Council approves Village at Greenbrier: 179 homes, development agreement to fund 85 off‑site affordable units; parking and traffic remain key concerns

The City Council on April 1 approved entitlements for the Village at Greenbrier, a proposed 179‑unit for‑sale residential community on the former Mercury Insurance office parcel at Greenbrier Lane and South Associated Road. The item included certification of a project EIR, a vesting tentative tract map, a General Plan amendment and zone change to MU‑2, a precise development plan and a development agreement.

Senior Planner Rebecca Pennington summarized the project: the proposal calls for three product types — "courts," "villas" and "yards" — arranged across internal streets and cul‑de‑sacs, with approximately 104,785 square feet of ornamental landscaping including an 8,565‑square‑foot private park. Pennington noted three development standards that require deviation or administrative approval (street‑side setback, rear setback adjacent to the freeway, and off‑street parking). Staff reported the EIR evaluation concluded the project would not result in unavoidable significant impacts with the proposed mitigation measures and recommended council approval of entitlements and the development agreement.

Applicant Peter Carlson (representing Lennar) said the office market decline and the adjacent high‑quality shopping center made residential reuse appropriate. Carlson told the council the development would include enclosed two‑car garages for most units, solar and EV charging pre‑wiring, and on‑site gathering spaces; he also said Lennar intends to leverage the project to fund 85 off‑site affordable rental units (including set‑asides and veteran preferences) rather than place nine for‑sale inclusionary units on‑site.

Staff and applicant figures show a parking difference when comparing the project's proposed parking to strict code requirements: using the single‑family attached standard, the code would require 448 spaces (358 enclosed garage spaces plus 90 guest spaces) for 179 units; the project as proposed showed 342 enclosed garage spaces and 55 guest spaces, a total of 397 — a shortfall of 51 spaces. The project includes conditions requiring a parking management plan, and the Planning Commission recommended additional conditions including financial contribution to pay for a future traffic study and feasibility review of parking over the flood‑control channel.

During the public hearing residents living on Greenbrier, nearby neighborhoods and the Chamber of Commerce testified. Supporters said reuse of the vacant office site and additional ownership opportunities would help the city meet housing goals; critics emphasized parking, cut‑through traffic, tree removal and privacy impacts. Several residents urged the council to keep pedestrian connections to Brea Plaza; others asked that the off‑site affordable units be better justified.

Council and staff discussion focused on the inclusionary housing trade‑off: staff explained that deed‑restricted for‑sale affordable units often fail to produce occupied units because income and mortgage‑qualification constraints (mortgage impounds, HOA fees and property taxes) prevent eligible buyers; staff argued that converting the requirement into an off‑site rental program would produce many more affordable units and meet low‑income housing goals more effectively. Council requested staff refine preference language (veteran/senior preferences while complying with fair‑housing law) and to return with final DA language on second reading.

The motion to approve the entitlements and move the ordinances forward passed with four votes in favor and one council member recused. Staff and the applicant committed to refining a parking‑management plan, exploring additional on‑site space gains (e.g., minor reconfigurations near the park and potential head‑in stalls), and funding a post‑construction traffic/parking study to identify future remedies and whether impact‑fee allocations should be directed to local mitigation.

Ending

Council approved the development agreement‑backed entitlements, sending ordinances to a future second reading and adoption. Staff recorded follow‑up tasks including parking‑management plan finalization, traffic study design and refinement of DA language about off‑site affordable units.