Agenda Related Items - Meeting of May 9, 2023
Supplemental Packet Date: May 9, 2023
THOUSAND OAKS CITY COUNCIL
Supplemental
Information
Packet
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA):
In compliance with the ADA, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting or other services in conjunction with this meeting, please contact the City Clerk Department at (805) 449-2151. Assisted listening devices are available at this meeting. Ask City Clerk st aff if you desire to use this device. Upon request, the agenda and documents in this agenda packet, can be made ava ilable in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability. Notification at least 48 hour s prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist City staff in assuring reasonable arrangement s can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
5:00 p.m.
Supplemental Information:
Any agenda related public documents received and distribut ed to a majority of the City Council after the Agenda Packet is printed are included in Supplemental Packets. Supplemental Packets are produced as needed, typically a minimum of two—one available on the Thursday preceding the City Council meeting and the second on Tuesday at the meeting. The Supplement al Packet is available for public inspection on the City’s website at toaks.org/agendas or by contacting the City Clerk Dept at (805) 449-2151 during normal busi- ness hours [main location pursuant to the Brown Act, G.C. 54957.5(2)].
Name City Item # In favor/ Oppose Comment
Paul Blakelock Newbury Park 12A N/A I would like the city to budget for a study on the impact of new development on traffic and other infrastructure issues south of the freeway near Borchard Road.
We were told that during the General Plan meetings that, although changes allowing higher density developments were being made, the GP process was "not the time" to address traffic concerns.
As a resident that is not involved in the planning process, common sense told me that infrastructure issues such as traffic, sewer, electrical, etc. would be reviewed as part of the approval process for each potential development. Then I realized that I was relying on common sense, so looked a little deeper.
After the General Plan is approved, it seems that there is no time or place where these issues are addressed before allowing a development. They might be considered, but it's too late to mandate fixes.
I've seen this game before, with building height restrictions. Once the heights were approved, there was no way to stop a developer from building to the maximum allowed height. Actually there was one way: negotiate. The city needed to allow the developer concessions to, for instance, remove more oak trees than would normally be allowed ,
in order to convince them not to build to full height.
Why am I bringing this up during the budget process? I'm told that traffic concerns are addresses during the budget process. And because I don't see any other time to do it.
Many people are concerned with traffic on Borchard Rd. near the 101 freeway, at both the Michael Dr. and Newbury Rd. intersections. It is a mess now, and the new developments that potentially will be allowed to the west near Michael and to the east near Newbury will cause complete gridlock. In the past I have had to wait three light cycles to get to the freeway due to the backed up traffic.
It's easy to imagine the reason that traffic concerns won't be addressed: Since no new developments have been approved, and might never be approved, improvements won't be made for traffic that may never materialize. But then again, they might materialize. Isn't that what planning is about? We don't need the details on which developments will eventually be there in order to do a study on possible infrastructure solutions. These studies take time, so it's too lat e
when the building proposals start. Let's not pretend that some developers aren't ready to go the moment that the General Plan allows them to.
Another reason to start early is that our hands are tied by the control that Caltrans has in that area. We should have a plan in place as soon as possible to get them on boar d
if need be. More likely, knowing how slow Caltrans moves, we should consider the traffic flow with the assumption that the area under their control won't change for at least 10 years.
In summary, I would like to see a study on how traffic can be improved before any new major developments in the area are approved. Even better would be to see the study before the General Plan is approved so these obvious impacts could be taken into consideration.
We need to budget for it now because we know that development is coming. Having numbers ready to justify what costs to pass on to developers seems like good basic planning.
Paul Blakelock
TO COUNCIL: 5/9/2023
MEETING DATE: 5/9/2023