HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 1992 0212 CC SPCMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Moorpark, California
00123
February 12, 1992
A Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Moorpark was held on February 12,
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 6:50 p.m.
Present: Councilmembers Montgomery, Perez, Talley, Wozniak and Mayor
Lawrason
Steven Kueny, City Manager; Richard Hare, Deputy City Manager;
and Cheryl Kane, City Attorney
In response to questions, Me. Kane gave a status of the motion by Moorpark
Unified School District (MUSD) attorneys (Bergman & Wedner) to recover
attorneys' fees and costs on the City vs. MUSD (Casey Road, Naylor Case).
She also questioned their ability to recover filing fees and stated that
she would discuss the motion with the Council in Closed Session at the
regular meeting on February 19, 1992.
2. CLOSED SESSION:
MOTION: Councilmember Perez moved and Councilmember Wozniak seconded a
motion to go into Closed Session for a discussion of all items listed on
the agenda:
A. Personnel.
B. Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9(b)(1)
C. Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c)
D. Litigation concerning Ventura County Community College District vs.
City of Moorpark.
E. Litigation concerning the County of Ventura vs. City of Moorpark.
F. Litigation concerning the Moorpark Mosquito Abatement District vs.
City of Moorpark.
G. Negotiations for Real Property at 280 Casey Road (Moorpark Unified
School District) pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8.
H. Negotiations for Real Property on Los Angeles Avenue (East) pursuant
to Government Code Section 54956.8.
I. Litigation concerning Conejo Freeway Properties, LTD. vs. City of
Moorpark.
J. Litigation concerning City of Moorpark vs. Southern California
Edison, et al
K. Negotiations for Real Property for Arroyo Vista Community Park
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8.
L. Negotiations for Real Property on the South Side of High Street
(Southern Pacific /VCTC) pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8.
Minutes of the City council
Moorpark, California Page 2
3.
4.
00124
February 12, 1992
M. Negotiation for Real Property at the Moorpark Community Center site
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8.
The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
Present in Closed Session were all Councilmembers; Steven Kueny, City
Manager; Richard Hare, Deputy City Manager; and Cheryl Kane, City
Attorney.
The meeting reconvened into Open Session at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Kueny stated that there was no action to report out of Closed Session
and only Item 2.L. had been discussed.
AT THIS POINT IN the meeting a recess was declared. The time was 7:00
p.m.
Mayor Lawrason called the meeting back to order at 7:17 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Councilmember Wozniak led the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Councilmembers Montgomery, Perez, Talley, Wozniak, and Mayor
Lawrason.
Steven Kueny, City Manager; Richard Hare, Deputy City Manager;
Cheryl Kane, City Attorney; Pat Richards, Director of
Community Development; Don Reynolds, Management Analyst;
Charles Abbott, Engineer; Lillian E. Kellerman, City Clerk;
Dorothy Vandaveer, Deputy City Clerk
5. PUBLIC COMMENT:
Mayor Lawrason introduced the representatives from the Resource Management
Agency of the County of Ventura and they addressed the Council first under
public comment.
Gene Kjellberg and Nancy Settle, County of Ventura, Resource Management
Agency, 800 S. Victoria Avenue, Ventura, provided an update on the
agricultural program within the County. Mr. Kjellberg outlined the
activities and issues that the Agricultural Land Trust Advisory Committee
will be addressing in 1992 and the role of the Local Area Formation
Commission (LAFCO) in this matter.
Connie Lawrason, 4291 Ambermeadow Street, provided a report on the
February 11, 1992 meeting of the Citizens Transportation Advisory
Committee. She said the main topic was the Americans with Disabilities
Act and an update on the paratransit and intercity transit study was
provided to the committee.
John Newton, 4410 Summerglen, spoke representing the Chamber of Commerce.
He passed out information regarding the Economic Development section of
the General Plan Update and indicated that this is not for decision - making
this evening, but is a follow -up to the presentation that he and Dr.
Abrams made to the Council at a previous meeting. He said this
information is a result of continued interest in providing input to the
Economic Development section to the General Plan Update. He said the
00125
Minutes of the City council
Moorpark, California Page 3 February 12, 1992
submittal they made to the final environmental impact report (goals and
policy statements) is still valid. He highlighted the Chamber's proposed
changes to Goals 13, 14 and 15 and the Economic Development Implementation
section. He said the Chamber would be happy to respond to questions after
the Council has an opportunity to review the provided information.
Ms. Kane raised a point of procedure. She said that under the Council's
own rules of procedure public testimony on a public hearing item is not
taken during the public comment period. She said the public hearing on
the General Plan Update was closed on Saturday, February 8, and it is not
appropriate to be taking any comment from the public as it relates to the
General Plan.
In response to Councilmember Montgomery, Ms. Kane said under the Council
rules of procedure Mr. Newton's testimony should have been heard during
the public hearing. She said once you have closed the public hearing that
action indicates you are taking no more testimony from the public.
Councilmember Montgomery asked "if it is not testimony, but merely
information that the public wishes to share with the Council, is it not
allowed, recognizing it will not go on the official public record of the
hearing ?"
Ms. Kane stated that the whole idea of a public hearing is to bring forth
information that members of the public think your body should consider in
making its final determinations. She said it's not a matter of how you
classify what is being said, if it's information that is being given to
you to consider in your deliberations, then it falls within the scope of
a public hearing.
Councilmember Montgomery asked how the City Attorney would recommend the
Council obtain information which it deems necessary upon which to make
decisions subsequent to the closing of the public hearing.
In response to Councilmember Montgomery, Ms. Kane said that at the time
YOU closed the public hearing you have reached the determination that you
have adequate information to begin deliberating the merits of the item.
She said if it is your determination that you don't have adequate
information, then you would not be closing the public hearing.
Councilmember Montgomery continued by asking what recourse was available
if a determination were subsequently made that the Council wanted
additional information that was unknown at the time the public hearing was
Closed.
Ms. Kane indicated that the public hearing would need to be reopened and
notice readvertised so that the public would know that further testimony
was being taken.
In response to further questions from Councilmember Montgomery, Ms. Kane
said the City's exposure to liability is a challenge to the final decision
regarding the General Plan based upon the fact that there were procedural
defects in the decision.
Mr. Talley said during the public hearing portion of the General Plan
Update process, Mr. Newton and Dr. Abrams spoke regarding the information
presented today and requested the opportunity to submit the information in
written form, further refined, at a future date. He said the Council
agreed by consensus to allow that later submittal.
00126
Minutes of the City council
Moorpark, California Page 4 February 12, 1992
Me. Kane said with respect to an assessment of that action, the public
hearing has been open and has been continuing for many weeks and the fact
that information is being brought to you at the last moment and not in a
complete form is not a defense to the fact that it should have been filed
with you during the public hearing.
Councilmember Montgomery responded that he felt it is entirely within the
Council's "jurisdiction and authority" to make the determination that the
public has the right to speak its mind.
Barbara Shultz, 116 Sierra Avenue, spoke regarding a drainage problem from
Gisler field. She indicated that water is draining through her yard and
she has had difficulty finding sandbags to stop the water. She requested
help in resolving her drainage problem.
Ivadel J. Sandoval, 210 Sierra Avenue, supported the comments made by Ms.
Schultz and said the drainage in the area of Gisler field needs to be
corrected.
Mela Kano, 148 Sierra Avenue, stated that she has water in the interior of
her home due to the situation in the vicinity of Gisler field. She said
the Fire Department has been helpful, but she feels the Mr. Macleod, owner
of the Gisler field property, is responsible for the damage being done to
the surrounding homes.
Councilmember Perez said the City will assist to the extent that it can.
Councilmember Talley said he has viewed the situation and there is a
definite drainage problem with the Macleod property -- it ponds and does
not go to a storm drain. He said the owner needs to review the situation
and correct it.
In response to Mayor Lawrason, Mr. Kueny said the City's responsibility is
to protect public property if it is threatened and in that instance, the
City would go onto private property to protect the public property. He
indicated that this situation is between two private property owners. He
said historically, public agencies try to make sandbags available to
private property owners to help them with flooding situations.
Mr. Talley requested that City staff be prepared to help the public when
they call City Hall looking for where to obtain sandbags.
Mr. Wozniak commented that it would be in the City's best interest to call
Mr. Macleod on behalf of these residents.
Ethel Sulkis, 270 Sierra Avenue, mentioned an advertisement she saw for an
individual who will assist in the removal of water from carpeting. She
also spoke regarding the rate increase for Ventura County Cablevision.
She requested the City send a letter of objection to the telephone company
or proper agency protesting the rate increase to pay for undergrounding of
cable in the Oakland, California area.
Eloise Brown, 13193 Annette Street, spoke regarding the presentation given
by County representatives this evening regarding agricultural lands. She
said her letter of dissent which was written while she sat on the Beyond
the Year 2000 Committee should be considered when the Council is making
00127
Minutes of the City council
Moorpark, California Page 5 February 12, 1992
agricultural determinations. She also expressed concern about the General
Plan process, saying that the Council's Affordable Housing Committee
should not meet with developers to discuss specific land use changes with
respect to the General Plan update. She requested the Council investigate
the process to make sure determinations are not being made at the
committee level.
Councilmember Perez said he acknowledges Mrs. Brown's concerns but that he
has questioned the City Attorney in the past and feels confident that
proper procedure is followed with regard to his participation on the
Affordable Housing Committee.
Gerald Goldstein, 11932 Los Angeles Avenue, spoke regarding the drainage
from Gisler field.
AT THIS POINT in the meeting, Mayor Lawrason declared a brief recess. The
time was 8:35 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 9:00 p.m.
Councilmember Perez made a statement that he does not now nor ever has
derived financial benefit as a Board Member of Cabrillo Economic
Development Corporation (CEDC) therefore there is no conflict of interest
per the Political Reform Act, and that in the past he has abstained from
Council issues directly related to CEDC out of concern with avoiding any
appearance of impropriety. He said regarding the General Plan Update
process and his role on the Affordable Housing and Community Development
Committees, he has met with CEDC regarding four specific parcels, one of
which was never part of the General Plan Update process. He said CEDC is
not engaged in any negotiations regarding the General Plan Update. He
said CEDC's submittal of an RFP to MUSD was public knowledge and was made
subsequent to the City's formal settlement offer to the school district.
With these facts before the Council he said doesn't believe there is an
issue of conflict of interest or any impropriety on his part and he is
looking forward to continuing his participation in the General Plan Update
process.
6. 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 Zone Change 89 -11. (THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED
2/8/92.)
Debbie Traffenstedt gave the staff report.
In response to Mayor Lawrason, Ms. Traffenstedt clarified that the shaded
text incorporates staffs' comments and the City Attorney's comments on
each item and does not include prior changes from the Planning Commission.
She clarified that Planning Commission comments were Attachment 2 to the
first public hearing staff report that the Council received. It begins
with numbered page 106.
By consensus, the Council made the following changes and /or requests for
revisions to policies of the Land Use Element:
The definition of "Goals" will be changed to read as follows:
"A goal is a statement of a value or quality desired by the Community and
is abstract by nature. Goals express an ideal future state or condition
00:12';
Minutes of the City council
Moorpark, California Page 6 February 12, 1992
within the community and set the direction of future development. Goals
are generally not quantifiable, time - dependent or suggestive of specific
actions for achievement."
The fifth bullet in the last grouping of bullets on page 9 should read,
"preservation of important natural features, agricultural areas and
visually prominent hillside areas."
The sixth bullet in the last grouping of bullets on page 9 will be
rewritten by staff using similar language to Policy 6.4 on page 13.
New Policy 1.4 will read as follows: "New development and redevelopment
shall not adversely impact the existing and planned capacity of public
facilities and services."
Mayor Lawrason declared a brief recess to change the videotape. The time
was 9:36 p.m. The Council reconvened at 9:37 p.m.
New Policy 2.1 - staff to draft two policies: one to address criteria as
far as timing and the second to express that the planning area is the area
of interest and it is not the intent that the entire area of interest be
the sphere of influence.
Policy 3.2 - Staff will modify to include the language that residential
projects of scale shall include variation of residential product types,
lot sizes, and designs.
Policy 3.1 - Councilmember Talley commented that the Planning Commission
made a recommendation on this policy.
Policy 4.1 - revise to read, "The residential character of identifiable
neighborhoods shall be maintained by requiring adjacent new development to
have compatible architectural, streetscape design, landscape, color and
materials, building setbacks, and building heights."
Policy 4.2 - to be deleted.
Policy 4.3 - to be addressed later.
Policy 5.3 - to be revised to read, "Natural and /or landscaped buffer
areas shall be provided around and within residential projects to minimize
land use conflicts and privacy impacts."
Policy 7.3 - to be revised to read, "External cross - connections between
commercial uses shall be provided so as to reduce the number of curb cuts
and number of vehicle trips on adjacent roadways."
Policy 7.4 - to be revised by staff.
Policy 8.1 - to be revised to read, "New commercial uses shall be
compatible in scale and character with all adjacent commercial uses."
Policy 8.2 - to be revised to read, "Commercial development shall
incorporate design features such as walls, landscaping and setbacks, and
include height and lighting restrictions so as to minimize adverse impacts
on adjacent uses..."
Policy 8.3 - to be revised to read, "Automobile and truck access to
commercial properties shall be located so as to minimize impacts to
adjacent uses."
00129
Minutes of the City council
Moorpark, California Page 7 February 12, 1992
Policy 9.1 - to be revised to read, "The visual character of the downtown
commercial core shall be strengthened in order to attract a variety of
commercial uses and to promote the economic viability of downtown
Moorpark."
Policy 9.3 - to be revised to read, "The establishment of a community
meeting /marketplace in the downtown core shall be promoted."
Policy 9.4 - to be revised to read, "A comprehensive plan for the
downtown commercial core shall promote new commercial infill areas, park
or recreational opportunities, public parking, and a potential multimodal
transportation center."
Policy 9.5 - to be revised to read, "The civic center shall remain in the
downtown area to encourage the revitalization of downtown."
Policy 9.6 - to be revised to read, "Public spaces and services shall be
maintained to create an aesthetically and functionally welcoming
environment."
Policy 10.2 - to be revised to read, "Industrial uses shall incorporate
design features, such as screen walls, landscaping and setbacks, and
include height, and lighting restrictions so as to minimize adverse
impacts to adjacent uses and to enhance the visual characteristics of the
area.
Policy 10.3 - to be revised to read, "Industrial uses shall be well
maintained to enhance the visual characteristics of the area." Staff
directed to also include this in the commercial land use area.
Policy 10.4 - to be revised to read, "Industries which meet local,
regional and state air and water pollution control goals and standards
should be encouraged to locate within the City."
Policy 10.5 - staff directed to draft a policy pertaining to enterprise
zones (i.e., recycling).
Policy 10.6 - staff directed to draft a policy to include non - polluting,
non heavy metal industrial uses.
Policy 11.1 - to be revised to read, "Farm land which has been identified
as Prime and of Statewide Importance should be retained as an agricultural
land use designation for as long as it remains economically viable within
the City's Area of Interest."
Policy 11.2 - to be revised to read, "When new residential development is
adjacent to existing agricultural uses, a setback shall be provided to
minimize compatibility conflicts."
Policy 12.1 - staff directed to revise.
Policy 12.3 - to be revised to read, "The city shall cooperate with the
County of Ventura and other appropriate agencies in the siting of any
future waste handling facility."
Policy 12.5 - Staff will revise to read similar to "the city's current
standard of maintaining maximum number of acres of parkland available
consistent with the City's Open Space and Recreation Element to ensure
that adequate passive /active parkland is provided in conjunction with
future infill, redevelopment, and new development projects..."
00130
Minutes of the City council
Moorpark, California Page 8 February 12, 1992
Policy 12.7 - to be revised to read, "Any proposed project shall be
required to contribute its fair share of the cost of providing adequate
public services and facilities."
Policy 12.8 - staff directed to draft a policy to address the need to
require parkland development from the industrial and commercial sector.
Goal 13: - staff directed to review the input from the Chamber of
Commerce for consolidation and inclusion in this section.
Goal 14 - to be revised to read, "Establish land uses which are compatible
with scenic and natural resources and which encourage environmental
preservation."
Policy 14.2 - to be revised to read, "New development shall respect,
integrate with, and complement the natural features of the land."
Policy 14.3 - to be revised to read, "New development shall not contribute
to or cause hazardous conditions of any kind."
Policy 14.4 - to be revised to read, "The flood control easement area
adjacent to the Arroyo Simi floodway shall be preserved and enhanced as an
important natural and scenic feature of the community."
Policy 14.6 - to be revised to read, "Areas identified as significant
aquifer recharge areas shall be protected and preserved."
Policy 15.2 - to be revised to read, "Ecologically sensitive habitats
shall be protected and preserved." Staff will draft added language for
this policy.
Policy 15.5 - to be deleted.
Policy 15.6 - to be revised to read, "Commercial, industrial and
manufacturing uses shall implement recycling programs to be consistent
with the City's Source Reduction Recycling Element (SRRE)."
Policy 15.8 - to be revised to read, "Development in significant hazard
areas, which cannot be mitigated without resulting in significant adverse
environmental impacts, shall be prohibited." Significant hazard areas" to
be defined in a glossary within the document.
Policy 15.9 - Staff directed to draft the language for a policy to address
the establishment of and maintenance of trails and wildlife corridors.
Goal 16 - to be revised to read, "Enhance and maintain the suburban rural
identity of the community."
Policy 16.2 - to be revised to read, "Hillside development standards
shall be adopted which restrict grading on slopes greater than 20 percent
and which encourage the preservation of visual horizon lines and
significant hillsides as prominent visual features."
Policy 16.3 - to be revised to read, "The overall density and intensity of
development should decrease as the slope increases."
Policy 16.4 - to be revised to read, "New residential development should
complement the overall community character of the city, establish a sense
of place, and ensuring compatibility with important existing local
community identities."
00131
Minutes of the City council
Moorpark, California Page 9 February 12, 1992
Policy 17.3 - to be revised to read, "Design standards should be
established for City entryways on the south (Moorpark Freeway), east (SR-
118 freeway), north (Walnut Canyon Road and future SR -23 extension), and
west (Los Angeles Avenue), which encourage landscape setbacks, sign
monumentation and other special design treatments to enhance gateways to
the city.
Policy 17.6 - staff directed to add language relative to xeroscaping to
this policy.
Policy 17.7 - staff directed to review the language of this policy.
Policy 17.9 - staff to review this policy for inclusion of language
related to undergrounding.
Policy 17.10 - to be deleted.
Policy 18.2 - to be relocated elsewhere in the document.
Policy 18.5 - to be revised to read, "Development in the downtown area
should incorporate the careful use of compatible or similar construction
materials and architectural style, so as not to detract from the integrity
of historical features."
PUB - Public /Institutional - staff directed to develop a policy statement
wherever they deem most appropriate (i.e., residential or specific plan
goal) which encourages this type of land use in the specific plan areas.
Mr. Richards indicated that some changes would be necessary for zoning and
general plan consistency.
MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved and Councilmember Wozniak seconded
a motion to continue this item to February 26, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. The
motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
CLOSED SESSION:
MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved and Councilmember Wozniak seconded
a motion to adjourn back into Closed Session for a discussion of all items
listed on the agenda under Item 2:
A. Personnel.
B. Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9(b)(1)
C. Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c)
D. Litigation concerning Ventura County Community College District vs.
City of Moorpark.
E. Litigation concerning the County of Ventura vs. City of Moorpark.
F. Litigation concerning the Moorpark Mosquito Abatement District vs.
City of Moorpark.
G. Negotiations for Real Property at 280 Casey Road (Moorpark Unified
School District) pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8.
Minutes of the City council
Moorpark, California Page 10
00 ;.32
February 12, 1992
H. Negotiations for Real Property on Los Angeles Avenue (East) pursuant
to Government Code Section 54956.8.
I. Litigation concerning Conejo Freeway Properties, LTD. vs. City of
Moorpark.
J. Litigation concerning City of Moorpark vs. Southern California
Edison, et al
K. Negotiations for Real Property for Arroyo Vista Community Park
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8.
L. Negotiations for Real Property on the South Side of High Street
(Southern Pacific /VCTC) pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8.
M. Negotiation for Real Property at the Moorpark Community Center site
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8.
The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
AT THIS POINT in the meeting a recess was declared. The time was 12:30
a.m. The Council reconvened into Closed Session at 12:33 a.m.
Present in Closed Session were all Councilmember; Steven Kueny, City
Manager; Richard Hare, Deputy City Manager; Cheryl Kane, City Attorney.
The meeting reconvened into Open Session at 12:44 a.m.
Mr. Kueny stated there was no action to report out of Closed Session and
only item 2.L. had been discussed.
7. ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: Councilmember Wozniak moved and Councilmember Talley seconded a
motion to adjourn. The motion carried by nanimous voice vote. The time
was 12:44 a.m.
Paul W. Lawr son Jr., May