Thousand Oaks planning commission denies permit for Adventist congregation over parking shortfall

The Thousand Oaks Planning Commission voted 3-0 July 6 to deny a special-use permit sought by a Seventh-day Adventist congregation to hold religious services at 2639 Lavery Court Unit 5, citing insufficient off-street parking and the absence of any agreement from the Lavery Court Property Owners Association to share spaces.

Assistant Planner Nicole Katz told the commission staff could not make the code finding that the project "comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and policies, including the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code," and recommended denial. "Staff is unable to make finding number 2," Katz said, adding that "the proposed project cannot demonstrate that it can provide the off street parking required by the municipal code." Katz also noted a typographical error in the draft resolution and confirmed the required number of spaces is 39 (the resolution had an erroneous 59).

The project proposed converting an industrial condominium unit into an assembly use for the Southern California Conference of Seventh-day Adventists and sought approval for an alternating/shared parking arrangement in the Rancho Conejo Industrial Park (SP-15) M-1 zone. City code requires off-street parking per Thousand Oaks Municipal Code section 9-4.2402; staff’s calculation found the proposed assembly would need 39 spaces. The other uses in the industrial park require roughly 97 spaces, bringing combined demand to about 136 spaces. The site currently provides about 85 surface parking spaces.

Gary Gagliardi, president of the Lavery Court Property Owners Association and owner of Unit 11, told commissioners the association’s recorded CC&Rs designate the parking field as common area under POA control and restrict uses that create parking demand above the CC&R formula. Gagliardi said Unit 5’s CC&R allocation (1 space per 500 square feet) yields roughly four spaces for that unit’s 1,721 square feet, and warned of safety problems when large gatherings occur in an industrial park. "This case is not about religion," he said, urging the commission to apply the code and recorded restrictions.

Another nearby unit owner, Mark Inochenzi, described the park as a collection of small shops with limited parking and said his business operates largely by appointment; he supported denial. Katz told the commission the applicant had not provided any executed shared-parking agreement signed by all owners with parking rights in the business park, nor evidence of legal authority to use contiguous off-site parking — both required for the commission to approve an alternate parking arrangement under the municipal code.

Commissioner Farris moved to adopt the resolution denying the permit as amended to correct the ownership language and the parking total; Commissioners McMahon and Chair Tyler Kettlehat joined the motion. The clerk recorded the vote as 3-0 with Commissioners Buss and Lanson absent. The chair advised that any aggrieved party may appeal the decision to the Community Development Department within 10 days.

The staff report and Katz’s presentation cited Thousand Oaks Municipal Code provisions related to SP-15 and shared parking (Title 9; sections 9-4.2402, 9-4.2403 and 9-4.2803(C)). Katz also noted Code Compliance opened an investigation after a 2024 complaint and that enforcement would continue if the SUP were denied.

The commission also continued item 7a to a future date for staff to correct an agenda error and approved the consent calendar; Chair Kettlehat abstained on the consent vote. The commission adjourned to its next meeting on Aug. 24, 2026, at 6 p.m.