Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 1992 0201 CC SPCMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL Moorpark, California February 1, 1992 A Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Moorpark was held on February 1, 1992 in the Council Chambers of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL, TO ORDER: Mayor Lawrason called the meeting to order at 10:20 a.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mr. Kueny. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Montgomery, Perez, Talley, Wozniak, and Mayor Lawrason. Steven Kueny, City Manager; Richard Hare, Deputy City Manager, Pat Richards, Director of Community Development; Charles Abbott, City Engineer; Kathleen Mallory Phipps; and Lillian Kellerman, City Clerk. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Consider General Plan Update Land Use and Circulation Elements, Sphere of Influence Expansion Study, and Environmental Impact Report (GPA -89 -1 and 'Lone Chanee 89 -1). Staff Recommendation: Continue public hearing. Mayor Lawrason indicated that the public hearing was still open. He said that a letter entitled "The Battle is Not Over" had been circulated in the community. He read the letter into the record and indicated his disappointment that the author had not signed the letter. Mr. Kueny, in response to Mayor Lawrason, said that the testimony given before the Planning Commission was included as part of the public record on the General Plan Update. Councilmember Talley requested a more definitive response from the City Attorney regarding the Council's ability to consider a less intense alternative than that which was studied within the existing General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Public Comment Regarding the General Plan: Bill Poleri, 6863 Trojan Ct., addressed the Council regarding his support of the Sphere of Influence Study. He also stated his concerns with past Planning Commission actions. AT THIS POINT in the meeting a recess was declared. The time was 1.0:30 a.m. The meeting reconvened at 10:45 a.m. Bill I.a Perch, 7200 Walnut Canyon, indicated that he was one of the five authors of "The Battle is Not Over ". He stated that he doesn't think the EIR for the General Plan is adequate. He said the dangers of Valley Fever are not addressed, there are not sufficient details of each of the specific plans, and water needs are not sufficiently considered. He said he supports Alternative 1. Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 2 February 1, 1992 Rene Mayfield, 6085 Darlene Lane, said she did not want a major development near her home. She said she was concerned that the air quality would deteriorate as it had in the downtown area where she previously lived. She said she did not understand the subject of the public hearing from the public hearing notice she received. Christina Smith, 11812 Elwin Road, said she agreed with the statements made by Mr. LaPerch. Fred Kinion, 6133 Darlene Lane, said he was concerned with traffic if the Levy project was allowed. Ron Tankersley, 2800 28th St. #200, Santa Monica, stated that there was a discrepancy between his Specific Plan and the General Plan. He said Spring Road was to be a two lane road not four lanes as shown on the circulation Element. In response to Council questions, Mr. Kueny indicated that staff would confirm the Spring Road configuration with the General Plan Update consultant. Monika Savic, 15576 Mallory Ct., stated that she is against the expansion of the City's Sphere of Influence. Kenneth Patton, 15311 Braun Ct., stated that he opposes hillside development. Jani Murphy, 15308 Seitz Ave, spoke representing the Environmental Coalition. She said that Specific Plans 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8 should be excluded from the General Plan Update. She also expressed concern regarding the protection of wildlife corridors. Elizabeth Leaver, 12617 Crystal Ranch Road, said she opposed the General Plan as now proposed and opposed the development of Hidden Creek Ranch (Specific Plan 8). She indicated that she was a sociologist and was concerned with uniting all factions of the community before increasing the City's boundaries and population any further. She said the downtown residents need to be represented. In response to Mayor Lawrason, Ms. leaver said that she would be willing to lend her expertise to staff in the future, if so requested. Councilmember Perez indicated that the Council needs and wants to consider the sociological needs of the community, and not just build roads and make public improvements. Councilmember Talley said that he lives in the downtown area and that the people there are and will be represented. Pat Leaver, 12617 Crystal Ranch Road, said he was grateful for the Saturday meeting format which allowed him to attend. Ile said he did not favor annexation of additional territory to the City. Roseann Mikos, 14371 E. Cambridge St., said she was opposed to expanding the population of the City without the infrastructure to support it and expressed concern that there is not sufficient water for an increase In population. She said she opposed extending Broadway through Happy Camp Canyon which would encourage more traffic through that pristine area. She said she was concerned that if the General Plan is adopted "as is ", the Specific Plans will automatically be approved. She said no matter what is approved, a mechanism for monitoring compliance and penalties for any non - compliance should be "put in place ". She said the school system would have difficulty absorbing the population increase that would occur if Specific Plan 8 were developed as proposed by the developer but said she was Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 3 February 1, 1992 concerned that the County might allow the creation of another city in that area if Moorpark didn't annex or include it in the City's Sphere of Influence. Councilmember Perez said that monitoring and penalties will be a part of any project that is approved. Abe Guny, 7250 Walnut Canyon Road, said that as a citizen he supported moderate growth and said that the developers are facing financial difficulties in developing projects at present. AT THIS POINT in the meeting a recess was declared. The time was 12:25 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 12:55 p.m. Dennis Hardgrave, 651 Via Alondra #714, Camarillo, representing the Levy Company said that the specifics of any of the Specific Plans are not determined at this stage of the General Plan process. He said that the Levy Company project would leave 25% of the project as open space and provide property for a downtown park. Ile went over the configuration of the plan proposed by the I..evy Company. Morteja Yassini, 11899 Darlene Lane, was not present to speak when called. Toby Wilhelm, 11905 Elwin Road, said she did not want the zoning to allow more than one dwelling unit per acre designation in the Specific Plan 1 area. She said the proposed equestrian facility in Specific Plan 1 was not adequate. Fadl Kairouz, 11922 Darlene Lane, was not present to speak when called. Doris Miller, 6395 Gabbert Road, said the equestrian facility in Specific Plan 1 was inadequate. She said she wanted the lifestyle which she and her neighbors enjoyed to be preserved. Jack Voita, 11806 Elwin, said his background was in economics and he raised racing pigeons on his property. He said he moved to Moorpark from the San Fernando Valley and he would move again if the General Plan was adopted as proposed. John W. Newton, 4410 Summer Glen Ct., spoke representing JBR. Ile said no open reservoirs were proposed on the project and explained that the project would have to provide on site water circulation. Ile said JBR would participate in the Highway 118 bypass which is an important circulation route for the City. He explained that the wildlife access would use the same corridors as the equestrian routes. AT THIS POINT in the meeting a recess was declared. The time was 2:00 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 2:40 p.m. Manny Asadurian, 11905 Darlene Lane, was not present to speak when called. Eloise Brown, 13193 Annette, said the General Plan needs to have some flexibility. She said most of Urban West Communities and Griffin Homes development in the City were projects developed under the County of Ventura. She said that some agriculture landowners need to be allowed to develop their land. She said she does not support a road into Happy Camp via Campus Park Drive. Barbara A. Shultz, 116 Sierra Ave., suggested that public notices should be mailed out in envelopes with the City Seal so that they are recognizable. She thanked Councilmember Talley for his representation of the downtown and said growth is needed but not concentrated in the downtown area. She said the Highway 118 bypass was needed. She said Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 4 February 1, 1992 she didn't support the extension of Liberty Bell Road between I.os Angeles Avenue and Poindexter. In response to Councilmember Perez, Ms. Shultz said she would like to see high density spread throughout the City and not concentrated in one area and not next to the railroad tracks. Gary Austin, 17512 Von Karman Blvd., Irvine, said he was present to answer questions and indicated that he would provide copies of the drawings shown at the last meeting. Robert Abrams, 3242 Darby Street, Simi Valley, representing the Moorpark Chamber of Commerce, said the Chamber would like to see a stronger economic development element in the General Plan. Ile said he was concerned with leakage of sales tax dollars. He asked that John Newton also be heard on this subject on behalf of the Chamber. John Newton, 4410 Summerglen Court, said the subject of strong economic development policies in the General Plan was discussed at the Moorpark Economic Development Committee. He said that because the public hearing may close today, the Chamber wanted to provide some conceptual information and then request that written material be allowed for later submittal. Ile said some of the things the Chamber is looking at in completing their research in this area is the November 1991 Southern California Edison Business Climate in Southern California material and other communities' general plans. He said the Chamber has submitted some suggestions for the economic development section of the General Plan but it was looked at more as an errata sheet. Ile said he would like to share a couple of comments with the Council and then after the next Chamber Board meeting, with the Council's concurrence, the information would be refined and submitted to the Council in writing. He read the following: Although focused on the business community, the economic development element is closely related to all the other elements of the General Plan. Some of the fundamental inter - relationships include: Compatibility with adjacent land uses as well as the natural environment, the availability of adequate and affordable housing units for employees, the availability and provision of community services, and the capability of the City's infrastructure to handle the increased demand for services. He said Dr. Abrams mentioned the City's problem with leakage. He said capturing potential leakage is something that will be considered and submitted to the Council for review. Ile said implementation was important and read the following: The City shall continue its policy of priority processing of commercial and industrial development applications. A planned development permit shall be required of all commercial and industrial developments. Maintenance districts and the like shall be included in the planned development permit in order to be ensure acceptable property maintenance and adherence to standards. The City shall continue to staff one or more positions under the City Manager to assume the responsibility for expediting commercial and industrial development applications, recruitment of new business, promotion of the City and other functions related to the City's Economic Development. The City shall assist the local development organizations, private, public and non- profit in the recruitment of commercial businesses which reduce City trade leakage. A rive year capital improvement program shall be carried out by the City and all agencies affecting economic development in order to provide a dependable and Minutes of the City Council Moorpark, California Page 5 February 1, 1992 coordinated schedule of development upon which industrial firms and developers can depend. The City in cooperation with the State Employment Development Department shall research the job skills in the City and shall give special attention to attracting industry which utilizes such skills. Mayor Lawrason said that the Council would look forward to that information. Dennis Miller, 229 Charles St., was not able to stay until called. Mayor Lawrason read Mr. Miller's written statement. Mr. Miller's statement indicated concern with noise, pollution and traffic in the area in which he resides. Joseph Latunski, 289 Casey Road, requested that the public hearing be left open. Gerald Goldstein, 11932 Los Angeles Ave., spoke regarding his concerns with increased tragic and the depletion of the aquifer if the General Plan is adopted. The Council discussed meeting dates of February 8, and February 12, 1992. The Mayor indicated that testimony would be limited to those speakers giving new information. MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved and Councilmember Wozniak seconded a motion to continue the public hearing to 9:00 a.m. on Saturday, February 8, 1992. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. 6. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Councilmember Perez moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to adjourn. The time was 3:36 p.m. Paul W. Iawrason Jr., Mayor ATTEST: