[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6611541,"mediaKeyId","2893989-8df0b760c6ab21173627d5a93294fcd1","parentId",2893989,"title","Votes at a glance: Simi Valley council confirms appointments, committee selections and routine items","audioSeconds",10110,"startMs",1850000,"endMs",11960000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2893989-8df0b760c6ab21173627d5a93294fcd1&start=1850&end=11960","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2893989-8df0b760c6ab21173627d5a93294fcd1/thumbnail_1850000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6611541/Simi-Valley/Ventura-County/California/Votes-at-a-glance-Simi-Valley-council-confirms-appointments-committee-selections-and-routine-items","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611541-b7b27b668bc6deafd432911e14cdec4e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771156395&Signature=Zj4EIJsEN153eXULLZk1tHfIgh67fwTO00bAksCmCbYee9h~ysQ7IS4davskrp04BCIuj~tFAuxIIS4sLN4T4aWydiUYQe4dlcRE3Mh5UV3As4Vl-~RAUKiF4gk5SUBj6AtYjQw719dfXJXWZ58DoSX5stITr8WliQno1AO~FSrWtMynSARMAKuUYXhEu3rIrIcdSJ~PglMZv768VAyStUAOejRCr7CgDDnxJCzdkRWTgm5FOoyQxr~D-Lm-prI06YvvvBAEBxmNa4YYjMLBpZYZpaHt0UF8qaEOnTX43-qt3fx9v4GF~f5UrLFDzSzEurx6PjZJ~ZeC2hOt8jKeUg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Simi Valley","date","2025-04-08T05:57:29.657Z","article","The Simi Valley City Council handled several routine and appointment items during its April 7 meeting. Highlights below list formal motions and outcomes recorded on the agenda.

• Reading of ordinances/resolutions: The council voted unanimously to read all resolutions and ordinances presented that evening by title only and waive further reading.

• Community Projects Grant Review Committee: The council approved seven nominees to the community projects grant review committee (one representative from each neighborhood council, one from the Council on Aging, one from the Youth Council and one community‑at‑large member). The appointments were approved unanimously.

• ADA Paratransit Advisory Committee: Councilmember Littster and Councilmember Ayala were selected unanimously to conduct interviews and nominate applicants for one member and one alternate opening on the ADA Paratransit Advisory Committee.

• Planning Commission appointment: The council reappointed Lee Kennedy to the Planning Commission with a unanimous vote.

• Consent calendar: All consent items were approved unanimously.

Separately, the council denied an appeal of a Planning Commission approval for a conditional use permit for a 24,290‑square‑foot industrial building at 875 Cochran Street (see separate article).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","At its April 7 meeting the council unanimously approved multiple appointments and the consent calendar; it also designated council members for ADA paratransit interviews and reappointed a planning commissioner. Separate coverage documents the denial of an appeal on the Cochran Street CUP.","taxTitle","Simi Valley, Ventura County, California","taxId",3724,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6611546,"CAL FIRE map update expands Simi Valley wildfire hazard zones; county officials urge home hardening",1266,2520000,3786000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2893989-8df0b760c6ab21173627d5a93294fcd1&start=2520&end=3786","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2893989-8df0b760c6ab21173627d5a93294fcd1/thumbnail_2520000.jpg","/articles/6611546/Simi-Valley/Ventura-County/California/CAL-FIRE-map-update-expands-Simi-Valley-wildfire-hazard-zones-county-officials-urge-home-hardening","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611546-76a1587ddbc0a18cc6abf11cbd3daa0c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771156395&Signature=NMHEMNuaMF74i3-H8J1pRlxQtT5hfqZ3Wpjgf0Tcg4MG6eO2U8CG6W4sV~Qf3QYPJ~zgwmOwoisr6gptE-ZODtn3SyUlKkKiK-ew42t7XThmxpzoEU0Sj2r3AshHW7kOzo2umo0aKK3bg1Y4ucz1C5IlR3vUuHeeeruunZ9TWuS2ZnpZiyFGLsCoqZtfCA4VZBn5p7s7ZeCDGuJUqAfrNpTevgISZ3E-pxLTpCZSh0-BYal5jeTsAyzi0ZsRBrV1RjsJbZCxITWWkj-OsX3jrLbo4sk9gjJIY-rsWK1M3dPn0paMYyFJzxbgalXdkia6da6Qvh3M0BOekQRMUN0v5Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Ventura County Fire Marshal Joe Morelli told the Simi Valley City Council on April 7 that CAL FIRE’s updated Local Responsibility Area maps substantially increase mapped wildfire hazard in the city. Morelli said Simi Valley’s mapped area rose 68% compared with the 2010 maps; the city’s very high fire hazard area expanded about 14% and the state this year included high and moderate classifications that previously were not mapped at the local responsibility level.

Morelli explained how the maps were developed: CAL FIRE used fuel, weather, topography and statewide fire history from 1991 through 2020. He emphasized the maps do not incorporate recent fires after 2020 and that the state’s computer modeling has evolved since the 2010 maps. The new maps add high and moderate hazard bands in addition to expanding very high hazard areas.

The county official outlined practical implications for residents and the city: typical “home hardening” measures apply in mapped areas (ember‑resistant attic vents, noncombustible or limited‑combustible siding, dual‑pane windows), and defensible‑space requirements (a 100‑foot zone in very high areas) remain enforceable. Morelli further highlighted Assembly Bill 38’s real‑estate disclosure requirement tied to defensible‑space inspections on property sales and said the State Board of Forestry has been ordered to promulgate regulations by December to address combustible materials within the first five feet around a structure — regulations that would apply to existing as well as new construction in very high hazard areas and include a three‑year compliance timeline.

Morelli and councilmembers discussed insurance effects, and he distinguished “hazard” maps (what CAL FIRE produces) from insurer “risk” maps (which consider parcel‑level mitigation such as hardening). He said the California Insurance Commissioner has indicated insurers use different risk‑based data, and that some insurers already apply 5‑foot noncombustible recommendations as underwriting mitigations. Morelli encouraged residents to pursue Firewise community status and to use Fire Safe Council home‑assessment programs, which can provide anonymous assessments without triggering enforcement.

The Ventura County Fire Department already inspects roughly 19,000 structures annually for defensible space, maintains about 66 miles of fire roads and has increased support for Firewise communities from 4 to 29 in recent years. Morelli said the county also pursues fuel reduction projects, prescribed burns and grazing, and partners on grants for mitigation work.

Councilmembers pressed on triggers for map updates, the scope of new building code and retrofit requirements, and what homeowners should do now. Morelli recommended residents check the CAL FIRE viewer, evaluate hardening measures, consider home wildfire assessments through Fire Safe Councils and watch for December rulemaking addressing the 0–5 foot zone.","Ventura County Fire Marshal Joe Morelli briefed the council on CAL FIRE’s updated Local Responsibility Area maps, saying Simi Valley’s mapped area increased 68% and outlining implications for home hardening, defensible space, and forthcoming state regulations targeting the first five feet around structures.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6611551,"Simi Valley Council Upholds Approval for Cochran Street Industrial Project Amid Easement Dispute",5701,6255000,11956000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2893989-8df0b760c6ab21173627d5a93294fcd1&start=6255&end=11956","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2893989-8df0b760c6ab21173627d5a93294fcd1/thumbnail_6255000.jpg","/articles/6611551/Simi-Valley/Ventura-County/California/Simi-Valley-Council-Upholds-Approval-for-Cochran-Street-Industrial-Project-Amid-Easement-Dispute","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611551-0d910f22cc66f9acfdfb40da7ab15f6c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771156395&Signature=iMWNur7kk2oIuhqjh3mPikmFA75XaDQoiSBw7oN2ixqTDyFj~2mLC~S1mD3KD7-Ra4G2iWjVeWsD-yuZP-g-DCuQEhtg3IFVn5duuKRHTKMSvqNfKvYrnKWkB~6eZ159VOfD8hO5sjBZJKWjquRBcxdcFqH4JCsfP4xgxUNHajsS~GK5Rwg-0Q0VmMjVATTsqOqkBEwyl5hTPNIta5T1WLi~JPAr1exDx3-vi4aa8JNGX-qhevWytGvufYaTXZ6yDPh2wN5ppJGr7ywgE9OSmvk8BxK2LDj6n-zd2OYQwZDEO74VEmqr1rHlgiceKyQngWI3Q4nc2hOHpByPNLM-YQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Simi Valley City Council on April 7 denied an appeal of a Planning Commission approval and upheld Conditional Use Permit CUP‑S‑2023‑0011, authorizing a 24,290‑square‑foot industrial building with outdoor storage near 875 Cochran Street. The council voted to deny the appeal 4–1, with Councilmember Litster voting no.

The decision preserves the Planning Commission’s finding that the application complied with municipal code and the West End Specific Plan. The appeal, filed by property owner Doug Feldbinger, contended the project would interfere with rights he holds under a recorded western access easement — specifically existing parking, landscaping encroachments and a claimed right to maintain those encroachments.

The council’s deliberations centered on the limits of the city’s land‑use review versus private property rights. Deputy Environmental Services Director Sean Gibson and staff told council members the city requires that recorded easements be shown on project plans and that disputes over easement scope and property rights are civil matters best resolved in superior court. Applicant representatives said the project would reconstruct and restripe the access drive and parking and would not remove access rights.

Appellant Doug Feldbinger told the council he had negotiated the right to maintain certain encroachments when he purchased his parcel and that the project as planned would remove landscaping and parking he has historically used. Applicant Mike Lohman and his counsel, Jeff Nurdin, said Lohman holds fee title to the site and that the easement grants ingress and egress rights rather than co‑ownership; they said the proposed improvements would comply with planning and engineering standards, improve drainage and replace parking and landscaping to city standards.

Appellant counsel Pooja Nair argued the easement language and a 2017 amendment protect the appellant’s right to existing parking and landscaping and that those recorded rights should weigh on the CUP finding. Lohman’s counsel and staff repeatedly told the council that interpreting the competing deeds and amendments is a legal question for the courts; the city may require plans to show easements but cannot itself resolve competing property‑title claims.

Councilmembers raised practical options during deliberations: several urged the parties to seek a negotiated settlement to avoid costly litigation; others noted either party could seek injunctive relief in court if construction began while a title dispute remained unresolved. Councilmembers also clarified that signage drawings shown during review were not part of the CUP approval and would require a separate review process.

By denying the appeal, the council left the Planning Commission approval in place. Staff told the council that a court determination in favor of the appellant could later render the CUP void if a court found the approval relied on defective easement/encroachment conditions. The council did not impose additional special conditions altering parking or landscaping, and members encouraged the parties to pursue a negotiated resolution to clarify rights before construction moved forward.

The applicant and appellant both said they preferred resolution outside of litigation but acknowledged the dispute may ultimately be resolved by a superior court quiet‑title or related action.","The City Council denied an appeal and upheld a Planning Commission permit for a 24,290‑square‑foot industrial building at 875 Cochran Street, while acknowledging the easement dispute may require court review.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Simi Valley council confirms appointments, committee selections and routine items

CAL FIRE map update expands Simi Valley wildfire hazard zones; county officials urge home hardening

Simi Valley Council Upholds Approval for Cochran Street Industrial Project Amid Easement Dispute