We
However, you
Hey,
Heat. Heat.
back. Heat.
Heat. Heat.
I will now I will now call to order the city council meeting. Will Oh, wait.
Will city clerk please call roll. >> Council member Adams
» here. >> Council member Newman
» here. >> Council member Gutierrez
» here. >> Mayor Prom Angler
» here. >> And Mayor Taylor
» here. Council member Newman is participating
remote in tonight's meeting. Pursuant to the Brown Act, I must ask Council
Newman, is there anyone who is 18 years or older with you in the room?
» Mayor Taylor, there is not. >> Thank you. Tonight, we have one close
session case. Miss Nan, will you please announce the session?
» Thank you, Mayor Taylor. We have one close session conference with legal
counsel on anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code section
54956.92. one potential case, a city employee has
alleged age discrimination and harassment.
» Thank you.
» That's it. All right, we'll see you guys here shortly.
Hey, hey, hey.
Heat.
Heat. Hey, Heat.
I got
Heat. Heat.
Heat. Heat. N.
Heat. Heat.
Hey,
hey, hey.
Heat.
I don't
Heat. Heat.
That's
right.
Heat. Heat.
Heat.
Hey, Heat.
Uh-huh. Uh-huh.
Heat. Heat.
Hey,
hey, hey.
Baby,
hey.
Heat.
Hey. Hey. Hey.
3.
Hey, hey, hey. Heat.
Heat. Heat.
Wow. Yeah. Yeah.
All
right.
All right.
I got to go.
Heat. Heat.
Hey,
hey, hey.
That's
all.
Heat. Heat.
Sound.
Heat. Heat.
Heat. Heat. N.
Welcome.
Heat. Heat.
Hallelujah.
We are now back from close session. Miss Nan, is there anything for you to
report? >> Nothing to report.
» All right. If you are able, can you please stand and join me in the pledge
of allegiance?
» Ready? Begin. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and
to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all.
» All right. Now we are going to move to the podium for our special presentation.
All right. And I'd like to welcome Denise and David Belco. Would you guys
like to come up? Thank you.
All right. Uh Denise and David Belco who are ambassadors for Donate Life. Donate
Life is a nonprofit organ and tissue donor registry dedicated to saving the
lives of thousands of Californians awaiting life-saving transplants. The
Belco family became involved in Oregon donor advocacy after their son Michael
at the age of 20 saved the lives of eight people through Oregon donation.
The city council encourages Thousand Oaks residents to participate in the
donate life California donor registry and we are therefore pro proclaiming the
month of April as DMV. Donate lifec california month organ donation turns
loss into legacy and you can register at donatelifec california.com.
Is there anything you guys would like to say?
» No. Okay. Thank you guys. We appreciate you. Here is the proclamation. And would
you guys come up and take a photo with our council?
» Can I invite council up for a photo?
All
right. Now, and now we have our final presentation of the evening. I'd like to
introduce Natasha Burn from the library. She is going to tell us about the
library's one city, one book selection for the year.
Good evening, Mayor Taylor and council members. I'm Natasha Buron, a librarian
at the Thousand Oaks Library and committee chair for Thousand Oaks Reads,
One City, One Book. I am pleased to be here tonight to announce the 2026 title.
The Friends of the Library have been supporting this program for 18 years and
we are just so thankful for their generous support. If you are unfamiliar
with One City, One Book, it is a citywide literary event that encourages
community members to collectively read and discuss a selected book.
One City, One Book is really built on a simple but powerful idea that books
bring people together. Stories have this unique way of helping us connect, start
meaningful conversations, and feel a little more rooted in our community.
Each year, this program reminds us that the library isn't just a place to check
out books. It's a vibrant gathering space where culture, ideas, and people
come together. In just the past three years, more than 4,500 people have
participated in one city, one book events, and that kind of engagement is
just so exciting for us, and it motivates us to keep growing and serving
our community through this program. I am pleased to announce that The Fox
Wife by Yang Xi Chu was selected as the 2026 title. New York Times best-selling
author Yang Shi Chu brilliant brilliantly explores a world of mortals
and spirits, humans and beast, and their dazzling intersections. Blending
historical fiction and folklore, The Foxwife follows Bao, a detective
investigating the death of a cortisone, and a mysterious servant named Snow, a
fox spirit seeking vengeance for the loss of her child on a journey through
China and Japan. We in we invite you to kick off this
year's one city, one book with a free concert at the Grant Art Burmhal Library
on Saturday, March 28th, featuring internationally acclaimed and
award-winning artist Bay Mter. The Gu Jang is a 21 string traditional Chinese
zither with a history of 2500 years. Joined by guitarist John Montter, the
duo will present an evening of contemporary fusion works. In the
following weeks, the workshops programs inspired by the book will continue
culminating with an afternoon with with Yang Xi Chu on Sunday, April 26 at 2
p.m. upstairs at the Fred Cavley Theater with a Q&A and book signing. Books are
available in paperback, large print, ebook, and e audiobook and will be
available to borrow starting tomorrow at the library. Uh this event is free.
Seating is first come first serve and uh if the public would like to know more
information, they can go to tool library.org or call us at the library.
Through one city, one book, we aim to bring together diverse voices and
viewpoints through a thoughtful exchange of ideas. A guiding principle that
drives this program is the belief that when we open a book together, we close
it in greater harmony. With appreciation, uh we would like to leave
a copy of the Foxwife with each council member and invite you and all the
community members to participate in the 2026 one city, one book program. Thank
you so much for your time today, >> Natasha. Thanks for being with us
tonight and sharing about the reading program.
» Thank you so much. Next up is public comments. Will city
clerk please announce them? >> This is the time and place for public
comments. Speakers are requested to state their name and community of
residents for the record. Two individuals have requested to speak and
pursuant to council standards. Speakers are allowed three minutes. The yellow
light displays when you have one minute remaining.
And >> city clerk, are you able to call in the
names? I I don't have them in front of me.
» Yes. Our first speaker tonight is Scarlet.
Greetings, council. I'm Scarlet from Thousand Oaks, and I have a seven
syllable word for you, and that is semiquincential.
Semi for half, Quinn for five, and centennial for 100. So, of course, half
of 500 equals 250. And so, as you know, we're embarking on our 250th year uh
birthday of America. And with that, um I'd like to in the spirit of that uh
kind of revisit a little bit of our nation's history and traditions of
America. So 1776, the Declaration of Independence was signed by 56 very
courageous men, lives, fortune, seek, sacred honor, all of that. Well, did you
know that half, actually more than half of those 56 had a degree in um ministry.
They were all um also seminary degrees from universities.
The declaration signer Francis Hopkinson. This is what's fun about it.
We get to rendeboo with our founding fathers. Francis Hopkinson actually
created and designed the great seal of America. He actually served as one of
our first judges, federal judges, and he was also the uh choir and uh music
director for Christ Church in uh Philadelphia. He wrote America's very
first hymn book and he also set the entire book of Psalms to music. And so
um I could give you so many examples of the faith of our founding fathers, but
I'm going to move on now to 1814. Francis Scott Key as we all know
probably that he wrote our nation's uh and na national anthem. And did you know
that in the fourth stanza of that book he uh actually had written um
and this be our motto in God be our trust. So, um I don't have
um too much more time here, but I did want to mention that uh the commander of
the Allied Forces of World War II. Um we have um Dwight Eisenhower who
officially set our national motto as in God we trust. And so um there has been a
lack of honoring our nation's history and tradition. And with that, I wanted
to let you know that our sister cities of Port Weini and Phil Filillmore have
both adopted our national motto and it resides in their council chambers. And
with that, I would love to request that the city of Thousand Oaks also honor the
history and tradition of America and place those words in God we trust in our
council chambers here. Thank you.
Thank you, Scarlet. Next up, we have Madison Richardson on Zoom.
» Hello. Can you hear me? >> We can. Go ahead.
» Okay, great. Uh, my name is Madison Richardson. I'm from Newbury Park. Um,
just to uh continue on the last speaker, um, I
would also like to honor our traditions as America and um, keep church and state
separated, but that's not what I'm here for. Um, today I want to talk about how
we are fortunate to live in a city that historically defines itself um, by how
we support one another. We saw that unity during the fires. We saw it in the
wake of borderline tragedy. We are community more than capable of standing
together. Yet when the topic of federal immigration enforcement arises, we see a
shift towards needless division. Whether one supports ISIS mission or not, the
reality of their current operations is by any metric unstable. We are seeing a
massive $ 38 billion detention re-engineering initiative unfold in real
time. Just today it was confirmed the core civic facility in Kern County, the
largest in California, has received official permission to expand. This
isn't a distant federal issue. It's a local reality. This expansion signals
that these operations are accelerating, bringing with them documented financial
hardships for our agricultural sector and a climate of fear that affects our
neighbors daily. The residents who come before you to share these concerns
aren't driven by ulterior motives. They are driven by empathy and a belief that
our city can always strive to be better. I fear that silence from the majority of
this council allows contention to breed. We look for we look to our leaders for
clarity and guidance, especially when navigating the complex intersection of
federal enforcement and local privacy. We need to move beyond political
divisiveness and towards a healthy transparent discussion about how we
protect our city's resources and our residents peace of mind. I hope we can
lead with the same unity we show during times of crisis, ensuring our policies
reflect the character of the city we love. Thank you.
» Thank you, Madison. Next is consent calendar. Does anyone have any questions
or would like to pull anything? Uh with no discussion, would anybody
like to make a motion? >> Mr. Mayor, we do have one speaker on
this item. >> Oh, we do.
» I'm not seeing that. Do you? Um, yes, we have John.
» John. Okay. >> Hello, city council.
I just want to clarify something I said last council meeting regarding the ADUs
and the Constitution of the United States and our oaths of office. I had
said two weeks ago that you guys are violating your oath of
office and the Constitution of the United States with article 1 section 10
where it says no state shall make a law which impairs the obligation of
contracts. With regard to ADUs, we're talking about
CCRs, covenant, covenants, conditions, and restrictions
where Assembly Bill 670 says to ignore those with regard to
building an ADU. Now, when I said that um
we're all violating our oath, and I turned around and I said we all are
violating our oath and the Constitution, what I really meant to say was
we're all partly to blame for allowing and tolerating those
violations to happen and not speaking up. So, that's really what I meant to
say. I just wanted to clarify that. Um, and in regard to the ADUs, I want to
also reiterate, I'm not an ADU hater. I think they're cute. They're actually
kind of fun. But when it comes to a neighborhood where they have CCRs
that says you cannot have those things like an ADU an an additional dwelling,
we should follow that contract. And I'm I have a question and that that is
do you think your constituents would like full disclosure that
in the processing of building an ADU in that case where the CCR is prohibited.
I I'm wondering if they would like to have full disclosure that the law that
supports it is unconstitutional because if they're not being told that
this is true, they're opening themselves up to a
lawsuit by their neighbors. And I've seen some ADUs where there's a
bunch of cars out front and it's getting really crowded.
And you know, there's other issues. it's just, you know, violating the CCRs
and I think it's just a matter of time before this starts to happen where they
start suing their neighbors and and it starts to cause a problem. So, I think
the disclosure in the application process would be appropriate to just
tell people, hey, keep an eye on your CCRs, check them out. And you guys know
I love you. I'm just trying to protect you and our city, and I appreciate you.
So, thank you. God bless.
» John, being in the real estate industry, you you are the first person I've ever
heard call ADUs cute and fun. Um, okay. Now, moving back to consent
calendar. Still nothing to discuss. Will somebody move or put a motion up?
» No comments on from staff. I'm happy to move consent
» all parts of it. >> City clerk, can you call the vote?
» Council member Adam, >> yes.
» Council member Newman, >> hi.
» Council member Gutierrez, >> yes.
» Mayor Prom Angler, >> yes.
» And Mayor Taylor, >> yes.
» And that motion passes 5 to zero. And your ordinance title is an ordinance
amending the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code relating to regulation of accessory
dwelling units, ADUs, and junior accessory dwelling units, JADUs,
updating Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 45, Accessory Dwelling Units to be
consistent with state law MCA 2025-7003, ordinance number 1747- NS.
» Thank you. Next up, we have our public hearing. Oh, no. I'm excuse me.
Next we have tonight's department report.
» No, you were right, Mr. Mayor. No, I was right. I was right. You're
» right. It's public hearing. >> There we go. It is public hearing. All
right. Will city clerk please open the hearing?
Hearing advertised as required by law is open to consider agenda item number 10A
mixed use development amendment SP2025-7003
Dagger 2025-00005
DP2025-70019
applicant is Lato Hillrest LLC speakers are requested to state their name and
community of residence one person has presented a speaker card and pursuant to
council standard that speaker is allowed 5 minutes. The yellow light displays
when you have 1 minute remaining. >> Thank you. Presenting the item tonight
is senior planner Justine Kendall. And available for questions, we have our
community development director Kelvin Parker, assistant city attorney Null
Doran, and deputy community development director Fabiola Za Melicher.
Uh take it away, staff.
» Good evening, mayor. Um, council members, members of the public,
as you just heard, the item before the city council for this evening's
consideration are amendments to specific plan 24 and development agreement
2022-70777-dagr
as well as a major modification, a development permit 202270773-
-p originally approved by city council in July of 2023 that would allow changes
to facade design and materials for the project approved at 2150 West Hill Crest
Drive.
Uh to provide a quick overview of uh what was already approved in 2023.
The project site consists of one parcel totaling 8.28 gross acres. The map on
your screen provides an aerial view of the site showing the previously existing
vacant office and surface bike parking which have since been demolished. The
project site is surrounded by developed urban uses and generally located north
of US 101, east of Rancho Kaneo Boulevard and a Chevron automobile
service station, south of Hillrest Drive and the Amgen Industrial Business Campus
and west of an existing multif family apartment complex. The project is
currently under construction for aspects of the development that are unaffected
by the subject request.
The subject request involves modifications to various aspects of the
project approved by city council which included the entitlements listed here.
The general plan amendment, zone change, protected tree permit, and special use
permit are are not uh proposed to be amended.
However, the specific plan, development agreement, and development permit um are
the approved project is characterized by a multif family mixeduse development
that includes an internal pedestrianoriented roadway separating
two buildings which would contain 333 multifamily residential units including
30 very lowincome affordable units and three moderate income affordable units.
common areas and amenities. 5,300 gross square feet of commercial retail and
restaurant space above semi-ubterane parking structures containing a total of
462 parking spaces as well as 121 surface parking spaces. The Northerly
building fronting on West Hillrest Drive or also known as building A is the
mixeduse building with three levels of apartments above a ground floor of both
residential units, amenities, and commercial tenant spaces. Building B
includes residential uses which appear as four other larger buildings on the
site connected by various walking paths, breezeways, and bridges. The smaller
building incorporated into building B will house the leasing and property
management office. Additional indoor and outdoor amenities are provided to the
residents throughout the site, including a playground, swimming pool, courtyards
with active play spaces, roof decks, and a dog park.
As approved, the project's architectural design is a modern style. The exterior
walls of the building are earthtoned colors primarily consisting of stucco
finishes, simulated wood fiber cement panels, brick veneer, multi-panel window
areas with dark bronze trim, awnings, and trelluses.
The northern building, again, building A located behind an existing landscape
burm with protected oak trees to remain in place, includes significant
articulation and massing brakes seen here. Building A also features a public
seating area on the ground floor in front of the commercial units and
material changes at the driveway entries to encourage pedestrian safety and
activity.
The southern building, building B, includes similar materiality and
articulation throughout, although to a lesser degree than building A. The
southern facads of the building are visible from the 101 freeway and as
approved are required to incorporate additional brick veneer somewhere on
each sub building subject to review and approval by the community development
department.
The development agreement is a contract between uh the property owner and the
city which outlines the private benefits received by the developer in exchange
for the benefits the project will provide to the public. In this instance,
the project uh must provide 333 new residential units, including those 30
affordable units, on-site amenities, an improved city gateway sign, uh
sustainability features, and enhanced architectural design in exchange for the
adoption of the general plan amendment. Uh the new specific plan, uh deviation
from the city's objective design standards and stability of some fee and
regulatory requirements.
SP20 was approved as part of the original project because the Thousand
Oaks Municipal Code did not include a mixeduse zoning designation at the time
of approval. A specific plan is a document designed to implement policies
in alignment with the intent of the city's general plan and establish custom
development and design standards, permitted land uses, infrastructure
requirements, implementation measures, and other criteria. These standards are
not required to replicate the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code requirements since
they are intended to be unique for the specific development area. It should be
noted that relief from normally required development standards was was granted as
part of the development agreement negotiations and specific plan drafting
process. For example, relief from municipal code building length
restrictions, window inset requirements, um, and others were all granted as part
of the original entitlement approval.
Uh before I get into each of the requests included in tonight's item, I
will review a little bit of the process that led to the approved project just
described.
As part of the typical planning entitlement review process, the part
that occurs before a project goes to public hearing. The applicant submits
plans which are refined as staff provide feed provides feedback. Corrections are
made to bring the plans into compliance with regulatory requirements and
negotiations are held to balance project specific contexts and operational
requirements with city design guidelines. In some situations such as
this one, revisions are deferred to the post approval process and memorialized
as conditions of approval which are contained within the final resolution
in order to allow an applicant to move forward to the public hearings. In the
instance of the subject project, the development permit resolution included
specific design modifications as part of the conditions of approval requiring
revisions to the plan set shown during the entitlement hearings to be made
during the building permit plan check process. Other conditions reinforce that
certain aspects of the project must be maintained as they are particularly
important to the design quality of the development.
The draft conditions of approval including the design related
modifications or enforcement conditions were provided to the applicant in
advance of the public hearing to allow an opportunity for review and
discussion. The applicant re agreed to the conditions at the time of planning
commission and city council consideration and the project was
approved subject to the conditions presented at the hearings.
Many of the conditions of approval adopted for this project were intended
to ensure consistency with the guidelines listed here as well as the
new specific plan for the property and the development agreement. As shown
earlier, the development agreement uh negotiated by the city and development
team uh present here this evening included the developer commitment to
provide uh quote enhanced architectural design with appropriate massing and
scale, extensive articulation, glazing, and extensive detailing with upgraded
materials.
Following planning entitlement approval, it is then normally expected that plans
submitted for grading and building plan check review will be modified due to
refinements made during the final engineering design process, updated
business plan, or financial considerations, or to comply with the
conditions of approval. During those review periods, revisions to plans are
categorized as either minor or major changes. In this case, definitions of
what is considered minor or major were included in section 10 of the adopted
development agreement. In particular, the development agreement
specified that changes to building materials that are not comparable or
better than those included in the project plans dated May 26, 2023 are to
be considered a major amendment requiring planning commission review and
city council approval. In April 2025, following both applicant and staff
identification of 19 design revisions or in some cases the lack of revisions
which are required by condition of approval, nine of those uh were
determined to be minor and granted ministerially per the direction of the
development agreement and 10 were qualified as major. The applicant
submitted complete applications to process the requested major design
revisions. Uh that would be the development permit major modification,
development agreement amendment application and specific plan amendment
application on December 17th of last year.
The primary issue before the city council is whether the requested
architectural modifications maintain consistency with the enhanced design
features and material standards of the original project approvals, including
resolution number 202343, which approved the development permit.
subject to the conditions of approval contained therein specific plan number
24 and the development agreement. The list of requests is summarized here and
I will go into more detail on each one. They include uh the removal of approved
trelluses and non-compliance with the requirement to provide additional
trelluses, installation of external downspouts rather than internalizing
those downspouts visible from prominent corners Hillrest Drive or Rancho Kaho
Boulevard as required by condition of approval number 62.
Provide painted metal doors rather than the French glass doors shown on the
entitlement plan set or other similarly decorative doors. This was uh
recommended for approval by planning commission
uh to substitute painted accent headers in a complimentary color in place of the
previously specified woodlook trim headers.
Reduce the total amount of transparency on the commercial storefront facade of
building A. Substitute woodframe trim for the
residential window awnings at certain locations on the fourth floor. uh to
reduce the number of thirdf flooror awnings from the number required by
condition of approval. Uh this also was recommended for
approval by planning commission. uh to remove vertical wood look slack
cladding from prominent elevator tower facades to provide additional brick
veneer on building B sub buildings B1 and B2 only and to provide vinyl framed
windows exclusively rather than the non vinyl windows required uh by resolution
number 2023 043 and specific plan 24 also recommended for approval by
planning commission
uh to go into more detail for each one of these a request Quest A is related to
condition number 48 of the adopted resolution which required several
changes from the plans presented at the hearings. The provision of shade
structures over common outdoor spaces was required to maintain or provide
greater visual interest and roof articulation as well as shade for the
users of such areas. The applicant has declined to provide additional shade
structures over common rooftop patios and is requesting to remove those
several that were previously proposed. Should this request be denied, the
trelluses originally maintained would need to remain and additional shade
structures would need to be provided. Um, for instance, at the southern
courtyard at building A and the patio southwest of building B4.
The plans as approved are shown here. You can see the top of the trellis uh
within the red outline above building A.
And this is what it would look like without.
This is where you would see the the trellis to be provided on building B's
rooftop deck. And lastly, on the ground floor of
building B in the interior of the project, the permanent shade structure
is now proposed to be movable furniture. Condition
of approval number 62 states that downspouts shall be avoided or concealed
within the building walls at specific feature corner elements such as the
commercial and retail corner and brick lobby towers or any facade viewable from
Hillcrest Drive or Ranchoko Boulevard. Any downspout not concealed within the
building walls must be painted to match the wall behind.
While the applicant has attempted to reduce their visual impact, roughly 24
exterior downspouts remain visible from the facades facing Hillrest Drive and
Rancho Kaneo, which affect the overall architectural quality of those facades.
The applicant is requesting that nine exit doors shown here with yellow dots,
primarily serving residents and their guests be allowed to be painted solid
metal doors, although they were originally approved to be French glass
doors, as you can see in these sideby-side images. Condition of
approval number 57 specified that exit doors visible from public streets needed
to be decorative and although the doors requested to be changed are not visible
from public streets, they are visible from the internal roadways. As such, it
was determined that this request qualified as a major modification since
doors serving primary residential and guest access should generally enhance
the overall quality of the building design and incorporate decorative
elements and provide visibility for individuals entering and exiting.
Condition
of approval number 53 as well as the design standards within specific plan 24
require specific window trim or header material. These standards were required
as material with heavier, higher quality materials and more substantial detail,
help create physical and visual depth, enhancing the overall quality of the
design and adding articulation to the building facade.
The applicant is meeting their requirement to inset 36% of all
residential windows, approximately 475 windows. However, they have requested to
provide a painted trim only rather than a woodlook tile or brick header.
Condition of approval number 54 and specific plan 24 require that 65% of the
commercial storefront facade have a transparent window area and 3-in recess
requirement. The applicant is meeting the recess requirement but is requesting
to reduce the transparency to 60%.
The images above show an example of how this change uh might appear.
Condition of approval number 48 uh sub requirement E required that additional
awnings be provided to increase visual interest in articulation throughout the
project and to provide shading to residents. The first sub requirement for
awnings on the north side of building A is to be met by the applicant and is not
part of the subject request.
Otherwise, the applicant is requesting to refrain from providing the required
additional third floor metal awnings and to prov and to remove awnings previously
provided on the fourth floor level. This image shows an example of where third
floor awnings are requested to not be provided. It should be noted that in
some cases the fourth floor awnings are proposed to remain as approved which is
seen here. In other instances, the applicant is
requesting to remove awnings previously provided on the fourth floor and replace
those awnings with wood frame trim. This change is proposed for the Hillcrest or
north side of building A, the east side of building A, the Rancho Kanejo or west
side of building B1, the residential or east side of building B2, and the
freeway or south side of building B3.
The facade as designed to meet uh the third floor awning requirement
uh can be seen on the left as an example versus a facade without the third floor
awnings which can be seen on the right.
While not specifically called out as a condition of approval, the applicant is
also requesting to remove woodlike material cladding from elevator towers
except those which appear on primary building facades facing public streets
and interior driveways as approved uh can be seen on the left and as requested
on the right. Specific plan 24 requires that veneers such as this vertical slot
material turn corners on such building elements in order to appear more
substantial and authentic and to provide visual interest from as many
perspectives as possible.
The removals are proposed at all seven locations shown here in yellow.
Condition of approval number 48, sub requirement F, required that brick
veneer, which is proposed heavily on building A, is also included on building
B, sub buildings 1 through 4. Staff recommended this condition so that the
building facads facing the Rena Freeway exhibit a similar quality of design to
those facing other roadways. The brick beneer adds significant value to the
overall sense of authenticity and depth of quality of the design wherever it
appears. The applicant is requesting relief from this requirement for the two
southernmost buildings that are visible from the freeway highlighted here in
yellow.
As part of the development agreement negotiations, relief from the objective
design standard prohibition of vinyl windows was provided and only those
windows on the external facing facades were prohibited from being vinyl framed.
The applicant now seeks complete relief from this requirement. Although vinyl
windows have been used in other projects in the city, vinyl window frames may
exhibit different long-term durability and aesthetic characteristics compared
to aluminum, fiberglass, or wood alternatives. In addition, uh the their
manufacturer is considered um to be not environmentally friendly.
Condition of approval number 48 sub requirement D memorializes this
agreement as do the design standards of specific plan number 24.
That concludes my review of the individual requests. Um to further
clarify as some of those uh requests conflict with the requirements of SP24,
an amendment to SP24 is included as part of the request to accommodate those
design revisions uh that are not currently permitted should they be
approved. And the subject development agreement is requested to remove and
replace the dates of the approved plan set and specific plan within section
10.1 and remove and replace the conditions of
approval which are included as an exhibit to that document. The remainder
of the agreement is unchanged.
The adopted specific plan development agreement and development permit
established architectural standards and material requirements that formed part
of the basis for the original project approval. Certain modifications to those
elements are defined as major changes requiring planning commission
recommendation and city council action. While the planning commission
recommended several of their requests be approved, the city council retains final
authority and may approve, deny, or modify the requested amendments in whole
or in part based on its policy considerations and findings. In
rendering its decision, city council may consider whether the proposed revisions
remain consistent with the adopted specific plan, development agreement,
and design objectives supporting the original approvals. If city council
agrees to some or all of the requested revisions, staff will prepare the
appropriate documents and include them um in a future city council meeting for
final approval. If city council denies all or part of the requested amendments,
the applicant may submit uh revised plans for further review. Any future re
revisions would be evaluated to determine whether they constitute a
minor change under the development agreement or require additional
discretionary review. That concludes our presentation. Staff is available for any
questions and I will provide the lists of requests um for everyone's reference.
» Thank you, Justine. And I'll just mention Mr. Newman because you're on
Zoom. If you have questions, just put your hand up there and I'll come to you
from the dis. Any questions for staff? Um I just need to announce I had an
exparte with one of the u representatives of the developer.
» With that mention, do you have any questions for staff?
» Sure. >> Okay.
The uh the development agreement mentioned
several different items. Uh specific plan 24 and some other items are our our
objective our objective building standards. Were all those in in place
when the when this agreement went into into effect? In other words, was there
any surprises for anybody involved in this this agreement?
Uh the conditions of approval incorporated as an exhibit to the
development agreement um were provided uh before the hearings and at the
hearings. Um and uh both the conditions of approval were um after the hearings
are finished. uh an affidavit of acceptance of conditions is signed by
the applicant and the development agreement which remained unchanged after
the hearings um was signed and recorded by the applicant. So I'm not sure if
that answers your question, but there were no changes postering.
» I just I just noticed when I was reading through it, there's a lot of references
to to to the documents. I just want to make sure that they were plainly
visible. >> Yes.
» Thank you, >> Mr. Adams. Uh thank you, mayor. Um
speaking of objective standards, um we have those in place so uh we uh are sure
to get a quality project constructed here in the city of Thousand Oaks,
right? And uh with the incursions by the state uh when it comes to housing, our
objective standards, in my opinion, are even more important.
Hope you would agree with that. Do any of the requests here counter to our
objective standards? >> Yes, some of these requests um are or
would not comply with the objective design standards. Um and you know that
was there were a number of um design standards that are particular to the
specific plan that are unique to this project which deviate from the objective
design standards. That was part of the negotiation process. um during the
entitlement review and took into consideration the the benefits provided
on on both sides as well as the project specific context
» and the builder was aware of the objective standards as we went through
the process. Correct. >> Yes sir.
» And okay and u complied initially shall we say?
Correct. But tonight uh the uh request is to uh void some of
our objective standards. Correct. >> I would characterize it more as um
deviating from the conditions many of the conditions of approval which had
already deviated in many ways from the objective design standards.
» Okay. Thank you >> Mr. Newman.
» Yes. Thank you, mayor. I want to begin with a few general questions about the
development agreement process just so I'm clear on that before getting
to the specific 10 requests retainment deviations as council member Adam just
characterized them. When there's a development agreement
negotiated, is it the case that the city works with
an applicant over a period of time to come up with a commonly agreed upon
set of conditions, conditions that may number in the dozens or even the
hundreds, but before before an agreement is reached, all of that is discussed and
understood. Is that do I more or less understand that at a 50,000 foot level?
» Yes, that is correct. >> And further with this specific
development agreement, I watched the planning commission hearing and Miss
Kendall, thank thank you for your report there and the one this evening. you at
the planning commission you said all of those conditions quote formed the
basis for the original approval meaning there was a meeting of the minds on
every single condition in the development agreement again is that
understanding correct >> that's right
» another general question is about the uh design guidelines that city staff uses
in in coming up with which conditions the city will and will not accept.
It's it's my understanding, this was explained to me many years ago, um at
the time there was a licensed architect on staff named Claudia Pedroso
uh who said whenever there's a plain surface uh that's that's not broken up,
as a general rule, the city looks for visual interest. Well, so we'll try to
seek articulation or some decorative element to break up something plain.
That was the practice 12 years ago. Is that been in continuous practice uh ever
since then to the current time? Is that still the practice?
» Yes, I would say that's that's generally something that we would look out for.
» Okay. Thank you. I want to follow up on a couple of
suggestions made by the applicant and I'll I will ask the applicant these as
well, but there were a couple of suggestions made at the planning
commission hearing. Um, one was about code requirements with
regard to the amount of glass that was in place. Um, so my question on that are
are any of the changes the applicant is requesting here necessary to meet code?
In other words, is is the development agreement that both parties agreed to
two years ago, is that somehow not compliant with current building and fire
codes?
» No. the um anytime that a light for safety or
building code requirement um is in play that would take priority. Um however, it
is possible um for instance in the case of um let's say like the metal doors
where the the glass may need to be reduced in order to comply with the
building code requirement. um the requirement to provide a decorative
door or something that's comparable or better. Um, one could still meet that
requirement and as well as the building code requirement.
» Okay. My next question has to do with the definition of the word major. Um in
your presentation you gave a timeline and you said that
that when development agreements are worked
out even after the agreement is reached discussions continue between an
applicant and the city and there are often minor changes made sometimes many
minor changes of when there's a major change or in this case 10 major changes
that's that's different. So my I have two questions on that for you. The first
one is, do any or all of these changes in
staff's expert opinion degrade the quality of this application of this
project? >> All of these requests, all 10 requests
um presented this evening um and staff's estimation were considered to not meet
that threshold of comparable or better. Um
and >> and that that by virtue of that that
threshold that is what makes them major changes. Correct.
» That's correct. >> Right.
So I'm I'm not aware of any case ever in the past 12 years of any precedent where
an applicant or developer has come back to the city and asked to revise a
development agreement with one major change, let alone 10. Uh is is staff
aware of of a request with major changes like this?
I'm not familiar of a project that's gone through a process
like this one is going through. >> Okay. Thank you. And then my final
question, actually two more questions, sorry. Um,
in the sequencing of the major changes, there are 10 of them, lettered A through
J. Is there any sort of hierarchy in sequencing of
uh not meeting that that equal or better
threshold like like is J farther away from that threshold than A or are these
just in random order? >> I would say they're roughly in order of
um lesser impact to greater.
So, so J would be the farthest away from equal or better
and A would be the closest to a a minimal change, although we're still
calling it major. >> That's
» is that is it right? Okay, very good. And then the final question, there was
some discussion at the planning commission on
the nature of vinyl materials in windows and whether
not whether vinyl is improved. I I would agree uh that it has, but rather whether
whether its lifespan and its sustainability was equal to or better
than other materials such as wood or aluminum or something else.
Does staff have an opinion on that? There were assertions made by the
developer, but I'd like to hear staff's view on that on that point.
It it depends on the specific brand and type of vinyl window um that would be
proposed. We don't have the specific brand provided, but uh in general, vinyl
windows um don't have quite the lifespan that um the other materials do. Um they
um uh can be less energy efficient. Some are not, but some are. Um and I would
say that one of the major points and the reason why um the prohibition of vinyl
windows was included in the objective design standards um was that the
manufacturing process for vinyl windows um is not environmentally friendly and
not um necessarily in line with the city's overall sustainability goals.
» Very good, Miss Kendall. Thank you very much for for your report and for these
answers. Thank you very much, >> Mr. Newman. Oh, excuse me, Mr. Angler.
Mr. Newman covered most of what I had to answer.
» Miss Gutierrez, >> thank you, Mayor Taylor. Um, thank you
so much for the presentation and the visuals as they are always necessary to
further my understanding. So, I'm much appreciative of that. Um,
I'm I may be asking questions just for uh the public as well. Um, but also to
get direct uh staff responses. Um,
and I feel like uh council member Newman did a great job of helping me along
here. So, thank you to David on that. Um,
and these may also be questions I ask our applicant um because I may seem
repetitive later on. Um so the requested changes are they from a staff and city
perspective are they necessary for the feasibility of this project or is there
something some other um driving factor that I might not be uh directly aware
of? >> That would be a question for the
applicant. >> Brilliant. Um,
uh, second, I would love to ask, um, you know what? I have a feeling these are
all going to be directly for the applicant, so I'm going to skip ahead.
Um, I apologize. Um,
here's one that might be a little more clear for our for for the city lens. Um
and just again just for clarity the benefits being reduced with do we feel
like the benefits are being reduced with without an equivalent um
I I want to say give but like return of what's being asked. I I know that the
process started long ago and as you mentioned about the specific plan, there
were a lot of exchanges, right? A very delicate negotiation of this for that
and understanding um the
the city's interest in creating those visual
um aesthetics. Um and as well as thank you
for mentioning the sustainability goals that we also hold um as a priority and a
goal of the city. Um
yeah. Do we think that now we're getting too many standard deviations from the
value proposition
to to those exchanges initially? Sorry. So I I guess and um please let me know
if anybody else wants to answer, but I would say that um that specific um part
of the development agreement that says that the project shall provide enhanced
architectural quality and design and articulation and all that. um the
conditions of approval. Um many of them were crafted to um more uh specifically
describe how to meet that requirement, that benefit to be provided to the city.
Um that's included in the development agreement and um that's what's being
requested um to be changed tonight. Um, and so, um, I would say that each of
these requests is contributing to maybe not meeting that benefit that was, um,
uh, approved to be provided. >> And originally, the approval is like any
contract contingent upon these agreements following through.
» Yes. >> Yes. Okay,
that's it. Thank you. >> All right. Next, we have the applicant
team and they will have 15 minutes to present and later 15 minutes to rebut.
Excuse me. Five, excuse me, five minutes for rebuttal. We have Mark Marin from
the Lato Group and Fernando Frisbee from KTGY.
What is it? Oh, we have Keith as well.
Good evening. Thank you council members for having us tonight. Planning staff,
always a pleasure working with you. For those of you who don't know the Lato
Group, we developed STL, which we're very proud of. Um we brought Go Fish, we
brought Basta, uh we brought a Pilates studio, and of
course the latest being Honeyup. And we intend to do that and more at Hillrest.
So I hope that with Santal you've all seen that Lato's intentions are to do
nothing but build the highest quality project. If you go to our in any market
we're in. If you go to our website, you see the projects we have in Florida,
they are best-in-class in every market we're in. That being said, we find
ourselves in a very challenging economic environment. Um that was true before the
situation in the Middle East. It's more true now. But I want to I'm only going
to make a couple of remarks before KT KTGY and Keith speaks specifically to
the 10 items. What I'd like to say is when we first met with planning and I
could totally understand this if I was sitting on the other side. First
question was why are you here now? You were approved in July of 23. I think
what people have to understand is that development is a parallel process. We
have plans. we have a budget because we have to raise capital. So when we were
approved with the development um uh agreement,
we still weren't done with plans. So what we did was we we we have to make
assumptions at that point with a budget. We're not in an environment where
lenders are particularly, you know, risk oriented risk-taking today. It's it's
the completely the reverse. So, for example, windows and I'll I'll start
with windows and probably leave with windows and leave the rest to Keith.
SL has the same vinyl windows. Your current MBK project that's being built,
the sanctuary has vinyl windows. The IMT project has the same vinyl windows.
There would been no reason for us to assume we couldn't use the same windows
in this project, which is a step up even from our STL project. There'd be no
reason. There was nothing that was, you know, in the airwaves, if you will, that
would have given us any sense that a new design standard was going to take place.
So, it is a $2 million item. And I think for those of you who understand
development, when we prepare a budget, and remember lenders look to the
developer and they expect to see as the budget gets nailed down, but there'll be
very few changes to that. Yes, some things can change and we set up a
contingency with respect to construction or hard cost as we call it, which in
this project is $5 million. The windows alone would wipe out 40% of
that contingency. Lenders look at a contingency and I can tell you from our
own projects, we have never ever built a single project without using every
single dollar in that contingency. You simply cannot forecast with plans
changes in the field that occur where you have to make changes and they cost
money. So it's money not there are rainy days but both as as we all know and that
contingency is incredibly important. If we get wiped out just one of these 10
items takes out two fifths 40% of that contingency. It is a big deal that will
have rippling effects with the lenders which is the last thing you know we need
at this point in what is a very challenging
environment extremely challenging so but understand that we knew 18 months ago
that there were some things we'd have to work with planning and I have to say the
planning staff is as good a planning staff they're better than anybody we've
ever worked in Florida so we have no issues and nothing but respect for the
planning staff they did their best we did our best but our development
agreement states specifically speifically that any changes in design
must come to city council. So you have a very you have a lot going on in Thousand
Oaks. Hence your city council meetings are full. This is the earliest we could
get to all of you. It's not like we didn't know 18 months ago that there
were some things we'd like to see changed.
Well, windows we didn't know because we had no reason to assume that we couldn't
use the windows. the rest of the items I'm going to show you. Yes, there's a
cost aspect to it, but there's also in some cases you're going to hear
functionality. We need good public private partnerships
with Thousand Oaks. You want development going forward. You need more affordable
units. We provided that here. But there has to be an understanding that our
budgeting process isn't perfect. Our plans, we did not have construction
drawings when we went to capital to basically attract it. This took six
months to close and I know you're all aware of projects that probably are not
going forward here as a result of cost. Nothing has changed for the better.
Construction costs have gone up. Rates have not come down. Insurance has not
come down. So, we're tasked with building a project. It's a $200 million
project that has thousands of pieces to it. Out of those thousands of pieces
that connect, we're only here tonight talking about 10 things. And yes, it's
later, but it's not because we woke up and said, "Let's go retrade with the
city." That is not who we are. We have never not closed on a land purchase.
We've never retraded a seller at the 11th hour like some people do. We value
our reputation is everything. And we believe that here with the city with SL,
which was a very different process. We delivered what we said we were going to
deliver. And we're going to do the same thing here. When you look at the rents
that we expect to receive and the tenants we expect to have on the retail
side, we have to deliver a compelling and beautiful pro project. There is no
substitute for it. The consumer is discerning. They will know. They will
see the differences. We cannot get the rents we want without being the best
project in the market. People are looking to Hillrest to set a new
standard much the same way we did with Sunl. So I ask again that as you hear
these things, this isn't a developer coming along and saying, you know what,
we'll come back and renegotiate the development agreement. That is not
what's happened. We simply have 10 things that is, as I said, out of many,
many things. And and again, we worked through administratively with staff on
many of them that you didn't even that are not even being discussed tonight.
But when it comes to design, it has to come to city council. So I'll wait for
some questions later. I'm going to turn it over to Keith. But I wanted you all
to just understand this is our second project in Thousand Oaks. We actually
would have had a third, but for a change in circumstances with the seller, we
love the city. We love what it stands for. We love the rigorous design because
it forces us to be to do our very very best. But we ask tonight that you have
an open mind with respect to what we're asking for. There's cost, there's
functionality, but most importantly do not want to be perceived as a group that
comes into retrade agreements. That is not what we do. We're only here now
because of the process you go through with planning and their hard work. Our
hard work resulted in 10 items. Major Ma has to go to city council and this is
the earliest we could be here. So, I just wanted to make that very clear
because I know that planning the planning staff had some questions about
that and I would too if I was sitting on the other side. So, I'm going to turn it
over to Keith as we go through some of these things. I think you'll see with
vinyl, for example, we don't see any difference as far as durability, um,
sustain. I mean, durability, aesthetic, again, it's been used widely through
Thousand Oaks. Where there was a change, it would have been would have been far
more helpful had we known in advance, we would have budgeted. But we have no no
ability at this point, especially with that contingency, which we have to
protect. We've used 2 million of that 5 million already. So, we've used 40% of
the contingency. You add the windows to it. We have no means by which in the
field to to to make a change or do something without going extremely over
budget. This is not the environment where lenders are kind. I can assure you
of that. And it's not unique to us. I think you could speak to anybody who's
in the development business today how challenging it is and how difficult it
is to raise capital. >> Thank you.
Hi, good evening, Mayor Taylor and city council. My name is Keith McCloskey with
KTGY Architects from Thousand Oaks, California. And um in addition to some
of the background that Mark provided this evening, I just wanted to take a
moment to uh focus on some of the details uh of what Justine was
presenting and some of the architectural um backup or justification for some of
those changes.
So, in terms of the changes that we're speaking about tonight, we kind of broke
them out into three separate buckets or um groups of changes that we're
proposing to the project. Um again, as Justine mentioned earlier this evening,
there's a number of um changes that are related to the specific plan that was
adopted into the project. So, when it comes to objective design guidelines for
the citywide standards, um the specific plan that was proposed and ultimately
approved by city council previously, SP24,
um presents this specific project for this specific site and uh what was
proposed by the developer at the time. So, there were deviations from objective
standards for things like maximum building length, um where massing
stepbacks, um plane breaks, etc. would occur and those were all worked through
uh with planning to arrive at a um final massing which the massing itself has
been uh maintained through this process. So when we think of the project overall
the project as it exists with respect to unit count building massing building
height parking counts is all identical. What we're talking about tonight are
specific architectural details um which u Justine has kind of walked us through
the highlights of those and some of them are things where our drawings that city
council saw in many ways are the same. The conditions where we were asked to
upgrade or enhance certain things that we're currently unable to do due to
budget constraints uh are the ones that I wanted to highlight today. And so um
of those brick veneer um the third floor awnings
and then window frame color are the items where what you see in the drawings
in terms of the color of the window frames um the locations of where the
awnings are in those drawings um still matches what was shown at city council
meeting and previously approved. um the conditions of approval uh and
development agreement that ask for further enhancement. Um those are the
items that uh we're asking for relief on tonight.
And then some of these slides that we've got here represent um brick veneer where
we've got the brick veneer that's being maintained along the public street on
Hillcrest and then at the back of the site along the off-ramp um we have uh a
material that is board form concrete that would not have brick veneer on it
but it would still create an architectural base to the project still
provide material variation. So the goal of having high quality architecture
hasn't changed. The specific material of the brick and the square footage of that
brick has changed.
And then this is the u third floor um condition that you can see if you go up
to the second level above the podium as it was shown in the um drawings that
were presented at city council. This is what the awnings if added would look
like. Um, and this is what we're looking for relief on is to basically provide
this building elevation, same height, same architectural skin, same balcony
railings, etc., but without the awnings at the third floor.
And then when it comes to the window frames in terms of the wood grain versus
um a solid bronze color, uh the vinyl is something that we feel strongly that
while conditioned to the project to have non vinyl at certain locations that
doing 100% vinyl, we feel confident that we can have a project that one meets
building code that achieves the STC ratings that are required along the
freeway along Hillrest and aesthetically matches the same um
quality that you'd see on many other projects throughout the city. Um
these window frames that we're proposing, you can see on SL
pictured here. Um couple projects that we've done next to Levi Stadium in Santa
Clara, California are also included here for reference. um a handover project in
the Bay Area also give you a sense of what the buildings
that we're talking about, you know, moving forward with tonight would look
like. So, in our mind, while it's not what was um agreed to in the development
agreement, we still feel that it's a high quality solution. And I think some
of the things that um have really been um maybe giving the brunt of negativity
for vinyl windows or lowquality manufacturers, all-white frames. These
are upgraded um factory painted frames that are going to look very similar to
aluminum storefront just uh construction method is vinyl. And we do that with a
you know enhanced C channel in the horizontal mullions. It gets us a much
more bigger, more commercial looking, robust window that's very durable. It's
got a 25-year warranty. It's something that we're proud to stand behind. Um,
happy to answer any questions regarding what we're proposing. Um, but these are
just some examples of that. And then in terms of some of the other
secondary items um trelluses that are being uh deleted, some of it is program
related, some of it's cost related, but the idea to remove some of the permanent
trelluses and in exchange for more mobile um uh FFN or fit and furnished uh
trelluses or umbrellas that offer more smaller scale, more affordable, and more
flexible solutions is something that we're looking to do for the project. And
then the back of house openings is really just a uh something that came up
with respect to security and um and cost as well and back of house doors like uh
egress stairs. So I'm out of time, but I'm here to answer questions.
» Thank you. You guys will have five minutes after.
» All right, we'll move over to >> Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, um could I propose
that we listen to his presentation, then ask questions after that? Give him an ex
extended time. >> How much time do you have left?
Maybe two more minutes. >> Two more. Yep, that's fine. Let's do
that. We'll go two more minutes. Let's conclude, then we'll go to public
speaker. >> So, back of house openings, just again
to reiterate, we're talking about um doors at egress stairways are they're
not just for egress. Somebody could use those stairwells to get to their unit if
they don't want to walk around to an elevator. Um but they're not the primary
entrances. All of our primary entrances are all still storefront. um some of
these uh secondary entrances that were um had a a glass window element to them
are being reduced. Um and then the commercial storefront design, that's
something where based on final locations of for u storm drain pipes, structural
shear walls, the window for the final storefront arrangement shifted and so
the percentage is slightly less and that requires uh council approval.
I think when you look at the overall percent of glazing along Hillrest, along
the kind of return walls of the retail, um the retailer is going to want
visibility, want transparency, and we're still providing that. So, we feel
confident that this is still a good solution to the project.
And then the rooftop trelluses, again, the ones up at the fourth floor roof
deck or on the uh building B roof deck and barbecue area. Uh those are going to
be replaced with more flexible, smaller scale furnishings.
So, this is the barbecue uh area on the middle of the building B courtyard here
that previously had a a fixed permanently mounted trellis on that
slab. That's going to be um smaller furniture shade structures now, large
scale umbrellas. And then there's some examples of other
projects that have integrated smaller umbrellas for shading in lie of large um
steel trelluses.
And then one of the other ones that um I would point out is the window header
design. This is the accent panel that's above the actual inset window that we
still have the condition where we've got um 2-in recess and we've got additional
um vinyl window frames with that accent panel there. It's still inset, still
contrasting, but we're asking for um that to be an enhanced um stucco color
to provide the contrast there in lie of uh tile or another material.
Thank you, Keith. I'm going to have you stay up here. We don't have any public
comments, so why don't we use this time for city council to ask applicant any
questions and then we'll move over to staff. So, any questions from council?
David Newman, excuse me, Mr. Newman, you want to start?
» Thank you, Mayor. Uh, first off, let me say to Mr. Marin, I'm glad to hear you
have your voice back. I've been there. I know what it was like uh hearing you at
the planning commission. So glad to hear you're fullthroated again.
Uh I think I have two or three questions regarding your presentation tonight. Uh
first let me just reconfirm when the city council approved this
project in July 2023.
You did agree to this development agreement including every single one of
its conditions. Did you not?
» The architectural ones. Keith, you should speak to.
» Yeah. In general, the question about was it approved? Yes, it was signed off by
the developer. Right. Both parties, the city there there was a lot of discussion
months and months between the city and your team and and both parties signed
this development agreement which bound both parties to
what was in the agreement and all of the conditions and I think we're all in
agreement on that. Um, I wanted to ask
» I'll just say this, David, again that when the development agreement was
signed, we did not yet have um fully bid construction documents, right? Because
CDs come last. So, what we do with staff is look, especially having um worked
with with staff before in Thousand Oaks, we do the best thing we can to give our
general contractor as much in the way of scope, but we don't know everything. So,
post the development agreement, we went to work immediately with staff going
back and forth. That took some time where many things, as I said tonight,
they're not even on the table. >> Yeah, I understand. But, but Mr. Mayor,
I'm I'm not referring to downstream agreements with contractors or other
parties. I'm I'm only referring to the development agreement here where where
the parties were yourself and the city and there was agreement at that time in
July 23 on that agreement including every single one of the conditions. Is
that is that a true statement? >> Well, yes, but again you can't ignore
the plan part of it which is not complete. All we can do as developer is
do our best to look at it and say, "Hey, can we fit what we want in a $200
million project with this development agreement that at that time the answer
was yes." But when we learn, for example, the windows, couldn't be vinyl.
That's where again we got into things that were administratively signed off.
In this case, it's a design element, so it had to go to city council. So as much
as you can say yes, you signed a contract, you can't, unfortunately with
development, you can't ignore the whole other side of that, which is you got a
budget, you got to keep capital going. It takes six plus months just to get to
a closing with capital. Budgets are changing.
» So I'm glad I'm glad you mentioned timelines. So let's talk about those
timelines. The the development agreement was agreed to by both parties in July
2023. As I understand it from Ms. Kendall's
presentation, the request for these 10 major
modifications came in December
2025. Is that right?
» It would have No, I think >> I see I see Mr. Powers nodding his head.
Is that is that one the major >> but again it's it's 10 David that come
out of a whole number of things that we went back and forth. These are only 10
out of many many things that were talked about where
» but I do have the timing right there. There was a my only question is is on
the timelines here. There was a DA that was agreed to in July 23 and then there
was a request for 10 major changes and that would request was in December
2025. Is that is that correct? Do I have that right?
» No, that's that's when it was deemed ready to come to council. But the
» Yeah. So that's when it's scheduled, right?
» So that's correct. It's December 17th of when we reached out to planning um to
let them know that there's proposed changes to the projects was many months
before that probably late 24 early 25.
» Correct. But I mean I think this is important nuance, right? We all know you
work with a lot of projects, Keith. Um there is an application process. We
don't schedule for hearing until we have those applications filed and the
documents all submitted and that's when that occurred in is in December. I just
want to make sure everyone's level set on timing and I understand that
discussions were happening much earlier but our
process is based on applications.
Then my my final question um for for the whole developer team here there was a
statement by Ms. Kendall in her presentation that that staff
views the the ordering of these major modifications
roughly in order of um the the least deviation from equal or
greater quality to the greatest deviation.
I'm going to ask you uh basically the same question but in terms of cost would
like would would you would you rank these equivalently
a A throughJ in order in terms of having the greatest cost impact for you and if
if not if they're not a A throughJ how how would you sequence these?
Yeah, in our mind the the list u has nothing to do with the immediate cost.
So, um I think J being a larger ticket item and lower in the list. Yeah, I
would agree with that. But generally, they're not in order of magnitude of in
our mind of deviation, extent or severity or cost. They're just, you
know, lettered A through J. And that >> is J is J the most impactful in terms of
cost. >> Yes, it is.
Okay. All right. Great. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
» Council member Gutier. >> Thank you, Mayor Taylor. Hello. Thank
you so much for being here this evening. Um I realized mid questions with staff
that these were going to be more appropriately um asked of you all. And
um so I just want to start with where I started with staff. Um I'm I'm really
interested in understanding what's driving the request to further delay the
project. Um because that's how I see this. There was an approval and a green
flag and now we're back and we're delaying. And so I'm trying to
understand is the are the requests being asked for necessary for feasibility
or or is there some other driving force? No, the the the project again we we
again we need building permit um soon to go vertical but the project is moving
on. We are simply basically coming and saying look
» from the time we signed that development agreement there was a lot of work done
afterwards. We're also trying to keep like any of you would with a business a
budget. Okay. >> We have lenders um and it took a very
long time to close this transaction. is probably one of the largest in Ventura
County at, you know, a little over $200 million.
When we present that budget and when we closed, we knew again we still had to
come in front of council. So, there's very little flexibility. The lenders
will show you, especially that's why that contingency is set up,
» but we can't be this early in a project and have four of $5 million used in
contingency. Any developer would would tell you that. I'm not saying anything
that is, you know, not consistent with way the business really works. So, no,
there's we're not there's no delay here. In fact, if anything, you know, but for
the rains, we actually were 3 weeks ahead of schedule. Um, we lost some of
that uh or a good chunk of that because of the heavy rains as you know, we all
had. But look, much like SL too, you're talking this is we're we're a
development group that goes beyond the norm. You've seen it with Zal and as
I said, Hillrest arguably is an even nicer project. I mean, it was something
that Amgen really, really wanted. We did our very best really to put a project.
The Amjen folks were excited about the whole life sciences quarter is excited
about. We've got amenities in there that you don't see um particularly on the
wellness side that we're putting in there, but they cost money. and we made
assumptions the very best that we could at the time where we didn't have our
plans bid. We trust our contractor implicitly. He's a resident of Thousand
Oaks. Company's here in Thousand Oaks. They do a great job. They're building
MBK as well. And we know that when they submit numbers to us, they're honest
numbers. They're the best they can get to. But we could have there's no way to
know for as I keep pointing out windows. >> Yeah.
» That that would be changed since Right. every high-quality project in the city
has been done with those windows. >> I understand. I think my my what I'm not
understanding or maybe what I understand and just want to say plainly are the
assumptions that you made at the beginning of this is the responsibility
and the cost of doing your business. And we as a city um our business is keeping
to what we think our our constituents our communities are going to take as a
as a contribution um whether it's aesthetics or not um by
our doing by our collective decisioning. And so that's where I'm where I'm
grappling. Um, and I think Dave, uh, Council Member Newman also tried to get
down to what on the list is because I heard you say some of it is
functionally, uh, driven and some of it is costbased driven. And I'm trying to
weed through those those items. Um, but without your insight, I don't know which
of those um, would garner either category. And then um you know cuz I
think of the window um percentage going from 60 to 65 sounds reasonable. I saw
the renderings. Those look like current um storefronts that we have here in
town. I understand that we're but I I I'm
again I'm I'm really just grappling with um
what is driving the ask? what feels like for me after a a green
lit project um coming back and and bringing us back to this conversation
and um I'm just being as direct as I can so that I'm not kind of dancing around
in my words. >> I I appreciate the directness and and
and frankly I mean it's healthy. So, believe me, what the the as I'll kick
speak to some some functional aspects from a pure cost standpoint, we simply
cannot use our contingency this early in the project where we haven't even gone
up yet. It's devastating. What are the worst case outcomes?
Typically, what lenders will say is you use up your contingency, you need to
reestablish it, rebalance the loan, which means put more capital in. We
can't do it. We're at a point now where, as I said, it took six months to close
this project. It took every bit, you know, of energy, of patience to stay
focused. We could have stopped many times. Um, we almost did several times
because of frankly just pressure from the lenders and development has to be a
public private partnership. >> Agreed.
» This isn't a math test where there's a there's an answer. It's right or you're
wrong. There is a matter of gray here and what we're not coming back and
saying, "Hey, help us make more profit. We didn't I can tell you that the
assumptions that we have aren't even credible today as far as where assets
are trading for. We're not looking short-term. We're looking at a long-term
situation. But we have to build on time and we have to build on budget because
if you don't do that, bad things do happen. And there are projects that get
stopped and sit because the lenders stop. That is a worst case outcome. And
I'm I'm I'm here to tell you today, it's a real possibility. We have no
flexibility. Everybody in the environment we're in, and this was true
before, you know, the uh the situation in the Middle East and rising oil
prices. Lenders are nervous. The their books uh the losses are mounting. You're
looking at foreclosures. There's nobody building. I mean, take a look around and
see how many multif family projects are being built anywhere, not just here in
in, you know, Thousand Oaks. Look around the country. Multif family starts at our
almost at an all-time low again. Too much. So, I'm just seeing like we're not
new. We we we did SL. We brought you >> some, you know, great amenities to the
public. We'll do the same thing. What we're asking for is just sheer
consideration for the situation we find ourselves in where we're we would be
seriously out of budget. And part of that is for things that nothing we could
have done differently because we couldn't have anticipated Windows for
example. >> I appreciate it and I appreciate all the
time. I'll ask my last question and then I'll I'll listen and learn from um the
following questions. Um so if the amendment is not granted, if
we don't move forward with um these changes, is the project at risk?
» Yes. >> Okay. Thank you,
» Mr. Engler. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you for
coming out tonight. Um, we appreciate I love the project over at 299, the
Shantel project. Nice project, and we appreciate the um the commitment you
have to this city. Um, I guess my struggle comes um I I was here for the
presentation a couple of years ago. Um, I remember our uh actually your your um
your attorney saying that um you have you have looked at all 279
um items in the in the agreement. And I uh in the last couple days waited
through all of those as well. everything from
um where the trash goes to how how high the curbs are to a h a lot of different
items. One of those items was the windows.
Um item 48D talked a lot about the windows and described the type of
windows that was looking for uh that the city was looking for. Um, I'm not sure
if there was a a discrepancy in what you saw and what the city was presenting,
but I know that your attorney said that all 279 were agreed to. How do you how
do you square that? Go ahead, Keith. Yeah, I think just like
Mark was suggesting a moment ago about we're only here because these are items
that we feel can deliver a similar quality building um that the city is
hoping for, but at a cost and budget that we can realistically deliver today.
Otherwise, we wouldn't be here. We would just be building um the items that were
agreed to at that time. So there's um I guess what I would describe as
unforeseen escalation in certain things like windows, like steel, um insurance
costs post fires um that are out of the developers control and other things um
that um we were able to accommodate and find workarounds for. Uh for instance,
one of the substitutions that we made for some of the slats on the project um
we were able to find that staff believed was comparable and um you know it was a
minor amendment and we moved forward with that and a lot of those items we
did work through directly with staff. some of these where we're reducing
square footage um or changing out a window type can only be done here at
council and that's why we're here tonight
» in in specific plan 24 as as you mentioned as we know from our our
discussions with staff there was several items that were changed from our um
design standards uh to allow this project to go forward in that location.
Um were you partners to that those discussions as well as as a as a
specific plan was being developed? >> Yeah, it was developed collectively uh
with Rencon, KTGY, the developer and representatives from city staff that
weighed in on um their thoughts on design, site planning, materiality, etc.
And all that collectively became the project that went to city council. So
then then at that time there was discussions of windows. I'm sure there's
discussions of awnings, there's discussions of trelluses. Um wasn't that
part of your discussions on that? I I'm just assuming so.
» Yeah, it the the discussions went on for many months and ultimately at the final
development agreement and final conditions of approval um they were
reviewed. I think they were believed to be
achievable at the time. Otherwise, the developer wouldn't have committed to
them. After approval, when we began schematic design, design development,
investigated more detailed material specs, um developed more comprehensive
drawings that were submitted for um final bidding that the numbers escalated
beyond what was projected at the time. We didn't have time to do a full 8week
comprehensive budget from the time the final development agreement terms were
presented to where they were accepted. It was um some of the items um came you
know in a time where in good faith we accepted and we pursued them and went
down that road to try and ensure that they could be provided. And in some
cases like the windows uh we looked at some alternative specs that had a faux
woodlook finish that we didn't believe were superior or that we would be
comfortable putting our stamp on and we feel comfortable with the product that's
specified. Um, and that one meets the budget.
» Um, I guess I know we we there's a lot of give and take between development
crew and our staff, but there's also a lot of give and take between the council
and the citizenry. So, I know that you know that there were there were people
opposed to this project because of the massing, because of the size, because of
a whole host of different reasons. Um, I know this council, I I was on the
council. Um, we weighed all this as part of our decision based on what was
presented to us at that time. Um, so you can see perhaps our hesitation now of
voiding the trust almost with our citizenry if we now change where we're
going with this. Um, I I have some problems with that. Um, you're you're
asking us to do that. Is that is that a fair ask of us?
» I I think Bob, I I think it is. I mean, I think look, as I said, your planning
staff, I mean, honestly, and trust me when I say this. I mean, we've
got a lot of units in Florida. I only wish that the staff there was as capable
as your staff here. Okay. So they've recommended,
you know, four I think, you know, four out of five
uh uh planning staff members recommended the 10 items be accepted tonight. So
it's not like I think we're on the other side of your own planning staff as it
relates to the things we're coming here for.
What they told us again is that look, there's we have the authority to do this
much. As Keith said, much of that has been done and you're not hearing about
it tonight. The 10 items is they said, "Listen, this is got to go to council.
This isn't something that we can simply opine on." Now, we did go back and forth
as Keith said, we show different options, for example, for windows, um,
and ultimately came back to, you know, same windows that the city has widely
accepted throughout. So I don't think we're asking for things that again it's
10 items on a project that you know is as as visible and large as this project
is but it will allow us to stay on course without it again we can only do
so much at the time that development agreement was signed and in good faith
because we had come to work with the city before look at SL we had a
six-month delay over very slight differences in renderings we got through
it. Um, I think both sides worked really, really hard. We narrowed it
down. You improved your process substantially from the first time we
were here. But I hope that in doing so, you've seen from us. We do what we said
we're going to do. You are not going to get a project that is going to be in any
way viewed as being less than what was proposed at the time. I mean, these are
very small changes, some of which are not even observable, like I'd say the
windows. And we're highly cognizant of the fact that it's our reputation. You
know, we love hearing that Santel, for example, described as a trophy property.
We want Hillrest to be the same thing. It's across the street from the largest
employer here at Amjad. Believe me, we have our work cut out. We want to
attract that 5,000 ft of commercial, something compelling, especially for the
folks in that quarter. This is what we do. But it's got to be a little give and
take. We're not asking really for that much. When you think about it in the
context of all the moving parts with this project, it's 10 items, one of
which we really had no reason to think would be any different than anything
else both we had done and others are doing as we speak right now that they're
building with vinyl windows. >> And but I want you to recognize it's
it's also our reputation with our citizens that we have promised that this
project was going to go forward as presented and now we have to make this
decision whether we need to change what was presented and then reckoned
with what uh going to come back from our citizens. So that's that's what I'm
trying to weigh. So um with that, thank thank you for your honesty and thank you
for your answers, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you, Mr. Angler. Thank you guys
both for being here. Uh my first question for you, when did you guys
close on your financing?
Dave, you know the date?
» I think it was just June or I think it was June of 25.
» June of 25. And then what's your guys current loan
to cost on it?
» With Pill? I mean, we got up to well over 80
» 80%. >> Over that.
» Over that. Okay.
And then for your contingencies, you mentioned that you guys have a $5
million contingency on a $200 million project. So two and a half%.
» Yeah, it's it's on hard cost. So >> that's on your hard cost.
» It's it's usually a 5% contingency on our hard cost, but you get to 5 million.
» Okay. And you're saying that you have already eaten into that by almost 45% at
this stage? >> 40%.
Okay. which again is not I mean we still have
um 60% left and we're going vertical. So a lot of that again with foundation
grading it's you know worked out we're kind of where we think we'd be.
» Okay. And the
a couple of the things that you mentioned that
when you're developing there's unknowns and you're making assumptions for at
least the the timeline on this. We get the project and title. You guys have
your developer agreement and you have kind of a pretty good idea of what is
entitled to build considering that costs may improve may increase by the time you
break ground. That fair statement. >> Mhm.
» When you guys then brought the final budget to the lender, did you guys bring
the final budget based on what was currently entitled?
So it was we we we brought the budget at the time that was we must have rebided.
I mean Steve's here. I mean we had that project rebid three I think at least
three three three three three times. Um what I'm what I'm trying to really hone
in on is you mentioned that you and if I'm saying something outline correct me
but you kind of felt like you were blindsided or something you know with
particularly the vinyl window windows. there was nothing that you saw that made
you feel like you couldn't get that approved.
And I think what some of the other council members mentioned and I do I do
want this answer as well. If you had your developer agreement signed which
stated that this was the requirement for Windows,
then presenting it to the lender to then close on your financing after. When you
were doing that budget, did you present a budget and made the assumption that
you could do the vinyl windows as opposed to what you currently had in the
agreement? >> We assumed that we would be able to use
the vinyl windows. Yeah. Now, we knew at the time and I think
that when we went to capital, Dave, you can come up here if you want because
might be helpful, but I think we knew again that there were things we were
going to work on with staff, some of which would be minor mod. We didn't
think Windows would be a major mod, for example. We'd have no reason to think so
based on what was being built. I mean, keep in mind, we're using the same GC as
MBK is, right, on the Sanctuary project. So there'd be no reason for us knowing
what's being used from a material standpoint that we wouldn't be able to
do that. Other things happened as we kept rebidding, you know, costs went up,
but again, we did everything we could value engineering where we could without
involving even the city, you know, to to to stay within within budget. But at
this point, you know, what we're talking about here are items that would only be
taken up in contingency. And there just simply is it's there's not enough there
to do that. particularly when we start first with the windows and the and the
cost there.
» What's what's you might have mentioned this what's what's your guys assumption
on what the if all 10 modifications are approved. What's the the cost that
you'll save in doing this? Do you have that number?
» You have it.
Total number Dave >> three four
» approximately four million right >> Dave windows are half
» Dave the CFO >> he's the head of development
» okay $4 million
okay um
okay I think I have I think that answers it for now I'll move over to staff
questions if you guys have any Mr. Mayor Mr.
» Mayor excuse excuse me Mr. Newman, you have a question.
» Just a quick clarification. Uh, thank you, Mr. Mayor. To follow up on a
question Mayor Prom Taylor, uh, Mayor Prom Angler was asking. Um, Mr. Marin,
what what's the current status of the vinyl windows? I I think I heard a
quote, I may have misheard it, uh, that quote they're building the vinyl
windows. U, so where where is that? What what is the current status of that?
We we we haven't gone up yet, so there's no windows yet.
» Okay. So So it's not like you you we're we're discussing whether or not to use
vinyl windows tonight. It's not like you've already purchased them or they're
being constructed right now. >> No.
» Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Now we we'll move over to staff.
You'd like to reply to any of the comments.
Excuse me. I'm just bringing up uh some reference material here. Um I just want
to clarify a couple things or provide some um context. Um I do want to uh
inter real quick. If you guys want to take a seat, you can. And then we'll
call you back up if we have anything. Yep.
» Uh I just want to confirm that um there there has been no uh real delay in the
project. Um the construction is underway and we've worked um closely together
with the applicant to make sure that building plan check and grading permits
and things like that um proceed while we um review
uh these requests. Um and indeed uh reviewing the building plan check um was
a part of forming these requests and identifying the revisions that needed to
be requested. Um in terms of the timeline um the
building permits um were submitted in uh or the applications rather um were
submitted in the August or September of 2024 and that's when we started
discussing um these revisions and identifying them through that building
plan check review process. Um the minor modifications there are a number of
modifications that were not really design related um that were you know
part of normal building plan check procedure. Um but in terms of design
revisions um there were 19 that were identified in early very early um 2025
maybe late 2024. Um and in April those um revisions which were identified as
minor were granted and we were you know those were incorporated into the
building plan check submitts. Um and then the final applications are that
were are required were required to move forward with this request and schedule
it for hearing um and process these major requests. Um those were submitted
in December. So between September and now is when we were able to formally
process um the major um requests, but again um review of the project and and
other things were moving forward. um during that whole time and um
discussions with the applicant on uh maybe how to revise or address these
requests were also had during that time uh and I want to thank them for those
discussions too. Um the in terms of the vinyl windows um to provide some context
the objective design standards have always included that vinyl windows are
not allowed um and those were identified as something to seriously take into
consideration um as part of the pre-application process which was uh
closed in June of 2022. Um and then the the discussion or
negotiation on um requiring vinyl windows or not was very active
discussion throughout the planning entitlement review process um which took
place over the next year between June uh 2022 and June 2023. Um that was uh
consistently a point of negotiation. Um, and then I I'd also just want to um
clarify that um items F, G, I, and J, which are part of that group one that
Keith described, um they were kind of described as inconsistencies
um and and I would agree that they're inconsistent um with the
entitlement set on on purpose. Um those are required revisions. Um, and so it's
not that they were inconsistent or erroneous necessarily so much as they
are revisions that are required.
» I think that's it. >> Okay. Thank you. After hearing that,
anyone from council have any questions for staff?
» Mr. Mayor, >> Mr. Newman.
» Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple of clarifications
of of statements made by the applicant. Um, one statement,
» Mr. Neon, sorry to stop you. Did you ask for Mr. Marin to come to the podium?
» A question. These are questions of staff.
» Of staff. Okay, great. >> Thank you.
Uh, just to clarify some statements made by the applicant team. Um, one, there
was a characterization of vinyl windows as quote a new design standard. Uh, my
reading of condition 48D is that it is not a new standard. The 48D
specifies which building materials can be used. Uh, would you agree that this
is not a new design standard?
» I would. Yeah, I would uh reiterate that, you know, the vinyl windows were a
very active point of negotiation throughout the entire entitlement review
process. Um, and that's why specific facades were identified as requiring the
vinyl windows as a, you know, um, as a concession that not all windows are
required to be non vinyl, just the ones that are publicly facing
um, or viewable from public areas. Um, that was a very specific point of
negotiation. >> Oh, I see. So, so you're saying there
was negotiation on vinyl or not vinyl >> prior to the enactment of the
development agreement. >> That's right.
» Okay. That's that's interesting. Okay. Thank you. Um, there's also a statement
made that four out of five quote unquote planning staff, I think the intent was
to refer to planning commissioners, um, recommended changes. Um, just to be
clear on that, the the recommendation from the planning commission was not 10
changes, it was three of the 10 changes. Correct.
» That's correct. From the planning commission staff made no recommendation.
» Very good. Thank you for those clarifications, Mayor.
» Thank you, Mr. Newman. Go ahead, Mr. Adams.
» Yeah, thank you. How many minor modifications did you say there were
over the time period here? >> There were nine minor design revisions
that were um approved ministerially. >> Nine. Okay. And then in your comments
just a moment ago, you were talking about inconsistencies
uh with the uh applicants requests and what our objective standards. Is that
what you >> Yeah. The um the presentation framed it
as inconsistencies between the what was required as the conditions of approval
and the um entitlement set um that was presented at hearing. And um that sort
of implies that there was an error in drafting those conditions. But I just
want to be clear um those conditions weren't written erroneously. They were
written specifically to require those changes.
» Okay. So there was no error. >> Not in that respect. No.
» If I can if I can just add on to it. But typically what happens is when you have
an entitlement package, you know, up to the last minute, there's a lot of
conversation and discussion. Um, so it's not uncommon for the plans that are
presented to the decision-making body to not incorporate all of the conditions of
approval that have been negotiated and submitted to the applicant. So sometimes
you'll see a condition of approval that basically says applicant shall modify
the plans that blah blah blah blah blah. And that's what happened in this case.
» All right. The applicant has five minutes if you would like to rebuttal
anything mentioned.
» Yeah. One thing I wanted to um point out as part of the window discussion and
deliberation about the right windows for this project. Um I think it was our
intent and it was presented um as part of our density bonus ask to seek a
density bonus waiver for um the objective design standard. Right? In
this case, we had a specific plan. So we were presenting a specific plan that was
proposing non- vinyl windows and by means of providing all of the affordable
housing on site, the project has the right to take advantage of certain
density bonus waiverss there. So that was one that we were seeking. staff
recommended that in order to provide enhanced quality that although we're
seeking the waiver provide kind of upgraded or enhanced windows on these
certain elevations or locations and that's when you know at the final um
point of approval that yes what's been discussed is correct like at the time of
signing the development agreement those additional enhancements
um were agreed to um and what we're coming back tonight um to request is
basically going back to our original density bonus waiver request of um all
100% vinyl windows. Um so it's not because we didn't go out and um do
research and seek the um uh the ability to provide what was
conditioned to the project. But again, it says if we have to, you know, make
changes, um, the development agreement allows for that. We just have to come
here and request them formally and get them approved. So, um I I understand the
kind of a the sensitivity to all these topics and um you know it is a back and
forth and give and take and um things like the windows, the um tile accented
windows. These are all things that we studied the details. We studied the
pricing and we came with what we felt was kind of the balanced solution to
provide a high quality project that met u the approved project conditions and
development agreement as close as we could and um that's why we're here
tonight. If I can ask some clar. So, so are you asserting at this point that
» you're not asserting that the development agreement controls and that
separate and apart from the development agreement, you have a right under the
density bonus laws to ask for a waiver at this point. Is that what you're
suggesting? >> No, no, no. project. Um was mentioning
as part of the history of the discussions of what the project was
proposing, which waiverss it would be requesting was discussing the density
bonus waiver for um the non vinyl window clause of the objective design
standards. through the process
and negotiation, the final development agreement requested the enhancements of
certain locations and it so it essentially partially approved the
waiver that we were originally seeking but added enhanced areas and those are
the ones that were unable to uh provide at this time.
» Right. So originally the project if my my recollection is that the original
project proposed 100% vinyl and staff objected to that because it violated our
objective development standards. And therefore that's, you know, part of the
negotiations as part of the development agreement which both the applicant and
the city agreed to was that based on all of the other objectives and all of the
other benefits to both the applicant and the city, the city's benefits being
affordable housing, significant architectural improvements,
um, and benefits to the developer, certainty, freezing of impact fees, for
example, that's a huge benefit to the developer because since that time we've
actually adopted to new user fees and our fees have significantly increased.
So there was obviously the negotiation that occurred and at that time the
applicant and the developer agreed that although vinyl windows uh were
prohibited under our objective development standard since the
development agreement was being negotiated, the both of the parties
agreed to recommend to the city council approval of allowing vinyl windows in
the interior facing areas but requiring non vinyl for the outward- facing ones
in concert with the objectives and the benefits that were negotiated by the
parties. Is that accurate? >> That is accurate as far as I believe.
Yeah. >> Okay. And at that time, um I believe we
actually incorporated into the specific plan to be clear how important that one
in particular was. I remember that one in particular as uh a very important
attribute or aspect of the of the project. And that's why it wasn't just
added as a condition of approval, but was actually incorporated into the
specific plan amendment.
in the original approved specific plan, right?
» Yeah. Yes. Okay. Thanks. >> Right. Thank you.
All right. I'm now going to close the public hearing
and then would anyone like to >> public speakers?
» Uh I don't see any public speakers. Uh Mr. Newman,
» city clerk. Correct. >> That's correct. the public speaker who I
thought it was was actually the applicant.
» Oh, did you hear that? >> My apologies.
» No problem. Thanks for the check. >> My apologies.
» Um, no problem. Anyone would like to make a comment or motion?
» Mr. Angler. >> Uh, thank you, Mayor. Yeah, I'll take
» Louise. >> Mr. Adams, I clearly didn't get enough
sleep with this new baby. I called you Mr. Angler.
» Oh, >> sheesh.
» I take that as a compliment. Anyway, uh, yeah, I'll kick it off with
the discussion. I think uh from what we've heard tonight that starting off
with the discussion would be a good way to go. Um I do want to acknowledge my
appreciation for Lato uh for the investments they've made in our city,
particularly Santal, a mixeduse project on the western end of the boulevard that
has been a gamecher for the city. It's fulfilled our dream of developing the
101 corridor and uh it's it's an excellent project and the project we're
looking at tonight is also part of the 101 corridor and a very highprofile
project as you say it's right next to Amgen right on the freeway. Uh and I do
believe in the concept of a public private partnership. I think there's um
obligations on both sides the city and the developer to make these projects
happen. I do think the city has been a good partner. Uh when you look all the
way back to 2023, whether it was the general plan we amended, the zone
changes, the special use uh or the specific plan, the special use permits,
the tree permits, the development agreement. Um you know, we've been right
there. Um we approved a 55- foot uh build uh
project, which is a little taller than usual, four stories. uh
you were able to take advantage of the density bonus and I think that gave you
87 additional units which I would which good for you. I hope that makes the
project pencil out even even better. We got some affordable units from that as
well. Um you were granted as Justine said nine
minor mods as we went along here. Um, that's routine.
What's not routine are these major modifications.
That that's not routine. Uh, I I um and and that means basically
starting over, you know, notifying the public, having a planning commission
hearing, and here we are at the city council.
And I'm I'm just concerned, you know, the windows, the doors, and all that
business. That's one thing. I'm concerned about the potential precedent
that this might be setting in the city. You know, as a developer, you have a the
right to the original approval and now we're looking at the approval
plans are are that we approved are just not final all of a sudden. uh
this the precedent of that concerns me that is the developer agreement
you know a an agreed upon plan or is it just a suggestion
but by the uh by the city and uh I'm I I uh I'm wonder I'm I'm worried about
that and I'm worried about it because Thousand Oaks is at the forefront of
housing in this county by any measure whether it's the regional studies that
have been done, studies by uh different intellectual think groups and whatever.
We are at the forefront. We have projects coming up out of the ground now
and we have projects in the pipeline and uh
I just worry a little bit about the what you would think would be the finality of
an entitlement and it's now becoming flexible. What about all these other
projects? What what could that mean for them?
Will will it mean more requests for changes? Um will it complicate our
future planning? I I see this as a potential slippery
slope. Uh this demand for flexibility after
everything's already been agreed to. And I worst case I see it as you know
community groups or competitors you know getting uh you know getting
legal with us uh when it comes to a project
and and as I mentioned I'm concerned about our objective standards too. The
the state of California has interjected themselves so much into the housing
process in cities. They've taken away a lot of our ability. But we do have the
objective standards as our one of our last lines of defense and and I really
think that we need to uphold those. Um
so those are my concerns. Um maybe we can discuss it a little further.
» Mr. Angler, >> thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um I I appreciate
my colleagues uh comments. um this this uh relationship that we've had
with with uh uh Mr. Mayor and in company um it's been a good relationship and I
think it reflects well with our staff that comments that were made about the
uh cooperation among staff uh reflects well both on the company and on the
city. Um, I do have um similar concerns and uh
um we've been presented I suppose in just layman's terms with a menu of
items, 10 items that perhaps we can choose a few too. We could go with what
the uh planning commission recommended. We could uh take all take none. It's
this menu of items that we're now presented with. Um, and I've uh I've
said it to uh staff, I've said it to my colleagues, designing from the dis is
probably the worst thing you can do. It's not um and I'm sure the applicant
could also uh agree to that that when um we five start getting involved and what
color the walls should be or should there be a uh horizontal slats on the on
the railings or vertical slats on the railings.
That's not our function. We're not good at it. It's not what we should be doing.
We should be setting policy such as the design standards, such as approving um
the uh development agreement, such as approving and and and going after our
our specific plan for 24. Um
a lot of the development uh that has occurred and this is another good
example of it has been a give and take along the way. Um my colleague mentioned
uh the trees. Uh there were 17 oak trees taken out and and we all know how much
we love oak trees in Thousand Oaks. 17 oak trees taken out. Believe me, that
raised some eyebrows with the citizens. But we were able to convince the
citizens that because of that sacrifice of trees um we we received in in
exchange some affordable housing. We exch
received in exchange the redevelopment of a defunct office building. Um, we
could sell that as part of what we approach the citizens with. That's why I
mentioned earlier it's our reputation as well that is is at risk here and is is
uh being um talked about. um our re we we told our citizens that this is what
the agreement was going to be and um I don't I don't take breaking that trust
with our citizens um lightly. It it's something that I I I stake my reputation
on. Um but I do agree with my colleague Mr. Adam down at the end. Um,
development agreements are one of the last things that we have to where we can
put a Thousand Oaks stamp on projects. The state does preempt us in a lot of
different areas. Um, and uh, I mean, a prime example is the density bonus.
We're willing to go along with the density bonus even though it produces
larger projects than we're used to because of the of the um give and take
that allows us to get that community benefit that resulted from the the uh
density bonus. But the state is more and more involved
in what we do here at the local level. And I'm I'm um a little a little uh
hesitant to um give up what little u influence we have with our development
agreements. Um I'm I'm torn on this one because I want I want a developer that
has produced good good product to continue to produce good product.
But for the reasons I've annunciated, I have a problem. um designing from the
dis. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
» Mr. Newman. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I I want to fully
endorse the comments of council members Adam and Angler and also echo as well my
appreciation for what Mark Marin and team have done.
There was a lot of collaborative discussion
prior to the July 23 approval by this council and I was one of the council
members that enthusiastically voted in favor of this project. There was a lot
of discussion about that night about what a highquality project this was and
it is and that unlocks a lot. It gives Mr. Marin and his team a lot of
benefits. The staff presentation tonight had a bullet list of six of them. I can
think of at least three more. But it also gives the community benefits. Uh
there is a $600 million R&D center going in literally across the
street. There's another $170 million in investment at DECA down the street and
this is a gateway to that. So this is a project that will be adjacent to some
very high dollar and high quality investment because
of an agreement between the people and this applicant for such a high quality
project. So given all that I'm
very torn on this. On the one hand, I'm not at all unsympathetic to the issue of
rising costs for building materials. I mean, anyone
who has gone into any hardware store anywhere to buy a 2x4 in the past 5
years has experienced sticker shock, let alone what Mr. Marin and team do when
they're buying thousands of windows and tons of rebar and concrete at a time.
building costs are really significant problem and I'm I'm not unsympathetic to
that and I'm also not unsympathetic to the
challenges of financing. Uh we'll talk more about that in our next agenda item
this evening. It is true however that there was an
agreement in July 23. And further, it's also true that investment u sorry
interest rates which were challenging at the time have actually improved since
then. The national interest rate was about 3.2%.
In July 23 when the development agreement was reached and when the major
modification request came back in December 25, the interest rate had
dropped a half a point to 2.7%. So yeah, I get it that you do the deal
with your lenders. you can at the time you do that deal. But this all happened,
these changes happen at a time of improving, not worsening interest rates.
Specific to this project, my discomfort is in three areas and I'll I'll ask
these in the form of questions for my colleagues. Um first is just the
unprecedented nature of this. I'm I'm this is my 12th year doing land
use stuff. I don't remember a developer ever coming back to the table
with one major change, let alone 10 and also not as not offering anything in
return. There's not more affordable units. There's not some other community
benefit here. So I guess the question I'd ask my
colleagues is why would we negotiate that badly? Why would why
would we be willing to enter into a negotiation like that? It seems very
one-sided. So that's one question. Another question is why would we
hamstring our staff? Be as council member Adam mentioned,
it's not just this development agreement. There are others in the
pipeline and as council member Angler may prom
Angler I'm sorry mentioned a development agreement is one of the
last toolkits we have here locally. Why would we lessen the value of that,
the sanctity of that bond between an applicant and the people,
which is what what this would do. And then finally, I I appreciate Mr.
Marin's statement that he's not looking to increase profit here. I believe that
this is this is about what his lenders want, not what he wants. That that's
probably right. I I take him at his word on that.
But when there's this agreement, we do agreements because build builders,
businesses of all kind like certainty. And a development agreement provides
certainty. But it provides certainty to two
parties. Not only to a developer, but also to the people. And the people were
promised a very high quality project in July 23.
And what we're being asked to do here tonight is a lessening of that quality
in 10 different ways. And that is essentially a transfer of
wealth away from the people toward Mr. Marin's investors.
And maybe that's a good idea, maybe it's not. But if we're prioritizing things, I
understand that a developer should be asking
to optimize his business and optimize his
his or her returns. That's that's literally the business. I get that. But
here on the other side of the table, that's not our business. Our business is
to ensure we are doing right by our citizens. that we are prioritizing
community interests and the community interest here is the very high quality
project that we all agreed to in July 23.
So those are those are the three questions I would ask is is if we are
going to contemplate making changes um why would we be doing that and who would
benefit? So, I I don't have a motion to offer at this time. Um, but those three
areas are my three areas of discomfort around this. Thank you.
» Thank you, Mr. Newman, Miss Gutierrez. >> Thank you, Mayor Taylor. I I also uh
like my fellow council members are gra I feel myself grappling with the um
with bringing a helping or assisting or continuing to um
usher this project forward to fruition. um the 30 units of lowcost
um affordable units is not lost on me um not to be confused for the for the
public with moderate cost um affordable housing. So that's significant. Um as my
colleagues have um articulated very beautifully all of the elements of uh
collaboration and um proven um just well done work that is
here in Thousand out Thousand Oaks already um and we would like to see
continue. I too want to um make sure that I'm doing my job and I
think we're we're all of the same uh notion here and can agree amongst
ourselves that our job is to ensure that the community value that was initially
negotiated stays intact. I I
and and I think I'll leave it at that. I I think if there were conversations
um around
uh an exchange instead of a a a straight ask and there were more there was more
on the table for the community to um to gain from this ex this amendment. I
would be it would it would be less of a grapple. That would be a clear a clear
um negotiation. Right now it just feels like an ask on something that was very
intently um negotiated and balanced between the
two parties. And um yeah, I just and for those reasons, I
too don't have a motion. And and um we'll leave it at that. Thank you so
much.
I'll start by saying thank you. We appreciate you guys. We appreciate the
time and investment that you have made and continue to make in our community.
Um, you know, a couple of things mentioned from my council members that I
do agree with the
the negotiation aspect and when we're speaking to other developers,
if we're known as a body that agrees upon terms and then is constantly
changing them after the fact, I I don't like that positioning that it puts the
city in. I I think we lose credibility and we lose leverage. So, I would agree
with both of you guys. I don't like that position.
Second, you know, Mr. Angler brought up a good point that I didn't factor into
this, which I think is valuable. The local policy makers have been stripped
of so much. And it does feel like there's very little that we get to
control. And the design standard I think is an
important one especially as we're going through a pretty big change as we're
starting to see development in our community. A lot of that is multif
family and multif family has the tendency of looking like big boxes. It's
very easy for multif family to not look good. And one thing I do appreciate
about Lato Group is your guys product is very good. I I think you guys are
helping this city maintain a great character. But what I would agree with
you, I don't want to lose that either. You know, something that was mentioned,
I think Mark mentioned this, is just the development environment,
and it it is brutal out there, especially for multif family. I I I I
completely agree with you and I want to be mindful of how we are
as a city when we're working with developers because as policy makers
there's the balance that that Mr. Angler brought up. What is the community
benefit and how do we create policy that gives potential benefit to the community
without being so offbalance that no one can invest here?
There's just no return to be made. And if there's no return to be made, no
one's going to take the risk. And so that's the balance that that we're up
against. And how at least I look at it is when we're
creating the original entitlement, and I mentioned this when we spoke when we
entitled your guys project, I was very willing to figure out where there was
room on our end to make it so that you guys had a viable and successful
project. And I do understand that there's assumptions that are made and I
do understand that things have changed, but I don't like that now we're back at
the point where we're having to consider additional
options to make the project more viable after the fact because certain
assumptions weren't realized. And so I don't like the timing of it. I guess
what I'm wrestling with is and I tend to be like this. Where is the balance? And
I I don't feel like this is this is the balance. Now, if I'm being truthful, I
think the project we entitled I think it looks better. When I was looking at the
A verse B, I do think the original project looked better.
I want to protect the credibility of the council and so I'm struggling with it as
well. Um this is not an easy one. And I would say one of the more difficult
ones. I'm okay if there's more discussion to
be had, but before I do that, I will entertain a motion if anyone has one.
» Mr. Mayor, >> Mr. Newman.
» Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> I I don't disagree with anything any any
of you have said. Um, I'm appreciative of the applicant. I'm appreciative of
the challenge, very challenging environment,
uh, we're in, especially around multif family housing. I'm appreciative
of the affordable units, which is, as we'll hear further tonight, by far our
greatest unmet housing need. and I'm appreciative of the deal that we
reached in 2023 and would like to see that deal go forward. So, for all those
reasons, I'm going to move that we do not consider modifications to the
development agreement and reject the um all of the asks in item
10. And madame clerk, if I I apologize for phrasing that so in in articul
in artfully. Um well actually it
you 10A asks to consider and provide direction. So my motion would be to not
make amendments to SP24. the DA
or the development permit and to find that this action is SQA exempt. Thank
you, Mr. Mayor.
» State clerk. Well, I'll stop. Anything else to discuss now? There's a motion.
» Lauri, you have the motion. Everything's good with it.
» Yes. Except I would like to clarify that's not SQA exempt. It previously had
an EI. >> Exactly. It's not that it's exempt. It's
reliant on the previous E. >> It's SEA compliant. I'm sorry.
» Complaint. >> Thank you, Mr. Newman.
» Okay. >> Thank you. Sorry.
» Will you please call the vote?
» Council member Adam, >> yes.
» Council member Newman, >> I.
» Council member Gutierrez, >> yes.
» Mayor Prom Angler, >> yes.
» And Mayor Taylor, >> yes. And that motion passes 5 to zero.
» Let's do that. Let's do a 5m minute break and we will be be back at about
8:30.
Heat. Heat.
hanging in there. I love it.
All right, we are back. Next is tonight's department report. Presenting
the report will be senior planner Ian Holtz.
» All right. Thank you, Mayor, Council members. So, uh, before you tonight, uh,
is a summary of the general plan and housing element annual progress report
for the 2025 calendar year.
As a quick background, uh, California government code requires all
jurisdictions to file a general plan annual housing progress report as well
as a housing element annual progress report and the housing successor agency
annual report to the state office of land use and climate innovation or LCI
and uh the housing and community development department prior to April
1st of each year. uh these reports uh for 2025 um and are required to be
submitted for each jurisdiction's lead decision-making body in a public setting
prior to submitting to the state.
So throughout 2025 um there's been uh several general plan implementation
actions that were either initiated or have made um some significant progress.
The full list of these short-term items are contained in attachment one of the
staff report. Uh some of the actions to highlight for you tonight are uh under
the land use and safety chapters. Um first off under uh the comprehensive
code update uh land use A1 uh there's a work currently underway uh aligning the
zoning regulations with the 2020 45 general plan. Uh variety of um technical
assessments has been done by the consultant evaluating the existing code.
A series of public workshops were held gathering feedback and uh the zoning and
sign code is currently being drafted. There's expectation that the code would
be released for public review in 2026. Um also is the continued effort and
progress on the downtown Thousand Oaks project. Uh entitlement action uh
applications were submitted um and processed or currently being processed
but were being processed towards the end of 2025.
also uh uh implementation items in uh steps towards adopting streetcape
standards. Uh in 2025 there has been uh work doing uh moving forward updating
the uh active transportation plan um which would inform any kind of design
details for like the Thousand Oaks Boulevard and other streetscape
standards used by the public works and community
development department. Moving
on to the housing element progress report. Um
so the sixth cycle housing element was adopted back in December 5th, 2023.
Um the report includes a summary of the
residential housing and building permit activity progress towards meeting the
six cycle reena uh implementation of the housing programs and the housing
successor annual um successor agency annual report.
Major component of the excuse me major component of the housing element is the
reena allocation which provided by HCD in coordination with the Southern
California Association of Governments. Uh the city of has met that reena
allocation by actually adopting the general plan and reszoning the areas
that would facilitate the building of housing u in those numbers which is uh
2,621 units were allocated to our
jurisdiction.
First off, um for 2025, this slide summarizes uh table A of the housing u
development applications submitted. Um these are applications we have received
143 within 2025. Of those 143 applications submitted, there were 139
units approved. Um but the total number of units
proposed is far more. We have 554 units of which um a significant amount of the
units submitted are captured in three pending projects. 411 um apartments that
are spread across the 195 East Hellcrest development uh and uh two projects along
Herbs Road. Uh all these projects all have density bonus applications and are
providing affordable housing and will be continued to be processed um
in 2026.
So just to quickly summarize uh yeah for 2025 we had 139 units uh approved
um that is planning entitlements uh of which
130 of those are accessory dwelling units uh six single family and three
were uh SB9 units.
In 2025, uh the number of building permits issued was 111 for accounting
for 340 new housing units. Um those are broken up into 97 dwelling units, nine
single family and 234 multifamily units.
So 2025 marks the biggest number of units permitted in the first year
capturing affordable housing since the adoption of the housing element. Um
those units uh are spread the well the 234 units that are spread amongst the um
the permits issued are associated with the 1818 Los Feliz Apartments as well as
the timber school site.
This slide summarizes this uh table B of the report. Uh it gives the total number
of perpends issued in the sixth cycle for 21 2021 to 2029. There's 1,934
remaining units for the sixth cycle with 687 units permitted in total for the
current housing cycle. As a reminder, the city's fulfilled its
RENA obligation as part of zoning the land to accommodate the 2,621
units. However, uh building permits are not representative of all the recent
development entitlements approved by the city council. While there are only 340
units permitted in 2025, approximately 1600 residential units
with approved entitlements, including 263 deed restricted affordable units uh
that are in the pipeline.
The number of building permits issued by the city is anticipated to increase
dramatically in the coming years uh with the issuing of building permits for
several projects including uh 500 East Thousand Oaks Boulevard with 328 units
including 44 low-income units, Latiggo Hillrest project with 333 units, and
three moderate and 30 very low units. Uh also 325 or the IMT project on or 325
Hampshire Road 420 units and then at 1500 Pacino Circle it's also known as
the Chappelle Apartments with 27 units.
Staff continues to work with developers to ensure the completion of the projects
and are confident that the affordable units will be full building permits in
the future.
So as part of the program implementation highlights uh under programs 3 and 8 uh
the ADU regulations had been updated in 2025 to be consistent with state law uh
primarily with AB 2533 and SB 1211.
And then under program seven, uh, the city continues to work with people's
self-help housing on the 78 unit for sale town home project, uh, together
with the housing land trust Ventura County to condition the units as
affordable into perpet per perpetuity. In 2025, the developer was awarded a
total of 12.5 million in funding from California HCD, Cal Home, HP Home, and
PHA programs. Also under program 7, the Thrive Grove
Navigation Center opened in June 2025, uh, which provided 30 modular non-
congregate emergency shelter units with on-site navigation services.
Also under program 9, uh, a variety of community service support grants. City
general funds provided support service for 281 persons who are homeless, at
risk of home homelessness or lower income residents. Uh, CDBG funds
provided support services for 12 persons who are homeless and 719
non-homelessness, lower income residents.
and some of the other remaining uh housing programs 12 program 12 mobile
home rehabilitation uh city city CDBG grants provide
rehabilitation assistance for 20 lower income seniorowned owner occupied mobile
home units under program 13 rental housing rehabilitation CDBG grants
accomplish the rehabilitation of 72 affordal units in the Bella Vista
apartments program 14 uh affordable housing
monitoring and preservation of at risk housing. The city continues to monitor
the affordability of 975 apartment units and 37 single family units.
And then lastly, under program 18, which is our neighborhood improvement program,
uh city public works department has conducted a variety of bicycle,
sidewalk, and other infrastructure improvements in low resource census
tracks as well as sensitive community census tracks. Those consist of a
variety of projects such as pavement overlay programs,
uh, traffic signal painting restoration, uh, curb pedestrian crossings along
Thousand Oaks Boulevard, a variety of flood mitigation projects along Herbs
Road, as well as wastewater pipe and maintenance um, upgrades.
So with that, that concludes uh the summary report and staff recommends the
city council receive and file this report, find this action is not a
project under SQA. Uh and after tonight, uh staff will submit this report to the
state office of land use and climate innovation and the housing and community
development department by April 1st. Um staff's available for any questions.
» Thank you, Mr. Holt. Does anyone from council have questions?
Mr. Newman.
» Thank you, Mayor. I have comments, not questions. Is it Is it appropriate to
make those at this time or do we want to hold for questions first?
Oh, oh, oh, oh. Okay, got it. So, no questions. Okay.
Now, we will have speakers. And we have one speaker tonight on Zoom, which is
Oh, we're a mess tonight, Mr. Angler.
» Okay. Um, one of the obvious um questions I think people would have uh
is meeting our our arena numbers across the board. Um, uh, I got a feeling that
perhaps my my, uh, council, uh, colleague would be speaking to this as
well, but is is are we is there anything else we could do to encourage uh,
development? I know we have we have set up the areas that are available for
development. We've made that through our general plan and through um, you know,
our housing element, making sure that we have the spots for this type of
development. Is there anything that we're missing or anything we can do to
make uh more development available to uh our our community?
Well, um I mean it staff does continue to uh you know receive inquiries
regarding housing and you know facilitate um pre-application
consultations in regard so that you know developers have an idea of you know what
works within the land you know the the confines of the land use designations
and the policies of the city. Um also we as part of one of the programs we do
also um have to post and that this will be a work in progress you know the
available sites that we have um those identified in the housing element um and
also do outreach to developers to basically see where the development
community is at in terms of seeking properties for building housing in the
community. And if I could add to that, uh, city council has done everything
within their purview to provide the opportunities for housing to be built.
You've used a number of tools at your disposal to provide opportunities for
market rate and affordable housing, even going as far as to fund affordable
housing projects. So, council is on point on point for providing the
opportunities for additional housing to be constructed.
» Thank you for that. I I know we do have some some projects in the pipeline
coming through and that's that's encouraging. Um I just want it to be
known that uh the city of Thousand Oaks is interested in meeting those numbers
if at all possible and that's something that we're we're encouraging folks to
help us with.
» All righty. We will now move to our speaker for the night, Jackson Piper.
» Uh good evening, Mr. Mayor and members of the city council. Uh, can you hear
me? All right. >> Yes, sound great.
» Oh, great. U, my name is Jackson Piper. I'm from unincorporated Newbury Park and
uh, I've spoken before this council many times before as a housing advocate for
Ventura County Yimi. Uh, so I'm here in that capacity today also um, along with
some other housing advocates uh, that I I've worked with over the years. So, um,
first off, I do want to say I appreciate all that the city of Thousand Oaks has
done up to this point to, um, to build to get more housing built within the
city. Um, the current economic situation across
the globe is not great. It looks like it's going to be worse for the
foreseeable future. Um, that being said, and while I recognize that there are a
lot of levers uh that deal, you know, that affect housing that people on the
city council cannot control, I still think the city needs to be doing more to
produce more housing. Uh, especially in those lower income categories where we
are not anywhere near meeting the Rhino targets. Um, I do appreciate that we are
a significant part of the way uh towards meeting our overall goals. Um, and it's
heartening to hear that we have what 1,600 or so units um in the pipeline
that are approved but not yet uh permitted for for building. Um,
but the reality has always been that Thousand Oaks, like just about every
other community in California, hasn't built nearly enough housing to meet the
demand and the need uh for people that want to live there. And that just forces
people with less means to uh support themselves out of the community. So, we
lose out on people um who are lower income or who or don't
have the means or who who haven't had the benefit of being able to
purchase a house early enough where it was cheap and then just hold on to it
for decades. Um, I'm asking you to look at and and
the zoning and land use elements and housing element of the um the general
plan. We did go over years ago, a few years ago, and it was it was great work,
but I think we need to look at that again and see where things can be
tweaked to get more housing produced in the city. And we need to look at any
other mechanisms that the city council has leverage over to encourage
developers to build in the city and to speed up the process between
approval and actually getting a project open for um habitation. So those are my
thoughts. Thank you and um please do all you can to produce more housing in the
city. Thank you. >> Thank you Drew Powers.
» Yeah. and I'll let staff add any other pieces in the um response section here.
Uh appreciated um Mr. Proper's comments. Um and I just want to remind the council
and the community at large, the single biggest missing component uh right now
is a funding stream uh to provide affordable housing. Uh we've done a
tremendous amount uh this council reszone 600 acres. Um and we're seeing
tremendous in interest. uh a lot of factors that have been talked about at
Nauseium that are affecting the pace of building, but um as you know, we're
working on a project at Herbs and Hillrest that's a for sale affordable
project. We're likely to be back in front of you with some other components
to that soon. Um but that's a great illustration of just how challenging it
is to materialize these uh these components even when you underwrite land
cost and do these things. Uh the state has put a lot of requirements out there.
you saw those numbers and those those numbers are real. They're daunting.
That's every city has different numbers to that effect. And um without the the
necessary funding that we used to have in the RDA era that that we built,00
units of affordable housing with during that period of time, it's just going to
be difficult to elicit significant production beyond inloo production in in
housing. >> Steph want to add anything?
» Uh no, Mr. powers covered in great detail.
» Okay, great. Um, anyone from council have a comment or a motion?
» Yeah, I'll move uh 12A that we accept the uh staff report.
» Mr. Newman, I see your hand up. You have a comment?
» I do. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to commend staff for a really
pretty good year last year um on a number of fronts.
The housing actual sticks in the ground increased by more than fourfold last
year, which is huge. And for the first time in this arena cycle, there's low
there are low income units there. And just as a reminder for the public,
because I hear this sometimes from residents, when they hear the term
lowinccome, they think of destitution and poverty. And in the context of
housing affordability in California, that's not what low income is. We're
talking about a family of four making nearly $120,000
in Ventura County. And in Thousand Oaks, that figure is almost certainly higher.
So it's very good to see that for the first time in this arena cycle we are
producing units in that category because that is by far that workforce entry
level housing by far is our greatest unmet need. And then below that it's
also good to see that we opened Thrive Grove last year. It's also great to hear
that we've got even more good things coming in the pipeline. Just three
projects alone next year, we've got I think there's the pipeline is about
1,600 in total now. And my math is right. It's nearly,00 units will be
under construction next year. 1100 additional units. So that's a really
significant bite taken out of the projects in the pipeline. But to wrap
this up, I'll want to endorse something Mr. Power said, which is that all of
this is really dependent on access to capital. And lending costs in the macro
environment economically are way above the pay grade of the city
council. But that that does have a very large, arguably the largest impact on
whether housing gets built here. But overall, great job by staff. Really
pleased to see a four-fold increase in housing production, better than
four-fold last year, and an even more significant increase to come this year.
Thank you. >> Any comments?
» Right. We have a motion. Will the clerk please call the vote?
» Council member Adam, >> yes.
» Council member Newman, >> I.
» Council member Gutierrez, >> yes.
» Mayor Prom Angler, >> yes.
» And Mayor Taylor, >> yes.
» And that motion passes 5 to zero. >> Next is city manager announcements. Mr.
Powers, do you have any for us? >> Uh, thank you, Mayor Taylor. Uh we will
be back on the 24th of this month for our next meeting. Um uh on that night um
uh we have currently a couple of public hearings. One for a major capital um uh
project. Uh the second one is for a um a really great item, our film permit
ordinance update. something that we've been working on for the better part of
the last year to make some modernizations to our film permit
ordinance. Uh and then we will also have um an item on our 2026 active
transportation plan. Thank you, Mr. Powers. I will now
adjourn the meeting to the next regular meeting on March 24th, 2026.