LCP Amendment No MAJ-2 -12 Item Th 15

LCP Amendment No. MAJ-2 -12, Item Th 15 b

Zoning Designations CTO 2007 DTSP City Approved 2007 DTSP Coastal Commission Approved in 2010

Coastal Commission Direction to City in 2010 • Demonstrate why a mix of uses at the site is appropriate. • Relationship of this site to other visitorserving coastal sites throughout the Ventura coastal area.

Economic and Financial Viability of Visitor-Serving Uses • City Initiated Economic Study • Conducted by HR&A Advisors, Inc. • Analyzed hotel, motel, retail and other visitor serving uses

Economic and Financial Viability of Visitor-Serving Uses • No demand for lodging site • Small retail not financially feasible • Site heavily constrained

Site Constraints • • Weak market demand Site competes with Downtown Core Isolated by Hwy 101, Railroad tracks, topography No direct access from Hwy 101

Entitled Hotels within Coastal Zone

Proposed 2007 DTSP Amendment T. 4. 3. 5 Urban General 3. 5 Promenade Parcels CT O

T 4. 3. 5 Promenade Parcels

Benefits to Public • Real development of Promenade with amenities • Accommodates all modes of transportation • Adds coastal visitor public parking

Promenade Detail Beachside Promenade • 8 foot walk • 6 feet landscape each side Seating areas • 28 feet deep w/ benches • Crosswalks Houseside Promenade • 6 foot walk • 6 and 10 feet landscape

Mitigation In-Lieu Fee • Fee for non-visitor serving uses • Use towards lower cost visitor serving uses in City

Suggested Edit to Modification 5 Management & Location of In Lieu Fee money 3 -Party MOU should be prepared between the Commission, State Parks and the City of Ventura Project should be in City limits Rationale: • Monies are collected under City permit authority for local use • Establishes accountability for use of public monies • Ensures partnership between local and state agencies – a key objective of Coastal Act implementation

MOD 4 & 9, Restrict portion for parking City owned parcel

City Owned Parcel

Railroad R Ash Street ROW City Owned Parcel - constraints ight of Wa utility y • Parking Space Standards • Back out Distance • Accessibility Requirements • Stormwater Requirements

City Owned Parcel Or Retain CTO =

Retain CTO – will maintain status-quo

Request Approval of LCPA Downtown Project Site Be ac h

Within the Downtown Specific Plan (Certified IP) DTSP Project Site Midtown Pacific Ocean

DTSP – Focus Area for Development Project Site

Land Use Designations D T S P PC-T 1989 Comprehensive Plan (LCP) PC-T = Planned Commercial – Tourist Oriented

Conceptual Cross Section Beach Highway Site

Conceptual Cross Section 15’ min.

Suggested Edit to Modification 5 1. Construct In Lieu Fee as a rolling fee based on identified ratio: 210 rooms x 25% x $34, 188. 88 = approximately $1, 794, 916. 00 $34, 188. 88 per residential unit instead of flat flee Rationale: • City must comply with AB 1600 for impact fee • Supports fee collection and nexus justification • Consistent with ratio-based fee Commission certified in 2010

Residential at full potential would equal same fee as…. Re sid en tial

Just 1% residential ? Ratio solves problem Residential