Supplemental Packet 1 2 — Thousand Oaks City Council, September 12, 2023

THOUSAND OAKS CITY COUNCIL

THOUSAND

CALIFORMIA
Supplemental
Information
Packet
Agendapreen a Pace ate: Sorsepter 12, 20,3023
2:30 p.m.

Supplemental Information:

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 staff if you desire to use this device. Upon request, the agenda and documents in this agenda packet, can be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist City staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting THE FOLLOWING 13

PAGES ARE RELATED TO
ITEM 12A
Community Development Department

MEMORANDUM
City of
Thousand Oaks 2100 Thousand Oaks Boulevard • Thousand Oaks, CA 91362 Phone 805/449.2500 • Fax 805/449.2575 • www.toaks.org
TO: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM: Kelvin Parker, Community Development Director
DATE: September 12, 2023
SUBJECT: Item 12A - Report on Mobile Home Park and Options Affecting Seniors Including the Consideration of an Urgency Ordinance Establishing a Senior Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone
The attached Urgency Ordinance was modified from the original submission. The following is the revised Ordinance removing duplicates of Parts 3 and 5.

Additionally, only the maps referenced in the Urgency Ordinance are provided in the modified Urgency Ordinance, Exhibits A and B. Should the Urgency Ordinance be approved tonight; the corrected Urgency Ordinance is attached. cdd:660-21/H:COMMONICity CouncilICC Agenda Items|2023101122023ISr Mobile Home Park Overlay|Supplemental Revised Ord Memo.docx
2 toaks.org
ATTACHMENT #1
ORDINANCE NO.

AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS AMENDING
SECTIONS 9-4.202, 9-4.309 AND 9-4.2003 AS WELL
AS ADDING SECTIONS 9-4.2005, 9-4.2006,
9-4.2007, AND 9-4.2008 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE

OF THE CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS REGARDING

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SENIOR MOBILE

HOME PARK OVERLAY ZONE AND RELATED

REGULATIONS
The City Council of the City of Thousand Oaks does hereby ordain as follows:

Part 1
The City Council finds that:

WHEREAS, pursuant to Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution and sections 37100 et seq. of the California Government Code, the City Council may make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws; WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Section 36937, the City Council may, by a four-fifths vote, adopt an urgency ordinance for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, containing a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency, to be effective immediately upon passing;
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Thousand Oaks deems it necessary to adopt an urgency ordinance to provide protections for senior housing within the City's jurisdiction given recent and significant actions to modify mobile home park occupancy types within the City;
WHEREAS, there are eight (8) mobile home parks in the City, five (5) of which have long operated as senior mobile home parks, providing an important source of unsubsidized senior housing;
WHEREAS, the five senior mobile home parks represent approximately 865 spaces out of 1,008 total spaces of all mobile home spaces in the City; WHEREAS, the conversion of senior mobile home parks to mobile home parks allowing occupancy by persons of all ages will result in the loss of existing unsubsidized senior housing that is affordable within the City. Such a loss presents a threat to, and a specific adverse impact upon, public health, safety, and cdd:660-21/H:COMMON|City Council\CC Agenda Items\2023\01122023\Sr Mobile Home Park Overlay Attachment 1\Supplemental Revised Ord.docx

Page 1 ends

welfare and the City's ability to provide safe and decent housing opportunities to seniors;
WHEREAS, mobile home parks represent one of a few unsubsidized affordable housing options left to senior citizens that permit exclusive residence in a detached dwelling by those individuals over the age of 55 years; WHEREAS, the goals of the 2021-2029 Housing Element of the City's General Plan mobile home parks as a source of unsubsidized senior housing that is vital to preserve. Furthermore, future change to the land use designation and zoning requires approval by a vote of the people, unless park tenants receive certain payments as prescribed by the measure passed by the citizens; WHEREAS, the City's Housing Element recognizes that seniors over the age of 65 represent 19 percent of the City's population as of 2019; WHEREAS, in contrast to other senior housing in the City, mobile home parks afford seniors the ability to live in their own homes rather than in apartments and provide a senior living community in a low-rise setting that provides a side the park so that the resides and so easizy was teless facies and eveni WHEREAS, the City Council received written requests and numerous public comments from individuals concerned about the loss of senior housing in mobile home parks, including concerns one of the five parks would convert from a senior- only park to an all-age mobile home park;
WHEREAS, the City is aware of one mobile home park owner who intends o convert its mobile home park from a senior-only park to an all-age/family park and that this owner has already provided notice to the State Department o Housing and Community Development of this intent under the State Mobile Home Park Residency laws;
WHEREAS, currently, the City does not impose any regulations on the conversion of mobile home parks from senior-only to all-age / family parks; WHEREAS, this ordinance is necessary to develop new zoning regulations to implement a Senior Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone to promote and preserve senior mobile home parks subject to the City's Rent Stabilization Ordinance; WHEREAS, this ordinance is also necessary to mitigate the unregulated effects of conversion of senior housing to housing allowing occupancy by persons of all ages, including the potential shrinking inventory of existing quality unsubsidized affordable housing for seniors, and restricted housing options for seniors hoping to remain in their mobile home community or transition into such a community from other housing. No feasible alternative is available to satisfactorily cdd:660-21/H:COMMON|City Council\CC Agenda Items\2023\01122023\Sr Mobile Home Park Overlay Attachment 1\Supplemental Revised Ord.docx

Page 2 ends

4 mitigate or avoid these specific adverse impacts as well as or better than, or with a less burdensome effect than, the adoption of the proposed ordinance; WHEREAS, California's Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civil Code, § 51 et seq.) authorizes private parties to establish housing for senior citizens and the Federal Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq.) expressly allows for "housing for older persons";
WHEREAS, the Federal Housing Act, California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and California Mobile Home Park Residency law permit local regulation of mobile park housing to provide "housing for older persons" to include housing that is restricted to occupancy of at least 80 percent of units by at least one person who is age 55 or older;
WHEREAS, the California Legislature has authorized cities to provide zoning for senior-only mobile home parks under Health and Safety Code section 18300;
WHEREAS, the ordinance would not alter existing General Plan land use designations or development standards;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061 (b)(3), there is no possibility that this project will have a significant impact on the physical environment and, therefore, is exempt from CEQA. This Ordinance merely amends the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code to maintain a senior-only status for mobile home parks within the City that have demonstrated over a long period of time that the park owner required at least one member of the mobile home park coach located within the park be a person of 55 years of age or older.

This Ordinance does not directly or indirectly authorize or approve any actual changes in the physical environment. Applications for any new mobile home parks would be subject to additional environmental review on a case-by-case basis.

Accordingly, the City Council finds that this Ordinance would be exempt from CEQA under the common sense exemption;
WHEREAS, the City Council determined that an urgency ordinance is necessary to preserve the public peace, health, or safety of the citizens of the City, and further determined upon that basis that an urgency ordinance is necessary to prevent unregulated conversions of senior-only mobile home park conversions to "all ages/family" parks within the City; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of the text amendments herein and the zoning of the listed existing mobile home park properties to the Senior Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone is consistent with the City of Thousand Oaks General Plan and good zoning practice and is in the interest of the public health, safety, and general welfare.
cdd:660-21/H:COMMON|City Council\CC Agenda Items|2023\01122023\Sr Mobile Home Park Overlay/Attachment 1\Supplemental Revised Ord.docx

Page 3 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Thousand Oaks as follows:

SECTION 1: Based on the evidence presented, and the findings set forth, the city General Plan a Orthe land uses perited vy in said bon coastication.

SECTION 2: The City Council does hereby approve changes to the Existing Trailer Park Development Zone Map in Exhibit A by adding the Senior Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone to properties as identified in Exhibit B of this Ordinance.

Part 2
Article 2: Definitions
Article 2, Section 9-4.202 Definitions, of Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code, is hereby amended by the addition of the following definition in appropriate alphabetical order:
"Mobile home park" means an area or land where two or more spaces are rented or leased for mobile homes or manufactured homes to be used as dwellings. The dwellings may be either owned or rented by the occupants. A mobile home park is defined in State Law, Civil Code, § 798.4, and does not include residences provided by employers for farmworkers or other employees, nor does it include campgrounds or other sites for temporary lodging. "Senior mobile home park" means a mobile home park as defined in Section 798.4 of the California Civil Code where the occupancy of a mobile home space is restricted such that at least one person occupying the mobile home as a permanent resident must be age 55 or older and that person must own or be a part-owner of that mobile home or the direct beneficiary of a trust or estate that owns that mobile home. To comply with federal law, a senior park may permit up to 20 percent of the coach owners under the age of 55.

Part 3
Article 3: Establishment and Designation of Zones
Article 3, Section 9-4.309 - Establishment and Designation of Zones, Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the City of Thousand Oaks Code is hereby added to read as follows:

There is hereby established the Senior Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone Se readeried sparel contain in any use part Ten pre i re cdd:660-21/H:COMMONICity CouncilICC Agenda Items|2023\01122023\Sr Mobile Home Park Overlay Attachment 1\Supplemental Revised Ord.docx

Page 4 ends

6 of land within the SMHP Zone shall conform to the regulations set forth in Article 20 of this chapter.

Part 4
Article 4: Purposes of Zones
Article 20, Section 9-4.2003 - Overlay Zones, of Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code is hereby amended by the addition of the following:

Sec. 9-4.2003 - Senior Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone (SMHP) The purposes of this zone are:
a. To recognize senior mobile home parks as walkable communities where seniors may live actively and independently among peers, the preservation of those qualities being central to residents' continued health, welfare, and financial stability.
b. To recognize that senior mobile home parks provide one of the few housing options within Thousand Oaks available to seniors that are unsubsidized and allow for independent living in a detached dwelling.

C. To preserve a significant source of unsubsidized, senior housing by ensuring that senior mobile home parks within the City's jurisdiction remain predominantly available to seniors and are not converted to allow occupancy by persons of all ages.

To recognize mobile home parks as communities in which residents are substantially invested and to provide for the security of tenancy comparable to that of other residential communities less vulnerable to redevelopment.
e. To meet the purpose of the federal Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 (42 U.S.C. § 3607).
f. To prevent senior mobile home parks from converting or becoming all-ages mobile home parks.
g. To ensure a sufficient supply of land for this type of use remains in the City for seniors.
cdd:660-21/H:COMMONICity CouncilICC Agenda Items|2023\01122023|Sr Mobile Home Park Overlay/Attachment 1lSupplemental Revised Ord.docx

Page 5 ends

7 Part 5
Article 20, Mobile Home Park Development Zones
Sec. 9-4.2005 - Occupancy Limitations & Rentals
Section 9-4.2005 of Article 20, Chapter 4, of Title 9 is reinstated and amended to read as follows:

At least 80 percent of the occupied units in a Senior Mobile Home Park must be occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or older.

Senior Mobile Home Park occupancy satisfies the requirements of this section even if:
a. There are unoccupied mobile homes, provided that at least 80 percent of the occupied mobile homes are occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or older.

To the extent permitted by applicable law, for a period of no more than two consecutive years fewer than 80 percent of the occupied units are occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or older, provided the Senior Mobile Home Park has reserved all unoccupied mobile homes for occupancy by at least one person 55 years of age or older.

Section 9-4.2006 of Article 20, Chapter 4 of Title 9 is added to read as follows:

Sec. 9-4.2006 - Age Verification & Compliance Procedures a. The City shall determine, and maintain summary documentation establishing, that at least 80 percent of the mobile homes in a Senior Mobile Home Park are occupied by at least one resident who is 55 years of age or older. The occupancy verification documentation shall be made available by park owners for inspection by the City upon reasonable notice and request.

At least once every two years owners and operators of Senior Mobile Home Parks shall submit documentation confirming that at least 80 percent of all occupied mobile homes are occupied by at least one resident 55 years of age or older to the Planning Division of the City.

C. Upon the operative date of this Section 9-4.2006, and no later than 30 days after the request for age verification by a mobile home park owner, operator, or employee of the owner or operator, all owners and residents of all mobile homes units located, or proposed to be located, within the Senior Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone shall cdd:660-21/H:COMMONICity CouncilICC Agenda Items|2023101122023ISr Mobile Home Park Overlay Attachment 1|Supplemental Revised Ord.docx

Page 6 ends

8 provide to the park owner or operator, and the Planning Division of the City's Community Development Department the requested age verification documents or information.
d. The City shall consider government-issued identification to be reliable documentation of the age of the residents of the mobile home park, provided that it contains specific information about current age or date of birth (e.g., driver's license).
e. Reliable documentation shall also include a certification in a lease, application, affidavit, or other document signed by any member of the household age 18 or older asserting that at least one person in the unit is 55 years of age or older.

If the occupant(s) of a particular mobile home refuses or is unable to comply with these age verification procedures, the City may, if it has sufficient evidence, consider the unit to be occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or older. Such evidence may include:
(1) Government records or documents;
(2) Prior forms or applications; or
(3) A statement from an individual who has personal knowledge of the age of the occupants. The individual's statement must set forth the basis for such knowledge and be signed under penalty of perjury.
g. Failure to submit the verification required by this chapter or failure of the verification to confirm a mobile home park with the Senior Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone (SMHP) meets the definition in Section 9-

4.202 shall constitute a violation of the zoning ordinance, subject to enforcement in the manner provided in Municipal Code Section 1-

2.01. Section 9-4.2007 of Article 20, Chapter 4 of Title 9 is added to read as follows:

Sec. 9-4.2007 - Duty of Mobile Home Park Residents to Comply with Age Verification Request
Upon the operative date of this Section 9-4.2007, and no later than 30 days after the request for age verification by a mobile home park owner or operator or an employee or agent of the City, all owners and residents of all mobile homes located, or proposed to be located, within the Senior Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone shall provide to the mobile home park operator and the Planning Division of the City the requested age verification documents.
cdd:660-21/H:COMMONICity CouncilICC Agenda Items|2023\01122023|Sr Mobile Home Park Overlay/Attachment 1\Supplemental Revised Ord.docx

Page 7 ends

Section 9-4.2008 of Article 20, Chapter 4 of Title 9 is added to read as follows:

Sec. 9-4.2008 - Duty of Mobile Home Park Owners/Operators to Comply with Age Reporting Requirement and Certification a. Within 90 days of the passage of this Section 9-4.2008, and then every two years thereafter, the owner or operator of each Senior Mobile Home Park shall report to the Planning Director of the City confirmation that at least 80 percent of all occupied mobile homes are occupied by at least one resident 55 years of age or older. The owners or operators of each senior mobile home park shall maintain procedures for verifying the age of park residents.
b. The senior mobile home park owner or operator shall provide to the City a certification substantially in the following form:
"I [name] hereby certify that there is a least one
out of a total number of [total number]
mobile homes located in this mobile home park.

This certification is based on my personal
knowledge of the residents, evidence provided
to me in •the form of official government
documents containing specific information
about the current age of the residents, resident
affidavits, or age certifications made by
residents."
Part 6
(Uncodified)
Conflicts with Prior Ordinances
If the provisions in this Ordinance conflict in whole or in part with any other City regulation or ordinance adopted prior to the effective date of this section, the provisions in this Ordinance will control.

Part 7
(Uncodified)
Severability
If any section, subsection, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this title; it is hereby expressly declared that this title, and each section, subsection, cdd:660-21/H:COMMONICity CouncilICC Agenda Items|2023\01122023\Sr Mobile Home Park Overlay Attachment 1\Supplemental Revised Ord.docx

Page 8 ends

10 sentence, clause, and phrase hereof, would have been prepared, proposed, adopted, approved and ratified irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Part 8
(Uncodified)
Effective Date
This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage and adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of September, 2023, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Kevin McNamee, Mayor
City of Thousand Oaks, California
ATTEST/CERTIFY:

Laura B. Maguire, City Clerk
Date Attested:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Office of the City Attorney
Tracy M. Noonan, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO ADMINISTRATION:

Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
The presence of electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the City of Thousand Oaks City Council on the date cited above. cdd:660-21/H:COMMONICity CouncilICC Agenda Items|2023101122023ISr Mobile Home Park Overlay Attachment 11Supplemental Revised Ord.docx

Page 9 ends

Page 10 ends

EXHIBIT A
CASE # MCA-2023-70011
Existing Trailer Park Development Zone Map
Overlay/Attachment 1\Supplemental Revised Ord.docx
-Janss Rd-
cdd:660-21/H:COMMONICity CouncillCC Agenda Items|2023101122023|Sr Mobile Home Park Prog, Ventu Paste Pesaga-Granada Dr -Old Conejo Rd Camino Dos Rios
12 PY EXHIBIT A
* Hillcrest-Dr
n- Borchard Rd Thousand Oaks B/vd.

Park Name Spaces Lynn-Rd-
1 Vallecito Mobile Home Estates 303
2 Ventu Estates Mobile Home Park 156
3 Ventu Park Villa Mobile Home Park 171
4 Ranch Mobile Home Park
Thunderbird Oaks Mobile Home Club 161
6 Elms Plaza Mobile Home Park
7 53 Conejo Living - Vacant
8 Twin Palms Mobile Home Park 81
City of Thousand Oaks
Community Development Department
2,500 5.500 100000Đ
U:Icdcjansen|_Case Mapsl2023MobileHomeParksMobileHomeParks.aprx

Page 11 ends

EXHIBIT B
CASE # MCA-2023-70011
Proposed Trailer Park Development Zone Map with Senior Overlay Overlay/Attachment 1\Supplemental Revised Ord.docx
-Janss Rd-
cdd:660-21/H:COMMONICity CouncilICC Agenda Items|2023\01122023|Sr Mobile Home Park •Old Conejo Rd- -Ventu Park Camino Dos Rios Sagu9_ oranada Dr 13 Капризм ey ЕХНІВІТ В
Reino:Rd
3 S Hillcrest-Dr-
-Borchard Rd- Hi Thousand oaks Blva
-Lynn-Rd
Park Name Spaces
Vallecito Mobile Home Estates 303
N Ventu Estates Mobile Home Park 156 Pyanysdwe
Ventu Park Villa Mobile Home Park 171
Rench Mobile Home Perk
Thunderbird Oaks Mobile Home Club 161
City of Thousand Oaks
Community Development Department
7Feet
2,500 5,000 10,000
U: lcdcjanseni_Case Maps\2023WobileHomeParks\MobileHomeParks.aprx From: George Senko <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2023 1:47 PM
To: Kevin McNamee <[email protected]>; Al Adam <[email protected]>; Bob Engler <[email protected]>; Mikey Taylor <[email protected]>; David Newman <[email protected]> Cc: Andrew Powers <[email protected]>; Tracy Noonan <[email protected]>; Sandra Delgado <[email protected]>; Bruce Stanton <[email protected]>; Anne Anderson <[email protected]>; George Rosenthal < [email protected]>; Pat Hostmyer <[email protected]>
Subject: Senior Overlay Ordinance
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Councilmembers,
On Tuesday, at September 12th's council meeting, you will be voting on going forth with the senior overlay process. In order to protect The Ranch as a senior park, it is necessary that you vote for option 1.

The Ranch was always envisioned as a senior mobile home park. he original builder, Mr. Hohn, was only given permission to build Thunderbird Oaks park if he would create the Ranch Senior Park.

Creating a senior overlay ordinance is the only way to protect your discretion in deciding how housing will be regulated in Thousand Oaks. Enacting the urgency ordinance is the only way to protect The Ranch during the time it will take to fully complete the overlay process. The Ranch's owner has already taken unilateral steps to convert that park into a totally inappropriate family park.

We ask you to please vote for Option 1. It will take four of the five votes to make this happen.

George Senko
President, Chapter 1121
Golden State Mobilehome Owners League (GSMOL)
818-621-6656
14 THE FOLLOWING 34

PAGES ARE RELATED TO
ITEM 12C
15 Public Works Department

MEMORANDUM
City of
Thousand Oaks 2100 Thousand Oaks Boulevard • Thousand Oaks, CA 91362 Phone 805/449.2400 • Fax 805/449.2475 • www.toaks.org
To: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
From: Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
Date: September 12, 2023
Subject: Agenda Item 12C - Stop Sign Installations at 12 Intersections (MI 2033) Please see attached emails received from residents pertaining to subject agenda item. 16| toaks.org
From: Mike Snow <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 3:58 PM
To: Bradley Ackart
Cc: Julie Snow
Subject: Proposal to install stop signs in my neighborhood You don't often get email from mike h [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Bradley,
Regarding the proposal to install 11 stop signs in my neighborhood I would like for you and the council to be aware of my opposition to this plan. I have lived in the Deer Ridge neighborhood since 1998 and during those 25 years I cannot remember a single traffic/safety incident that this proposal would have prevented. Even more importantly I can't remember any traffic accidents at all during that time. We drive, walk and ride our bikes in this neighborhood every single day. This is a very safe and quiet community and the very reason why people choose to live here. The stop signs and other painted lines poposed are a waste of taxpayer money for this neighborhood. It would also negatively affect the aesthetic of our homes and community. People here are more than careful when they approach these intersections. The people visiting and that service us are also extremely careful. As I've pointed out this isn't a neighborhood that would benefit from this. I've lived in communities where what is being proposed would be welcomed but not here, not in Deer Ridge.

Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to voice my concerns.

Best Regards,
Michael Snow
3287 Erinlea Avenue
Newbury Park, CA 91320
805-857-0672
17 From: Gary Abrams <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 10:28 PM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: No to adding 11 stop signs
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Thousand Oaks City Council,
We read the recently mailed City Council September 12 Meeting Notice about adding stop signs at 11 intersections in the so-called Deer Ridge neighborhood of Newbury Park.

Having lived in Deer Ridge for over 30 years and having observed zero safety issues at any of the intersections listed, we are of the opinion
that adding stop signs is an unnecessary waste of resources and will detract from the appearance of our streets. The streets and intersections in our area are all wide (over 30'), well lit at night, almost never obstructed by parked vehicles or foliage and traffic is very light. We have never felt threatened or unsafe driving or walking in the neighborhood due to lack of stop signs at the intersections - drivers are generally very courteous.

To paraphrase California Vehicle Code 21800, an uncontrolled interested is to be treated as if a "Yield" sign is in place, i.e. right of way goes to the vehicle already in the intersection, and if two vehicles approach at the same time, the vehicle on the left yields to the vehicle on the right. Drivers in our local area
seem to follow this code very well.

The question of added stop signs is reminiscent of the old refrain "a solution in search of a problem". Stop signs are simply not needed in this case. Please conserve public resources while helping to maintain the desirable rural feel of our community by canceling the proposed addition of 11 unnecessary traffic controls.

Sincerely,
Gary and Mara Abrams
3311 Mountain Trail Av
Thousand Oaks, CA 91320
18 From: Buster Akrey < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 2:43 PM
To: Gary Abrams
Cc: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Re: No to adding 11 stop signs
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Gary is correct !
Sign are unnecessary and would be considered pollution to myself and everyone I have spoken to in our beautiful neighborhood
We moved here because of the space and minimal signs.

I believe it would be a waste of money and angry all who live here Thank you
Frank Akrey
1039 antelope place
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 3, 2023, at 10:28 PM, Gary Abrams <[email protected]> wrote:

Having lived in Deer Ridge for over 30 years and having observed zero safety issues at any of the intersections listed, we are of the opinion that adding stop signs is an unnecessary waste of resources and will detract from the appearance of our streets. The streets and intersections in our area are all wide (over 30'), well lit at night, almost never obstructed by parked vehicles or foliage and traffic is very light. We have never felt threatened or unsafe driving or walking in the neighborhood due to lack of stop signs at the intersections - drivers are generally very courteous.

Sincerely,
Gary and Mara Abrams
3311 Mountain Trail Av
Thousand Oaks, CA 91320
20 From: Cindy Magnante <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:28 PM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: NO to Stop Signs in Deer Ridge
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Thousand Oaks City Council,
Having lived in Deer Ridge for over 13 years and having observed zero safety issues at any of the intersections listed, we are of the opinion that adding stop signs is an unnecessary waste of resources and will detract from the appearance of our streets. The streets and intersections in our area are all wide (over 30), well lit at night, almost never obstructed by parked vehicles or foliage and traffic is very light. We have never felt threatened or unsafe driving or walking in the neighborhood due to lack of stop signs at the intersections and drivers are generally very courteous.

Stop signs are simply NOT needed in this case. Please conserve public resources while helping to maintain the desirable rural feel of our community by canceling the proposed addition of 11 unnecessary traffic controls.

Sincerely,
Paul and Cindy Magnante
941 Remington Place
Newbury Park, CA 91320
21 From: Randy Hallford <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:54 PM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Deer Ridge - Proposed 11 stop signs
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Thousand Oaks City Council,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed installation of 11 new stop signs in the neighborhood of Deer Ridge. As a resident of Deer Ridge, I understand that traffic safety is a priority for our community; however, I do not believe there is an issue that needs addressing.

The addition of so many stop signs would create an unpleasant driving experience for residents who travel through the neighborhood regularly as they would be forced to come to a complete halt at each intersection. This could lead not only to increased congestion at peak times but also have serious implications on air quality and noise levels in our area.

Furthermore, as a father with four children, former police officer, and frequent walker within Deer Ridge, I can personally attest that there are no concerns relating to lack of traffic signage or pedestrian safety issues. My firsthand experience leads me further away from believing these 11 stop signs are necessary or beneficial for anyone living within or visiting Deer Ridge.

Thank you for your time and attention on this matter.

Sincerely,
Randy Hallford
(805) 813-3999
982 Golden Crest Avenue
Newbury Park, CA 91320
22 From: Jenneffer Hallford <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2023 10:58 AM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Deer Ridge: Stop Sign Proposal
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Good morning,
I am writing this email to voice my opposition to the proposed addition of 11 stop signs to our neighborhood.

I am a mother of 4 and frequently walk the neighborhood with my children. I not only have a significant interest in the safety of my children but also the safety of my neighbors and their children and grandchildren. From my personal experience, we have never had an issue due to lack of stop signs. Cars and pedestrians (including bicycles) are well aware of the commonsense protocol involving intersections. After discussing this topic with my neighbors, I realized that my personal experience was not unique as this is an experience other neighbors share.

After reviewing the Staff Report provided on the city website, I found that "obtaining community input is a key component" when considering the installation of the stop signs.

I believe our community has been very vocal in the opposition of the stop signs.

Stemming not only from our personal experience but the love for our community and neighbors. Yet after reading the reports, it seems like our opinion will be overshadowed by a lack of choice and fall on deaf ears.

The report also states that the addition of the stop signs is "to better clarify and remind motorists the need for vehicles approaching the intersection" yet this "reminder" is not needed. I suggest inquiring into collision reports from our neighborhood and investigating whether the lack of stop signs has directly correlated with accidents, if any.

To my knowledge an accident under those circumstances has not occurred.

The proposal of the stop signs is represented as a "recommendation." A recommendation for an issue that does not exist. The installation of this "reminder" , as represented by the report will cost about $5,500.

Although I will be unable to personally attend the City Council meeting tonight, please do not misinterpret my absence as an indifference to this proposal. My neighbors and I walk and drive on these streets daily and we are aware of issues, or in this case lack of issues present in our community. I strongly encourage you to take our input into strong 23 consideration. This may be a recommendation from the City, but the issue simply does not exist and is not needed. Yet, this seems to be a proposal that snowballed from a single request for a single stop sign.

Jenneffer Hallford
982 Golden Crest Avenue
Newbury Park, Ca 91320
24 From: Jeff Harris < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 10:50 PM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Stop signs in Deer Ridge neighborhood
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I live at 3337 Mountain Trail Avenue, Newbury Park and I'm contacting you to share that I am very opposed to the proposed addition of stop signs in our neighborhood.

The residents of the neighborhood have been driving safely for the 30+ years that these homes have been here and we like it the way it is now.

Please support our opposition to this project.

Jeff Harris
25 From: Samantha <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2023 10:39 AM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Stop Sign Recommend
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I wanted to right and let you know that I oppose this recommendation for the 11 Stop Signs in the Deer Ridge neighborhood.

As a driver in this neighborhood I always feel very safe with everyone who drives in our neighborhood. I have never felt worried or concerned of a problem at any of these intersections nor has anybody been that I have spoken with concerning this issue.

Thank you,
Samantha Harris
26 From: Sarah Harris < [email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2023 10:41 AM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Stop Signs Recommendation
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello,
I'm writing in opposition to the new stop signs proposed in the Deer Ridge neighborhood of Newbury Park. 11 new stop signs within one small neighborhood is extremely excessive and feels politically or monetarily motivated. I feel we have a very safe and conscientious population here in Deer Ridge, and strongly oppose this insane overuse of regulation.

Sarah Harris
27 From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:30 AM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: NO Stop signs in Deer Ridge.
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

To Whom it May Concern,
Our family has lived in Deer Ridge for 22 years, moved in when kids were very little. In all these years we have not experienced people driving in our neighborhood streets recklessly or fast. Not sure why tax payor dollars ought to go towards putting up several more stop signs here. It seems un-necessary and wasteful.

Please DO NOT PUT UP MORE STOP SIGNS in Deer Ridge. Thank You.

Sincerely,
Joyce Katz
Sent from my iPhone
28 From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2023 10:50 AM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Deerridge stop signs
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

City Engineer
I have been a resident of Deerridge for 22 years and counting. Walking/ dog walking everyday for 22 years I have never seen or heard of an car accident in Deerridge. Stop signs are not needed in our neighborhood. Our community drives safely and yields to any other cars in the area. Our speed limit is 25 mph which I find our neighbors follow.

I vote for No to the stop signs. Please use the money for other improvements in our area.

Best
Michael Katz
936 Golden Crest Ave
Newbury Park, CA 91320
29 From: Scott McVey <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 10:03 AM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Proposed Deer Ridge Stop Signs
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear TO City Council,
We recently received mail correspondence discussing this proposed stop sign installation in my neighborhood. We thought this matter was resolved early this year with the proposed 2 sign solution. What happened?
My family has lived on Mountain Trail for 25 years and both drive and walk most all of these streets where you are proposing stop signs be added. We have never personally had any issues while entering and/or exiting any of these tee intersections nor have we heard of any occurrences from our immediate neighbors or neighbors at large.

We oppose adding these signs for multiple reasons; personal experience presented above, adding these signs will detract from the quaint and natural beauty of the neighborhood, expending tax resources for signs that aren't needed is wasteful, especially since there are other more vexing traffic safety issues within Newbury Park in which this money could be spent. Example: address the excessive speed of cars on Lynn Rd between Deer Valley and Wendy where I walk my dog daily and I swear most are doing 60 MPH. It is like a freeway there.

Thank you for you time and consideration for our opinion in this matter.

Scott and Dawn McVey
30 From: Terrence Enright <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 10:52 AM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Stop Signs in Deeridge, Newbury Park
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

We respectfully, but strongly, oppose the installation of stop signs at all T-intersections within the Deer Ridge neighborhood.

There is no justification (accidents or otherwise) for this over-regulation of intra-neighborhood, strictly residential, T-intersections. This proposed over-regulation is inconsistent with the majority of communities. Over-regulation of traffic tends to invalidate other appropriate traffic controls (human nature).

Should the City Council approve this shotgun approach to intra-residential stop signs, they would be setting inappropriate precedence for hundreds of like-uncontrolled residential T-intersections throughout the city.

Stop signs at residential T-intersections are most properly warranted when the residential street (25 mph) intersects a primary through street with heavier traffic and a higher speed limit. There are no through streets in this neighborhood. Accordingly, the overwhelming majority of traffic in this low- density community is the residents.

The city has made many outstanding traffic safety engineering changes! However, this proposal would not be one of them.

I recommend that city traffic engineering staff make a physical review of other intra-neighborhood T- intersections for guidance on this issue.

Respectfully submitted,
Terry and Kristy Enright
(34 year residents)
3286 Erinlea Avenue
Thousand Oaks
Residents of the Conejo Valley since March 1962
31 September 6, 2023
Regarding Unnecessary Stop Signs
Dear Mayor McNamee, Councilmembers Adam, Engler, Newman, Taylor:

I am writing to you as a resident of the neighborhood in question. I wish I could be at the meeting to speak to you in person, but I will be out of the country at the time of your meeting.

There was a complaint about where Golden Crest meets with Erinlea. Erinlea is a long street, with a steep downhill and that section of Golden Crest is one of the few streets that is not a cul de sac. It also gets traffic fed from other streets. We need a stop sign here. But our City staff is thorough, they always want to do the right thing, I know this as I worked with them for 20 years, as a traffic commissioner. And now 7 years on the planning commission. Our City staff is the best, they are pro-active. However, this is one of the few times where being proactive is just wrong, and overkill.

One stop sign, for this one intersection is the right thing to do. More is not better in this situation.

It is a small neighborhood. Most streets are short cul de sacs. It is not a cut through neighborhood so those who drive here know it. 11 stops signs are too much. I hope you all drove through my neighborhood and did your due diligence and saw how small and quiet it is.

When a cul de sac meets in a T with a through street, it is already in the vehicle code that drivers must yield to the larger street. And, we do. On these small cul de sacs, drivers do not get up to any speed as they approach the T. They are naturally cautious before turning onto the larger streets.

There is no way that the police have the resources to sit and monitor these 11 intersections. Everyone who drives here will know that and disregard the stop signs. And because there are so many, they will disregard the one stop sign that is necessary.
32 I believe that 11 stop signs, that will be disregarded and are unnecessary in this small neighborhood are also visual pollution. I also think of the cost to taxpayers for the installation and maintenance of these is an unwarranted and unwanted expense.

I think Staff remembers the Peppertree Park parking situation. Again, staff tried to do the right thing for residents. It is a park with a lot of activity, a lot of sports, and parking is tough there. We had a hearing for angled parking; we could add additional parking if we angled it along Reino road. It was a Wed night, a school night, just like your meeting night. A lot of people who work, and who have kids didn't show up to tell us how they felt. We approved it, thinking we were doing them a favor. The result was a disaster. That neighborhood did not want it and the city ended up taking it back to the way it was.

As staff will state in their report, the Traffic Commission agreed with us residents and voted to recommend only the stop sign at Golden Crest. Please take their (and my) recommendation. Only do what is appropriate, and no more. One stop sign at the intersection of Erinlea and Golden Crest.

Sincerely
Sharon McMahon
33 From: Connor Philpott <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 5:01 PM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: T-intersection Stop Signs
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mr. Ackart,
My name is Connor Philpott and as a resident of the deer ridge community. A community in which I have lived in my whole life and the location of a few of these stop signs. I believe the adding of stop signs in these locations is absurd. The community has been a safe place my entire life. The adding of stop signs will do two things. First the stop signs will confuse the average driver. Example if you take a stop sign such as the one on holliday st and wendy dr people don't know basic right of way rules. Leading to more traffic collisions. The proposed areas of stop signs have been safe places where people only have to do their due diligence and look before preceding. Secondly, adding stop signs in such poor locations; many people are going to make the decision to disregard such stop signs. I know personally they would be hard to respect as a driver who uses these roads everyday. I hope my viewpoints will be taken seriously as a long time member of this community. Thanks! Sincerely,
Connor Philpott
34 Jim Mashiko
From: Elizabeth Jones < [email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 9, 2023 10:20 AM
To: Jim Mashiko
Subject: Fwd: City Council Sept 12 Re:Eleven proposed stop signs Attachments: imagel.jpeg
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
am forwarding my concerns to you due to Bradley Ackart out of office --- Forwarded message -------
From: Elizabeth Jones <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 10:14 AM
Subject: City Council Sept 12 Re:Eleven proposed stop signs To: Bradley Ackart <[email protected]>
I am writing regarding the proposal to add 11 stop signs in the Deer Ridge Neighborhood in Newbury Park. I echo the comments made by Gary and Mara Abrams in the September 8, 2023 Thousand Oaks Acorn I want to go on record that I am opposed to this proposal in its entirety.

I have lived in this neighborhood for 30+ years and have extensive personal experience with all the proposed T- intersections either as a pedestrian or driving. Rarely have there been accidents at any of these intersections. I can recall a singular accident. The same that was reported at the Traffic Commission meeting.

The CA DMV handbook states for T intersections without Stop signs the vehicle on the through road have the right of way and when coming to an intersection be prepared to slow down and stop if necessary. The picture I have included is the intersection of Erinlea and Golden Crest. Item 1 on the the proposed list of stop signs and 1 in the picture. Item 2 in the picture is Erinlea and Wendy. Item 3 is the opposite side of Erinlea and Wendy. At the Traffic Commission meeting, it was asserted that a stop sign was needed as the visual reminder to stop. Drivers stop just fine at the Wendy intersection where there is no stop sign (picture Item 2). As a compromise the Traffic Commission settled on suggesting on 1 stop sign- at intersection 1. This compromise is an unneeded solution. Note the close proximity to the next intersection (picture item 2).

Adding stop signs would not make these intersections any safer. More likely less safe as a driver would now be expecting cross traffic to stop at stop signs and would be unprepared for drivers "blowing" the stop sign.

An additional concern is the reduction in available parking by adding these stop signs. These signs would eliminate street parking for all the homes in front of the signs. There is already parking congestion in many of these areas.

The money spent installing these signs in areas where there is little need is a poor use of tax dollars.

Elizabeth Jones
1 35
1099 Antelope Pl
Newbury Park
Jim Mashiko
From: Lili Goczal < [email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2023 3:26 AM
To: Jim Mashiko
Subject: Re: Staff Recommendation to install 11 stop signs at Deer Ridge T-intersections. [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

September 9, 2023
Re: Staff Recommendation to install 11 stop signs at Deer Ridge T-intersections.

My husband and I are newcomers to this area. The attraction was its beauty and peacefullness. While I encourage safety for all, I do not see the benefit of installing these stop signs. I must preface that I regularly use only 7 of these intersections, namely by your #'s (1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11), Never have I felt in danger at these T-intersections. They are unobstructed areas with little traffic. The driving code for approaching a T is sufficient. Only a reckless driver severly impaired would not follow the rule, and such a driver would likely ignore the stop sign also.

I suggest that the monies that would fund these stop signs would be more appropriately used toward resurfacing and fixing the many potholes along these avenues. The worst hole, growing weekly, is when turning right from Golden Crest Ave onto Deer Valley Ave.

Thank you for your attention.

Lili Goczal
Richard Goczal
3301 Mountain Trail Ave.
(805) 375-6556
From: Tom FitzGibbon <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 4:42 PM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Sep 12, 2023 City Council Meeting re Deer Ridge Stop Signs You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi-
We have lived in Deer Ridge for 14 years. I am not familiar with any accidents at any intersection in our community during that time. There is very little traffic here as it is all residents going to or from their homes. Thus, there is really no need for the proposed stop signs, with the possible exception of (1) a stop sign on Golden Crest where it joins Erinlea near Wendy Drive (#1 in the Meeting Notice), and (2) the stop sign on Antelope at Golden Crest (MN #8). All of the others are not necessary as it is clear the right-of-way belongs to cars passing straight through T intersections, rather than those making turns.

Save the money and use it for more bicycle infrastructure.

Let me know if you have any questions: 310.795.1410.

Thanks
Tom & Dara
Tom FitzGibbon & Dara Rogers
3324 Erinlea Ave.

Newbury Park, CA 91320
E: [email protected]
T: 310.795.1410
E: [email protected]
T: 805.338.5340
38 Jim Mashiko
From: Ed Simmons <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2023 9:02 PM
To: Bradley Ackart; Jim Mashikc
Cc: Ed Simmons; Kevin McNamee
Subject: Stop Signs Proposed - Deer Ridge
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

To: Thousand Oaks City Council
Council Meeting 9/12/23
Re: Agenda Item 12.C (Department Reports)
Bradley Ackart,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed installation of 11 new stop signs in the neighborhood of Deer Ridge. As a resident of Deer Ridge, I understand that traffic safety is a priority for our community; however, I do not believe there is an issue that needs addressing.

There is also the matter of enforcement. Enforcement of the existing yield law California Vehicle Code 21800 which applies to uncontrolled intersections should suffice as it appears to have been the case for over 30 years since the development of Deer Ridge. Allocation of law enforcement dollars from the police budget on this idea, if allocated at all, would be better spent on enforcing existing speed limits within Deer Ridge and on Wendy south of Lynn and installing flashing lights for the pedestrian crosswalk on Wendy at Erinlea.

Furthermore, as a frequent walker within Deer Ridge, I can personally attest that there are no concerns relating to lack of traffic signage for pedestrian safety issues. I do not believe all of these 11 stop signs are necessary or beneficial for anyone living within or visiting Deer Ridge.

Thank you for your time and attention on this matter.

Ed Simmons
Consultant - Parking, Transportation and Real Estate
3117 Deer Valley Ave.

Newbury Park, Ca. 91320
310-991-2743
[email protected]
1 39
Jim Mashiko
From: Mary Simmons <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2023 8:34 AM
To: Bradley Ackart; Jim Mashiko
Cc: Kevin McNamee
Subject: Fwd: Stop signs in Deer Ridge
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

To: Thousand Oaks City Council
Council Meeting 9/12/23
Re: Agenda Item 12.C (Department Reports)
Bradley Ackart,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed installation of 11 new stop signs in the neighborhood of Deer Ridge. As a resident of Deer Ridge, I understand that traffic safety is a priority for our community. However, I do not believe there is an issue that needs addressing.

Allocation of law enforcement dollars from the police budget on this idea, if allocated at all, would be better spent on enforcing existing speed limits within Deer Ridge and on Wendy south of Lynn and installing flashing lights for the pedestrian crosswalk on Wendy at Erinlea.

Thank you for your time and attention on this matter.

Mary Simmons
1 40
From: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 11:48 AM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: Stop signs Deer Ridge
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Thousand Oaks City Council,
I am writing to express my opposition to the ridiculous proposed installation of 11 stop signs in the Deer Ridge neighborhood. Our neighbors have been very careful driving in Deer Ridge and we feel strongly that these stop signs are not needed to improve safety.

I have never seen or heard about any problems or accidents to merit this absurd action to install the 11 stop signs.

Our neighborhood is more than 30 years old and we enjoy a certain way of driving our streets, there is no need to change this. Adding stop signs will lead to new congestion and increase noise levels as well.

Thank you for supporting our opposition to this matter.

Sincerely,
Debra Violette
971 Golden Crest Ave
41 From: Betty Levy <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2023 2:59 PM
To: Bradley Ackart
Subject: TRAFFIC ISSUES
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

To Thousand Oaks City Council
I am a resident in the Deer Ridge Community of Newbury Park/Thousand Oaks I think it's a ridiculous waste of tax payer money and time to install stop signs in this neighborhood.

It's just another way to regulate and control people. Why don't you put up cameras instead? Why not just have police on every corner to make sure we obey the rules! Duane & Betty Levy
1026 Antelope Place
Newbury Park
42 From: Pamela Rhodes <|[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2023 4:57 PM
To: Bradley Ackart
Cc: Kevin McNamee; Al Adam; Bob Engler; David Newman; Mikey Taylor; Kelvin Parker; City Clerk's Office; Community Development Department; Public Works Department; [email protected]
Subject: Re: NO STOP SIGNS TO DEER RIDGE!
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 04:43:57 PM PDT, Pamela Rhodes <[email protected]> wrote:

To the Thousand Oaks City Council and all other interested parties, Our family moved to 929 Remington Place, Newbury Park on 8/30/1988. We moved in when Deer Ridge was still under construction. We love our Deer Ridge neighborhoods and neighbors.

We respect each other in more ways than can be listed but one of those ways is in our manner of driving. We drive slowly and respectfully through the neighborhood.

Our intersections are approached cautiously and we do not have a problem with speeders going through our neighborhood.

This email is being sent because of the notice we received in our mail notifying us of the city's intent to install 11 stop signs.

We have not observed any safety issues or close calls in our entire 35 years living here. Our street is a cul de sac off of Deer Valley Ave. In 35 years I can honestly say that we have had to yield to an oncoming car on Deer Valley Ave. less than 20 times. There was no speeding and the turn/yield was safe and cautious. As we have traveled through other Deer Ridge streets over the past 35 years, we have had even less contact with cars yielding. The streets are short enough and curvy enough that speeding is not an issue ever. We drive slowly here. I doubt you have record of even one accident in our Deer Ridge development. If so, I would ask that you would provide those records to us.

By adding stop signs you will be creating situations that could actually increase the likelihood of problems as our residents are not used to having to be stopped at EVERY intersection.

I believe, that should you go forward and install these unnecessary stop signs, you are being irresponsible in the handling of our tax payer monies and city resources. I am 43 really in the dark as to why you would pursue such a needless project. Deer Ridge warrants no project of this type and I really hope you listen to our Deer Ridge residents when they tell you that WE DO NOT WANT THIS!
Please use our tax dollars to improve other areas of the city. As an example I can point you to the intersection down by Islands Restaurant/Wendy Drive off ramp/ and Lowe's commercial property. The traffic signals there are incredibly dangerous with drivers running a red light daily, near misses, and I'm sure accidents. Those are not problems you will find in Deer Ridge!
Please do the right thing and cancel this stop sign project. There is absolutely no reason to have it go through.

Unfortunately my husband and I have separate church commitments tomorrow and are unable to attend the meeting. I am giving Gary and Mara Abrams permission to speak on our behalf if aiven an opportunity to do so.

Sincerely and with hope that you will listen to us,
Donald & Pamela Rhodes
929 Remington Place
Newbury Park, CA 91320
805-390-0729
805-390-8412
44 September 4, 2023
Thousand Oaks City Council - Public Works
2100 Thousand Oaks Blvd., Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
Attn: Bradley Ackhart - [email protected]
First, I would like to thank the Thousand Oaks City Council and Public Works for scheduling a Meeting to improve the safety conditions of my Neighborhood.

Your staff has recommended 11 stop signs in the area I have lived in since the Deer Ridge tract was developed in 1988. I do not see a need for any stop signs in this area. Also, gasoline & electricity are expensive and each time a vehicle comes to a complete stop and accelerated it uses more energy. So, I feel it also is environmentally wasteful for our energy sources.

How many vehicle or pedestrian collisions or deaths with current traffic conditions have there been since 1988 in this designated area due to a lack of stop signs at these intersections? How much does it cost for each stop sign to be installed? If there is any available money from our high property taxes in our area of homes there is an extremely, dangerous road condition that I feel is the highest priority of funds to make it safer and that is crossing of Wendy Drive from the Deer Ridge tract on Erinlea Avenue. In the past I have requested the City of TO to install a stop light on Wendy Drive at this intersection of Erinlea Avenue and Wendy Drive and it hasn't been installed. Residents cross here all day and night to walk their kids to Banyan School, walk their dogs, go to Banyan Park, and residents of other neighborhoods cross to walk and ride bikes in our tract. Crosswalk at Knollwood & Lynn Rd. you installed seems like also a good alternative. I've read you have a grant for installing something like this crossing, but it is not done. When is it scheduled? I have noticed that in front of Tarantula Hill Brewery on TO Blvd., that has a speed limit of 35 mph, there is installed a safety lit up crossing walk lane on the street with flashing lights on the road and posts with flashing lights on either side of the road. Wow great job! But you are expecting people and animals to cross on Wendy Drive and Erinlea Avenue with a speed limit of 45 mph with a painted crossing lane? We need a Stop Light on this intersection crossing with a mounted post that has a push pad to activate the stop light and a crossing path with flashing lights on the street and posts with flashing lights on either side of the road before a tragedy occurs that could have been avoided.

My husband and I have had numerous close calls over the years crossing here and it's even more dangerous now that we are older, and we take our grandchild in a stroller or our daughter's French bulldog with its short, little legs to Banyan Park with these traffic conditions. Many neighbors have complained to me about this problem for 37 years!
The other extremely, dangerous road intersection whether driving in a car or walking across the street is the intersection of Wendy Drive and Potrero Road. The visibility south on Potrero Road is limited and as they are proceeding downhill drivers can pick up speed. Also, this is a very, high usage road crossing for the trail head into the National Park where people enjoy walking and mountain bike riding. This is also an intersection that is used all day every day for water trucks going to deliver in the Hidden Valley homes. A crosswalk and stop light here is a very much needed for safety concerns for vehicles, bike riders, and pedestrians.How many pedestrian, vehicle collisions or deaths have occurred here in this road intersection over the years? 1 45
In the past, I have called you about a possible sink hole in the road of our tract at the corner of Antelope Place and Golden Crest Avenue. Thank you so much again for fixing this problem your crews were there for weeks.

Unfortunately, this intersection has a problem again. There is a big pothole which you know can harbor nails or sharp debris and can cause damage to a wheel or a flat tire. Wide cracks are everywhere in the road and Public Works needs to have someone assess the problem. With all the wonderful rain this year the ground water engineers need to evaluate this section of road, in my opinion before money is spent on a stop sign here. *I have enclosed 3 photos of the road.

Last time our streets were resurfaced within days the roads had cracks everywhere. I called to complain. I was told that you had fired the contractor doing the resurfacing for the other phases of the Deer Ridge tract to be done because the product and application were faulty. The other sections of the Deer Ridge tract were resurfaced properly. I called you back to ask when you were going to redo and correct the resurfacing and it wasn't done to the level of the other sections of the track. I live on Mountain Trail Avenue, and it was the 1st section that was done.

When have you scheduled the resurfacing of the streets that were done incorrectly years ago? Thank you for maintaining the vegetation land areas on the perimeter of our tract on the roads of Wendy Drive and Lynn Road. These are huge areas of land, and the hard-working crews work constantly to maintain it. Unfortunately, many of the pine trees have dead branches in them that need to be pruned. There is also debris very thick under the trees that need to be cleaned away. As the fire danger in our area is always present these ground covered areas are ladder fuels to ignite brush fires. *l've enclosed a photo of one of the pine trees and one of the ground debris.

Our tract used to have a concrete sign with the letters "Deer Ridge" imprinted in it at the corner of Erinlea Avenue and Wendy Drive. It looks like the pine tree roots have grown to topple it over and it was removed.

When is it going to be replaced? If the trees you planted broke it, it seems like the City of TO would be responsible for replacing it. If it isn't, can the landscaping crew at the very least level the soil and plant it? It's a real eye sore. What do you suggest? *| have enclosed a photo of the area.

My family moved to Newbury Park in 1963. I have raised my daughters in Newbury Park with my husband, Michael Estrada, a retired Battalion chief for VCFD here. Each year the freeway and roads become more congested, and crime and the cost-of-living increases. We did not have to lock our home or car doors in Newbury Park and lower income citizens and new immigrants were able to buy homes in this area. People are leaving Los Angeles County and similar places because of congestion and high-density housing which raises the crime rate and the cost of living and lowers to quality of life to move here! Please VOTE to preserve our quality of life here with low-density housing and safe roadways that many residents live in and have invested in! Your decisions can raise the cost of living while lowering the quality of life for all income brackets and raise the crime rate. I look forward to the City of Thousand Oaks improving some of the issues I've addressed soon.

Sincerely,
Sally Estrada
3325 Mountain Trail Avenue
Newbury Park, CA 91320-5820
[email protected]
Attachments: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B, ЗА
2 46
From: Caro|RaeDeanHenderson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 10:46 AM
To: Bradley Ackart
Cc: Kevin McNamee
Subject: Proposed stop sign at Campbell Avenue and Fordham Avenue [Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Some points to keep in mind when considering this proposed stop sign:

One, this is not a 4-way stop. Fordham as it continues past Campbell toward Lynn Road dead ends several feet from intersection. There are no homes facing this small section of roadway nor main driveways facing this short section of roadway. Basically traffic does not use this section of roadway except for an occasionally parked car.

Two, has an independent licensed traffic engineer reviewed and approved the installation of a stop sign at this location?
Three, this intersection has unfettered line-of-sight approaching this intersection and many people will be inclined not to stop or roll through it creating a dangerous perception for motorists and pedestrians, not to mention the family of six children who live on the corner of Campbell and Fordham who have made this small section of Fordham their private playground and will believe everyone is going to stop looking all directions before they proceed with the protection of stop signs. I personally had a young child ride into the intersection in front of my vehicle. There is a dip in the street at this intersection which makes you come a rolling stop so fortunately I was able to stop for this young child.

Four, streets are not playgrounds for children. They are meant for traffic flow. Playing in them should not be encouraged.

Five, Campbell Avenue is the main artery so maybe a stop sign at Fordham but that creates a three-stop.

In my last interaction with traffic engineers they usually do not recommend three-way stops as it sets up the perception that everyone is going to stop.

Six, is there a history of accidents at this intersection that might indicate the need for additional traffic control.

Thank you for your consideration.

Carol Henderson
1929 Campbell Avenue
Thousand Oaks CA. 91360
805-905-1086
47 10/28/2020 Fax-Cover-Sheet-4-01-724x1024.png (724×1024)

FAX COVER SHEET

KEVIN MCNAMEE

AL ADAM
TO: BOB ENGLER FROM: TERRY ENRIGHT

DAVIA NEWMAN

MIKEY TAYLOR KRISTY ENRIGHT
COMPANY: DATE:

CITY COUNSIL 19-6-2023

THOUSAND OAKS
FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES:
805-449-2125 2
PHONE NUMBER: SENDER'S NUMBER:
805-449-2121 805-390-3520
RE:

CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEP. 12, 2023
RECOMMENDATION TO INSTALL 11, STOP SIGNS

URGENT STORREVEW PLEASE COMMENT PLEASEREPLY PLEASE RECYCLE NOTES COMMENTS:

I WOULD BE HAPPY TO GIVE ANYONE A TOUR
OF THE CITY TO SHow How INCONSISTENT
THIS IS WITH MOST NEIGHBORHOODS.
48 https://bestlettertemplate.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Fax-Cover-Sheet-4-01-724x1024.png 111 KEVIN Me NAMEE MAYOR
en To [email protected] CC /BCC
Stop Signs in Deeridge, Newbury Park
We respectfully, but strongly, oppose the installation of stop signs at all T-intersections within the Deer Ridge neighborhood.

There is no justification (accidents or otherwise) for
this over-regulation of intra-neighborhood, strictly
residential, T-intersections. This proposed over-
regulation is inconsistent with the majority of
communities. Over-regulation of traffic tends to invalidate other appropriate traffic controls (human nature).

Should the City Council approve this shotgun
approach to intra-residential stop signs, they would be setting inappropriate precedence for hundreds of like-
uncontrolled residential T-intersections throughout the city.

Stop signs at residential T-intersections are most
properly warranted when the residential street (25 mph) intersects a primary through street with heavier traffic and a higher speed limit. There are no through streets in this neighborhood. Accordingly, the overwhelming majority of traffic in this low-density community is the residents.

The city has made many outstanding traffic safety
engineering changes! However, this proposal would not
be one of them.

I recommend that city traffic engineering staff make a
physical review of other intra-neighborhood T-
intersections for guidance on this issue.

Respectfully submitted,
Terry and Kristy Enright
(34 year residents)
3286 Erinlea Avenue
Thousand Oaks
Residents of the Conejo Valley since March 1962
TO COUNCIL: 09/12/2023
MEETING DATE: 09/12/2023
Name City Item # In favor/ Opposed Comment
Susan Ringheim Thousand Oaks 12A In favor We who live here at the Ranch Mobilehome park, are so appreciative of your commitment to helping us, my parents lived here since 1992 and died here peacefully. I've gotten to know a lot of wonderful poverty level seniors in this park, this senior park has been a godsend for many of us, please help us to keep it a senior park and thank you for reading my words.

Jarryd Gonzales 12A Opposed Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council:

The Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association (WMA) represents the owners and operators of mobilehome parks and manufactured housing communities throughout California.

Having been founded in 1945, WMA is one of the oldest, largest and most respected non-profit trade associations of its kind in the United States.

WMA and its Thousand Oaks members oppose creating a Senior Mobilehome Park Overlay Zone for the following reasons:
• A senior overlay zone will not solve or help the affordable housing shortage in Thousand Oaks; in fact, in a way, it discriminates against non-seniors who live in or wish to live in mobilehome parks;
• If a senior resident sells his/her home, this type of ordinance will limit those who could purchase the property, as non-senior families are disqualified from buying the home, thus making it more difficult for the seller to find a buyer (must be a senior buyer); • This would hurt low-income city residents seeking affordable housing; for example, single mothers with children who could otherwise purchase and occupy an affordable mobilehome would not be eligible and further exacerbating the affordable housing shortage in Thousand Oaks and, therefore the state;
• This attack on private property rights is a far-reaching attempt to essentially tell parkowners who their customers must be (seniors 55 and over);
• It's a short-sighted approach that creates more unintended consequences, such as administering the compliance of such an ordinance - this would undoubtedly increase the city' udget at a time when none of the current senior mobilehome park owners have any desire ti We respectfully request that the City Council take no action toward establishing a Mobilehome Park Senior Overlay Zone.

Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Jarryd Gonzales
WMA
Elizabeth Kasting Thousand Oaks 12A In favor I moved to The Ranch Mobile Home Park at the age of 55 knowing that this was going to be my retirement home and to spend the rest of my days on earth here. To think of it becoming a family park is causing so much stress to the all ready sick and aging population here. It is senior amite to arter pure. Try are aristo stret burn oil end to younge dangerous here at The Ranch for children
50 Name Item # In favor/ Opposed Comment
Resident of Ranch Mobi Thousand Daks
12A In favor I moved to The Ranch Mobile Home Park at the age of 72. I moved here because it was a Senior Park. Please don't allow this to become a family park. It will be to stressful for both the children and the seniors. The seniors are having a hard enough time just getting through their days and their is no place for children to play and also no sidewalks. The park would be very prone to accidents if children were allowed in here.

Thousand Oaks 12A In favor Please don't convert into family park. This is my retirement home. It is very quiet here and peaceful. Many of us have to take naps during the day to rejuvenate. With kids running around that would be hard to do.

Mark Wiemann Thousand Oaks 12A In favor I moved to The Ranch Mobile Home Park knowing that it was a senior park. It has been a senior park very several decades. My elderly Mother lives with me too. We both need to sleep during the day. Having children run around during the day would not be a good fit for this park. Please keep this a senior park. It is a great place for younger seniors to come to start their retirement.

Todd Thousand Oaks 12A In favor I am a heart attack survivor and have other illnesses that would make my life very stressful if the park was loud with children running round. moved here because it was quite. I also sutter tron PTSD and Misophonia. Please keep this a senior park. We are here because we need to be in senior park. We can't afford assisted living. Thanks, Todd Ann Forman Thousand Oaks 12A In favor It is important to keep this a senior park as their are many vulnerable people in here that can't be around loud noises and disturbances. The elderly residents here need a calm environment to live peacefully. Thank you for your consideration.

Sandy Gill Thousand Oaks 12A In favor Please keep this a senior mobile home park. I moved here because it was a peaceful place to live in my senior years. Having kids in here would create too much stress for the elderly in here.

Newbury Park 12A In favor Save our senior parks. It is our only option to avoid homelessness. 12A In favor We are so concerned about losing our homes at Ventu.

Please protect our seniors.
12A In favor We at Vallecito are so worried. We nearly lost our homes 10 years ago via condo conversion.

Our seniors need and deserve protection from greedy out of town land owners. 12A In favor The very problematic SO 1559 destroyed the Ranch MHP. Without protection, Ranch will no onger be available to low income seniors. Please vote yes on the overlay 51 Name City Item # In favor/ Opposed Comment
Ed Simmons Newbury Park 12C Opposed I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed installation of 11 new stop signs in the neighborhood of Deer Ridge. As a resident of Deer Ridge, I understand that traffic safety is a priority for our community; however, I do not believe there is an issue that needs addressing.

THOUSAND

CALIFORMIA
Supplemental
Information
Packet
5:00 p.m.

Supplemental Information:

Any agenda related public documents received and distributed to a majority of the City Council after the City's website at toaks.org/agendas or by contacting the City Clerk Dept at (805) 449-2151 during normal busi- Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA):
n compliance with the ADA, if vou need special assistance to participate in this meeting or other services il onjunction with this meeting, please contact the City Clerk Department at (805) 449-2151. Assisted listenin devices are available at this meeting. Ask City Clerk staff if you desire to use this device. Upon request, the agenda and documents in this agenda packet, can be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist City staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting THE FOLLOWING 4

PAGES ARE RELATED TO
ITEM 12A
From: Jonathan Friedman <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 3:58 PM
To: Kelvin Parker <[email protected]>
Cc: Lynn Oshita < [email protected]>; Thomas Cohen <[email protected]>; Danielle Hastie <[email protected]>
Subject: Urgency Ordinance - Senior MHP
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Kelvin,
Don't usually like to send emails at 3:30 on a Friday but I just received the Staff Report for the Urgency Park Ordinance that will be heard on Tuesday. I am not an attorney and Tom is understandably busy recently, but here goes my question.

The Staff Report seems to suggest the Urgency Ordinance will only be placed on the 5 Senior Parks. But Attachment 2, Section 1 states ".... To add a senior mobile home park overly zone to five mobile home parks within the City." Wouldn't it be a little cleaner to list the 5 Senior parks in the Urgency Ordinance itself? Without such a list, I am concerned there may be some ambiguity as to the status of the 3 non-senior parks during the "Urgency " period. Does the adoption of the Urgency Ordinance in any way preclude the other 3 parks (53 Conejo being one) from proceeding with a request for a different land use or from refurbishing the park through HCD and renting to anyone we choose?
Thank you for taking the time to clarify this for California Commercial Investments and me.

Jon
805-338-1151
2 From: Jonathan Friedman <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 9, 2023 11:35 AM
To: Patrick Hehir <[email protected]>
Cc: Kelvin Parker <[email protected]>; Fabiola Zelaya Melicher <[email protected]>; Tracy Noonan <[email protected]>; Lynn Oshita < [email protected]>; Tabitha McAtee <[email protected]> Subject: RE: City Council 09/12/23 Agenda Item regarding Mobile Home Parks CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Patrick,
Thanks for getting back to me. In my 40 years of being in development 1 am still not clear on the legal relationship between Staff Reports and the actual ordinance that may get adopted. With that said would Staff be willing to consider my proposed change attached? Strange things happen after the hearings and I believe my suggested revision removes any uncertainty.

Thanks again and I'II see everyone Tuesday night.

Jon
ATTACHMENT #2
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF THOUSAND OAKS DECLARING AN INTENTION TO

CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE THOUSAND OAKS

MUNICIPAL CODE AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS

CONCERNING A SENIOR MOBILE PARK OVERLAY
ZONE
WHEREAS, on September 12, 2023, the Thousand Oaks City Council considered the adoption of an urgency ordinance regarding senior mobile home bark overlay zones for certain mobile home parks located within the City:
nact zonina redulations in response to efforts to remove senior-onlv status o HEREAS, an urgency ordinance is needed to move expeditiously 1 one or more mobile home parks within the City;
WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 36934 and 36931 allow a local jurisdiction to adopt an urgency ordinance with a four-fifths (4/5s) vote, becoming effective immediately upon passing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council also desires to initiate duplicative amendments to the Municipal Code to be presented and analyzed through the standard land use process for such amendments as set forth in the Municipal NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Thousand Oaks as follows:

Section 1: It is the intention of the City Council to consider an amendment to the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code, to add a senior mobile home park overlay zone to the five existing senior mobile home parks within the City as shown on attached Exhibit "A".
cdd:660-21/H:COMMONICity CouncilICC Agenda Items|2023\01122023|Sr Mobile Home Park Overlay/Attachment 1

Page 1 ends

4 Section 2: This amendment is hereby referred to staff for processing to the Planning Commission for public hearing and back to the City Council.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of September 2023, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Kevin McNamee, Mayor
City of Thousand Oaks, California
ATTEST/CERTIFY:

Laura B. Maguire, City Clerk
Date Attested:_

APPROVED AS TO FORM
Patrick J. Hehir, Chief Assistant City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO ADMINISTRATION:

Page 2 ends

Thousand Oaks City CouncilSeptember 12, 2023

Thousand Oaks City Council
September 12, 2023