Fisherman’s Wharf Timeline Overview 2004-2019

– The County issued a Request For Qualifications (RFQ) for Fisherman’s Wharf.
[ RFQ_Aug_18_2004]

– The County issued a 2nd Request For Qualifications (RFQ) for Fisherman’s Wharf. [ RFQ_July-25_2012]

The Coastal Commission determined the County must obtain a Local Coastal Plan Amendment (LCPA) from the City of Oxnard. HBCA attended the Coastal Commission hearing and supported the City of Oxnard. We won by revealing the County’s many contradictory positions as well as supporting the City’s jurisdiction over its Local Coastal Plan.  To date, the County and developer have not submitted the documents necessary for the City to responsibly review and process the project’s amendment application.  Their application to the City remains incomplete as of this date.

See Coastal Commission 9/2017 exhibits : PWP-4-CIH-16-0005-2-EDD(CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR)SEPTEMBER14, 2017 EXHIBITS https://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/2017/9/th10a/th10a-9-2017-exhibits.pdf

The Coastal Commission determined the County must obtain a Local Coastal Plan Amendment (LCPA) from the City of Oxnard.  HBCA attended the Coastal Commission hearing and supported the City of Oxnard. We won by revealing the County’s many contradictory positions as well as supporting the City’s jurisdiction over its Local Coastal Plan.  To date, the County and developer have not submitted the documents necessary for the City to responsibly review and process the project’s amendment application.  Their application to the City remains incomplete as of this date.

See Coastal Commission 9/2017 exhibits : PWP-4-CIH-16-0005-2-EDD(CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR)SEPTEMBER14, 2017 EXHIBITS https://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/2017/9/th10a/th10a-9-2017-exhibits.pdf

The Board of Supervisors awarded 2-year extensions of Exclusive Right to Negotiate (ERN) to the developer, Channel Islands Properties LLC, for three premium waterfront properties: 1) Fisherman’s Wharf parcels on Victoria Avenue until the end of 2022; 2)  X-3 and F/F-1 for the Casa Sirena Hotel replacement development approved by the Coastal Commission – the exact same parcels as the hotel replacement project on Peninsula and the promontory lot on Harbor Boulevard across from the Harbor Walk Complex until June 2020.  These valuable extensions were given to the developer at no cost. 
Unclear why both the hotel developer, Brighton Management and CIHP have rights to the same parcels. 
Reason is unknown for these actions.
HBCA spoke at the Board of Supervisor’s Meeting, wrote letters to the Supervisors and wrote a letter to the editor published in the Ventura Star describing the action as a “strange move” that made no business sense.

City notifies Coastal Commission that the County and Developer to day has not submitted an application for a Specific Plan and LCPA since the October 12, 2017 Coastal Commission hearing. 
County has cancelled several appointments regarding this matter (Dec 28 and Jan 3)

The County gave power of attorney to the developer, Tom Tellefson, to negotiate with the City on behalf of the County for a Local Coastal Plan Amendment. Our land use attorneys said this was an extraordinary action, one they had never seen before and it was an obvious conflict of interest.  Initially, the County denied they gave this authority but official documents prove otherwise.  HBCA then wrote articles in several media outlets publicizing the questionable business sense of this clear conflict of interest.  Note: this was done just a few days before Lyn Krieger announced her retirement.

On May 26, 2018, when questioned by the yacht clubs, Lyn Krieger defended this action by saying it        was only for the Fisherman’s Wharf area. HBCA pointed out that other changes requested to the HCI  Sections 17-24, specifically noted they were only for Fisherman’s Wharf. However,  the County did not  limit the elimination of yacht clubs and other harbor services to only Fisherman’s Wharf.

On July 10, 2018, after continued questioning from HBCA and the yacht clubs at a meeting with the Channel Islands Harbor Lessees Association, the County said the elimination of yacht clubs and other  harbor related services as a permitted use at the harbor was really a “mistake and unintended”.  Note: to  date (9/5/2018) the County has not rescinded this officially in writing.

On February 8, 2018, the Charrette findings were presented to the City of Oxnard at a Special Harbor Task Force by the Charrette participants.  Close to 300 members of the public attended.

On May 26, 2018, when questioned by the yacht clubs, Lyn Krieger defended this action by saying it        was only for the Fisherman’s Wharf area. HBCA pointed out that other changes requested to the HCI  Sections 17-24, specifically noted they were only for Fisherman’s Wharf. However,  the County did not  limit the elimination of yacht clubs and other harbor services to only Fisherman’s Wharf.

On February 6, 2018, the Board of Supervisors voted to allow Lyn Krieger to stay on as a part-time employee to oversee the unpopular Fisherman’s Wharf project by making her an exception to the Pension Reform Law (PETRA 2013) which only allows exceptions for “critically needed” positions for an emergency situation. Prior to this Board meeting, HBCA sent a pointed letter objecting to this action.  HBCA went to the meeting but the Board had moved the item to hours earlier than scheduled to avoid public comments.  HBCA then wrote an Op Ed published in the Ventura Reporter, calling the Board’s action a “strange move” and another bad business decision.

The County attempted to rename and reconfigure the land parcels designated for the Casa Sirena Hotel replacement project. This would give the developer of the Fisherman’s Wharf apartments a possible future project.  In reviewing the County’s Notice of Impending Development (NOID) for the hotel, HBCA uncovered these changes and questioned the legality of such changes with the Coastal Commission staff.  The Coastal Commission told HBCA they had also noticed the changes and had notified the County that such changes would require a Public Works Plan amendment.  This was important to ensure all future harbor land parcel changes go through the required public process.

At the Board of Supervisors meeting, the Harbor Department presented a report on the “Harbor’s Economic Impact on Ventura County”.  HBCA raised a concern that this report should have been provided to the public prior to the meeting.  The public has a right to review all documents prior to a meeting in order to prepare comments if needed.  This was a violation of the Brown Act and HBCA has written to the District Attorney to censure the Board of Supervisors for this action.  The District Attorney is now investigating this matter.

On July 10, 2018, after continued questioning from HBCA and the yacht clubs at a meeting with the Channel Islands Harbor Lessees Association, the County said the elimination of yacht clubs and other harbor related services as a permitted use at the harbor was really a “mistake and unintended”.  Note: to date the County has not rescinded this officially in writing.

The County, in Lyn Krieger’s letter of July 20^th to the City of Oxnard demonstrates the County’s intractability.  It repeats the request that the City’s Local Coastal Plan (LCP) be made to conform to its General Plan.  This is contrary to coastal law.  In the Coastal Zone, the LCP governs, not the General Plan, so if anything, the General Plan should be made to conform to the LCP.  The County also asked that the City process the LCP amendment within 90 days.

The City of Oxnard responds to the County’s letter of July 20^th.  In the letter, the City respectfully disagreed with certain characterizations identified in Krieger’s letter regarding “events that occurred, documents and information that have been provided, and the assurances and reassurances that were made.”  The City’s letter also said that the City had in cooperation and good faith, streamlined the process for the Developer and was unable to accept requests for further concessions in the LCP process.  The City also asserted its right and responsibility to identify and consider the environmental impact of the project, given its proposed size and scope.  It also stated it could not guarantee that it could conduct and complete its review within 90 days from the Developer’s submittal of a complete application.  Note the Developer has not filed a complete application to date.

HBCA met with the new Harbor Director, Mark Sandoval.  Mr. Sandoval said he would not change any projects that are as far along as Fisherman’s Wharf.  He said, “the project is Lyn Krieger’s project”.

Mr. Sandoval asked us what we wanted to see “changed” at the harbor.  Here is what we all need to be united in telling him:

1. Development that is consistent with the Coastal Act and is visitor-serving and harbor-oriented.
2. Going forward, what is needed is an updated Public Works Plan with a comprehensive Master Plan for the entire harbor.
3. Going forward, we would like to see a “change” to an open, transparent RFP (Request for Proposal) process at the harbor with open bidding for development that is not limited to apartment developers’ proposals. In addition, when the existing ERNs expire in a year and a half, an open rebidding process should be implemented.  Note: in the meeting Mr. Sandoval assured us that when the time comes for a rebidding process, it would be an open one.  HBCA said we believe in actions not rhetoric so we will observe his actions as the new Harbor Director and see what he does.

Harbor Department’s new Director sends letter to the City that contains several errors in fact and repeat arguments that the County has made for the past 2 years,  and demonstrating the County’s unwillingness to go through the City’s public LCPA process that has been streamlined for them.

1. the study done by the City of Port Hueneme, that is referred to in this letter does not support the claim that there is insufficient residential to support commercial/retail. That HR&A 2013 Study on page 29 clearly concludes “these results (for Port Hueneme) do not reflect a strong hotel/motel market that can absorb significantly more product.  Moreover, if such products were to be developed, both Ventura and Oxnard are superior locations for any additional inventory, because both cities have strong presence on the major tourist corridors as well as tourist infrastructure and services that are superior to those found in Port Hueneme.”
2. The letter asserts that working with developers over the past decades, the County has determined that for Fisherman’s Wharf  the only economic factor required by developers to make an investment is residential development.  This is not supported by any documents the County has been able to show given the fact that RFQ and RFP have clearly specified proposals require residential/apartment experience.
3. Though the harbor is an enterprise operation, so are the GSA Parks Department, Department of Airports and Health Care Agency – all are enterprise funds and the Harbor Department is only 1.9% of the total Enterprise Funds.
4. The City is under no obligation to amended its Local Coastal Plan. The Coastal Commission in October 2017 required the County to apply for one.  The County continues to avoid/delay going through the City process.  The tone of their series of letters implies this should be a “automatic” process.
5. The Harbor Department insists that it is the appropriate entity to approve all permits, if this is so, why have not the developers moved forward with the County’s permits?

The County/Harbor Department sends a letter to the City regarding the Fisherman’s Wharf project in response to the City’s August 6, 2018 letter.  

The letter attempts to characterize the County as wanting to work cooperatively with the City but implies only if the City agrees to process an amendment to its Local Coastal Plan to allow 400 apartments at Fisherman’s Wharf. The letter reiterates the same claims the County has maintained since 2016 (asking the City to conform its Local Coastal Plan to its General Plan, which in the coastal zone, is incorrect, rather the Local Coastal Plan supercedes both the General Plan and Harbor Public Works Plan).  The letter concludes if the City does not accede to the County’s demands, it will either seek assistance from the Coastal Commission or court of law to reach a resolution – signed by Lyn Krieger on Mark Sandoval’s stationery. 

The City of Oxnard responds to the County’s and Harbor Department’s letters of September 18^th and 19^th.   The letter states that since February 13, 2018 when the City notified the County and developer that their application for the Fisherman’s Wharf project was incomplete, the developer and/or its agents have failed to submit any additional documentation to change the incomplete status of the application.

The letter also states the City disagrees with “a number of the positions and narratives outlined in Mr. Sandoval’s letter.  The letter goes on to state that the County’s consultant Lyn Krieger’ letter includes “unhelpful rhetoric and threats of litigation or undefined Coastal Commission action if the City did not  “relent” and follow what Ms. Krieger stated was the direction of the Coastal Commission and Executive Officer of the Coastal Commission.  The letter goes on to say the Ms. Krieger’s position is inconsistent with what occurred at the October 12, 2017 Coastal Commission hearing.

The County responds to the City’s letter of September 26^th.  In this letter, Michael Powers, the County CEO, says it is their desire to continue to work through an agreeable process together.

It goes on to say the County “believe we need to work quickly to resolve the fundamental areas of disagreement we share regarding Harbor operations including maintenance and repair obligations, permitting authority, the equitable sharing of tax revenues necessary to fund services as well as the progress of important development projects critical to the revitalization of the beautiful Channel Islands Harbor.”  The County continues to pursue and pressure the City to give up its jurisdiction over a harbor that is within the City and continues to attempt to avoid any public disclosure of its development plan for the entire harbor.  The County prefers stealth amendments to its 32 year old Public Works Plan.  The new Harbor Director has also stated there no need for a Master Plan for our harbor, claiming the Public Works Plan is a living document.  No well-run business CEO would make such a statement to his shareholders.  The County agrees to meet with the City regarding their Harbor issues on November 16, 2018.

HBCA holds its annual fundraiser to pay for needed expert and legal counsel to effectively oppose the Fisherman’s Wharf project and ensure a more open, transparent development process at Channel Islands Harbor through an updating of the 32 year old Public Works Plan.

HBCA organized a Specific Planning Charrette led by a professional facilitator and attended by a cross section of 31 major local organizations.  The goal was to identify a set of alternative development criteria for the 400 apartment project at Fisherman’s Wharf.  A key finding identified the need for an updated Public Works Plan (PWP) and a comprehensive Master Plan for the entire harbor. 

the Charrette findings were presented to the City of Oxnard at a Special Harbor Task Force by the Charrette participants.  Close to 300 members of the public attended.

In a February 8, 2019 letter to the Harbor & Beach Community Alliance with copies to the County Board of Supervisors and Oxnard City Council, Mark Sandoval wrote “I also stated that if anyone other than myself or my staff was providing an update on Harbor development or operations, to take it with a grain of salt and understand the objective of the presenting organization.”

City of Oxnard (K. Mallory) sends Tom Tellefson a letter declaring the application incomplete.

This Letter from the City of Oxnard Planning Division identifies Project Questions/Clarifications regarding:

• Conformance with the Local Coastal Plan
• Project Density
• Traffic/Parking
• Visual Impact Analysis
• Hydrolic Modeling Results

This letter references the tentatively Scheduled April 22nd Public Workshop

County’s 4/12/19 Response to City’s Letter of 3/21/19

The County continues to insist that the the City simply rubber stamp the plan to replace the largest open space public, boater and visitor serving land in the harbor with a 4 story 400 unit apartment complex. 

THANK YOU TO ALL WHO ATTENDED!

PUBLIC WORKSHOP APRIL 22 2019

The public workshop was WELL ATTENDED!

See the following for details:

Click for more

April 22 2019 Gallery and Video

Click for all news about the Workshop: HERE
Or see:
April 22 2019 Workshop Gallery and Video

Scale Model presented at Neighborhood Council

Since 2016 HBCA has sent Public Information Requests to the County of Ventura for all the Architectural drawings of the Fisherman’s Wharf Project. The County failed to send us these drawings, once even denying they existed. In 2018 the new Harbor Director, Mark Sandoval wrote the drawings are “exempt” from public review. HBCA managed to obtain them another way. Using the developer’s own architectural drawings, HBCA created a Scale Model. For the first time, the public can actually see the scale and density of the Fisherman’s Wharf project. The public can see the County and Developer’s promotional renderings are misleading.

 UPDATE SUMMER 2019 Fresca II in Whale’s Tail HAS BEEN CANCELLED
It had been two years since the original announcement that Fresca II would be opening at the deteriorating Whale’s Tail restaurant building.  Finally, the Harbor Department confirmed they’ve agreed upon lease terms.  The terms will be submitted to the Board of Supervisors in January or February 2019 at the latest.  The terms should be publicly available at that time.  However, the Harbor Department was either unwilling or unable to identify the key factors on which their selection of Fresca II was based.  It is especially important for the public to understand how decisions are made in selecting a lessee for a specific harbor facility or service.  In the future, such factors should be made public at the time the County is requesting proposals, not after the selection has been made, and all proposals should be made public. This would be true transparency.

2nd City of Oxnard Public Meeting RE: LCPA

The SECOND public meeting was with the City of Oxnard’s Planning Commission. There are 5 members on the Commission. The meeting was anticipated to be sometime in June 2019 – but was delayed until August 22. The the result was the Planning Commission voted 5-1 to support the recommendation of Staff to Deny the Amendment and will now submit that recommendation to the City Council.

The public has supported the hotel replacement project since it was proposed in March 2016.  But County actions have continued to hold up the building of the hotel and it appears the project start will be delayed for at least another year or so. Here is an overview of the major delays.

First, the County granted Channel Islands Properties LLC (CIHP), the Fisherman’s Wharf apartment developer, an Exclusive Right to Negotiate (ERN) for the exact same land site as Brighton Management (the hotel developer for the proposed Hyatt Place Hotel). This ERN was used to pressure Brighton to allow space for CIHP’s “undetermined development project” on the same land parcels originally approved solely for the hotel. The County also did this to get the height variance granted to the hotel builders for the hotel for their anticipated apartment developer’s project on the Peninsula.  The County is also using this “height variance” as precedent for the Fisherman’s Wharf 400 apartment complex.

Second, the approved “hotel project design” requires the City to give up land for the hotel to meet its parking requirements and allow land space in the future for CIHP to build its “undetermined development project”.  The City supports the hotel project but without the County submitting an application for a “street vacation permit” (permit to use City land for hotel parking), the City is again unable to process their request for use of City land.  If the County or developer does not apply for this permit, there will be another delay because Brighton will be forced to redesign its hotel plan in an attempt to accommodate and allow space for the apartment developer’s (CIHP) “undetermined project”.  Parking is and will continue to be a problem on Peninsula Road with over 400 apartments, hundreds of condos and a popular community park competing for limited parking spaces.

Third, in December 2018, the Harbor Department found more rock revetment repair at the hotel site was required than originally estimated by the County. The Harbor Department has had almost 3 years to identify this problem. This is inexcusable incompetence or a deliberate delay tactic. We are told this could be an additional 6-month repair job.  However, before repairs can even take place, the old Casa Sirena Hotel must be removed so the repair work can be done from landside according to the Harbor Director.  This means Brighton would need to demolish the hotel first and then the revetment repair could start.  Demolition requires a City permit.   It now appears the hotel project will be delayed for at least another year or more (hotel replacement project was approved in March 2016).  This again reveals the hypocrisy in the County’s rhetoric on the urgent need for harbor revitalization.

Forth, October 2019 – The Harbor Director announced at a Neighborhood Council Meeting that plans have to be updated because of length of time since approvals. He later said the delay was due to

November 5, 2019 – Ventura County Board of Supervisors delay decision to extend the ERNs for X-3 and F/F-1 for CIHP but extend the deliverables deadline, this time from December 31, 2019 to March 31, 2020. and directed the staff to return to the Board with revised
amendments to the ERNs, if accepted by CIHP, that reflect such extensions and remove any requirement that CIHP wait until Fisherman’s Wharf project is under construction before providing deliverables under the ERNs.

3rd and final  City of Oxnard Public Meeting RE: LCPA

The THIRD and final meeting NOVEMBER 7th 2019 Special City Council Meeting  6PM, City Council heard Staff and Planning Commission reports. The Harbor Department and Developer  also presented  – and the PUBLIC MADE COMMENTS! 
The City Council voted to DENY THE AMENDMENT in support  ofStaff and The Planning Commission recommendations !

December 9th Harbor Director response to HBCA letter to Ventura BOS dated Dec 8 

December 12th   HBCA reply to  Harbor Director response dated Dec 9 2019