►
From YouTube: Planning Commission - 04/26/2021
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Good
evening,
at
this
time,
I'd
like
to
call
to
order
the
planning
commission
meeting
of
april
26
2021
for
viewers
watching
at
home,
all
commissioners
and
the
public
are
participating
via
video
conference
or
teleconference
to
assist
the
city
in
our
social
distancing
efforts.
Please
stand
and
join
me
in
the
pledge
of
allegiance.
A
D
Yes,
good
evening
there
were
several
correspondence
items
that
were
received
on
agenda
item
8a
that
were
delivered
to
you
in
a
supplemental
package
and
posted
on
the
website.
Earlier
this
afternoon,.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
All
right
now
is
the
time
for
public
comment.
This
time
any
person
may
address
the
commission
regarding
a
city
planning
matter.
That
is
not
on
this
evening's
agenda.
Should
the
commission
wish
to
discuss
an
issue
raised
by
a
member
of
the
public.
The
issue
will
be
referred
to
staff
for
scheduling
on
a
future
agenda.
Anyone
who'd
like
to
speak
under
public
comments,
must
complete
a
speaker
card
and
file
it
with
the
recording
secretary
before
the
public
comments.
Portion
of
the
agenda
is
called
speaker's.
A
Remarks
should
be
addressed
to
the
commission
as
a
whole
and
not
to
an
individual
commissioner
or
staff
member
unless
otherwise
provided
by
the
commission.
Speakers
are
limited
to
five
minutes.
Monitor
in
front
of
you
will
show
you
the
remaining
time
you
have.
It
is
my
understanding
that
I
have
two
speakers
this
evening.
A
First
of
whom
is
rebecca
albarn.
D
Here,
rebecca
is
not
in
the
viewing
room.
A
So
I'll
assume
rebecca
does
not
need
to
speak
with
us.
The
second
speaker
is
dr
karen
martin.
D
And
karen
is
no
longer
is
not
in
the
room
either.
A
All
right
we're
going
to
assume
that
they
do
not
want
to
talk
to
us
anymore,
all
right.
A
F
A
All
right,
let's
move
on
to
department
reports
before
we
get
started,
I
would
just
like
ever
to
let
everyone
know
that
we
have
a
lot
of
material
to
review
and
a
significant.
B
A
A
D
H
Thank
you,
ms
finley,
first
of
all,
just
good
evening
to
the
commission
and
to
the
community
it's
great
to
to
be
here
tonight
to
be
involved
in
this
project.
H
I've
been
involved
in
various
updates
to
elements
of
the
general
plan
over
the
past
three
decades,
but
I've
never
like
anybody
in
the
community,
except
those
involved
at
the
beginning,
been
involved
in
a
comprehensive
update
of
our
general
plans.
It's
very
exciting.
For
me.
It's
also,
I
think,
a
very
positive
thing
for
the
community
as
well.
H
Before
I
get
going,
though
I
did
want
to
share
a
few
thoughts
and
then
matt
ramey
will
will
will
continue,
and
so
the
first
thought
which
is
which
is
this
image
is-
and
these
are
thoughts
that
are
overarching
that
I
think,
are
relevant
to
to
our
discussion
tonight.
First,
to
keep
in
mind
is
that
lanya's
plans
are
not
static.
H
They
change
over
time
continually
being
refined
to
meet
the
constantly
changing
needs
of
our
community
and
in
this
case,
on
the
right
side
of
this
image
is
our
1970
development
plan
and
on
the
bottom,
is
our
current
general
plan.
And
if
you
look
at
these
quickly,
you
can
see
some
really
obvious
changes.
A
lot
of
land
that
was
originally
proposed
for
low
density
residential
has
been
preserved
as
open
space.
Much
more
than
we
thought
would
be
possible
50
years
ago,
which
I
think
is
a
great
thing
for
the
community.
H
H
That
obviously
didn't
happen,
and
there
was
even
if
you
look
in
the
lower
center
of
the
the
original
plane,
you
can
see
a
big
blue
area.
There
were
institutional
uses
planned
for
the
ridgeline
area,
south
of
the
101
23
interchange,
just
to
the
southwest
actually,
but
in
that
vicinity
and
so
landy's
designations
have
changed
and
land
use
categories
have
changed
over
the
years
we
used
to
have
an
in
institutional
and
industrial
combination
and
later
that
was
discontinued,
and
now
we
have
a
commercial
residential
land
use
designation.
H
That
was
added
for
the
downtown
specific
plan
area
and
also
for
civic
center
specific
plan
up
at
fireworks
hill,
so
plants
change
over
time
tonight.
We're
gonna
we're
gonna,
be
looking
at
other
potential
changes
other
refinements
to
our
land
use
plan.
H
I
wanted
to
emphasize
right
up
front
that
the
vast
majority
of
the
city
is
not
being
proposed
for
any
changes
over
90
percent
is
is
being
preserved,
as
it
currently
is,
with
a
comparatively
small
amount
proposed
for
potential
change,
and
that's
of
course,
what
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
next
slide.
Please
this.
What
you're
going
to
see
tonight
we're
going
to
be
discussing
is
the
result,
I
think,
as
everybody
knows,
of
a
year
and
a
half
of
public
input
going
way
back
to
community
workshops
and
so
forth.
H
That
is
really
beginning
to
coalesce
into
a
preferred
landis
map
and
on
the
right
side
of
this.
This
image
are
three
of
the
of
the
original
community
values
that
were
that
were
defined
by
the
community.
The
ability
to
live
in
the
city,
regardless
of
income
or
stage
in
life
to
to
have
a
community
which
has
housing
for
everybody.
H
A
diverse
and
resilient
economy
is
very
important
to
to
residents
and
to
be
a
leader
on
the
environmental
front
as
well
has
has
shown
to
be
an
important
community
value
next,
please.
H
H
The
final
language
map
will
be
adopted
actually
next
year
about
this
time
after
preparation
of
the
housing
element,
after
preparation
of
all
the
other
general
plan,
elements,
safety
and
and
circulation,
and
so
forth,
and
after
an
environmental
impact
report
has
been
prepared
for
the
general
plan
update,
including
alternatives.
So
there
is
still
some
some
steps
to
go
through
important
steps.
Tonight
is
a
milestone,
but
there
are
a
number
of
other
steps
in
this
process
before
the
final
land
use
map
is
adopted
next,
please,
and
then
just.
H
Finally,
I
think
everybody
on
this
on
this
call.
You
know
recognize
how
fortunate
we
are
to
be.
You
know
associated
with
the
city
whether
we
live
here
work
here,
it's
a
great
city
and
you
know
at
the
end
of
this
process.
I
think
we
all
you
know,
agree
that
that
everybody
is
working
together
to
try
to
create
an
even
more
desirable
place
to
live,
work
and
play.
H
We
have
a
great
city
like
I
said,
a
lot
to
be
proud
of,
but
there
are
areas
that
that
we
can
improve
on,
I
think
and
as
one
can
in
any
in
any
city,
and
so
that
I
just
wanted
to
remind
everybody.
It's
really.
H
Goal
of
tonight's
discussion
so
with
that
I
am
going
to
now
turn
it
over
to
mr
ramy.
He
is
our
primary
advisor
on
this
project
and
has
been
with
us
for
the
last
year
and
a
half
so.
E
Take
it
away
matt
good
evening,
everyone
thank
you
mark
for
the
introduction
on
setting
the
stage
it's
nice
to
see
everyone
again.
It's
been
a
month
since
we
saw
you
last.
I
just
want
to
go
over
briefly
what
what
we're
hoping
to
do
this
evening.
So
we
want
to
start
off
by
summarizing
the
supplemental
survey
analysis
that
we
did
on
the
survey
that
we
discussed
at
our
last
meeting
in
march.
E
I
want
to
start
with
an
overview
of
the
supplemental
survey
analysis
since
we
presented
a
preliminary
analysis
at
the
meeting
last
month.
If
you
will
remember,
we
presented
that
we
received
a
total
of
2127
total
responses.
The
majority
of
those
were
online
surveys
through
the
surveymonkey
tool.
There
were
about
25,
hard
copy
surveys
that
were
completed.
E
The
survey
was
open
from
february,
2nd
to
march
15
2021.
There
were
33
questions.
Six
of
them
were
open-ended
questions
where
respondents
could
write
anything
that
they
wanted.
16
were
questions
that
were
multiple
choice,
but
if
you
selected,
none
of
the
above,
you
got
to
write
a
comment
and
then
there
were
five
demographic
questions,
so
we
understood
who
took
the
survey
and
it's
important
to
note
that
not
every
respondent
answered
every
question
survey.
E
E
What
I'm
going
to
talk
about
is
tonight
a
little
bit
is
the
survey
results
from
the
6
000
comments
from
the
survey.
There
were
two
opportunities
for
the
public
to
provide
comments
on
the
survey.
The
first
was
questions
where
respondents
had
a
multiple
choice
option
and
one
of
those
options
was
none
of
the
above,
which
meant
that
if
they
didn't
like
any
of
the
alternatives
or
any
of
the
ideas
presented,
they
could
select
none
of
the
above
and
then
write
their
response
generally.
E
This
corresponded
with
a
specific
geographic
question,
so
a
question
about
a
specific
area
of
the
city.
Overall,
less
than
19
of
respondents
selected,
none
of
the
above
and
most
of
the
questions
had
less
than
15
respondents.
E
Overall.
Most
of
the
comments
that
we
received
were
something
that
was
opposing
or
comment
opposing
the
alternative
opposing
the
idea,
so
that
essentially
accounts
for
a
very
small
while
there.
The
comments
are
important.
It
counts
for
a
very
small
percentage
of
the
overall
comments
received
on
the
survey
on
those
questions,
because
the
majority
supported
one
of
the
alternatives.
E
The
other
was
there
were
open-ended
questions
with
just
just
broadly,
you
know
what
other
ideas
do
you
have
about
this
area
and
these
answers
were
more
balanced
between
those
who
were
supportive
of
the
vision
for
the
area
and
those
who
were
not
supportive
and
or
had
another
idea.
Most
of
the
respondents
skipped
the
open-ended
questions.
Only
between
15
to
25
of
respondents
on
on
almost
every
open-ended
question,
actually
provided
an
answer
and
a
lot
of
the
answers
that
were
provided
were.
I
have
no
further
comments.
E
The
only
exception
to
this
was
question
number
nine,
which
was
for
the
rancho
canejo
area,
where
65
of
survey
respondents
left
a
comment.
This
means
that
about
1400
of
the
2100
respondents
left
a
comment.
E
Our
full
survey
report
is
available
on
the
project
website.
At
the
last
meeting.
There
was
also
questions
about
whether
the
anyone
was
gaming,
the
system
and
whether
one
person
could
take
the
survey
multiple
times.
As
I
had
mentioned
previously,
we
went
back
and
looked
at
the
instances
where
there
were
multiple
ip
addresses
associated
with
one
survey
response.
E
The
survey
was
set
up
so
that
each
person
could
take
it
once
on
their
device
and
the
the
survey
responses
the
survey
tool
tracks
ip
addresses,
so
we
could
go
back
in
and
see
if
one
person
or
if
one
ip
address
had
multiple
responses
and
what
we
found
was
that
400
there
were
413
instances
where
there
was
more
than
one
ip
address
associated
with
the
survey
response.
So
there
were
152
ip
addresses
that
each
had
two
responses:
20
24
ip
addresses
that
had
three
responses.
E
Each
three
ip
addresses
that
had
four
responses:
each
and
then
three
ip
addresses
that
had
a
total
of
25
responses.
One
had
six
one
at
seven
and
one
himself,
so
we
asked
ourselves.
How
could
this
happen?
It's
very
common
for
two
people
in
a
household
to
each
have
a
separate
device
and
for
each
of
them
to
take
the
survey
and
that
would
show
up
as
the
same
ip
address
two
times,
but
because
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
were
so.
E
In
other
words,
if
you
take
out
the
the
ip
addresses
with
more
than
one
ip
address,
the
results
are
overall,
very
close
and
did
not
change
at
all
the
overall
direction
of
the
survey.
E
The
process
of
developing
the
preferred
alternative
was
to
look
at
all
of
the
three
alternatives
that
were
presented
and
to
take
components
of
all
of
those
alternatives.
We
presented
this
concept
that
this
was
going
to
be
our
approach
in
the
alternatives
development
process.
In
the
briefing
book
we
presented
the
alternatives
as
a
way
of
expressing
the
guiding
for
the
vision
and
the
guiding
principles
in
a
map
form
and
testing
as
a
way
of
testing
different
ideas
for
the
community,
and
that's
why
we
presented
the
alternatives
and
that's
why
we
asked
the
survey
questions.
E
We
used
primarily
the
survey
in
order
to
guide
the
direction
for
the
preferred
alternative,
but
that
was
not
the
only
form
of
input.
There
was
other
input
and
other
feedback
from
residents
and
businesses
that
helped
guide
the
direction
that
is
proposed
in
the
preferred
land
use
map
overall
compared
to
the
alternatives
compared
to
the
three
alternatives.
E
I'll
explain
that
in
a
little
bit
more
detail
in
just
a
second
as
you'll
remember,
we
had
proposed
land
use
designations.
These
next
two
slides
show
what
those
land
use
designations
are
and
if
you'll
remember,
we
had
a
land
use.
Designation
called
neighborhood
high
and
another
land
use
designation,
called
mixed-use
high.
E
The
neighborhood
high
designation
was
between
30
and
45
dwelling
units
per
acre
and
the
mixed
use
high
was
between
45
and
60
units,
an
acre
because
of
feedback,
some
feedback
that
we
received
during
the
process.
We
eliminated
these
two
land
use
designations,
so
that
the
maximum
designation
that
we
have
for
neighborhood
medium
high
is
well
the
maximum
is
neighborhood
medium
high
and
then
the
maximum
for
mixed
use
is
mixed
use
medium
at
up
to
45
dwelling
units
per
acre.
E
The
characteristics
of
the
preferred
alternative
are
shown
here
and
they
are
built
primarily
off
of
the
guiding
principles
that
were
created
during
the
process.
So
the
preferred
land
use
map,
preserves,
parks
and
open
space
throughout
the
community.
It
maintains
the
residential
neighborhoods.
It
focuses
development
on
a
very
limited
number
of
locations
in
the
city.
It
maintains
a
strong,
a
strong
job
focus
and
expands
employment,
and
it
also
takes
steps
to
provide
what
we
heard
from
the
businesses
are
needed
for
employee
retention.
E
I'm
going
to
walk
through
each
of
the
sub
areas
and
the
proposed
direction
that
we
have
in
the
in
the
land
use
in
the
land
use
map
the
preferred
land
use
now,
starting
with
the
rancho
canejo
area.
We
heard
from
through
the
survey
that
respondents
wanted
to
see
a
balance
between
lower
intensity
and
higher
intensity.
E
There
was
support
through
the
survey
for
increased
residential
density
of
up
to
45
dwelling
units
per
acre
as
a
method
of
enhancing
infill
and
you'll,
see
that
north
of
the
101
freeway
with
the
dark
purple
south
of
the
101,
the
the
preferred
direction,
was
to
add
mixed-use
development
and
have
a
variety
of
of
uses
on
the
south
side
of
the
freeway
you'll
see
in
the
in
the
purple,
you'll
see
in
the
light
purple
that
there
is
mixed
use
low
around
the
freeway
entrances,
there's
also
the
red
color,
which
is
which
is
the
regional,
commercial
or
commercial
regional.
E
One
question
that
received
a
large
number
of
interest,
as
you
all
know,
is
the
alice
property
or
the
orchard
property,
which
is
you
see?
It's
there's
a
image
in
the
lower
left
hand,
corner
and
you'll,
see
the
leader
line
going
to
that
area.
So
of
the
responses
about
two-thirds
of
the
people
responded
who
took
the
survey.
Two-Thirds
of
the
respondents
who
took
the
survey
wrote
something
about
this
about
this
parcel
about
this
area
and
the
majority
about
80
of
those
were
in
support
of
mixed
use
and
multi-family
development
on
this
site.
E
However,
because
there
was
some
concern
about
adjacency,
the
proposed
direction
for
this
area
is
to
have
residential,
low,
neighborhood
low
adjacent
to
the
existing
single
family
areas
and
then
mixed
use
low
on
the
eastern
portion
of
the
site.
E
E
We
also
extended
the
commercial
on
both
east
and
west
along
the
101
freeway,
in
order
to
provide
a
buffer
on
the
on
the
west
side
is
the
commercial
regional
which
allows
hotels,
and
that
is
their
existing
hotels
in
this
area
and
to
the
east,
it's
commercial
town,
which
allows
a
variety
of
commercial
and
retail
uses.
E
E
So,
overall,
in
this
area
in
there
were
70
to
78
percent
of
the
respondents
were
supportive
of
three
to
five
story:
mixed
use
and
multi-family
buildings
within
this
area.
E
The
open-ended
comment,
the
question
which
was
question
14.
There
were
20
of
the
of
the
respondents
who
wrote
a
comment,
a
third
of
those
said
that
they
had
no
additional
comments.
A
third
were
opposed
to
any
change
in
this
area
and
a
third
supported
mixed
use
or
had
suggestions
and
again
that
only
represents
one-fifth
of
the
respondents
of
the
survey.
So
80
supported
one
of
the
three
alternatives
for
the
downtown
and
thousand
oaks
boulevard
area
that
you
see
here.
There
was
overall
support
for
mixed
use
and
residential
development.
E
So,
as
you
can
see,
the
proposed
direction
here
along
thousand
oaks
boulevard,
is
a
combination
of
mixed
use
as
well
as
commercial
neighborhood.
The
dark
purple
in
the
downtown
area
represents
mixed-use
medium
at
up
to
45
dwelling
units
per
acre,
just
west
of
that
is
an
area
of
mixed-use
low
transitioning
over
to
commercial
neighborhood
at
the
intersection
at
the
off
ramp,
intersection
thousand
oaks
boulevard
and
rancho
road
moving
east
from
panejo
school
road.
E
There
are
some
areas
that
were
that
are
designated
as
mixed
use
in
the
specific
plan,
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
specific
plan,
but
they
were
proposed.
They
are
proposed
to
be
commercial
neighborhood
in
this
plan
either
because
the
parcels
are
very
small
or
because
there's
existing
uses
such
as
the
toyota
dealership,
and
then
you
see
it
transitions
as
you
go
east
into
the
mixed
use,
the
mixed-use
low
designation.
E
However,
when
we
went
back
as
staff
went
back
and
looked
at
this
area,
we
felt
like
it
was
best
to
keep
the
same
land
use
designation
in
this
area
as
industrial
low,
in
order
to
provide
opportunities
for
a
diversity
of
industrial
uses
in
the
city
and
not
necessarily
encourage
transition
to
higher
densities
on
the
east,
far
east
side
of
thousand
oaks
boulevard.
You
see
the
dark
gray
area
here.
This
is
across
from
the
high
school
and
there
was
strong
support
for
expanding
the
the
amount
and
diversity
of
job-producing
uses
in
this
area.
E
To
keep
this
as
to
keep
this
area
as
a
job
anchor.
There
was
also
support
for
having
some
amount
of
mixed
use
in
this
area,
particularly
around
the
intersection
of
west
lake
boulevard
and
thousand
oaks
boulevard.
So
there
were
the
the
two
shopping
centers
here
on
the
south
side
of
thousand
oaks
boulevard
were
identified
for
mixed
use,
as
well
as
the
former
kmart
site
and
across
the
street
from
the
former
cayman
site.
E
There
was
also
strong
support
for
keeping
the
the
the
west
lake
shopping
center,
west
lake
plaza
and
center
as
commercial
and
not
converting
it
to
mixed
use,
and
so
that's
what
you
see
here
in
the
commercial
neighborhood
for
the
village
centers.
The
three
options
that
were
presented
were
to
convert
them
all
to
mixed
use,
low
to
keep
them
all
as
commercial
or
to
have
a
mix
of
some
mixed
use,
and
some
commercial
and
overall
58
of
respondents
wanted
to
keep
the
village
centers
as
commercial
uses.
E
Overall,
with
the
preferred
land
use
map
this,
this
shows
the
overall
numbers
and,
as
you
can
see,
48
of
the
total
land
area
in
the
city
is
open.
Space
parks,
natural
and
golf
courses
and
35
is
made
up
of
single-family
areas
at
neighborhood,
rural
neighborhood,
very
low
and
neighborhood
low.
That
means
that
83
of
the
entire
land
area
of
the
city
is
designated
as
one
of
those
two
categories
of
uses.
E
Five
percent
of
the
city
is
neighborhood
low,
medium
or
higher.
The
reason
this
was
categorized
together
is
because
it
allows
for
duplex
triplex,
townhomes
and
small
apartment
buildings,
so
anything
sort
of
above
any
kind
of
attached
housing
and
so
there's
only
five
percent
of
the
city.
The
four
percent
of
the
city
is
institutional,
three
percent
is
industrial,
two
percent
is
commercial
and
then
overall
only
1.3
is
mixed
use.
E
E
The
question,
then,
is:
where
did
we
add
mixed
use,
because
we
know
that
it's
a
concern
about
adding
mixed-use
development
and
adding
higher
intensity
development,
and
so
this
map
identifies
the
locations
that
did
not
previously
that
do
not
currently
allow
mixed-use
development
that
we
are
now
proposing,
and
some
of
these
areas,
as
you'll
see
further
on
are
even
subject
of
discussion.
E
In
our
conversation
based
on
feedback
from
the
general
plan
advisory
committee,
so
moving
east
to
west,
you
see
the
area
at
the
intersection
of
thousand
oaks
boulevard
and
west
lake,
then
you
see
the
kmart
site
and
across
the
street
from
the
kmart
site.
As
we
know,
the
kmart
site
is
already
moving
forward.
We
have
the
lakes
shopping
center
parking
lot,
which
currently
does
not
allow
mixed
use,
but
we're
we're
moving
that
to
allow
mixed
use.
E
There
is
a
a
the
area,
a
small
parcel
or
a
parcel
on
thousand
oaks
boulevard
west
of
the
23
freeway.
Then
you
have
the
area
around.
You
have
the
oaks
mall
and
jan's
marketplace,
and
then
you
have
the
mixed-use
parcels
in
the
rancho
canejo
area,
both
north
and
south,
of
the
freeway
and
again,
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard.
Specific
plan
essentially
allowed
mixed-use
development
along
the
entirety
of
the
thousand
oaks
corridor
between
moore
park,
road
and
then
all
the
way
east
to
the
auto
malls.
E
So
there's
a
very
limited
increase
in
the
amount
of
mixed
use
and,
in
fact,
we're
proposing
reducing
mixed
use
in
some
areas
along
thousand
oaks
boulevard
that
currently
allow
it
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
including
the
partialization
pattern,
as
well
as
the
proximity
to
the
freeway.
So,
overall,
there
is
not
a
large
net
increase
in
the
number
of
mixed
use
process.
E
We
met
with
the
general
plan
advisory
committee
last
week.
It
was
a
joint
general
plan,
advisory
committee
and
public
workshop,
and
we
had
a
really
great
conversation,
great
open
conversation
with
the
group.
There
were
a
lot
of
great
ideas
that
came
through
and
overall
we'd
like
to
express
what
the
direction
was
that
we
got
from
the
gpac
and
those
members
of
the
gpac
who
did
attend,
and
I
believe
there
were
14
so
about
two-thirds
of
the
gpac
members
attended.
E
E
There
were,
however,
some
concerns
that
were
raised
about
the
pace
of
change.
There
was
a
recommendation
that
the
period
that
we're
looking
at
should
only
be
the
eight
year
arena
cycle,
and
then
there
were
questions
about
the
impacts
that
development
would
have
on
schools
and
the
school
age
population.
E
If
you're
going
to
attract
attracted
a
workforce,
there
was
strong
support
that
the
general
plan
is
about
people
and
the
quality
of
life
in
the
community,
and
not
just
about
buildings
and
land
uses,
and
that's
an
important
point
to
keep
in
mind,
and
we
have
been
front
loading
the
discussion
about
development.
However,
it
is
really
about
the
people
in
the
city
and
the
quality
of
life
in
the
city.
E
There
were
comments
about
the
need
for
both
long-term
flexibility
in
the
especially
in
the
retail
areas,
to
allow
change
to
happen
over
time,
because
we
can't
predict
where
that
change
is
going
to
be,
but
also
a
request
that
we
not
make
land
use,
changes
on
parcels
that
we
don't
think
will
redevelop
suit.
And
so
in
the
comments
from
the
gpac,
there
was
a
tension
between
this,
where
there
were
some
ideas
for
let's
make
a
larger
area
mixed
use
or
commercial
or
industrial.
E
B
E
E
The
the
request
was
made
from
many
members
of
the
general
claim
advisory
committee
to
add
mixed
use
back
to
some
of
the
village
centers.
There
was
a
lot
of
support
for
having
mixed
use
in
some
of
these
areas,
and
this
goes
against
goes
against,
but
it's
slightly
different
than
the
direction
that
we
heard
from
the
survey
where
58
of
respondents
said
that
that
they
wanted
to
keep
those
areas
commercial.
E
We
also
heard
that
it's
not
just
about
the
designation,
but
there's
also
policies
that
should
be
included
in
the
plan
relative
to
village
centers,
including
ensuring
the
long-term
preservation
of
retail
in
these
areas,
creating
attractive
environments
for
meeting
and
gathering
providing
flexibility
for
future
uses,
enhancing,
walking
and
biking
from
adjacent
areas,
and
also
connecting
the
village
centers
to
other
activity
centers
in
the
community.
E
There
were
a
couple
of
areas
that
that
were
mentioned
as
possible
locations
for
for
converting
or
reverting
to
the
mix.
A
mixed
use,
designation
and
those
apologies.
I'm
looking
for
my
notes
are
the
jans
and
moorpark
village
center
and
the
arbelis
and
herbs
village
center,
and
you
can
see
those
in
number
four
and
number
six
in
the
map
on
the
screen.
E
The
next
area
that
was
brought
up
is
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
area,
and
there
were
comments
from
the
gpac
that
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
specific
plan
should
remain
mixed
use
overall.
So,
as
I
had
mentioned
previously,
we
identified
some
locations
that
are
that
are
currently
commercial,
residential
or
mixed
use
in
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
specific
plan.
But
we
we
recommended
in
the
preferred
land
use
map
that
they
be
converted
to
commercial
uses
which
reflect
the
current
uses
on
the
ground,
and
you
can
see
these
areas
identified
in
the
dotted
circles
on
the
map.
E
We
did
hear
that
there
are
some
we
thought
about
some
options
and
heard
some
options
about
how
we
could
proceed
from
the
general
plan
advisory
committee
and
from
our
own
thinking
as
a
team.
So
one
is
to
keep
the
direction
as
we
have
it
in
the
map.
E
The
other
is
to
revert
the
commercial
parcels
that
are
circled
to
mixed-use
low
so
that
they
match.
What's
in
the
existing
specific
plan,
there
are
also
and
I'll
pause
here
for
a
second.
There
was
also
a
question
in
the
survey
that
asked
whether
respondent
whether
respondents
would
be
okay
with
allowing
up
to
45
dwelling
units
per
acre
if
the
building
form
essentially
remained
the
same,
and
about
three
quarters
of
respondents
to
the
survey
said
that
they
would
be
amenable
to
them.
They
supported
that
as
a
concept.
E
So
there
are
two
other
options
to
consider.
One
is
to
redesignate
the
whole
area
as
mixed-use
medium,
which
is
45
dwelling
units
per
acre
and
up
to
58
feet
right
now.
E
It's
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
and
50
feet
and
then
the
other
is
to
modify
the
mixed-use
designation
to
allow
for
45
dwelling
units
per
acre
in
approximately
50
feet
of
height,
so
the
last
bullet
is-
and
it
was
about
70
percent
who
supported
this
in
the
survey
is
to
allow
for
increased
density
for
affordable
housing
and
project
feasibility,
but
to
do
so
within
the
generally
the
50-foot
height
limit.
So
these
are
options
to
consider
the
planning
commission
to
consider
with
no
recommendation
of
direction.
E
The
third
area
is
the
mixed
use
at
west
lake
and
thousand
oaks
boulevard.
As
you
can
see,
we
identified
mixed
use
on
either
side
of
westlake
boulevard,
south
of
thousand
oaks
boulevard,
and
several
members
of
the
general
plan
advisory
committee
recommended
that
we
not
include
mixed
use
in
these
areas,
because
the
likelihood
of
these
areas
be
being
converted
to
mixed
use
or
residential
being
added
is
very,
very
low
and
instead
we
should
place
the
mixed
use,
just
east
of
this
area
on
the
baxter
site.
E
The
fourth
area
is
jans
and
marketplace.
There
was
near
unanimous
support
from
the
gpac
for
redeveloping
these
parcels.
There
was
also
calls
to
allow
for
greater
flexibility
over
time
and
a
recommendation
to
create
a
new
land
use,
designation
or
special
land
use
policies
to
allow
for
flexibility
in
building
form,
including
potentially
higher
height
limits
in
certain
areas.
E
There
was
a
call
for
greater
flexibility
in
the
uses
and
an
idea
to
cap
the
total
number
of
units
in
the
area
so
as
not
to
overwhelm
the
site,
but
still
allow
for
flexibility.
So
there
could
be
policies
in
the
plan
to
have
a
strong
commercial
focus,
but
also
to
allow
for
residential
development
in
select
locations.
E
The
fifth
area
is
the
orchard
or
alice
property.
There
was
at
the
gpac.
There
was
general
support
for
mixed
use
and
flexibility
in
this
area
across
the
site,
but
there
were
also
some
different
opinions
about
this.
There
were
ideas
to
require
that
there
be
an
open
space
buffer
adjacent
to
the
residential
uses,
and
then
there
was
also,
as
I
mentioned
previously
in
question.
9
74
of
respondents
to
that
question.
E
E
The
sixth
area
is
rancho
canejo
north
of
101..
There
was
support
generally
support
for
mixed
use
overall
north
of
101
in
rancho
canejo.
E
However,
there
were
some
recommendations
to
remove
make
some
of
the
mixed
use
because
of
the
lack
of
likelihood
of
anything
being
redeveloped
in
the
time
horizon
of
the
general
plan
you
see
on
the
map
areas,
one
two
and
three.
These
are
marked
for
further
discussion
with
the
general
plan
with
the
planning
commission.
So
you
can
provide
us
with
direction
in
this
area
about
whether
you
think
these
areas
should
remain
as
they
are
identified
in
the
preferred
land
use
map
or
whether
they
should
be
reverted
to
other
uses.
H
Great,
thank
you
matt
for
that
overview.
So,
as
I
mentioned
at
the
outset,
we
are
looking
at
a
draft
preferred
lane
use
map
this
evening
on
on
may
12th.
Looking
forward,
there's
a
survey
that's
currently
available
online
and
that
survey
will
conclude.
So
we
are
continually
looking
for
public
input
on
this.
H
H
Coming
up,
they're
also
important,
not
only
in
terms
of
the
the
preferred
land
use
map,
but
they
set
the
stage
for
preparation
of
the
draft
housing
elements
and
review
of
the
policy
frameworks
for
other
elements
of
the
general
plan
and
then
also
sql
for
the
california
environmental
quality
act
that
the
map
will
provide
the
basis
in
part.
H
For
that
analysis,
in
conjunction
with
the
other
elements
and
and
those
related
policies,
latter
part
of
this
year
from
september
to
december,
we'll
be
working
on
the
housing
element,
review,
preparing
the
draft
general
plan
and
the
sql
document,
and
then
early
next
year
we
were.
H
We
anticipate
that
the
state
department
of
housing
and
community
development
will,
by
that
time
approve
our
element
and
we
will
have
that
ready
for
adoption
and
then
the
draft
general
plan
and
eir
will
also
be
available
for
public
review,
and
this
entire
project
is
anticipated,
then
to
wrap
up
in
march
april
of
2022
with
the
general
plan.
H
A
All
right,
I
will
assume
everybody's
done,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
my
fellow
commissioners
if
they
have
any
questions
about
that.
At
this
point.
A
C
Thank
you,
chair
boss,
and
thank
you,
mr
town,
nice,
to
see
you
back
in
the
process.
Mr
remy,
thank
you
for
your
report.
Just
a
few
clarifying
questions
because
of
the
the
sheer
number
of
issues
that
go
into
this.
C
My
first
kind
of
question
was
kind
of
to
get
an
idea
of
kind
of
some
of
the
reasons
that
we're
looking
at
doing
this
as
I
have
to
as
opposed
to
want
to,
and
my
thought
was
again
sb
330,
which
was
the
emergency
housing
act
and
again
something
leading
to
having
objective
criteria
to
make
sure
that
our
rules
are
enforced.
This
map
doesn't
have
any
of
those
criteria.
My
understanding
is
that
that
will
come
later
when
the
housing
element-
and
other
things
are
done,
is
that
correct.
H
H
H
H
If
there
is
a
significant
impact
that
can't
be
mitigated,
then
the
alternatives
provide
an
option
for
consideration
by
the
commission
and
the
council
at
the
end
of
this
entire
process,
so
that
that
detailed
data
analysis
will
happen,
and
it
will
happen
after
the
the
vision
is,
is
sort
of
finalized
so
to
speak.
At
this
point,.
C
H
Well
there
there
will
be
the
upcoming
two
city
council
meetings
to
begin
with,
obviously
the
online
survey,
but
the
the
upcoming
council
meetings.
There
will
be
public
opportunity
for
comment
on
the
scope
of
the
eir,
the
topics
that
it
will
be
analyzing.
H
There
will
be
public
input
on
the
actual
eir
itself.
A
draft
er
will
be
issued
and
all
comments
will
be
encouraged
on
that
and
welcome
and
we
will
respond
to
each
and
every
one
of
those
comments
and
then,
at
the
end
of
all
of
that,
the
draft
general
plan
will
come
back
to
you
is
the
planning
commission
and
then
you
will
provide
another
recommendation
to
city
council
for
their
final
adoption.
So
there's
still
a
number.
What
was
that?
C
Again,
it's
important
because
I
know
a
lot
of
people
are
concerned
about
the
survey
involvement.
I
want
to
make
sure
everybody
knows
that
there's
a
lot
of
opportunities
to
get
involved
and
here
make
sure
your
voices
are
hurt.
So
thank
you
for
kind
of
going
through
that
one
thing
about.
Why
also
we're
doing
this
and
again,
I
know
it's
not
necessarily
the
topic
we're
just
looking
at
a
map,
but
obviously
we
get
into
other
things
like
the
arena
numbers
based
on
our
current
general
plan
map.
H
Our
current
general
plan
map,
I
don't
believe,
has
the
capacity
to
meet
the
current
arena
for
the
next
cycle,
and
by
that
I
mean
the
arena
number.
The
regional
housing
needs
assessment
number
it's
an
overall
number
about
2
600
for
the
next
cycle,
but
the
state
breaks
it
down
into
further
income
categories
and
and
we
need
to
identify
appropriate
densities
as
proxies
for
those
income
categories.
So
again
we
begin
to
sort
of
get
into
the
weeds
there,
but
the
the
existing
general
plan
would
have
to
be
modified.
H
I
believe
to
meet
the
current
arena
and
so
folding
that
into
this
long-range
vision
for
the
city
I
think
is
appropriate
because,
as
I
mentioned
at
the
outset,
we
have
never
done
a
comprehensive
update
of
our
of
our
dental
plan.
The
state
recommends
that
it's
done
about
every
15
years.
What
we've
done
over
the
years?
H
We've
updated
the
individual
elements,
we've
updated,
even
land
use,
but
but
only
portions
of
of
the
city,
not
looking
at
everything
at
the
same
time,
and
then
we
add
in
sb
330,
which
is
the
one
of
the
recent
pieces
of
state
legislation
that
encourages,
to
put
it
mildly,
cities
and
counties
to
add
housing.
H
We
thought
that
it
was
appropriate
to
to
work
together
on
this
comprehensive
plan
so
that
that's
that's
why
we
are
where
we
are
it's.
H
It's
a
big
undertaking,
undertaking
and
and
staff
and
matt's
team
recognize
that,
but
the
idea
is
to
look
broadly
solicit
public
input
which
which
matt
summarized-
and
I
think
we
have
a
you-
know
good
sense
of
and
again
going
all
the
way
back,
not
just
the
recent
survey,
but
going
all
the
way
back
to
the
community
values
and
implementation
strategies
from
almost
a
year
and
a
half
ago,
a
few
of
which
I
mentioned
at
the
out
at
the
outset.
H
Those
are,
I
think,
really
important
points:
adding
housing
to
options
for
residents,
adding
jobs,
continuing
to
protect
our
environment,
reducing
trips
on
our
freeways
traffic
in
terms
of
people
commuting
into
thousand
oaks
to
work.
Those
types
of
things
are:
are
topics
that
we
heard
about
from
the
community
and
are
part
of
the
background
of
the
land
use
map
that
you
see
tonight.
H
C
A
Commissioner,
newman,
I
see
your
hand
up,
I
see
your
actual
hand
up.
That's
cool.
J
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
mark
it's
good
to
see
you
back
and
thank
you,
mr
amy,
your
presentation.
J
I
have
some
questions
about
showing
your
work
here
about
the
math,
but
let's
start
with
the
top
line.
Number
do
I
understand
correctly
from
the
alternative
before
us
tonight
that
there
are
about
22
400
total
units
that
would
be
added
to
the
areas
of
change.
Is
that
correct.
H
That
that's
the
total
capacity
of
the
areas
of
change,
and
so
that's
the
number
that
is
is
sort
of
the
maximum
in
front
of
you
now
and
then
that
would
be
massaged
going
forward.
So
I
anticipate
it's
not
going
to
end
up
at
that
at
that
level
going
forward,
but
that
is
the
capacity
that
is,
that
is
reflected
in
the
preferred
language
map.
J
J
J
H
E
I
jump
in
sorry
sorry
to
interrupt,
but
there's
that
right
now
there's
a
capacity
in
the
city
of
eighty
one
thousand
plus
or
more
you
know,
plus
or
minus
units.
That
capacity
is
not
changing
from
the
preferred
alternative,
the
preferred
map
in
the
alternatives
and
what
is
in
the
existing
general
plan.
E
There
is
capacity
in
the
existing
right
now
in
the
existing
residential
neighborhoods
unbuilt
capacity
and
there's
capacity
in
what
in
the
areas
of
change
so
there's
48,
000
housing
units
in
the
city
there's
a
capacity
of
81
000,
and
that
means
that
there's
overall
in
the
city
across
the
the
all
the
entire
geographic
area,
about
33
000
unbuilt
units,
the
the
proposed
alternative,
has
22
000
approximately
housing
units
in
those
areas
of
change.
However,
there's
al
there
are
existing.
E
J
E
H
Which
transfer
number
is
this,
commissioner?
Newman.
J
H
J
This
table
is
titled
residential
unit
capacity
by
geographic
area.
E
Yeah,
so
I
I
understand
your
question
and
I
what
what
I
don't
have
is
the
existing
and
if
any
staff
has
a
number
for
this
is
what
the
existing
capacity
is
in
these
areas
under
the
existing
general
plan,
because
what
we're
talking
about
is
the
delta
right?
The
difference
between
what
the
existing
capacity
in
these
areas
is
now
compared
to
what
it
is
in
the
proposal.
Okay,.
E
J
K
May
I
clarify,
though,
because
that
that
number
is
based
on
the
existing
general
plan
designations,
so
the
excess
capacity
that
we're
going
to
be
reallocating
will
be
based
on
the
delta
between
the
new
proposed
density
calculation,
the
new
density
categories
and
what
was
there
before.
So
that
number
actually
may
change.
J
H
I'll
start,
I
think,
in
in
a
couple
of
ways
it
would
add
some
additional
housing,
quantity
and
options
for
residents
that
you
know.
Additional
units
would
probably
have
a
a
beneficial
impact
on
on
rents,
for
instance,
but
you
know,
density
in
and
of
itself
does
not
directly
equate
with
affordability.
H
So
you
know
when
we
talk
about
affordability
in
the
sense
of
state
law
and
so
forth,
we
will
almost
undoubtedly
be
discussing
options
to
include
affordable
units
within
a
market
rate
project
going
forward,
and
we
will,
you
know,
need
to
talk
about
that.
H
J
E
It
is
the
answer
to
all
of
the
questions.
The
majority
of
responses
were,
the
majority
of
respondents
responded
to
the
one
of
the
three
alternatives.
J
Well,
I'm
asking
about
there
were:
there
were
20
100
200
survey,
responses
that
I
think
we're
to
the
multiple
choice
part,
and
then
there
were
much
larger
numbers,
something
like
6000
that
gave
written
responses
where
there's
6,
000
unique
written
responses,
and
what
I'm
asking
is.
J
E
Well,
let
me
see
if
I
can
clarify
what
I
said
previously
to
make
sure
everyone
understands
there
were.
There
were
opportunities,
many
opportunities
in
the
survey
for
people
to
write
responses.
E
The
majority
of
those
written
responses
came
when
someone
selected
an
option
said
that
they
didn't
like
one
of
the
alternatives,
so
they
were
given
the
option
to
provide
a
comment.
The
majority
of
comments
were
for
that.
So
when,
if
there's
a
question
that
had
80
of
people
select
one
of
the
three
alternatives
and
20
select,
none
of
the
above
only
the
none
of
the
above
has
the
written
comments.
So
that
automatically
is
the
minority
opinion.
E
J
Well,
well,
I
think
if
I
understood
what
you
just
said,
there
were
cases
where
there'd
be
a
written
comment
that
was
sort
of
an
addendum,
if
you
will
to
instead.
E
J
E
Yes,
but
but
it
was
still,
the
minority
of
respondents
checked
a
box
that
allowed
them
to
write
a
response.
Okay,
if
you
didn't
check
that
box,
you
couldn't
write
a
response.
J
But,
but
in
in
listening
to
you
go
through
your
response,
your
your
report,
mr
raymie,
I
heard
I
heard
things
like
saying.
31
of
respondents
wanted
this
and
42
wanted
that
that
that's
based
on
the
multiple
choice,
part
of
of
the
survey
correct
that
is
correct.
Yeah,
you
weren't,
you
weren't
counting
written
responses
in
that
you're
you're.
You
know
the.
E
Responses
were
part
of,
but
that
was,
but
it
doesn't
the
alternative
a
b
or
one
two
or
three.
You
get
a
lot
of
times
alternative.
You
know
alternative
one,
two
or
three
or
the
option
of
none
of
the
above
together,
they
added
up
to
100
less
than
15
percent
selected,
none
of
the
above
in
the
majority
of
those,
so
85
selected
alternative
one
two
or
three,
so
the
majority
of
people
selected
one
two
or
three,
and
then
of
the
fifteen
percent.
Those
people
wrote
responses
and
those
responses
added
up
across
all
of
the
questions.
E
So
the
majority
of
responses
that
we
had
in
the
survey
were
people
who
said
none
of
the
above,
that
they
didn't
like
the
alternatives,
so
that,
therefore
it
is
actually,
even
though
there's
a
large
number
of
responses
across
the
33
questions
of
the
survey.
It
represents
a
minority
of
respondents
overall,
because
the
vast
majority
selected
one
of
the
three
alternatives
they,
they
preferred
one
of
the
three
alternatives
over
none
of
the
above
and
if
they
selected
one
of
the
three
alternatives,
they
were
not
given
the
option
of
writing
a
comment.
J
Okay,
I
mean
really
the
meta
question
here
is
what
what
part
of
the
of
the
analysis
of
the
response
was:
qualitative
versus
quantitative
and-
and
now
I
better
understand
how
you
did
that
this
next
question
is
either
from
mr
town
or
mr
heeher
regarding
measure
e.
Do
I
understand
correctly
that
measure
e
does
in
fact
allow
a
net
increase
in
general
plan
designation,
provided
the
voters
approve
it.
H
Correct
you
know:
measure
e
requires
no
net
increase
in
the
capacity
of
the
general
plan
as
it
existed,
when
measuring
was
passed
in
1996
and
that's
the
81
000.
I
think
it's
81
124
figure
that
that
matt
mentioned
anything
above
that
requires
a
vote
of
the
people.
J
Thanks
for
that
clarification,
I
I
also
want
to
understand
better
the
way
that
general
plan
designations
and
zoning
align
and
don't
align,
and
we
had
this
quest
this
discussion
with
staff
in
the
in
the
past
week
on
email,
but
I
want
to
get
this
on
the
public
record
and
be
sure
that
I
understand
clearly
how
these
two
parts
of
how
we
divvy
up
land
use
or
are
allocated.
J
J
J
H
H
J
And
would
be
rezoned
to
be
within
the
range
given
in
the
general
plan,
designation,
correct,
okay.
So
now,
let's
go
to
a
different
example,
where
there's
a
little
more
ambiguity
again,
these
are
bogus
numbers
but
which
we're
talking
about
ranges.
Here
again
we
have
the
same
hypothetical
range
of
15
to
30
units
in
the
general
plan
designation
and
this
time
the
zoning
is
within
the
range
20
dwelling
units
per
acre,
but
an
applicant
says:
hey
the
range
says
30.
K
Actually,
the
the
range
is
a
practice
that
has
occurred
over
years.
It
is
a
very
common
practice
has
happened,
however.
What's
come
happened
is
new
state
legislature
that
says
that
there
needs
to
be
vertical
alignment
between
the
zoning
and
the
land
use
so
that
ability
to
pick
a
zoning
that
falls
within
the
range
goes
away
because
ab3194
basically
states
that
actually
an
applicant
come
in
and
says
I
want
to
build
at
30
dues
to
the
acre,
regardless
of
what
the
zoning
says
they
get
to
do
that
without
even
rezoning.
K
That's
what
the
state
law
currently
says.
So
that
is
something
that's
new,
so,
yes,
you
can
point
to
probably
many
general
plans
that
still
have
that
range,
but
especially
since
we
are
in
the
lower
range
categories,
it's
really
hard,
but
you
know
it's
it's
basically
government
code.
So
this
is
not
staff's
interpretation.
J
I'm
well
I'll
come
back
to
that.
But
but
my
question
here
is:
I'm
not
asking
about
in
1985
I'm
asking
about
today.
What's
the
point
of
having
a
range,
if
the
answer
is
automatically
going
to
be
the
top
of
the
range.
G
Well,
it's
a
distinction
between
what
the
city
allows
and
what
a
developer
wants.
So
the
purpose
of
having
the
ranges
now
is
that
we
are.
We
are
required
now
to
not
only
specify
a
maximum
density,
but
in
many
cases
we
are
required
to
specify
a
minimum
density.
In
order
for
us
to
get
credit
under
arena
for
our
low
and
very
low
categories,
we
not
only
have
to
allow
a
maximum
density
of
at
least
30
units
an
acre.
We
are
required
to
allow
a
minimum
density
of
20
units
an
acre.
G
So
if
a
developer
comes
in
and
wants
to
build
below
20
units
an
acre
in
that
case,
we
can
say
no,
you
are
not
meeting
the
minimum
if
they
want
to
build
anywhere
between
20
and
30
units,
an
acre,
they
have
the
ability
to
do
that.
They
can't
go
over
30
units,
an
acre
unless
they're
implementing
a
density
bonus
or
something
like
that.
G
But
if
the
zoning
that's
on
the
ground
is
somewhere
in
between
that
20
and
30
units,
an
acre
they,
they
can
still
request
to
build
and
we
have
to
allow
them
to
build
30
units,
an
acre,
which
is
why
it's
important
to
have
the
zoning
and
the
general
plan
consistent.
So
the
purpose
of
the
range
is
to
to
provide
the
minimum
and
the
maximum.
We
always
go
to
the
maximum,
because
that's
for
the
purpose
of
calculating
the
capacity
of
the
city
under
measure
e,
we
have
to
calculate
the
overall
maximum
capacity.
G
J
Are
you
familiar
with
this?
This
came
in
in
the
supplemental
packet
and
I
printed
it
out.
This
is
the
decision
matrix
for
the
housing,
the
housing
accountability
act
in
2018..
J
J
I'm
sure,
I'm
sure,
as
planners
you,
you
work
with
this
table
all
the
time
in
the
lower
right
of
the
matrix
there's
a
the
final
set
of
questions
is:
does
the
project
meet
general
plan
standards,
but
zoning
is
inconsistent
with
the
general
plan
and
if
the
answer
is
yes,
it
meets
general
plan
standards,
but
it's
inconsistent
with
the
general
plan.
J
If
the
answer
is
yes,
the
project,
according
to
this
matrix
is
found
to
be
consistent
with
zoning,
and
if
it's
no,
there
needs
to
be
written
documentation
of
the
inconsistency.
So
I'm
having
a
hard
time
reconciling
what
this
matrix
says
and
the
response
that
you
just
gave
one
one
says
that,
as
long
as
zoning
is
consistent
with
the
general
plan
designation,
it's
okay
and
the
other
more
recent
interpretation
is
that
no
it's
always
got
to
go
up
to
the
top
of
the
range,
no
matter
what
the
range
given
in
the
designation
is.
G
Well,
like
many
documents
produced
by
the
state,
that's
a
lot
of
things
are
not
always
clear
and
you
need
a
lot
of
planners
and
attorneys
to
figure
out
what
it
says.
What
that
document
is
saying
is
that,
even
though,
on
paper,
it
may
be
inconsistent
with
the
zoning,
we
are
compelled
to
find
it
consistent
with
the
zoning.
So
what
it,
what
that
flow
chart
is
saying,
is
as
long
as
it's
consistent
with
the
general
plan.
The
city
must
consider
it
consistent
with
the
zoning
and
not
force
the
applicant
to
go
through
a
rezone
process.
G
So
it's
not
it's.
This
isn't.
I
know,
there's
the
the
comment
letter
that
that
came
with
talks
a
lot
about
the
the
definition
of
consistent
and
inconsistent
and
how
staff
has
interpreted
that
you
know
I'll
tell
you
that
this
is
how
it
is
in
being
being
interpreted
at
the
state
level
by
attorneys
and
by
hcd,
and
I
I
fear,
we're
getting
a
little
bit
off
into
the
weeds
on
a
on
a
topic.
J
J
I
do
I
do
want
to
ask
one
more
question
about
this.
Matrix,
though,
is
this
still
in
effect,
or
is
this
superseded
by
any
current
law?
Is
this
still
a
tool
that
uses.
G
J
This
is,
this
is
cda's
september
2020,
update
of
the
housing
accountability
act.
M
Nice,
chair
newman,
I'm
not
aware
of
any
change
at
this
time,
except
that
your
your
the
document
that
you
showed
up
had
an
error
on
there
on
the
right
side
panel.
That's
not
on
the
matrix
that
I've
seen
from
the
september
2020
version
matrix,
but
what
I
will
say.
J
M
I
I
think
it's
also
important,
mr
newman
to
just
go
back,
as
I
think
mr
bus
was
mentioning
that
what
we're
doing
today
is
a
is
a
general
plan
of
memory,
we're
not
talking
about
the
zoning
at
this
point
and
in
fact,
once
we
go
through
this
process
through
the
general
plan,
we
are
going
to
have
to
revisit
all
these
other
factors,
including
our
zoning,
to
ensure
that
the
zoning
remains
consistent
with
their
general
plan.
M
So
as
as
mr
town
mentioned
and
and
mr
ramy
mentioned,
of
course,
we
have
to
have
the
general
plan
and
everything-
that's
a
top
regulate
land
regulation
document,
and
then
everything
else
has
to
be
consistent
with
that.
So
there
is
inconsistencies
after
we
adopt
the
general
plan,
then
we
make
those
zoning
changes
to
reflect
to
ensure
that
they
are
consistent.
M
Go
ahead,
I'm
sorry,
no
just
at
times
over
time
period
of
time.
This
is
an
example
of
the
general
plan
where
sometimes
things
are
not
built
to
this
to
the
capacity
that
is
allowed
in
the
general
plan,
and
that's
one
of
the
functions
that
we're
doing
now
is
we're
doing
this
analysis
to
ensure
that
our
new
general
plan
is
is
is
showing
what
is
there
now
and
then
what
we
want
in
the
future.
J
Okay,
so
let's
tie
this
to
the
proposed
changes
to
the
to
the
general
plan
in
the
neighborhood
low
category
right
now
that
has
a
range
of
2
ru
to
6
ru
and
that's
that's
an
increase
from
the
existing
low
designation,
which
goes
tops
out
at
4.5.
J
The
plan
doesn't
show
the
work
for
that,
but
if
it's
going
to
be
at
six
and
the
sales
pitch
for
this
whole
thing
said-
and
I'm
quoting
here,
the
city
will
quote:
protect
single-family
neighborhoods
and
quote
reduce
development
capacity
in
single-family
neighborhoods
by
transferring
this
capacity
to
other
areas
in
the
city,
without
showing
the
work
and
and
giving
designations
that
are
higher,
not
the
same
or
lower,
and
given
that
you've
just
explained
in
great
detail
how
staff
will
max
out
to
the
top
of
the
general
plan
designation.
J
M
Sure
so
I'll,
let
other
staff
members
jump
in
on
that
in
a
minute
about
this,
I
do
want
to.
You
know,
comment
that
this
is
you
know
this
whole
process
that
we've
been
doing
over
the
last
18
months.
You
know
when
you
say
sales
pitch,
I'm
a
little
bit
wary
of
using
that
term,
just
because
we
have
had
a
lot
of
people
respond
to
the
surveys,
a
lot
of
people
being
invested
in
doing
the
work
and
commenting
and
and
and
giving
their
time
to
to
give
us
information.
M
M
As
we
said
from
the
very
beginning,
we
know
that
the
arena
number-
and
we
know
the
measure
e
total
and
so
what
we
said
and
it's
in
the
staff
report-
and
it's
been
said
multiple
times.
We
know
that
we
can't
exceed
the
81
000
under
measure
e,
and
this
plan
does
not
do
that.
In
fact,
this
plan
is
much
less
than
the
measuring.
So
I
understand
that
you
want
to
see
the
math,
but
we're
I
think
it
gives
back
to.
M
We
need
to
see
what's
going
to
be
put
on
the
land
use
alternative
first,
and
that
helps
us
understand
how
many
units
we
take
from
the
residential
and
then
after
that
we
take
it
from
the
residential
areas
and
ensure
that
we
do
not
reach
that
capacity
of
81
000..
M
G
The
mark,
I
see
you
starting
to
talk
to
but
I'll
say
one
I'll
say
one
thing,
and
then
let
you
take
it.
The
subcategories
that
we've
discussed
and
that
are
proposed,
those
will
be
their
own
general
plan,
land
use
designations.
So
when
we
talk
about
the
top
of
range,
we
will
be
using
for
the
purposes
of
calculating
capacity,
the
top
of
range
within
those
subcategories.
It
won't
be
six
it'll
be
four
and
a
half
or
whatever
those
subcategories
are
for
the
purposes
calling
saying
calling
them.
G
E
What,
if
I'm
just
going
to
ask
a
question,
I'm
sorry
to
interrupt.
Are
you
and
I
I'm
just-
I
want
to
try
and
like
understand
where
we're
trying
what
your
question
is.
Ultimately,
so
we
can
try
and
what
the
concern
is
ultimately
is
the
concern
that
that
what
we're
doing
is
up
zoning
single-family
residential
areas
to
have
higher
density.
J
That's
not
a
concern.
I'm
stating
flat
out
there's
no
way
even
the
math,
that
you've
shown
that
you
can
avoid
up
zoning
some.
What
some
percentage
of
neighborhoods
that
are
currently
low,
yeah
and
further
you've
done
the
math
on
the
destination
side
of
this
equation.
You've
brought
you've
given
the
breakouts
in
the
areas
of
change.
J
E
Yeah,
and
so
let
me
let
me
see
if
I
can
help
assuage
some
of
the
of
the
concern
in
the
question
that
you
have
with
this,
which
is
when,
with
the
the
looking
at
at
the
land
use
designations
in
the
residential
areas,
we
went
in
and
looked
at
what
the
actual
densities
are
on
the
ground
for
what
is
built
right
now.
E
So
what
we
found
is
that
there
were
areas
that
were
that
had
a
designation
of
four
and
a
half,
but
that
actually
are
more
at
six
twelve
units
per
acre
and
the
reason
that
happened
is
because,
when
these
larger
subdivisions
were
built,
they
were
built
with
an
average
of
four
and
a
half
units,
an
acre
with
some
higher
and
some
lower.
E
And
so
what
we're
essentially
going
in
and
doing,
is
going
up
and
down
in
some
of
these
areas
to
write
to
identify
what
the
current
built
density
is
and
match
it
to
that.
And
so
that's
what
we're
trying
to
do,
and
so
what
we
actually
found
when
we
did
this
is
that
there
were
actually
some
areas
that
were
that
were
overbuilt.
That
actually
are
like
parcels
and
neighborhoods.
E
That
actually
had
a
higher
density
than
what
the
land
use
designation
was
and
some
that
were
lower,
so
we're
trying
to
go
through
and
it's
a
little
bit
of
a
cleanup
to
sort
of
right-size.
Some
of
this.
The
other
point
to
make
is-
and
I
understand
your
point
about
in
order
to
figure
out
what
we're
saying
yes
to
in
the
areas
of
change,
we
have
to
see
what
the
the
map
looks
like
for
the
neighborhoods.
I
I
understand
what
you're
saying
the
challenge
that
we
have.
J
E
And
I'll
just
say
what
what
we've
done
is:
we've
gone
through
and
and
looked
at
it
to
try
and
right
size
for
what
the
existing
land
use
density
is
on
the
ground
right
now
it
is
actually
a
very
difficult
process
and
it's
a
very
time-consuming
process
to
go
through
and
do
that
when
we
know
that
there
are
going
to
be
changes
to
the
areas
of
change
which
could
dramatically
change
the
numbers,
and
so
our
process
overall
has
always
been
to
look
at
those
areas
of
change
and
figure
out
the
vision
that
this
community
wants
for
the
oaks
mall
for
jan's
marketplace
for
thousand
oaks
boulevard,
and
once
we
know
that
vision
that
gives
us
the
information
that
we
need
to
go
and
modify
the
designations
in
the
other
areas.
E
J
E
Yeah
and
I
think
it's
going
to
shift
and
that's
why
we're
like
we're.
We
know
that
that
number
is
going
to
shift
and
it's
going
to
move
around,
which
is
why
we're
concerned
to
like
just
say
this
is
what
it
is,
because
it
might
change
in
a
little
bit.
So
that's
why
we
created
the
range
of
designations
so
that
we
could
do
that
and
and
we're
not
trying
to
you
know,
pull
the
wool
over
people's
eyes,
we're
just
trying
to
get
it
so
that
we
know
that
they're
going
to
be
in
that
range.
E
We
know
it's
in
the
range
now,
but
we
just
don't
know
the
exact
number,
because
we
don't
know
how
much
it
is.
J
H
And
if
I
could
just
just
chime
in
and
and
we
will
do
that,
commissioner
newman
as
we
did
in
2017
when
we
identified
the
source,
you
know
neighborhoods
for
that
5400
rolling
unit
figure
that
you
mentioned
only
20
of
which
was
ultimately
chosen
by
council
to
actually
reallocate,
but
we
will
do
that
as
as
we
did
before
and
as
is
on
our
website
right
now,
the
focus
is
to
figure
out
what
is
the
what
is
sort
of
the
target
capacity
and
then
once
we
know
that-
and
I
imagine
like
I
said
earlier-
it's
going
to
be
less
than
the
22
000.
H
That's
a
starting
point,
then
we'll
know
exactly
how
many
units
we
need
from
other
areas
to
calibrate
those
those
densities
in
our
general
plan
to
match
as
built.
But
to
do
it
now,
as
matt
said,
it
would
take
a
lot
of
effort
and
we
don't
know
exactly
where
our
target
is.
Until
we
move
till
this
land
use
map
is
refined
based
on
your
input
tonight
council's
input,
we
don't
know
exactly
what
that
target
number
is
right
now.
J
Okay,
I'm
a
little
skeptical
in
that
in
that
you
know
in
general
terms,
you
know
in
general
terms
that
there
are
available
units
elsewhere.
Mr
mr
ramy
said
something
about
there
are.
There
are
neighborhoods
that
are
overbuilt,
so
there
is
at
least
some
general
sense
of
how
much
could
be
pulled
and
there's
very
detailed
sense
within
the
areas
of
change
of
how
that
would
break
out.
A
I
think
we're
pretty
clear
at
this
point
that
we
don't
want
to
have
that
discussion
until
we
know
how
much
we
want
to
pull
from
the
neighborhood
is
what
they're
saying.
E
A
E
I
I
just
want
to
say
that
you
know
we're
really
doing
this
push
right
now,
because
we're
trying
to
get
to
the
point
where
we
can
do
the
housing
and
so
that
the
the
designations
in
the
neighborhoods
actually
have
a
little
more
flexibility
about
when
that
decision
gets
made.
J
Okay,
so
last
question,
then,
on
that
on
that
word
flexibility.
I
heard
that
requested
quite
a
lot
in
wednesday's
meeting,
which
I
watched
that
this
is
the
community
workshop
slash
gpac
meeting
there
were
multiple
people
who
asked
for
more
flexibility,
and
my
question
to
you
is:
what
is
your
understanding
of
the
definition
of
that
term?
Is
it
just
more
density,
or
is
it
something
beyond
that.
J
E
I
I
think,
I
think
it
means
I
think
it
meant
different
things
in
different
situations.
I
think
that
in
some
areas
it
wasn't
necessarily
just
about
more
density.
It
was,
it
was
maybe
where
that
density
goes,
and
flexibility
and
heights
in
certain
areas.
E
So,
for
example,
the
oaks
mall
could
have
a
lower
overall
density,
but
there
might
be
certain
actual
parcels
on
it
that
are
higher
density,
so
we
might
have
a
low
like
a
20
units,
an
acre
average
overall,
but
you
might
have
some
parcels
that
are
you
know,
40
or
50
units,
an
acre
and
taller
buildings,
and
so
the
idea
was
that
if
you
have
that
flexibility,
whereas
overall
it's
the
same,
but
you
have
flexibility
within
a
project
that
that
that
actually
gives
the
property
owner
more
to
work
with
in
terms
of
coming
up
with
a
really
good
project.
E
So
that's
what
I
understood
that
it
meant
in
some
places
in
others.
I
understood
that
people
wanted
mixed
use
in
certain
areas
because
they
wanted
the
flexibility
to
potentially
add
residential,
and
I
think
that
came
up
with
the
changes
that
we
made
on
thousand
oaks
boulevard
in
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
specific
plan
in
the
areas
that
were
mixed
use
that
we
proposed
putting
to
commercial,
and
so
I
think
the
request
in
that
kind
of
flexibility
was
those
parcels
had
flexibility
to
be
commercial
or
residential
or
mixed
use.
E
A
Thank
you,
mr
newman.
Did
any
of
the
other
commissioners
have
questions
at
this
point.
A
So
you
no
questions
at
this
time,
though.
Okay,
any
questions
at
this
time.
I
believe
commissioner
lansin
has
another
question.
C
Just
to
briefly
share
bus,
if
I
can
in
your
materials
on
the
staff
report
and
again
by
the
way,
I
know
a
lot
of
people
online.
A
lot
of
comments.
I've
seen
are
concerned
about
having
our
density
obviously
increase
exponentially.
Your
staff
report
indicates
that
maximum
residential
capacity
reaching
that
number
is
unrealistic.
H
H
You
know
slopes
over
25
percent
oak
trees,
parking
requirements,
setbacks,
height
limits,
the
actual
then,
as
built
density,
is
not
at
the
maximum.
Sometimes
it
is
but
many
times
it's
not,
and
that's
that's
the
situation
that
we
found
when
we
did
the
measuring
analysis
four
years
ago
and
found
that
that
the
majority
of
the
city
in
fact
was
under
built,
quote
unquote.
It
was
built
at
lower
than
maximum
densities.
H
I
don't
know
if
you
know,
michael
or
matt,
want
to
augment
that
that
comment,
but
yeah,
that's
been
my
experience.
The.
E
Only
the
only
augmentation
is
that
there
are
lots
of
parcels
that
are
that
may
be
mixed
use.
However,
it
has
a
and
a
lot
of
these
have
an
existing
use
on
them,
and
the
economics
are
just
not
there
in
order
to
redevelop
that
parcel.
So
if
you
have
a
single
story,
retail
building
that
is
currently
vibrant,
it's
rented
it's
been
paid.
The
families
owned
it
for
years,
but
it
allows
30
units
an
acre
on
it
or
even
45
units,
there's
nothing
to
take
down.
E
Oh
really,
is
this
better
yeah,
that's
much
better!
Okay!
So,
in
order
to
meet
that
max
in
order
to
reach
that
build
out,
every
single
parcel
in
the
city
would
need
to
redevelop
to
the
maximum
amount.
And
if
you
look
around
the
city,
you
know
the
likelihood
of
that
happening
is
pretty
much.
H
There
have
been
in
terms
of
that
have
gone
forward.
We
have
the
lupe's
project,
36
units,
the
299
east,
thousands
boulevard
project,
that's
142
units.
We
have
26
condominiums
on
clay
court
and
a
four
unit
apartment
building
across
the
street
from
the
new
clay
court
condominiums.
And
so
that's
it.
That's
about
200
units
since
over
the
last
10
years.
C
So
you
can
again,
it
sounds
like
we
put
plans
down,
but
not
as
many
projects
were
necessarily
convinced,
as
we
probably
anticipated.
H
In
many
cases
it
is,
but
often
it's
not,
and
so
you
know
this
type
of
change
is
incremental
and
and
the
general
plan
is
no
different.
It'll
take
quite
some
time
most
likely
to
you
know
for
it
to
come
to
fruition,
because
there's
so
many
factors
involved,
but
that's
the
the
short
of
it
for
the
downtown
plan.
C
Thank
you,
chair
bus.
I
will
stop
now,
so
everybody
else
has
a
chance
to
comment.
Thank
you,
commissioner.
A
A
I'm
not
going
to
public
comments.
My
understanding
is
at
this
moment.
I
have
42
speakers
wanting
to
speak
because
of
the
significant
number
of
speakers.
We
have
I'm
going
to
limit
comments
to
two
minutes
and
for
each
speaker
I
would
like
you
to
go
ahead
and
state
your
name
and
your
city
of
residence
for
the
records,
so
we
will
begin
with
luke
celarullo
salsa
ruler.
Sorry,.
D
Good
evening,
chair
bus
and
members
of
the
planning
commission,
my
name
is
danielle
borgia.
I
am
president
ceo
of
the
greater
kenichi
valley
chamber
of
commerce,
a
resident
of
thousand
oaks
and
I'm
speaking
tonight
in
reference
to
the
chamber's
letter
submitted
to
the
planning
commission
on
behalf
of
our
executive
committee.
There
were
three
main
themes
in
this
letter:
one
allocate
more
mixed-use
medium
and
add
mixed-use
high
back
to
the
map.
D
The
city's
own
survey
results
indicated
that
70
percent
of
the
respondents
supported
increasing
density
city-wide
to
45
units
per
acre,
which
would
represent
media
mixed-use
density
designation.
They
supported
this
increase
in
density
specifically
to
allow
for
smaller
and
potentially
more
affordable
units.
The
current
amount
of
mixed-use
density
and
removing
the
high
density
altogether
will
not
meet
the
needs
of
our
workforce
housing,
given
our
expanding
biotech
sector
and
will
make
it
much
harder
for
the
city
to
meet
its
affordable
housing
goals.
D
Number
two
provide
more
flexibility
to
the
opportunity
sites
previously
identified
by
the
city
council.
We
are
requesting
the
entirety
of
these
opportunity
sites
as
either
mixed
use,
medium
or
mixed
juice
high
to
provide
these
flex.
This
flexibility
to
these
developers
number
three
moving
housing
designations
from
established
parcels
to
site
that
have
the
most
potential.
It
makes
sense
for
the
city
to
allocate
housing
units
to
places
where
projects
have
real
potential
to
be
built
in
the
near
or
medium-term
future.
D
Allocating
housing
to
sites
that
have
recently
been
developed
are
not
actually
going
to
produce
housing
over
the
next
25
years.
The
density
on
these
sites
are
better
utilized
on
parcels
where
the
ownership
has
the
interest
or
intention
to
build,
including
the
properties
on
thousand
oaks
boulevard
in
the
specific
plan
area
and
the
baxter
site
that
has
already
gone
through
a
pre-screen
for
a
mixed-use
project.
Our
chamber
urges
the
planning
commission
to
give
serious
consideration
to
these
suggestions
when
making
your
recommendations
this
evening.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
ms
borgia.
I
am
remiss.
I
also
want
to
inform
my
fellow
commissioners,
because
this
is
department
of
report
and
public
comments
are
happening.
You
were
actually
allowed
if
you
would
like
to
ask
any
questions
of
any
of
the
public
commenters
before
they
hang
up.
If
you
can
just
put
your
hand
up
on
the
zoom,
so
I
can
see
you
and
I
will
be
sure
to
make
sure
that
you
have
the
opportunity
to
ask
a
question
at
the
end.
A
Following
ms
borgia
is
stephanie
sullivan.
B
Hello,
my
name
is
stephanie
sullivan
and
I
have
been
a
resident
of
thousand
oaks
for
over
10
years.
I
am
calling
on
behalf
of
the
grassroots
organization,
805
resistance
and
have
a
letter
that
I
would
like
to
read
for
the
planning
commission.
We
are
at
a
crossroads.
As
a
community,
we
can
either
choose
purposeful,
progressive
growth
or
stay
stagnant
in
classes
and
elitist
values.
There
has
been
a
growing
fear
heard
during
gpac
meetings
and
seen
in
the
survey
results
regarding
the
land
use
map
that
we're
turning
into
the
valley.
B
The
only
way
that
this
will
happen
is
if
we
do
not
purposely
plan
and
create
flexibility
for
growth,
because
growth
will
happen.
The
san
fernando
valley
did
not
grow
with
purpose.
It
grew
out
of
crisis
and
necessity
without
the
forethought
and
planning
needed
to
support
it.
Along
with
this,
unsubstantiated
fear
of
urban
sprawl
community
members
have
been
voicing
not
in
my
backyard
sentiments
about
more
flexible
zoning.
B
Some
residents
of
newbury
park
are
fervently
against
mixed-use
zoning
at
the
vacant
lot
in
rancho
cane
hill,
which
has
the
most
potential
to
be
built
out
with
care
and
purpose
by
a
lifetime
resident.
Who
cares
deeply
about
the
vision
of
our
city?
We
at
805
resistance
are
asking
that
this
lot
at
rancho
canelo
be
given
complete
mixed
use,
low
to
medium
density
zoning
and
that
any
issue
with
the
community
are
discussed
at
the
project
planning
level
split.
B
Zoning
acts
is
an
immediate
barrier
to
the
potential
of
this
lot,
which
will
prevent
the
ability
for
affordable
housing
due
to
costs
and
divisions
of
plans.
We
also
ask
that
focus
be
shifted
from
rezoning
at
the
oaks
mall
in
the
westlake
village
promenade
and
put
towards
the
village
centers
in
kmart
property.
The
village
centers
are
an
opportunity
to
create
more
housing
for
empty
nesters,
older
citizens
and
younger
professionals,
which
will
create
more
inventory
of
single-family
homes
for
families
looking
to
grow.
B
Increasing
the
density
allowance
at
the
kmart
property
is
also
critical
to
create
more
affordable
housing.
Exclusionary
zoning
perpetuates
segregation.
If
the
city
of
thousand
oaks
is
committed
to
equity
and
racial
justice,
it
will
create
a
new
general
plan
that
allows
for
purposeful
growth,
affordable
housing
and
supporting
folks
of
all
identities.
B
This
letter
has
been
signed
on
by
nearly
50
people
and
is
continuing
to
gain
support,
so
there's
definitely
a
desire
for
this
to
be
addressed.
Matt
ramey
gave
a
very
helpful
overview
of
equity
and
racial
justice.
Thank.
A
You
stephanie
I've
got
you
your
two
minutes.
L
Good
evening,
chairman
bus
and
planning
commissioners,
thank
you
for
allowing
the
time
for
me
to
make
some
comments
on
this
agenda
item.
I
am
here
to
respectfully
request
that
you
reconsider
the
removal
of
the
mixed
high
use
and
the
reduction
of
the
mixed
medium
use
from
this
project
and
consider
reintroducing
those
items.
L
Young
professionals,
group,
and
as
well
as
other
young
professional
communities,
I
believe
it's
important
for
us
to
take
into
consideration
more
housing
options
for
the
young
professionals
and
their
families
that
could
potentially
move
to
the
area
based
off
the
growing
industries
here
and
also
as
a
cal
lutheran
alumni.
I
think
it's
important
that
we
consider
housing
options
for
the
future
graduates,
as
those
are
our
future
community
leaders
and
we
would
love
to
keep
them
here
in
the
community,
so
they
can
contribute
to
the
future
growth
of
our
city.
K
K
Speaking
to
you
guys
tonight
regarding
a
property
located
at
the
northeast
corner
of
lakeview
canyon
in
la
tienda,
commonly
referred
to
as
the
anthem
property,
we
at
greystar
were
partnering
with
union
company,
the
owner
of
that
property
and
several
office
buildings
and
thousand
oaks,
and
we
really
want
to
transform
what
is
now
an
unused
parking
lot
and
potential
residential
housing
development
that
would
serve
the
surrounding
community.
K
We've
shared
conceptual
plans
for
the
project,
with
staff,
who
are
supportive
of
a
residential
use.
We've
gotten
the
direction
that
we
need
to
seek.
The
property's
designation
and
the
land
use
map
alternative
to
allow
for
residential
development
and
in
the
current
alternative,
the
property
has
been
designated
as
industrial.
K
However,
we
believe
strongly
that
the
property's
destination
for
residential
use
would
be
warranted
for
a
couple
main
reasons:
one
the
location's
ideal
for
residential,
as
it
would
be
walkable
to
employers,
services,
retail
options,
providing
much
needed
housing
for
businesses.
Second,
the
property
is
currently
underdeveloped
under
utilized
as
overflow
parking.
K
K
Fifth,
we
would
propose
a
percentage
of
inclusionary,
affordable
housing
alongside
market
rate
units,
and
what
that
really
means
is
that,
given
the
property
that
is
available,
it's
suitable,
it's
feasible
and
extremely
likely
to
be
developed
with
proper
zoning
ultimately
will
assist
the
city
in
actually
meeting
its
arena
allocation
for
the
sixth
cycle,
as
you
guys
just
pointed
out,
many
of
the
sites
earmarked
for
residential
in
the
map
in
its
current
form
will
never
be
built
given
existing
uses
on
site
and
other
land,
topography
and
other
constraints.
So
thank
you
for
your
consideration.
K
B
Thank
you
good
evening.
My
name
is
roseanna
guerra
and
I'm
a
28-year
resident
of
the
city
of
thousand
oaks.
My
purpose
this
evening
is
to
call
attention
to
the
survey
results
through
the
basis
of
the
draft
preferred
land
use.
Although
the
survey
received
over
two
thousand
responses,
my
question
before
the
commission
is
how
many
of
those
two
plus
were
from
our
marginalized
population.
B
Yet
that
particular
designation
did
not
get
many
responses
and
was
left
off
of
the
update
for
residential.
We
are
an
aging
population
where
our
future
will
require
easy,
walkable
access
to
banks,
doctors,
offices,
restaurants,
groceries
and
pharmacies
that
could
be
answered
by
village.
Then
the
village
centers
concept,
if
we
are
to
be
inclusive
as
city
council,
has
placed
as
a
number
one
goal.
A
revisit
to
village
centers
with
a
residential
component
is
needed.
Thank
you.
L
Thank
you,
sir.
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
sir?
Thank
you
hey.
I
wanted
to
thank
all
of
you
for
your
time
and
your
commitment
to
our
community.
First
of
all,
with
the
dedication
you
guys
have
put
out,
is
really
great,
and
I
really
do
appreciate
that.
Secondly,
I'd
like
to
thank
mr
ramyan
associate
and
his
associates
for
the
presentations
they've
done
over
the
last
18
months.
It
really
provided
us
unique
opportunities
to
look
at
our
community
from
a
different
set
of
eyes,
and
I
think
that
was
very,
very
beneficial.
L
L
L
My
children
moved
to
anaheim
because
of
the
lifestyle
there,
the
ability
to
walk
to
local
businesses,
the
ability
to
enjoy
a
community
center
where
they
could
actually
participate
with
others
in
their
community
without
driving
a
car,
and
I
think
it's
really
important
for
us
to
take
that
into
consideration.
As
we
look
into
the
next
25
years
and
say
how
do
we
impact
the
children
who
want
to
remain
in
our
communities?
We
can
do
that
through
affordable
housing.
L
We
can
do
that
through
centers,
like
we're
talking
about.
One
of
the
things
I
was
very
disappointed
about
was
the
fact
that
we
removed
so
much
of
the
higher
density
population
areas,
which
are
something
that
our
younger
generations
are
looking
for,
the
medium
medium
and
mixed
used
areas
where
there's
businesses
close
by
where
people
can
walk
to
them.
K
Hello,
chairman
bus
and
members
of
the
planning
commission,
my
name
is
adam
haverstock
and
I'm
the
director
of
government
affairs
and
tourism
for
the
greater
kaneohe
valley
chamber
of
commerce,
our
board
of
directors
sent
in
a
comment
letter
about
the
preferred
alternative
map.
In
short,
we
believe
that
the
current
map
is
insufficient
to
provide
the
workforce
housing
required
for
the
future
of
our
city,
additional
housing
density
and
more
mixed-use.
K
Zoning
will
allow
for
the
most
flexibility
to
build
workforce
housing
for
the
future
of
thousand
oaks,
but
you
don't
need
to
take
my
word
for
it.
The
city's
staffing
consultants
conducted
a
survey
and
extensive
amounts
of
outreach
to
find
out
residents.
Opinions
on
the
land
use
alternative
maps.
In
fact,
2127
people
responded
to
the
survey.
As
you
know,
land
use
alternative
map
number
one
which
had
the
largest
amount
of
the
mixed
used.
High
designated
parcels
was
not
only
the
chamber's
preference,
but
it
was
also
the
top
choice
of
survey
takers
by
a
huge
margin.
K
Additionally,
an
overwhelming
70
percent
of
survey
takers
said
that
they're,
supportive
of
additional
density
up
to
45
units
per
acre
and
74
of
survey
takers
agree
or
strongly
agree
with
putting
45
units
per
acre
in
the
rancho
caneo
area.
These
are
overwhelmingly
large
numbers
in
support
of
workforce
housing.
A
thousand
oaks,
despite
these
overwhelmingly
supportive
survey
results
staff
decided
to
take
thousands
of
additional
housing
units
off
of
the
map.
This
is
in
direct
opposition
to
the
data
of
the
survey
that
they
themselves
conducted
and
the
staff
have
produced
a
map.
K
That
is
the
direct
opposite
of
what
residents
of
thousand
oaks
have
said.
They
want
luckily
you're
in
a
position
to
fix
this
issue.
Please
add
mixed
use:
high
designation
back
onto
the
map.
Please
put
the
thousands
of
units
that
were
taken
away
back
onto
the
map
as
well.
Our
recommendation
would
be
to
put
additional
density
in
the
city's
identified
opportunity
sites,
as
approved
by
the
city
council
in
the
2017
economic
development
strategic
plan.
They
approved
that
plan
on
a
5-0
vote,
so
it
stands
to
reason
that
they
support
economic
development
in
these
opportunities
sites.
K
I
Floor,
thank
you
good
evening,
chair
bus
and
commissioners,
my
name's
tom
cohen,
I'm
a
60-year
resident
of
thousand
oaks.
A
thousand
oaks
was
a
small
time,
a
small
town.
At
one
time
I
I
was
born
here
there
were
ten
thousand
residents.
I
I
Our
businesses
have
suffered
greatly.
We
now
have
the
chance
to
address
this
through
our
general
plan
update
and
what
is
proposed
responsibly
addresses
it
by
limiting
future
housing
opportunities
outside
of
our
residential
neighborhoods
and
based
on
review
of
the
preferred
land
use
map.
I
think
we're
missing
some
opportunities.
I
I
A
Mr
cohen,
you've
reached
the
end
of
your
two
minutes.
Sir.
Thank
you
all
right.
Our
next
speaker
is
karen
wilburn.
D
J
I
do
have
a
speaker
card
in
she
has
one
in
also
you
got
just
you
got
your
wires
crossed.
A
Yeah,
it
looks
like
it,
I
guess
we'll
go
ahead
and
reset
your
time.
You
are
going.
D
D
Hello
neighbors,
I'm
scott
horn.
I
live
in
newbury
park.
My
family
moved
to
the
canelo
in
71..
I
am
a
newbie
park.
High
school
alumni
class
of
79
go
panthers.
I
moved
back
to
the
canada
valley
after
college
as
soon
as
I
could,
because
I
knew
this
was
the
best
place
to
live.
I
am
thankful
to
own
a
home
in
newbury
park
and
I'm.
J
D
Area
is
flowed
as
as
as
a
flood
plain
hundreds
of
homeowners
in
the
area
must
have
flood
insurance.
It's
not
a
good
idea
to
build
multi-story
commercial
residential
properties
in
a
flood
zone.
What
are
you
thinking,
let
alone
at
the
preposterous
densities
you
are
being
considered.
You
know,
ventura
county
has
easements
on
this
property,
and
so
does
the
city
in
2000
a
federally
funded
study
released
the
cliegus
creek
watershed.
Wetlands
restoration
plan.
D
J
It's
zoned
r1,
the
city
owns,
have
shown
that
even
after
extensive
flood
issue
mitigation,
the
property
couldn't
handle
nearly
all
of
the
homes.
It's
zoned
for.
D
J
I
thank
you
for
your
time
and
you
guys
have
got
a
lot
of
storm
coming.
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
stop
time.
Mr
horn,
I
just
want
to
check
and
see
if
we've
got
karen
wilburn
this
time.
D
L
L
L
Thank
you.
My
name
is
karen
wilburn.
I
live
in
newberry
park,
I'm
also
a
member
of
canelo
valley
advocates
for
sensible
planning.
I
noticed
that
mr
ramey
has
been
asked
several
times
by
myself
and
by
commissioner
newman
for
the
actual
number
of
additional
units
that
are
moving
into
the
areas
of
change.
We
know
now
that
it's
22
000
units
total
in
the
areas
of
change,
but
we
still
don't
know
how
many
of
these
are
additional
units
based
on
the
staff
report
that
was
just
released.
L
There
are
about
15
000
units
in
the
areas
of
change
that
are
mixed
use
and
since
we
don't
have
much
mixed
use,
I
think
it's
a
pretty
safe
assumption
that
those
are
going
to
be
additional
units.
So
let
me
state
that
another
way
the
new
map
could
potentially
result
in
15
000,
additional
housing
units
in
an
area
of
484
acres
or
3
percent
of
our
city.
This
is
not
the
vision
of
thousand
oaks
or
measure
e
was
founded
on
now.
As
a
at
our
group.
L
We
understand
the
need
for
more
housing
and
affordable
housing
and
the
state
requirements.
We
don't
have
a
problem
with
that.
What
we
don't
understand
is
why
are
we
taking
such
drastic
measures
that
could
move
fifteen
thousand
unbuilt
units
into
four
small
areas?
Once
we've
made
these
changes,
the
state
may
pass
more
laws
to
prevent
us
from
going
back.
It's
like
someone
is
asking
us
to
to
let,
if
that's
like
someone
is
asking
to
borrow
ten
thousand
dollars
and
we're
saying
hey.
Let
me
give
you
fifty
thousand.
L
The
changes
to
the
general
plan
should
be
done
gradually
over
time,
and
the
city
must
absolutely
put
the
developers
feet
to
the
fire
regarding
low
income
units.
If
they
don't
provide
them,
projects
should
not
be
approved.
Our
group
believes
in
sensible
planning
for
all
areas,
but
I
do
want
to
comment
on
newberry
park.
In
particular,
I
provided
the
commission
with
a
google
earth
picture
of
newberry
park,
demonstrating
just
how
much
development
has
taken
place
in
this
part
of
the
city
since
1994..
L
L
L
Thank
you
good
evening.
Everyone,
my
name
is
cindy
and
I'm
the
founder
and
chief
advocate
of
we
belong
805.,
we're
a
grassroots
organization
advocating
for
access
representation
for
people
with
disabilities
in
our
community.
I'm
speaking
tonight
to
ask
you
all
to
recommend
that
our
council
include
higher
density
that
will
allow
for
housing
that
is
actually
affordable,
as
well
as
add
back
the
village
centers
as
part
of
their
next
draft
for
the
alternative
land
use
maps.
L
L
L
This
process,
regardless
of
the
final
outcome,
we
must
remain
intact
as
a
community
to
do
so.
I
encourage
everyone
to
approach
this
process
with
a
mindset
of
abundance.
A
community
table
is
big
enough
for
all
of
us.
Equity
and
access
for
all
should
not
be
an
existential
threat.
We
must
traffic
in
facts,
not
fear,
engage
respectfully
with
our
enablers,
not
with
disdain
community,
not
othering.
We
are
ho
strong.
Let's
let
that
guide
our
actions
and
approach
as
we
continue
the
process.
Thank
you.
So
much.
A
D
B
D
Look
more
closely
at
what
the
people
who
live
in
the
various
age,
areas
of
change
and
surrounding
areas
actually
would
like
to
see
in
those
areas
of
change.
So
far,
I
don't
believe
that
data
has
been
produced.
I
would
like
to
see
that,
for
both
the
survey
that
was
completed
and
the
one
that
is
in
progress
would
that
the
current
survey
had
a
space
to
put
in
any
other
comments.
That
would
have
been
great,
but
we
have
multiple
choice.
D
I've
been
trying
to
figure
out
a
way
that
we
can
get
to
win-win.
In
this
set
of
circumstances,
I
would
like
to
suggest
that
in
the
industrial
loop
in
the
rancho
conejo
area
of
change
that
you
allow
for
some
development
or
mixed
use
in
the
way
of
being
able
to
put
things
like
tarantula
hill
to
or
maybe
a
new
borderline,
those
kinds
of
facilities
to
be
incorporated
in
some
of
the
large
industrial
zones
that
are
being
put
up
putting
entertainment
into
industrial
areas
has
become
a
popular
concept.
D
You
can
see
it
over
in
via
colinas
to
our
east,
it's
happening
in
camarillo
and
many
other
places.
The
square
footage
is
inexpensive
for
them.
The
noise
from
those
kinds
of
places
in
the
late
night
life
does
not
disrupt
quiet,
residential
neighborhoods.
It's
a
great
way
to
make
more
better
use
of
our
industrial
and
flex,
areas
that
are
happening
and
buildings
are
going
up,
and
those
kinds
of
things
could
also
be
good
tenants
for
the
developers
of
those
projects
over
on
the
north
side
of
the
freeway.
D
It
would
satisfy
a
lot
more
of
the
needs
for
the
people
who
want
more
commercial
and
entertainment
venues,
and
it
would
not
put
so
much
of
a
burden
on
those
of
us
who
live
in
quiet,
residential
neighborhoods
as
to
the
alice
property.
We
have
a
very
special
opportunity
with
alice
because
it
has
wildlife.
It
has
thank.
A
You
very
much
mrs
zimmerman
all
right.
Our
next
speaker
is,
I
just
have
a
first
name.
I
Good
evening
my
name
is
clint
and
I'm
a
renter
here
in
thousand
oaks.
I'm
also
a
founding
member
of
the
canao
climate
coalition.
I'd
like
to
frame
my
comments
by
starting
with
some
relative
relevant
statistics.
Ventura
county's
average
temperature
has
increased
4.7
degrees
since
1895,
making
ours
the
fastest
warming
county
in
the
continental.
I
Climate
coalition
has
a
vision
for
more
people-centric
walkable
connected
thousand
oaks.
The
vision
for
neighborhood
town
squares
will
facilitate
reductions
in
vehicle
miles
traveled
and
greenhouse
gas
emissions,
while
simultaneously
increasing
housing
that
is
actually
affordable.
The
neighborhood
town
squares
concept
could
come
to
life
at
the
jans
marketplace,
oaks,
mall
and
existing
village
centers.
These
areas
could
be
zoned
for
mixed
use,
which
would
allow
for
increased
housing
opportunities.
I
The
benefits
of
more
broadly
distributed
and
diverse
housing
stock
would
be
housing
that
is
affordable
by
design
a
reduced
concentration
of
development
along
the
main
artery
of
thousand
oaks
boulevard
would
result
in
less
traffic
congestion,
less
potential
spillover
parking
into
adjacent
neighborhoods
and
faster,
safer
egress.
During
disaster.
Evacuation
situations,
you
would
carry
the
creation
of
walkable
areas
where
more
residents
can
accomplish
their
routine
errands
without
driving,
would
result
in
reduced
vehicle
miles,
traveled
fewer
greenhouse
gas
emissions,
less
air
pollution
and
improved
health
outcomes
using
existing.
A
K
You're
care,
bus
and
members
of
the
planning
commission,
my
name
is
don
phillipson
and
I've
lived
in
newport
park
since
1979.,
and
this
issue
is
close
to
my
heart
because
subjectively
speaking,
I
raised
three
kids
here,
my
wife
and
I
did
and
we
just
loved
the
thought
of
them
settling
down
here
and
unfortunately,
two
of
them
cannot
because
of
the
affordable
housing
issue.
K
My
son
did
and
that
just
warms
my
heart
with
my
grandson
there,
but
from
a
more
objective
perspective,
I
see
the
issue
as
a
business
owner
since
1989
I've
owned
or
combed
three
businesses,
and
during
that
time
my
partners
and
I
have
hired
well
over
40
employees,
although
these
were
relatively
high,
paying
jobs
in
advertising
and
marketing,
fewer
than
half
of
our
employees
could
afford
to
live
in
our
community,
so
they
commuted
burning
their
valuable
personal
time
on
the
freeway
and
contributing
to
traffic
congestion
in
our
valley.
K
A
second
on
from
another
perspective.
I
see
the
issue
from
the
the
view
of
the
chamber
of
commerce.
I
joined
the
chamber
in
2004
and
I've
served
as
an
ambassador
and
in
2019
as
chairman
of
the
board.
In
that
time,
I've
become
acquainted
with
literally
hundreds
of
business
owners
who
virtually
all
agree,
the
lack
of
affordable
housing.
Our
area
makes
finding
attractive
and
attracting
employees
at
virtually
any
pay
level
more
difficult.
K
L
Hi,
I'm
I'm
a
40-year
resident
thousand
oaks
and
I'm
also
the
secretary
of
thousands
boulevard
association,
which
is
generally
referred
to
as
toba
about
20
years
ago.
Tobo
was
looking
at
the
city's
attitude
surveys,
which
repeatedly
every
year
seemed
to
say
the
number
one
goal
in
the
community
should
be
upgrading
thousand
notes
boulevard
we
got
together.
We
try
to
decide
how
best
to
do
that
and
we
felt
one
of
the
best
ways
to
do.
That
is
to
create
a
motivation
for
the
property
owners
to
upgrade
their
properties.
L
And
we
said
one
of
the
key
tools
is
to
create
a
specific
plan.
We
wanted
to
create
our
own
specific
plan.
L
We
didn't
want
to
have
the
city,
hire
a
consultant
and
tell
us
what's
best
for
our
properties,
so
we
created,
what's
called
a
business
improvement
district
where
all
the
properties
within
the
boulevard,
commercial
properties
within
the
boulevard
pay
an
assessment
every
year
and
the
goal
was
to
basically
create
this
specific
plan
that
would
have
mixed
use
in
it
and
why
mixed
use,
because
mixed
use
will
bring
customers
to
our
all
our
members,
attendance
and
businesses.
L
So
we
created
that
specific
plan.
The
city
council
approved
that
specific
plan,
and
now
for
about
20
years,
the
commercial
property
owners
have
been
paying
thousands
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
for
the
equal
and
the
same
right
for
every
parcel
along
the
boulevard
to
do
a
mixed-use
project
if
they
felt
it
was
justified.
L
I
agree
there
are
some
are
very
small,
but
one
of
the
main
concepts
of
redevelopment
was
to
gather
properties
and
make
them
larger.
So
I
don't
have
a
crystal
ball.
I
don't
know
which
properties
are
going
to
be
mixed
use,
but
I'm
here
to
ask
for
fairness
and
an
equal
opportunity
for
all
the
property
owners
along
the
boulevard
that
have
paid
so
much
for
that
over
the
years.
A
I
B
I'm
lisa
powell
16-year
resident
of
thousand
oaks
and
my
comments
tonight
are
geared
for
the
community
as
well
as
our
commissioners.
Thank
you
for
your
service.
We
are
not
going
to
become
the
valley.
The
proposed
changes
in
the
map
refer
to
eight
percent
of
the
available
land.
Here
in
the
city,
there
is
no
density
for
high-rise
buildings.
The
open
space
and
single-family
housing
stay.
B
B
Luckily,
there's
a
lot
of
research
on
these
topics
of
growth
and
development
and
planning
on
the
truths
of
mixed-use
development
and
affordable
housing
that
can
help.
You
inform
you
as
to
why
it's
a
really
good
thing
for
thousand
oaks
to
build
more
housing,
including
mixed-use
development
and
affordable
housing,
and
I
include
the
village
center
concept
and
alice
parcel
and
thousand
oaks
and
dance
malls
when
thinking
about
mixed
use.
B
Let's
ensure
that
thousand
oaks
is
a
welcoming
and
wonderful
place
to
live
for
all
backgrounds,
ages,
abilities
and
income
levels
for
the
next
50
years
by
being
forward
thinking
in
the
final
land
use
map
decision,
given
our
demographics
and
a
very
different
world
than
when
thousand
oaks
was
developed
several
decades
ago,
we
must
grow
and
develop
to
keep
our
city
sustainable
and
healthy
as
well
as
to
make
it
more
equitable.
Thank
you.
B
Yes,
thank
you.
I
thought
the
little
box
would
appear
before
I
started
speaking
chairman
bus
planning,
commissioners
staff
and
fellow
residents
of
thousand
oaks.
My
name
is
marianne
vanzile
and
I'm
an
18-year
resident
of
the
west
lake
village
portion
of
thousand
oaks.
I
speak
tonight
in
support
of
the
reimagining
of
our
older
neighborhood
shopping
centers
as
village
centers,
allowing
mixed-use
development
and
pockets
throughout
the
facility
city
will
be
great
for
the
livability
of
thousand
oaks.
For
many
reasons
they
will
become
gathering
places
where
we
can
rebuild
a
sense
of
neighborhood
community.
B
I
am
a
walker
and
a
bicyclist,
and
I
train
my
kids
to
be
bike.
Riders
in
the
city,
but
one
of
the
drawbacks
of
the
development
style
of
the
1960s
and
70s
was
its
street
layout.
We
have
neighborhoods
filled
with
cul-de-sacs,
surrounded
by
fast-moving
arterials
village.
Centers
can
be
anchor
points
for
bike
lanes,
wider
sidewalks
transit
networks
that
allow
us
to
get
out
of
our
cars,
which
are
good
for
the
bicyclists
and
the
kids
walking
to
school.
B
I
I
was
just
very
disappointed
when
they
came
off
of
the
plan
and
I
hope
you
will
consider
recommending
to
city
council
that
village
centers
be
put
back
on
the
land
use
plan.
Thank
you.
L
L
California's
most
significant
issue
is
our
increasing
unhoused
population
and
it's
running
in
parallel
with
the
planet's
most
significant
threat,
which
is
climate
change,
and
both
matters
live
under
an
umbrella
that
disproportionately
and
systemically
affects
people
of
color,
as
well
as
those
with
disabilities,
both
visible
and
invisible,
and
tonight
we
have
an
opportunity
to
address
both
of
them
in
a
manner
that
is
consistent
with
the
bright
future.
That's
already
ahead
for
an
already
beautiful
city,
but
one
that
doesn't
fail
to
ignore
the
issues
that
are
no
longer
debatable.
L
The
land
use
map,
as
proposed,
removes
one
of
the
most
unique
elements
that
others
have
spoken
on
tonight
that
directly
tackles
both
that
need
for
additional,
affordable
housing,
as
well
as
climate
change
and,
quite
frankly,
just
general
happiness
when
it
comes
to
living
in
this
city,
and
that
is
this
concept.
We've
heard
a
lot
tonight
about
livable
village
centers.
L
I
live
within
walking
distance
of
one
of
the
proposed
sites,
particularly
the
one
at
moorpark
and
arboles,
so
I
do
consider
myself
a
stakeholder
when
it
comes
to
what
comes
next
for
this
neighborhood
and
I
was
like,
like
miss
vanzile
said
I
was
disappointed
to
see
them
come
off
the
proposal.
That's
before
you
tonight,
it's
a
missed
opportunity.
L
Village
centers
provide
that
central
hub
where
we
can
achieve
the
improvement,
walkability,
affordability
and
livability,
and
so
it
is
my
request
that
you
officially
recommend
that
the
livable
village
centers
return
to
the
map
as
it
was.
This
isn't
political,
it's
not
debatable.
It
is
simply
logical
and
we
are
beyond
the
point
where
the
city's
future
will
tolerate
more
missed
opportunities.
I
Good
evening
and
thank
you
planning,
commissioners
and
community
members
who
are
here
at
this
meeting,
I'd
like
to
start
off
by
saying
that
on
friday,
I
spoke
with
sean
muradian
to
learn
more
about
his
plan
for
his
property,
his
family's
property,
that's
known
as
the
wetlands
or
the
alice
property,
and
though
I've
had
some
reservations
about
the
sorry.
My
dogs
are
commenting
on
things
as
well,
but
I've
had
some
reservations
about
the
survey
results.
I
I
have
to
say.
My
sense
is
that
mr
moradian
is
very
concerned
about
his
community's
well-being
and
is
trying
to
develop
the
property
in
a
way
that's
sensitive
to
the
neighbors
concerns
and.
B
I
Next,
I
would
like
to
state
that
the
acorn
article,
which
came
out
today
mentions
that
the
units
that
are
to
be
zoned
for
in
this
plan
have
been
reduced
from
22
or
from
32
000
units
over
a
25-year
span
to
22
000.
I
feel
that
this
is
an
unacceptable
reduction.
I
know
people
are
concerned
about
over
development,
but
the
truth
is,
we
are
all
still
in
a
housing
and
homelessness
crisis
that
has
lasted
for
years
and
will
continue
to
last
until
we
build
enough
housing
and
thousand
oaks
is
part
of
that
village.
I
I
Centers
for
those
who
are
interested
in
learning
more
about
the
missing
middle
types,
daniel
pirolec,
who
originated
the
idea,
is
speaking
at
the
santa
barbara
trust
for
historic
preservation
on
wednesday
may
5th
at
6
p.m,
and
I
encourage
you
to
go
finally
as
to
the
5400
housing
unit
idea
and
the
idea
that
the
general
plan
has
served
our
city
well
for
the
last
50
years.
I
have
to
say
no,
I
don't
think
it
has
and
if
you
really
think
so,
look
at
the
problems,
our
city
and
our
community
have-
and
please
rethink
that.
J
I
do
thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you,
mr
piper,
for
your
comments.
I
just
want
to
be
sure
I
understand
what
you
were
you're
advocating
regarding
reinstatement
of
mixed-use
designations
and
the
village
centers.
Are
you
also
in
favor
of
reinstating
the
village
center
idea
that
was
proposed.
D
Sorry
about
that
hi
guys,
I'm
jess
waihee.
If
you
hear
screaming,
don't
be
alarmed.
It
is
just
my
toddler.
It
is
past
her
bedtime.
I
do
really
appreciate
your
time
tonight.
Thank
you
so
much
to
the
commissioners
to
the
city,
consultants
in
the
city,
honestly,
the
tox
2045
website
has
been
really
helpful
and
I
think
this
whole
process
has
really
given
a
lot
of
opportunities
for
input,
and
so
I
just
want
to
thank
you
for
your
time.
On
that.
I
know
this
is
a
very
divisive
topic.
D
I
am
a
newberry
park
resident.
I
was
born
and
raised
here
and
I'm
now
raising
my
family
here.
I
love
the
open
space
and
the
character
of
our
community
and
I'm
really
glad
that,
after
reviewing
the
land
use
map
alternatives,
that
none
of
the
proposed
elements
will
jeopardize
the
character
of
our
community.
D
So
I
see
that
the
agenda
notes
that
the
recommendation
is
for
the
commission
to
provide
a
recommendation
to
city
council
about
the
latest
preferred
land
use
map.
I
want
to
keep
it
short,
so
I
would
just
hope
to
request
that
the
commission
please
ensure
that
any
land
use
map
respects
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
specific
plan.
D
I
believe
these
businesses,
within
the
bid
have
been
abiding
by
this
council
approved
plan
for
more
than
a
decade
now,
and
I
believe
the
process
must
be
fair
to
these
businesses
and
honor
their
investment
in
this
process
and
as
a
newberry
park
resident.
I
would
also
like
to
request
that
the
property
known
as
the
alice
property
portion
of
rancho
canejo
be
zoned
for
medium
mixed
use.
Our
remaining
undeveloped
parcels
of
land
are
precious
and
as
a
designated
opportunity
site.
D
This
last
largest
parcel
of
undeveloped
land
at
37
acres
can
really
revitalize
our
community
generate
tax
revenue
for
our
city
and
meet
diverse
housing
needs
residential.
Only
zoning
or
split
zoning
will
not
help
our
city
meet
its
needs
and
is
really
the
least
equitable
use
of
this
land.
As
others
have
stated.
I
also
support
bringing
back
the
town
center
concept.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
your
time
tonight.
B
I
have
it
thank
you
for
listening.
My
name
is
johanna
jones,
I'm
a
mental
health
therapist.
I've
been
practicing
in
thousand
oaks
for
just
over
ten
years,
and
I've
lived
here
since
I
was
two,
but
I'm
not
going
to
say
how
many
years
that
was.
I
would
like
the
planning
community
to
look
at
the
general
plan
from
the
perspective
of
mental
health
in
the
original
finding
from
the
remy
group,
it
was
cited
that
the
canelo
valley
had
more
depression
and
rates
of
self-harm
than
in
other
areas
of
the
county.
B
This
may
seem
odd,
but
further,
research
on
this
subject
shows
that
suburban
planning,
gated
communities
and
neighborhoods
that
are
divided
by
socioeconomics
do
lead
to
higher
levels
of
isolation
which
we
know
leads
to
depression
in
our
post-pandemic
world.
We
crave
community
and
connection
the
retail
world
is
failing,
and
the
world
is
changing.
B
It's
up
to
this
commission
and
city
council
to
make
progressive
decisions
that
allows
flexibility
which
commissioner
newman
is
being
defined
as
the
ability
to
use
multiple
spaces,
multiple
ways
over
the
course
of
time
for
the
growth
that
we
want
in
the
next
20
years.
In
order
to
stay
economically
and
mentally
agile,
it
has
been
shown
in
research
that
mixed
use.
Zoning
increases
mental
health
as
there
is
more
access
and
more
beauty
in
the
diversity
of
buildings.
B
It
increases
productivity,
as
one
does
not
have
to
go
so
far
to
have
needs
met
and
proves
to
be
flexible
with
different
types
of
housing
at
different
stages
of
life,
and
it
eliminates
an
asthma
culture.
It
also
creates
a
feeling
of
community
and
values
the
interconnection
of
people.
There
are
limited
areas
that
we
have
as
opportunities
to
plan
purposefully
for
progressive
growth.
For
this
reason,
I
ask
that
you
bring
back
village
centers
the
use
of
the
kmart
property
and
pumpkin
patch
to
medium
mixed-use.
Zoning
move
the
density
away
from
caruso.
B
D
It
also
fulfills
several
of
the
guiding
principles
developed
through
the
consultants
community
engagement
process,
including,
as
the
stated
community
values
of
a
suburban
community.
That's
easy
to
get
around
where
it's
easy
to
live,
work
shop
and
play
the
ability
to
live
here,
regardless
of
income
or
stage
of
life,
a
diversity
of
safe
and
convenient
mobility
options,
a
safe
and
healthy
community
leadership
and
climate
and
environmental
sustainability,
and
an
active
and
involved
community.
D
We
do
this
by
implementing
the
stated
strategies
of
creating
a
diversity
of
housing,
types
and
affordability
levels,
creating
more
meeting
and
gathering
spaces
to
enhance
community
revitalizing
under
utilized
land,
including
the
malls
and
older
shopping
centers,
improving
public
transportation,
including
connections
to
neighbor
neighboring
cities.
Creating
a
complete
and
safe
bicycle
network,
improving
walkability,
pursuing
strategies
to
reduce
the
city's
environmental
impact,
including
ghg
emissions,
reduced
water
use
and
reduced
energy
use
and
protecting
the
city
against
future
natural
or
human-caused
disasters
like
wildfires
and
earthquakes.
D
A
Thank
you,
ms
wood.
I'm
gonna
break
for
a
second
here
and
ask
my
fellow
commissioners
we're
hitting
about
8
30
now,
and
I've
got
roughly
17
speakers
to
go.
Would
you
like
to
take
a
break
now
or
do
you
want
to
go
through
17,
more
speakers
and
then
take
a
break
if
anybody
has
an
opinion
either
way
you
gave.
I
I
I
A
All
right
we
have
all
of
our
commissioners
back,
so
we
will
continue
with
the
public
comments.
Leading
off
will
be
lisa
and
nelity.
Nice.
Sorry,
but
please
you
have
the
floor.
D
Hi,
my
name
is
lisa
safanili.
I
lived
in
thousand
oaks
over
26
years
and
I've
worked
most
of
that
time
serving
the
latino
community
here
in
town
at
running
a
non-profit
for
people
making
minimum
wage.
First.
I'd
like
to
thank
all
of
you
for
the
hard
work
that
you're
doing
it's
real,
I'm
sure
it's
very
challenging.
D
I
love
living
here
and
I
love
hiking.
That's
my
favorite
thing
to
do
and
I
really
appreciate
how
you've
protected
the
open
space
and
kept
this
a
really
great
community
for
all
of
us
in
saying
that
the
community
that
I
serve
is
essential
to
the
healthy
well-being
of
all
of
us
in
our
community
they're
the
people
who
work
at
the
assisted
living
centers
caring
for
our
elders,
our
the
people.
D
At
the
same
time,
making
minimum
wage
is
really
tough
and
I
know
a
lot
of
the
assisted
living
centers.
I've
heard
them
say
they
have
really
tough
time
filling
the
spots
for
the
people
that
they
need
to
care
for
the
elders,
and
so
we
need
to
in
whatever
housing
that
you
plan.
We
need
to
have
enough
housing
set
aside
that
can't
that
that
can
control
that
has
caused
rent
that
is
affordable
for
minimum
wage
earners.
D
So
people
who
don't
have
cars
who
work
in
our
community,
who
can't
afford
to
commute,
we
don't
want
the
traffic
anyway,
have
a
way
to
live
here
and
help
our
community
grow
in
the
future.
So
I'm
hoping
that
there'll
be
a
way
that
you
guys.
I
really
like
your
plan.
I
really
love
the
way
you've
put
made
community
centers
and
I
just
hope
that
you'll
make
sure
that
there's
housing
strictly
designated
for
minimum
wage
earners
in
our
city.
Thank
you.
D
Hi
good
evening,
chair
bus
and
commissioners,
thank
you
for
having
me.
I
love
thousand
oaks
I
was
raised
here.
I
raised
my
four
kids
here.
My
business
is
here.
I
tend
to
do
a
little
volunteer
work
here.
I
would
like
to
part
of
that
volunteer.
Work
is
with
the
chamber,
and
I
want
to
fully
support
what
they're
asking
for
tonight.
D
Please
allocate
and
then
approve
medium
high,
mixed
use
for
the
designated
opportunity
sites,
including
orchard
road.
These
were
approved
in
2017
with
the
fibo
vote,
then
also
look
at
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
specific
plan,
which
is
more
like
a
promise.
It's
a
decade
old
that
these
folks
and
small
business
owners
by
self-assessment
have
been
paying
in
to
be
able
to
do
mixed
use
on
their
properties.
These
are
families
and
small
business
owners
that
made
financial
decisions
based
upon
this
specific
plan,
and
it
should
not
be
changed
that
just
feels
wrong.
D
The
baxter
parcel
and
the
villages,
it's
great.
As
I
said,
I
raised
four
kids
they're
they're
adults.
They
have
good
jobs
and
none
of
them
have
chosen
to
live
here.
Not
everyone
wants
a
red
tile
roof.
They
want
walkability.
They
want
some
of
the
new
things
we
have
to
offer.
So
let's
try
some
new
things.
Some
mixed
use,
some
walkability,
I
love
thousand
oaks.
I
look
forward
to
the
future
vision
where
we
have
new
parks
for
the
new
people.
D
D
D
I
hope
that
this
will
not
be
treated
as
a
state
compliance
exercise
where
we
do
as
little
as
possible,
but
instead
is
an
opportunity
to
take
the
lead
in
enhancing
the
livability
of
our
city.
Tonight
I
am
speaking
to
you
from
the
perspective
of
a
12-year
former
school
board
member.
I
saw
firsthand
how
the
closure
of
elementary
schools
devastated
neighborhoods
I'm
worried
about
the
aging
neighborhoods,
with
their
old-fashioned
shopping
centers
and
their
shrinking
school
age
populations.
D
I
think
that
the
village
centers
could
help
to
revitalize
these
neighborhoods
in
ways
that
would
be
attractive
to
younger
people
and
to
folks
with
no
with
school
age.
Kids,
bringing
that
vitality
into
our
aging
neighborhoods,
rather
than
concentrating
all
of
the
growth
along
the
101
corridor,
will
provide
many
benefits,
including
greater
walkability
bike
ability
and
more
opportunities
to
create
public
transportation
hubs.
I
have
read
through
every
comment
in
the
village
center
section
and
I
see
real
enthusiasm
for
the
village
center
concept,
balanced
against
a
repetition
of
the
no
change,
no
growth
mantra.
D
58
is
not
an
overwhelming
rejection,
especially
when
the
placement
of
village
centers
in
the
survey
and
the
soft
sell
it
received
in
the
briefing
book
are
considered.
I
hope
you
will
give
village
centers
and
their
potential
to
revitalize
aging
neighborhoods
a
closer
look.
Thank
you
for
your
attention.
D
A
A
K
C
Evening
good
evening,
mr
chair
and
thank
you
so
much
for
allowing
me
the
opportunity
to
speak
andrew
pleasure.
I'm
a
resident
of
newberry
park.
L
L
L
L
L
The
rancho
canel
property
south
of
the
101
should
lose
its
split
zoning
and
be
allowed
maximum
flexibility,
through
its
its
current
mixed
use,
low
that
flexibility
should
continue
throughout
additional
parcels,
including
our
thousand
oaks
mall
and
our
jans
marketplace.
Those
parcels
should
actually
be
zoned
to
create
maximum
usage
because
of
their
setbacks.
Their
traffic
tree
coverage
parking
and
a
lot
of
other
things
that,
on
a
different
and
on
a
different
meeting,
normally
are
very
pro
things
that
we
do
encourage
when
we
look
at
a
particular
application.
L
A
Thank
you,
mr
fletcher.
We
will
move
on
to
tim,
mcdougall.
L
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you
for
your
quality
time,
wow
such
a
difficult
decision,
so
many
opinions,
but
you
know
there's
a
couple
of
things
that
just
ring
throughout
everyone's
comments.
Tonight.
Everyone
wants
to
have
affordability.
L
L
A
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
mcdougall.
Next
speaker
is
nat
farah.
L
If
you
support
rezoning
of
the
borchard
site,
you'll
be
accused
of
being
paid
off
by
developers,
be
afraid
if
you
live
in
newbury
park
or
adjacent
to
the
orchard
site
and
support
its
rezoning.
You
are
not
one
of
our
neighbors
be
afraid.
If
you
support
rezoning
of
the
borchard
site,
you'll
destroy
the
wetlands,
I
support
and
accept
residential
development
on
the
orchard
site,
but
be
afraid
if
it
gets
rezoned,
it
could
actually
get
built
be
afraid
that
the
survey
results
have
been
rigged,
be
afraid.
We
don't
want
lower
income.
L
People
in
our
community
be
afraid,
take
the
survey
and
tell
the
city
that
you
are
afraid
be
afraid.
I
accuse
the
property
owner
of
rigging
the
survey
without
disclosing
the
fact
that
for
months
I
spread
misleading
information
on
every
social
media
platform,
with
flyers
to
my
neighbors
door.
Knocking
letters
to
the
editor
public
comments
during
city
events
and
by
creating
a
website
to
spread
defamatory
statements,
be
afraid.
If
you
speak
up
in
support
of
rezoning
the
borchard
site,
you'll
be
targeted
and
harassed
in
thousand
oaks.
We
don't
believe
in
private
property
rights.
K
Yes,
my
name
is
john
freeman
with
gem
street
properties.
I
was
calling
excuse
me
not
calling,
but
calling
in
today
to
discuss
the
parcel
at
53
caneo
school
road.
It's
the
old
trailer
park
that
is
pretty
much
a
vacant
parcel.
K
K
A
All
right
next
speaker
is
our
old
friend
kevin
kohan.
Mr
kohan,
you
have
the
floor.
K
Thank
you,
chair
bus
and
former
colleagues
of
the
planning
commission.
I
want
to
thank
you
city
staff
remy
associates
on
their
extensive
level
effort
on
the
general
plan
process.
K
As
a
former
planning
commissioner,
certified
urban,
planner
and
resident
of
the
thousand
oaks.
I
largely
support
support
the
preferred
land
use
alternative
map.
I
do
have
some
recommendations
for
modifications
to
the
map
number
one:
implementation
of
mixed-use
village
centers
to
encourage
walkability
connectivity
and
new
housing
types
throughout
the
city
number.
Two
all
areas
in
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
specific
plan
should
remain
mixed
use
in
all
commercial
areas,
designating
the
preferred
land
use.
Alternative
map
should
revert
to
mix
use
medium
number
three.
K
K
The
property's
adjacency
to
sensitive
residential
usage
should
come
through
the
design
review
process
rather
than
through
the
division
of
land
use
decision.
Designations
number
four:
the
oaks
engine
small,
should
allow
for
greater
flexibility
and
uses
and
have
a
special
land
use
policies
on
height
limits
and
a
cap
in
total
units
and
finally,
number
five,
the
westlake
boulevard
thousand
oaks
boulevard
commercial
center
should
expand
its
mixed-use
designation
further
into
the
baxter
property
to
provide
for
opportunities
of
workforce
housing
and
pedestrian
walkability.
K
D
D
Hello
planning,
commission
and
community
friends:
my
name
is
kenzie
flame,
I'm
a
local
business
owner
as
well
as
I
own
a
home
on
michael
drive.
My
home's
lot
direct
directly
backs
up
to
the
orchard
project,
all
the
way
across
the
creek,
I'm
one
of
the
three
homes
in
this
neighborhood
as
a
homeowner
in
this
area.
The
last
thing
I
would
like
to
see
is
a
track
of
homes
behind
us.
I
don't
feel
another
set
of
single
family
homes
is
what
our
community
needs.
D
I
would
like
the
planning
commission
to
take
into
consideration
rezoning
this
area
for
mixed
use.
This
would
revitalize
our
community
generate
tax
dollars
and
provide
diverse
housing,
our
community
so
desperately
needs.
We
need
housing
for
our
teachers.
The
los
robles
hospital
students,
biotech
companies
who
are
hiring
new
staff,
and
everyone
in
between
many
people,
like
myself,
have
to
move
out
of
the
canal
valley
to
rent
and
save
before
we're
able
to
move
back
to
buy
here.
D
I
would
rather,
I
would
much
rather
have
put
the
money
back
into
our
community
that
I
plan
so
that
I
planned
on
settling
down
in
I
own
one
of
the
largest
social
media
groups
in
our
area
with
23
000
members.
We
get
dozens
of
posts
per
day
asking
for
rentals
in
our
area.
We
need
starter
houses
for
new
families
so
that
the
community
can
grow
and
thrive.
D
His
plans
have
your
homes
in
mind,
and
those
of
you
that
have
had
people
visit
your
home
with
incorrect
information.
Please
do
your
own
research
reach
out
to
mr
meredian
visit.
The
city
website
do
something
other
than
believe
the
incorrect
information
community
members
are
posting
on
social
media
and
dropping
off
at
your
home.
Also,
I
haven't
even
heard
of
any
seven
story
buildings
being
built,
so
we
can
just
stop
talking
about
that.
One
last
thing:
the
orchard
property
is
not
a
wetlands
anymore.
L
Good
evening,
commissioner
bus
fellow
planning,
commissioners,
my
name
is
sean
moradian
thousand
oaks
native
and
lifelong
resident
of
the
countless
heirs
before
you
this
evening.
For
your
consideration,
I
specifically
asked
for
your
flexibility
and
support
for
what
you've
heard
tonight
as
a
orchard
opportunity
site.
It's
a
37
acre
vacant
parcel
located
at
the
south
west
corner
of
orchard
road
and
highway
101.
L
L
Prior
to
the
discussion
of
this
general
plan,
the
city
endeavor,
to
identify
any
and
all
remaining
undeveloped
parcels
in
the
entire
city,
which
resulted
in
what's
known
as
the
opportunity
sites.
They
consist
of
six
parcels,
totaling
80
acres
in
2017,
the
city
council
adopted
5-0
the
opportunity
sites
because
of
their
size,
location
and
proximity
to
large
employment
base
and
transportation
corridors
at
37
acres.
The
orchard
opportunity
site
represents
nearly
50
percent
of
the
site's
entire
opportunity
site
area.
This
is
an
important
consideration
during
the
entire
general
crime
process.
L
It
was
repeatedly
identified
as
a
site
that
could
address
countless
community
needs.
As
you
heard
this
evening,
the
portrait
site
received
over
80
support
for
mixed-use
zoning
over
the
entire
parcel.
This
was
more
than
any
other
area
and
or
specific
site.
Citywide
of
the
1300
survey
comments
over
1100
supported
mixed-use
zoning.
After
the
current
proposed
land
use
map
was
released.
I
expressed
concerns
to
city
staff
for
suggesting
the
split
zoning.
L
The
arbitrary
split
zoning
limits,
flexibility
over
the
entire
parcel
and
prevents
us
from
designing
a
project
that
would
actually
provide
a
healthy
buffer
from
our
existing
neighbors.
Allow
us
to
direct
traffic
away
from
their
neighborhoods
and
provide
community
benefits
and
amenities
which
the
newberry
park
community
deserves
all
in
all
opportunity.
Sites
are
just
that
opportunistic
to
allow
for
a
variety
of
dynamic
and
flexible
uses
to
satisfy
a
wide
range
of
city
needs.
A
single
mixed-use
zoning
designation
does
not
achieve
any
of
that.
L
L
Good
evening
mr
chairman
and
commissioners
gregory
20-year
resident
of
newbury
park,
I'm
speaking
to
you
tonight
on
behalf
of
the
southern
california
conference
of
seventh-day
adventists.
Several
members
of
the
seven-day
adventists
are
on
the
line,
including
mr
salazar,
who
is
the
president
of
the
southern
california
conference.
L
For
those
of
you
who
don't
know,
southern
california
conference
has
been
a
property
owner
in
the
community
for
over
50
years,
they've
educated,
thousands
of
children.
They
have
a
church
in
thousand
oaks,
a
church
in
newberry
park.
They
run
senior
programs,
health,
nutrition
programs
and
property
that
was
once
owned
by
the
southern
california
conference
is
now
target
lowe's
home
depot.
L
In
2019,
a
map
was
recorded
with
some
idea
of
some
residential
uses
and
in
fact
not
only
has
there
been
commercial
use
in
the
area,
but
the
southern
california
conference
also
agreed
to
dedicate
240
acres
of
open
space
to
the
city.
The
industrial
use,
that's
on
the
current
preferred
map
just
doesn't
make
any
sense
and
raises
a
number
of
concerns
for
the
southern
california
conference
in
the
school.
So
we
would
ask
that
the
planning
commission
reject
the
industrial,
designation
and
designate
the
property
for
neighborhood
medium
or
neighborhood
medium
high.
Thank
you.
K
Good
evening,
boss
and
fellow
commissioners,
my
name
is
john
stuckley,
I'm
a
resident
of
los
angeles,
and
I
am
the
development
lead
for
maserg,
the
majority
owner
and
operator
of
the
approximately
80
acre
oaks
mall.
I
want
to
thank
the
planning,
commission,
city
staff
and
consultants
for
their
forward
thinking
and
inclusiveness
throughout
this
general
plan
and
land
use
element
update
process.
K
K
A
I
I
I
I
I
L
A
Thank
you,
mr
president,
have
one
more
minute:
no
sir,
we're
you're
out
of
time!
Thank
you
all
right
and
our
last
speaker.
A
N
B
D
My
name
is
stephanie
mario
and
I
am
a
young
hispanic
recently
married
woman,
who
one
day
would
love
to
purchase
a
home
in
thousand
oaks.
I
currently
work
in
thousand
oaks
and
serve
as
the
executive
secretary
for
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
association,
and
today
I
have
a
letter
that
I
would
like
to
read
on
their
behalf.
D
Based
on
the
city
and
its
consultant's.
Presentation
of
the
initial
survey
results.
The
thousand
oaks
boulevard
pacific
plan
area
received
the
highest
amount
of
community
support
for
mixed-use
general
plan
designations,
followed
by
the
rancho
punahou
area.
There
was
overwhelming
support
for
the
medium
density,
mixed.
D
B
D
Presentation
reflected
little
to
no
support
for
mixed
use
at
the
oaks
mall
jan
small
village
center
or
on
the
east
side
of
the
city
near
wesley
boulevard
and
thousand
oaks
boulevard.
The
initial
survey
separated
the
properties
west
of
moore
park,
road
from
the
ones
to
the
east,
where
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
specific
plan
starts.
D
We
have
serious
concerns
that,
as
part
of
the
final
prefer
land
land
use
map
survey
process,
nearly
the
entire
west
side
of
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
specific
plan
area
with
its
unique
boulevard
oriented
smaller
properties,
is
now
with
no
justification
lumped
together
with
the
large
mega
properties
of
the
oaks
and
jans
malls,
which
makes
it
impossible
for
our
association
and
our
members
to
effectively
express
their
opinions
on
what
is
best
for
the
boulevard
in
that
survey.
Since
all
comment,
boxes
have
also
been
removed.
D
The
survey
taker
is
forced
to
take
an
all
or
nothing
approach
without
being
able
to
measure
the
true
and
accurate
support
for
mixed
use
in
each
unique
area.
The
entire
two
large
malls
are
being
recommended
for
100
mixed-use,
designation,
possibly
resulting
in
thousands
of
new
units
in
areas
that
have
no
survey
or
community
support.
D
In
contrast,
thousands
of
spoiler
virtues
that
the
service
participants,
support
for
makeshift's
development
is
only
receiving
limited
and
partial
mixed-use
consideration
on
any
arbitrary
unfair
partial
bipartisan
justification
in
closing
toboy
is
supported
with
the
city's
effort
to
update
general
plan.
However,
at
this
point
we
are
unable
to
support
your
approval
of
the
current
preferred
general
plan
update
land
use
map.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
Thank
you,
ms
moreau,
and,
like
any
good
rock
band.
We're
gonna
have
an
encore
here
for
public
comments,
so
I've
got
three
more.
We
will
begin
with
gregory
leon.
B
Hi,
can
you
hear
me
yes,
perfect?
Thank
you
good
evening
thousand
oaks
planning.
Commission.
My
name
is
rebecca
albrown
and
I'm
a
current
lead
with
ventura
county
gimbi,
which
stands
for.
Yes
in
my
backyard.
We
are
a
grassroots
organization
advocating
for
affordable
housing
throughout
ventura
county,
and
I
am
here
tonight
to
express
my
support
of
mixed-use
zoning
at
the
sites
such
as
vacant
as
the
vacant
lot
in
rancho
conejo.
B
I
am
here
to
support
focusing
care
and
equitable
development
on
the
village
centers
and
the
kmart
property,
while
keeping
in
mind
that
it's
important
to
increase
density.
There
was
a
report
card
published
on
the
mercury
newspaper
in
february
of
this
year,
based
on
the
arena.
Numbers
and
thousand
oaks
has
areas
that
definitely
need
improvement
for
the
very
low
income,
housing
and
the
low
income
housing
categories.
B
People
who
need
affordable
housing
already
live
and
work
in
this
community.
I
want
to
echo
the
need
to
build,
affordable
housing
and
add
back
the
higher
density
levels
that
were
previously
that
were
left
out,
especially
to
house.
You
know
the
population,
the
workforce
population
that
is
already
currently
in
thousand
oaks,
as
well
as
the
the
millennial
population.
That
is,
you
know
that
is
currently
there
and
just
as
a
reminder
in
regards
to
density
and
mixed
use,
mixed
use.
Zoning,
especially
given
kovit.
B
A
people-centered
community
is
really
important
to
this
generation
and
what
I've
heard
tonight
from
many
people
in
the
business
community
is
supporting
workforce
housing,
and
I
think
that's
really
important
to
acknowledge
that
that
you
have
the
business
community
supporting
you
know,
affordable
workforce
housing,
and
I
really
do
hope
that
you
take
a
look
at
the
map
and,
you
know
add
back
some
of
the
higher
density
zoning.
Thank
you.
A
Edie
so
good
to
have
you
back,
you
have
the
floor,
sir.
A
I
Better
last
anyway,
good
evening,
chair
boston,
thanks
for
getting
me
on.
Finally,
here
I'm
a
resident
of
newport
beach,
but
I
work
for
kennedy
wilson.
The
owners
of
the
baxter
way
property
at
the
east
end
of
thousand
oaks
boulevard.
I
This
is
just
getting
a
couple
of
highlights,
but
notably
our
property
has
been
designated
on
the
preferred
land
use
map
as
industrial
flex,
and
we
think
that
there
should
be
a
residential
designation
on
at
least
a
portion
of
the
property,
and
we
would
ask
for
your
favorable
consideration
on
that,
principally
because
the
initial
concept
we've
had
we
had
for
adding
a
multi-family
component
to
the
oaks
has
already
been
vetted
at
the
city
council
level,
and
the
proposal
is
proceeding
in
a
manner
consistent
with
that
vetting
through
the
whole
entitlement
process.
I
So
to
not
include
the
property
would
be
inconsistent
with
the
council's
prior
action.
I
would
add
that
our
residential
plan
that
we're
working
on
here
has
a
number
of
affordable
dwelling
units
which
I've
heard
over
and
over
tonight.
People
asking
for
that,
and
it's
virtually
non-existent
in
this
area
of
thousand
oaks
on
the
east
end
of
town.
I
I
As
someone
noted
earlier,
the
promenade
property
and
other
properties
like
that
are
built
out,
and
it's
not
realistic
to
think
that
you're
going
to
be
able
to
add
housing
there,
because
you're
talking
about
having
to
demolish
structures
to
accommodate
houses
and
those
are
both.
Those
are
all
viable
entities
underway.
I
So
these
reasons
and
others
that
I
put
in
the
letter
are
the
basis
for
the
requests
we
have
of
you
to
seriously
consider
a
multi-family,
designation
or
its
equivalent
of
some
sort
to
at
least
a
portion
of
our
property
yeah.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
And
see
if
you
have
any
comments
to
follow
up
if
this,
mr
town's,
around
or
who
we
got.
G
There's
a
there's
a
couple
of
things
I
wanted
to
clarify
and
then
I'll
turn
it
over
to
mark.
If
you
have
some
additional
items,
just
a
couple
things
really
quick.
A
few
of
the
speakers
talked
about
the
survey
results
and
looking
at
what
zipcodes
responded
or
different
aspects
of
who
responded
to
the
survey.
One
of
the
speakers
also
mentioned
wanting
to
see
the
actual
data
from
the
survey,
so
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
all
of
that
information
is
available
on
our
website.
G
We
have,
depending
on
how
deep
of
a
dive
you
want
to
take.
We
have
a
summary
of
the
survey
results.
We
have
a
very
detailed
many
dozens
of
pages
report
of
analyzing
the
survey
results
and
then
for
those
who
want
to
climb
into
the
data
we
actually
have
an
excel
file
on
our
website
that
has
all
of
the
raw
survey
data
available.
So
if
people
want
to
filter
it
or
slice
it
or
dice
it,
however,
you
know
they
would
like
to
see
it.
The
the
data
is
available
there
to
do
that
on
the
teox2045.org
website.
G
G
We
got
carried
away
and
continued
the
mixed
use
from
the
boulevard
to
there,
but
there
is
actually
an
ordinance
that
was
passed
in
about
12
years
ago.
I
think
around
2008,
or
so
that
actually
says
that
the
you
cannot
approve
a
general
plan
amendment
to
remove
a
mobile
home
park
designation
unless
and
until
all
of
the
relocation
fees
are
paid
to
all
of
the
tenants,
and
the
owner
goes
through
that
relocation
program
required
by
the
state
and
or
there
is
a
vote
of
the
people
to
approve
that
change.
G
So
because
of
that
ordinance
and
its
requirements,
it
was
not.
We
didn't
feel
it
was
appropriate
to
recommend
that
change
through
this
process,
but
at
such
time,
in
the
future.
If
and
when
they
want
to
close
that
park
and
go
through
that
process,
they
could
apply
for
a
general
plan
amendment
at
that
time.
H
H
Great
thanks,
michael,
I
just
had
a
few
quick
responses.
H
One
ms
zimmerman
recommended
that
there
be
sort
of
additional
activity
in
the
industrial
areas
and
for
both
industrial,
low
and
industrial
flex,
the
anticipated
land
uses
include
supportive
retail
breweries
and
distilleries,
which
we
have
heard
over
the
years
as
a
as
a
desired
component
of
that
area,
so
that
there's
not
such
such
separation
of
land
uses.
H
H
But
I
just
wanted
to
sort
of
lay
the
landscape
for
the
commission
that
there
that
there
are
three
different
land
uses
institutional
today
proposed
industrial
in
the
preferred
land
use
map
and
residential
requested,
and
then
finally,
mr
stokley,
from
mace,
rich
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
oaks
mall
mentioned,
that
there
would
be
a
reduction
in
height
under
the
current
proposal.
That's
that's
accurate.
H
The
current
zoning
for
the
oak
small
and
actually
for
well
same
height
for
the
jans
marketplace,
but
the
zoning
for
the
oaks
mall
is
regional
shopping
center.
It's
it's
very
limited
in
thousand
oaks
and
it
does
allow
75
foot,
high
buildings
and
mixed
use.
Low
is
proposed
for
the
oaks
mall
and
for
the
jazz
marketplace,
which
has
a
maximum
height
of
50
feet
and
the
jams
marketplace
has
a
different
zoning,
but
it
also
allows
up
to
75-foot
high
buildings.
G
One
thing
real,
quick,
I'm
sorry
sheriff.
I
can
just
add
on
to
to
mark's
comment.
It
is
before
the
commission
this
evening
that
the
the
height
limits
and
the
fars
that
are
attached
to
those
mixed-use
designations
are
not
set
in
stone
and
those
two
could
be
subject
to
deliberation
by
the
commission.
So
if
you
thought
that
the
density
was
appropriate
but
the
height
or
the
far
needed
to
be
increased
either
at
certain
locations
or
city-wide,
that
would
be
within
your
purview
to
have
that
discussion
tonight
before.
A
Mr
commissioner,
newman
asked
the
question:
I'm
going
to
ask
you
the
question:
would
those
be
enforceable
if,
if
state
law
supersedes
and
allows
people
to
the
maximum,
because
I
know
that
that's
going
to
be
the
immediate
question,
if
we,
if
we
try
to
set
them
at
the
city
level,
would
they
be
enforceable?
If
anybody
presents
something?
That's
that's
greater.
G
All
of
those
things
can
still
be
regulated
where
you,
where
you
run
into
problems
with
the
state,
is,
if
you
say,
I'm
going
to
allow
you
to
a
bit
to
build
100
units
an
acre,
but
it
can
only
be
a
two-story
building
because
it's
impossible
to
build
that
density
and
that
in
that
height,
so
as
long
as
we're,
you
know
as
long
as
it's
practical
and
feasible
to
to
match
the
density
to
the
building
height,
then
we
still
absolutely
have
the
ability
to
to
control
development
and
control
the
character
of
the
buildings.
Okay,.
A
M
I
would,
I
would
say
it
would
be
our
rule
chairbus
again,
as
as
mr
forrest
mentioned,
the
state
has
the
ability,
whether
it's
a
density,
bonus
law
or
some
other
way
to
modify
that
through
their
own
power,
and
so
that
would
be
that
that
would
be
the
concern.
But
certainly
we
have
our
limits
that
we
can
put
on
to
our
general
plan
and
ours
and
ultimately,
our
zoning.
M
Think
what
mr
forbes
is
saying-
and
that's
my
point
is
just
to
agree
with
his
comments-
is
that
there
are
options
that
a
developer
could
do
that
might
again
might
have
an
opportunity
to
exceed
some
of
our.
Our
requirements
are,
are
conditions
based
upon,
for
example,
doing
a
density
buzz
with
affordable
or
doing
a
complete,
all
affordable
or
something
of
that
issue
where
they
get
these
bonuses,
where
they
get
these
additional
entitlements.
Because
of
a
state's
position
on,
we
need
more
affordable
housing.
M
A
A
For
me,
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
open
it
up
to
my
fellow
commissioners,
and
I
see
commissioner
newman
is
chomping
at
the
bit.
So
I
will
you
have
the
floor,
sir.
J
E
J
Okay
thanks,
mr
chair,
I
have
some
other
comments
and
questions,
but
I'll
reserve
them
for
now.
Thank
you.
A
You
got
it
all
right.
Any
of
my
other
fellow
commissioners
have
questions
for
commissioner
mcmahon.
You
have
the
floor.
N
Yes,
hello,
I
had
a
question
about
the
baxter
property.
N
It
seems
that
the
city
council
has
somewhat
green
lighted
their
ability
to
move
forward
with
a
proposal
and
nobody's
guaranteeing
that
it's
going
to
go
through,
but
it
just
seems
disingenuous
to
me
to
not
not
give
them
that
opportunity
and
not
have
that
designated
as
a
residential
of
some
sort
and
I'd
like
to
hear
the
city
comment
on
that.
M
So
if
I
may
miss
chair,
commissioner
mcmahon,
we
certainly
understand
your
your
question.
The
fact
is
that
they
have
been
given
a
pre-app
approval
to
go
forward
with
the
allocation
at
this
time
on
this
property,
so
with
that
they
have
an
opportunity
to
present
their
project
and
move
it
along,
and
that
is
currently
in
the
process
to
do
so.
We
would
expect
a
final
determination
on
that
property
with
their
project
to
be
done
before.
M
A
final
determination
for
a
final
map
is
is
completed
through
this
process
that
we're
doing
now,
and
therefore,
if
that
happened-
and
they
were
approved
for
that
again-
that
it's
a
general
plan
amendment
that
they
have
to
do
and
then
also
the
project
itself,
whatever
that
turns
out
to
become,
if
that
is
approved
by
city
council,
then
we
would
obviously
have
to
fix
that
change
the
map
to
reflect
that
approval
before
it's
final.
A
I'll
be
back,
many
of
my
other
planning.
Commissioners
have
questions
of
staff.
A
I
see
commissioner
lansin.
C
Thank
you,
chairpers,
just
a
quick
question.
This
designation
that
we're
going
through
as
this
this
map
does
not
prevent
an
applicant
in
the
future,
I'm
assuming
from
submitting
a
specific
application
for
a
zone
change
or
some
other
thing
to
the
extent
they
don't
get
or
or
are
not
happy
with
the
designation
they
get
as
part
of
this
process.
Is
that
correct.
H
That's
correct:
any
applicant
can
proceed
with
a
with
an
application
for
a
general
plan
amendment
in
the
future,
if
they're,
if
they
change
their
mind,
something
some
different
use
comes
up.
That's
still
on
the
table.
C
Okay,
so
it
doesn't
prevent
them
from
from
doing
at
that
point,
we're
just
trying
to
deal
with
other
things.
At
the
same
time,
one
thing
I'd
like
just
real
quick.
There
was
a
number
of
comments
as
to
members
of
the
specific
plan,
I
guess
topa
concerned
about
somehow
the
changes
that
are
happening
as
part
of
that
process.
What
is
the
nature
of
that
concern?.
H
The
I
think
that
the
basic
nature
of
the
concern
is
that
when
the
the
thousands
boulevard
specific
plan
was
crafted-
and
it
has
been
about
10
years
now-
it
was
crafted
with
a
uniform
mixed-use
designation
over
the
entire
specific
plan
area
and
that
that
speaks
to
the
equity
issue
that
you've
heard
about
tonight.
H
This
preferred
land
use
map
this.
This
draft
map
takes
a
more
fine-grained
approach,
actually
adding
some
density
in
certain
areas
like
on
the
west,
end
sort
of
in
the
vicinity
of
boardwalk
and
and
and
thousands
boulevard,
and
also
in
the
downtown
core
itself,
roughly
between
herbs
and
canelo
school
road,
but
it
also
pulls
the
mixed
use
back
in
other
areas
where
it
didn't
seem
as
likely
that
those
properties
would
redevelop
going
forward,
and
so
those
are
shown
as
commercial
in
the
in
the
plan.
H
So
what
we've
heard
tonight
is,
if
it's,
if
it's
fair
to
paraphrase,
is,
is
a
request
for
equity
among
all
the
property
owners,
sort
of
to
revert
it
or
keep
it
the
way
it
is
today
and
then
there's
also
been
a
request
for
higher
density,
and
so.
H
A
change
and
it's
it's
a
fair
policy
question
in
front
of
you
to
see
me.
Okay,
thank.
C
N
Well,
it's
a
different
question:
we're
talking
about
housing,
it's
been
a
topic
for
quite
some
time
and
especially
tonight,
affordable
housing-
and
I
know
you-
we
can
designate
areas
for
affordable
housing,
but
I
we
can't
make
the
developers
actually
build
it.
We
can
just
make
it
an
opportunity.
N
Is
the
city
discussing
any
kind
of
options
to
require
a
certain
amount
of
of
affordable
housing
across
the
board
with
any
development
or
anything
that
will
put
a
little
bit
more
incentive
into
actually
using
these
areas
that
we
were
hoping
to
have
some
affordable
housing
in.
H
The
there
are
really
three
ways
that
that
sort
of
true,
affordable
housing
could
be
created.
H
One
is
through
an
inclusionary
ordinance,
which
I
mentioned
earlier,
and
that
is
that
for
a
particular
project
of
a
minimum
size,
a
an
ordinance
that
requires
that
a
certain
percentage
of
the
units
be
assessed
be
set
aside
for
lower
income
residents,
that
that
is
an
option
that,
as
I
mentioned
before,
will
certainly
be
part
of
the
discussion
going
forward.
That's
that
is
not
in
place.
H
Right
now
is
a
requirement,
but
it
could
be
reinstated
in
the
future
on
the
second
is
the
state's
density
bonus
law,
which
basically
says
that
if
a
developer
provides
a
certain
number
of
units
in
a
certain
income
category
that
they
can
receive
additional
units
on
top
of
the
maximum
that
a
city
would
otherwise
allow
and,
and
then
the
third
is
sort
of
100
percent.
Affordable
projects
like
hillcrest
villas,
comes
to
mind.
H
A
beautiful
project
on
hillcrest
drive
where
the
city
partnered
with
many
mansions
and
and
brought
that
to
fruition
and
the
city
council
just
approved
the
cip
budget
and
that
included.
Funds
for
affordable
housing
and
related
needs
and,
and
so
that,
for
instance,
is
is,
is
a
way
to
possibly
partner
again
with
with.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Newman
you
have
the
floor.
J
Thanks
two
questions:
just
to
follow
up
to
mr
town
on
the
affordability
options.
Would
the
reinstatement
of
rent
control
which
thousand
oaks
did
have
in
the
1980s,
be
a
fourth
viable
option
toward
getting
toward
more
affordable
housing?
H
A
All
right
and
commissioner
new
and
based
upon
kind
of
how
the
map
has
been
divided
up
and
discussed
multiple
times
now
publicly.
What
I'd
like
to
propose
is
once
we
cease
questioning
staff
and
we
enter
our
own
discussion.
A
We
pull
up
the
map
section
by
section,
moving
from
east
to
west
and
then
discuss
the
village
centers
and
discuss
our
concerns
about
any
any
particular
elements
of
each
of
those
areas.
That's
acceptable.
J
A
J
A
And
I
see
with
other
people
nodding
their
heads
before
we
do
finish
up
questions
with
staff,
though
I
wanted
to
check
with
commissioner
just
make
sure
I
have
not
neglected
you.
No.
F
A
Okay,
then
yeah,
we'll
kind
of
open
with
that,
with
our
general
thoughts
about
it
and
then
and
then
move
forward,
I
guess
would
probably
be
the
best
way
to
go,
but
I
did
have
one
last
question
for
the
consultant,
mr
ramy
and
I'm
gonna
go
back
to
the
survey.
I
guess
what
the
heck.
That's
fine
right.
A
My
question
is:
is
you
said
that
I
believe
it's
generally
15
or
less
was
none
of
the
above
selections
on
the
questions?
There
were
multiple
choice,
but
then
you
mentioned
that
on
the
open-ended
questions
that
you
receive,
roughly
50,
positive
and
50
negative
comments
is:
was
that
correct,
or
did
I
mishear
that.
E
Generally,
that
is
correct,
so
on
the
open-ended
comments
and
it's
open-ended
where
anyone
could
could
provide
a
comment,
and
so
that
was
at
the
end
of
each
geographic
section.
We
asked
if
people
had
any
other
thoughts
and
sometimes.
A
My
question
is:
what
what
would
you
categorize
as
positive
and
what
would
you
categorize
as
negative
just
so
I
can
define
that
my
own
head.
E
Sure
negative:
well,
you
could
probably
read
some
of
the
comments.
Some
of
them
were
not
polite,
so
those
go
without
saying
for
what
the
negative
is
and
it's
essentially
essentially
don't
change
a
thing
so
negative,
referring
to
the
land
use
map
and
the
alternatives,
not
that
they're
negative
comments,
but
it's
negative
as
in
the
alternatives
are
not
good
or
they
don't
like
it
or
make
a
change.
You.
A
Got
it
and
the
reason
I'm
asking
is,
is
because
you
know
it's
publicly
available.
We,
as
lay
people,
are
able
to
read
these
comments,
but
I
was
wondering
what
somebody
who
has
experience
seeing
this
in
multiple
surveys
across
multiple
areas
interpreted
that
as
so
okay.
I
appreciate
your
time
at
this
point.
I
say
we
are
are
done
so
I
would
like
to
open
it
up
to
my
fellow
commissioners
for
your
comments.
A
Of
course,
we
are
open
for
emotion
at
any
time
here,
but
I
I
think
that
all
of
us
have
a
lot
to
say
before
we
we
get
that
far.
So
I
I
welcome
any
of
you
to
to
open
the
bidding
here.
I
will
start
with
commissioner
mcmahon.
N
Now
I
I
understand
that
you
wanted
to
start
from
east
to
west,
but
I
wanted
to
bring
up
something
if
you
don't
mind
that
kind
of
encompasses
the
whole
plan
and
that's
the
village
centers
we
had.
I
thought
that
they
were
a
great
idea
and
I
was,
as
many
of
the
speakers
were,
disappointed
that
it
got
removed,
but
one
speaker
that
spoke
to
us.
N
What
was
it
a
month
ago
made
a
really
good
point
and
she
said
that
these
village
centers
could
be
like
little
mini
transportation
hubs,
and
I
think
many
of
you
know
that
I
was
on
the
transportation
commission
for
20
years
and
we
are
connected
with
the
to
bus
system,
which
is
very
inefficient.
N
It's
not
inefficient
because
of
anything
the
city
does
or
doesn't
do
it's,
because
we
live
in
a
city
that
isn't
on
a
grid.
We
don't
have.
N
We
don't
have
a
lot
of
through
streets,
and
it
occurs
to
me
that
this
this
is
an
amazingly
good
opportunity
to
get
some
better
transportation,
and
I
I
can
see
I
can
see
that
it
would
be
very
useful
for
people
to
be
able
to
walk
to
a
village
center
near
them
and
grab
a
bus.
So
what
I've
done
and-
and
this
is
why
I'm
I'm
presenting
this
now-
is
because
it's
throughout
the
city.
A
Mcmahon,
I
just
want
to
stop
here
a
second
yeah.
I
am
also
a
fan
of
them
and
I
definitely
want
to
address
them.
I
was
going
to
address
them
last,
but
if
you
want
to
do
it
first,
I'm
cool
with
that
too,
but
I
did
want
to
get
kind
of
everybody's
overarching
viewpoint
before
we
delve
into
them.
But
no,
I
I
believe
that
village
centers
is
a
very
specific
topic.
We
need
to
discuss.
A
A
N
Generally,
the
same
with
the
my
concern
for
the
the
academy
property
and
it
being
industrial
as
far
as
not
residential,
which
is
what
they
were
planning
and
the
baxter
property
it
just
that
that
was
a
little
bit
concerning
to
me.
I
also
am
concerned
about
the
specific
plan
and
perhaps
making
it
more
uniform
because,
as
each
individual
parcel
comes
before
the
planning,
commission
or
the
city
staff,
perhaps
that's
when
the
the
the
differential
would
be
utilized.
N
So
I
I
think
that
perhaps
we
might
want
to
revert
that
part
of
the
boulevard
back
to
the
specific
plan
and
for
right
now.
I
guess.
That's
all
my
comments.
A
C
Commissioner
lansin
thank
you
chairbus.
I
want
to
initially
kind
of
just
say
how
unique
this
is.
Normally,
when
I
look
at
these
things
and
commissioners
will
know,
I
always
say
I'm
applying
the
rules
and
the
codes,
I'm
not
applying
my
personal
opinion,
so
this
is
a
unique
opportunity.
I
think
we
have
as
commissioners
to
kind
of
get
beyond
what
normally
would
be
the
codes
and
provide
our
opinion
as
to
a
lot
of
the
issues
going
forward
and
provide
our
recommendations
to
the
city
council.
So
it's
a
unique
opportunity.
C
I
wanted
to
mention
the
survey
and
again
I
know
there
were
a
lot
of
issues
with
it.
I
would
say
me
personally:
I
reviewed
probably
more
of
the
briefing
book
comments,
the
letters
to
the
editor
in
local
papers,
twitter
comments
and
all
those
things
more
than
I
did
the
results.
C
I
was
looking
for,
I'm
the
kind
of
person
when
I
go
on
a
vacation.
I
look
at
the
yelp
reviews
or
the
reviews
of
a
place
and
find
the
negatives.
I
can
find
lots
of
positive
things,
but
I
want
to
know
the
negatives.
I
want
to
know
what
the
concerns
are.
C
So
I
looked
those
comments
from
the
surveys
really
more
more
valuable
to
me
than
the
results
of
the
survey,
necessarily
because
it
gave
me
the
information
I
needed
to
kind
of
delve
into
as
much
as
I
possibly
could,
and
I
heard
a
lot
of
of
concern.
Believe
me.
I
want
to
make
sure
everybody
out.
There
knows
that
I
and
all
the
commissioners,
I
know,
read
your
comments.
We
know
your
frustration,
we
know
your
your
desire
for
one
way
or
the
other
in
terms
of
the
process
we've
heard
and
listened
and
we've
read.
C
Believe
me,
we've
read.
I
think
there
were
thousands
of
comments
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I've
probably
read
in
terms
of
what
we're
going
for
and
what
we're
looking
at
and
again
I
don't.
I
want
every
voice
to
count
so
in
looking
at
this
process.
I
really
made
sure
to
listen
to
all
those
voices,
but
again
the
understanding
and
the
and
the
the
task
given
to
us
is
to
lay
down
possibly
a
framework
for
the
next
25
to
50
years.
C
So
to
me,
when
I'm
looking
at
the
survey
results
that
may
be
2100
people
or
whatever
happens
to
be
that's
great,
I
feel
we
represent
128
000
people
which,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I'm
here
to
hopefully
provide
my
common
opinion
and
assistance
for
every
single
resident,
not
just
those
that
responded,
not
those
that
didn't
and
that's
kind
of
tough.
So
again,
I
took
the
survey
results
as
a
piece
of
information,
but
it
was
not
definitive
in
anything
that
I
was
looking
at.
C
It
was
just
one
piece
of
information
I
used
as
part
of
my
overall
evaluation.
My
first
thing
I
did
in
looking
at
this
process
to
say
is:
do
we
have
to
do
this
at
all?
And
that
was
a
lot
of
the
comments
that
people
said
is.
Can
we
just
forget
this
designate,
2
500
units
and
then
move
on,
and
I
don't
think
we
can?
I
don't
think
we
have
identity
can
identify
properties
correctly.
I
don't
think
that
we
satisfy
sp
330.
I
don't
think
we
satisfy
a
lot
of
arena
issues
all
those
things.
C
C
I
think
we
were
probably
still
in
a
goods
economy,
an
economy
based
upon
going
and
getting
product
and
getting
goods
at
stores,
and
at
that
extent,
if
you
look
at
the
way
our
city
is
laid
out,
it's
built
for
cars.
We
have
a
very
wide
thousand
oaks
boulevard.
It's
not
a
narrow
street,
like
state
street
in
santa
barbara
or
other
streets.
It's
a
very
wide
street
built
for
cars.
In
fact,
our
city
is
built
for
cars.
C
It's
made
for
you
to
travel,
to
places
to
go,
get
your
things,
there's
not
things
that
were
necessarily
closed,
so
we
had
a
goods
economy
when
our
whole
initial
system
was
set
up
over
time.
We
turned
into
a
service
economy
in
the
80s
and
90s,
with
huge
mega
malls
and
stuff
like
that.
Now
we're
at
what
we
call
an
experience
based
economy,
that's
what
the
jans
mall
is
trying
to
do
is
change
the
environment.
C
To
more
of
an
experience-based
process,
where
you
keep
people
shopping,
keep
them
involved
and
keep
them
engaged,
and
to
me
that
is
what
we
have
to
look
at
planning
for
the
next
25
to
50
years
is
not
maintaining
a
goods
economy
but
trying
to
figure
out
what
economy
we're
in
and
what
economy
is
going
to
exist.
25
to
50
years
from
this
point
forward
and
what
I
looked
at,
that
at
the
end
of
the
day,
as
I
realized
the
key
is
and
again
I
think
mr
sahiki
mentioned
it
lifestyle.
C
This
is
a
dispute
about
lifestyle,
so
many
people
that
don't
want
anything
to
be
built
are
trying
to
preserve
that
way
of
life.
That
lifestyle-
and
I
understand
it
believe
me-
I
love
open
space.
I
love
having
quiet.
Others
want
to
create
a
lifestyle
that
provides
options,
multi-generational
options
to
have
kids
parents
and
grandkids
all
living
in
the
same
community.
C
So
it's
a
question
of
finding
a
way
to
balance
that
lifestyle
concept,
where
we
can
maintain
what
we
have
in
terms
of
the
single-family
home
environment,
but
again
allow
some
options,
some
lifestyle
options
to
create
that
flexibility
for
workforce
millennial,
entry
level,
whatever
you
want
to
end
up
calling
it,
but
I
call
it
the
end
of
the
day.
That's
part
of
our
community
we're
never
going
to
house
everybody,
that's
not
possible!
That
wants
to
live
here
and
that's
awesome,
because
we
have
an
amazing
city.
C
What
we
can
do
is
find,
hopefully
some
more
options
that
will
again
allow
the
city
to
evolve
over
time
and
grow
right
now
we
have
a
average
age
of
44
years
old
in
terms
of
our
city.
We
have
to
find
ways
to
create
that
opportunity
so
that
young
kids,
I
have
a
28
and
26
year
old
professionals
that
want
to
come
back
and
live
here
and
right
now
the
average
price
of
a
house
is
850
000.
So
we
have
to
find
ways
to
create
those
optional,
those
different
lifestyle
housing.
C
J
J
I
have
a
different
view,
but
I
want
you
to
know
how
much
I
respect
and
agree
with
much
of
what
what
you
just
said.
I
I
have
five
concerns
with
this
whole
process.
J
That
as
a
whole,
one,
the
first
one
has
to
do
with
with
the
scope
of
this.
This
is
really
unprecedented
in
scope.
I
know
we
looked
at
reallocating
a
little
bit
more
than
a
thousand
units
in
2018,
and
that
was
unprecedented
tonight,
we're
talking
about
22
000,
nearly
22
500
units,
potentially
up
to
33
000
units.
J
This
is
far
more
allocation
or
reallocation,
redesignation
rather
of
of
units
than
has
been
done
in
thousand
oaks's
entire
history,
since
the
first
general
plan
went
into
effect
in
1970
and
all
the
discussion
really
has
been
about,
where
we're
going
to
put
things
to
understand
my
concern
about
that,
a
quick
allegory.
This
is
something
I
actually
heard
from
someone
in
town.
J
J
I
definitely
think
we
need
to
do
more
to
produce
better
and
more
affordable
housing,
and
we
we
had
that
gp
update
a
couple
of
meetings
ago
where
there
were
columns
and
the
medium
and
above
medium
columns
were
like
607,
100
full
and
then
the
below
columns
were
like
30
full
with
that,
and
there
were
a
lot
of
years
where
we
didn't
produce
any.
So
we're
not
really
talking
about
how
we're
addressing
the
units
so
much
as
we
are
about
the
scope
or
the
size
of
the
units.
J
Only
and
that's
that's
a
concern
for
me
and
I
don't
think
we're
having
the
entire
discussion.
We
should
be
having
on
that.
The
second
concern
I
have
is
that
is
about
the
laws.
There's
this
narrative
that
we
kind
of
have
to
do
this
now,
because
we're
boxed
in
by
the
law
that-
and
I
think
the
study
guide
for
the
gp
update
said
this-
that
that
measuree
won't,
let
us
go
any
higher
and
sp
330
won't.
J
Let
us
go
any
lower
and
in
fact
neither
of
those
is
quite
right
as
we
as
staff
testified
tonight.
Measure
e
does
allow
increases
in
general
plan
capacity
with
the
consent
of
the
voters
that
that's
the
important
part
we
need
to
include.
In
that
phrase
we
could
do
this
entire
exercise.
We
could
add
22
000
units,
we
could
add
33
000
units
without
moving
units
around
town
without
reallocating
anything
else.
As
long
as
the
voters
were
okay
with
it,
sp
330
would
be
fine
by
that.
J
That's
about
zoning.
This
is
about
measure
e
is
about
general
plan
designations,
so
it
is
possible
to
raise
the
ceiling
with
measure
e.
It's
just.
We
need
to
have
as
a
policy
matter
the
will
to
take
this
to
the
voters
and
when
we're
making
a
decision
this
big.
That
is
something
I
think
we
should
be
talking
about
and
then
looking
at
sp
330.
It
is
true
that
we're
not
allowed
to
do
any
net
reduction
in
density
and
zoning
density.
J
That's
that's
what
sp
330
requires
that
law
is
in
effect
for
the
next
four
years,
so
for
us
to
make
this
massive
wholesale
change
to
commit
to
this
really
radical
departure
from
50
years
of
slow
growth,
and
do
this
massive
growth
thing
just
at
the
moment,
when
we're
most
constrained
doesn't
make
a
whole
lot
of
sense
to
me.
You
know.
I
know
people
complain,
and
sometimes
I
do
that
sacramento
is
putting
their
foot
on
our
neck
or
we're
constrained
this
way
in
that
way
by
outside
forces.
But
this
is
an
own
goal.
J
The
third
concern
I
have
is
with
infrastructure
and
the
the
story
here
has
been
that
we
really
can't
even
talk
about
that,
because
we
don't
know
yet
what
housing,
what
density,
what
allocations
we're
going
to
do
in
housing?
So,
let's
lock
that
down
and
then
do
an
eir
and
then,
and
only
then
can
we
talk
about
infrastructure,
and
I
don't
think
that
logic
follows
the
the
notion
that,
because
we
have
to
wait
for
an
eir,
we
can't
even
talk
about
what
kind
of
changes
and
we're
going
to
get
into
this
in
each
area.
J
You
know
if
we're
going
to
put
higher
density
in
an
area
and
not
talk
about
what
kind
of
schools
or
water
or
sewer,
I'm
not
saying
we're
going
to
have
to
attach
budget
line
items
to
it,
but
the
notion
that
we
can't
talk
about
it
at
all
seems
very
misguided
to
me
and
very
short-sighted
the
fourth,
the
fourth
thing
I
want
to
bring
bring
up-
and
this
is
I'll
do
this
as
gingerly
as
I
can
is
the
survey
I
agree
with
commissioner
lansin,
who
said
I'm
quoting
now
there
were
a
lot
of
issues
with
it.
J
I
read.
I
read
city's
memo
about
the
survey
and
I
had
four
takeaways
from
that
memo
said
number
one.
This
is
this
survey
is
not
statistically
valid,
said
number
two.
We
knew
that
some
of
the
responses
would
be
cooked.
Number
three:
we're
not
going
to
do
anything
about
it
and
number
four.
These
critiques
of
it
are
really
disrespectful
and
that's
a
terrible
response.
J
J
I
do
appreciate
the
input
of
everyone,
both
both
who
took
the
multiple
choice,
parts
and
who
and
the
much
larger
number
who
wrote
in
responses
and,
like
commissioner
lansin
I
did
try
to
read
as
many
of
those
as
I
could.
I
think
that
is
an
issue,
though,
that
that
we're
not
really
representing
you
know.
At
most,
we
have
2
000
something
2100
responses
and
6
000
written
responses
in
a
city
where
of
nearly
120
000.
J
That
is
not
a
terribly
representative
process,
so
I
hope
we
can
come
up
with
more
valid
ways.
We
certainly
can
do
better
in
terms
of
authentication
in
terms
of
getting
more
widespread
input
before
we
commit
to
these
really
radical
changes
away
from
our
50-year
history
of
slow
growth.
J
The
final,
the
final
thing,
the
final
concern
I
have
and
I'd
like
to
ask
all
commissioners
to
consider
this
as
we
go
through
each
neighborhood
is
who
benefits
this
is.
This
is
a
question
I
ask
with
every
application,
but
I
think
we
should
especially
ask
it
now,
because
this
is
such
a
big
picture
thing
and
I'm
going
to
subdivide
that
into
three
areas
of
who
benefits
and
the
three
areas
would
be
people
in
need
of
affordable
housing,
the
general
public
and
developers
and
land
speculators.
J
J
We
know
from
a
long
history
of
urban
planning
that
that
cities
succeed
best
when
they
include
people
at
all
income
levels
within
within
the
neighborhoods,
where
they
work
and
live
and
the
to
the
extent
that
we
can
do
that
successfully.
I
think
we
have
the
greatest
chance
for
long-term
success,
so
more
affordable
housing.
Yes,
absolutely.
A
A
10
o'clock
and
I
believe
we
need
a
motion
to
continue
past
10..
So
I
suppose
well
as
we
go
to.
Let's
do
a
vote
to
see
if
we
want
to
go
past
10
and
say
what
11
11,
30
11
30
it'll
work
for
me
and
then
we
can.
J
J
So
anyway,
I
was
talking
about
the
general
public
if
you're
concerned
about
property
rights,
it's
something
we
heard
about
tonight,
what's
being
proposed
here,
is
essentially
moving
on
a
massive
scale,
unprecedented
scale
units
around
town,
for
example.
If
you
bought
a
piece
of
property
that
was
zoned
for
four
units
and
you
put
up
a
single
family
house
and
the
city
says
you
know:
you've
only
got
the
one
house
there,
so
we're
going
to
take
two
of
those
units
away.
J
Is
it
legal?
Yes,
cities
are
allowed
to
rezone,
it's
not
a
taking
legally,
but
you
do
have
less
property
rights
at
the
end
of
that,
and
that's
something
I
think
we
need
to
be
mindful
of
even
mr
forbes
on
a
call
this
week
said:
sb
330
is
basically
a
shell
game
and
I
agree
with
that.
J
I
wouldn't
go
quite
that
far,
but
this
is
this
is
if,
if
we
move
to
a
model
that
is
not
mainly
but
but
many
many
more
apartments
we're
moving
to
a
model
that
is
in
an
annuity
business
for
a
relatively
small
number
of
apartment
owners,
and
that
again
is
a
radical
break
from
our
50-year
history,
where
most
people
have
some
equity,
maybe
in
a
small
home,
maybe
in
a
condo,
but
most
people
own
a
small
piece
of
something
and
we're
proposing
a
big
change
away
from
that.
Not
putting
a
value
judgment
on
that.
A
Thank
you,
secretary
of
health,
prepares
for
a
vote
on
extending
to
11
30.
I
B
A
I
I
I
A
A
I'll
just
assume
we're
going
live
as
soon
as
tltv's
puts
me
on
we're
back,
live
all
right,
we've
kind
of
become
the
commissioner's
comments.
We've
heard
from
commissioner
mcmahon
commissioner
lansin
and
commissioner
newman
about
their
initial
thoughts.
I
wanted
to
throw
to
commissioner
link
if
you
want
to
to
kind
of
open
the
with
your
thoughts.
F
F
As
far
as
housing
is
concerned,
I'm
certainly
an
echo.
The
comments
of
my
fellow
commissioners
would
love
to
see
housing
be
placed
near
neighborhood,
commercial
and
regional
and
village
centers
and
we'll
get
to
village
centers
a
lot
later.
But
if
the
intent
is
to
reduce
vehicle
trips,
bmt
ownership,
greenhouse
gases,
certainly
adding
housing
back
where
we
have
our
employment,
centers
and
shopping
centers
is
going
to
go
a
long
way
towards
that.
F
So
we
hope
to
see
that
paradigm
shift
occur
in
the
future,
especially
as
if
we
process
more
development
applications
and
it
may
come
with
the
millennial
generation
and
subsequent
generations,
but
certainly
this
is
going
to
take
a
lot
of
time.
F
Let's
see
as
far
as
mixed
use
concerns,
I
I've
always
had
a
lot
of
concerns
about
mixed
use.
If
the
goal
is
able
to
get
people
out
of
their
cars,
these
these
developments
need
to
be
near
shopping,
centers,
regional
areas,
the
general
development
or
commercial
that
comes
along
with
these.
These
kinds
of
projects
has
generally
been
smaller
or
live
work.
F
Another
thing
with
with
any
kind
of
commercial
is
that
you
need
to
have
a
lot
of
connectivity
with
the
as
the
crow
flies
about
1.3
1.5
miles
on
the
boulevard
between
herbs
and
dusenberg.
You
have
two
connections
between
hillcrest
and
without
in
thousand
of
boulevard.
F
So
if
we're
trying
to
get
more
people
to
do
this
and
again,
echoing
commissioner
mcmahon,
is
more
conducive
when
you
have
blocks
and
a
tenth
of
a
mile
blocks
quarter
mile
blocks
any
of
those
kinds
of
things.
So
we
do
not
have
the
walkability
in
this
community
because
it
was
very
vehicle
driven,
as
was
designed.
F
Let's
see,
I
am
concerned,
and
I
was
actually
pleased
to
see
that
mixed
use
high
was
removed
from
the
projects
again
stemming
from
santa
barbara
and
even
seeing
in
certain
areas
again,
not
la
in
general,
but
certainly
a
lot
of
areas
in
our
communities
canonization,
and
that
was
a
extreme
concern
in
santa
barbara
is
when
you
get
above
certain
heights,
then
you
start
affecting
the
view
shed.
F
You
start
affecting
creating
shading
in
certain
areas
and
that
that
is
not
conducive
to
the
kind
of
walkability
or
community
that
we
look
forward
to,
even
if
you
have
any
kind
of
articulation
setbacks
in
the
building
heights,
as
we
do
at
the
the
thousand
oaks
civic
arts
plaza,
you
still
have
that
shading,
especially
when
a
thousand
of
school
of
arts,
east-west
you're,
gonna,
get
all
that
sun
and
taking
those
buildings
or
the
shading
is
gonna.
F
Come
from
all
those
buildings
on
the
south
side
of
the
roadway
contact
sensitivity
is
certainly
big
for
me
and
again
I
try
to
balance
property
rights
and
development
with
those
that
come
along
with
those
rights
with
neighborhood
uses.
F
So
on
that,
at
that
end
I
can
see
supporting
that
kind
of
development
and
vacant
properties,
but
at
the
same
time,
I
still
think
that
we
have
to
be
sensitive
to
the
adjacent
uses.
We'll
talk
about
that
as
we
get
further
down
the
road
as
well
again
supporting
building
heights
as
they
are
currently
established.
F
We
should
endeavor
to
put
new
residential
in
areas
where
there
isn't
currently
and
certainly
consider
the
kind
of
the
funk
zone
sort
of
thing
where
you're
not
going
to
have
that
kind
of
noise
issue
in
industrial
areas
and
not
the
other
way
around.
I
would
hate
to
see
that
kind
of
development
occur
in
a
residential
area.
F
Let's
see
a
couple
more
comments,
I
apologize
so
the
likelihood
of
development
comments.
I
was
confused
by
those
because
this
is
a
guideline
so,
whether
a
a
zone
or
you
know
that
these
land
uses
are
likely
to
be
developed,
it
really
doesn't
have
any
bearing
on
this
plan
so
pushing
that
off
for
20
30
years
is
not,
in
my
opinion,
necessary.
F
Let's
see,
I
think
we
should
be
cautious
when
we
talk
about
affordable
housing
and
again,
I'm
echoing
my,
my
fellow
commissioners
when
we
talk
about
this
without
restrictions-
and
I
don't
mean
restricting
the
number
of
units
when
I
say
we
have
covenants
that
are
asked
of
developers
that
it's
it's
really
up
to
the
developers
to
decide
what
number
of
units
they
construct
and
they
will
be
market
driven,
so
unless
every
developer
possible
descends
upon
thousand
oaks
upon
the
passage
of
this
general
plan,
supply
is
going
to
be
outstripped
by
demand
and
the
market
is
going
to
dictate
what
those
rents
are
going
to
be
currently,
and
I
don't
want
to
pick
on
them.
F
They
have
two
units
available
right
now,
both
two
bedrooms
1710
on
the
boulevard,
the
old
lupe's
property,
is
asking
3
300
for
a
two-bedroom
apartment,
that's
more
than
a
lot
of
people's
mortgages,
and
I'm
not
talking
about
people.
Who've
lived
here
for
30
years,
I'm
talking
about
people
who
have
moved
in
here
within
the
last
five
years.
So
certainly
something
to
be
considered.
F
I
actually
do
support
the
many
mansions
cabrillo
economic
development
corporation,
certainly
on
those
projects
they
put
forward
great
projects,
I've
seen
it
any
number
of
times
workforce
housing
and
with
the
help
of
cities
that
are
able
to
provide
some
financing,
or
at
least
some
concessions
in
regard
to
those
those
kinds
of
things
taxes,
even
they
have
developed
excellent
projects.
F
I
already
mentioned
the
balance
of
property
with
sentiment
but
infrastructure.
I
know
that
came
up
a
little
bit
early
earlier,
having
seen
a
lot
of
development
projects
and
certainly
putting
forward
development
projects
as
a
as
a
consultant
for
many
years
and
now
reviewing
development
projects.
A
lot
of
that
is
going
to
be
a
incumbent
on
the
developer,
and
if
the
infrastructure
doesn't
support
the
project,
then
the
project
doesn't
go
forward,
so
we
will
have
a
sewer.
We
have
a
sewer
model,
I'm
sure
we
have
a
water
model.
F
We
are
going
to
be
able
to
model
what
those
impacts
are
to
our
infrastructure
and
again
that
will
dictate
the
number
of
units
that
occur.
I
mean
there
are
going
to
be
a
number
of
fixtures
that
are
limited
to
a
project
if
the
infrastructure
doesn't
support
it.
Otherwise
the
developer
is
going
to
get
stuck
with
with
tearing
up
the
street
and
installing
a
new
main
or
a
new
trunk
line.
So
those
are
my
general
overarching
comments.
Hopefully
that
wasn't
excessive.
A
A
A
I
have
talked
to
business
owners
on
the
boulevard
and
beyond.
I
have
talked
for
with
reps
from
a
number
of
advocacy
groups.
I
have
spent
an
incredible
amount
of
time
on
social
media,
stalking
people
on
everything,
from
their
facebook
to
their
instagram
to
next
door
and
seeing
all
of
the
comments
I
have
read
all
of
it,
and
at
this
point
I
have
talked
to
all
of
my
friends
the
point
where
none
of
them
will
answer
my
calls
anymore.
A
Many
of
them
are
long
time
residents.
I
think
I've
told
everybody
here
ad
nauseum,
that
I
am
a
thousand
oaks
lancer
and
a
clu,
an
alum,
and
I
I
feel,
like
I've
been
here
for
a
long
time
and
I've
seen
a
lot
of
the
changes,
and
so
just
so,
you
know-
and
all
of
my
commissioners
have
done
this-
we
we
live
here.
A
We
work
here,
we're
invested
in
this
and
we're
investing
this,
because
this
is
where
we
raise
our
children
or
are
raising
our
children.
This
is
where
we're
going
to
raise
our
children.
This
is
where
we
hope
to
see
our
our
families
live
for
a
long
time,
so
we
are
as
invested
as
as
anybody
in
the
community.
A
As
far
as
all
this
goes
moving
on
to
my
actual
concerns
about
the
plan,
one
of
the
biggest
things
that
I've
been
kind
of
belaboring
with
everybody
is
the
city
has
a
certain
amount
of
kind
of
built-in
in
in
how
it
looks
where
our
schools
are,
where
our
parks
are,
what
is
considered
accessible,
open
space
and
those
are
elements
that
have
always
made
thousand
oaks
very
attractive
to
its
residents,
to
the
point
where
you've
seen
city
council
meetings,
where
people
fight
over
parking
relative
to
access
to
regional
parks,
people
talk
about.
A
What's,
what's
what
schools
are
important
to
them?
We've
had
schools
close
in
this
city,
and
people
have
reopened
them
as
magnet
schools
and
charter
schools.
People
the
way
our
infrastructure's
set
up
is
very
important
to
us,
and
it's
very
important
to
me
in
thinking
about
where
potentially
anywhere
from
a
thousand
two
thousand
eighty
681
over
the
next
eight
years
to
potentially
33
000
units
end
up
because,
as
we're
saying
we're
not
talking
about
building
into
open
space
here,
we're
talking
building
into
an
existing
city,
that's
already
there.
A
Two
of
the
biggest
elements
for
me
are
potential
for
upward
mobility
because
I
have
children
and
I
expect
them
to
be
able
to
live
in
this
community
and
have
hopes
for
them
for
that,
and
also
for
our
aging
population.
I'd
like
them
to
be
able
to
remain
here
and
stay
in
place,
so
they
can
enjoy
their
children
and
grandchildren.
A
The
other
thing,
as
a
number
of
commissioners
have
pointed
out,
is
that
accessibility,
mobility
and
thinking
beyond
where
the
car
culture
takes
us,
is
something
that
we
really
have
to
factor
into
this
land
use
alternative,
because
you
know
cars
are,
are
pollutant
at
this
point
and
and
are
contributing
to
a
number
of
environmental
issues,
and
so
how
we
think
about
housing
in
the
future
over
the
next
two
to
three
to,
as
commissioner
lance
said,
possibly
five
decades,
because
last
general
plan
lasted
50
years
is
important
so
with
those
things
in,
in
my
mind,
I'd
like
to
to
go
into
the
the
individual
items
or
individual
sections
everybody's
comfortable
with
that.
A
N
All
right
well,
thank
you
very
much
and
I
guess
I
jumped
the
gun
a
little
bit
and
I
apologize
for
that.
What
I
did
was,
I
looked
at
all
the
the
village
centers
that
were
on
the
first
alternatives
and
I
looked
at
them
with
regard
to
where
they
were
in
the
city
and
how
close
they
were
to
a
an
easy
bus
route,
and
there
are
three
of
them
that
the
extreme
edges
or
they're,
not
ex
they're,
in
areas
where
the
buses,
just
it's,
not
easy
for
them
to
come.
N
The
first
was
las
priestes
and
vioria
arbales
and
herbs
and
kanan
and
lundaro,
and
then
rayno
and
kimber
is
possible.
I
know
the
one
on
orchard
and
reno
there's
a
bus
that
goes
to
new
park
high,
so
that's
maybe
not
necessary
and
then
the
two
that
were
on
moorpark,
sending
a
bus
up
and
down
moorpark
road
doesn't
seem
to
be
difficult
to
do
so.
N
I
would
like
to
talk
about
adding
back
in
at
least
les
brieses
and
vio
rio
arboles
and
nerves,
kanan
and
lyr
lindero,
and
I'm
I'd
like
comments
on
reno
and
kimber
and
just
see
what
the
other
commissioners
think
about
that.
I
think
those
areas
the
that
gives
us
the
walkability
that
gives
us
a
place
to
send
a
bus,
bring
them
bring
people
to
and
from
there
and
and
and
the
areas
there
are
are,
I
think,
conducive
to
village
centers.
So
I'd
like
to
hear
what
everybody
else
says
about
those.
F
I
absolutely
support
the
concept
and
then
my
conversations
with
staff.
Last
week
I
was
surprised
to
see
them
fall
out.
We
have
a
lot
of
commercial
centers
that
are
over
parked,
which
means
that
that
we
have
way
too
many
parking
spaces
for
what
the
uses
are
and
certainly
herbs
and
arbolous,
which
I
actually
live
within
spitting
distance
of.
I
is
extremely
overparked
and
certainly
would
be
conducive
to
that
kind
of
I,
and
an
even
bus,
a
bus
isn't
necessarily
a
factor
for
me.
F
F
I
think
there
are
some
shopping
centers
on
moorpark,
certainly
that
are
over
parked
as
well
the
and
we
could,
if
they
decide
that
they
want
to
come
in
with
a
development
application.
We
can
always
condition
if
staff
doesn't
of
installing
bus,
pullouts,
so
there's
ways
of
improving
this
infrastructure
in
order
to
to
create
that
kind
of
connectivity
and
putting
people
where
they
shop,
where
they
work.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Lanson.
C
I
toom
in
favor
of
the
concept.
I
think
it
creates
again
lifestyle
options
of
having
grandparents
and
your
grandkids
a
lot
easier.
It
creates
a
lot
more
opportunity,
but
I
would
ask,
though,
is
it
possible
that
again,
the
the
staff
is
not
probably
listening
to
us,
but
somebody
could
put
up
and
share
their
screen
of
the
village
centers
and
then
maybe
commissioner
mcmahon
can
identify
by
the
numbers
so
that
everybody
watching
can
know
exactly
which
ones
we're
referencing
is
that
she
wants
to
add
back
in.
A
A
N
Well,
when
I
first
heard
that
they
were
taken
off,
I
I
assumed
they
were
taken
off
for
a
reason,
so
I
went
for
being
practical
and
not
putting
all
of
them
back
in.
So
I
I
was
looking
at
bus
routes
and
if
you
look
on
this
map,
number
one
is
las
priestes
and
via
rio.
N
How
you?
How
the
heck
are
you
gonna,
get
a
bus
all
the
way
out
there
efficiently
I
mean
you've
got
you've,
got
that
beautiful
little
shopping
center
with
the
restaurants
and
the
cute
little
market,
and
and
there's
some
town
homes
there.
N
So
if,
though,
the
people
who
want
to
get
there
or
get
away
from
there
and
go
somewhere
else
in
the
city
they're
not
anywhere
near
a
bus
route
right
now,
but
if,
if
we
could
put
one
there,
I
think
that's
that
would
be
very
useful
and
then,
if
you
go
down
to
number
three,
that's
renault
and
kimber,
I
think
that
that
is
also
a
conducive
area,
because
there's
a
lot
of
homes
there
that
might
work
and
then
arbolos
and
herbs
was
number
five.
N
Excuse
me
six.
It
was
number
six
because
that's
another
area
of
our
city
that
is
kind
of
out
of
the
way
for
a
bus
to
go
and
and
and
as
our
commissioner
also
said,
it's
real
conducive
because
of
the
over
parking
and
because
of
the
way
the
the
shopping
center
is
with
all
the
different
things
it
has
to
offer.
I
think
that's
a
good
place
and
then
it
and
as
much
as
las
priestes
and
villarreal,
is
on
one
side
of
the
city
away
from
everything
else.
Then
you've
got
number
seven
kanan
and
lindaro.
N
That
really
could
use
some
connectivity
and
if
the
commissioners
want
to
put
them
all
back,
the
ones
up,
the
two
left
were
the
ones
on
moorpark
road.
I
just
was
trying
to
be.
N
I
don't
know
more
trying
to
be
more
they're
doing
a
compromise,
because
some
people
didn't
want
them,
and
I
thought
well
putting
a
bus
up
and
down
moore
park.
Road
can
hit
those
areas,
but
I'm
not
opposed
to
adding
those
back
in
also.
F
Terabus
commissioner
mcmahon,
I
might
actually
weigh
in
on
here
arvalis-
does
actually
have
a
bus
route
on
it.
F
A
All
right,
you
know
what
with
the
screen
sharing,
I
can't
quite
see
you
guys
so,
commissioner,
newman,
did
you
have
any
additional
comments
on
that.
J
J
I
could
use
some
clarity
from
fellow
commissioners
about
their
ideas
about
how
the
mixed
use
would
work
here.
I
I
think
I
I
heard
commissioner
link
say
he's
talking
about
working
close
to
where
you
live
and
is.
Is
this
I
guess
it's
a
question.
Are
you?
Are
you
targeting
people
who
would
work
from
home
and
there
would
just
be
this
convenient
there'd
either
be
residential
at
the
center
or
or
they
live
nearby
or
they
they
would
work
at
home
nearby
and
do
their
shopping
there.
How
do
you
envision
the
work?
F
Certainly,
there
are
certain
areas
of
the
city
that
would
not
be
as
conducive
if
they
were
talking
about
population
centers,
not
necessarily
well,
when
you
start
getting
into
educational
type,
you've
got
especially
for
herbalists
and
herbs.
You
have
low
cerritos,
you
have
lang
ranch,
you
have
a
few
that
are
actually
fairly
close
by.
That
could
certainly
support
that
level
of
you
know,
professionals
that
work
in
and
around
the
other
thought
that
I
had
in
regard
to
those
which
I
just
completely
lost,
maybe
come
back
to
me
but
yeah.
F
I
had
another
thought
along
those
lines
and
it's
it
just
escaped
me.
J
Okay,
but
you're
you're
envisioning,
this
being
a
support,
a
commercial
support
center
for
people
who
work
from
home
in
the
area,
not
not
just
at
the
village
center.
Well,
I.
F
And
that
was
you
just
reminded
me
of
my
my
thought:
we've
recently
processed
in
simi
valley,
two
developments
that
are
geared
towards
millennials
and
what
they
do
is
they
provide
parking
spaces
for
uber
and
lyft.
They
provide
parking
spaces
for
grub
hub
or
whatever
else,
and
that's
not
to
say
that
every
millennial
gets
all
their
food
delivered,
but
they
actually
have
a
communal
space
in
the
apartment
complex
that
they
can
use,
whether
it's
a
conference
room
or
gym
or
what
have
you
and
they
don't
have
to
go
anywhere.
F
J
And
a
big
question
here
and
I'd
defer
to
your
expertise
on
this,
but
but
what
percentage
of
folks
who've
been
working
from
home
during
the
pandemic
will
remain
at
home
afterward,
because
if
we
take
something
like
on
the
other
side
of
town,
the
the
reno
and
kimber
zone,
I
think
the
the
arboles
and
herbs
is
a
little.
More
is
a
little
better.
A
J
A
Okay,
commissioner,
newman
I've
got
thoughts
on
this.
That
may
be
a
little
bit
different
than
commissioner
links,
and
commissioner
mcmahon.
My
mine
is:
is
that
the
village
centers
happen
to
be
in
areas
where
we
already
have
residential,
and
that
also
translates
to
they
tend
to
be
near
existing
schools,
and
so
for
me,
I
live.
I
live
directly
across
the
street
from
number
four
essentially,
and
my
neighborhood
school
is
on
my
street.
A
Less
than
300
yards
from
my
house
and
the
shopping
center
is
less
than
a
half
mile
walk
for
me
around
my
neighborhood
to
get
out,
but
I
could
have
my
back
fence
and
be
there
in
30
40
seconds.
A
So
when
I
look
at
these
these
village
areas,
that's
what
I
think
of
is
that
the
accessibility
to
my
shopping
center
to
my
child's
school,
to
to
things
I
need
the
drugstore.
My
dry,
cleaner.
All
of
those
things
are
very
very
close
proximity
to
me
and
it
makes
my
life
very
easy
and
it
makes
easy
for
me
to
go
without
a
car
and
that's
what
I
think
of
when
I
think
of
these
village
centers.
A
J
So
if
I
understand
correctly,
you're
saying
this
is
a
benefit
for
people
who
might
work
somewhere
else,
but
they're
still
all
kinds
of.
N
A
real
quick
comment
on
that
until
the
future,
when
people
are
are
maybe
where
it's
built
out
and
people
are
working
from
there
think
about
a
weekend.
You
get
home
from
your
long
commute.
You
don't
want
to
get
back
in
the
car
and
you
can
walk
to
the
grocery
store.
You
can
walk
to
the
coffee
shop.
C
I
also
think
in
looking
at
these
village
centers,
there's
a
better
chance
of
that
kind
of
development
happening
at
these
centers,
sometimes
better
than
some
of
the
other
areas.
We're
going
to
talk
about
some
of
these
areas
and
these
centers
are
are
in
need
of
this
type
of
involvement
to
create
that
kind
of
different
type
of
housing
that
they're
missing
right
now.
C
I
think
that
will
be
a
nice
synergy
between
all
of
this
as
we're
talking
about
and
again
create
those
neighborhood
centers,
which
will
then
alleviate
traffic
for
them
having
to
go
to
other
places.
So
I
I
think
this
is
a
good
solution
in
terms
of
incorporating
these
kind
of
areas
in
terms
of
that
kind
of
concept.
A
I
I
was
going
to
say
I
I
need
to
defer
to
staff
for
a
second
here.
Can
we
line
item
make
changes
here
or
like
can
we
say:
hey,
we
want
low
zoning.
You
know
low
mixed
at
four
five
and
six
and
leave
one
and
two
alone,
and
can
you
guys
make
these
changes
on
the
fly
for
us.
H
Well,
maybe
I
can
jump
in
here,
you
can,
you
can
handle
it
either
way.
In
other
words,
you
could,
as
shown
on
this
slide,
you
could
express
support
for
the
idea
of
village
centers.
The
idea
of
adding
mixed
use
to
these
to
these
locations
and
we've
included
some
policies
in
the
general
plan
that
are
supportive
of
that.
H
But
you
can
either
just
take
a
a
more
broad
brush
approach
and
say
we
support
the
of
idea,
use
in
these
locations
and
and
the
details
will
be
essentially
worked
out
at
a
later
time
or
if
you
feel
strongly
that
certain
sites
are
really
inappropriate
for
a
village
center
concept.
But
others
are.
You
could
go
down
that
that
that
path,
I
think
professionally,
you
know
each
of
these
centers
is-
is
unique.
H
Unless
there's
something
that's
really
of
concern
to
the
commission,
I
would
lean
toward
a
more
general
expression
of
support,
which
is
still
very
significant
for
city
council
and
and
if
you
want
to
qualify
that
in
some
way,
that's
of
course
fine
and
and
leave
sort
of
the
the
topic
somewhat
open,
so
that
the
various
sites
can
be
analyzed
more
in
greater
detail.
Going
forward.
F
I
would
prefer
to
do
the
use
the
broad
brush
sort
of
approach.
I
mean
there's
probably
a
few
of
these
that
commissioner
mcmahon
had
mentioned.
That
would
probably
not
be
necessarily
conducive,
but
I
also
know
that
you
know
number
one.
The
las
resistant
villa
rio
has
been
a
a
fairly
depressed
shopping
center
for
a
long
time,
and
maybe
that
kind
of
revitalization
could
you
know,
bring
some
vitality
back
to
that
area
and
again
it
is
adjacent
to
high
density,
or
you
know,
multi-family.
D
A
A
A
All
right,
we
got
the
village
centers
down
now,
if
staff
be
so
kind
as
to
put
up
a
map
of
the
west
lake
area.
For
us.
A
All
right
who
would
like
to
kick
off
the
bidding
on
this
one.
A
I
do
not
see
any
commissioners
expressing
themselves,
commissioner,
newman.
D
A
Actually,
the
market
for
us.
Thank
you
very
much,
so
actually
I'll
throw
my
suggestion
in
first.
I
think
that
we
should
have
that
property
already
kind
of
match
what
city
council
has
as
as
guided
the
property
owner
as
acceptable
to
them,
and
I
would
say
that
the
the
mixed
use
low
next
door
in
the
promenade
and
across
the
street
makes
less
sense
if
they,
if
we
need
to
account
for
units
and
leave
those
as
commercial
as
they
are,
because
those
are
relatively
new
developments.
A
F
I
would
be
supportive
of
that.
I
think
that
the
gte
and
incidentally
my
wife's
mother-
used
to
work
there
and
my
brother-in-law
used
to
work
there.
So
I
think
everybody's
had
a
hand
in
that
that
building
so
I
would
be
supportive
of
that
change.
I
hesitate
to
add
any
kind
of
intensification
at
the
to
boulevard,
westlake
intersection.
F
C
I
agree
with
commissioner
link.
I
think
the
feasibility
and
the
the
actual
prospect
of
it
happening
here
is
tough
and
by
the
way,
if
at
some
point
in
the
future,
the
property
owners
here
want
to
submit
something.
They
obviously
can't
at
that
point
for
whatever
zone
change
or
whatever
issue
they
may
look
at
at
that
point,
but
I
think,
conceptually
speaking,
that's
probably
not
going
to
be
an
area
that
housing
is
going
to
look
to
go
anytime
soon.
So
I
I
would
agree.
A
N
I
I
agree
with
everything
that's
been
said
here.
I
think
it's
out
of
fairness.
We
need
to
have
it
as
a
residential
area,
because
the
city
council
has
given
them
that
kind
of
a
green
light
to
go
forward,
and
I
also
agree
that
it's
unlikely
that
that
new
shopping
center,
newer
ish
shopping
center
again
we'll
get
housing
soon.
So
I
agree
completely.
A
I've
been,
I
think
we
can
go
through
this.
Oh
commissioner,
newman.
J
Mr
chair,
I
I
partially
agree,
but
only
partially
I'm
fine
with
putting
gte
prudential
gte
back.
A
J
J
In
part
because
of
the
general
comments
I
had
and
and
the
issue
I
raised
in
questioning
staff,
we
don't
really
know
for
anything
that
we
do
going
forward.
We
don't
know
where
we're
pulling
units
from
so
all
that
all
the
yellow
or
light
yellow
or
darker
yellow
around
there
might
actually
end
up.
Even
though
it's
supposedly
protected
it
might
actually
end
up
with
increased
density,
and
we
don't
know
that
yet,
and
I
think
we
should
have
that
be
part
of
the
discussion
before
making
any
further
changes.
J
Plus
we
also
heard
from
a
number
of
toba
people
tonight,
saying
respect
our
specific
plan.
Don't
change
it,
I'm
not!
I'm!
Not
necessarily
endorsing
that
view.
I'm
saying
we
don't
have
enough
information
to
make
designation
changes.
So
I'm
okay
with
advanced
change.
I'm
I'm
would
like
to
break
that
out.
If
I
could,
because
I
endorse
that,
I
don't
endorse
the
rest
of
what's
proposed
here.
A
Well,
I
I
was,
I
would
say
this,
commissioner,
newman,
let's,
let's,
let's
be
in
agreement
on
the
stuff,
we're
in
agreement
on
and
then
when
we
get
to
the
the
the
final
overarching
plan,
we
we
can
kind
of
hash
out
whether
or
not
it
the
whole
thing
makes
sense,
but
at
least
the
this
way
we've.
Given
our
specific
our
specific
input
to
what
the
city
council
will
see
on
these
individual
things,
if
it
because
it's
going
to
go.
J
This
is
an
input
output
problem.
For
me,
mr
chair,
I
mean
I'm
I'm
going
to
have
this
issue
with
with
all
of
the
areas
of
change,
where
there's
very
granular
information
about,
what's
being
done
on
the
output
side,
without
the
concomitant
information
on
the
input
side,
and
so.
J
F
Commissioner
link
just
to
weigh
in
before
I
forget
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard.
Specific
plan
actually
ends
with
duesenberg.
A
F
Yes,
I
I
would
move
to
in
essence,
swapped
the
mixed-use
assuming
mixed-use
low
from
the
promenade
to
the
gte
baxter
verizon
property.
A
You
got
it
secretary.
Please
prepare
us
for
a
vote.
I
A
This
beyond
the
one
that
commissioner
newman
expressed,
that
he
is
just
not
supportive
of
any
of
the
rest
of
it
in
general.
H
Mr
chair,
yes,
sir,
can
I
ask
for
a
clarification
on
the
mixed
use
at
the
southwest
corner
of
westlake
and
thousands
boulevard?
H
H
A
Okay,
I'm
going
to
revert
this
back
to
my
commissioners.
I
was
under
the
impression
that
was
that
was
also
a
piece
we
were
voting
on.
I
had
them
lump
together
in
my
head,
but
that's
because
you
know
bed,
bath
and
beyond
the
habit
are
over
there.
So
all
right
it
just
all
feels
like
the
same
shopping
center
to
make.
Did
anybody
feel.
A
A
separate
piece
and
when
they
were
voting,
commissioner.
F
Yeah
I
hadn't
included
it.
I
I
wasn't
intending
to
do
that.
That's
that's
another
shopping
center
that
I
think
would
actually
be
right
for
redevelopment.
Given
the
the
vacancy
you
know,
cost
plus
moved
out.
They
could
never
rent
out
that
restaurant
on
the
corner.
So
certainly
there's
there's
opportunities
at
this
site.
A
But
it's
next
my
concern
me
it's
next
to
an
auto
mall
and
they
tend
to
be
open
late
on
weekends.
There's
a
lot
of
parking
issues
all
that
fun
stuff,
so
it
would
be.
There
would
be
a
number
of
concerns
I
think
for
any
any
any
housing
developer
there.
A
But
I'm
willing
to
run
with
it,
mr
mcmahon.
F
You're
talking
about
that's
yes,
so
talking
about
the
western,
so
when
you
would
refer
to
the
auto
mall,
that's
that's
correct.
That's
that
was
the
puzzle,
we're
referring
to
not
cost.
Plus
we
already,
we
already
swapped
the
the
promenade,
which
is
where
cost
plus
actually
is.
I
had
made
my
mistake:
there.
N
A
Yeah,
the
question
is:
does
anybody
in
favor
of
taking
away
the
mixed
use
designation
from
the
west
park,
commissioner
link
is
in
favor
of
keeping
it.
F
Now
I
would
be
in
favor
of
removing
it
as
well
yeah.
I
would
agree
that
your
your
assessment
of
the
adjacent
use,
and
especially
when
we're
talking
about
noise
and
any
of
the
the
subsequent
elements
that
would
come
along
with
this
land
use
alternatives
that
it
would
certainly
be
a
consideration.
A
M
A
Yeah
yeah
so
who
wants
to
move
on
the
western
side
of
west
lake
boulevard
south
of
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard.
N
B
B
H
Yes,
sir,
I'm
I'm
sorry
to
to
interrupt,
but
as
we
remove
or
remove
the
capacity
and
remove
the
mixed
use
from
those
two
sides
of
west
lake
boulevard.
What
is
the
the
commission's
pleasure
in
terms
of
of
its
recommended
land
use
for
those
sites.
H
What
we
said
correct,
but
but
which
type
of
commercial-
it's
commercial
town
across
the
street,
on
the
north
side-
that
that
would
be,
I
think,
the
most
logical
approach.
The
alternative
is
commercial
neighborhood,
which
is
more
appropriate
for
the
village
centers.
We
were
talking
about
before
or.
H
That
is,
promenade
is,
is
c3,
which
is
our
community
shopping
center
35
foot
max,
but
with
the
potential
for
75
foot
overlay
and
on
the
west
side,
it's
actually
a
highway
and
arterial
commercial,
but
that
that
has
the
same
height
limits
as
well.
35
foot
normal
up
to
75
foot
with
an
overlay.
H
That's
commercial
town,
1.0
far
and
50
foot
average
50-foot
height
limit.
A
So
let's
have
a
quick
conversation
with
my
fellow
commissioners:
are
we
comfortable
leaving
them
as
is,
or
do
we
want
to
have
them
match
the
northern
their
northern
neighbors.
H
Zoning
is
still
in
place,
but
we
need
to
make
a
decision
as
to
what
type
of
proposed
commercial,
in
other
words,
there's
three
types
of
of
commercial
in
the
proposed
land
use
system,
neighborhood,
a
town
and
regional.
So
there
are
three
options:
it's
it's
basically,
the
the
pink
you
can
see
here,
the
the
salmon
to
the
north
and
then
the
bright
red
down.
There
is
the
hyatt
hotel,
just
south
of
the
freeway,
so.
H
Well
again,
the
the
current
zoning
is
highway.
Arterial
on
the
west
side
of
westlake,
boulevard
and
and
neighborhood
shop
are
sorry
community
shopping
center
on
the
east
side.
So
that's.
The
current
zoning
general
plan
is
currently
commercial
for
all
four
corners,
just
commercial
there's,
no
there's
no
intensity
in
our
current
general
plan
for
commercial.
J
Yes,
is
there,
is
there
any
change
in
height
under
consideration
here
in
building
height.
H
So
the
the
salmon
color,
the
commercial
town,
is
a
50-foot
height
limit,
1.0
florida
area
ratio.
The
current
zoning
for
those
two
areas
would
allow
35
foot
height
buildings
normally
and
up
to
75
foot
with
a
height
overlay.
It
does
not.
They
do
not
have
a
height
overlay
yet,
but
that
is
allowed
under
our
code.
H
G
And
that
is
if
it
helps
the
commission
at
all,
that's
what
it
was
proposed,
an
alternative
to
which
was
one
of
the
alternative
that
left
it
as
commercial.
It
was
a
commercial
town
to
match
the
north
side
of
that
intersection.
A
Yeah,
I
believe
that
makes
the
most
sense
in
my
head
markdown.
Do
you
have
your
hand
up
or
no
I
don't.
Okay,
he's
virtual
all
right!
So
did
you
want
to
make
him?
Oh
commissioner,
mcmahon.
I
A
All
right
two
down
four
sections
to
go
and
then
the
big
fish:
all
right
can
we
get
east
geo
boulevard.
A
Easy
for
you
guys
today,
where
are
we
that
was
much
boulevard
all
right
here
we
go
so
this
is.
This.
Is
toba's
territory
correct.
A
We're
a
little
bit
beyond
going
that
way,
but
does
anybody
have
any
comments
on
this
one.
N
N
Individual,
I
don't
know
how
to
say
this.
I
just
feel
that
it
isn't
fair
to
take
that
away
from
them
when
they've
worked
towards
that,
and
we
still
have
the
ability
to
to
work
on
the
type
of
of
property
or
the
type
of
buildings
that
they
will
build
as
they
individually
come
to
the
city.
So
I
would,
I
would
like
to
see
it
as
mixed-use
medium.
F
Question
for
staff,
what
is
the
current
designation
for
tova?
Is
it
mixed
use
low?
Is
it
mixed
use
in
general,.
H
N
M
It
and
if
I
make
chair
bus,
I
think
this
is
important
for
commissioner
mcmahon
and
all
of
you
frankly.
You
also
have
to
remember
that
with
a
specific
plan
20
it,
it
is
imperative
that
you
understand
that
there
was
a
cap
placed
on
the
specific
plan
as
far
as
how
many
units
go
in
there.
M
After
that,
that's
why
we
do
the
measure
e
pre-screening
allocation,
because
it's
city
council
action
that
adds
more
units
to
that.
So
it's
not
just
a
straightforward,
hey
everything
is,
is
commercial
mixed
for
housing
too?
If
I
hope
that
brings
clarity
to
that,
just
because
I
think
it
is
important
that
you
understand
it
wasn't
like
they
can
just
go
and
build
homes
or
residents
residential
units
on
the
boulevard,
without
as
unless
they
had
allocation
from
before.
M
Absolutely
yeah
that
I
mean
there's
many
of
many
of
them
that
actually
ask
for
allocations
that
they
initially
got
them,
and
then
they
didn't
build
anything
and
after
one
year
they
had
to
re
return
them.
You
I'm
sure
you
all
heard
about
the
nazar
beacon
property
that
recent
was
allocated.
Some.
There
was
one
before
the
principy
project
that
was
just
west
of
city
hall.
They
were
not
allocated
units,
so
they
did
not
change
that
to
bad
house
to
that
location
that
one
across
the
street
from
the
lakes.
M
That's
in
the
boulevard.
It's
a
specific
plan.
Excuse
me
they
initially
were
allocated,
but
then,
after
a
period
of
time
they
realized
they
were
not
going
to
apologize
for
that.
They
were
not
going
to
make
it
happen,
so
they
returned
the
units
back
to
the
capacity
the
the
bank.
If
you
will.
F
I
I
would
be
a
supporter
of
that
moving
towards
the
mixed
use
low,
which
would
return
it
to
the
previous
designation
that
they
had
sought.
The
one
thing
I
guess
would
be
the
two
or
maybe
two
caveats
would
be
that
the
the
lakes
is
its
own
specific
plans,
so
we
should
we
might
be
who
has
to
treat
that
separately
from
the
thousand
oaks
boulevard
specific
plan,
and
then
I
would
assume
that
and
I
for
the
life
of
me.
F
I
can't
remember
the
name
of
the
project,
the
high
density
project,
that's
going
in
to
towards
the
west,
as
you
get
closer
to
rancho,
I
know,
is
it
rancho
or
moore
park.
F
Either
but
I
think
that's
where
tarantula
hill
is,
where
you
have
the
kind
of
u-shaped
area,
which
is
mixed-use
medium,
that
I
would
imagine
we
would
want
to
keep
that.
H
So
so,
if
I
may,
this
is
an
important
point,
because
the
downtown
corridor
along
thousands
boulevard
does
have
two
specific
plans.
One
is
the
thousands
boulevard
specific
plan,
the
other
is
the
civic
arts
plaza
specific
plan,
and
the
cap
specific
plan
is
basically
you
can
see
it
on
the
west
side
of
canada,
school
road
here
on
the
north
side
of
the
freeway
city
hall
and
the
theaters
etc.
H
So
I
would
suggest
it
sounds
like
the
commission
would
like
to
first
discuss
or
take
action
on
the
thousands
boulevard,
specific
plan
which
is
much
of
the
remaining
corridor
and
then
and
then
I
would
suggest
that
that
you
be
explicit
about
that
about
the
cap
specific
plan
as
well.
So
so
there's
clarity.
H
A
Yeah,
my
just
so
everybody
knows
my
concerns
in
this
area.
We've
got
one
elementary
school
and
very
limited
park
space.
There's
the
park
behind
mouthful
eatery.
I
don't
know
if
you
guys
are
familiar
no
over
there,
so
I
before
we
start
opening
it
up,
because
obviously
the
number
of
units
was
capped
previously,
if
we,
if
we
zone
the
whole
thing
mixed
use
to
any
degree,
we'll
probably
far
exceed
that
cap.
H
I
believe
it
would
increase
the
capacity
we'd
have
to
run
the
numbers
right
now.
You
have
a
mix
right.
You
have
some
areas
that
are
mediums
of
magenta
that
are
high.
You
have
some
areas
that
are
commercial,
that
don't
have
mixed
use,
so
we
have
to
run
the
numbers
after
tonight
and
see
where
we
end
up,
but
that
that's
that's
your
your
choice.
All
right.
E
This
I
just
want
to
make
sure
with
the
numbers,
since
we
ran
the
numbers
that
there's
clarity
on
this
and
sorry,
I
apologize
for
jumping
in
no
no
please
so
when
the
number
that
we
discussed
with
the
22
000
includes
all
of
the
areas
that
you
see
in
purple
on
this
map,
so
all
of
the
mixed
use
low
and
mixed
use
medium.
So
it
all
includes.
E
It
already
includes
that,
and
so,
if
what
I'm
hearing
you
all
say,
is
that
what
you
want
to
do
is
add
back
in
these
areas
which
are
on
the
on
the
map
here
which
are
circled.
Those
were
the
areas
that
were
plus
that
were
generally
were
mixed
use
or
are
mixed
use
in
the
specific
plan,
but
we
were
proposing
putting
it
back
to
commercial
and
what
I'm
hearing
you
say
is
those
should
go
back
to
mixed
use
in
order
to
match
the
specific
plan.
E
It
also
actually
includes
another
small
area,
but
that
wouldn't
be
you
know:
we'd
have
to
run
the
numbers,
but
we've
already
included
everything
in
in
purple
and
the
allocation
would
go
away
with
the
new.
The
allocation
method
would
go
away
within
new
jobs
and
they
would
just
be
allowed
correct.
M
A
A
M
Make
this
all
mixed
use
back
to
where
it
was
the
allocation
product
specific
plan?
20
is
no
longer
going
to
be
there
because
you're
going
to
allow
all
of
these
to
have
that
mixed
use,
density
to
the
same
minimum
of
30
units
or
maximum
30
units.
Even
but
now
you
get
the
whole
boulevard
with
that
number.
M
M
It
will
leave
the
specific
plan
in
place,
but
that
again
it
goes
back
to
the
in
the
process
that
we've
talked
about
from
the
beginning.
Where
we
do
this
vision
and
then
after
we
do
this
vision,
visionary
process,
then
we
start
going
back
and
making
sure
everything
else
is
going
to
be
consistent
with
the
general
kind
of
once
it
gets
adopted.
So
we
look
at
the
zoning.
We
look
at
all
the
specific
plants
because,
ultimately,
those
all
have
to
be
consistent
with
the
general
time
as
you
go
from
top
to
bottom.
M
B
G
Specifically,
if
you're
asking
specifically
about
the
way
that
the
units
are
allocated
now,
whether
you
leave
it
as
it
is
on
this
map
or
take
it
all
back
to
30
units,
an
acre
that
allocation
process
will
go
away.
So
whatever
you
whatever
is
reflected
on
the
map,
those
units
will
be
there
for
property
owners
to
use.
There
won't
be
allocation
either
way.
A
C
Lansin
yeah
and
looking
at
this
one
thing
that
kind
of
strikes
me
is
that
this
is
the
one
area
where
the
city
council
has
already
made
an
order
and
made
a
ruling
with
regard
to
this
this
issue,
and
I'm
not
as
comfortable
kind
of
contradicting
that
as
part
of
a
recommendation.
C
If
the
city
council
theme
that
they
want
to
go
back
and
change
it
and
leave
it
this
way,
they
obviously
can,
but
I
kind
of
want
to
honor
what
the
specific
plan
ruling
was
at
that
point
and
then
leave
it.
That
way,
with
the
understanding
that
it's
up
to
the
city
council,
then,
if
they
want
to
then
incorporate
this
revised
concept.
That
would
be
my
my
sense.
A
Commissioner,
lance
I've
got
a
question
for
you
on
that,
but
if
the
city
council
passed
that,
knowing
that
they
had
a
cap
on
the
number
of
units,
but
they
were
just
kind
of
opening
the
door
for
all
the
landowners
there
but
knew
it
was
just
going
to
be
a
specific
number
of
units
that
were
going
to
be
constructed.
It
was
going
to
be
kind
of
first
come
first
serve.
A
C
A
C
That's
the
whole
thing
is
that,
yes,
it
opens
it
up
conceptually,
but
I
think
the
practical
reality
is.
I
don't
think
we're
going
to
see
as
much
and
then
we
haven't
seen
as
much
in
the
last
10.
You
know
15
years,
so
it's
one
of
those
things
where
I
would
defer
to
the
city
council
at
that
point
in
terms
of
what
they
previously
ordered.
A
All
right,
my
fellow
commissioners,
just
so
you
know,
I
cannot
see
all
of
you
on
the
screen,
while
we're
screen
sharing
so
do
use
that
hand
thing
if
you
want
to
talk,
because
I
I
swear
I'm
not
ignoring.
I
just
can't
see
you
there,
commissioner
mcmahon.
N
Yes,
I
I
just
wanted
to
ask
mr
town,
if
we
could
suggest
to,
or
would
we
want
to
suggest
to
the
city
council
to
consider
putting
the
cap
on
if
we
make
that
change
is?
Is
that
something
that
we
could
do
or
we
would
want
to
do
or
the
city
council
would
appreciate
us
doing.
H
So
I
think
I
think
the
commission
has
a
decision
as
to
whether
it
wants
to
again
go
with
this
vision
or
revert
it
back
to
all.
You
know
low,
which
is
consistent
with
the
current
specific
plane
or
could
also
recommend
increasing
density,
but
the
the
big
difference
that
was
just
discussed
is
that
your
recommendations
in
the
final
map
for
this
general
plan
is
going
to
put
units
on
the
ground.
So
that's
that's
what
the
state
wants.
H
They
want
cities
to
be
specific
about
where
growth
will
and
will
not
occur,
so
should,
if
you
go
with
this
option
or
another,
it
will
put
capacity
on
the
ground
as
matt
mentioned,
and
and
we
will
no
longer
have
these.
You
know
city-wide
pools,
teal
boulevard
pools
as
we've
had
in
the
past.
So
I
think
that's
the
only
that's
an
important
point
to
keep
in
mind
as
you
make
a
recommendation
here.
J
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I'm
gonna
vote
against
changes
here
for
the
because
of
the
concerns
I've
already
raised,
but
as
an
informational
point,
I
think
all
of
us
should
bear
in
mind
here
is
something
mr
town
just
said
about
caps
and
pools
going
away.
A
Commissioner,
newman
and
with
density
bonuses,
I
feel
that
some
of
these
could
be
potentially
50
higher
than
what
we
designate
them.
As
is
my
understanding
from
reading
law.
J
A
And
I
personally
would
anticipate
that
any
developer,
because
we've
seen
such
a
reluctance
to
develop
that
it's
probably
due
to
lack
of
cost
effectiveness.
So
I
think
it
is
a
fair
assumption
to
make
that
they
will.
They
will
build
to
as
many
units
as
they
can
on
a
on
a
unit
as
or
on
a
piece
of
property,
as
we
will
allow
and
lot
the
law
will
allow.
F
Another
configuration
here
is
that
whatever
designation
that
we
give,
even
if
it's
just
commercial,
it
doesn't
preclude
them
from
going
and
getting
a
general
plan
amendment
zone
change.
So
there
is
that
that
potential.
So
even
if
we
put
it
at
commercial,
it
should
make
a
difference.
F
The
other
issue
that
I
just
looked
at
is
a
rancho
which,
incidentally,
will
actually
have
quite
a
bit
more
bicycle
connectivity,
because
there's
a
project
that
takes
bike
lanes
from
rancho
up
to
the
transit
center,
which
will
certainly
help,
but
the
other
consideration
I
would
have
is
that
that
ramp,
the
freeway
ramp
from
101
to
23
may
not
be
conducive
as
far
as
a
noise
and
even
a
pollution
sort
of
a
situation
for
mixed
use.
So
I
would
be
hesitant
to
put
any
kind
of
residential
immediately
adjacent
to
that.
A
So
do
any
of
my
commissioners
want
to
make
a
motion
to
change
any
of
this,
or
are
we
in
agreement
that
we
can
just
leave
it?
As
is
stated
at
the
moment,
I'm
seeing
a
lot
of
nodding
of
heads.
A
I
was
gonna
say
if
you
don't
agree
with
it
at
all,
at
the
end,
we're
going
to
vote
on
on
on
this
whole
thing,
and
I
think
that's
that's
probably
the
best
time
to
just
say
right.
A
Kind
of
deal
with
that
end
of
it
in
in
this
piecemeal
portion.
C
I
I'll
go
along
with
that
concept
if
there's
just
something
that
they
can
put
in
the
the
report
saying
that
we
recognize
the
city
council
obviously
has
the
ability
to
go
back
and
deal
with
this
I'll
support
that
then.
A
Yeah
because
I
I
think
we're
all
in
agreement
that
city
council
came
up
with
a
plan,
actually
we're
talking
about
a
couple
of
different
plans
as
far
as
the
specific
one
for
civic
arts
plaza
and
the
and
the
the
t.o
boulevard,
and
it's
kind
of
up
to
them
how
they
want
to
untie
that
and
still
keep
their
original
intent
and-
and
I
think
all
of
us
have
looked
at
it
and
gone.
N
H
Town,
so
just
to
be
clear,
is
the
commission's
preference
then
to
leave
these
land
use
designations
as
proposed
or
yes,.
H
A
All
right
and
yes
and
commissioner
newman's
made
it
very
clear-
he's
not
a
fan:
let's
go
to
downtown
teal
boulevard.
A
H
I'm
sorry
chair
did
we
take
a
vote
to
support
this
land
use
map
then,
as
shown?
No,
we
didn't
okay.
H
C
J
A
look
I'm
actually
okay,
either
way,
I
mean
I'm
okay
with
voting
well,
I
have
voted
for
a
few
little
pieces,
so
yeah,
okay,.
C
I
B
Motion
carries
3-0,
commissioner,
newman
and
chairbus
abstaining.
A
This
one
raise
your
hand,
because
I
can't
see
all
of
you
all
right,
commissioner,.
F
Sorry,
I'm
just
jumping
in
on
this.
I
would
actually
support
an
increase
in
in
density
for
the
oaks
and
jans
again,
echoing
some
of
my
comments
about
centers
that
are
underutilized.
That
may
be
depressed,
especially
jans.
I
know
that
the
with
the
vacation
of
sears
and
other
uses
that
is
an
extremely
over
parked
shopping
centers,
so
certainly
they
could
use
the
existing
capacity.
They
already
have
to
increase
density.
F
A
All
right,
commissioner,
newman.
J
J
I
do
have
a
question
for
staff,
though
about
how
we
proceed
here,
as
currently
proposed
is
the
are
the
the
5400
units
that
were
identified
as
being
able
to
be
redesignated
back
in
2018?
J
So
that
number
then-
and
thank
you
for
that-
that's
that's
right
so
that
number
the
3000
whatever
is.
Is
that
sufficient
to
cover
this
or
would
additional
units
be
needed.
J
J
Yeah,
okay-
I'm
I'm
torn
on
this
because
I
do
I
do
support
smaller
pilot
projects
at
the
two
current
shopping
centers,
but
again
without
information
about
where
those
additional
units
are
coming
from.
I
don't
think
I
can
support
this
gotcha,
but
let's
hear
from
some
more
folks.
C
Commissioner,
lansing
yeah,
I
think
this
is
again
as
we
keep
saying
this
is
kind
of
if
you're
gonna
put
it
anywhere
the
synergy
between
the
mall
and
housing
here
in
this
situation,
especially
given
it's
near
the
freeway,
it's
secluded
from
other
housing,
I
mean
it
seems
to
make
the
most
sense.
If
we're
going
to
try
to
do
something,
this
area
would
make
sense
now,
by
the
way.
C
On
top
of
that,
I
don't
know
if
any
of
you
have
walked
through
the
oaks
mall
anytime
recently,
they
need
some
different
idea,
and
I
don't
know
if
mixed-use
low
is
enough
to
be
honest
with
you
in
terms
of
trying
to
find
the
flexibility
of
an
option.
That's
going
to
end
up
working
jans
is
trying
very
hard
to
figure
out
various
different
ways.
They've
come
before
us
with
a
a
new
business
of
axe,
throwing
which
we
all
can't
wait
to
wait
to
do
so.
A
I'm
gonna
throw
in
my
two
cents
now.
Why
have
a
moment
the
eastern
side
of
moorpark
road
above
hillcrest,
where
the
best
buy
is
and
everything
there
up
to
wilbur
and
where
the
whole
foods
shopping
center
is.
I
think
that
all
of
this
should
have
the
potential
to
be
mixed
use,
slow
and
the
reason
I
say
that
is
is
because
directly
north
of
there
is
glenwood
elementary
school
acacia
elementary
school
there's
a
large
park
next
to
well
there's
a
smaller
park.
A
Next
to
glenwood,
there's
a
larger
park
in
the
shadow
oaks
neighborhood.
I
feel
like
there's
a
lot
of
accessibility
plus.
If
you
go
south
on
moore
park,
road,
just
south
of
the
freeway
there
there's
trail
access.
So
I
am
in
great
agreement
that
this
is
one
of
the
one
of
the
locations.
I
feel
could
support
a
large
amount
of
population
growth
without
a
significant
amount
of.
A
Infrastructure
change,
as
far
as
as
far
as
that
goes,
I
think
that
we
could.
We
could
handle
a
lot
of
people
here
and
so
and
at
the
same
time,
I'm
not
sure
how
much
longer
box
stores
like
best
buy,
are
going
to
exist.
I
know
that
fries
fell
off
the
face
of
the
earth
last
year
and
I
wish
best
by
all
the
best.
A
I
don't
want
to
jinx
them
by
saying
that
in
the
meeting,
but
I
do
think
that
the
landowner
there
would
need
could
potentially
need
flexibility
over
the
next
decade
or
two,
and
I
think
we
would
be
remiss
in
not
giving
them
that
opportunity
now
and
and
waiting
for
that
place
to
to
to
end
up
in
the
straits
that
we
do
see
the
oaks
and
jan
small
in
now.
A
So
I
would
throw
that
out
to
my
fellow
commissioners.
If
you
guys
are
interested,
I
would.
I
would
actually
like
to
expand
the
area
of
mixed
use
here.
A
What
would
you
do
the
oaks
of
the
jazz
mall?
I
think
that
I
think
they
need
to
be
mixed
use
medium.
I
I
believe,
both
of
them
in
the
letters
I
read
are
suggesting
that
they
see
themselves
as
trying
to
build
hotels,
stuff
like
that
and
I
went
to
high
school
here.
We
had
our
prom
at
the
marriott
woodland
hills
because
there
wasn't
a
hotel
big
enough
for
us.
A
You
know
I
mean
there.
There
are
there.
There
would
be
advantages
to
having
stuff
like
that
in
those
in
those
centers,
I'm
not
sure
how
much
actual
housing
they're
going
to
build.
I
know
neither
one
of
those
corporations
is
specifically
a
housing
company,
but
I
think
that
we,
if
we,
if
we
do
open
it
up
to
them,
I
I
am
confident
they're
going
to
come
up
with
projects
that
are
going
to
make
them
money
if
they're
going
to
and
will
create
benefit
to
the
city.
J
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
one
of
the
letters
in
the
supplemental
packet
we
received
this
afternoon
is
from
six
former
planning
commissioners
and
they
are
endorsing
the
idea
of
limited
development
in
two
areas.
One
of
them
is:
is
the
oaks
mall
and
jan's
marketplace
area?
I
don't
know
if
they're
endorsing
the
entire
outline
of
the
map
in
the
proposal
here,
which
is
significantly
denser
than
just
those
two
malls,
but
the
former
commissioners
did
endorse
some
development
in
this
area
and
also
we'll
get
to
this
later.
Rancho
conejo
north
of
the
101.
N
A
That
that's
what
I
would
throw
out
there,
because
I
see
it
all
on
on
thousand
oaks
boulevard
and
I
feel
like
there's
a
greater
opportunity
up
at
the
top
here.
I
I'm
actually
less
enthusiastic
about
mixed-use
medium
in
the
lower
part
along
thousand
oaks
boulevard
than
I
would
be
in
those
areas
because
they're
because
they're
such
large
parcels-
and
I
feel
like
there's
a
lot
more
room
to
play
with
there.
F
Speaking
from
personal
experience,
I
know
the
best
buy,
especially
the
total
wine
seems
to
get
quite
a
bit
of
traffic,
so
I
mean
I
could
certainly
see,
certainly
see
you
know
some
I
mean
it
does
seem
like
a
fairly
utilized
center.
I
mean
again,
the
big
box
store
is
not
withstanding.
F
I
I
think
the
bigger
concern
for
me
would
be
the
regional
malls
and
where
they're
going,
I
know
I
mean
I
think
it's
called
the
promenade,
but
in
woodland
hills
it's
certainly.
I
mean
it's
basically
empty.
It's
that
new
kind
of
paradigm
with
what's
it
called
the
village,
which
has
seen
a
huge
amount
of
success,
so
encouraging
something
like
that.
For
these,
these
regional
malls
that
are
kind
of
going
out
the
door
would
be
my
preference.
F
A
All
right,
if
I
think
everybody's
had
their.
C
I
A
H
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Only
a
point
of
clarification:
the
area
on
the
north
side
of
the
jans
marketplace
that
is
currently
shown
in
pink
there
as
commercial
neighborhood,
correct,
that's
where
bandits
is
and
and
and
loco
and
so
forth.
It
is
the
intent
to
retain
that
area.
Leave
that
area
as
commercial
neighborhood
or
or
as
the
intent
to
include
that
as
mixed
use
as
well.
A
My
personal
feeling
would
be
I
would
I
would
prefer
that
bmx
juice
as
well.
I
I
know
that
the
band
is
obviously
highly
successful.
I'm
sure
the
car
wash
is
doing
fine,
but
that
that
that
mall,
where
there's
been
a
number
there's
a
pizza
place
there
there's
been
a
couple
of
mexican
restaurants.
C
So
if
I
can
also
ask
one
other
question
that
I
got
a
quick
inspiration,
looking
at
the
list
here,
number
three
create
a
new
land,
designation
or
special
land
use
for
I'm
assuming
the
mall
area.
What
would
that.
J
Just
narrower,
I
actually
would
would
be
supportive
of
that
just
just
to
have
a
smaller
area
for
the
boundaries
here.
Basically,
what
nelson
described.
G
I
think
our
intent
when
we
said
create
a
new
land
use
designation,
was
going
back
to
what
I
mentioned
earlier
about
revisiting
the
height
and
the
far
in
relation
to
the
density
and
whether
it
made
sense
to
mix
and
match
those
numbers
on
these
sites,
given
how
large
they
are,
and
that
kind
of
ties
in
with
the
next
bullet
to
increase
height
limits
in
some
areas.
G
Yes,
yeah,
I
mean,
I
think
I
mean
overlays,
aren't
often
used
in
general
plans,
but
there.
B
G
A
Yeah
I
yeah
my
personal.
My
personal
feeling
is
that
we
should
give
this
area
as
much
flexibility
as
possible.
I've
seen
this
area
change
significantly
in
in
the
time
that
I've
lived
here
since
88,
and
I
I
feel
like
it.
You
know
I
one
of
my
first
jobs
was
at
the
the
chance
mall
shout
out
to
larry
singer
the
big
and
tall
store
that
is,
that
is
very
long
gone
at
this
point,
but
yeah.
A
Oh,
so
I
I'll
let
my
fellow
commissioners
if
they
want
to
throw
out
a
emotion
on
any
of
that,
though,.
A
As
well
as
the
peninsula,
above
up
to
wilbur
road
above.
J
I
G
One
more
point
of
clarification
too:
on
the
oaks
they're
on
the
southeast
end,
there
there's
a
commercial
piece.
Are
you
suggesting
change
that
to
mixed-use
medium
also
to
match
that
whole
just
make
that
whole
thing
the
same.
A
Yes,
big
five
yeah
yeah,
absolutely
they
should
be
they
should
be
able
to
if
they
could
come
up
with
a
like
a
grand
unified
plan
for
all
that.
That
would
be
amazing.
H
I'm
sorry,
but
just
a
quick
point
of
clarification
are
we
talking
about
the
area
shown
in
red
underneath
correct,
okay,
right
right,
okay,
so
the
proposal
is
mixed,
use
medium
for
that
area
as
well,
correct,
okay
and
and
for
the
for
the
peninsula.
F
So
when
we're
referring,
oh
big,
five,
okay,
so
we're
not
talking
about
starbucks
men's
warehouse.
I
A
A
I
A
Moving
on
to
rancho
canal.
N
Okay,
this
one
is
tough
because
I
am
in
newberry
park
and
I
travel
these
streets
a
lot.
N
We've
got
37
acres
in
one
spot,
we've
got
the
old
drive-in
theater
in
another
spot,
we've
got
the
old
school
area,
so
we've
got
37
acres
and
then
9.6
acres
and
then
another
7.23
acres
that
are
basically
being
proposed
for
a
lot
of
residential
units,
and
I
think
it's
just
so
much
to
put
in
newbury
park.
N
Something
lower,
I
don't
know
like
a
neighborhood,
low
or
neighborhood
low
medium,
probably
neighborhood
low
medium.
I
just
think
there
there's
so
much
acreage
and-
and
there
was
one
speaker
who
who
was
talking
about
you-
know
ghettos
and
redlining
and
all
this
stuff
about
concentrating
so
much,
and
I
know
that
it's
not
feasible
for
or
profitable
for
somebody
to
put
in
a
lot
of
affordable
housing.
It's
just
not
going
to
make
sense.
It's
not
going
to
happen,
but
with
so
many
acres,
there's
still
going
to
be
more.
N
I
think
maybe
in
this
one
small
area
of
the
city
than
anywhere
else
and
I
think
having
the
village
centers
spreads
it
around
and
offsets
it
a
little
bit,
but
I
just
I
just
I
don't
know
what
to
do.
I
don't
know
how
to
do
it,
but
I
just
think
there's
so
much
there
that
I
would
off.
I
would
ask
for
some
suggestions-
let's,
let's
put
put
it
that
way.
J
N
Yes,
for
example,
kelly
road
that
goes
down
and
you
drive
down
there
and
first
you
have
the
drive-in
theater
old,
driving,
theater
property,
and
then
you
have
kohl's
and
on
your
right.
You
have
the
the
school
area.
Now,
that's
a
very
narrow
road
and
there's
properties
on
the
one
side.
So
how
are
you
going
to?
How
are
you
going
to
accommodate
all
that
housing?
N
A
All
right,
just
so
I'm
clear
is
the
old
drive-in.
Now
on
this
map,
designated
commercial,
regional
or
is
it
is
it?
Is
it
does
it
or
am
I
looking
at
the
wrong
spot.
N
F
Yeah,
I
would
say
I
would
agree
that
we
are
certainly
packing
in
quite
a
bit
of
residential,
especially
on
the
south
side
of
newbury
road.
I
don't
think
I
would
support
mixed
use.
Medium.
Excuse
me
mixed
use,
low
at
the
library
site.
I
think
we're
you
know
kind
of
putting
a
lot
of
stress
on
that
intersection.
I
would
certainly
support
the
this.
Is
the
amgen
visitor
center,
which
I
think
for
the
most
part,
is
fairly
empty
and
the
proximity
to
anagen
and
the
make
or
the
industrial
flex
would
be
conducive
to
that?
F
I
would
add
additional
either
restaurants
or
you
know
other
other
opportunities
for
for
people
who
work
for
amgen
to
actually
walk
two
places
same
thing
with
you
know
you
can
call
it
workforce
housing.
You
know
this
generally
reserved
for.
F
A
I
I
believe,
we're
talking
about
both
north
and
south.
At
this
point,
all
right.
E
Sorry
to
to
jump
in,
I
I
put
this
slide
up
just
because
it
covers
the
whole
area.
There
is
a
separate
slide
that
had
the
orchard
alice
property,
but
I
figured
that
just
one
image,
so
you
could
look
at
it
and
I
think
you
should
just
direct
us
with
this
slide,
which
area
and
I
can
figure
out
how
you
want
to
go
through
and
give
us
the
and
make
a
recommendation
for
all
of
this
area.
C
Great-
and
I
can
do
that
so
I'll-
look
at
both
for
me
personally,
I
don't
mind
the
one
two
and
three
above
the
101,
given
I
guess
it's
it's
underused
now.
I
think
this
kind
of
use
could
be
productive,
especially
given
the
businesses
that
are
in
the
area.
So
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
with
those
below
101.
C
I
you
know,
I
don't.
I
don't
think
the
split
zoning
is
an
effective
concept.
I
think
it.
It
essentially
renders
the
property
unusable
and
by
the
way,
I'm
putting
aside
the
issue
is
whether
it's
a
protected.
You
know
issue
or
not,
I'm
assuming
that
that
would
come
out
as
part
of
the
discussion
as
whether
it
was
a
wetland
or
not,
but
I
think
a
split
zoning
just
creates
an
intentable
situation
in
that
nothing
would
end
up
happening,
which
is
is-
and
I
understand
that
residents
believe
me.
C
I
understand
the
resident's
frustration
and
desire
not
to
have
a
bunch
of
stuff
happening
here,
but
I
think,
given
that
the
size
of
the
lot
and
and
again,
I
think
commissioner
lincoln
had
a
good
comment
was
you
know
it
was
empty
land?
Something
was
going
to
get
put
there.
I
think
mixed
use
makes
sense
for
that
entirety
of
that
strip.
I
agree
about
the
the
area
lower
on
orchard,
maybe
not
necessarily
being
mixed
use
and
staying
commercial.
That's
what
it
was
previously
designated
again.
C
I
think
the
split
zoning
of
that
property
is
is,
I
know,
an
accommodation
that
was
trying
to
be
made,
but
I
think
that
ultimately,
is
is
not
going
to
make
anybody
happy,
because
even
if
homes
are
built
there,
it's
not
going
to
make
them
happy
the
mixed
use,
that's
going
to
be
a
budding,
and
it's
going
to
be
difficult
to
do
again.
C
C
You
know,
I
think
if
we
take
away
the
mixed
use
below
it,
and
then
I
would
make
it
mixed
use
medium,
because
the
the
one
below
it
at
the
end
of
the
day
then
can
stay
the
commercial.
And
then
you
have
the
mixed
use
medium
on
that
segment.
That
would
then
be
accessible
from
the
freeway.
So
there's
ways
to
kind
of
have
that
buffering
go
right
into
the
freeway
and
right
into
other
transportation
issues
without
necessarily
affecting
the
residents.
A
On
the
other
side,
commissioner,.
F
F
F
The
other
thing
that
I
also
see
is
access
and
again
the
primary
access
points,
for
this
is
going
to
be
the
adjacent
neighborhood
or
if
they
are
able
to
actually
get
access
over
to
over
the
easement.
F
With
that
channel
there
it
would
be
immediately
adjacent
to
a
single-family
home,
and
not
only
would
it
be
on
top
of
his
residence
essentially,
but
it
would
border
his
his
entire
side
yard
so,
and
I
hate
to
single
out
that
one
person
and
and
sort
of
make
that
the
crux
of
the
issue,
but
it
certainly
should
be
an
issue
that
comes
up
and
and
access,
I
think,
is
just
going
to
be
difficult
part,
because
if
they
can't
get
that
easement
with
the
county.
F
Well,
then
all
of
their
access
is
going
to
be
taken
from
the
neighborhood
and
even
then,
with
the
two
roads
split
out.
It's
when
we
go
back
to
this,
a
lack
of
a
grid
system
and
predominantly
you're
going
to
have
one
access
point
or
you're
going
to
have
a
very
circuitous
access
point
that
all
leads
back
over
to
wendy.
F
A
Gotcha
mark,
do
you
have
your
hand
up.
H
I
I
do,
and
it
was
simply
to
say
that,
once
the
commission
is
sort
of
done
with
this
particular
area,
we
will
put
up
another
image
that
shows
the
entire
rancho
conejo
area.
This
is
a
zoom
in
on
on
this
interchange
of
the
freeway
and
and
rancho
canelo.
So
just
so
you
know
we
have
that
that
graphic,
ready.
A
Can
you
go
ahead
and
move
to
that
one?
I
I
my
brain.
Can
I
wrap
my
chat
around
this,
this
zoomed
in
area,
it's
just
hard
for
me.
A
J
A
Okay,
are
there
particular
parcels
that
are
you're
not
comfortable
with
that
you'd
like
to
address
or
no.
J
There's
that
and
then
really
the
only
designations.
I'm
comfortable
with
here
are
the
ones
north
of
101.
N
I'm
sensing
that
we
are
all
comfortable
with
the
ones
north
of
the
101.
So
maybe
we
just
vote
on
that
and
get
that
out
of
the
way
and
then
discuss
the
others.
N
All
right,
I
move
that
we
keep
the
proposed
designation
use
designations
for
the
areas
north
of
the
101.
F
There
abouts,
I
had
a
quick
comment.
It
was
my
vote.
I
think
there
was
a
comment
and
more
than
likely
should
be
addressed
about
the
venice
property.
I
am
particularly
uncomfortable
with
putting
housing,
single-family
housing
adjacent
to
a
high
disaster
area
or
disaster
prone
area,
so
I
think
it
should
remain
as
as
zoned,
because,
certainly
there's
there's
less
risk,
I
would
say
associated
with
that,
but
if
we've
learned
anything
from
the
hill
fire,
that
is
a
particular
area
of
concern.
A
I
appreciate
that
and
since
we
already
have
the
proposal
to
leave
it,
as
is
everything
north
secretary,
please
prepare
us
for
a
vote
for
that
portion
of
rancho
canelo.
I
I
A
I
got
I've
got
a
question
for
mr
town.
Perhaps
you
can
help
me
on
this.
The
the
drainage
channel
that
runs
along
the
borchard
opportunity
zone,
that
is
an
easement
owned
to
the
county,
correct.
H
K
A
So
all
right
and
I'm
just
trying
to
wrap
my
head
around
this
piece
of
land,
because,
yes,
I've
heard
numerous
people
being
very
enthusiastic
about
something.
That's
going
to
happen
there
and
I've
had
a
number
of
people.
It's
it's
almost
like
an
elephant's
been
described
to
me
in
the
dark
by
a
number
of
different
people
phone
conversations,
and
so
I
am
not
sure
what
it
looks
like
commissioner
lance
you
can
help
me
out
here.
C
But
it's
it's
a
very
large
piece
of
property
and
I
think
it's
again
one
of
the
areas
that
the
city
council
are
previously
identified
as
an
opportunity
zone
where
there
was
going
to
be
development
there
at
some
point.
That
was
one
of
the
six
areas
that
they
had
identified
and
they
were
looking
forward
to
having
that
that
occur.
That's
kind
of
what
I
was
looking
at
it
kind
of
furthering
that
that
concept
in
terms
of
what
they
already
had
laid
out
as
an
area
that
they
wanted
to
see
development
happen.
C
It
is
a
very
large
piece
of
land.
It's
right.
Next
to
the
freeway.
It's
got
a
lot
of
problems
in
terms
of
single
family
homes
because
of
the
noise.
Because
of
those
kinds
of
things,
that's
why
I
think
mixed
use
does
work
at
that
spot,
better,
probably
than
single
family
homes.
I
think
it
would
be
very
difficult
to
even
build
those,
especially
given
our
market,
it's
not
going
to
be
for
low
income
or
even
medium
income.
People
in
terms
of
what
the
ultimate
cost
would
be
for
those
kinds
of
homes.
C
H
N
A
A
So
and
then
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
if
there's
a
density
bonus
applied
hypothetically,
that
would
that
allow
them
to
build
higher
in
the
air
or
would
it
literally
be
capped
at
58
feet.
G
A
Yeah,
I
I
think
that
makes
you
slow
makes
the
most
sense.
If
there
is
a
proposal
like
we
said,
any
landowner
can
come
in
front
of
city
council
and
the
planning
commission
and
and
get
it
adjusted.
A
I
do
want
to
see
something
come
forward
from
this
property,
but
I'm
not
comfortable
allowing
allowing
mixed-use
medium,
knowing
that
the
potential
for
that
that
you
know
for
37
acres
with
a
50
density
bonus
could
translate
into
an
amazing
log
jam
of
people
trying
to
get
on
the
freeway
of
orchard
road
every
morning
and
people
trying
to
get
off
trying
to
get
to
amgen
at
the
same
time
that
that
would
be
terrifying
to
me.
I
agree.
F
I
I
think
my
main
concern
with
this
property
is:
is
the
the
look
and
feel
of
a
wagon
wheel
development.
That's
pretty
much
where
we're
headed,
especially
with
mixed
used,
medium
and
obviously
there's
a
there's.
A
dearth
of
housing
in
oxnard
there's
certainly
quite
a
bit
of
people
over
there,
but
that's.
F
Just
because
it's
the
freeway
doesn't
mean
you
can't
develop
single-family
homes
and
it's
been
done
immediately
adjacent,
so
I
I
I
would
still
advocate
for
for
something
that
is
predominantly
residential
or
at
least
keeping
the
split
zoning
as
there
is
because
again
it's
it's
still
a
more
context,
sensitive
type
of
solution
and
going
back
to
the
comments,
and
certainly
the
the
briefing
book-
and
I
read
quite
a
few
of
those
and
not
a
lot
of
them.
Well,
I
would
say
the
ones
that
I
read
were
not
at
all
supportive.
F
We
heard
from
from
what
I
recall,
one
homeowner,
adjacent
and
57.
We
didn't
hear
from
excuse
me,
there's
57
houses
adjacent
to
the
south
and
to
the
west
and
north
of
bits
and
pieces
of
the
property,
and
we
heard
from
one
of
them.
So
we
have
56
people
we
haven't
heard
from
whose
properties
would
immediately
back
to
this.
F
So
again,
I
understand
the
need
to
have
the
the
development
pencil
out
and
they
need
to
make
money,
but
there's
certainly
money
to
be
made
with
single
family
dwellings.
A
A
I
am
getting
silence,
so
I
am
going
to
assume
that
commissioner
mcmahon
would
prefer,
and
commissioner
lanson
mr
mcmahon.
A
Okay,
so
neighborhood
low
medium.
All
right
we
are,
we
are
we
are.
We
are.
We
are
angling
down,
commissioner.
Lance
do
you
have
input
on
this
at
this
point,.
C
N
Okay,
I
guess
we
can't
do
anything
about
a
buffer
zone
at
this
point
or
we're
open
space
or
anything.
We
just
give
him
the
neighborhood
medium
and
then
hope
that
he
presents
us
with
a
plan
that
is
not
too
too
dense.
That's
my
only
concern.
A
Okay,
mr
ramy,
you
you've
got
your
hand
up,
sir.
Please
join
in
yeah.
E
It
it's
always
possible
to
put
a
designation
and
then
identify
an
area
and
write
specific
policies
in
the
general
plan
about
what
you
want
to
see.
So,
for
example,
you
know
you
could
keep
a
designation
at
I'm
just
going
to
say
just
because
it
came
up
previously.
You
could
put
it
at
mixed
use
low
and
then
say
that
you
want
a
tapering
of
density
with
an
open
space
buffer
and
put
the
density
over
to
the
east
side.
E
A
All
right,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
that
at
this
point
I,
if
I
remember
correctly,
mr
writing,
called
in
and
he
he
said
he
would
be
happy
with
mixed
use
medium.
Is
that
correct?
Does
anybody
remember
that
I
believe
that
was
his
statement,
and
so
I
suspect
that
anything
we
do
will
will
be
something
that
that
he'll
want
to
pursue
further.
A
C
I
would
say:
leave
it
as
is
then,
and
let
that
issue
at
least
be
something
that
can
be
further
discussed
as
part
of
the
city
council
meeting.
A
Yeah,
I
I
I
think
I
would
concur
at
this
point.
I
think
that
the
larger
conversation
still
needs
to
be
had
there's
a
survey
still
outstanding.
I
think
that
anything
that
we
do
at
this
point
to
change
what
it
is
at
this
point.
It
doesn't
sound
like
it'll,
be
anything
that
will
please
the
applicant,
so
I
I
think
that
we
should
just
vote
to
leave
it,
as
is
mr
town.
H
H
We
included
that
land
use
designation,
because
that
is
a
reflection
of
of
community
input
and
these
are
freeway
close
locations,
but
I
just
wanted
the
commission
to
be
aware
of
that
and
before
we
finalize
this
vote
and
then
I
had
one
other
clarification
on
the
property
north
of
the
freeway.
When
we're
done
with
this
particular
area,
I
apologize,
but
I
need
to
go
back
and
revisit
one
particular
area,
one
parcel.
H
A
Yeah,
so
everybody
aware
of
that
that
all
these
zones
are
going
to
be
potential
hotel
sites,
etc.
Commissioner
mcmahon.
N
Okay,
when
we're
looking
at
where
I
was
talking
about
originally
the
kohl's
and
the
old
school
property,
I
don't
feel
comfortable
with
the
two
red
areas
right
adjacent
as
being
commercial
regional.
N
I
would
prefer
to
see
them
as
maybe
a
commercial
town
there's,
there's
they're
too
close
to
the
houses
and
yeah
there's
a
freeway
there,
but
I
think
they're
too
close
to
the
houses.
So
I'd
like
to
change
that
to
commercial
town
and
then
the
old
drive-in
place.
I
think
I'd
like
to
change
it
to
either
neighborhood
low,
medium
or
probably
neighborhood,
low,
medium
or
mixed
use,
low
one
of
the
lower
areas
and
I'll
leave
that
to
what
you
guys
think.
A
Okay,
commissioner,
newman.
M
I
A
All
right
I'd
make
a
motion
that
we
continue
until
we're
finished
here.
Secretary.
A
Zero
all
right,
commissioner
lake.
F
I
would
actually
be
supportive
with
the
commercial
regional,
the
there
is
a
topographical
difference
between
those
two
parcels
in
the
jason
single
family
homes.
So
the
you
know
the
the
heights
may
not
have
as
much
of
an
effect
as
as
you
would
normally
expect
if
they
were
upgrade
or
at
least
share
the
same
same
elevation
again,
I
would
be
supportive
and-
and
I
do
support
commissioner
mcmahon
on
removing
the
mixed
use.
F
A
A
M
Yeah,
I
mean
it's
still
in
the
development
stage
and
and
we
don't
have
a
final
development
agreement
on
that
because
of
the
changes,
but
that
was
recently
in
the
last
two
years.
It
was
approved
for
residential
and
a
mixed-use
type
of
aspect
to
itself.
N
M
If
I
made
sure,
but
to
miss
mcmahon's
comments
about
the
the
property
to
the
west
and
then
just
south
of
that,
those
have
not
been
and
those
are
listed
as
they
are,
and
you
can
certainly
modify
those
if
you
wish.
N
The
one
that
is
currently
neighborhood
medium
to
go
to
neighborhood,
low,
medium,
okay
and
then
we're
talking
about
the
one.
That's
right
next
to
the
commercial
property,
which
is
mixed
too
slow.
Is
that
the
other
one
we're
talking
about.
A
A
And
then
did
you
do
commissioner,
link
said
that
he
supports
commercial
regional
immediately
to
the
east
of
that?
Are
you
comfortable
with
that?
Or
would
you
prefer
it
be
lower.
A
A
The
mixed
use
in
front
of
it
here
to
the
north,
because
that's
already
in
development.
N
C
A
I
I
think
I
would
concur
as
well
and
I'm
I'm
fine
with
neighborhood
low
medium
below
that
below
the.
What
do
we
call
the
timber
school
property.
A
Okay,
so
if
we'd
like
to
propose
that
I'm
okay
with
that
vote,
the
other
thing
is:
is
that
mixed-use
portion
over
on
the
far
side?
Are
we
gonna
address
that
or
will
we
consider
that
part
of
the
issue
that
radiating
will
have
to
deal
with,
even
though
it's
a
totally
separate
property.
N
I
don't
have
any
strong
feelings
about
that.
All.
A
Right,
we'll
just
let
all
of
that
live
on
so
we'll
just
address
this
portion
over
here.
N
M
N
G
J
A
All
right
everybody's
got
their
notes.
Secretary
prepares
for
a
vote.
B
A
Okay,
I
think,
and
at
this
point
we're
going
to
go
for
the
overarching
plan
as
presented
to
oh,
mr
town,.
H
Mr
chairman,
thank
you.
I
apologize.
I
should
have
brought
this
up
earlier,
but
could
we
please
just
quickly
revisit
and
it
would
require
a
separate
vote,
but
you
see
the
where
the
home
depot
is
the
the
red
area?
Yes,
and
then,
above
that,
you
see
the
sda
institutional,
the
blue
and
then,
if
you
look
closely
above
that,
you'll
see
a
little
green
darker
green
part
exactly
right.
There
that's
a
vacant.
Well,
it
has
an
old
water
tank
on
it
today,
but
basically
it's
vacant.
H
It's
it's
general
planned
commercial
today
in
this
map
it
showed
up
as
as
utilities,
but
the
intent
was
that
it'd
be
industrial
like
the
west
side
of
academy
road
there
and
like
the
the
north
side.
Exactly
so,
I
would
like
clarity,
please
from
the
commission
as
to
whether
they
would
want
where
they,
where
the
market
is
right.
Now
where
the
cursor
is
for
that
to
be
industrial.
H
That
was
the
intent
because
it,
although
it
is
a
utility
site
today,
it's
it's
it's
commercial
in
the
current
general
plan,
so
the
intention
and
in
the
specific
plan
for
sda
was
always
to
develop
that
that
site.
So
I
think
we
need
to
have
something
have
a
language,
designation,
other
than
utilities
and
flood
control
and
and
the
intent
was
industrial
to
match
the
the
west
side
of
academy
road.
A
All
right,
commissioner,
newman.
J
H
J
So
if
there
were,
if
this
was
redesignated
industrial,
whether
would
there
still
be
a
utility
use
with
an
easement
or
it
could.
H
F
Would
support
going
to
industrial
for
the
things
that
I
mentioned
earlier
about
being
disastrous
areas
and
certainly
industrial
would
be
more
conducive
as
far
as
evacuations
are
concerned
than
single-family
residential,
I
will
say
just
taking
a
look
at
a
an
ariel.
It's
the
site
is
encumbered
with
distribution,
electrical
distribution
lines,
which
would
certainly
make
some
development
untenable,
but
I
would
imagine
that
there's
probably
a
sizable
easement
on
the
property.
J
A
All
right,
I
guess
we
can
now
zoom
back
out
to
the
entire
plan
as
presented
to
us.
Does
anybody
have
any
final
comments
before
we
or
a
motion
for
the
final
overarching
plan
that
we've
belabored
for
the
last
five
minutes.
J
A
A
We
we
truly
do
appreciate
the
effort,
as
speaking
for
the
128
000
residents,
your
efforts
will
not
go
unrecognized
and,
and
we're
going
to
be
grateful
for
you
for
for
the
years
to
come,
and
I
look
forward
to
seeing
this
general
plan
ultimately
completed,
someday
all
right.
Let's
move
on
now
is
the
time
for
commission
comments
and
or
any
ab1234
reports.
Are
there
any
comments
from
my
fellow
commissioners,
commissioner?.
J
I'll
endorse
commissioner
mcgrant's
comments.
We
may
not
agree,
but
I
appreciate
the
confidence
and
the
professionalism
that
staff
has
shown,
and
I
very
much
appreciate
the
many
people
who
showed
up
to
to
write
to
speak
to
provide
input
into
this
process.
This
isn't
over
and
I
hope
people
will
continue
to
give
their
valuable
input.
Thank
you.
A
D
Hi,
yes,
so
as
you're
probably
aware,
the
next
general
plan
related
meetings
will
be
in
front
of
the
city
council
on
may
18th
and
may
25th
with
your
recommendations
and
then
the
current
general
plan
draft
land
use
maps
survey
is
still
open
for
comments
until
may
12th
and
the
results
will
be
forwarded
to
the
c
council
and
then
also
again
a
reminder
that
the
the
jump
hunt,
update
schedule
is
on
the
project
website,
which
is
teox2045.org.
D
Then,
on
another
note,
I
just
wanted
to
let
everyone
know
that
the
public
information
counters
for
planning,
building
and
public
works
opened
today
for
the
first
time
for
in-person
visits
between
nine
and
eleven
in
the
morning,
so
they'll
be
open
monday
through
thursday
and
then
every
other
friday,
when
city
halls
open
from
an
eleven
excuse
me
nine
to
eleven
in
the
morning,
and
I
heard
that
this
morning,
before
it
even
opened,
there
was
a
line
of
thirty-some
people
waiting
to
to
come
and
talk
to
people.
D
So
that's
kind
of
exciting.
I
think
we're
turning
a
corner
right
and
then
also
tomorrow
evening,
the
city
council
will
be
considering
two
pre-screening
projects,
so
that
might
be
interesting
to
watch
the.
If
you
can
stay
up
that
late
anyway,
one
is
at
86
long
court
and
it's
a
55
unit
proposal
and
the
second
one
is
for
a
property
at
2150
hillcrest,
which
is
an
amgen
property
for
246
units.
A
And
upcoming
planning
commission
meetings.
D
So
the
next
meeting
is
tentatively
scheduled
for
may
10th.
However,
there
are
currently
no
items
on
the
agenda
and
I
was
told
that
we
do
not
have.
We
haven't
yet
received
the
plans
for
the
future
elite,
but
we're
anticipating
that
they
should
be
submitted
later
this
week
and
and
then
they'll
be
processed
accordingly
and
return
to
you
and
that's
all
I
got
for
you
today.
A
All
right,
and
with
that
thank
all
of
you
for
for
hanging
with
us
this
long.
I
I'm
very
impressed.
This
meeting
is
now
adjourned
to
the
next
meeting
on
may
10
at
6
pm,
good
night,
everyone
or
good
morning.