1995 03-21 Agenda CITY OF POWAY
REGULAR MEETING - MARCH 21, 1995 - 7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 13325 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AS CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING ~OMMISSION/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1. ROLL CALL - CAFAGNA, CALLERY, EMERY, REXFORD, HIGGINSON
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - DEPUTY MAYOR CALLERY
3. PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (State law may prohibit the City Council from
taking action on items not on the agenda. Your concerns will be referred
to staff.)
CONSENT CALENDAR - NOTICE TO PUBLIC
ITEMS NUMBERED 5 THROUGH ~i~i~ MAY BE ENACTED IN ONE MOTION AT THIS POINT IN THE
MEETING. THERE WILL BE NO'SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE TIME
COUNCIL VOTES ON THE MOTION UNLESS THE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, STAFF OR THE PUBLIC
REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE REMOVED AND DISCUSSED SEPARATELY. THOSE ITEMS WHICH
ARE REMOVED WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THE ORDER THEY APPEAR ON THE AGENDA. IF YOU
WISH TO PULL AN ITEM, PLEASE FILL OUT A SLIP AND GIVE IT TO THE CITY CLERK.
WORKSHOP
4.# Discussion of status of South Poway Planned Community {referred from
January 31, 1995, Item 20A), including: financial status and outlook;
review of current plan and allowed uses; possible new uses and their
direct and indirect effects.
CONSENT CALENDAR
5.* Ratification of Warrant Register for period of February 27-March 3, 1995.
(401-10)
6.* Denial of claims for damages: A} Edward J. Kolenski; B) Gordon Adams,
trustee for Richard Aldrich {704-13)
* Exhibit Enclosed
# Exhibit in Preparation
CITY OF POWAY - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - MARCH 21, 1995 - PAGE TWO
CITY ~ANAGEE ITEMS
7.
CITY ATTOENEY
8.
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL-INITIATED ITEMS
9. MICKEY CAFAGNA
10. SUSAN CALLERY
11. ROBERT EMERY
12. BETTY REXFORD
13. DON HIGGINSON
ADJOURNMENT
TO: CITY OF POWAY MARCH 21, 1995
13325 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, FROM: STEVE ZUILL, RESIDING AT:
POWAY, CA 92064 13138 WELTON LN.,
P.O. BOX 873,
A3-rN.: CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS POWAY, CA 92074-0873
AT-~N.: JIM NESSEL, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
RE: AMPHITHEATER SOUND TEST
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I'M WRITING PRIMARILY TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE
SOUND TEST; HOWEVER, I'M ALSO PASSING ALONG THE EXPERIENCE OF SOME OF MY
NEIGHBORS, AND MY REACTION TO THE WHOLE THING.
MY EXPERIENCE:
ON THE EVENING OF WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 1995, WHILE ON THE TELEPHONE, I
HEARD SOME VERY LOUD MUSIC, AS IF SOMEONE WAS HAVING A VERY LOUD PARTY
NEARBY. IT DID NOT SOUND LIKE A TYPICAL "BOOM BOX", BUT MORE LIKE A LARGE P.A.
SYSTEM. IT WAS LOUD ENOUGH AND DISTINCT ENOUGH THAT I COMMENTED TO THE
PERSON I WAS TALKING TO SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF '"tHERE IS SOMETHING
VERY STRANGE GOING ON OUTSIDE, LIKE SOME VERY LOUD MUSIC", AND WAS
PLANNING TO INVESTIGATE AFTER GETTING OFF THE PHONE. I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE
THAT A TEST WAS GOING TO TAKE PLACE, SO MY EXPERIENCE WAS COMPLETELY
UNBIASED BY ANY FOREKNOWLEDGE. I LEARNED ABOUT THE TEST ON THE 11
O'CLOCK NEWS THAT NIGHT. NOT HAVING BEEN AWARE OF THE TEST AHEAD OF TIME,
I DIDN'T KEEP A DETAILED TIME LOG, AND BEING IN A PHONE CONVERSATION, I DIDN'T
PINPOINT THE DIRECTION; HOWEVER, IT MUST HAVE LASTED AT LEAST 10-20 MINUTES
WITH ABOUT 9:30 P.M. BEING ABOUT THE MIDDLE OF THE TIME RANGE (I WASN'T HOME
BEFORE 9 P.M.); AND I WAS IN THE SOUTHEAST PORTION OF THE HOUSE, IN A ROOM
WITH A CLOSED WINDOW FACING EAST.
SOME OF MY NEIGHBORS EXPERIENCE:
ONE COUPLE BOTH FOUND THE SOUND '~ERY OBJECTIONABLE" AND GOT UP TO
INVESTIGATE, THE RECALLED THAT A TEST WAS TO TAKE PLACE.
ANOTHER NEIGHBOR (AS I UNDERSTOOD IT) THOUGHT HE HEARD A LOUD PANTY
GOING ON FROM ROUGHLY THE SOUTHEAST, AND WENT OUTSIDE TO INVESTIGATE
(I HAVEN~ HAD A CHANCE TO TALK TO HIM YET TO GET THE DETAILS).
ANOTHER NEIGHBOR HEARD NOISE LOUD ENOUGH TO GET UP TO SHUT THE WINDOW
(TO BE FAIR, HE THINKS IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A 'I~OOM BOX', AND CLOSING THE
WINDOW WAS ENOUGH TO RESOLVE THE IMMEDIATE PROBLEM FOR HIM).
MY REACTION:
I WASN'T AWARE OF THE SOUND TEST BEFOREHAND, BUT I WAS AWARE THAT AN
AMPHITHEATER WAS BEING CONSIDERED. UNTIL NOW, LIKE MOST THINGS THE CITY
DOES, MY ATTITUDE WAS NEUTRAL. NOW I TAKE THE POSITION THAT UNLESS VERY
STRONG MEASURES ARE TAKEN TO ENSURE VERY LI3-R.E, OR PREFERABLY NO,
CHANGE TAKES PLACE IN THE BACKGROUND NOISE AROUND HERE, THEN YOU CAN
EXPECT STRONG OPPOSITION FROM ME TO PUl=rING AN AMPHITHEATER IN; AND IF
YOU PUT ONE IN, STRONG ACTION FROM ME IN EXPECTING ENFORCEMENT OF NOISE
ORDINANCES. AND I DON'T JUST MEAN NOISE LEVEL; TYPE OF SOUND CAN OI- [EN BE
MORE DISRUPTIVE THAN LEVEL OF SOUND. THIS SHOULD BE IRRELEVANT, BUT I NOT
SPEAKING FROM A STANDPOINT OF OPPOSITION TO A PARTICULAR TYPE OF MUSIC; I
LIKE A WIDE VARIETY OF MUSIC, AND SOMETIMES GO TO LOUD CONCERTS MYSELF; I
JUST LIKE TO CONTROL WHAT MUSIC I WILL HEAR AND WHEN.
A COUPLE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
MY NEIGHBORS SEEM TO HAVE A BROAD RANGE OF ATTITUDES TOWARD THE
AMPHITHEATER. IN GENERAL, I BELIEVE MOST WOULD BE CONCERNED IF THE NOISE
FROM THE AMPHITHEATER WAS AT A PROBLEM LEVEL. SOME WOULD LIKE IT TO GO IN
IF NOISE WAS NOT A PROBLEM. QUITE A FEW HOWEVER, SEEM CONCERNED ABOUT
THE POSSIBLE INCREASE IN CRIME, TRAFFIC, AND GENERAL DEGRADATION OF RURAL
ATMOSPHERE, WITH SOME COMPLETELY OPPOSED TO THE AMPHITHEATER. I
SUGGEST THAT IF YOU FIND A SUBSTANTIAL MINORITY OPPOSED FOR THESE
REASONS, THAT YOU WEIGH THEIR OBJECTIONS HEAVILY, CONSIDERING POWAYS
MOTTO "CITY IN THE COUNTRY", AND THE SLOGAN VVHEN BEING INCORPORATED
"KEEP POWAY RURAL".
ONE MORE THING: I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW LEGOLAND GOT SUCH A HO-HUM
TREATMENT BY THE CITY, WHILE THIS SEEMS TO BE G~ ilING A MORE ENTHUSIASTIC
RECEPTION.