Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 1988 0525 CC ADJMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL Moorpark, California May 25, 1988 The adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Moorpark, California was held on May 25, 1988, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:15 P.M. by Mayor John Lane. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Brown. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Eloise Brown, John Galloway, Clint Harper, Bernardo Perez and Mayor John Lane. Steven Kueny, City Manager; Cheryl Kane, City Attorney; Patrick Richards, Director of Community Development; Dennis Delzeit, City Engineer; Lt. Michael Brown, Sheriff's Department; Stan Raap, Eire Department; Philip Newhouse, Director of Community Serv-r_es; and Maureen Wall, City Clerk. 4. PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS, AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: None were presented. 5. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS T0,-THE AGENDA: There were no reordering of or additions to the agenda. 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Connie Lawrason, 4291 Ambermeadow Street, asked the Council for a status report concerning the fence problem at Sunrise Meadows and also brought to Council's attention the weeds along Tierra Rejada Road. B. Douglas Holland, 11515 Willowood Court, as Chairman of the Planning Commission, thanked the City Council for the new chairs which are available to the Commissioners in the Council Chambers and also thanked the Council for the Commission's opportunity to review the Comprehensive Planning Ordinance. He stated the Commission was pleased with some of the concepts in the document and would like some additional time to review it. He asked the Council to extend the Planning Commission's review period an additional month. Minutes of the City Council --2- May 25, 1988 Moorpark, California C. Sally Slanker, 13763 Gunsmoke Road, thanked the Carlsberg people for bringing back an amended plan for their project at Spring Road and Tierra Rejada. However, she still felt the density along Spring Road and Tierra Rejada was still too great. D. Linda Jarvis, 4170 N. Cedarpine, thanked Carlsberg and staff for providing more information on the proposed Moorpark Highland project. She further stated she was not in favor of setting a population cap figure on the City's size. However, she did appreciate a portion of Part 2 of the Comprehensive Planning Ordinance. E. Phil Vein, 6685 Princeton Avenue, representing A +R Development asked the City Council to direct staff to provide him with the grading permit necessary for his project and additionally asked that the Planning Commission be able to approve his final list of CC &R's. F. Ethel Sulkis, 270 Sierra Avenue, asked the City Council not to levy an. assessment on the Park Assessment District this fiscal year if Measure C passes and additionally asked what would happen to monies which which were not spent if Measure C passes. Councilmember Brown stated she was going to vote against the levying of an assessment for the Parks Assessment District this fiscal year. Mr. Kueny added that monies in excess of the city's spending limit could be returned through the reduction of taxes or in not levying taxes for the assessment district or by other means. Councilmember Galloway also added he would not be voting in favor of a Parks Assessment District fee this year. 7. COMMITTEE REPORTS: Councilmember Brown reported she had attended the League Legislative meeting in Sacramento. While in Sacramento, she had had an opportunity to speak with specific legislators and strategic committee members concerning Moorpark's traffic problem. Councilmember Harper reported he had met with Shell Oil Company representative concerning the safety of their transmission lines and felt the information provided to him was very reassuring. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR: Nothing was presented. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Update to the City's Land and Circulation Elements. Continued discussion regarding the scope of work for request for proposal. Staff's Recommendation was to ask Council for direction (continued Public Hearing from May 18, 1988). Minutes of the City Council - May 25, 1988 Moorpark, California Patrick Richards, Director of Community Development, gave an overview of the action taken by Council on this matter thus far. It was staff's recommendation to include only five properties in the scope of work. Those being Moorpark Ranch and Milling, the Geisler property, the Anderson property, CP Financial and high school site on Casey Road. Since the Public Hearing was continued to this date and time, the Public Hearing was then reopened. A.1 Arend Collen, 372 Misty Falls Court, Simi Valley, representing McDonald's Corporation stated he supported inclusion of all nineteen (19) properties in a General Plan Update. A.2 Harry Lieb, Huntington Beach, stated that his property has sewer and water mains installed and that the County is currently updating those lines to 10 inch pipe. He asked the Council to allow his rezoning request. A.3 Mark Rosenberg, representing JBR Development, 8383 Wilshire Boulevard #1036, Beverly Hills, spoke in favor of including the JBR site in the General Plan Update process. A.4 Bruce Tackman, 14501 Los Angeles Avenue, representing Kavlico stated that he was in favor of the General Plan Amendment process moving forward. It was noted by the City Clerk that a letter had been received from Mrs. Myrtle Geisler asking that the Council consider their parcel for inclusion in the General Plan Update. AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING, the Public Hearing was closed when no one else wished to speak. Councilmember Galloway commented that the General Plan ought to be a plan for the City's future. He felt it should reflect our plans for areas of the City and not bound by individual parcels. Councilmember Harper felt that the process needs to be closely defined. He felt consideration of the circulation problem must drive the process before land uses are considered. Councilmember Brown felt the Council should deride which areas of the City should be addressed, however, the circulation element should not be the only consideration. Steven Kueny outlined the following course of action for the Council: 1. One consultant would be selected to do the entire process. 2. The Circulation Element Update would be started first. 3. Land Use goals and policies with any changes or draft goals to be reviewed in order to maintain internal consistency with the other General Plan Element:.. 4. The Draft EIR would be done. Minutes of the City Council 4- May 25, 1988 Moorpark, California 5. Against the results or draft conclusions of No. 3, each specific land use of the parcels identified would be measured. Councilmember Galloway felt the cost involved should be shared up front by the City and the landowners. Councilmember Harper felt the City could begin the process then allow interested landowners to enter the process once the draft changes have been identified. Costs of the entire process could be spread at that point in time. Councilmember Brown suggested everyone who wanted to be considered be put into the process. The following Motion was then heard. MOTION: Councilmember Galloway moved and Councilmember Brown seconded a Motion to allow the previously identified nineteen (19) parcels who subsequently agreed to participate in funding on a pro rata share of the EIR and update to be included. Mayor Lane felt the property owner should pay for all costs not just those associated with the EIR. Steven Kueny suggested when the Scope of Work and the Request for Proposal be brought back for Council consideration, staff would present a pro rata share of costs for each owner with the City sharing some of these costs. These costs would not be limited to the EIR. After further discussion, the following amendment to the main motion was heard. AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION_: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Perez seconded a Motion to limit the analyses to property currently within the City limits which would mean only a portion of CT Financial would be included. Councilmember Brown commented open space areas have always been important to the City and including all the CT Financial parcel might be an opportunity for the City to keep a portion of that area as open space. Councilmember Galloway was very concerned about areas being developed adjacent to the City. He felt the City's lack of attention to their desire to be included in our process might force them to go to the County. The Amendment to the Main Motion was approved with Councilmembers Brown and Galloway voting no. The Motion as amended was approved with Councilmember Harper voting no. The following Motion was then heard. MOTION: Mayor Lane moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a Motion that land uses for residential will be considered at the requested density of the applicant, at one category less than what was requested, and at one category more than the current density. The voice vote was unanimous. Steven Kueny stated staff could return to Council with a Scope of Work and Request for Proposal by the first meeting in August. Minutes of the City Council 5- May 25, 1988 Moorpark, California The following Motion was then heard. MOTION: Councilmember Galloway moved and Councilmember Brown seconded a Motion to select one consultant to take care of the entire process; the Circulation Element Update would be started first with a parallel review of land use goals and policy, any changes or draft goals would also be reviewed in order to maintain internal consistency within the General Plan; a Draft EIR will be done; and against the draft conclusions, the specific land uses of the nineteen (19) parcels would be measured. The voice vote was approved with Councilmember Harper voting no. Councilmember Harper commented since open space was not being considered, he could not support the process as submitted. Steven Kueny asked the Council whether or not they wanted to remove the high school site from consideration since staff could not support a commercial designation which was being requested by the applicant. Councilmembers Brown and Galloway responded they were not in favor of removing the parcel from consideration, however, neither were in favor of changing the zoning. AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING, the Council recessed, the time being 8:47 P.M. At 9:07 P.M., the full Council reconvened. B. Processing Review of the Carlsberg Specific Plan (Moorpark Highlands). Continued discussion regarding the possible processing options available. It was staff's recommendation that Council direct staff as they deemed appropriate (the Public Hearing was closed on May 4, 1988). Patrick Richards, Director of Community Development, gave an overview of the Council's previous action and also reviewed the land use changes currently being proposed by the applicant. The Public Hearing was reopened by consensus of the Council. B. -1 Ron Tankersley, 2800 28th Street, Santa Monica, representing Carlsberg Financial Corporation summarized the changes they were proposing in their letter to the City Council dated May 18, 1988. Councilmember Galloway thanked Carlsberg for their concern and for the effort they are exhibiting -in their revised plan. B. -2 Linda Jarvis speaking for Lynn W. Crockatt, 13768 Christian Barrett, thanked Carlsberg for their sensitivity to the residents needs and feelings. However, it's felt the minimum size should be similar to the adjacent Steeple Hill homes. B. -3 Marjorie Blye, 4122 Oakcliff, thanked Carlsberg for listening to what the residents had to say and working with those suggestions. She still, however, had a problem with the single family dwelling lot size and two story office buildings. It was her feeling that if these two issues could be resolved then she Minutes of the City Council --6- May 25, 1988 Moorpark, California would agree that the process might proceed. She also would like to see the EIR include a nice restaurant and hotel on the site. AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING, the Public Hearing was closed when no one else wished to speak. Councilmember Harper commented he would like to see the density in the Village lot area reduced by 30 percent; wondered if the area designated as a school site was desirable to the school district and if it had proper access; would like to see the two story office buildings on the ridge line eliminated; would like more emphasis placed on large lot development; and would like to see the borrow site for dirt identified on the map eliminated. Councilmember Galloway wondered if the school site was needed by the community. Councilmember Perez suggested the minimum lot size in the Village lot area might be 10,000 square feet. Councilmember Harper felt that alterations through the proposal should be identified now to avoid problems in the future. The following Motion was then heard. MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved and Councilmember Galloway seconded a Motion to allow the project to proceed as a specific plan with the EIR to be brought back to the Council. After some discussion, the following Motion was heard. AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Perez seconded a Motion that the Scope of Work for the EIR, in addition to the applicant's submittal, would also consider: (1) minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet, (2) elimination of the office use on the plateau area, and (3) elimination of the dirt borrow site. The Amendment failed with Councilmembers Brown and Galloway and Mayor Lane voting no. After further discussion, the following Motion was heard. AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved and Councilmember Galloway seconded a -Motion that the Scope of the EIR in addition to the applicant's submittal would also consider a preference of 8,000 square foot minimum lot size in the Village lot area. The voice vote was approved with Councilmember Galloway voting no. The following Motion was then heard. AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Mayor Lane moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a Motion that the scope of the EIR, in addition to the applicants submittal, would also consider: (1) elimination of the office use on the plateau area and (2) elimination of the dirt borrow site. The voice vote was approved with Councilmember Brown voting no. Then the following was Motion. AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Galloway seconded a Motion to direct staff to include in the Scope of Work of the EIR an alternative of no school site and the potential addition of an active park site on the project. The voice vote was unanimous. Minutes of the City Council - -7- May 25, 1988 Moorpark, California The main Motion as amended three times was approved by a voice vote with Councilmember Harper voting no. 10. COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS: Councilmember Brown commented that Hot Meals for Seniors program has begun. However, the program is in need of volunteers. 11. DISCUSSION /ACTION ITEMS: A. Consider a report regarding _ the__ Planning Commission's recommendations concerning_ Part I_ of the draft Comprehensive Planning Ordinance (CPO). Staff's recommendation was that Council direct staff as they deemed appropriate. By concurrence of the Council, this item was continued for one (1) month. B. Consider a council ad hoc committee's report regarding proposals for Building and Safety, and_Enyineering_Services. Staff's recommendation was to consider the committee's recommendation award of contract to a selected firm(s) and direct staff as deemed appropriate. This item was continued to June 1, 1988. C. Consider authorizing staff to proceed with the public bid process for landscape maintenance at City parks and landscaped areas. Staff's recommendation was that Council direct Staff to proceed with the solicitation of bids for the landscape and maintenance of all City parks and landscaped areas. Philip Newhouse, Director of Community Services, gave an overview of this item stating that the project will be bid in one large project. Councilmember Brown commented that we need to offer the opportunity to people within the City to do the work, but by having one large contract we preclude this possibility. After some discussion, the following Motion was heard. MOTION: Councilmember Perez moved and Councilmember Brown seconded a Motion to direct staff to proceed with the solicitation of the bids with two scenarios: (1) group the Campus Park area as one area separating it from the rest of the City and (2) landscaped areas including slopes, parkways and medians could be separated from the parks. The voice vote was unanimous. 12. ORDINANCES: Minutes of the City Council -8- May 25, 1988 Moorpark, California There were no ordinances presented to the Council. 13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: The following future agenda items were mentioned: The possibility of an elected Mayor measure with this item being addressed by the City Attorney; need to review ongoing legislative issues; need to continue the City's lobbying and planning efforts in order to resolve our current traffic problems. 14. CLOSED SESSION: Cheryl Kane recommended that the Council add an item to the Closed Session and the following Motion was heard. MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved and Councilmember Perez seconded a Motion to add an item 14.F. - Litigation concerning Kavian vs. the County of Ventura, et. al. to the agenda since the need arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda. The voice vote was unanimous. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Brown seconded a Motion to go into Closed Session concerning potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1); litigation of Urban West Communities vs. the City of Moorpark; litigation concerning B.I.A. vs. the City of Moorpark; personnel; and litigation concerning Kavian vs. the County of Ventura, et. al. Voice vote was unanimous. The time of adjournment to Closed Session was 10:25 P.M. Also attending the Closed Session were: Steven Kueny, Cheryl Kane, Pat Richards, and the full Council. The full Council reconvened in Open Session at 11:33 P.M. The City Attorney announced that there was no action to report. 15. ADJOURNMENT: Councilmember Brown moved and Councilmember Galloway seconded a Motion to adjourn the meeting. The voice vote was unanimous. The time was 11:34 P.M. ��►Y v e Mayor ATTEST: