Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2004 0915 CC REG ITEM 10ACITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA City Council Meeting of IC %5`�DD ACTION: MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL ITEM I o. A. gY' Moorpark, Cailfo—rnia June 16, 2004 A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Moorpark was held on June 16, 2004, in the Council Chambers of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 7:21 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Brad Miller, City Engineer, led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, Millhouse, Parvin, and Mayor Hunter. Staff Present: Steven Kueny, City Manager; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; Kenneth Gilbert, Public Works Director; Mary Lindley, Community Services Director; Barry Hogan, Community Development Director; Cynthia Borchard, Administrative Services Director; Brad Miller, City Engineer; Captain Richard Diaz, Sheriff's Department; David Bobardt, Planning Manager; John Brand, Senior Management Analyst; Nancy Burns, Senior Management Analyst; Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk; and Maureen Benson, Deputy City Clerk. 4. PROCLAMATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS: A. City Manager's Monthly Report Mr. Kueny deferred the monthly report until later in the meeting to be included with Items 9.G. and 9.H. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT: Michele Berry, a Moorpark resident spoke in opposition to development near Gabbert Road and any changes to the General Plan. 00 -S,i 0 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 2 June 16, 2004 Will Whitaker, a Moorpark resident and business person, spoke in regard to Item 10.G. and urged the Council to approve staff's recommendation and start the CEQA mandated environmental review. He thanked the Council for correcting the procedural errors that had occurred. Mr. Whitaker went on to state he is saddened by the findings in a recent Grand Jury report about the city of Moorpark. Jennifer Diamond, a Moorpark resident, spoke in opposition to rezoning property near Gabbert Road and urged the Council to retain the five -acre parcels zoned for this rural farm area. Jayla Haxton, a Moorpark resident, spoke in opposition to the proposed Centex and Rasmussen developments, which would require the widening of existing Gabbert Road to comply with Ventura County Fire District requirements for additional housing in this area. She also spoke in opposition to the Hitch Ranch project, which would alter the existing characteristics of her neighborhood. Cynthia Hollister, a Moorpark resident, stated in view of the recent Grand Jury report, she would like to request the Council establish an independent committee to review the report during open meetings to alleviate any misconceptions concerning the city of Moorpark and to address the Grand Jury with a proper response. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, the City Council recessed to convene a meeting of the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. The time was 7:32 p.m. The City Council meeting reconvened at 7:34 p.m. 6. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: None. 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Councilmember Mikos invited the public to join her in an eight to nine mile hike in Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park on Saturday, June 19th from 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Councilmember Parvin complimented the Moorpark Police Department, Ventura County Fire Department personnel, City staff, and the public for organizing Moorpark's contribution to the Ronald Reagan Funeral and for ()00 25 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 3 June 16, 2004 graciously handling any inconveniences associated with this momentous event. 8. PUBLIC HEARING: A. Consider General Plan Amendment No. 2001 -05, Specific Plan No. 2001 -01, and Zone Change No. 2001 -02 for 1,650 Housing Units on 3,586.3 Acres Located Generally North of Moorpark College and State Route 118 on Land Immediately Outside City of Moorpark Municipal Boundaries, on the Application of North Park Village LP. (continued from May 19, 2004, with public hearing open) Staff Recommendation: Continue to take testimony in the open public hearing, and continue the agenda item with the public hearing open, to July 21, 2004. Mr. Bobardt gave the staff report. He introduced Ms. Dana Privitt, of Bontara Consulting who spoke about the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process; gave an overview of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared by her company; and discussed the findings in the EIR. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Bobardt clarified the number of acres contained in the proposed Specific Plan area to be 3,544, which does not include the offsite improvements, while the EIR looked at both areas, bringing the total acreage to 3,586.3; and stated the project site would add approximately 5.5 square miles to the existing land area of the City. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Montes stated, in October, the Council is scheduled to discuss what goes before the voters; there are a couple of possibilities including the entire package going before the voters for approval, or the City Council certifying the EIR and recommending that an Ordinance be placed on the ballot to approve everything else. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Bobardt explained the different slope categories contained in the acreage of the Specific Plan site. He stated the Hillside Ordinance applies to the development area; areas less than 20o slope do not fall under the provisions of the Hillside Ordinance; the amount of open space required ()00 2!5 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 4 June 16, 2004 to be dedicated for the project increases as development on 20 -35% and 35 -50% slope increases; and development on land over 50% slope would be prohibited unless there is a Development Agreement, which indicates that development is for a certain associated public benefit and that development is on isolated land forms. Mayor Hunter requested a summary, when this item returns in July, on how the developed portions of this site fit into each of the slope categories. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Bobardt confirmed the school and fire station sites are dedicated land only, and structures would not to be constructed as part of the project. Mayor Hunter stated the public hearing remains open. Kim Kilkenny, 680 Walnut Street, Moorpark, California, gave a presentation on the vision of the North Park Village, which is to create a family and recreation oriented community. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Kilkenny stated if the recycled water from Simi Valley becomes unavailable or cost prohibitive for the lake, the plan can be changed for the lake to be serviced by potable water; and in conversations with the Water Districts, the assurance is that if North Park makes the $6 million improvement to the water transmission line, which would only be made if there were a contractual guarantee, then there will be continued use of their water for some time into the future. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Kilkenny stated to assure the voters the lake and freeway interchange will be built, as will be detailed in the Development Agreement that they will pay to a City escrow account a minimum of $50,000 per home to ensure there would be cash on hand to build the interchange when 500 homes are built. He continued by stating there are other means to guarantee that funds are available up front, including bonding, formation of community facilities districts, and /or certain threshold dates established by the City in the sy 0 0.2460 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 5 June 16, 2004 Development Agreement to ensure that at the 501st building permit, the interchange will be operational. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Kilkenny stated the bulk of the land needed for the interchange is owned by Unocal; if there is a failure to negotiate a sale, the Development Agreement would require the City to acquire the land by eminent domain; and North Park Village, LP would pay the City for the land. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Kilkenny stated in his view, Caltrans will have to perform a separate EIR for the interchange. He also stated in meetings with Caltrans they are confident the EIR can be accomplished within the projected timeline for the project, since tax dollars will not be used, because North Park is willing to pay for the improvement. Councilmember Mikos stated she would like to see whatever Caltrans Agreement exists for this interchange. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Kilkenny clarified the lake will be filled with potable water and recycled water will be used for the landscaping; lake management is addressed in the EIR; and for more detailed questions he deferred to the lake expert who will testify at a future meeting. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Kilkenny stated they are still in discussions with the Moorpark Unified School District regarding the funding mechanism for construction of a facility on the 18 -acre school site. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Kilkenny stated Ventura County Fire Protection District has not made a request for funding for a fire station; and an analysis of the revenues can be discussed at a future meeting. Mayor Hunter requested staff make a note of this request for a future meeting, as Supervisor Judy Mikels has indicated this is the last fire station to be built for some time. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Kilkenny explained the Community Facility District (CFD) they propose 00 X6 1 • Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 6 June 16, 2004 would bridge the gap created by the Annexation Agreement between the expected tax revenue per parcel as opposed to the needed revenue per parcel by imposing an additional tax on the developed portion of the property so that each home would pay an additional $283 per year to the CFD to be turned over to the City for General Fund use; and this assessment will work just like the property tax system so that during property re- appraisals, structure improvements or upon change of ownership the tax would increase. In response to Councilmember Parvin, Mr. Kilkenny stated the traffic counts in the Collins /Campus Park area were performed at the beginning of the Moorpark Community College session, approximately two Septembers ago; and the Traffic Consultant will be present at a future meeting to discuss whether a new Traffic Study is needed due to the installation of the traffic signal at that intersection. In response to Councilmember Parvin, Mr. Kilkenny stated the Planning Commission did not specify who would be responsible for the maintenance of the 9 -acre lakeside park; however, the traditional approach would be for the City to be responsible. In response to Councilmember Parvin, Mr. Kilkenny stated they had met with residents in the Campus Hills area showing them exhibits of the berm and a cross section of their view toward the project area. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Kilkenny stated they have not yet been approached by the Ventura County Library District to mitigate their services. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Kilkenny stated a representative from British Petroleum, owner of the mineral rights on the property, has been contacted and others in his organization had previously been contacted regarding these public hearings. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Hogan stated the commercial site proposed for the project takes up approximately 6 acres and would be somewhat smaller than the center to be developed at Campus Park and Collins Drives. f F Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 7 June 16, 2004 In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Kilkenny stated their proposal is to annex the whole property into the city of Moorpark; they are suggesting the City Urban Restriction Boundary (CURB) line exclude the nature preserve to make it abundantly clear it can never be developed. Pat Miranda, a Moorpark Traffic Study and spoke in unless State Routes 118 and the lake does not provide the size of the project. resident, questioned the opposition to the project 23 are widened; and stated enough recreation area for Chip Johnson, a Moorpark resident, spoke in favor of the project; complimented the developer, Planning Commission and the public for their input; and stated he wants this project to get to the voters as soon as possible. Lyle Penington, a Moorpark resident, spoke in favor of the project stating the developer is wonderful and has built fantastic developments in the past; this project has great amenities; and the best benefit is the mitigation to handle traffic. John Chaplin, a Moorpark resident, spoke in opposition to the project and criticized the areas of truck traffic, a gas station on a residential corner near Campus Park, and cramming more retail between Starbucks and McDonalds at the corner of Spring Road and New Los Angeles Avenue. He further stated developers seem to do whatever they want in Moorpark; and some Councilmembers were elected on a managed growth platform, but he wonders if Moorpark has the best politicians money can buy. He ended by stating no houses should be built until the State widens the freeways. Mayor Hunter chided Mr. Chaplin on accusing the Council of misconduct. John Dyke, a Moorpark resident, spoke in favor of the project; complimented the developer on the many amenities the project offers; and acknowledged their willingness to make changes requested by the Planning Commission and the public. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paqe 8 June 16, 2004 James Carpenter, a Moorpark resident, spoke in favor of the project as the best he has seen. He stated the developer has made many changes at the request of the public; it is unfair to make North Park mitigate all of the traffic problems; and he wants a chance to vote on the development. Scott Mosher, representing the Moorpark Chamber of Commerce, 225 West Los Angeles Avenue, Moorpark, stated the Board is very supportive of this well - designed development, which provides amenities and preserves open space. He stated North Park supports this community; and he has visited Otay Ranch in Chula Vista, which is one of their quality projects where attention to detail and responsiveness to the needs of the community are evident. Thomas Duck, a Moorpark resident, spoke in opposition to the project outlining the non - benefit of incompatibility with this community. He asked what will happen to the fire station planned for Campus Park and Collins Drive if a fire station is situated in North Park; what happens to the school site, since it will not be needed when the school in the Pardee development is opened; and is the lake deep enough and available to all citizens? Mr. Duck requested the Council and the people of Moorpark study the project carefully. Janet Murphy, a Moorpark resident, spoke in opposition to the project and forewarned of its negative effects on the community, if approved. She stated she had formed a nonprofit organization called Save Open Space Santa Susana Mountains to oppose development and to preserve land in the Santa Susana Mountains. Lisa Leal, a Moorpark resident, complimented Mr. Kilkenny's presentation as answering many questions. She stated the project improved after the Planning Commission meetings; the developer is open to change; the amenities are great offerings to all citizens; and 750 of the project will be a nature preserve. Sheri Harris, a Moorpark resident, asked the Council to remember why they chose Moorpark as a place to live. She described the Country Days Parade on High Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 9 June 16, 2004 Street with its large trees and quaint buildings as one reason she decided to move here. She stated the North Park presentation is lovely, but asked if the lake is more beautiful than the rolling hills? She continued by stating she would prefer not to develop this property, but if it is approved for development, then make sure the freeways are widened prior to building the homes. She recommended the Council visit Valencia to see what out -of- control growth can do. Linda Shoshino -Cruz, a Moorpark resident, expressed concerns regarding the lake and the Homeowner Association fees associated with water prices, the maintenance of the lake, and liability insurance costs. She spoke about the impacts to State Routes 118 and 23; and the fact that the existing infrastructure cannot support this project. Randy Griffith, a Moorpark resident and participant in a study group of the EIR, who has also attended the Planning Commission hearings, stated in his daily commute to work, he observes the increased traffic in the area. He continued by stating the traffic cannot be mitigated to less than significant; improvements at Collins Drive and the newly proposed interchange will only alleviate traffic in that area; and asked what about the overall regional traffic situation? Mr. Griffith further stated under CEQA, overriding considerations must be taken into account; there is no regional transportation plan in place; and he suggested the City wait until a plan is implemented and the infrastructure is in place to handle the impacts. Tim Rosevear, a Moorpark resident, spoke in opposition to the project and recommended keeping the current zoning for ranch homes. He stated he works in the Budget Department of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority where he has been working with the repercussions from the State of California taking away over a billion dollars of transportation funding for Los Angeles County; funding for expansion of State Routes 118 and 23 has been deferred for seven to 15 years due to State budget constraints; the proposed developments in Simi Valley on Runkle Ranch, Big Sky Ranch and in other canyons, along with the North Park development here in Moorpark Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 10 June 16, 2004 will add thousand of homes and associated car trips to the already congested freeways; the North Park project must be required to mitigate traffic congestion before building one home; and he encouraged the Council to vote "No" on the project. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Traffenstedt summarized 11 Written Statement cards in favor of the project from Armando Aguirre, Flo Carvalho, Chris Childers, Rosalie Gehres, Mark Grendy, Jerry Grote, Cathy Heron, William Kamp, Vicki Koch, Tove LaRusso, and Gary Lowenberg including comments that the project it is well planned and has many amenities; and four Written Speaker cards in opposition to the project from Gayle Bruckner, Michele Fasoline, Sunshine Gray, and Nicole Hatcher including comments to keep the community small and expressing concerns regarding increased traffic. She stated copies of the statement cards would be provided to the Council, as the public hearing remains open. Mr. Kilkenny stated the lake would be open to the public; the City can choose to place a fire station at Collins Drive in the Campus Park area instead of in North Park; the air quality will not be polluted with toxic emissions; Caltrans' construction of the freeway interchange would not be delayed until the widening of State Route 118; and many acres of public parkland are being dedicated. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Kilkenny stated the speakers' concerns about regional traffic, especially on State Routes 118 and 23 will be addressed at a future meeting; and ultimately, the solutions to the problems with the freeway system are the responsibility of the State. Councilmember Mikos stated, at future meetings, she would like more information on: 1) The various approvals required for this project and which agency or entity is responsible for that approval, possibly formatted in a table or grid; 2) The Hillside Ordinance; 3) How a Development Agreement works; 4) Whether this project violates the Hillside Ordinance and if it does, how would the development look if the Hillside Ordinance were not violated; 5) Impacts to the agricultural land to the west, which was part of Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 11 June 16, 2004 the original Hidden Creek project, if this North Park project is approved and those lands ask for a similar density; 6) What does it mean to have a program EIR, as opposed to some other kind of EIR; 7) What happens if some constraints are identified after the approval of the program EIR; and 8) Who pays to move or build a new conservatory at the college or is the offer for just the site. Councilmember Mikos stated the old Hidden Creek project, approved by City Council, was overturned by a referendum of the voters and at the same time the Save Open -Space and Agricultural Resources (SOAR) ordinance was passed by the voters, which now gives the public the opportunity to vote on future projects like North Park. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Kilkenny stated the freeway interchange cannot be constructed before the project, as it would cost $25 million and take 3 -years to build; and the interim improvements on Collins Drive should enhance the area immediately. Mayor Hunter stated the focus of the July 21st meeting will be on traffic, public facilities, and other EIR topics and tonight's questions should be focused on the basic infrastructure. Mayor Hunter requested staff invite representatives from Moorpark Municipal School District, Ventura County Fire Protection District and any other experts from the County to future meetings; begin each meeting with a summary; and then proceed to answer the questions raised at this current meeting. Councilmember Mikos asked staff to consider whether there is an overlap in traffic mitigations for Collins Drive with the M &M Development for the gas station and commercial center in the Campus Park area; and how the mitigations are performing. Councilmember Millhouse stated it was helpful to listen to the testimony; hear the facts; and he is looking forward to intelligent discussions in the future. f;60 2.067 ` Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 12 June 16, 2004 MOTION: Councilmember Mikos moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to continue the agenda item with the public hearing open, to July 21, 2004. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, the Council recessed. The time was 10:11 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 10:25 p.m. AT THIS POINT, in the meeting, due to the late hour, Mayor Hunter announced that the Council should consider reordering of the agenda according to Council rules, and recommended the Council proceed through the agenda as written. CONSENSUS: It was the consensus of the Council to proceed with the agenda as written. 9. PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION: A. Consider Whether Appliance Sales, Distribution and Warehousing are Commercial Uses in Compliance with the Existing SDI Development Agreement for the Land Located on the East Side of State Route 23, Immediately North and South of New Los Angeles Avenue (Lots 1 and 2 of Tract 5004). (continued from June 2, 2004) Staff Recommendation: Find that the distribution use is not within the uses of Section 6.k. of the Development Agreement and that the distribution use is inconsistent with the General Commercial land use and the CPD zone. Mayor Hunter announced, "Since the last meeting where this matter was considered, several events have occurred with regard to the lawsuit between Mr. Selleck and SDI, the prior owners of this property. Not withstanding those events, there still remain issues which may necessitate my participation in that lawsuit, as a witness. Accordingly, while I do not have a legal conflict of interest that would prohibit my participation this evening, I nevertheless feel compelled to recuse myself to avoid any appearance of impropriety or bias." AT THIS POINT in the meeting, Mayor Hunter left the meeting. The time was 10:37 p.m. Mr. Hogan gave the staff report. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 13 June 16, 2004 In response to Councilmember Millhouse, Mr. Hogan agreed that this meeting is to provide guidance to the applicant; if the Council vote remains tied, the applicant can still submit an application and go through the process, on to the Planning Commission and then possibly to Council by October. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Hogan stated such an application would be reviewed for consistency with the commercial use and whether the site plan is in compliance with the standards of the Commercial Zone; if the site plan meets the zoning requirements, but the use does not, staff would find the use not to be allowed; then an appeal could move to the Planning Commission; and ultimately on to City Council. He ended by stating, if Council feels the use is commercial, the request must still meet the Commercial Standards as they exist today; and at this point, the applicant could file for Amendments to the Commercial Standards. Chuck Cohen, of Weston Benshoof LLP, 2801 Townsgate Road, Thousand Oaks, California, stated he continues to respectfully disagree with staff's interpretation; he understands the parameters as described by staff; and it is his understanding that they would not have to return to Council with a formal request in advance of the application for a determination on the use. Mr. Montes stated the applicant could appeal to the Planning Commission if an application is submitted and deemed to be not complete, because the use is not consistent with the Development Agreement. Mr. Hogan expressed concern with that process, since if staff recommends a denial of the application, they will not pursue any detailed review of the project, which would then move on to the Planning Commission under the applicant's appeal. He continued by stating if the Planning Commission concurs with the denial and the applicant appeals to the Council, there will be a full -blown project presented without any Conditions of Approval or CEQA. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Hogan stated there is nothing to prevent the applicant from filing a General Plan Amendment at the same time as this 9 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark. California Paae 14 June 16, 2004 project; however, it would not come before Council until next year, possibly in January or February, unless Council waives rules for allowing more than two GPA preapplication filings in a year. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Hogan confirmed that in the absence of a GPA filing, staff would continue to find this application inconsistent, incomplete, or would recommend for denial. Tom Schlender, President of Warehouse Discount Center, 774 Wildwood Avenue, Thousand Oaks, referenced a letter sent to Council indicating changes in square footage of the store and the size of the building to accommodate parking requirements. Councilmembers Mikos stated the letter Mr. Schlender is referencing was received at 6:00 p.m. today; she has not had time to review the material; and does not feel that receiving something this late is the right way deliberate. Councilmember Harper concurred with Councilmember Mikos and stated he had not had a chance to thoroughly review the material. In response to Councilmember Harper, Mr. Hogan stated the material submitted is closer, but still does not conform to the zoning requirements. He continued by stating in response to the applicant's attorney who spoke at the June 2nd meeting, staff at Council's direction, is reviewing the parking ordinance; the City does not have a parking standard for furniture stores or appliances stores; the applicant would still have to meet the coverage requirement; however, staff has not analyzed this new material, since it was received late today. Mr. Schlender stated they have reduced the square footage well under the limit required by the SDI Development Agreement; they have tried to adjust the parking to accommodate any possible future tenant use; and asked, if they meet the requirement for parking, would that be satisfactory to the Council. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Hogan stated staff did not have any prior notice of this letter; he d �;r'i 0 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 15 June 16, 2004 had corresponded via email with Mr. Cohen to answer some questions yesterday and this morning; and there has been no dialogue between the applicant and staff since the last meeting. Councilmember Mikos stated she cannot make a decision without time to review the new material and to allow staff the time to consider it as well; and she has not heard anything at this meeting to cause her to change her mind. Councilmember Harper stated staff needs time to analyze this new information and suggested the item be continued. Mr. Hogan stated the Council has directed staff to look at the Entitlement and Use Ordinances, which have already been before the Planning Commission and will be presented to the Council at their July 7th meeting; the question remains, as to whether this use is proposing something to be considered in a Commercial Zone; if the Council decides it is a permitted use during the July 7th discussion of the Ordinances, this use could be included in a request for the Planning Commission's consideration; then the Planning Commission could perhaps proceed with a requirement for a Commercial Development Permit; however, the parking and coverage issues would still remain. Councilmember Millhouse stated the applicant should move forward with an application and go through the process. MOTION: Councilmember Millhouse moved and Mayor Pro Tempore Parvin seconded a motion to find the distribution use within the uses allowed in Section 6.k. of the Development Agreement; the proposed distribution use consistent with the General Commercial Land use and Commercial Planned Development Zone; and instructed staff to take an application if one is submitted. Councilmember Mikos argued that this motion would approve the use as consistent with Section 6.k. and she cannot do that. Councilmember Harper stated he is very reluctant to undercut staff's opinion on this issue; and Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 16 June 16, 2004 recommended a continuance to look at the more global issue of the zoning ordinance itself. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Parvin, Mr. Montes reiterated the process this application would take if it were denied, no CEQA was performed, and no Conditions of Approval were applied. He further stated the Council could, upon appeal, decide to approve the use and refer the item back to staff to complete their analysis, which is not the typical application process. The motion failed by tie voice vote 2 -2, with Councilmembers Harper and Mikos dissenting, and Mayor Hunter absent. Councilmember Millhouse asked a point of procedure on the vote, in regard to Section 8.5 of City Council Rules of Procedures Resolution No. 2003 -2102, as to whether this is actually a tie vote since the Mayor is not really absent. Mr. Montes stated the Mayor has absented himself and any other interpretation would have been "a race to the mike" where those Councilmembers in opposition would have been rushing to make their motion prior to the Councilmembers in favor. He continued by stating the tie vote results in a continuance unless the four Councilmembers determine to do something else. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Mikos seconded a motion to continue this item referring the matter back to staff to work with the applicant to see if there are any modifications to bring the project into conformance with the zoning and the General Plan. Mr. Kueny recommended scheduling this for the second meeting in July to allow staff time to work with the applicant and present all options. The motion carried by voice vote 3 -1, with Councilmember Millhouse dissenting, and Mayor Hunter absent. AT THIS POINT in the meeting, Mayor Hunter returned to the meeting. The time was 11:13 p.m. ()F X02 7 2 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 17 June 16, 2004 B. Consider Teen Council Appointments. Staff Recommendation: Make a minimum of seven and a maximum of eleven appointments to the Teen Council for a one - vear term to end on June 30, 2005. Ms. Traffenstedt gave the staff report. Mayor Hunter stated this is a difficult, but enjoyable responsibility to review the applications and see the wide variety of expertise and quality of young adults in Moorpark. Councilmember Millhouse stated he has come to know several of the candidates personally through his involvement in youth sports programs and would like to recommend Kaitlin Priebe, Lauren Ormsbee, Lindsay Pogemiller, Jordann Schoonover, Jon Lamberson, and Taylor Olmstead. Councilmember Harper stated one of his daughters had served two terms on Teen Council and reported it to be a positive experience. MOTION: Mayor Hunter moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to waive rules to allow all eleven nominations in one vote. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Traffenstedt stated there were no speakers. MOTION: Mayor Hunter moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to appoint Aryan Aziz, Kelsey Butzer, Brianna Corzine, Taylor Fernandez, Paul Jafar, Jon Lamberson, Roxanna Moradi, Sergio Pacheco, Hilary Pemberton, Allyson Rueckert, and Gregory Smith to serve on the Teen Council for a one -year term ending June 30, 2005. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. C. Consider Award of Agreements to Provide Dial -A -Ride Paratransit Services to Senior Citizens and Persons with Disabilities. Staff Recommendation: Award a contract to MV Transportation Inc. for paratransit services and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement. Mr. Brand gave the staff report. () V it 2, / 3a Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 18 June 16, 2004 In response to Councilmember Parvin, Mr. Brand stated staff has received a few complaints regarding the switch in dispatch location; MV Transportation's headquarters is in northern California in the East Bay with a local office in Newbury Park; and he has called other communities served by MV Transportation. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Traffenstedt stated that there were no speakers. Mayor Hunter stated he can support staff's recommendation since the staff report notes MV Transportation, Inc. is a national firm specializing in this type of service; and over the course of three years will save the City $2,000. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Millhouse seconded a motion to award a contract to MV Transportation Inc. for paratransit services and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. D. Consider City of Moorpark Home Buyer Program and Approving Proposal for Services Associated with the City's Home Buyer Program (Workshop Presentations, Spanish Translation, Application Review, Counseling, Loan Packaging). Staff Recommendation: 1) Adopt general program guidelines per the agenda report; and 2) Approve proposal from Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation (CEDC) for Home Buyer Services, with exact costs to be charged per Cost of Services a schedule, estimated to total $34,250 for June 2004 -May 2005. Authorize the City Manager to sign Agreement, subject to City Manager and City Attorney final language approval. (Staff: Nancy Burns) Ms. Burns deferred the staff report due to the late hour. Mayor Hunter asked for comments from the Affordable Housing Committee members. Councilmember Mikos, a member of the Community Development /Affordable Housing Committee, stated it would be helpful for the program to use dollar figures o-00274 Xd Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 19 June 16, 2004 for the resale price to be charged to the low income buyer. Mr. Kueny concurred and stated the agenda report is slightly misstated in that the intent would be that the subsequent buyer would be charged consistent with what was charged to the original buyer, adjusted for time and not just with the change in the median income. He clarified the adjustments in dollar figures would be for example: • Home selling at market value of $400,000; • Qualified buyer can only afford $180,000, making a difference of $220,000 to become the second trust deed, which according to the plan would require no payment or interest charges; • House sells at market value of $600,000 with the First not paid down, then the $180,000 is subtracted and the Second of $220,000 is subtracted so there is $200,000 in inflation based equity in the house; • Original buyer can only get a portion of the $200,000 based upon the median income, i.e. if based upon 50/50 would get $100,000; and • Next buyer gets a $210,000 First based on new median income, their Second is much larger and carries over in the same fashion. Councilmember Millhouse stated a chart is a good idea. Councilmember Mikos stated she is very much in favor of this program and has referred citizens to Ms. Burns. In response to Councilmember Parvin's request for more information regarding the lottery to be held on July 8th, Ms. Burns stated the City will handle the lottery with Councilmember participation; home purchasers do not need to be present during the lottery; City employees have expressed an interest in participating; she believes the guidelines will not allow family and staff of Cabrillo to participate; and staff can clarify this at Council's direction. In response to Councilmember Parvin's request that this disclaimer be put in writing, Ms. Burns stated 000275 ` Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 20 June 16, 2004 there will be an affidavit to sign indicating all information provided is accurate; there will be considerable review of documentation in regard to address, years of residency, and income; and this documentation could include relationships as well. In response to Councilmember Parvin, Ms. Burns stated, in regard to CEDC's mailings, City of Moorpark residents have first preference. She went on to describe the three categories of the lottery with the first being City of Moorpark residents, the second being the people who work in the City of Moorpark, and the third everyone else. Mr. Kueny stated staff would prefer direction and suggested an employee or contract employee of CEDC or National Housing Services of America (NHSA) would not be eligible; however, a relative could be eligible, but it must be disclosed, so staff can independently verify during the application processing. Councilmember Parvin stated she would be more comfortable with that process. Mayor Hunter stated he would like to go a step further and articulate the rules, since he shares Councilmember Parvin's concern regarding the perception of fairness, and above all, objectivity in this process. He recommended employees and family members, of contractors, subcontractors, and employees of the City should not be eligible to participate, since in all fairness, if the employees of the development company and their family members are excluded, it seems only fair and reasonable that City employees and their family members also be excluded. Councilmember Parvin concurred stating she wishes to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest. Mayor Hunter stated this is the only way to insulate the City from criticism. In response to Mr. Kueny, Mayor Hunter stated Councilmembers and Commissioners would also be included in the group excluded from participating. 000276 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 21 June 16, 2004 Councilmember Harper stated he would hate to penalize someone because they happen to be a relative of a City employee who has no influence over the selection process and works in a completely different department. Mr. Kueny suggested moving forward with this item to find occupants and buyers for the first seven homes and the subject Councilmember Harper is addressing be referred to the Affordable Housing Committee for review for future home lotteries. Mayor Hunter stated he would like to provide sufficient direction to allow staff to proceed even though this is not an all inclusive list and obviously contingencies are going to arise that cannot be foreseen. He continued by stating Councilmember Harper's point is well stated, and perhaps it is unfair to exclude family members of City employees, but none - the -less, his position remains the same. He would like to include them, but there are so few of these units available, in order to be completely free from any criticism, they have to exclude not only City employees but family members. Councilmember Mikos, stated she thought Mr. Kueny was suggesting that for this first seven homes exclude all those the Mayor is describing, but then have the Affordable Housing Committee study if there is a way to allow City employees and their families for future lotteries, or find some middle ground. She concurred with Councilmember Harper, that some people who work for the City may need help just like others. Mayor Hunter asked if this would not be changing the rules by handling this first set of homes differently than the next. He stated in order to remain as objective as possible, even if this is referred to the Affordable Housing Committee, he is unalterably opposed to allowing those listed to participate. Councilmember Millhouse concurred with Councilmembers Harper and Mikos in regard to sending this to the Affordable Housing Committee to explore the possibilities for future lotteries. 0002`!'7 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 22 June 16, 2004 Councilmember Mikos stated they cannot wait to decide on these seven homes. Councilmember Harper concurred and recommended moving forward with the first seven homes and refer the possibility of including others in future lottery pools to the Affordable Housing Committee. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Traffenstedt stated that there were no speakers. In response to Councilmember Mikos, Mr. Kueny stated that a non - occupant or co- borrower would not be allowed to sign a note; however, the applicant can receive a gift for a portion of the down payment. MOTION: Councilmember Mikos moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to approve staff's recommendation with the exception that for the first round of seven homes, City staff and their relatives, Councilmembers and Commissioners and their family members, CEDC employees and their family members, developers and affiliates and their family members, all be excluded from participation in the lottery and to refer back to the Affordable Housing Committee the possibility of adjusting for some middle ground or any other modifications for eligibility for future lotteries. The motion carried by 3 -2, Mayor Hunter and Councilmember Parvin dissenting. E. Consider Resolution Approving a Negative Declaration for the City's Proposed New Corporate Yard. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2004 -2205. Mr. Gilbert deferred the staff report. In response to Mayor Hunter, Mr. Gilbert stated there had been no responses to the comments on stamped page 4 of the agenda report. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Traffenstedt stated that there were no speakers. MOTION: Councilmember Millhouse moved and Councilmember Parvin seconded a motion to adopt Resolution No. 2004 -2205. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. () () 0?'0 8 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 23 June 16, 2004 F. Consider the Creation of an Ad -Hoc Committee of the Moorpark City Council, Pertaining to the Proposed Expansion of the Three Grimes Canyon Sand and Gravel Quarries and to Meet with Representatives of the City of Fillmore City Council. Staff Recommendation: Appoint two Councilmembers to serve on the ad -hoc committee and direct staff to send a letter to the City of Fillmore inviting participation by two of its Councilmembers. Mr. Hogan deferred the staff report. Councilmember Millhouse volunteered to serve on the committee. In response to Councilmember Parvin, Mr. Hogan stated staff would not know where the meetings would take place until they talk with the City of Fillmore. Councilmember Parvin also volunteered to serve on the committee. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Traffenstedt stated that there were no speakers. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Parvin seconded a motion to appoint Councilmembers Millhouse and Parvin to serve on the Grimes Canyon Sand and Gravel Quarries Expansion Proposal Committee. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. AT THIS POINT in the meeting Mayor Hunter stated the next two items would be heard concurrently. G. Consider Resolution Adopting an Operating and Capital Improvements Budget for the City of Moorpark for the Fiscal Year 2004 -2005. (continued from May 26, 2004) Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2004 -2206. ROLL CALL VOTE REQUIRED H. Consider Mission Statement, Priorities, Goals and Objectives for Fiscal Year 2004/2005. (continued from May 26, 2004) Staff Recommendation: Consider the priorities, goals and objectives. '`;l9 Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Paae 24 June 16, 2004 Mr. Kueny stated the changes discussed at the Special City Council meeting of May 26, 2004, have been incorporated into the budget. In response to Mayor Hunter, Ms. Traffenstedt stated that there were no speakers. Mayor Hunter recommended, due to the late hour, that priorities, goals and objectives be continued. MOTION: Councilmember Millhouse moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 2004- 2206, approving the fiscal year 2004/05 budget; and 2) Continue Item 9.H. to July 7, 2004. The motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. 10. CONSENT CALENDAR: MOTION: Councilmember Millhouse moved and Councilmember Parvin seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. A. Consider Approval of Minutes of Special Meeting of Ma 19, 2004. Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes. B. Consider Approval of Warrant Register for Fiscal Year 2003 -2004 - June 16, 2004. Manual Warrants Payroll Liability Warrants Regular Warrants 116331 116332 - 116336 $ 15,758.29 $ 2,645.28 116337 - 116419 & $ 36,106.77 116420 - 116432 $ 611,188.94 Staff Recommendation: Approve the warrant register. C. Consider Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement with Vavrinek, Trine, Day & Co., LLP, for City and Agency Audit Services for Fiscal Years 2003 -04, 2004 -05 and 2005 -06. Staff Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to renew the agreement. D. Consider Resolution Approving Loan Agreement between the Citv of Moorpark and the Moorpark Redevelopment s Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 25 June 16, 2004 Agency. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2004 -2207. ROLL CALL VOTE REQUIRED E. Consider Resolution Establishing the Appropriation Limitation for Fiscal Year 2004 -2005 for the City of Moorpark at $17,494,629. Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 2004 -2208. F. Consider Contract Extensions for Sunridae Landscape Services, Inc. and Venco Western, Inc. for Landscape Maintenance Services. Staff Recommendation: Approve one -year contract extensions including Consumer Price Index adjustments with Sunridge Landscape Services, Inc. and Venco Western, Inc. for landscape maintenance services as described in the agenda report and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendments on behalf of the City. G. Consider Rescinding Action Approving the Removal of Five Pepper Trees on High Street. Staff Recommendation: Rescind the Council's February 4, 2004, action to remove five Pepper trees on High Street and implement ongoing maintenance procedures, and direct the City Manager to execute a contract with a qualified consultant(s) to prepare a Tree Management Plan and environmental report as outlined in the agenda report. H. Consider Resolution Designating Cedarpine Lane to be a Through Street in the Vicinity of Shady Point Drive, and Directing the Placement of a Stop Sign at the Shady Point Drive Entrance Thereto. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2004 -2209. I. Consider Annual Review of Development Agreement Established in Connection with Residential Planned Development Permit No. 97 -1, a 312 -unit Apartment Project Located on the West Side of Moorpark Avenue, South of Park Crest Lane and North of the Arroyo Simi (Archstone Communities /Pacific Property Company). Staff Recommendation: 1) Accept the Community Development Director's Report and recommendation that, on the basis of substantial evidence, Pacific Property Company ahs complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the agreement; and 2) Deem the annual review process complete. }0� 2SI Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California PaQe 26 June 16, 2004 J. Consider a Resolution Calling and Giving Notice of the Holding of the General Municipal Election to be Held on Tuesday, November 2, 2004, for the Election of Certain Officers of the City and Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Ventura to Consolidate said Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election on said Date, and a Resolution Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Ventura to Permit the County Clerk to Render Services to the City of Moorpark for the General Municipal Election and to Canvass the Returns of the General Municipal Election. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2004 -2210 and Resolution No. 2004 -2211. 11. ORDINANCES: None. 12. CLOSED SESSION: Mr. Kueny requested that the City Council go into closed session for discussion of one case under Item 12.B. on the agenda. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Mikos seconded a motion to adjourn to closed session for a discussion of one case under Item 12.B on the agenda. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. The time was 11:45 p.m. B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to Subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code: (Number of cases to be discussed - 4) Following a brief recess, the City Council reconvened into closed session at 11:52 p.m. Present in closed session were Councilmembers Harper, Mikos, Millhouse, Parvin and Mayor Hunter; Steven Kueny, City Manager; Joseph Montes, City Attorney; Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager; Barry Hogan, Community Development Director; and Deborah Traffenstedt, Assistant to City Manager /City Clerk. Councilmember Millhouse left the meeting at 12:10 a.m. The Council reconvened into open session at 12:20 a.m., June 17, 2004. Mr. Kueny stated one case under Item 12.B. was discussed and there was no action to report. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 27 June 16, 2004 13. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Hunter adjourned the meeting at 12:20 a.m., June 17, 2004. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt City Clerk