Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission approves 58‑home Cochran Street cluster development; neighbors raise tree, trail and drainage concerns
Summary
The commission unanimously approved a cluster development permit and tentative map for a 58‑home subdivision at 6024 Cochran Street, finding the project consistent with zoning and exempt from additional CEQA review; neighbors voiced concern about tree removals, a private trail adjacent to backyards, sewer/drainage and traffic at a blind curve.
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Simi Valley Planning Commission on July 22 approved a cluster development permit and tentative map (CDS20250001 / TT2025‑0004) to build 58 single‑family detached homes on a 19.53‑acre parcel at the east end of Cochran Street, with the commission recording a unanimous vote and standard appeal periods (14 days for the permit, 10 days for the map).
Staff described the proposal as a cluster development that would merge three parcels into 63 lots (58 numbered lots for homes and five lettered lots for common/open space). House plans would range roughly 2,000–3,000 square feet and lot sizes from about 4,800 to 24,000 square feet; the project would preserve roughly 75 percent of the site as landscaped or open space and provide private amenities including pocket parks, dog parks and an internal trail system. Staff noted 14 trees on site (five protected) that would be removed for grading; staff also raised concerns about a private trail routed through sloped areas and recommended the commission consider removing trails or requiring further design mitigation, and recommended sidewalks be considered to improve pedestrian safety where steep street grades exist.
Developer Gary Gorion of Colton Lee Communities said the design intentionally reduces density from what zoning would allow (the developer cited a 98‑unit maximum by code and said 58 homes were their conservative choice) and emphasized on‑site parking: the plan provides approximately 283 total parking spaces (two‑car garages plus on‑street and guest parking) and that the project is consistent with CEQA Guidelines §15183(b). On fire safety, the applicant said it will create a 200‑foot fuel modification zone (versus the 100‑foot standard) and add enhanced sprinkler systems in homes.
Neighbors and technical speakers raised multiple concerns. A board‑certified master arborist urged preservation of specific valley oaks and warned that grading would destroy existing coastal sage scrub habitat; one homeowner said a proposed walking trail would run along and through his property line and called it an invasion of privacy. Several residents raised drainage and sewer concerns, citing a past construction incident in the area that resulted in a sewer backup; public works staff explained current procedures requiring capped sewer connections during construction and described design criteria intended to handle storm flows and provide emergency paths of travel.
Traffic engineer Sean Link told commissioners Cochran Street’s existing average daily traffic was measured at about 2,500 vehicles in 2025 and the project would add roughly 453 daily trips (bringing total to about 2,938 ADT). He explained MUTCD thresholds and the city’s speed‑hump policy and said conditions did not support an all‑way stop or speed humps at the Saint Clair intersection based on the measured volumes and classification of Cochran in the California Vehicle Code; staff noted some signage changes previously installed to advise drivers on the curve.
Commissioners discussed sidewalks, trail liability, tree replacement and privacy buffers. The applicant said they evaluated moving specimen trees but that four on site were rated in poor condition and not suitable for relocation; the developer committed to replanting and proposed planting 12 oak trees on site to replace removed oaks and to meet landscape plan requirements. After deliberation, Commissioner Rice moved to adopt the resolution approving CDS20250001 and TT2025‑0004; the motion was seconded, passed unanimously and the commission announced the appeal periods (14 days for the permit; 10 days for the map).
If no appeals are filed the project will proceed to final engineering and construction plan review, where tree species, drainage details and final landscaping will be refined under city standards and permits.

