City Council — October 13, 2026

♪ Oh, Oh, The

So, All right, I'm now going to call this meeting to order. Can the clerk please call the roll?

Yes, Mayor. There's three items on the agenda but I'm going to be pulling item B, Jones v. City of Thousand Oaks. We will not be having closed session on that. We will be having closed session on the other two. Both are pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.98. The first one is Bonnie Bean v. Gerardo Rodriguez and the second one is Keyes v. City of Thousand Oaks.

All right we have no speakers on these items so we're gonna head into closed session now. We'll see everybody in 1 hour.

♪ I'm you ♪♪ The Oaks City Council meeting is being recorded. ♪♪ So, you You. Thank you. You. ♪ You. ♪ ? ? ? ? ? ?

Hello. The

♪ ♫ you You're welcome. ♪ Yeah. you You.

All right, we are going to get started. We are back from closed session. Ms. Noonan is there anything to report? Nothing to report. All right if you are able would you mind please standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. Right hand over your heart ready begin. All right, and now we have special presentation so give me one second. Our first presentation this evening is to recognize National Code Enforcement Appreciation Month.

Code enforcement officers play such a crucial role, and often they are some of the most underappreciated groups and roles in maintaining the thing that we so desperately care about quality of life. Their work helps ensure safe healthy and orderly neighborhoods by enforcing building codes zoning laws and other regulations Throughout October, cities across the country recognized the important contributions of these dedicated professionals.

Here in the City of Thousand Oaks we're proud to acknowledge our small but mighty code compliance team for their hard work, commitment and service to our residents and businesses. I am happy to hereby proclaim this month of October 2026 as National Code Compliance Appreciation Month in the City of Thousand Oaks. And here to accept this proclamation, which I should have called down here is Deputy Community Development Director Tamar Saad, Code Compliance Supervisor Anne Brannan and the code compliance team.

Thank you, Mayor Taylor. And the council. Thank you for recognizing the code team. My name is Tamar as mentioned and I have the honor of overseeing this team. As mentioned small but mighty. They're hard working, diligent and compassionate which is most important so thank you. Thank you everyone for the recognition and thank you to my team. And Brandon is our Code Compliance Supervisor, Ashley Cruz, Joanna Garcia, our newest member Leanne, and Miguel Oroz, and now with us today is Christina Prado. So thank you to the team.

Can council join me for a photo please?

Nice to meet you.

And our second presentation this evening is to also recognize the month of October as Community Planning Month. The celebration of National Community Planning Month gives us the opportunity to publicly recognize the participation and dedication of appointed Planning Commission members who have contributed their time and expertise to the exceptional planning that makes the City of Thousand Oaks the amazing place it is today.

We recognize the many valuable contributions made by the professional city planners of the City of Thousand Oaks and extend our heartfelt thanks for the continued commitment to public service by these professionals. I'd like to invite Community Development Director Kelvin Parker, and Deputy Community Development Director Fabiola Zalaya-Melletcher, and some of the City Planning Division up to accept this proclamation.

Good evening Mayor, thank you City Council Administration and members of the community. Thank you for this proclamation in recognizing planning month and the important role planning plays in our city. Planning is more than maps zoning development it is about people neighborhoods opportunity safety and quality of life. It is about thoughtful decisions And the decisions that we make today that create stronger, more connected, more resilient community for tomorrow.

On behalf of the planning staff I want to thank the city council and administration for your continuous support, leadership and partnership. Your commitment makes this work possible and help us serve the community. So thank you. We truly appreciate the recognition. Thank you.

Can you guys join me for one more photo, please? All right, next up is public comments. Will the City Clerk please announce public comments?

This is the time and place for public comments. Speakers are requested to state their name and community of residence for the record. Six individuals have requested to speak pursuant to Council standards. Speakers are allowed three minutes. The yellow light displays when you have one minute remaining.

All right, and I'm gonna call all in person first but actually it doesn't look like we have any on Zoom tonight. Okay so everybody in person great. First up will be Miss Geiselman and yeah

that's all. This one or this one, or does it matter? Okie dokie. Yes hi my name is Mrs. Geiselman I live in Foxmoor community in Thousand Oaks and first and foremost before I begin I wanted to publicly thank Ted Gerber and Saeed for their dedication and ongoing problem that has been completed they came in the tail end of an issue worked diligently to see that it was done correctly and very respectful crew they sent out Meeting the requirements that result in a satisfied finished project. So I just wanted to thank him and his staff, I want to say that publicly as well as mentioning Chief Parris who actually came and helped us with patrolling and sighting cars that were parked on the curbs of Little Potrero that were blocking the sight line of residents' drivers exiting their streets so I would like to publicly thank him as well Today, I come to you as Vice President of Foxmoor HOA with a problem that has been continuing for over a year now in our community.

It is a city issue because the Greenbelt that runs through Foxmoor is owned by the City so our HOA has no jurisdiction to monitor or set rules for anyone using this area. However, we as residents are affected daily by anything that goes on on the Greenbelt. In the far end of Foxmoor in the grass area behind and adjacent to Margate Place and Cromwell Place several people have designated this place as their personal dog park. At least six to eight dog owners with large dogs come every night between 5.30 and 7.30, depending on daylight and weather, to let their dogs off the leash to run. They play freely chasing balls running after whomever or whatever comes down the green belt. I have spoken to these dog owners and tried to resolve the issue but to no avail.

Residents have contacted Animal Patrol who have tried to solve this issue on many occasions, but have run up against these arrogant people who as soon as they see the officers leash up their dogs and then as soon as they leave they unleash them. So this leaves animal control with an issue. They have repeatedly, and when they were asked about that they repeatedly say we don't care give us a citation.

I'm going to do what I want. Okay both children adults have been chased after people are reluctant to walk there one lady who lives there dreads coming home because she knows the running dogs are going to be in her backyard recently having surgery she dared not even go out for a walk afraid of getting attacked A terminally ill man didn't go out for walks on his last day of life for fear of getting jumped on or run over by these loose dogs. Signs say, dogs on leashes are posted in plain sight. They simply just don't care these people. Our Foxmoor owners did not sign up for a dog park in their backyard it is a city ordinance to keep your dog on a leash, and an ordinance is a local law. This law needs to be enforced. Being that this is city property the liability will of course be in your court when something happens, and of course you know it will happen.

So on behalf of these residents and all of us in this community of Foxmoor please put a stop to this behavior. There are plenty of dog parks in the area available to these people, and our Greenbelt is just not one of those so I thank you for your immediate attention. Thank you. I made it,

okay. That was impressive. Yeah! I was so nervous. Do you know how many words you had? That was like literally great. Thanks Ms. Guzman. Scott Bell next up Scott Bell

Hello again, Scott Belden, Thousand Oaks. Honorable Mayor, City Council, I'm back like I told you. I'm trying not to get frustrated. I've given you guys everything here on Airbnbs. Nothing's been done. I haven't heard from anybody except for Mayor Taylor. Are you guys going to do anything? You should have one in your neighborhood. It's pretty frustrating. I provided you all the cities that have made STRs illegal. I provided you the information where cities have mandated that they carry insurance for liability, like what happened to my cars when they were hit, Hit and Run.

I've also given you all the signatures except for one in our neighborhood that signed the petition to you to do something. I'm pretty frustrated. I am going to be here every month And if I have to, I guess I'm going to have to do another article in the Acorn, reopen my Facebook account. But I'm going to do whatever it takes for you guys to do your jobs. You should have one in your neighborhood. You'd enjoy it.

Thank you for your help. That's all I have.

Thank you Scott. Next up is Christopher Hicks.

Good evening, thank you for allowing me to speak tonight. I'm actually talking on the same subject. I am another resident of the street but it's more of just a city or a street issue. It's a city issue so you know my background a little bit. I was in law enforcement for 35 years and I used to deal with problems like this on a daily basis and the last thing I want to do after I've left that profession is to deal with it on a daily basis at my house In short, last night at 3 o'clock in the morning I was awakened by a woman screaming next door. There were at least 10 people in the house. That woman earlier in the evening had sped off down the street after having an argument with one of the young men there.

I didn't get involved. Three o'clock in the morning, I called local law enforcement. I don't know if they ever responded or not but I believe they did because they usually will do so. I have no complaints about how law enforcement deals with the issue. The reality is this like Scott has stated You guys don't live next to one, you don't understand. I've dealt with this for seven years, the marijuana, the parties, the pornography being filmed there, numerous parties, the gang members that used to be there.

My question to you is Simi Valley, Oxnard, all these surrounding cities, Santa Monica, they all have ordinance against this. I'm not sure why as a residence for over 30 years that you guys aren't willing to at least address this issue? to look at it, to work with us as citizens to come up with an idea and a plan to fix it. It's a business there's the owner of the building or that the residence has never stayed at that property in sense it's a hotel he's getting away with not paying business taxes being properly insured no regulations whatsoever right now there's no less than four big Commercial trucks parked in that property that they're rented out to construction companies or electrical businesses, stuff like that. The owner has tried to be compliant with us.

I'm not complaining directly about him. I am asking the city to at least address the issue. Why are you so hesitant to put into place an ordinance that collects revenue and pays taxes for a business operated? If I was a taco stand on the sidewalk, you'd be charging me. If I was a food cart, you would be charging me. If i was a hotel, you charge me tax. This is a hotel I'm just asking as a resident of this community for you to at least address it. Ms. Gutierrez, I'm sorry you've called me twice.

We've never been able to set up a time to actually communicate about this. I would hope that you would take the time to actually set a time and a place where we both can communicate so thank you.

Thank You Christopher Next up is Laura Tribble

Hello, members of the council. I am here tonight as a volunteer, oh sorry my name's Laura Tribble, I'm from Thousand Oaks and I'm here as a volunteer from 805 Undocufund and unfortunately I don't have good news. What's happening in our community? I will tell you since the beginning of Trump's 45 day immigration enforcement surge we have documented over 60 community members taken off the street in our local communities.

The most alarming thing about this surge is that non-criminal immigrants are being targeted, specifically. These are our neighbors, coworkers and our parents and our children. And I want to remind everybody what some of these detentions have looked like right here in our city. Five ICE vehicles detained a father leaving behind his wife, infant and toddler in the car.

A mother and her 11 year old child were reportedly taken while driving to school A young woman who was following the law was detained at her required immigration check-in by vehicles without license plates. A man was taken near Herb's Road on his way to work, leaving his truck. And perhaps the most heartbreaking one is a man who has lived here 20 years was detained at an immigration check-in following the law and sent to Adelanto facing deportation to Oaxaca and separation from his wife and U.S. citizen son.

These are families being torn apart right here in our backyard. And with everything happening in our community, transparency and accountability from local law enforcement have never been more important. And I want to bring up the Truth Act Forum which is a California law requiring counties to hold a public forum when local law enforcement has provided ICE access to individuals in custody.

This forum gives the public an opportunity to understand those interactions and ask questions, and provide comments that the Board of Supervisors is required to receive and consider. And the date of that will be... The forum is held by the Board of Supervisors at the Ventura Government Center on October 20th at 4 p.m. My ask is that you attend. It's important to attend. Your presence matters and at the last truth act forum, our Sheriff Fryhoff delivered his report and turned around and walked out. He didn't stay to hear a single public comment from the very community members he serves. The board is legally required to hear them but while the sheriff is not walking out before hearing from his constituents was basically a big F you.

I'm sorry excuse my French. So why this matters to Thousand Oaks? Our city contracts with the Ventura County Sheriff's Office for law enforcement. These are the people entrusted with protecting our community and our council has a responsibility to understand how that relationship affects our residents. Transparency isn't just showing up to deliver a report, accountability means staying to listen especially when questions are uncomfortable I hope our council will attend the October 20th forum and demonstrate that the voices of our community matter. And, I want to give a special thanks to Councilwoman Ty Gutierrez and Councilman Newman for always being there at community events and board meetings and hearings to hear about this concerns. Thank you.

Thank You Laura and next up is Janice Green

My name is Janice Green. I've been a resident of the City of Thousand Oaks since 1965, and I'm here tonight to respectfully oppose placing the words in God we trust on or in Thousand Oaks City Hall. I want to be clear this is not about opposing religion or taking away anyone's right to express their faith. We have personal spaces to do such—our homes, houses of worship, cars, clothing. But City Hall is different. It belongs equally to every resident of Thousand Oaks, people of every faith and people who have no religious beliefs at all. When our government prominently displays a statement declaring trust in God, it can send the message that some beliefs are more closely aligned with our government than others.

I also believe we need to be accurate about our history. Our national motto, In God We Trust, was not adopted until 1956—nearly 180 years after the Declaration of Independence. It does not appear in the Declaration or the Constitution. Similar to adding Under God to our Pledge of Allegiance, the history of these additions were more performative religiousness during the Cold War than signs of faith.

I also heard a claim at a council meeting that our country was founded on the Holy Trinity. Our founders certainly used religious language and religion played a role in early American history, but that is very different from saying that our government was founded on the Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity. The Constitution does not mention God, Jesus, Christianity or the Trinity. Instead it explicitly states that no religious test shall ever be required for public office. The First Amendment protects religious freedom and prohibits the government from establishing religion.

Our founders held a wide range of beliefs, and we can acknowledge the role of faith in our history without rewriting that history to suggest our government was founded on one particular religious doctrine or that it should follow one in the future. I have to ask what problem does this solve? How does displaying this phrase improve public safety, address homelessness, maintain our parks or make Thousand Oaks a better place to live. What is the reason behind this and when would come next? The Ten Commandments?

I ask those who have attended Council meetings in support of this proposal to consider the entire community, not only their church but neighbors with many different beliefs and ways of practicing them. Why place one group's beliefs on a public building meant to serve everyone? Approving this display would send a clear message about your position on the separation of religion and government.

For these reasons, I respectfully ask you not to move forward with displaying this at the Thousand Oaks City Hall. Thank you.

Thank you Janice and next up is Heather Hamilton.

Hello. Oh, I almost forgot my glasses. Okay, I want to share an experience from this past week which will explain why I can barely walk if you watch me. I participated in almost half of a 96-mile interfaith pilgrimage from Adelanto in the Mojave Desert to downtown LA in 110 degree weather. In solidarity with our neighbors living in fear of being brutalized, detained and sent into unimaginable conditions.

And I believe that history will reveal not only what happened to these human beings but how many people chose to look away. I walked alongside rabbis, pastors and peacemakers. We were praying with our feet. Let me tell you what we were praying against. I heard from people who had been detained at Adelanto. They shared things I didn't know where our friends and neighbors are being sent to, and it's honestly heartbreaking.

You know how you read Yelp reviews before booking a hotel like if they have nice sheets or in-room jacuzzis or room service? Well let me tell you what Adelanto has. Federal inspectors found when they looked at 20 cells 15 of them were found to have had nooses hanging from them, and the guards reportedly said removing them was not a priority. Investigators have documented delayed medical care, murky drinking water and reports of pepper spray being used against people experiencing mental episodes. I mean can you imagine? Of course they had mental episodes there.

The lights are on 24 hours a day, it's freezing and their food is wretched. Mold and larvae have been found in the showers, and we've had people recently die there from the conditions. And according to ICE's own data, roughly six out of 10 people detained at Adelanto have no criminal record. These are all documented findings that anyone with a quick Google search can look at, and they've been happening for years.

And our apathy allows their suffering to continue because it's easier to not look. And I'm here to say do not look away. I learned on this pilgrimage that there are churches that serve love and there are churches that serve power. There are courageous pastors, and there were cowardly pastors. There are good law enforcement officers, and there are those who abuse authority.

And it is our responsibility—those of us with privilege and power—we have the responsibility to step in and help our neighbors. It's unfortunate that caring, compassionate human beings are called radicals. But I am grateful to be surrounded by extraordinary radicals showing up for our neighbors. And wouldn't it be wonderful if we packed this chamber with as many people passionate about protecting human beings as protecting the downtown project? Because we can do both!

Love is something we do, it is not something we plaster on a wall in a chamber like so many people have come in here and advocated for. And I am so grateful for the amazing work right here in the Conejo Valley standing up for our neighbors that continues to grow week by week because a lot of people are realizing you cannot look away from the horror that is happening. Thank you.

Thank you Heather

and next up is Suzanne Duckett.

Good evening, Suzanne Duckett from the corrupt city of Thousand Oaks. Tonight I don't have a real prepared speech because on next door There's a wonderful group effort instead of my speech tonight with Mikey and his neighbors in Newbury Park, District 1. It's fabulous. You will be able to decide what kind of person you want up here in front of us for the next several years, so I encourage everyone to go to Nextdoor and listen carefully and make your decision from Nextdoor.

Tonight I would also like to talk about Karen, who is also running for District 1 in Newbury Park. I came from pharmaceuticals and I am very much Probiotech. This is an industry which has kept all of us alive for a long time, does very good at keeping us healthy while we're going through our problems. It's for us elderly people, younger people, our kids and our grandchildren It's kept all of us alive for many years.

This is a business that believes in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And Karen was in contracts And contracts at Amgen was important because it goes through details, it evaluates details, legal issues and fairness. So she is definitely my person to be elected even though I can't vote in District 1. I would encourage people to vote for Karen for District 1 Thank you. Good evening.

Thank you, Suzanne. That's all the speakers correct? All right next is we're going to move over to our consent calendar. Does anyone have any questions or anything anyone would like to pull? Can I have a motion for consent? All right we have a motion can the city clerk please call the vote

Council Member Engler?

Yes.

And Council Member Gutierrez? Yes, and that motion passes five to zero

All right next up we have our first public hearing Excuse me our second public hearing will the city clerk please open this hearing This is the first this is the first

yes

Am I on the right item?

Item 10A

Here we, we're back. First public hearing will the city clerk please open this hearing?

Hearing advertised as required by law is open to consider agenda item number 10A Hollycrest Homes for sale affordable housing project modifications there are no speakers for this item

okay and presenting the item tonight is associate planner Nicole Katz

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.

Thank You Nicole that was a great presentation anybody have any questions? Mr. Newman.

Thank You Mr. Mayor and thank you Miss Katz for your presentation Just a few quick questions on this. On financing, it is difficult to build anything and I think everyone here would agree that goes 100 times for affordable projects so my question on this is all of these proposed changes in the aggregate will they increase the likelihood that financing will be completed on this project and it will get built?

Thank you, Council Member Neumann. I would say yes. Obviously as mentioned by Ms. Katz some of these changes would decrease overall project construction costs, elimination of the balconies but they also decrease the ongoing cost that an owner would have such as HOA fees in order for the maintenance for balconies so yes it would decrease construction costs and then the overall cost to the owner And we have Veronica Garcia here who is with People Self-Help Housing, so she could more specifically answer that question as well about how much sooner they'd be able to start construction if these amendments were changed tonight.