Good evening one moment while I queue up those slides All right, good evening Mayor Taylor, Council Members and members of the public. My name is Nicole Katz and I am an Associate Planner with the City of Thousand Oaks Planning Division. The item before you this evening pertains to project updates to the Hollycrest Homes affordable for sale housing development at 384 Herbs Road This evening, there are five requests for your consideration.
The first request is to adopt a resolution finding that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to section 15332 infill development projects and statutorily exempt pursuant to section 15194 affordable housing projects and to approve residential plan development permit major modification RPD 2023-70014 Tentative track map minor modification TTM 2023-7001 and underground utility waiver UUW 2026-7003.
The remaining requests are to approve amendments to the disposition and development agreement, to authorize the city manager to negotiate and draft a first amended and restated DDA, to authorize the city manager to execute the first amended and restated DDA on behalf of the city and to authorize the City Manager to act on behalf of the city whenever an administrative action is required to implement the first amended and restated DDA in its associated documents, except for matters that are reserved under state law to the City Council or if the City Manager determines they should be referred to the City Council.
Within the first portion of the project there are three related entitlements RPD major modification involves modifications to the previously approved 78 unit residential development consisting primarily of architectural revisions, including the removal of balconies and associated design changes. Tentative track map modification involves modification of condition of approval number 173 within resolution 2024-003 which is to revise the mix of affordable units consistent with the mix of affordable units proposed by the developer presently.
An underground utility waiver, which involves waiving the requirement to underground electrical transmission poles and overhead utilities along the northern and eastern property lines. On your screen is an aerial view of the property. The property is located at 384 Herbs Road, which is at the southeast corner of Herbs Road and Hillcrest Drive, and is zoned R3 with a general plan land use designation of Neighborhood High.
The property is approximately 3.89 acres in size, and it is surrounded by single-family residentially zoned properties to the north and east, multi-family residentially zoned properties to the south and west, and Estella Park to the southeast. City Council has previously taken action on this project. The first action involves City Council's approval of the project through Resolution 2024-003 on March 19, 2024 which found the project exempt from CEQA, approved entitlements, declared the site as exempt surplus land, approved the DDA and authorized the city manager to implement the DDA.
The second action was during the April 14th, 2026 meeting where City Council authorized a city manager to negotiate amendments to the DDA and the underlying entitlements and directed staff to research the feasibility of a citywide impact fee waiver for 100% affordable projects. For sale projects. The third and most recent action was during the September 15, 2026 meeting where City Council adopted a citywide impact fee waiver for 100% affordable for sale housing development projects.
This ordinance exempts payment of the police facilities in city traffic impact fees. The fee waiver is available to all qualifying projects for which this project is eligible. When the project was originally entitled by the City Council in 2024, the City Council granted the following deviations from development standards. Pursuant to State Density Bonus Law, the applicant was granted one concession and one waiver.
The concession decreased the open space required for the project from 35% to 9.19%, and the waiver provided reduced front, side, and rear setbacks. As permissible under the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code, the applicant was granted two modifications to objective design standards. One modification allowed deviations from the rowhouse access standard and the other modification allowed the development to forego the usable outdoor open space requirement for rowhouse units Since the project's original entitlements, the applicant has submitted construction drawings, analyzed construction costs and continues to work towards obtaining all necessary financing.
Through this process, the applicant has identified modifications from the entitled project which are necessary to develop the units. On the chart before you is a compilation of the project deviations with the new and modified items bolded. Removing the balconies from the project results in conflicts with Thousand Oaks Municipal Code sections 9-4.2205C2 and 9- 4.904E4.
A state density bonus law concession and waiver may be used to accommodate the request. The previously granted concession pertaining to decreasing the open space standards has been shifted to a state density bonus law waiver. To summarize the overall project, a total of one state density bonus law concession is requested to accommodate balcony removal Three total state density bonus law waivers are requested, including the existing waiver previously granted for setback reductions. The open space decrease which was previously granted as a concession and one new waiver to accommodate balcony removal.
Two total ODS modifications are requested which include the two previously granted objective design standard modifications and one new condition of approval modification is requested to increase retaining wall heights. On your screen is an architectural rendering of a building from the project. The image on the bottom shows the project as previously entitled, which has balconies on units on the second floor.
The image on the top shows the proposed design with the balconies removed and in place of the balconies roof overhangs and windows instead of the balconies and sliding glass doors. Balconies were required to satisfy objective design standards and residential plan development standards. The objective design standard within municipal code section 9-4.2205C2 required that a minimum of 25% of residential units facing a street, alley or common interior courtyard provide a balcony overlooking a public space with a minimum size of 6 feet by 4 feet.
The Residential Plan Development Standard within Municipal Code Section 9-4.904E requires that townhome ownership units in excess of seven units per net acre must provide private yard areas as stated by the underlying RPD permit. To satisfy these code requirements, the previous resolution had Condition of Approval Number 15 which necessitated balconies. The request from the applicant involves removal of all previously proposed balconies.
The applicant has indicated that providing balconies would result in identifiable construction and maintenance costs, which would adversely impact the ownership cost for the 100% affordable for sale housing project. Plan preparation, engineering, materials and labor for balcony construction would increase the project costs and could affect unit sales costs.
Additionally, the HOA will be responsible for the ongoing maintenance and inspection of the balconies resulting in recurring costs that could increase HOA dues. The objective design standard is intended to provide connections to exterior space and enhance the architectural design of facades. The modified project would continue to address the intent of this objective design standard by replacing the sliding door with a larger window which incorporates decorative trim and recessing, which provides facade articulation.
Staff supports the request to utilize a state density bonus law concession to remove the requirement to install balconies pursuant to Thousand Oaks Municipal Code section 9-4.2205C2. Strict application of the balcony requirement in the residential plan development standards would physically preclude the construction of the project with a number of units needed to meet the density required for the site under the general plan.
Staff supports the request to utilize a state density bonus law waiver to remove the requirement to install balconies pursuant to municipal code section 9-4.904E4 Since balconies were required within condition number 15 of resolution 2024-003, the conditions should be removed as described in the staff report and the proposed resolution. To establish the building pad necessary for the project, various retaining walls were proposed during the project's original entitlement.
Condition number 37 limited the maximum exposed height of retaining walls to six feet. Through site design and engineering, the applicant team has determined that walls two, three, four, five and six will have portions that exceed the exposed height of six feet. Of those walls, only Walls 2 and 6 will be visible from the public right-of-way off of Erbes Road.
On your screen is a site plan which indicates the retaining wall placements, depicting only the walls which have portions exceeding the six-foot limitation. The site grading and retaining wall design is intended to limit grading and preserve existing topography. Since the building pad sits significantly below the grade off Hillcrest Drive, the portion of Wall 3 exceeding 6 feet in height will not be visible from the right-of-way.
Furthermore, walls four and five are located in the interior of the site and also will not be visible from the adjacent streets. This plan view demonstrates a more refined view of walls two and six with the exposed portions of the walls exceeding six feet in height are depicted in red. These walls retain the sloping terrain along the western portion of the site to establish the building pad and to accommodate electrical transformers.
The additional height requested for these walls would reduce ground disturbance, preserve the site's terrain and accommodate construction of the units at the density permitted. Conditions of approval remain in place to soften the appearance of the retaining walls. As such staff supports the request for additional wall height and has provided revised language for condition of approval number 37 in the proposed resolution.
Thousand Oaks Municipal Code Section 7-5.202A requires that developers underground existing adjacent utilities. This requirement was applied to the project through Condition of Approval No. 78, which necessitated utility undergrounding. Adjacent to the site along the north and east property lines are various electrical transmission poles with overhead utilities highlighted on your screen in yellow.
Waivers of underground utility requirements may be granted for non-single family residential projects where undergrounding would be unreasonable or impractical considering the use of the property. The poles outside the north property line adjacent to Hillcrest Drive are already within the Hillcrest Drive segment of the city's Undergrounding Utility Master Plan, which identifies these facilities for future undergrounding by the city.
Granting the waiver would not preclude the city from pursuing the improvements through its own undergrounding program. Furthermore, the applicant has indicated that undergrounding the utilities would increase project costs adversely impacting ownership costs for the 100% affordable housing project. For these reasons staff is in support of the underground utility waiver request and has provided revised language for condition number 78 in the proposed resolution Through the project modifications and DDA amendments, several of the conditions of approval within resolution 2024-003 require modifications.
The proposed resolution provides the revised language for the conditions of approval. To summarize, condition number 14 should be revised to reflect the new affordable unit mix. Condition number 15 should be removed if balcony removals are permitted. Condition number 37 should be revised to allow retaining walls 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 to exceed the six foot maximum exposed height limitation.
Condition number 78 should be revised to reflect the applicant's responsibility for project design of the undergrounding installations. And condition number 173 should also be revised to reflect the new affordable unit mix. The RPD major modification which involves the balcony removal, increases to retaining wall heights and modification of condition number 14 must comply with all of the four findings in Municipal Code section 9-4.2803C The modifications to the previously approved project remain consistent with the site's general plan and land use designation, and supports various general plan goals and policies.
The granting of the concession, waivers, and revised entitlement conditions are consistent with applicable local laws, local and state regulations, and policies including the municipal code. The modifications will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. And the project modifications conform with the CEQA analysis which was previously conducted for the project.
The tentative track map minor modification, which involves the revision to condition number 173 to revise the mix of affordable units must comply with all four findings as described within municipal code section 9-3.702D. The revision of this condition does not impact the quality or quantity of any dedications, does not increase the number of lots or increase the configuration of the map, does not alter the intent or purpose of the prior conditions of approval and does not change any of the previously adopted findings.
The Underground Utility Waiver, which involves waiving the requirement to underground the existing overhead utility lines may be granted if the undergrounding requirement would be unreasonable or impractical based on at least one of the findings described within Municipal Code Section 7-5.203D Since the project involves a non-single family residential subdivision, would be cost prohibitive and several of the lines are already to be undergrounded within the city's undergrounding program. The requisite findings can be made to grant the underground utility waiver Building on the entitlement changes I just described, I will now cover the DDA updates including the revised affordability mix and current project financing plan.
The project will continue to provide 78 affordable homes for ownership. The proposed amendments updates the affordability mix to align with the current project financing and underwriting. Since conditions number 14 and 173 in resolution 2024-003 specify the affordability mix, these conditions require modification to reflect the updated affordability mix. Condition number 14 can be modified through the RPD major modification process and condition number 173 can be modified through the tentative track map minor modification process The number of moderate income homes would increase from 19 to 38, and the number of lower income homes would change from 59 to 40. 10 of the lower income homes will remain subject to the city's housing successor fund requirements and also satisfy the project's density bonus affordability requirement.
In short, the total number of affordable homes does not change. The amendment updates the income mix while preserving the city's 10 required lower income units. The first amended and restated DDA is the agreement that implements these updates. It updates the project scope, remove references to the Housing Trust Fund Ventura County, establishes a new ground lease structure with the Housing Land Trust Ventura County, resets the remaining performance schedule, and updates the sales price and resale price requirements.
It also reflects the current project budget and financing plan, including an estimated total development cost of approximately $47.9 million. These amendments align the DDA with the current Hollycrest Homes Project financing plan and affordability requirements. The environmental review previously conducted for the project determined that the project was categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to section 15332, infill development projects and statutorily exempt from CEQAs pursuant to section 15194 affordable housing exemption.
Since the project changes do not materially alter the project's development intensity, the project remains exempt from CEQAS as previously determined within resolution 2024-003 The applications were noticed in accordance with Thousand Oaks Municipal Code and state requirements. At the time of initial packet publication, no written correspondence was received. However one piece of written correspondence was received this afternoon which has been included in the supplemental packet for your consideration.
To conclude, the project modifications can be accommodated through the mechanisms and applications described within this presentation in the documents in the packet. The modified project remains consistent with the city's requirements and the underlying entitlement conditions. Advancing the Hollycrest Homes Project remains a top City Council priority and approval of these requests would facilitate the development of the 100% affordable for sale housing project As such, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to find that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 Infill Development Projects and statutorily exempt pursuant to Section 15194 Affordable Housing. And to approve Residential Plan Development Permit Major Modification RPD 2023-70014 Tentative Track Map Minor Modification 2023-7001, and Underground Utility Waiver UUW 2026-7003 subject to the findings and conditions of approval contained in the proposed resolution.
Staff also recommends that the City Council approve amendments to the DDA, authorize the city manager and city attorney to negotiate and draft a first amended and restated DDA. Authorize the city manager to execute the final first amended and restated DDA And authorize the city manager to act on behalf of the city whenever an administrative action is required to implement the terms of the first amended and restated DDA in its associated documents, except for those matters that are reserved under state law to City Council or that the city manager determines should be referred to the City Council.
This concludes my presentation. I, along with members of the Community Development, Public Works and Finance Departments, the City Attorney's Office and members of the applicant team are available to answer your questions. Thank you.
