’m pleased to be here,” Clark said.

Concerns Raised Over Avenue Development

By Logan Hall
The city of Ventura has slowed annexation plans for the Ventura Westside Community Plan, but is still moving forward with the effort.

The plan is divided into three distinct areas.  The lower Ventura Avenue development includes an area around the Avenue that is already within the city limits of Ventura. The other two areas, Cañada Larga and North Ventura Avenue, including the Petrochem Plant area, would need to be annexed before the city could go forward with any development project.

Most of the opposition to the plan is directed toward the two components that would require annexation. Because the lower Avenue portion of the plan involves areas with empty lots or abandoned buildings, many of which are in disrepair, the opposition isn’t as concerned with that particular component and, in some cases, is in favor of it.

“We have no problem with the lower Avenue aspect,” said Jim Hines, representative of the Ventura Citizens for Hillside Preservation. “They need to fill those empty lots.”

Hines says the real issue is with the North Avenue and Cañada Larga components. He also believes that the city of Ojai is dragging its feet in their involvement with the project. “Ojai is like the last body to jump on the bandwagon,” he said. “They should have been the first.  Where are you city of Ojai?”

The question then should be:  What can Ojai really do if taking a position of opposition?

According to Ojai interim city manager John Baker, if an Environmental Impact Report states that there could be negative impacts on the Ojai Valley, the city could take legal action. “The city of Ojai would be in a position to give input and then challenge the project,” said Baker. “If you can provide appropriate questions, it will stop them and make them rethink things. If they don’t, that’s when you can take legal action.”

Ventura’s plan seems to have an effect on many different people from all walks of life. Some believe housing developments are part of progress; others believe if the area is developed, it will have serious negative impacts to the area.

Buz Bonsall, whose family owns 6,500 acres near the proposed site, with 800 of those in the Cañada Larga area that fall in the potential annexation zone, says he would need to see more information about any development plan before he could say whether the annexation would be a positive or negative thing for his property. “Everything is all conceptual at this point,” said Bonsall in a phone interview. “It will only happen if it’s feasible and makes sense.”

Bonsall says that out of the 800 acres, only 200 acres consisting of flat pastures, out of range of the 100-year floodplain, would be available for future development. When asked if he would be selling property if the plan does move ahead he said that selling isn’t what he is interested in. “I don’t want to sell, I want to be involved in the property,” he said adding, “The ranch is not for sale.”

Written by admin

February 10th, 2011 at 6:06 pm

Posted in news,ojai

Sleeping giant threatens Ojai

Author: Jim Hines; Guest editorial

Two sleeping giants from Ojai’s past are now ready to reawaken at the entrance to the Ojai Valley.

Remember the major battle back in the 1980s to stop the pollution at the Petrochem refinery along the lower Ventura River? Well, you will love the encore presentation: Plans for hundreds of dwelling units right in the middle of the Ventura River floodplain.

Remember our valiant efforts to stop Waste Management Company from developing a massive landfill (dump) at Weldon Canyon along Highway 33 at Rancho Cañada Larga? Well, how about hundreds of dwelling units in the beautiful Cañada Larga Valley right beside Weldon Canyon? And, yes, the Waste Management Company lease on Weldon Canyon is still active.

Now the ghost of the past has come back to haunt the Ojai Valley. The owner of Rancho Cañada Larga wants to annex 800 acres in Cañada Larga Valley into the city of Ventura for development purposes and the owners of the former Petrochem site also want the city of Ventura to develop their land into housing units, in the middle of the Ventura River.

Nothing has changed in regards to these proposed projects’ negative impacts on the Ojai Valley. Air still blows inland from the ocean to the valley. These two projects produce the smog; Ojai gets it.

Traffic increases on Highway 33 will impact the Ojai growth allocation numbers. These projects use it up and Ojai pays the price.

Great things for the owners of these two sites and a whole lot of bad things for the Ojai Valley:traffic congestion, air quality, flooding of Ojai wastewater treatment plant and urban growth inducement on Rancho Cañada Larga, more urban sprawl, more lighting of the night sky.

And while we’re at it, let’s put some great view homes on Sulphur Mountain Road.

Add to this the loss of a major Ojai Valley to the ocean wildlife migration corridor and loss of lands used by endangered species.

The city of Ojai, the Chamber of Commerce and various other organizations are working to promote the beauty of Ojai.

How’s this for Ojai’s new marketing strategy:”Once you get past the dump, urban sprawl and homes in the Ventura River, welcome to beautiful Ojai.” Or think about this: Ventura, where the air is clean and the beautiful generated smog blows into Ojai, turning the Topa Topa ‘Pink Moment’ into the brown haze from Ventura’s urban sprawl.” Ojai Valley residents, now is the time to act to protect the valley. Please contact Ojai City Council members and urge them to pass a resolution strongly opposing any inclusion of the Cañada Larga Valley or the former Petrochem site in the Westside Community Planning Project.

Ojai needs to voice its strong opposition to the Ventura City Council.

Please contact members of the Ventura City Council -and ask them not to include any annexation of Cañada Larga Valley into the city for development purposes.

Remember that Ventura’s potential financial gains are at the expense of the quality of life in the Ojai Valley. Please act now before it is too late.

Yes, these two projects affect you! Note: Representatives -from the city of Ventura will explain the project at Ojai’s Planning Commission meeting today at 7:30 p.m. at Ojai City Hall.

Jim Hines lived in the Ojai Valley for more than 40 years. He was a founding board member of Citizens to Preserve the Ojai (CPO). As a CPO member he was active in stopping Weldon Canyon Landfill at Rancho Cañada Larga and the closing of the former Petrochem oil refinery along the lower Ventura River. He is currently on the board of directors of Ventura Citizens for Hillside Preservation, vchp.org, and the board of directors of Sierra Club Ventura County Chapter

Copyright (c) 2011, Ojai Valley News, All Rights Reserved

Ventura Slows Annexing Plan

By Logan Hall
What would happen to the Ojai Valley if 2,100 new homes were built between Casitas Springs and the 101 freeway? The city of Ventura sent a representative to give a presentation to the Ojai City Council and the Ojai Planning Commission on Wednesday, outlining the Ventura Westside Community Plan project that proposes such a development.

Dave Ward, planning manager for Ventura’s Community Development Department, showed the council and commission details regarding the project, and let Ojai’s representatives know about recent changes to the plan’s time line.

According to Ward, there was an outpouring of comments from the public opposing the project last week at Ventura’s City Council meeting. Ward said that because of the public feedback, the Ventura council has decided to slow down their efforts to annex areas of Ventura Avenue from the county to the city. The annexation would be necessary for Ventura to move forward with development plans in the Cañada Larga and Petrochem plant areas.

When pressed further by the OVN in a phone interview yesterday, Ward commented that the Ventura council’s decision was also based in no small part on Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposal to end redevelopment, as part of California state budget cuts. If Brown’s proposal passes, possibly later this year, Ventura may not be able to use state funds for the project. “Our Westside development effort had an implementation strategy that included redevelopment,” said Ward. “Since redevelopment statewide is under question, the council is questioning whether the redevelopment project proposed will still be valid. It’s sort of a waiting game at this point.”

Jim Hines, representing the Ventura Citizens for Hillside Preservation, told the OVN he believes Ventura’s reasons for pushing back the effort is a veritable smokescreen. “Dave really put on a dog-and-pony show last night,” said Hines, who was an Ojai resident for 40 years before moving to Ventura. “He will keep pushing and pushing though. They want you to think they are running into problems and this project will be pushed back. But they’ve spent a lot of money on this thing and it’s not just going to go away.”

Several local citizens spoke to the Planning Commission and the Ojai City Council in opposition of the project, including Larry Rose and Peter Cantle. The council and commission also asked Ward questions regarding the possible impact the project would have on the valley.

Councilwoman Carlon Strobel and Commissioner Cortus Koehler asked about the possible effect the project could have on air quality in the valley. “When do you stop sending air pollution our way?” asked Koehler.

Ward responded to most of the questions by saying all would be addressed in Environmental Impact Reports that have yet to be conducted.

According to Ward, the Ventura City Council will be conducting a market and fiscal analysis of land usages before their next meeting on the project taking place on April 18, where they will determine whether or not to proceed with the costly and time-consuming EIR process.

So far, neither the Ojai City Council nor Planning Commission has taken any formal action on the matter. Katrina Rice Schmidt, Ojai city planner, sent a letter to Ward on behalf of the commission expressing certain concerns without actually taking a stance. The items are expected to be added to future Ojai council meeting agendas.

The Ojai Valley News is committed to continue reporting on the Ventura Westside Community Planning Project. Look for a full report on the latest developments in next week’s issues.

Written by admin

February 3rd, 2011 at 4:54 pm

Posted in news,ojai

Ventura City Council suffers from blurred vision

By Claire Chouinard

Saturday, January 29, 2011

A slim majority of the Ventura City Council is supporting development of the county open-space valley, Cañada Larga. Proponents are saying Ventura County businesses want new executive housing and that building mansions for the rich will attract jobs to Ventura. These claims are flawed, outdated, real-estate speculations being made with your tax dollars.

My family and I own the outdoor clothing company Patagonia, which if you count our beginnings as a blacksmith shop, has been headquartered here since the mid-1960s. About 350 people come to work here near the mouth of the Ventura River and all of our shareholders proudly call Ventura home. We are one of the largest, private, in-city employers and we don’t need or want this so-called “executive” housing.

The claim is that development of Cañada Larga would attract executives, presumably because the city’s high-end housing isn’t up to par with neighboring cities. Let me state clearly that the reason we, at Patagonia, are located in Ventura is exactly because it is not like these nearby cities.

Our employees, including our highest paid executives, are active, environmentally minded individuals and families, who enjoy a variety of outdoor pursuits, and who like Patagonia, give back to their community. These are the kind of citizens a city should work to attract and who don’t pick a community based on its executive “ranchettes.”

Our top executives often relocate to work for us from places like Portland, Seattle, San Francisco and Boulder. Those coming from Orange and Los Angeles counties move because they are disgusted with the traffic and sprawl and want to raise their families somewhere smaller, with less development and more accessible, unspoiled nature.

We are competing on a global scale based not just on quality of social life but the quality of our open space areas, ocean, rivers and recreation. We find that these elements are hugely important for people considering a job offer.

There are many “up-scale” homes already within the city limits, many for sale, such as those in the hill neighborhoods, the Keys, on the beach and beautifully restored bungalows in midtown. We have not had trouble attracting employees due to a shortage of appropriate housing, but rather what some perceive as a compromised lifestyle.

The City Council is right in assuming that it can be hard to attract executives to Ventura, but for the opposite reasons it assumes. There are visual clues throughout Ventura that indicate we don’t take care of ourselves very well, we may be a bit more dangerous, don’t value the open spaces we have, and are often ready to sell-out to the highest bidder.

Instead of a clean, scenic beach and community river parkway accessing open-space, we have parking lots, an ugly sky-high hotel, industrial parks and decaying refineries. We let businesses build on the banks of our river, well within its flood plain. We have few community trails other than the bike path along the river, where our employees constantly run into scary confrontations, trash, and human waste due to homeless settlements allowed to set up in the river bottom.

What would attract Patagonia executives to this city is if we were a community that worked to improve the area we have already developed, restore our river and beaches and protect the pristine open space we still have. Beautifully remodeled historic homes are driving executives in droves to cities like Portland, as are their walkable neighborhoods, safe bike pathways and improved natural settings.

Current projects such as the restoration of coastal dunes and beaches are steps in the right direction that we can be proud of. The removal of Matilija Dam and restoration of our beach sands and steelhead trout will be another crowning achievement and attraction to our area. Local open-space groups are buying land to preserve and make accessible, and others are improving water quality in our streams and oceans. These are the actions that will attract people to our community.

The Ojai Land Conservancy, and their new river and canyon trails, are a great example of what can be done to add real lasting value and appeal to the community with the help of private landowners, local citizens and environmental groups. There is nowhere like this in Ventura and outside of work many people go toward Ojai, Santa Barbara, and as far as Sycamore Canyon and Pine Mountain, spending money far from our homes.

We are at a crossroad that requires us to think big picture and long-term. We need city leadership with a vision for a unique, cultural and natural Ventura. I applaud the City Council for working to improve west Ventura, but I urge them not to spoil progress made so far with this poorly supported Cañada Larga “executive home” scheme.

Ventura is a unique place, and like Patagonia, which was born out of this city, we are of “uncommon culture.” Let’s focus on improving what we have, fix what’s broken and protect what is precious; it’s what will differentiate us from other areas and attract people to want to live here.

— Claire Chouinard is a co-owner of Patagonia and Lost Arrow Corp.