<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Simi Valley Landfill Expansion</title>
	<atom:link href="http://homebuysblog.com/2009/09/17/simi-valley-landfill-expansion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://homebuysblog.com/2009/09/17/simi-valley-landfill-expansion/</link>
	<description>Simi Valley&#039;s Insider&#039;s Guide to Real Estate Research &#38; Home Owner Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 Dec 2011 09:47:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simi Valley City Council 3-2 Vote Approves The Simi Valley Landfill Expansion MOU</title>
		<link>http://homebuysblog.com/2009/09/17/simi-valley-landfill-expansion/comment-page-1/#comment-1766</link>
		<dc:creator>Simi Valley City Council 3-2 Vote Approves The Simi Valley Landfill Expansion MOU</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 02:14:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://homebuysblog.com/?p=849#comment-1766</guid>
		<description>[...] Landfill nor am I unhappy with Waste Management. I do not see Waste Management as bad guys.  I wrote about the landfill expansion on this blog back in September 2009. If you read the comments below the article you can see my position on the Simi Valley Landfill [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Landfill nor am I unhappy with Waste Management. I do not see Waste Management as bad guys.  I wrote about the landfill expansion on this blog back in September 2009. If you read the comments below the article you can see my position on the Simi Valley Landfill [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ted Mackel</title>
		<link>http://homebuysblog.com/2009/09/17/simi-valley-landfill-expansion/comment-page-1/#comment-1052</link>
		<dc:creator>Ted Mackel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 23:15:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://homebuysblog.com/?p=849#comment-1052</guid>
		<description>Brenda,

Thank you for stopping by and commenting. I am not sure where I have claimed that Big Sky residents are proponents of the expansion. Here is my exact position on the landfill:

&lt;strong&gt;The City of Simi Valley handed the landfill expansion over to Waste Management on a silver platter&lt;/strong&gt;. 

I am not sure if you are aware of the Unocal  development that was proposed for Alamos Canyon.  That development would  have almost encircled the existing landfill.   If the development would have been approved then expansion of the landfill would be very difficult to almost impossible. Any expansion would have been very limited.

What many people do not consider is that when a developer proposes a large-scale development such as Alamos Canyon; the densities of the communities are critical to whether the developer can make the project work. The more restrictions a city puts on a developer - the higher the cost of the development. Your development, Big Sky is a prime example. That project was more than 10 years in planning, the astronomical costs in developing drove the pricing of those homes much higher than they should have been (including your HOA fees).

Because the city of Simi Valley was so inflexible on the densities for the Alamo&#039;s Canyon project, Unocal backed out, abandoned their plans and sold their property to Waste Management (the most logical buyer). We as residents,  allowed our city Council and Planning Commission to kill a project which would have encircled the landfill and severely limited future expansion of the landfill.

Now that the city has backed our residence into a corner on Alamos Canyon and the landfill, we are stuck  with an expansion project. Your battle is going to be with the County as our city will have very little input on the future of this project.

Understanding this unpleasant predicament we are in, I can at least find a positive  in that I know Mike Smith and Scott Tignac. Both are local and, involved in our communities and will be good stewards of this project. I am not saying you have to like the project, but at the very least we have good local people at the helm.

I think that &lt;strong&gt;this project is going be one of the most important lessons for the residents of Simi Valley,&lt;/strong&gt; that the next time we want to kill a project, we should think about all the more serious ramifications that are tied to these properties. This was a very shortsighted view of what should happen around the landfill.  The county is not going to stop this project.  

These City planning blunders are not limited to the landfill expansion, this is with almost all development in the city.  We have very serious issues facing our city in future development, unfortunately the right decisions to fix these problems are not popular decisions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brenda,</p>
<p>Thank you for stopping by and commenting. I am not sure where I have claimed that Big Sky residents are proponents of the expansion. Here is my exact position on the landfill:</p>
<p><strong>The City of Simi Valley handed the landfill expansion over to Waste Management on a silver platter</strong>. </p>
<p>I am not sure if you are aware of the Unocal  development that was proposed for Alamos Canyon.  That development would  have almost encircled the existing landfill.   If the development would have been approved then expansion of the landfill would be very difficult to almost impossible. Any expansion would have been very limited.</p>
<p>What many people do not consider is that when a developer proposes a large-scale development such as Alamos Canyon; the densities of the communities are critical to whether the developer can make the project work. The more restrictions a city puts on a developer &#8211; the higher the cost of the development. Your development, Big Sky is a prime example. That project was more than 10 years in planning, the astronomical costs in developing drove the pricing of those homes much higher than they should have been (including your HOA fees).</p>
<p>Because the city of Simi Valley was so inflexible on the densities for the Alamo&#8217;s Canyon project, Unocal backed out, abandoned their plans and sold their property to Waste Management (the most logical buyer). We as residents,  allowed our city Council and Planning Commission to kill a project which would have encircled the landfill and severely limited future expansion of the landfill.</p>
<p>Now that the city has backed our residence into a corner on Alamos Canyon and the landfill, we are stuck  with an expansion project. Your battle is going to be with the County as our city will have very little input on the future of this project.</p>
<p>Understanding this unpleasant predicament we are in, I can at least find a positive  in that I know Mike Smith and Scott Tignac. Both are local and, involved in our communities and will be good stewards of this project. I am not saying you have to like the project, but at the very least we have good local people at the helm.</p>
<p>I think that <strong>this project is going be one of the most important lessons for the residents of Simi Valley,</strong> that the next time we want to kill a project, we should think about all the more serious ramifications that are tied to these properties. This was a very shortsighted view of what should happen around the landfill.  The county is not going to stop this project.  </p>
<p>These City planning blunders are not limited to the landfill expansion, this is with almost all development in the city.  We have very serious issues facing our city in future development, unfortunately the right decisions to fix these problems are not popular decisions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brenda Stang</title>
		<link>http://homebuysblog.com/2009/09/17/simi-valley-landfill-expansion/comment-page-1/#comment-1047</link>
		<dc:creator>Brenda Stang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 08:48:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://homebuysblog.com/?p=849#comment-1047</guid>
		<description>You should not use any pictures from Big Sky.  I am one of 700 residents that live in the Big Sky area and I&#039;m sure everyone in this area  who knows about the landfill expansion  is against it.  As a matter a fact, we will be collecting signatures in opposition to the expansion through out the area.  I suggest you think twice about using Big Sky residents as proponents of the Landfill expansion.     DO YOU REALLY WANT TO SEE A 15 STORY BUILDING OF TRASH IN THE  SIMI VALLEY HILLS INSTEAD OF WHITE FACE MOUNTAIN???????????  How are you going to sell that building as real estate?????</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You should not use any pictures from Big Sky.  I am one of 700 residents that live in the Big Sky area and I&#8217;m sure everyone in this area  who knows about the landfill expansion  is against it.  As a matter a fact, we will be collecting signatures in opposition to the expansion through out the area.  I suggest you think twice about using Big Sky residents as proponents of the Landfill expansion.     DO YOU REALLY WANT TO SEE A 15 STORY BUILDING OF TRASH IN THE  SIMI VALLEY HILLS INSTEAD OF WHITE FACE MOUNTAIN???????????  How are you going to sell that building as real estate?????</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

