Thousand Oaks planning commission certifies EIR, approves Conejo Summit industrial park

The Thousand Oaks Planning Commission voted 4-0 on Sept. 8 to certify the final environmental impact report under the California Environmental Quality Act and approve entitlements for the Conejo Summit project, an industrial business park of 15 buildings totaling about 755,000 square feet on roughly 50 acres in the Rancho Conejo area.

The commission’s action adopts a resolution that includes findings and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program. The project — led by Thousand Oaks Master LLC and Chappell Properties — would reconfigure existing parcels into condominium lots, construct 15 industrial buildings ranging from about 22,700 to 93,000 square feet, extend Academy Drive, and make roadway, grading, utility and landscaping improvements. The approval includes waivers for building height (from 35 feet to up to 41 feet in places) and reduced front setbacks on four parcels. The commission vote was 4 yes, 0 no; one commissioner was absent.

Staff summary and why the project matters

Senior Planner Scott Kollwitz told the commission the project is consistent with the city’s 2045 General Plan and Rancho Conejo Specific Plan No. 7 (SP 7) land‑use designation of Industrial Low, and that the final EIR identifies mitigation measures the city will require and monitor. "Based on all of that, we would request that the planning commission adopt the approval resolution tonight," Kollwitz said. City staff said on record that infrastructure capacity (water, roads, grading) is available and that the project is anticipated to be built in phases over about 10 years.

Commission and staff emphasized the project’s economic intent: add modern industrial space to support manufacturing, research and development, and other employment uses in a core job center for Thousand Oaks. Applicant and staff both cited the project as supporting the city’s economic development strategy and a regional shift toward larger, higher‑clearance industrial buildings that many existing properties lack.

Key approvals, design and conditions

- Entitlements approved include a development permit for phased construction of 15 buildings, two vesting tentative tract maps to reconfigure lots, a protected tree permit, a unified sign program and related administrative plan checks. The planning commission is the final decision maker unless the action is appealed to the City Council within 10 days. - Building area: approximately 755,000 sq. ft. across 15 buildings on ~50 acres; parcels reconfigured into 16 condominium lots. Staff said the total project as proposed is less intense than some earlier environmental assumptions for SP 7. - Waivers: staff recommended and the commission approved waivers to allow building heights up to 41 feet (M‑1 zone standard is 35 feet) and to reduce the required setback in some locations from 100 feet (from the centerline of adjacent streets) to as little as 52 feet for four properties. - Phasing: staff and the applicant described a multi‑phase buildout the applicant estimated could take about 10 years from the start of construction.

Trees, grading and landscaping

The approved protected tree permit allows removal of up to 22 regulated trees (staff said that number conservatively includes trees that may be salvageable) and encroachment into up to 28 other regulated trees. Under the conditions of approval, replacement trees would be planted on‑site at a 3:1 ratio, which staff said would allow up to 66 replacement trees if all 22 were removed. Staff and the applicant said transplanting mature protected trees was not expected to be successful and therefore is not part of the mitigation approach.

The project requires roughly 156,000 cubic yards of cut and fill; public works reviewed the grading calculations and found them reasonable and balanced on site, according to staff. Retaining walls are generally below the city’s preferred 6 feet of exposed height, but four locations exceed 6 feet (up to 10 feet was described in the presentation) and the conditions allow up to 12 feet in limited situations with architectural treatments.

Visuals, lighting and open‑space adjacency

Several northern buildings back to open space and trails. Staff presented sight‑line exhibits and visual simulations included in the final EIR showing that the top portions of buildings would be visible from Hawk Canyon Trail and other vantage points but argued topography and screening limit the view of lower building portions. Staff said buildings facing the Costco‑managed open space would use earth‑tone paint to reduce visual contrast, and that rooftop and façade materials would be non‑reflective. The approved conditions require downcast, shielded lighting with automatic dimming of building and parking lighting by 20–30% during non‑occupied hours and reduced pole heights adjacent to open space.

Transportation, VMT and electric vehicle infrastructure

The EIR found that, without mitigation, the project would exceed the city’s vehicle‑miles‑traveled (VMT) standards; staff and the final EIR therefore include a menu of mitigation measures the applicant must use to reduce VMT, and conditions require documentation and monitoring as buildings are phased. In reading responses into the record, the project’s mitigation package included options such as on‑site EV installations; the response letter read at the hearing referenced installing 84 EV chargers and 249 EV‑capable parking spaces at certain buildings as mitigation components in addition to applicable 2022 California Green Building Standards (CalGreen) requirements. Staff said plan checks and later building permits must reflect changes in state building and fire codes as those codes are updated.

Public comments and contested issues

Members of labor and environmental groups and several Thousand Oaks residents urged the commission to continue the item and recirculate the EIR, citing concerns about air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, health risk from diesel trucks, VMT mitigation adequacy, biological baseline and impacts to wildlife and open space. Aiden Marshall of Care California argued in public comment that the EIR relies on an in‑lieu fee approach for some air emissions mitigation and that available on‑site measures (for example solar canopies, higher EV requirements or use of 100% renewable electricity) should be required rather than paid fees. Brian Flynn, representing SAFER, urged additional biological and energy mitigation, saying the EIR undercounted certain species and did not bind rooftop solar.

Staff and the project’s environmental consultant (Environmental Science Associates) responded at the hearing that the final EIR addressed construction and operational health risk scenarios, that the county air district mitigation guidance cited in the EIR (a 2003 guidance document) is still used, and that the EIR used conservative assumptions for truck travel distances. Dudek, the applicant’s biological consultant, described the project site as previously disturbed with many non‑native plants, summarized focused surveys performed for special‑status resources and said mitigation measures in the EIR and conditions address identified biological impacts. COSCA/Conejo Open Space staff (Anna Huber) said COSCA participated in reviewing lighting, trails and other measures and supported the project’s mitigation approach for adjacent open space.

Formal action and appeals

Commissioner Lanson moved to adopt the approval resolution that would certify the final EIR (SCH #2023020425), adopt CEQA findings and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program, and approve the development permit (2019‑70439‑DP), vesting tentative tract maps (2019‑70440‑VTTM and 2019‑70441‑VTTM), the protected tree permit (2021‑71158‑PTP) and unified sign program (2019‑70442‑USP) subject to the conditions in the staff report. The motion carried 4‑0 (Commissioner McMahon absent). The commission record and resolution indicate the applicant has accepted the conditions; staff noted that an appeal of the commission decision may be filed with the community development department within 10 days.

What to watch next

The project will proceed to building permit and construction plan checks, during which staff and consultants will review grading, detailed lighting, final landscaping and biological avoidance/monitoring requirements. State building and fire code updates that take effect during the multi‑phase buildout will apply at the time individual building permits are submitted. Opponents signaled they may pursue further review in the record and urged recirculation of the EIR; any legal challenges or appeals may affect the project schedule.

Quotes

"The EIR was prepared to identify and evaluate potential environmental impacts, require mitigation of potential significant impacts, and to establish a reporting and monitoring program," Senior Planner Scott Kollwitz said during his presentation. Applicant representative John Love (Chappell Properties) described the project as "state of the art" industrial product intended to attract technology and manufacturing employers. Public commenter Aiden Marshall (Care California) told the commission the EIR "has not resolved" what his group considers air quality, health risk and VMT issues.

Ending

The planning commission’s decision clears the way for Conejo Summit to move into its construction‑plan phase under the conditions the commission approved. The city’s official resolution and the final EIR remain in the public record; interested parties have 10 days from Sept. 8 to file an appeal to the City Council.