Tiki Archeology-The Trade Winds-Oxnard, Ca (Image Heavy) - General Tiki

B bigbrotiki Tiki Socialite Tiki Island, above the Silverlake Joined: Mar 25, 2002 Posts: 11621	B bigbrotiki Posted posted on Sat, Oct 3, 2009 12:20 AM Aaaah what a great post, TC at its finest. X-ept that Bongofury's opening post's pictures are all postage stamp size now. Oh well, nothing lasts: http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2009/sep/30/judge-rejects-bid-to-halt-wagon-wheel-demolition/ Judge rejects bid to halt Wagon Wheel demolition A Ventura County Superior Court judge on Wednesday ruled against an effort to stop the demolition of the historic Wagon Wheel Restaurant and Motel next to Highway 101 in Oxnard. A preservation group, the San Buenaventura Conservancy, wanted the court to halt the demotion of the old buildings and order the city of Oxnard to redo an environmental impact report on a developer’s planned $100 million makeover of the 64-acre property. The group argued that the city neglected practical alternatives to tearing down the structures, which is required under the California Environmental Quality Act. But Judge Glen Reiser said in his written ruling that the city — and attorneys for the developer Oxnard Village Investment LLC — showed that preserving and restoring the dilapidated buildings would create extra costs “sufficiently severe as to render it impractical to proceed.” Neither Susan Brandt-Hawley, the attorney for the San Buenaventura Conservancy, or Oxnard City Attorney Alan Holmberg had seen the ruling as of late Wednesday afternoon and would not comment on the judge’s decision. While the ruling was a victory for the city, he issued some caveats and chastised the city on several levels. Reiser said the city could not consider his decision as vindication for its conduct. The judge said the city had, in fact, violated CEQA and Mayor Tom Holden and another councilman had inappropriately ridiculed the conservancy’s viewpoint publicly during a hearing. The judge also said the city attorney, in Reiser’s court, apparently misrepresented the administrative record of the process. According to city estimates, it would cost $7 million to restore the old Wagon Wheel roadside attraction. Instead, the developer plans memorialize it in photographs and by incorporating pieces of it in a new transit center planned for the site. But the preservationists argued that the plan was akin to “drawing a chalk mark around a dead body.” In January, the city approved the plan, which entails razing the old motel, restaurant and bowling alley as well as taking a 171-space mobile home park and the other old industrial and commercial buildings. In their place, the developer plans to build about 1,500 homes, apartments and town homes, as well as commercial development and a transit center. About 225 homes would be affordable, some for very low-income families. Included in the plans are about 50,000 square feet of new mixed-use commercial buildings and possibly two 25-story high-rise apartment buildings. It was not immediately clear what Wednesday’s ruling meant for the conservancy’s effort to stop the demolition or whether the group would appeal the decision or sue the city on grounds it violated CEQA rules.

Aaaah what a great post, TC at its finest. X-ept that Bongofury's opening post's pictures are all postage stamp size now.
Oh well, nothing lasts:

http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2009/sep/30/judge-rejects-bid-to-halt-wagon-wheel-demolition/

Judge rejects bid to halt Wagon Wheel demolition

A Ventura County Superior Court judge on Wednesday ruled against an effort to stop the demolition of the historic Wagon Wheel Restaurant and Motel next to Highway 101 in Oxnard.

A preservation group, the San Buenaventura Conservancy, wanted the court to halt the demotion of the old buildings and order the city of Oxnard to redo an environmental impact report on a developer’s planned $100 million makeover of the 64-acre property.

The group argued that the city neglected practical alternatives to tearing down the structures, which is required under the California Environmental Quality Act.

But Judge Glen Reiser said in his written ruling that the city — and attorneys for the developer Oxnard Village Investment LLC — showed that preserving and restoring the dilapidated buildings would create extra costs “sufficiently severe as to render it impractical to proceed.”

Neither Susan Brandt-Hawley, the attorney for the San Buenaventura Conservancy, or Oxnard City Attorney Alan Holmberg had seen the ruling as of late Wednesday afternoon and would not comment on the judge’s decision.

While the ruling was a victory for the city, he issued some caveats and chastised the city on several levels. Reiser said the city could not consider his decision as vindication for its conduct.

The judge said the city had, in fact, violated CEQA and Mayor Tom Holden and another councilman had inappropriately ridiculed the conservancy’s viewpoint publicly during a hearing. The judge also said the city attorney, in Reiser’s court, apparently misrepresented the administrative record of the process.

According to city estimates, it would cost $7 million to restore the old Wagon Wheel roadside attraction. Instead, the developer plans memorialize it in photographs and by incorporating pieces of it in a new transit center planned for the site. But the preservationists argued that the plan was akin to “drawing a chalk mark around a dead body.”

In January, the city approved the plan, which entails razing the old motel, restaurant and bowling alley as well as taking a 171-space mobile home park and the other old industrial and commercial buildings. In their place, the developer plans to build about 1,500 homes, apartments and town homes, as well as commercial development and a transit center.

About 225 homes would be affordable, some for very low-income families. Included in the plans are about 50,000 square feet of new mixed-use commercial buildings and possibly two 25-story high-rise apartment buildings.

It was not immediately clear what Wednesday’s ruling meant for the conservancy’s effort to stop the demolition or whether the group would appeal the decision or sue the city on grounds it violated CEQA rules.

Post #486199 by bigbrotiki on Sat, Oct 3, 2009 12:20 AM