Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Planning commission calls for redesign, traffic study and fewer drive‑throughs at 760 S. Seward preliminary review
Loading...
Summary
At a preliminary review of a three‑building redevelopment at 760 South Seward, staff and the applicant sought early feedback; commissioners and about 10 public speakers urged a comprehensive traffic study, stronger freeway buffering, fewer drive‑throughs and architecture more consistent with Pierpont’s beach‑town character.
The Ventura Planning Commission on April 22 provided advisory feedback — but no formal decision — on a preliminary redevelopment proposal at 760 South Seward Avenue that would replace the long‑vacant Golden China site with three low‑rise buildings, including two drive‑through establishments and one quick‑serve or full‑service restaurant/retail space.
Staff associate planner Grant White framed the meeting as a “temperature check” at the applicant’s request: project 25‑0802 is a 3.37‑acre coastal‑zone proposal that would require a major design review, coastal development permit and use permit for the drive‑through uses. White told commissioners the application is still incomplete for technical studies; outstanding issues noted by staff and the Design Review Committee (DRC) include trash enclosures that must be integrated into building massing, inadequate required setbacks (drive‑through lanes proposed at about 10 feet from the southern property line vs. the 20‑foot standard), and potentially insufficient drive‑through queuing that could spill vehicles into on‑site circulation.
Tom Cohen, speaking for the applicant Ashton Development, said market research led the ownership to propose low‑rise, auto‑oriented uses compatible with the adjacent hotel and the site’s freeway adjacency. Cohen stressed the applicant is not seeking variances where avoidable and said the team plans to resolve conflicts with code (including trash enclosure placement and setback issues) before a formal application. “We’re here to solve those issues to come back with a fully compliant, to code, project,” Cohen said.
Public comment was heavily critical. About 10 speakers urged the commission to prioritize visitor‑serving, pedestrian‑oriented design in line with the Planned Commercial Tourist (PCT) designation and the city’s coastal goals. Bob Guthrie and Mark Serota both asked for a comprehensive traffic and circulation study that accounts for nearby and planned projects (Residence Inn, KB Homes, Vista Del Mar, Anastasia) and highlighted potential impacts on pedestrian and bicycle safety and tsunami evacuation routes. Several residents said the corridor already hosts many fast‑food outlets and asked the commission to push for fewer drive‑throughs and more imaginative, community‑oriented uses; Sherry Egbert (Midtown Ventura Community Council) framed the question as one of the city’s long‑term health and pedestrian safety priorities, citing air‑quality and idling concerns.
Commissioners’ advisory feedback largely aligned with public concerns: many recommended a robust traffic and circulation study that includes planned nearby development; stronger green buffering and native landscaping along the 101 to mitigate noise and air pollution; consolidating or reorienting buildings to create a safer, walkable cluster; and reducing the number of drive‑through lanes (several commissioners said one drive‑through or none would be preferable). Commissioner McCarty proposed an alternative concept: replacing one drive‑through with a cyclist‑ and pedestrian‑oriented “rad‑bar” (a cafe and rest stop for cyclists tied to the city’s active‑transportation goals) to help activate the site for visitors and residents and to connect to future bike lanes envisioned in the Active Transportation Plan.
Staff emphasized the project has not yet received an application completeness determination and that required technical studies (traffic, stormwater, CEQA/VMT) will be required before a formal decision hearing. The applicant acknowledged the DRC’s recommendations and said the team is open to design changes and will return with more details. No votes were taken; commissioners offered the comments as direction to the applicant and staff.
What’s next: The applicant will refine the project and complete technical studies; staff will require the traffic, VMT, stormwater and CEQA work prior to scheduling a formal decision hearing. Commissioners recommended that staff consider combining future review of the project’s in‑lieu context with the annual housing progress report to provide broader policy context.
