Comments on: Landfill Expansion Tour

By: Mike

Mike — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:31:03 +0000

Ted, you have a point about expansion objections if a housing development existed. I just wish I was more tuned in back then to get a better feel for why the city pushed back on Unocal and why there couldn’t be a compromise. I can’t find much in my online searches.

By: Matthew C.

Matthew C. — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:19:35 +0000

I was against the Unocal development even back when simivalley.com had an online poll that talked about it. Talk about over development, but then Unocal stuck it to the city by selling out to WM. Lesson learned. I want Unocal back.

By: Deborah D

Deborah D — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 08:47:39 +0000

No, absolutely not. If we needed it to expand to meet the needs of OUR city, Simi Valley, then I would understand. But, we do not need to expand to accommodate more trash from L.A. and San Bernadino Counties or anywhere else. We don’t need the trash. We don’t need the traffic. Let THEM build their own dumps!@@@

By: Ted Mackel

Ted Mackel — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 08:15:44 +0000

Mike & Barbra,

Unfortunately some compromise really needed to be worked out so the densities could support the development. Unocal pulled out because the it did not pencil.

The fact remains that Waste Management now controls the property and if there was a chance to control the landfill expansion it would have happened with a Unocal development surrounding the landfill.

We are the only city that puts our businesses in the hills and our homes on the railroad tracks.

By: Mike

Mike — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 02:23:53 +0000

Hmmm, not sure I agree with this. If I’m not mistaken, this is the development that was called The Canyons, correct? I was pretty sure it was rejected because the developer was going to carve up the land with too much severity. Unocal opted to sell over modifying their plan. That’s on them, not the city.

By: jason

jason — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 02:18:58 +0000

you could have asked them to adjust their plan and present a new proposal, instead you kicked them out the door and they were forced to sell to the worst possible land owner. i agree city council served this up on a platter

By: barbra

barbra — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:10:49 +0000

Ted Mackle,
Spoken like a true developer. Unocal was denied because they were looking to develop on slopes greater than 20%..and they wanted to fill in the valleys and place houses on top of them….the City Council and the Planning Commission made the right decision on this.

By: Ted Mackel

Ted Mackel — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 06:55:52 +0000

The city screwed this one up. They chased Unocal out of the canyon with their typical attitude that they need to over control a development. Unocal decided that the restrictions were not worth the effort. Unocal sold the property to Waste Management and now we get a larger landfill.

If you are a resident and you are unhappy with a larger landfill, then look right at your city council and planning commission, because they served it up to you on a silver platter.

By: Jason

Jason — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 00:15:06 +0000

They shouldnt expand, we dont need a bigger landfill here

By: Brian Dennert

Brian Dennert — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 06:15:49 +0000

Make sure to get video.

I wrote about this entry on my blog. Check it out here:

http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/dennert/

Thanks for your support and thanks for your work.