MOORPARK FOR MORE HOMES? YES VOTE WOULD PAVE THE WAY FOR 1,680-UNIT NORTH PARK.

Byline: Angie Valencia-Martinez Staff Writer

MOORPARK - Supporters say it will forever change this city for the better, providing parks, a lake, high-end homes and a nature preserve.

Opponents call it urban sprawl that will pave over open space and bring traffic and pollution, altering the city's landscape and suburban charm.

Now, after years of debate and delay, the voters finally get to decide.

On Tuesday, Moorpark residents will head to the polls to choose their city's fate, and whether it will include the North Park Village and Nature Preserve.

``The benefits outweigh the negative impacts,'' said City Councilman Clint Harper, a vocal supporter of the 1,680-home community along the foothills north of Moorpark College. ``It's going to change the character of the city. This is the best designed project that's come before us.''

Tuesday's vote technically will decide whether the city should annex the 3,544 acres of Ventura County land needed to build the development. In essence, it's a yes-or-no vote on the project itself, labeled Measure A6 on the ballot.

There are 16,600 registered voters in Moorpark, and polls open at 7 a.m. at nine precincts citywide.

The development requires voter approval because of the city's growth-control initiative known as SOAR - Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources. The plan requires a simple majority to move forward.

The city's annexation of the area also must be approved by the county's Local Agency Formation Commission. If approved, the project would take up to a decade to build.

Yes on Measure A6, with major funding from North Park Communities, LLC, is expected to have spent more than $500,000 on the campaign. Moorpark Citizens Against Urban Sprawl - No on North Park, and Save Open Space - Santa Susana Mountains, two grass-roots groups opposed to the measure, raised less than $50,000 combined to get their message out, setting the stage for what they call a David and Goliath battle.

Kim Kilkenny, vice president of North Park, the project's developer, said the company has spent four years on the project and $2 million on the planning process. The developer also is footing the bill to put the measure on the ballot, which he said cost roughly $250,000.

``Election day will tell the tale,'' he said. ``We have a plan that will be an asset to the community.''

The weeks-long campaign has split City Council members as well as the 36,000-resident community.

Project spokesman Keith Jajko said about 1,000 campaign signs supporting North Park have been stolen from private property. Other larger signs have been spray-painted.

``The question is why,'' he said. ``It's amusing. We're just trying to identify who the people are. This is a paid or organized effort.''

Backers tout North Park for its amenities, including a recreational lake and a 2,121-acre nature preserve. The city also would receive at least $85 million in developer fees, acquire new parks, a fire station, an 18-acre school site and a commercial center.

North Park's developers also have proposed building a freeway off-ramp for the Ronald Reagan Freeway and other local road improvements.

But with it also comes traffic congestion, crowded schools and the destruction of critical wildlife habitat, opponents insist.

``We put together a plan even before we were a city, and it was a good plan and it still has places we could build in, and I'm for that,'' said Leta Yancy, Moorpark's first mayor.

The $3-billion community would increase the city's population by 6,000 residents, generate 23,000 daily car trips and contribute to the city's annual property tax revenues, although it would be less than half what is received from current Moorpark homeowners.

Mayor Pat Hunter, who with Harper negotiated the development deal on behalf of the city, said Moorpark typically receives 7.4 percent of property tax revenues, but in this case it would be getting about 3.3 percent. Property taxes pay for municipal services, including law enforcement, the library and road improvements.

However, to make up for the shortfall, the developer plans to contribute another $30,000 per unit to an endowment fund, which is supposed to cover city services forever.

The developer also agreed to pay the Moorpark Unified School District $76 million - five times more than required - to build facilities to handle the expected influx of students.

The new dwellings include 180 affordable units, but there also are more than 2,500 homes already approved or slated to be approved within the city limits, said Hunter, a North Park opponent.

``This is not the best plan for the city,'' he said. ``It is inconsistent with the residents' view of the future of their community. A large number of our residents fled urban sprawl and they want to retain open space and buffer zones between cities. This is exactly the kind of urban sprawl people were fleeing.''

Hunter helped write the ballot argument against the project. Specifically, he said the project shortchanges the city because it has to split property taxes with the county, overburdens the local school system and is in violation of the city's hillside building restrictions.

``To build this project will require the grading of almost 28 million cubic yards of dirt,'' he said. ``That is enough to fill the Rose Bowl over 30 times.''

Councilwoman Roseann Mikos, another project foe who co-authored the ballot argument against North Park, said the development is the ``wrong project in the wrong location at the wrong time.'' Housing should be built within the city's boundaries first, she said.

``Why is this a bad plan for Moorpark? Let me count the ways,'' she said. ``We're not trying to shut the gates to growth by saying no. Adding 1,680 homes on top of 2,500 homes already approved or in the pipeline would increase the population by 42 percent ... It's not what the city needs.''

If the measure passes, it would change the topography of the land, worsen traffic and drain the city's infrastructure, among other things, she said.

``People need to think about it,'' she said. ``If you say yes, you start the ball rolling for something to happen. If you say no, you wait and you're more prudent.

``Is it going to be a beautiful project? Sure. Will people have fun there? Sure. But the benefits don't outweigh the liability.''

Gary Lowenberg served on the city's Planning Commission in 1997-98 and helped put North Park's predecessor, Hidden Creek Ranch, up for a vote. That development of 3,221 homes on 4,300 acres north of Moorpark College was easily overturned by Moorpark voters in 1999 after the City Council and Ventura County officials had approved it.

The election drew 5,267 people to the polls and was defeated by a margin of 65.6 percent to 34.4 percent.

Angie Valencia-Martinez, [phone]

angie.valencia(at)dailynews.com

CAPTION(S):

map

Map:

North Park Village

Daily News