Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1992 1216 CC REG ITEM 11CTO: FROM: DATE: MOORPARK ITEM"//,, Cb 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 AGENDA REPORT The Honorable City Council .'OORPARK, CALIFORMA Cn Council Meefing of / -,2 - )Y--. 199 _-�7- ACTION: �/ ►-nom BYA Jim Aguilera, Director of Community Development *` December 10, 1992 (CC Meeting of 12/16/92) SUBJECT: TUSCANY HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION LETTER DATED 11/30/92 BACKGROUND: The Council has received a letter from the Tuscany Homeowners Association (HOA) requesting that this item be placed on the Council agenda for December 16, 1992. (See attached letter dated November 20, 1992.) Staff has had several contacts recently with members of the HOA and representatives of Urban West Communities (UWC) regarding this and other issues. DISCUSSION: Issues: Apparently the HOA is unhappy with the prospect of having UWC convert the original model homes to saleable homes. The HOA is expecting the City to assist them in preventing UWC from taking this action. The HOA believes that they were "promised" that the models would remain until all homes in the Tuscany tract were sold. Findings: Staff has researched the issue and has found that UWC filed for a minor modification on April 24, 1992 for the purpose of adding new models. The HOA filed an appeal which was later withdrawn due to an agreement which was reached between the HOA and UWC (see attachment). That agreement allows UWC to proceed to construct new models and is very specific about not mentioning the status of the existing models. Mrs. Lori Rutter claims that the president of the HOA acted without HOA approval in signing the agreement. PAUL *rL4Ri;§ ghArJF;.C, 1992 JdFI gtJkGjkhTA4CANY.2 SCOTT MONTGOMERY BERNARDO M. PEREZ ROY E. TALLEY JR. Mayor Mayor Pro Tern Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember The Honorable City Council December 10, 1992 Page -2- City Involvement: Staff believes that the concerns voiced in the letter by the HOA dated November 30, 1992 are a private party dispute and should be handled accordingly. Further, staff has researched the City codes, State laws, and the conditions of approval and we have found no authority granting the City the ability to restrict model homes from being converted to saleable homes. RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. crl December 10, 1992 -A: \C0UNCIL \TUSCANY.2 June 16, 1992 Mr. Bill Phelps Interim Director of Community Development City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 Dear Mr. Phelps: I hereby withdraw the appeal, dated May 28, 1992, of the Director of Community Development and the Moorpark City Council decision to allow Urban West Communities to build seven (7) new models in Tracts 4341 and 4342. a Sin rely, Craig Kuske President, Mountain Meadows Tuscany Homeowners Association -- RECEIVED — J U s; ; 1992 Nhi of Moorpark Mr. Steven Kueny, City Manager City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 Dear Mr. Kueny, Pb 10 1 (T r.At+ L{34 h I II, r( +3t. we, the undersigned homeowners, hereby appeal the city council approved motion, dated May 20, 1992 regarding the modification of the Master Plan at WEST RANCH,',,, Q E, We believe many more homeowners from Tuscany, Deauville, and Belmont will express opposition to this modification of the Master Plan, than are represented by our signatures below. But because no public announcement was made of the city's deliberation on this matter, we have had less than a day's time to prepare this appeal. we ask that the city again review its decision on this matter once we, the existing homeowners, have an opportunity to express our opinion before you. Sincerely, i1_ ,,. 11 b l I rin eA l,-- 0 krA-Aci, .r.,,,. ' : (; 4*4C r-e�o-c4 ke, t,-,J S f XO)q Z . cc: Honorable City Council Members RECEIVED MAY 2 6 1992 City o! ftrparM CITY OF MOORPARK 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 93021 805/529 -6864 APPEAL FORM MUST BE FILED WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE DECISION To: V City Council Date: Planning Commission I hereby appeal the decision of the which was given on The decision was as follows: I The grounds of appeal are: (attach additional sheets as needed) NA J Address of Appellant: 11667 h np d a le- VOa A Mon - -pa, L x 31 l Telephone Number of Appellant: Is the appellant a party in the application? If not, state basis for filling appeal as an "aggrieved person." Signature of Appellant: CRL- 01- 14- 92(9:34am)C:\WP5 I\FORNS\APPEAL Date: Ib'{G�1 �� ��t t 2- rS RECEIPT j b , Appeal and deposit fee of: Received at a.m /p.m, on 19 By: Community Development Department Signed: Title: APPEAL PERIODS I 1. Appeals of all entitlement, permits and administrative decisions shall be filled within 10 calendar days following the date of approval, conditional approval, denial or date of the alleged error. (Section 8111.2 * * *) 2. An appeal of a Planning Commission decision shall be filed within 10 calendar days following the date a decision was rendered. 3. An appeal of an environmental decision shall be filed within 10 working days following the date a decision was rendered. * * *If the end of an appeal period falls upon a weekend or holiday, the appeal must be filed by 5:00 p.m. on the first working day thereafter. CRL- 01- 19- 92(9:39 am) C: \NP51 \FORMS \APPEAL Y�a,rE � � rn ®�. e�! C�a�'1s �►.� � � v� -}�,� L � -��+ --mss 1�.`fir� i P d W�vi° ( �n ►n n -1e,�. ��n�u, f ou n 4-D c,�7�c-ev� �Ls cir� op ,T)P—C:Ls i u,-\� -- VVN -&V --I r-� b-o� 6t c,�-� t-)a ,-e4 in' +ni s CA. ,E d,.P. {v YYlr. �Aj Y 6e j G „.{' S, -gQ � c+ lov Lo-CL” l vv L � r-j-- a l vv�� V1 ►mod wo � 1-0-4 a-s yy,, l vbw V S - N'Y,.-x J OY', �eh- 114 1�C