The Ventura County Planning Commission on July 31 recommended that the Board of Supervisors adopt amendments to Articles 2, 4, 5 and 9 of the Noncoastal Zoning Ordinance to implement Housing Element Program HEH and revise the Residential High Density (RHD) zone. Planning staff said the changes are intended to remove constraints to multifamily development in the RHD zone and to provide alternative compliance options for affordable-housing requirements, as required by state law.

"This requirement was found to be restrictive and in direct conflict with Government Code 65583.2," Jerilyn (Jerilyn) Hollis, case planner, told commissioners, explaining the removal of the 100% on-site affordability requirement. Hollis said the ordinance retains an affordable housing use restriction and offers a menu of compliance approaches: on-site affordability tiers, land donation, acquisition (financial assistance to eligible organizations), or a developer's proposal of equivalent action. Under the alternative-compliance calculation example staff gave, an applicant choosing off-site/alternative compliance would be credited at a rate equivalent to 30% of required units for lower-income households in lieu of the base 20% on-site standard.

Hollis summarized the RHD sites: seven parcels established in 2011 across El Rio, Piru and Santa Susana, collectively accounting for about 250 dwelling units of capacity and nearly 40% of the county's lower-income housing target from the sixth-cycle RHNA (the county's RHNA allocation for the current cycle is 1,262 units). Hollis said no development has occurred on the RHD parcels and that March 2024 infrastructure discussions flagged water supply as a primary constraint, particularly in El Rio; staff included text allowing privately operated water production and storage facilities as permitted uses to facilitate solutions.

Public commenters raised concerns about notice, local traffic, wildfire risk and suitability of the Santa Susana parcels for high-density housing. Joe Herrera, a nearby property owner, said the Piru parcel is irregularly shaped and asked how access will be handled. "That road is a dead end road. Is that road gonna be open?" Herrera asked. Sunshine Gray (Grace), speaking for her mother who owns a home backing the Piru site, said the community values rural character: "Piru is a choice for many people. It's not because they're disadvantaged or they can't afford to live in Ventura or Los Angeles." Gray urged the commission to reconsider site suitability.

Commissioners focused on three recurring concerns: (1) the feasibility of the alternative compliance options actually producing lower-income units, (2) the need for clearer timing and enforceable provisions in any affordable housing agreements or deed restrictions, and (3) site-specific safety and infrastructure changes since 2011 that may affect Santa Susana and Piru.

Commissioners asked whether donated or acquired land used for alternative compliance could be resold before development. Staff said deed restrictions and recorded affordable housing agreements would run with the land and that the planning director must approve transfers or releases in writing and make findings that the requested change is consistent with the RHD zone. Staff also said detailed affordable-housing agreement language and deed-restriction templates have not yet been finalized; county counsel and the Planning Division plan to use existing county affordable-housing agreements as a starting point.

The commission read and adopted a set of comments to forward to the Board of Supervisors asking staff to: (1) specify timing for construction of affordable units under alternative compliance options, (2) outline key components of the affordable housing agreement to ensure the framework is not developer-driven, (3) consider narrowing the alternative compliance menu, (4) expand outreach to the community of Santa Susana, and (5) express strong concerns about the viability of development on Santa Susana and Piru sites given changed conditions since 2011. After deliberation, Commissioner Boystrom/Boydstrom moved to recommend approval with the listed comments; Commissioner Cushing seconded. Secretary Luce recorded a 4-0 vote in favor.

Staff said the Board of Supervisors hearing for adoption is tentatively scheduled for Sept. 16, 2025. Staff also told the commission it had sent postcards to parcels within 300 feet of the RHD sites, presented to the El Rio Municipal Advisory Council and Piru Neighborhood Council, and had received two public comments in the record as of the staff report cutoff.