Oxnard council approves Teal Club specific plan and development agreement over objections to CFD restrictions

The Oxnard City Council approved the Teal Club (Orchard) specific plan, associated rezoning and a development agreement by a 7-0 vote after more than three hours of public comment and council deliberation.

The project, generally bounded by Teal Club Road, Ventura Road, Patterson Road and Doris Avenue, would annex and rezone the property and allow residential development and associated infrastructure. Council action included ordinances approving the pre-zoning, specific plan and the development agreement filed by applicant Dennis Hardgrave and Orchard Property owners.

The council’s permission comes after dozens of speakers — in person and by phone — participated in a lengthy public hearing. Concerns raised by residents and callers included projected traffic increases on Doris Avenue and Second Street, the potential for neighborhood cut-through traffic, soil contamination and the risk of lead exposure from nearby airport operations. Pastor Greg Runyon told the council, “This will not be a perfect project. But the question becomes, is it a good project? Is it going to meet the needs of our residents now and future residents?” and said he hoped councilmembers would vote yes. Local resident Eric Andrist urged traffic-calming measures, saying neighbors “sometimes sit at the corner of G and Second and we have to wait 5, 6, 7 minutes to get out.”

A caller who identified himself as Emmanuel Herrera of Citizens for Better Oxnard asked the council to require Chumash recognition in street or park names. The applicant earlier told councilmembers he is open to Chumash street naming and to considering roundabouts as traffic-calming measures, saying during deliberations that “we have no issue with that” with respect to roundabouts and would work with the city during the tentative tract-map stage.

Several speakers urged more testing and remediation of soil on the site. The applicant and staff said the environmental review includes a Phase I site assessment and that a required Phase II assessment and any remediation would be conducted under state and county oversight. The applicant described typical findings on farmland soil and said, based on recent local school-site studies, that “they did not identify anything like lead at any levels that were of concern.”

A caller and public commenters also raised the project’s proposed financing structure: a Community Facilities District (CFD or Mello-Roos) and related developer-recorded restrictions. One remote speaker argued that the development agreement’s Section 7 would require a restrictive covenant that could limit voters’ ability to rescind the CFD later. That caller said the covenant “requires the developer to record a restrictive covenant that supports to take away state constitutional rights to vote to eliminate taxes.” Council debate focused on that clause and on whether the restriction is permissible. City staff said the city has used similar limitations in at least one prior project (Sacchioca Farms) and that the provision has not been litigated in that instance.

Councilmember Star said he was comfortable supporting the project but said he could not support the development agreement while the CFD restriction remained; he said during deliberations that he objected to using a deed restriction to “bargain away the constitutional rights of the public.” Despite his objection to that section, Star ultimately voted in favor of the broader package; he asked that his objection to Section 7 be recorded during the roll call.

After discussion of procedure and attempted amendments (a motion to delete Section 7 of the development agreement failed to gain a second), the council voted to approve Option 1, which includes the specific plan, the pre-zoning ordinances and the development agreement. The city clerk read the ordinance titles into the record before the vote.

Councilmembers and staff also emphasized several implementation points: properties south of Teal Club Road that are now outside the annexation area were described by staff as allowed to retain their existing well water and septic systems so long as they do not change or expand their uses; the city said there will be no automatic right-of-way takings from those properties during Phase 1 and that sewer stub-outs would be considered to avoid ripping up new streets. Staff told council that property assessments would not be automatically reassessed to a higher value unless the property were conveyed or substantially altered; otherwise assessed value would follow the normal limits on assessment increases.

During deliberations, the city manager and councilmembers noted one project concession: the applicant is offering Oxnard residents a first opportunity to purchase units when homes are released for sale. Council members also requested that staff and the applicant explore roundabouts during the tentative tract map stage and consider Chumash naming for streets and the park.

The motion to adopt Option 1 passed 7-0. Councilmember Star stated on the record that he objected to Section 7 of the development agreement; the clerk recorded that objection. The council carried the ordinances and the development agreement as read.

Votes at a glance: Ordinances approving pre-zoning, specific plan and adoption of the development agreement; motion carries 7-0 (detailed vote recorded in the official minutes).