HBCA Assessed the Pros and Cons of Developer Presentations
HBCA Pros & Cons of Developer Proposals
HBCA assessed the 3 proposals for Fisherman’s Wharf by developing a list of Pros and Cons for each proposal. This assessment indicates Karls “Strawberry Village” offers the best opportunity to revitalize the harbor without long delays, maximize public access, and drive visitors to the harbor.
Overview of Pros and Cons of the 3 Proposals for Fisherman’s Wharf
Karls Strawberry Village
Karls Strawberry Village PROS
- Karls’ “Strawberry Village” will be a place of fun activities for families to bring their children and grandkids. The harbor has no wholesome fun place for kids and neither does Ventura Harbor. There are events but no place within Ventura County for families to repeatedly visit and enjoy with their kids for a few hours.
- Karls will be an affordable place to visit as it is free to all with open public access to the waterfront and best views.
- It will be a unique destination that would differentiate the harbor and be a promotional visitor and tourist driver.
- Karls initially said the project would include some residential for some of its employees but to avoid the Public Works Plan (PWP) and Local Coastal Plan (LCP) Amendments Processes and HCI re-zoning Requirements have said they will now not include any residential housing. This would mean the project could move forward without years of delay.
- The restaurants, shops, live exhibits, and boutique hotel will be owned and operated by Karls. Karls’ success does not depend on finding appropriate lessees nor on others’ operating abilities.
Other Pros to Note
- The “strawberry” theme will heighten and invigorate the promotional impact of Oxnard as the strawberry capital of the USA which will benefit local strawberry growers and open a new market for their product.
- As its first and flagship location in the USA, Fisherman’s Wharf is an important project for the company and would receive commensurate attention and effort from the company.
- The developer has a performance track record and financial capability to deliver on the proposal.
- Karls propose an exchange training program for employees to go to Germany and for their German employees to come to the USA to exchange knowledge.
- If the lease is not renewed at a future date, then repurposing the area would be more viable than the other proposals.
Karls Strawberry Village CONS
- The strawberry theme should integrate some nautical theme and concepts into their design plan – for example only, Strawberry Village by-the-Sea, Strawberry Village on the Wharf, logo of strawberry with sea captain hat and cob pipe, etc
- Since Karls is a German Company and this will be their first project in California and the USA, the company may not be familiar with the area’s building and safety code requirements and should retain a local company to work with them on design and building requirements, as well as an expert in Coastal development policies.
Mixed Use Development – Ashkar’s Pacific Heritage
Mixed Use Development – Ashkar’s Pacific Heritage PROS
- The developer has extensive experience in the County and strong development and financial credentials.
- The project includes a fresh fish market supplied by local fishermen and a Farmer’s market from local producers.
- The project concept includes a boutique hotel and amphitheater as well as dining, entertainment and shopping facilities.
Mixed Use Development – Ashkar’s Pacific Heritage CONS
- This proposed development must include residential for the “financial feasibility” of the project. This a familiar proposition to this community who said no to apartments for the past 5 years at this site.
What is also very concerning is Pacific Heritage fails to say how many apartments their “endeavor” will require. This is unacceptable. The number of units should be known before any support or Exclusive Right To Negotiate (ERN) is considered for this project.
- Because the proposal has residential as an essential element, the project will require Public Works Plan (PWP), Local Coastal Plan (LCP) and HCI Zoning Amendments. These processes, as has been seen, will take 5-7 years before any serious work and construction could start.
This means Fisherman’s Wharf would continue to sit empty and a deteriorating eyesore and safety liability for at least another 5-7 years. It could take a decade before this project is completed and operating.
- The big “benefits” of this project to the community (restaurant, entertainment, hospitality) are dependent upon an unknown “variety” of operators who will lease those facilities from the developer.
Given the number of retail shops, bars and restaurants already at the harbor, north and south of the bridge, and those coming soon at the new Hyatt Place Hotel and the revitalized Whale’s Tail, the question is how many more restaurants, bars and shops can this area support, especially since many of the residences are second homes? How many restaurants and shops are successful now?
- There are questions regarding the wide appeal this project would have as a destination and driver of visitors/tourists. There are also questions of the affordability of its proposed restaurants and shops to the communities outside of the harbor area and throughout Ventura County.
- Its mixed use plan is a conventional combination of commercial and residential nothing different from other harbor/waterfront developments to differentiate Channel islands Harbor. It is interesting to note that this proposal is very closely similar to the one Pacific Heritage submitted to Ventura Harbor in late 2016 but without residential for feasibility purposes. This shows this plan could be at any harbor and would not differentiate Channel Islands Harbor from other harbors.
Specialty Lifestyle Market Anchored Retail Center – Vallner & Litwak
Specialty Lifestyle Market Anchored Retail Center – Vallner & Litwak PROS
- The initial phase of this project does not require PWP, LCP and HCI zoning Amendments as there is no residential.
- Proposal shows generous public open spaces, an Amphitheater for events as well as restaurants and retail shops
- This developer has the experience and track record in the development of similar projects
Specialty Lifestyle Market Anchored Retail Center – Vallner & Litwak CONS
- The anchor specialty market is essential to the viability of this proposal.
There is no guarantee that the developer will attract a viable specialty market. Approving a project with an undetermined key element risks long delays and possibly the need to reissue a new RFP and start the proposal process over again – further delaying the revitalization of a deteriorated Fisherman’s Wharf.Adding to the risk of this project, is the concern that the mixed-use project on the vacant lot next to the Rite Aid near the intersection of Victoria/Channel Islands Boulevard, has been held up for several years as it has been unable to attract an appropriate specialty market needed for its approved project.
- The proposal also includes the idea of a “future Opportunity” to expand their development using some of the parking lot space for additional commercial/retail facilities or residential should the community approve.This appears to be a hedge/back up plan should the initial plan fail to be viable as initially proposed. This is a plan with future proposed conditions that may not be acceptable even now.
Once the initial phase of this project is built, this “future opportunity” puts the County and community in the difficult position of either rejecting expansion or finding other alternatives.
- The proposed project is not a compelling destination and driver of visitors/tourists. Plan is not exciting, offers a conventional development concept. It is also questionable as an affordable attraction with County-wide appeal.
In Case You Missed it
The video and link to submit feedback is on the Harbor Website.
Comments regarding the proposals will be accepted until October 3, 2022.
This is terrific! Thanks for providing this detailed analysis to the public. Is it posted on Nextdoor, so those who are so uninformed can learn the facts?
There should be a required percentage of local employment. Sounds like they are planning to bring German work force to Oxnard.
My understanding was that they would bring in their own team of course for design, build and launch prep but that they would be sourcing local Strawberries and employees – and they will do an exchange program for training
Thank you for providing information on all of the proposals. Our vote is to make the Harbor into something akin to what Ventura Harbor has: Several good restaurants, shopping, retail, fish markets, fishing, diving and tourist-related establishments and, if needed, a small number of residential allotments. To us the closest proposal mentioned would be “Specialty Lifestyle Market Anchored Retail Center – Vallner & Litwak”, so that takes our vote.
Thank you for providing the opportunity.
We have published a response that we feel addresses the concerns:
https://www.hbca.info/hbca-position-on-karls/
I think the Vallner and Litwak proposal offers the most reasonable time frame and more immediate public benefit.
We have published a response that we feel addresses the concerns:
https://www.hbca.info/hbca-position-on-karls/
You have missed several CONs for the Karl’s development. Noise for the residential areas located across the street and channel could be intolerable. If successful, which is doubtful, traffic could be more impacted than the traffic concerns from the previously proposed residential project. The Karls parks are tacky in appearance and do not fit in with the overall visioning process presented to the public over the last few years that integrates the entire harbor into a cohesive destination. Imagine a giant 3 story Strawberry installed instead if the current light house. Security is also a concern considering what has recently happened with fights at Knotts in Buena Park which resulted in temporary park closure. Wouldn’t Karls be more appropriate in a strawberry field near the freeway? Perhaps we need to look for additional alternatives to redevelop this parcel.
We have published a response that we feel addresses the concerns:
https://www.hbca.info/hbca-position-on-karls/
No to Karls Adventure Park at the Fisherman Wharf!
Is this really what you want:
https://youtu.be/QMww7zkpfr0
This is the worst possible choice for the Fishermans wharf property. I live very close to the site and I can tell you that the vast majority of my neighbors are against this use for the property. We were so excited with the initial visioning plan for the Harbor but were so surprised at Karls Adventure Park coming in at the end of the process that we did not believe that it would even be considered. How does a Karls Adventure Village tie into the harbor vibe at all that was presented by the initial visioning process that links the entire harbor into a cohesive destination. It now turns out that the Karl’s proposal was on the table years ago. Isn’t it interesting that it was never included in the visioning process. The harbor department has provided the responses from the public for the 3 proposals and 75% of the Karls responses are very negative. It feels like the entire visioning process was a sham and waste of money as the decision was a forgone conclusion. It is clear that public opinion had no bearing on the decision to ask for exclusive rights to negotiate with Karls.
I want to be able to walk to a destination that adds value to my life with dining, entertainment and shopping, I do no want to walk to a children’s amusement park with limited value for people who do not have kids. While you want to attract people from outside the area you also need to serve the needs of the people who live next door. I am not against this type of development, but it is not appropriate for the harbor. A Karls adventure park if built, should be built in the middle of a strawberry field near the freeway for access, not on the harbor near existing residential developments.
We all want a project that brings value to the entire community. The community rejected the apartment proposals due to traffic concerns, Karls will not only bring traffic but will also bring significant noise pollution to our neighborhood. I believe our property values will decline with such a project so close to our homes and apartments. Do the people in the apartments on Peninsula or the houses just across the street really want to be looking at, and hearing Karls? A Karls will be a place that is visited a few times and then most likely forgotten. How many times have you visited or revisited Lego Land or the old Santas Village in Lake Arrowhead?
A project modeled after Pike Place Market or Granville Island would really add value to the area and bring in much higher sustained revenue. A mini Knotts Berry Farm will not. Do the people coming to stay at the new Hyatt hotel want to get a slice of strawberry pie, a candle, or a jar of honey and have a ride on a small roller coaster, or spend the day at a place like Granville Island or Pike Place Market? Also, look at the security problems they have had at Knotts Berry Farm recently with the teenage crowd, we don’t need those challenges at our harbor. We need a destination that serves all of the local community as well as attract long term visitors from outside the area.
If we had a place with both high end dining as well as mid priced and reasonably priced stall type dining (like Granville), plus entertainment, and shopping we will attract people of all economic backgrounds who come back over and over again.
I am certain that the local residents that live around the Wharf area will stand up to fight this decision. We do not want a Karls Adventure Park at our harbor.
I urge the Harbor Department and the Board of Supervisors to reconsider this decision.
We have published a response that we feel addresses the concerns:
https://www.hbca.info/hbca-position-on-karls/