Vote Will Help Shape Ventura

Seven years after voters passed Ventura’s first anti-sprawl law, residents are facing a crucial test: They will decide next week, in one trip to the ballot box, how the seaside city will grow over the next two decades.

If passed, Measure A would allow 1,390 homes to be built on scrub-covered hillsides and canyons north of Ventura during the next 15 to 20 years -- part of a complex deal that also includes a 3,050-acre gift of public open space.

The campaign leading to the Nov. 5 vote has been one of the most divisive in recent memory, pitting neighbor against neighbor.

It also has been the most expensive growth-related ballot initiative in the history of the county, which is a national pacesetter when it comes to growth controls.

For both sides, a lot is at stake.

Representatives of Lloyd Properties, the family partnership that sponsored the measure, say this is their one shot to do something with all the property they have owned in Ventura for more than a century.

Supporters believe the landowner has offered a fair trade: the right to apply for 139 housing units a year for 10 years in exchange for preserving 80% of their 3,800 acres as trails, parks or untouched public open space.

The project also includes preserving the Two Trees hilltop, featuring a pair of blue gum eucalyptus trees that have served as a visual landmark in Ventura for generations.

“I thought they came up with a plan that is far-seeing and really beautiful,” said Eunice Koch, 77, a 33-year Ventura resident. “They have really addressed the complaints of most people.”

But opponents -- a mix of Ventura County slow-growth leaders, project neighbors and other Ventura residents -- say the development is too big for the pristine hillsides that overlook their city of 100,000. They’d rather see the Lloyd ranch purchased and preserved entirely as open space.

“It’s a very picturesque area, and we’d like to keep it that way,” said Martha Zeiher, president of Citizens for Hillside Preservation. “We’re not anti-growth; we just don’t want growth in the hillsides.”

Opponents say the project would pour thousands of cars a day onto city streets, crowd local schools and erode hillsides -- complaints that backers of the measure say are overstated.

Many opponents worry that traffic from new homes would clog two-lane Foothill Road and Poli Street. Their traffic study predicts a doubling of car trips on Foothill.

Landowner consultants said those figures are wrong and predicted that Foothill would have one-third as many trips as opponents estimate.

Measure A is on the ballot partly because Ventura voters last November overwhelmingly passed Measure P, which requires a public vote before the City Council can approve hillside development.

Measure P was an offshoot of the city’s historic 1995 ballot measure that requires voter approval before projects can be built on most of the city’s remaining open space and farmland.

Since then, every major city in the county has followed suit by approving its own Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources law.

A chief criticism of Measure A is its timing, coming before completion of environmental and fiscal studies that must be submitted before the City Council can allow construction.

If Measure A passes, opponents think it could set a statewide precedent for allowing virtual pre-approval of projects with unknown flaws.

“We’re presented with one option -- yes or no, take it or leave it -- and we don’t know enough to make intelligent decisions,” said Bill Fulton, a planning expert whose hillside home is near the project. “I am concerned about an approval process entirely driven by the landowners.”

Supporters, however, say the Lloyd project is precisely the kind of development SOAR and Measure P were intended to produce: lots of public open space, limited development and new parks.

And approved by voters.

“If a project with this many benefits cannot win voter approval, it will call into question the validity of voter-approved growth-control measures everywhere,” said Doug Halter, a downtown business owner and citizen activist.

Halter and others also are concerned that hard feelings caused by a bitter campaign -- marked by personal attacks, misinformation and vandalism -- could keep residents from working together to solve city problems in the future.

Halter said he receives dozens of hateful e-mails every day.

Margaret Merryman, a longtime Avenue area activist who was hired as the landowners’ spokeswoman, said residents who back Measure A are afraid to put signs in their yards because of possible retaliation.

“They’re not attacking the plan; they’re attacking the people,” Merryman said.

Last week, Lloyd Properties complained to police after activists vandalized signs posted along Foothill Road by spray-painting “No” over the “Yes on A” message. One opponent was cited criminally for stealing a sign.

Zeiher said her group was not behind the sign damage and condemned the perpetrators. The anti-Measure A side has suffered similar attacks, she said.

“Our group has operated with integrity and truthfulness, and we encourage all supporters to do the same,” Zeiher said. “We believe the election can be won solely by educating the community.”

But, Zeiher said, proponents have not been completely honest.

In fact, some mailers and television ads by Lloyd Properties have focused only on “saving open space and stopping overdevelopment,” never mentioning that the Measure A plan also calls for 1,390 homes.

“This is actually pretty shocking to those of us who haven’t been involved in campaigns before,” Zeiher said. “I asked, ‘Isn’t there a truth in advertising law?’ The answer is no.”

Opponents have also complained about the money Lloyd Properties has invested in its campaign. As of last week, the landowners had spent $1.33 million. SOAR had raised about $194,000 to battle three growth-related campaigns countywide.

Measure A covers about 3,800 acres in the rolling hills and canyons north of Foothill Road that stretch five miles from Ventura Avenue on the west to Victoria Avenue on the east.

It is by far the largest single piece of vacant residential land remaining in the Ventura area. Its 700 acres for houses compares with about 400 acres left for homes elsewhere in the city.

The project calls for six neighborhoods, varying in size from 20 estate homes to 435 townhomes and houses. These neighborhoods would be connected by bike and hiking trails, said project manager Jim Anderson.

Two back-canyon neighborhoods farthest from the city would include 40,000 square feet of shops, stores and markets. No schools are planned.

The land is in unincorporated Ventura County and would have to be annexed by the city, except for one 218-acre parcel already inside the city limits.

That site could be developed with up to 480 homes without a public vote, Anderson said. Measure A proposes to build 180 houses there.

“It’s a better deal for the public,” he said.

Opponents don’t like the plan because they say it doesn’t provide affordable housing, which the city needs. Luxury homes in the hills would only attract Santa Barbara commuters, Fulton said.

Many opponents are equally frustrated by the ballot-box approval of projects before they’ve been thoroughly analyzed.

“I think if our City Council had negotiated this, we would have a much better project,” said Ventura County Supervisor Steve Bennett, a SOAR co-founder, leading Measure A opponent and hillside resident.

“Citizens should vote at the end of the process, not in the beginning,” he said.

But that’s not required by new SOAR-related laws approved by voters and championed by Bennett, said Amy Forbes, the landowners’ attorney.

The ballot argument for last year’s Measure P, in fact, said a public vote should come before a developer applies to the city.

The public is protected, she said, because a new project such as Measure A would then be fully analyzed by the City Council. And council members could reject it if problems cannot be fixed or offset by changes that are good for the city.

Fulton rejects that reasoning, insisting that no council would force meaningful change in a project endorsed by a majority of voters.

“I don’t think the City Council will sink it if voters have already approved it,” he said.

Forbes notes that the landowners are taking a risk as well. If Measure A passes, all 3,050 acres of open space must be preserved in a land trust, even if no homes are ever built.

“The nefarious intent everyone is trying to assign to this just isn’t there,” Forbes said.