Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Runkel Canyon Delay topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council denies Runkel Canyon developer’s request for extended force‑majeure delay
Summary
After a two‑hour exchange between developers, staff and residents, the Simi Valley City Council unanimously voted to deny Runkel Canyon LLC’s request for a day‑for‑day extension of hard milestones tied to a claimed Sandy Fire force majeure and processing delays.
The Simi Valley City Council unanimously voted to deny Runkel Canyon LLC’s request for a day‑for‑day extension of the project’s hard milestones after a lengthy presentation and council questioning.
Assistant City Manager Luis Garabay told the council staff’s recommendation was to deny the permitted‑delay notice, citing factors laid out in the city’s written objection. Developer representative Jordan Ferguson asked for more time, citing the Sandy Fire and processing time required for post‑wildfire geotechnical reconnaissance. "Building the safest possible project could take an eternity," Ferguson said in his presentation, but added, "we wanna build the project quickly, and we wanna build it safely." He said grading on phase‑one estate lots was complete, that several plan‑check submittals were under review, and that the developer had submitted monitoring data and technical responses.
Council members pressed the developer on the project’s long history, prior extensions and whether the previously granted 120‑day extension (agreed June 22) was sufficient. Council member Rhodes argued the fire extension had already been addressed and said a blanketing multi‑month tolling was not appropriate, moving to deny the requested day‑for‑day tolling. The motion to deny the request and to affirm the city’s written objection passed unanimously.
City staff and the developer also discussed technical next steps: the city described a 'top‑10' list of additional items and said further geotechnical observations through a post‑wildfire wet season could extend field work into mid‑2027 unless a narrower testing strategy is agreed. The developer said it had proposed modeling and limited building with certificates of occupancy withheld until monitoring demonstrates safety. Council declined to grant the broader extension and instructed staff and the parties to continue meet‑and‑confer discussions.
The denial does not foreclose further negotiations; staff indicated follow‑up meetings were expected and that both sides should pursue collaborative technical reviews to resolve outstanding items.
