Thousand Oaks City Council
October 21, 2025

TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Kelvin Parker, Community Development Director
DATE: September 8, 2025
SUBJECT: Conejo Summit Project
Development Permit (DP) 2019-70439
Vested Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) 2019-70440
Vested Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) 2019-70441
Protected Tree Permit (PTP) 2021-71158
Uniform Sign Permit (USP) 2019-70442
Landscape Plan Check (LPC) 2019-70443
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 2022-70771
APPLICANT: Thousand Oaks Master, LLC
LOCATIONS: Generally located at the intersection of Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard,
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs): 667 -0-340-030; -045; -055; - 065; -075; -085; -095; -105; -125; -135; -145; -155; -185; and -195 REQUEST:

That the Planning Commission adopt a resolution to certify the Conejo Summit Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), which has been filed for all of the project’s requested entitlements to allow the construction of the Conejo Summit project associated with properties generally located at the intersection of Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard (Attachment #s 1, 2, and 3) , and approve the following entitlements:.

1. Environmental Impact Report 2022-70775-EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2023020425) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP):

To consider the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), including Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) , prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the subject project.

ATTACHMENT #3
ATTACHMENT #3
Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

2. Development Permit 2019 -70439-DP: To allow the construction of 15 industrial buildings ranging in size from approximately 22,700 to 93,000 square feet (sf) totaling approximately 755,000 sf of building area for industrial and ancillary uses on approximately 50 acres. The project site 1) has an Industrial Low General Plan land use designation, 2) is within the Rancho Conejo Specific Plan (SP 7), and 3) is within the Industrial Park (M-1) zone.

Waivers are requested to 1) increase the maximum building heights from 35 feet up to 41 feet above finished floor and 2) reduce the minimum setback from 100 feet from the centerline of adjacent streets down to 52 feet for four properties.

Primary access to the proposed buildings would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard, Conejo Center Drive , and the new Academy Drive extension within the Rancho Conejo Specific Plan area. Parking would be provided in surface lots, generally located around each building.

The project also includes associated grading (balanced on-site), roadways (Academy Drive extension), parking, hardscape, landscaping, retaining walls, lighting, signage, utilities, and infrastructure.

The proposed project (project) would consist of a maximum of seven phases, with an anticipated construction period of 12 to 18 months for each phase. It is anticipated that the entire project phasing will be completed within approximately 10 years from the commencement of the first phase.

3. Vesting Tentative Tract Maps 2019 -70440-VTTM (VTTM 6021) & 2019- 70441-VTTM (VTTM 6022): The application includes two proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Maps (VTTM) that will reconfigure the existing lots. No new lots are proposed. VTTM No. 6021 involves approximately 35.8 gross acres that would be subdivided into 12 condominium lots for Buildings 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F, 1G, 2, 3, 4A, and 4B. VTTM 6022 in volves approximately 15.5 gross acres that would be subdivided into 4 condominium lots for Buildings 5A, 5B, 6A, and 6B.

The project would include the dedication and development of an easterly portion of Academy Drive within the Rancho Conejo Specific Plan area , which would extend west from Conejo Center Drive, and would provide access to Lots 4A and 4B. In addition, the project would provide easements for utilities, multi-use trails, and access.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

4. Protected Tree Permit 2021 -71158-PTP: To allow removal of up to 22 protected trees ( 10 oak trees and 12 toyon trees) and encroachment into the protected zone of up to 28 protected trees ( 21 oak trees and 7 toyon trees), and to plant replacement trees on the project site at a 3:1 ratio.

5. Uniform Sign Program 2019-70442-USP: To allow new monument signs, directional signs, walls signs, address numbers, and ancillary signs within the Conejo Summit project area.

6. Landscape Plan Check 2019 -70443-LPC: Technical review of proposed on-site landscaping.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein to:

1. Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report associated with 2022-70771- EIR (SCH# 2023020425) with appropriate CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and

2. Approve Development Permit 2019 -70439-DP, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps 2019 -70440-VTTM & 2019 -70441-VTTM, Protected Tree Permit 2021-71158-PTP, and Uniform Sign Program 2019 -70442-USP (Attachment #4).

PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW

Section 9 -4.2105 of the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code (TOMC) requires approval of an administrative Development Permit for an industrial use in the M-1 zone, if it is located more than 400 feet from of any existing residentially zoned property; however, Section 9-4.2804(a)(1) of the TOMC, requires approval by the Planning Commission (Commission) if the proposed development does not comply with all of the development standards for the zone. As the project includes Waiver requests to 1) increase the maximum building heights from 35 feet up to 41 feet above finished floor and 2) reduce the minimum setback from 100 feet from the centerline of adjacent streets down to 52 feet for four properties, the Commission is the approval authority.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Section 9 -3.702(a)(2) of the TOMC requires Commission approval of a map, consistent with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the TOMC, if it is not being concurrently processed with a zone change or other legislative action .

The Conejo Summit project does not include a zone change or other legislative action; therefore, the Commission is the approval authority.

Section 9-4.4206(a)(2) of the TOMC requires any request for the removal of any non-exempt oak tree twenty -four (24") inches or greater in diameter when measured at a point four and one half (4-1/2') feet above the tree’s natural grade, and/or four (4) or m ore non-exempt oak trees on a single parcel, and/or hearing requests in conjunction with other entitlement applications presented to the Commission to be considered by the Commission at a public hearing. Similarly, Section 9-4.4305(a)(2) of the TOMC requir es any request for removal of four (4) or more non-exempt landmark trees on a single parcel, and/or hearing requests in conjunction with other entitlement applications presented to the Commission to be considered by the Commission at a public hearing. Consequently, the Commission is the approval authority.

Section 9 -4.2310 of the TOMC allows, u nless otherwise approved through by Special Use Permit, a maximum of one monument sign to be installed upon one parcel of record on industrial properties . Additional freestanding signs require approval by the Planning Commission.

The associated Landscape Plan Check is an administrative process that will be implemented as a project condition of approval.

Staff has included suggested findings and draft conditions of approval, including the Environmental Impact Report’s Mitigation Measures, that ensure compliance with these findings. The recommended findings and suggested conditions of approval are incorporated in the attached Resolution (Attachment #4).

BACKGROUND

Project Sites and Settings

The project site, which consists of approximately 5 0 acres is located near the western boundary of the City within the northwestern portion of the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area, approximately 1 -mile north of the 101 Freeway. The southern portions of the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area have been developed resulting in a Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

biotech corridor with companies such as Amgen, Atara Biotherapeutics, Capsida Biotherapeutics, FUJIFILM Diosynth Biotechnologies , Latigo Biotherapeutics , Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Teledyne Technologies, and the Ventura BioCenter.

These companies make up the majority of the industrial businesses in the City.

The Rancho Conejo Industrial Area contains over 120 industrial buildings ranging from 5,000 sf to 127,000 sf.

The project site is located entirely within the Rancho Conejo Specific Plan (SP 7) planning area. The project site is specifically located within SP 7’s Planning Units B, 5, and Q. SP 7 designates the project site parcels as Employment Park and (M- 1) zone.

Land that is owned and managed by the Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency (COSCA) is located to the north and west of the project site. Industrial development is located northeast of the project site as well as to the south and west of the parcels that would be developed, including the City’s Municipal Service Center.

Permit History and Application Process

SP 7 was originally adopted in 1983 and envisioned an approximately 1,862 -acre area that was to be utilized by a variety of uses (residential, employment park, commercial, schools, parks, and open space) and circulation systems. The original SP anticipated 1,893 residential units, approximately 152 -acre employment park with light manufacturing and office uses (and developed consistent with the M -1 zoning standards), and 23 acres of commercial development. The total projected population was estimated to be 4 ,370 persons and contain 4,800 new jobs at full development.

Multiple Environmental Impact Reports, Mitigated Negative Declarations, and Negative Declarations have been certified/approved for the Specific Plan and Amendments. The most recent Negative Declaration, written for Amendment 16, amended the Specific Plan land use designation from “High Density” residential to “Employment Park”, and estimated the future industrial development with a floor area ratio (FAR)1 of 0.35 to estimate future building floor area. The utility systems

1 FAR is the ratio between the total gross floor area of all buildings on a lot and the total land area of that lot. A 20,000 square foot building on a 40,000 square foot lot yields a FAR of 0.5. A 0.5

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

were found to have capacity to serve the project in the CEQA analysis and is to be confirmed as part of the building permit technical plan check review and building permit inspections.

The 2045 General Plan has an Industrial Low land use designation for the properties identified as being within the employment park. Utilizing the Industrial Low’s FAR of 1.0 for the entire 100 -acre employee park results in approximately

4.4 million square feet. Utilizing a 0.50 coverage consistent with the M -1 zoning standards for the entire 100 -acre employment park results in approximately 2.2 million square feet. Utilizing a 0.35 floor area ratio for the entire 100 -acre employment park results in approxim ately 1.5 million square feet of building floor area. A total of approximately 260,000 square feet of development and a 30 residential unit navigation center (emergency shelter) have been developed on approximately 50-acres of the 100-acre employment park lands. The proposed 50- acre project contains approximately 754,222 square feet of building area.

Cumulatively, the developed and proposed project would total approximately 1.01 million square feet and 30 residential units, which is approximately half of th e development anticipated in SP 7 and a quarter of the development anticipated in the 2045 General Plan and less intensive than the anticipated development analyzed in the prior environmental analysis.

In the 1990s, the parcels were graded, and backbone infrastructure was installed to serve these properties for the anticipated development in the public right-of-way between 1993 and 2001. The public infrastructure is appropriately sized to serve the project.

Conejo Summit Application Process

In May of 2019, the applicant began submitting the applications listed in the “Request” section of this report. Upon receipt, staff initiated its review of the plans and worked collaboratively with the applicant team to refine the project. Through this process, staff outlined the path forward for consideration at a Commission public hearing.

FAR can describe a single-story building that covers half of the lot, a two-story building covering approximately one-quarter of the lot, or a four-story building covering one-eighth of the lot.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Between February 11, 2022, and March 14, 2022, the City circulated an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), 2019 -70444-MND, for a 30 -day public review period and received a substantial number of comments. The City and applicant determined th at a Focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be prepared for the project.

On February 17, 2023, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the EIR, and the NOP comment period began on February 17, 2023, and ended on March 20, 2023. On March 1, 2023, during the NOP comment period, a scoping meeting was held to provide additional opportunities for the public and various agencies to provide input on the scope and content of the EIR and to generally describe the project and the CEQA process for the EIR.

On March 2, 2023, a Notice of Application was mailed and posted at the property site.

Between November 26, 2024, and January 10, 2025, the City circulated an EIR for a 45-day public review period and received a substantial number of comments.

Between January 11, 2025, and August 28, 2025, the City prepared the Final EIR for the proposed project. The Final EIR includes: 1) responses to public comments received on the Draft EIR; 2) a list of revisions, clarifications, and corrections that have been made to the Draft EIR for the proposed project based on comments received from the public and agencies, 3) the full MMRP for the proposed project, and 4) written findings that the EIR is prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a) . None of th e revisions or clarifications constitutes “significant new information” under CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. As a result, recirculation of the Draft EIR is not required. On August 28, 2025, the Final EIR was posted on the City’s website, and all parties who commented on the Draft EIR were notified of its availability.

On August 25, 2025, the Notice of Hearing was published, mailed , and posted at the property site.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

PROJECT OVERVIEW

Project Summary

The applicant’s goals and objectives of the proposed project are to:

1. Support the goal in the 2045 General Plan to enhance the City’s high-value economic sectors and diversify its job base to contribute to the City's long- term economic vitality.

2. Create additional commercial building stock in Thousand Oaks for business, industrial, and manufacturing space to expand economic development opportunities, following the recommendations outlined in the Thousand Oaks Economic Development Strategic Plan (November 2017).

3. Develop a critical mass of buildings and uses sufficient to create the environment and economic incentives needed to foster growth and attract new industries to the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area.

4. Develop a large-format business park to attract quality tenants and that will be competitive with other similar facilities in the region.

5. Cluster development in the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area to promote and expand existing job centers.

6. Enhance and improve infrastructure and circulation in the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area to support commercial and industrial uses.

7. Develop uses that are consistent with the uses authorized in the Specific Plan.

8. Create adequate parking facilities to support the businesses and employees at the project site.

Project Description

The project involves construction of 15 industrial buildings ranging in size from approximately 22,700 to 93,000 sf totaling approximately 755,000 sf of building area for industrial and ancillary uses on approximately 50 acres. The project includes associated grading (balanced on-site), roadways, parking, hardscape, landscaping, retaining walls, lighting, signage, utilities, and infrastructure. The project site 1) has an Industrial Low General Plan land use designation, 2) is within the SP 7, and 3) is within the M-1 zone. The concept plans are included as Attachment #5. Figure 1 below illustrates the proposed site configuration.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Waivers are requested to 1) increase the maximum building heights from 35 feet up to 41 feet above finished floor and 2) reduce the minimum setback from 100 feet from the centerline of adjacent streets down to 52 feet for four properties.

Figure 1: Proposed Conejo Summit Site Plan Drive

The lots would be located in three separate clusters:

1. On the western side of Conejo Center Drive just northwest of the intersection of Conejo Center Drive and Conejo Spectrum Street;

2. Along the eastern side of Conejo Center Drive from Conejo Spectrum Street up to Rancho Conejo Boulevard; and

3. North of the intersection of Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard, extending west to a parcel at the end of Rancho Conejo Boulevard.

The project would include the dedication and development of an easterly portion of Academy Drive within the Rancho Conejo Specific Plan area , which would

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

extend west from Conejo Center Drive, and would provide access to Lots 4A and 4B. In addition, the project would provide easements for utilities, multi-use trails, and access.

Primary access to the buildings would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard, Conejo Center Drive, and the new Academy Drive extension . Parking would be provided in surface lots, generally located around each building.

The Conejo Summit project would include 1,663 surface parking spaces, in accordance with the TOMC requirements. Additionally, bicycle parking spaces will be provided in accordance with the California Green Building Standards Code in effect when the building permit is issued. Today’s code would require 84 short- term bicycle parking facilities and 84 long-term bicycle parking facilities.

The proposed project would require approximately 156,186 cubic yards of cut and fill, which would be balanced on-site.

Landscaping would be provided primarily along the public right -of-way and in landscape planters throughout the parking lot and near the buildings.

Lighting would be typical of industrial development. Building lighting would be limited to points of ingress/egress, security lighting, and accent lighting. Parking lot lighting would include pole-mounted lights throughout the proposed parking areas, wall-mounted security lights along the perimeter of the proposed building. Signage lighting is anticipated to include internally illuminated tenant wall signs, monument, and directional signage. All lighting would be downward-facing, shielded, and limited in brightness.

Construction Timing

Following City approvals and issuance of building and grading permits, the proposed project would consist of a maximum of seven phases, with an anticipated construction period of 12 to 18 months for each phase. It is anticipated that the entire project pha sing will be completed within approximately 10 years from the commencement of the first phase.

Operation Phase

The project has been designed as an industrial park with flexible space for industrial uses such as biotechnology labs, research and development facilities, Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

offices, manufacturing , and warehouse uses. During the project’s operational phase, employees would have access to the Site 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

The applicant has conservatively estimated that up to approximately 985 total employees would work at the project Site. The end users for the buildings are not yet known. Future tenant improvements are subject to project conditions, which were developed considering these estimates and additional permits.

Vesting Tentative Tract Maps

The application includes two maps that will reconfigure the existing lots. No new lots are proposed. VTTM No. 6021 includes approximately 35.8 gross acres that would be subdivided into 12 condominium lots for Buildings 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F, 1G, 2, 3, 4A, and 4B. VTTM 6022 includes approximately 15.5 gross acres that would be subdivided into 4 condominium lots for Buildings 5A, 5B, 6A, and 6B.

EVALUATION:

GENERAL PLAN, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND ZONING EVALUATION

2045 General Plan

The project s ite currently has a 2045 General Plan land use designation of Industrial Low, which allows for lower intensity job-producing uses including manufacturing, distribution, industrial, research and development, offices, breweries, distilleries, and supportive retail and services. Buildings are generally large footprint buildings with surface parking. Care should be tak en to create an attractive environment along public rights of way.

The project is consistent with the General Plan as the project consists of industrial uses within an industrial area, is located within a district that has other industrial uses and is on a site that has easy access to the Ventura Freeway Corridor. In addition, the project provides industrial employment opportunities. The project was reviewed for its effect on physical design on the environment, and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project’s conditions of approval.

The project was reviewed for its consistency with the 2045 General Plan as part of the EIR process. Specifically, four tables specify how the project is consistent with General Plan Goals and Policies, and these tables are included within the approval Resolution (Attachment #4).

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

1. EIR Table 3. 1-1 “ General Plan Consistency Analysis”, Section 3.1 (Aesthetics), Pages 3.1 -16 through 3.1 -17, and as amended in the Final EIR, and

2. EIR Table 3.7-7 “Consistency Analysis with 2045 General Plan Goals and Policies”, Section 3.7 (Greenhouse Gas Emissions), Pages 3.7-53 through

3.7-55, and as amended in the Final EIR, and

3. EIR Table 3.9-1 “General Plan Consistency Analysis ”, Section 3.9 (Land Use and Planning), Pages 3.9-7 through 3.9-8, and as amended in the Final EIR, and

4. EIR Table 3.12-1 “Project Consistency with Applicable Policies of the City of Thousand Oaks General Plan”, Section 3.12 (Transportation), Pages

3.12-10 through 3.12-11).

As seen in the approval Resolution and associated Tables, the project is consistent with the 2045 General Plan.

Economic Development Strategic Plan

The project is complementary to the Thousand Oaks Economic Development Strategic Plan’s goals of creating a diverse employment base, expanding existing businesses, and creating new jobs that contribute to the fiscal health of Thousand Oaks.

Less than 2% of the City is comprised of industrial uses, which include biotechnology labs, research and development facilities, offices, manufacturing , and warehouse uses. The Conejo Summit project seeks to add industrial, manufacturing, and limited office space to expand the area’s existing industrial and commercial character while supporting development of the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area’s growing industries and creating additional local employment opportunities consistent with current market demand wh ich are not provided in existing buildings in the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area (e.g., many of the existing buildings are not designed with high interior clear heights to provide for future tenant needs, such as , but not limited to, mechanical cranes to move equipment and goods, state -of-the-art research and design spaces, high -capacity racking systems and fire suppression systems ). In particular, the development is anticipated to result in short -term economic growth during the construction of the facility and long-term growth through the employment of approximately 985 people.

Collectively, these actions are expected to contribute to the fiscal health of Thousand Oaks.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Zoning Consistency

The project site is located within the SP 7 area, which envisions these properties to be an employment park with light manufacturing and office uses . SP 7 directs these properties to be developed consistent with the M-1 zoning standards, which provide specific development standards for industrial properties. Both the employment park and M-1 zoning standards are consistent with the project site’s 2045 General Plan Industrial Low land use designation.

The project was reviewed for consistency with SP 7 as part of the EIR process.

Specifically, one table specifies how the project is consistent with SP 7, and this table is included within the approval Resolution (Attachment #4):

1. EIR Table 3.9-2 “Ranch Conejo Specific Plan (SP 7) Consistency Analysis”, Section 3.9 (Land Use and Planning), Pages 3.9-9 through 3.9-10).

As seen in the approval Resolution and associated Tables, the project is consistent with SP 7.

The project, as designed, was reviewed for consistency with the TOMC development standards , including, but not limited to, setbacks, height 1, landscaping, and parking.

As seen in summary Table 1 below and the detailed table in Attachment #7, the project is compliant with all development standards of the M-1 zone except for the 100-foot setback from centerline of adjacent streets for four properties (Buildings 1A, 4A, 4B, and 5B) and the maximum building height for all buildings. The Commission has the authority to grant a Waiver to decrease the setback and increase the maximum building height. Waivers are requested to 1) increase the maximum building heights from 35 feet up to 41 feet above finished floor and 2) reduce the minimum setback from 100 feet from the centerline of adjacent streets down to 52 feet for four properties. See the Waiver discussion further below in this report.

1 As the Conejo Summit project includes a Vesting Tentative Map, the project’s maximum height is calculated based on the definition of “Building height” that was in place on the date the application was deemed Complete for processing (March 17, 2020) . That definition is as follows: “Building height” shall mean the vertical distance from the grade to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof, or to the deck line of a mansard roof, or to the average height of the highest gable of a pitch or hip roof.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Table 1 – Summary Conejo Summit Project Consistency with Development Standards

DEVELOPMENT

STANDARD
(M-1; SP 7)

REQUIRED PROPOSED COMPLIES
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

All Buildings except
Buildings 4A, 4B, & 5B
comply.

Building 4A front (south)
setback at 52 feet.

Building 4B front (south)
setback at 63 feet.

Building 5B front (south)
setback at 54 feet.

Waiver
Required
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines
if the building exceeds 25 feet.

On corner lots, no less than 100
feet from the center line of any
public street.

All Buildings except
Building 1A comply.

Building 1A (west)
setback at 59 feet.

Waiver
Required
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet

Increase the maximum
building heights from 35
feet up to 41 feet above
finished floor.

Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10 -foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open
parking and driveway areas shall
be landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.

All properties comply. Yes

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Parking/Traffic

As seen in Table 2 below and the detailed table in Attachment #8, the project will include 1,663 surface parking spaces , which complies with the TOMC requirements of 1,663 parking spaces.

Table 2 – Summary Conejo Summit Project Consistency with Parking Standards

Use Square Feet Parking Ratio Required
Parking

WHOLE PROJECT PARKING REQUIREMENT SUMMARY
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
671,122 sf 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
1,342

Business and
professional
offices
80,325 sf
(83,100 sf less
2,775 sf)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 321
Total Required 1,663
Total Provided 1,663
(standard parking spaces)

The Conejo Summit Project would include 1,663 surface parking spaces, in accordance with the TOMC requirements, including o nsite Electric Vehicle charging parking spaces, ADA accessible spaces, carpool/vanpool spaces, “clean air vehicle” or similar preferentially identified spaces, and any permitted reserved parking spaces (such as time-restricted spaces). Additionally, bicycle parking spaces must be provided i n accordance with the California Green Building Standards Code in effect when the building permit is issued. Today’s code would require 84 short-term bicycle parking facilities and 84 long-term bicycle parking facilities.

Traffic impacts were independently reviewed by the City’s Traffic Engineering Division, which concluded that the project will not have a significant impact on existing traffic patterns, level of service (LOS), or vehicle miles traveled (VMT) with the implementation of mitigation measures.
• LOS: The applicant will be required to pay the Citywide traffic mitigation fee to help contribute towards the cost of future improvements at the Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

intersections identified in the City's Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee Nexus Study.
• VMT: In addition to improvements required by the TOMC and policy implementation such as Pedestrian & Bicycle Network Improvements (Condition of Approval Nos. 123, 278 & 279), Bicycle Parking (Condition of Approval Nos. 133, 181 & 187 ), Preferential Rideshare Parking Program and Commute Trip Reduction Marketing (Condition of Approval No. 134), and Electric Vehicle Charging Facilities (Condition of Approval Nos. 125, 181, 187), the project requires the applicant to offset 788 total daily VMT through the implementation of one or more of the following VMT mitigation measures:
o Provide Pedestrian & Bicycle Network Improvements (Condition of Approval No. 52 / TRAF-1)
o Electric Chargers for Bicycles & Scooters (Condition of Approval No. 53 / TRAF-2)
o Provide End of Trip Facilities (Condition of Approval No. 54 / TRAF- 3)
o On-Site Facilities (Condition of Approval No. 55 / TRAF-4) o Electric Vehicle Charging Facilities (Condition of Approval No. 56 / TRAF-5)
The traffic and VMT reports are included in Appendix J of the Draft EIR (Attachment #9), and clarifications were provided to VMT mitigation measures (TRAF-1 through TRAF-5) in the FEIR (Attachment #10).

Architectural Design

The architectural design of the building s reflects the industrial vernacular of the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area. The buildings are characterized by simple forms and open interior spaces , which are intentionally designed to provide maximum flexibility for future tenants.

Although the building forms are straightforward, the design breaks up the massing and adds visual interest. The design includes offset concrete wall panels accented with reveals and coordinated paint scheme, recessed storefronts and windows, and strategically canopies that create shadow and articulation.

The primary building entries are highlighted through double-height recessed glazing and canopy element s, clearly defining points of access. The material palette consists of concrete walls , glazed anodized aluminum curtain walls, wall tile accents, metal canopies, and flashings. These materials and colors are applied Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

consistently across all building elevations to create a cohesive architectural identity. Canopies are limited to the main entry areas to and emphasize entry features.

As shown in Figures 2 – 8, the architectural renderings show how the project would appear in context , confirming the design intent and compatibility with the surrounding industrial area.

Figure 2: Building 1A Project Rendering – North and East Elevations

Figure 3: Building 1B, Project Rendering – South and West Elevations

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Figure 4: Building 1F Project Rendering – North and West Elevations

Figure 5: Building 3 Project Rendering – South and East Elevations

Figure 6: Building 5A Project Rendering – South and East Elevations

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Figure 7: Building 5B Project Rendering – South and East Elevations

Figure 8: Building 6B Project Rendering – South and West Elevations

The Conejo Summit project was evaluated for sensitivity to aesthetic impacts from Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency (COSCA) lands to the north and west of the project site. Visual simulations were prepared to illustrate the visual effect the Conejo Summit project would have from the surrounding public trails within the COSCA land project (Figure 9 below and EIR Figures 3.1-1 through 3.1-4). As shown in the visual simulations, the top portion of the buildings would be visible but the lower portions of the buildings would be screened by existing topography and vegetation/ landscaping. As shown in the visual simulations, the buildings would not substantially change the view from the trails or scenic vista. Per City policy, the buildings would be painted earth tones to blend in with the surrounding area, and reflective materials are to be avoided per City policy, where feasible. The buildings that border COSCA

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

open space (Buildings 3, 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B, 6A, and 6B) are to be painted with earth tones that are found within COSCA’s open space immediately surrounding the Conejo Summit project site with the intention of blending the buildings into the environment space as seen from COSCA’s open space.

Figure 9 EIR Photo Simulations Figure 3.1-4

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

The building design and materials comply with the City’s Architectural Design Guidelines for Construction and Development of Residential, Industrial, and Institutional Projects (Resolution No. 2023 -061) as described in this staff report and as conditioned in the approval Resolution (Attachment #4). Overall, staff finds that the project’s architectural design is compatible with surrounding development and complies with the standards of the Architectural Guidelines for industrial buildings.

Landscape Design

The project site is highly disturbed , and common plant species found on site include many non-native species. Most of the existing vegetation communities and land cover types would be removed.

A conceptual landscape plan has been prepared to illustrate the proposed landscaping for the project. The proposed project would replace the existing landscape with trees, shrubs, and various hardy, drought -tolerant perennial groundcovers. The proposed planting plan for the project includes both native and climate-adapted trees (i.e., Coast Live Oak, Desert Museum Palo Verde, Chitalpa, Wilson Fruitless Olive, Catawba Crape Myrtle), shrubs (i.e., Blue Glow Agave, Curve Leaf Yucca, Red Yucca, Century Plant), and groundcover (i.e. , Berkeley Sedge, Prostrate Myoporum, Blue Chalksticks) . The Conejo Summit project will provide 18.1 percent landscape coverage (approximately 391,831 sf), providing enhanced perimeter landscape treatment.

The conceptual landscape plan focuses on landscaping along the public right -of- way, within parking lot planters, and near the buildings. A minimum 10 -foot landscaped area would be provided along all property lines fronting Rancho Conejo Boulevard, Conejo Center Drive, and Academy Drive. Interior property lines within the approved circulation system are exempt , while all other interior property lines would include at least 4-foot landscaped area s, except in limited locations behind the buildings adjacent to the cultural resource or adjacent to the open space areas to the north and west. Perimeter landscaping would reduce vehicle headlight glare, and street-facing trees would help soften the building and provide shade to park vehicles.

Of the 52 regulated trees within the survey area (consisting of 32 protected oak trees, 19 toyon trees, and 1 unprotected city street tree), 51 are located around the perimeter of the project site, and a single Toyon tree meeting the City’s definition of a landmark tree is located in the near-center of the proposed parcel 9 of VTTM Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

6021. Grading and construction of the project is expected to require removal of up to 22 protected trees (10 oak trees and 12 toyon trees) and encroachment into the protected zone of up to 28 protected trees (21 oak trees and 7 toyon trees) as described in the “Protected Tree Report” dated August 12, 2025 (Attachment #6).

The project includes provisions to plant replacement protected trees at a 3:1 ratio in accordance with City of Thousand Oaks Municipal Code. Consistent with regulatory requirements and pro ject mitigation measures, a total of 66 protected trees consisting of 30 oak trees (20 24 -inch box trees and 10 36 -inch box trees) and 36 toyon trees (24 24 -inch box trees and 12 36 -inch box trees) would be incorporated into the project landscape plans and planted on site to mitigate for their removal. Adequate space is provided on-site to accommodate these trees.

See the Protected Tree Permit section for further discussion.

The project is conditioned to submit detailed landscape plans concurrent with the construction plans. These plans will undergo technical review through the City’s Landscape Plan Check process to ensure compliance with all applicable standards including the City of Thousand Oaks’ Guidelines and Standards for Landscape Planting and Irrigation, the 2017 Forestry Master Plan Newbury Park Regional Character Design Guidelines, the Ventura County Fire Department’s Prohibit Plant List and associated standards an d g uidelines, the Ventura County Fire Department’s Ordinance 32 Chapter 49 Requirements for Wildland -Urban Interface Fire Areas. All landscape plans for the project will demonstrate compliance with the State of California Model Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance.

Staff finds the landscape design is compatible with surrounding development as it meets Code requirements for landscape setbacks including (front, rear and side yards) and the minimum 10% landscaped area in the parking lots as further detailed in Attachment #7 and conditioned in the approval Resolution (Attachment #4).

Access & Circulation Design

Primary access to the proposed buildings would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard, Conejo Center Drive , and the new Academy Drive extension . The project would include the dedication and development of an easterly portion of Academy Drive within the Rancho Conejo Specific Plan area, which would extend west from Conejo Center Drive, and would provide access to Buildings 4A and 4B on Lots 11 and 12 of VTTM 6021.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

On-site circulation has been designed to provide adequate access to parking areas around each building . The circulation system accommodates large vehicles including fire engines and tractor -trailers for maneuvering throughout the development and loading areas . The City’s Planning Division, Building & Safety Division, Traffic Division , and Fire Department reviewed the circulation plan , including pedestrian and vehicular movements, separation distances, turning movements, and trip generation and determined that the project, as conditioned, complies with the TOMC, Building Code, Fire Code, and ADA standards.

A 25-foot-wide fire access easement is proposed within the 30-foot-wide drive aisle of Lot 4 of VTTM 6022 to provide access between Rancho Conejo Boulevard and the northeastern portion of the lot to connect to the Hill Canyon Fire Road.

An additional 15-foot-wide multi-use trail and City maintenance vehicular access easement is proposed on the eastern lot line of Lot 4 of VTTM 6022 to provide access between Rancho Conejo Boulevard and the Hill Canyon Fire Trail for open space visitors and government vehicles.

To facilitate future development of multi-use trails by COSCA for use by hikers, mountain bikers, and equestrians, the project would provide several multi-use trail easements:

1. An 8-foot-wide easement along the north side of the Academy Drive.

2. A 3-foot-wide easement along the west side of Conejo Center Drive.

3. A 10-foot-wide easement around the perimeter of Lots 1-4 of VTTM 6022.

Grading Design

No areas of the site contain natural terrain with slopes of 25% or greater.

The project requires approximately 156,186 cubic yards of cut and fill, which will be balanced on -site. The City’s Public Works Engineering Division reviewed Sikand Engineering Associates’ grading calculations, which account for cut, fill, offing spoils, basin, utility trenches, shrinkage, and removal/recompaction, and found them substantially correct. Compliance will be verified during grading plan check and inspection by the Public Works Department.

As illustrated in Figure 10, proposed grading would alter pad elevations. Portions of the site would be approximately 0 to 10 feet lower (lighter to darker red shading), and portions of the project site would be approximately 0 to 8.5 feet higher than the existing grades (lighter to darker blue shading).

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Figure 10: Grading Heat Map

To achieve the grading approach as described above, retaining walls will be constructed throughout the site with the intent of lessening the amount of grading without negatively impacting public views of the property. All retaining walls shall incorporate the design and materials utilized on the buildings and be softened by

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

the installation of landscaping adjacent to the wall. Walls that are exposed to public view shall utilize pilasters, decorative materials, and/or horizontal articulation of varying depths to break up a long, linear, monotonous appearance.

The most substantial retaining walls would be constructed primarily along property lines behind the proposed buildings. Specifically, four ret aining walls are anticipated to exceed 6’0” of exposed height as follows:

1. VTTM 6021, Lot 4 (Building 1D): 9’0”

2. VTTM 6021, Lot 6 (Building 1F): 7’0”

3. VTTM 6021, Lot 7 (Building 1G): 8’0”

4. VTTM 6021, Lot 10 (Building 3): 10’0”
All other retaining walls shall be limited to a maximum exposed height of 6’0” . In no case shall retaining walls exceed 12 feet.

Staff supports the retaining walls to exceed a maximum height of 6 feet up to a maximum of 12 feet , as shown on the plans , to reduce the amount of grading without negatively impacting public views of the property. Consistent with the City’s Standard Policy Conditions for Commercial/Industrial and Residential Projects (Resolution 1995-020), a project condition has been included to allow the above- listed retaining walls to exceed a maximum exposed height of six feet.

Conditions are included requiring the applicant to obtain a grading permit and a haul route specifying the number of truck trips per day, proposed hours of operation, traffic control measures, and identification of the disposition location.

With the inclusion of appropriate conditions, including, but not limited to, dust and rodent control, conducting pre-construction meetings, traffic control plan, amongst other measures, the proposed grading will have minimal impact on surrounding properties. Additionally, the TOMC limits construction hours between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday , with no work allowed on Sunday or City-recognized holidays, so no grading activities or truck trips are permitted to occur outside these hours.

Stormwater
Project grading and excavation would temporarily alter drainage patterns.

Compliance with stormwater regulations and incorporation of biofiltration best management practices (BMPs) would reduce flow velocities, minimizing scouring and erosion.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

During operations, the project will include necessary connections and upgrades identified in the hydrology and utility plans. Low Impact Development (LID) features will be implemented in accordance with the Ventura County Stormwater Manual to treat runoff, including bioswales, biopod planters, underground biopods, and detention pipe s, and connections to the existing storm drain system. facilities.

These measures, consistent with RWQCB requirements under the MS4 permit, will mitigate site runoff and protect water quality. The project would not require construction or expansion of off -site stormwater facilities, as it will not generate substantial new runoff beyond existing conditions.

Waivers

As discussed below in the Setback and Height Waiver sections, staff finds the buildings’ height, bulk, pattern, scale, and character are compatible with the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area, an area which contains over 120 industrial buildings ranging from 5,000 sf to 127,000 sf.

The proposed building’s shape (rectangle), stories (2 stories), maximum height (up to 41 feet), and size (~22,700 sf to ~93,300 sf) are similar to and compatible with the nearby industrial buildings to the north, east, and south of the project site.

Table 3 – Proposed & Adjacent Development Compatibility

ADDRESS GENERAL

SHAPE STORIES MAXIMUM

HEIGHT SIZE
Conejo Summit
(Proposed)
Rectangle 2 stories 41 feet 0 inches

~22,700 sf to
~93,300 sf
1515 Rancho
Conejo Boulevard
Rectangle 2 stories 35 feet 0 inches

~96,170 sf
1525 Rancho
Conejo Boulevard
Rectangle 2 stories 35 feet 0 inches

~60,600 sf
1535 Rancho
Conejo Boulevard
Rectangle 1 story 23 feet 7 inches

~97,000 sf
1682 – 1700
Rancho Conejo
Boulevard
Rectangles 2 stories 34 feet 0 inches ~160,666 sf
1993 – 2010
Conejo Center
Drive (Municipal
Service Center)
Rectangles 2 stories 34 feet 9 inches ~22,874 sf
2600-2736 Conejo
Center Drive
Rectangles 1 story 25 feet 0 inches ~74,180 sf
Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

ADDRESS GENERAL

SHAPE STORIES MAXIMUM

HEIGHT SIZE
2498-2550 Conejo
Center Drive
Rectangle 2 stories 31 feet 6 inches

~21,440 sf
2380 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 47 feet 0 inches

~53,131 sf
2400 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 37 feet 6 inches

~53,131 sf
2405 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 41 feet 0 inches

~55,800 sf
2430 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 41 feet 0 inches

~93,080 sf
2455 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 41 feet 0 inches

~98,270 sf
2500 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 41 feet 0 inches

~38,780 sf
2535 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 41 feet 0 inches

~45,640 sf
2570 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 41 feet 0 inches

~37,270 sf
2585 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 41 feet 0 inches

~49,100 sf
2590 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 36 feet 0 inches

~77,252 sf
2595 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 41 feet 0 inches

~50,760 sf
2610 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 36 feet 0 inches

~36,186 sf
2615 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 41 feet 0 inches ~39,660 sf
2630 Conejo
Spectrum Street
Rectangle 2 stories 35 feet 0 inches

~30,001 sf
1445 Lawrence
Drive
Rectangle 2 stories 35 feet 0 inches

~129,000 sf
1465 Lawrence
Drive
Rectangle 2 stories 36 feet 8 inches ~342,000 sf
1480 Lawrence
Drive
Rectangle 2 stories 35 feet 0 inches ~85,788 sf

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Setback Waiver

Staff supports granting the setback Waiver for four properties (Buildings 1A, 4A, 4B, and 5B) that do not meet the required M-1 zone’s 100-foot setback from the centerline of adjacent streets.

The Conejo Summit properties are constrained by curved roadways and irregular topography, resulting in parcels with variable shapes and slopes. Modern industrial buildings, however, require more regular footprints, minimum dimensions, and flatter grades to ensure efficient circulation and operations. While the project meets applicable site planning, circulation , and parking on twelve of sixteen properties , the development on four parcels is infeasible without a Waiver to reduce the required 100-foot setback from centerline of adjacent streets.

The Conejo Summit properties are within the SP 7, which applies the M-1 zoning development standards, including the 100-foot setback from centerline of adjacent streets. By comparison, the adjacent Rancho Conejo Industrial Park Specific Plan (SP 15) modified this requirement, replacing the 100 -foot centerline setback with a 20 -foot minimum setback from the property line adjacent to a street . This relationship between SP 7 and SP 15 is illustrated in Figure 11.

Figure 11: Specific Plan 7 & 15 Geographic Areas
(SP 7 = light tan area and outlined in blue; SP 15 = abutting light orange area)

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

If the Conejo Summit properties were developed with the same setback standards as SP 15, all the Conejo Summit buildings, as measured at their closest point to the property line, would comply with the SP 15 setback standards, as shown below in Table 4.

Table 4: Conejo Summit Setback Comparison SP 7 & SP 15

BUILDING SP 7

DEVELOPMENT STANDARD
SP 15

DEVELOPMENT STANDARD
No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street
20 feet from the property line
adjacent to a street
Proposed Complies? Proposed Complies?
1A 59’0” Waiver required 29’3” Yes
4A 52’0” Waiver required 23’3” Yes
4B 65’0” Waiver required 26’9” Yes
5B 53’0” Waiver required 23’3” Yes

For illustrative purposes, Figures 12-15 below identify the setback at 100 feet from the centerline of the public streets (the back dashed lines interior to the property) and superimpose the area within the setback to illustrate the Waiver request for Buildings 1A, 4A, 4B, and 5B.

Figure 12: Building 1A Setback Waiver Illustration
(Waiver required for the red area – 59 feet from the centerline of the street)

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Figure 13: Building 4A Setback Waiver Illustration
(Waiver required for the red area – 52 feet from the centerline of the street)

Figure 14: Building 4B Setback Waiver Illustration
(Waiver required for the red area – 63 feet from the centerline of the street)

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Figure 15: Building 5B Setback Waiver Illustration
(Waiver required for the red area – 54 feet from the centerline of the street)

The Conejo Summit project as designed has f ront yard setbacks that range between 52 to 128 feet from the center line of abutting streets . The requested setback Waiver would only be experienced in the public rights-of-way immediately in front of four buildings at the end of Rancho Conejo Boulevard, on a curved portion of Conejo Center Drive, and along the Academy Drive extension that would only serve these buildings. In the context of the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area, the buildings’ bulk, pattern, scale, an d character are compatible with the existing and potential Rancho Conejo Industrial Area developments, as demonstrated by the compliance with the adjunct SP 15 development standards.

Height Waiver

Staff also supports granting a maximum building height Waiver to allow building heights of up to 41 feet, exceeding the current M -1 zone maximum of 35 feet as measured from the adjacent grade.

The Conejo Summit properties are designated Industrial Low by the 2045 General Plan, which allows building heights up to 50 feet, or up to 75 feet when accompanied by a Specific Plan or Height Overlay Zone. The City is in the process

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

of updating the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code to align zoning standards with the General Plan, but this update is not yet complete.

Modern industrial buildings require interior clear heights to accommodate advanced tenant needs, including mechanical cranes to move equipment and goods, state-of-the-art research and design spaces, high-capacity racking systems and fire suppression systems . The Conejo Summit buildings are designed with clear heights up to 32 feet. With parapets of up to 6 feet, the resulting maximum building height reaches 41 feet.

Figure 16 below superimposes the 35-foot height limit on Building 1A to illustrate the Waiver request which is representative of the Waiver request for all Conejo Summit buildings.

Figure 16: Building 1A Height Waiver Illustration
(Waiver required for the area above the red line)

The Conejo Summit project includes parapets designed to screen rooftop mechanical equipment from public view. While future tenants may require equipment that exceeds both the M-1 zone height limit and the requested maximum height Waiver, Figure 17 demonstrates that equipment set back on the roof would not be visible from the public right-of-way. The project requires line-of- sight verification to ensure all rooftop equipment is screened from public view.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Figure 17: Building 1A Line-of-Sight Illustration– Rancho Conejo Detail

To further reduce the perceived height of the building, all structures are set back beyond the minimum required front, side, and rear yard setbacks (Attachment #7).

Additionally, the conceptual landscape plans provide trees between the buildings and the public right -of-way (Figure 18). Collectively, these measures minimize visual impacts and reduce the apparent building height.

Figure 18: Building 1A Conceptual Landscaping

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Furthermore, the height of the proposed development is similar to the height of the surrounding development. As seen above in Table 3, the buildings directly east of the project site along Conejo Spectrum Street range between 35 feet and 47 feet with 9 of 15 buildings at 41 feet tall.

Vesting Tentative Tract Maps 2019-70440-VTTM & 2019-70441-VTTM

The underlying parcels were created by Vesting Tentative Tract Map 4823, Minor Modification 2, in June 1994.

The application includes two proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Maps (VTTM) that will reconfigure the existing lots. No new lots are proposed. VTTM No. 6021 includes approximately 35.8 gross acres that would be subdivided into 12 condominium lots for Buildings 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F, 1G, 2, 3, 4A, and 4B. VTTM 6022 includes approximately 15.5 gross acres that would be subdivided into 4 condominium lots for Buildings 5A, 5B, 6A, and 6B. Attachment #7 demonstrates that the proposed parcels comply with the required minimum lot size and width of the M-1 zone.

The project include s the dedication and development of an easterly portion of Academy Drive within the Rancho Conejo Specific Plan area, extending west from Conejo Center Drive, and would provide access to Lots 4A and 4B. In addition, the project would provide easements for utilities, multi -use trails, and access . The project is conditioned to establish Property Owners Association s and implement Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions and related agreements to ensure site maintenance and reciprocal access and parking within the project area.

Protected Tree Permit 2021-71158-PTP

The Conejo Summit Project Arborist Report, dated August 2025, prepared by Dudek; Chris Kallstrand, ISA Certified Arborist is attached to this staff report (Attachment #6) and included in Appendix M of the Final EIR (Attachment #10) , and it identifies a total of 52 regulated trees within the survey area (consisting of 32 protected oak trees, 19 toyon trees, and 1 unprotected city street tree), 51 are located around the perimeter of the project site and a single Toyon tree meeting the City’s definition of a landmark tree is located in the near -center of proposed parcel 9 of VTTM 6021. None of the existing protected trees were planted by the property owner as required mitigation trees.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Grading and construction of the project is expected to require removal of up to 22 protected trees ( 10 oak trees and 12 toyon trees) and encroachment into the protected zone of up to 28 protected trees (21 oak trees and 7 toyon trees) as described in the “Protected Tree Report” dated August 12, 2025 (Attachment #6).

Descriptions of the protected trees impacted by the proposed development though encroachment and removal are provided below in Table 5 and illustrated in Figure 19.

Table 5 – Protected Trees

Tree No. Common Name DBH Health Structure
Protect
2 Coast Live Oak 12” Good Fair
42 Chinese Pistache
(City Street Tree)
7” Fair Fair
Remove
4 Coast Live Oak 12” Fair Fair
7 Coast Live Oak 9” Fair Fair
8 Coast Live Oak 10” Good Fair
11 Coast Live Oak 9” Fair Fair
12 Coast Live Oak 13” Fair Fair
13 Coast Live Oak 9” Fair Fair
14 Valley Oak 10” Poor Fair
16 Toyon 12” Fair Fair
17 Inland Scrub Oak 6” Fair Fair
19 Inland Scrub Oak 20” Fair Fair
20 Toyon 14” Good Fair
21 Toyon 10” Good Fair
23 Toyon 16” Fair Fair
41 Toyon 13” Good Fair
45 Toyon 17” Fair Fair
46 Coast Live Oak 26” Fair Fair
47 Toyon 15” Fair Fair
48 Toyon 14” Good Fair
49 Toyon 10” Good Fair
50 Toyon 13” Good Fair
51 Toyon 13” Good Fair
52 Toyon 13” Good Fair
Encroach
1 Coast Live Oak 11” Good Fair
3 Coast Live Oak 11” Good Good
5 Toyon 10” Poor Poor
6 Toyon 17” Poor Fair
9 Valley Oak 4” Fair Fair
10 Coast Live Oak 13” Fair Fair
Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Tree No. Common Name DBH Health Structure
15 Toyon 20” Fair Fair
18 Inland Scrub Oak 8” Fair Fair
22 Inland Scrub Oak 20” Fair Fair
24 Toyon 10” Good Fair
25 Toyon 10” Fair Fair
26 Inland Scrub Oak 10” Fair Fair
27 Inland Scrub Oak 10” Fair Fair
28 Inland Scrub Oak 10” Fair Fair
29 Inland Scrub Oak 10” Fair Fair
30 Inland Scrub Oak 10” Fair Fair
31 Inland Scrub Oak 7” Fair Fair
32 Inland Scrub Oak 7” Fair Fair
33 Inland Scrub Oak 4” Fair Poor
34 Inland Scrub Oak 10” Fair Fair
35 Inland Scrub Oak 8” Fair Fair
36 Inland Scrub Oak 13” Fair Fair
37 Toyon 10” Poor Fair
38 Inland Scrub Oak 10” Fair Fair
39 Inland Scrub Oak 7” Fair Fair
40 Inland Scrub Oak 12” Fair Fair
43 Coast Live Oak 37” Fair Fair
44 Toyon 21” Fair Fair

The City’s arborist has independently reviewed the tree report provided by the applicant’s consultant and concurs that the tree impacts are necessary to accommodate site preparation , grading, and construction activities. Figure 24 illustrates the development areas and tree locations affected.

Of the 22 protected trees, 6 protected trees (Tree Nos. 4, 6, 7, 11, 12, and 21) are identified as having substantial levels of crown encroachment (47.4%, 39.4%,

41.2%, 30.5%, 38.9%, and 34.8%, respectively). Both the applicant’s arborist and the City’s arborist agree that, although these levels are higher than ideal, the trees may tolerate disturbance if protective measures are applied. While the removal has been conservatively recommended, retention may be possible through the tree protection measures required by Conditions of Approval Nos. 36 – 39 / BIO-11a – BIO-11d.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Figure 24: Protected Trees – Preserved, Removed, and Encroached

The City’s Oak Tree Consultant took into consideration the feasibility of transplanting the trees proposed for removal; however, transplanting was not recommended for this specific project due to the significant root loss that would occur to these trees, the sloping topography, and the uncertainty that the trees will survive even if appropriate care is taken during the pre - and post-transplanting process.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Staff finds that the removal of up to 22 protected trees is necessary to allow reasonable use of the property. The project includes the provision of replacement landmark trees at a 3:1 ratio in accordance with City of Thousand Oaks Municipal Code and City's Oak Tree Preservation and Protection Guidelines. Consistent with regulatory requirements and project mitigation measures, a total of 30 oak trees (20 24-inch box trees and 10 36 -inch box trees) and 36 toyon trees (24 24 -inch box trees and 12 36 -inch box trees) would be incorporated into the project landscape plans and planted on-site to mitigate for their removal.

Replacement trees will be strategically planted around the perimeter of properties to provide roadway screening and reduce the visual scale of the buildings. Staff therefore supports the proposed replacement tree plan.

Uniform Sign Program

The uniform sign program is intended to identify the Conejo Summit properties and tenants, establish a cohesive appearance, and accommodate future tenant signage.

The proposed program includes three types of monument signs (Complex, Address, and Directional ) two types of wall signs (Tenant and Address) , and ancillary signs ( e.g., regulatory parking signs) . While the TOMC allows one monument sign per industrial property; the applicant proposed 27 monument signs. As conditioned, the number of monument signs will be reduced to 19 signs:
four Complex and 15 address monument signs. All monument signs will be located within the project area, comply with Public Works’ line -of-sight standards, and be placed outside easements.

Complex Monument Signs

A total of four Complex monument signs are proposed at gateways to the Conejo Summit project area generally as described below and as illustrated in Figure 25:

1. Northeast corner of the project area on Rancho Conejo Boulevard

2. Southeast corner of the project area on Conejo Center Drive

3. Northwest corner of the Rancho Conejo Boulevard/Conejo Center Drive intersection

4. Southwest corner of the project area on Academy Drive Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Additionally, the Complex monument signs include a "Rider" sign1 which states the development’s name but not any tenant names.

Figure 25: Proposed Complex Monument Sign Locations

The design of the Complex monument signs is supported in concept only, but these signs have been conditioned to not exceed a maximum overall height of 6 feet tall. Three of the four signs comply with the 6 -foot height limitation, but Complex monument sign MM-1 is proposed at 9 feet 6 inches tall (Figure 26).

1 TOMC Section 9-4.2303: “Rider” shall mean an attachment to a sign that is not an integral part of the display panel of the sign.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Figure 26: Proposed Complex Monument Sign MM-1

As conditioned, Complex monument sign MM-1 must be reduced proportionally by approximately one-third to achieve a pedestrian scale, with Rider text limited to 24 inches in height and the base reduced to approximately 4 feet.

Address Monument Signs

As conditioned, the Conejo Summit project will include 15 Address signs, with one sign per parcel (except Lot No. 8 in VTTM 6021 , which will not have a sign). The design of these signs is supported in concept only (Figure 27). Address monument signs are intended to identify the tenants of each lot and may list up to two tenants.

Figure 27: Proposed Address Monument Signs

Directional Monument Signs

The uniform sign program proposes a total of 8 eight Directional monument signs throughout the Conejo Summit project area to guide vehicles and pedestrians. As conditioned, these signs must comply with the TOMC Directional Sign criteria, limiting each to 3 square feet and allowing only directional text and symbols.

Directional signs are not classified as monument signs.

Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

Wall Signs – Tenants

The uniform sign program anticipates up to 29 wall signs to identify tenan ts. As conditioned, the uniform sign program must include building elevations with identified sign areas. Maximum letter heights must be reduced from 48 inches to 30 inches.

Wall Signs – Addresses

The uniform sign program anticipates up to 27 wall signs to identify addresses. As conditioned, the program must include elevations with sign area locations.

Address letter heights are to be revised from 24 inches to the mini mum height required by both the Fire and Police Departments. The sign program must also specify text/graphics indicating unit addresses placement and include corresponding minimum and maximum letter heights.

Staff finds the uniform sign program, as conditioned, is consistent with the City’s Sign Regulations and applicable architectural standards , providing effective and appropriate identification for the Conejo Summit project and its tenants. Should the Commission approve the program concept with four additional monument signs, including Rider signage , the applicant must revise the program to ensure consistency with project conditions and the TOMC. The revised uniform sign program would be subject to administrative review and approval by staff. Approval is recommended based on the findings of fact contained in the attached Resolution (Attachment #4) and subject to the conditions of approval outlined therein.

Environmental Review (CEQA) (2022-70771-EIR)

In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a comprehensive environmental analysis was prepared for this project. This analysis determined that the project could result in significant environmental effects without mitigation; therefore, an Environmental Impact Report ( EIR) was prepared (Attachments #9 & #10). The EIR identified mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less than significant level, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is required to ensure implementation.

A Notice of Availability was issued, and the Draft EIR (DEIR) was circulated for a 45-day public review period from November 26, 2024, and January 10, 2025.

During this period, the City received comments from six members of the public and two public agencies: the County of Ventura Resource Management Agency and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) . All comments and staff responses are included in the Response to Comments (RTC) within the Final EIR Conejo Summit Project (2022-70771-EIR/2019-70439-DP/2019-70440-VTTM/2019- 70441-VTTM/2021-71158-PTP/2019-70442-USP/2019-70443-LPC) September 8, 2025

(Attachment #10). None of the comments warranted substantive changes to the analysis or con clusions of the DEIR . Additionally, Findings of Fact have been prepared and are also included in the Final EIR (Attachment #10, Appendix O).

Based on the Final EIR, staff finds that all potential impacts of the project can be mitigated to a less -than-significant level. Staff therefore recommends that the Planning Commission certify the Final EIR (2022-70771-EIR).

PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE
Staff received public correspondence in which several agencies and organizations commented on the Draft EIR as mentioned above.

CONCLUSION
Staff has evaluated the project for consistency with the City’s regulations, 2045 General Plan goals and policies, SP 7, applicable TOMC development standards, and architectural design guidelines. The proposed buildings and site design/layout integrate well with surrounding development and reflect a cohesive architectural design. Based on the analysis and findings in this report and supporting attachments, the staff recommends that the Planning Commission certify the Final EIR and approve this project, subject to the conditions of approval in Resolution (Attachment #4).

PREPARED BY: Scott Kolwitz, Senior Planner

Attachments:

Attachment #1 – Vicinity Map
Attachment #2 – Location Maps
Attachment #3 – Aerial Photos
Attachment #4 – Resolution for 2022-70771-EIR, 2019-70439-DP, 2019- 70440-VTTM, 2019-70441-VTTM, 2021-71158-PTP,
2019-70442-USP
Attachment #5 – Project Plans, dated September 8, 2025 Attachment #6 – Protected Tree Report, dated August 12, 2025 Attachment #7 – Conejo Summit Project Consistency with Development Standards
Attachment #8 – Conejo Summit Project Consistency with Parking Standards Attachment #9 – Draft EIR (2022-70771-EIR)
Attachment #10 – Final EIR (2022-70771-EIR)

CDD:420-46/sk/H:COMMON/Planning Commission/Agenda Packet/2025/2025-09-08/07A Conejo Summit 19-70439-DP Staff Report.docx/pz (FILE ID: 2019-70439-DP) 5D
QFK
R
&RQH
MR
%OYG
:HQG\
'U
$FDG
HP
\'U
7HOOHU 5G
*UDQG
H 9LVWD 'U
&RQ
HMR 6SH
FWUXP
6W
/DZUHQ
FH'U


'3 
9770
9770

863 373 
/3&
(,57KRXVDQG2DNV0DVWHU//&
9LFLQLW\0DS
8 ?FGFMDQVHQ?B&DVH0DSV?5DQFKR&RQHMR%OYG
?5DQFKR&RQHMR%OYG
DSU[
  
)HHW
m
6LWH
&LW\RI7KRXVDQG2DNV
&RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW'HSDUWPHQW
6LWH6LWH

CDD:420-46/sk/H:COMMON/Planning Commission/Agenda Packet/2025/2025-09-08/07A Conejo Summit 19-70439-DP Attach 1 Vicinity Map.pdf/pz (FILE ID: 2019-70439-DP)
ATTACHMENT #1
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
5DQFKR &RQHMR
&RQHMR&HQWHU 'U
&RQHMR 6SHFWUXP
6W


'3 
9770
9770

863 373 
/3&
(,57KRXVDQG2DNV0DVWHU//&
/RFDWLRQ0DS
8 ?FGFMDQVHQ?B&DVH0DSV?5DQFKR&RQHMR%OYG
?5DQFKR&RQHMR%OYG
DSU[
&LW\RI7KRXVDQG2DNV
&RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW'HSDUWPHQW
  
)HHW
m
6XEMHFW
3URSHUWLHV
6XEMHFW
3URSHUWLHV
6XEMHFW
3URSHUWLHV
CDD:420-46/sk/H:COMMON/Planning Commission/Agenda Packet/2025/2025-09-08/07A Conejo Summit 19-70439-DP Attach 2 Location Map.pdf/pz (FILE ID: 2019-70439-DP)
ATTACHMENT #2
To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
Rancho Conejo
Conejo Center Dr
Conejo Spectrum
St
2019-70439 DP, 2019-70440 VTTM, 2019-70441 VTTM,
2019-70442 USP, 2021-71158 PTP, 2019-70443 LPC,
2022-70771 EIR - Thousand Oaks Master, LLC
Aerial Map
U:\cdcjansen\_Case Maps\Rancho Conejo Blvd 1691\Rancho Conejo Blvd 1691.aprx City of Thousand Oaks
Community Development Department
0 300 600 900150
Feet
±
Subject
Properties
Subject
Properties
Subject
Properties
CDD:420-46/sk/H:COMMON/Planning Commission/Agenda Packet/2025/2025-09-08/07A Conejo Summit 19-70439-DP Attach 3 Aerial Map.pdf/pz (FILE ID: 2019-70439-DP)
ATTACHMENT #3
ATTACHMENT #3
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
ATTACHMENT #4
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Meeting)

To avoid duplication, see the final, signed PC Resolution in Attachment #4 of the 10/21/2025 City Council Packet.

ATTACHMENT #4
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
#5 of the
ATTACHMENT #4
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Meeting)

To avoid duplication, see the final, signed PC Resolution in Attachment #4 of the 10/21/2025 City Council Packet.

ATTACHMENT #5
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
#5 of the
To avoid duplication, see the Project Plans included within the final, signed PC Resolution in Attachment #5 of the 10/21/2025 City Council Packet.

Arborist Report
Conejo Summit Project,
City of Thousand Oaks, California
AUGUST 2025
Prepared for:

THOUSAND OAKS MASTER, LLC
11200 Corbin Avenue, Suite 201
Porter Ranch, California 91326
Contact: Adrian Taghdiri, Portfolio Director and
Regional Development Director
Email: [email protected]
Prepared by:
225 South Lake Avenue Suite M210
Pasadena, California 91101
Contact: Chris Kallstrand
ISA Certified Arborist
ATTACHMENT #6
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
ATTACHMENT #6
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material.

14782 i
AUGUST 2025
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.
1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 2

1.2 Assignment ............................................................................................................................................. 3

1.3 Project Description ................................................................................................................................. 3

1.4 Setting ..................................................................................................................................................... 4

1.4.1 Location ..................................................................................................................................... 4

1.4.2 General Physical Characteristics ............................................................................................. 4 2 Methods ................................................................................................................................................................ 5

2.1 Field Tree Inventory and Evaluation ...................................................................................................... 5

2.1.1 Tree Inventory ........................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Tree Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 6

2.3 Scope of Work Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 6 3 Findings/Results .................................................................................................................................................. 7

3.1 Inventory Summary ................................................................................................................................ 7

3.2 Project-Related Impacts ......................................................................................................................... 8

3.3 Tree Relocation ....................................................................................................................................... 8 4 Mitigation and Management Recommendations ........................................................................................... 11

4.1 Mitigation Recommendations............................................................................................................. 11

4.2 Tree Permits ......................................................................................................................................... 12 5 Disclosure .......................................................................................................................................................... 13 6 References ........................................................................................................................................................ 15 TABLES
Table 1. Tree Species Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Table 2. Summary of Protected Tree Impact Determinations ........................................................................................ 8 Table 3. Mitigation Recommendations for Proposed Regulated Oak Tree Removals ............................................... 11 FIGURE
Figure 1 Project Location ................................................................................................................................... 17

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 ii
AUGUST 2025

APPENDICES
A Tree Locations
B Tree Impacts
C Tree Information Matrix
D Photograph Log
E Tree Protection Measures

14782 1
AUGUST 2025
1 Introduction
This report summarizes Dudek ’s evaluation and analysis of tree resources within the tree survey area for the proposed Conejo Summit project (project). The tree survey area generally includes the project boundary + 25 feet.

An off-site improvement area immediately north of the project site (“trail expansion area”) was also included in the tee survey area, as depicted on Figure 1, Project Location, and in Appendix A, Tree Locations, and Appendix B, Tree Impacts. The project site is situated in the Conejo Valley, in the western portion of the city of Thousand Oaks (City).

The project site consists of undeveloped lands, with commercial and industrial development immediately to the east, west and southeast and land that is owned and managed by the Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency (COSCA) to the north and west of the project site. Most of the surrounding open space burned during the 2018 Hill Fire, but recovery is in progress , and the area currently supports minimally disturbed natural and naturalized vegetation. The field inventory and assessment of the tree survey area was conducted on May 13 and July 10, 2025. The focus of Dudek’s field evaluation was to identify and inventory all trees within the tree survey area that are subject to regulation per the City of Thousand Oaks Municipal Code and that could be affected by the proposed grading limits per the site plan. This report includes a discussion of tree inventory, evaluation, and analysis methods; a summary of findings; identification of anticipated impacts; and tree protection and tree impact mitigation recommendations consistent with the City’s Municipal Code and the tree removal permit process specified therein.

The City requires a permit for the cutting, removal, protected zone encroachment, or relocation of any oak tree or landmark tree, which are defined as follows:
▪ Oak Tree: Any oak tree of the genus Quercus including, but not limited to, valley oak (Quercus lobata), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), and scrub oak (Quercus berberidifolia), regardless of size (City Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 42, Oak Tree Preservation and Protection). ▪ Landmark Tree: Specimens of the following species that have reached the designated maturity: Platanus racemosa (California sycamore) that exceed 12 inches in diameter when measured at a point 4.5 feet above the natural grade at the base of the tree (diameter at standard height [DSH]), Umbellularia californica (California bay laurel) that exceed 8 inches in diameter when measured at a point 4.5 feet above the natural grade at the base of the tree, Juglans californica (Southern California black walnut) that exceed 8 inches in diameter when measured at a point 4.5 feet above the natural grade at the base of the tree, and Heteromeles arbutifolia (toyon) that exceed 8 inches in diameter when measured at a point 4.5 feet above the natural grade at the base of the tree. Trees with multiple trunks shall be deemed to have reached maturity if the sum of the diameters of the multiple trunks exceeds the required diameter plus 2 inches of a single trunked tree. Landmark trees shall also include all designated historic trees (City Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 43, Landmark Tree Preservation and Protection). ▪ Protected Zone: A specifically defined area totally encompassing an oak, landmark, or historic tree within which work activities are strictly controlled by the City Municipal Code . When depicted on a map, the outermost edge of the protected zone will appear as an irregular shaped circle that follows the contour of the dripline of the tree. Using the dripline as a point of reference, the protected zone shall commence at a point 5 feet outside of the dripline and extend inward to the trunk of the tree. In no case shall the protected zone be less than 15 feet from the trunk of a landmark tree (City Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 4, Articles 42 and 43).

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 2
AUGUST 2025
Permits are not required to cut, remove, or encroach within the protected zone of any oak tree that does not exceed 2 inches in DSH (City Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 42). For the purposes of this arborist report, Dudek considers oak trees with multiple trunks to be protected if the sum of the diameters of the multiple trunks exceeds 4 inches.

Additional City approval is required for the cutting, removal, trimming, or alteration of street trees, which are defined as “tree[s] planted or to be located within the public right -of-way, or public service easement as a requirement of development or an entitlement of the same or adjacent property” (City Municipal Code, Title 7, Chapter 2, Article 9).

The analysis of potential tree impacts in this report considers the requirements outlined in the appropriate sections of the City’s Municipal Code. The proposed project would remove 10 regulated oak trees and 12 protected landmark trees due to site development. In addition to the 22 total tree removals, the project would encroach into the protected zone of 28 trees, including 21 protected oak trees and 7 landmark trees. There is one street tree that falls within the project boundary that will be preserved in place. Section 4 of this report recommends mitigation measures for anticipated tree removal and construction encroachment into the protected zone of regulated trees that would result from the proposed project. The measures provided are consistent with the provisions of the City Municipal Code.

1.1 Summary
The field survey recorded 52 regulated trees within the survey area. In total, Dudek ’s arborists recorded 32 protected oak trees , 19 landmark trees, and 1 city street tree . The inventoried tree locations are depicted in Appendix A, Tree Locations. The proposed project ’s tree impacts are depicted in Appendix B, Tree Impacts.

Construction of the proposed project is expected to require removal of up to ten regulated oak trees and 12 landmark trees, as well as encroachment into the protected zone of 21 protected oak trees and 7 landmark trees. All other trees, including the single city street tree, are expected to remain in place without the need for pruning or encroachment.

However, once detailed site plans are finalized and roadway locations are established, any tree with a canopy height of less than 13 feet 6 inches over a roadway will require crown raising to comply with local fire safety regulations. These trees would then be classified as encroached upon , potentially increasing the total number of encroached trees .

The following conditions may be placed on an oak tree and/or landmark tree permit (City Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 4, Articles 42 and 43):

1. Replacement or placement of additional trees on or off site

2. The relocation of a tree on or off site

3. The initiation of a maintenance and care program

4. Payment of a fee or donation of a boxed tree if there are no suitable on- or off-site planting locations The City’s Oak Tree Preservation and Protection Guidelines calls for one 15-gallon oak tree to be planted or donated for each dead or hazardous oak tree removed. For removal of healthy oak trees associated with commercial, industrial, and new residential development projects, the guidelines call for planting or donation of two 24-inch box trees and one 36-inch or 60-inch box tree. In the case of removal of oak trees larger than 48 inches in diameter, the applicant is required to obtain the largest nursery -grown oak tree available or provide two 60 -inch box trees.

The City does not specify minimum replacement requirements for landmark trees; however, it includes a condition requiring the planting of replacement or additional trees on the subject property to offset impacts associated with tree removal, loss of limbs, or encroachment into the protected zone of a landmark tree. The city will determine and provide specific replacement requirements during the review and permitting process for the removal of landmark trees. Furthermore, the City’s Municipal Code requires the replacement of street tree removals with City-approved

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 3
AUGUST 2025
street tree s (City Municipal Code, Title 7, Chapter 2, Article 9). However, no street trees are impacted by the proposed project. The tree replacement recommendations contained herein are based on previous standards set forth in the City ’s Oak Tree Preservation and Protection Guidelines as well as current standards set forth in the City’s Landscaping Provisions in Public Rights -of-Way Guidelines. Finally, Section 4 of this report provides construction-related tree protection recommendations and recommendations for long-term maintenance and care for regulated trees that will be retained on the project site.

Dudek recommends planting 30 oak trees (twenty 24-inch box trees and ten 36-inch box trees) on site to mitigate for the anticipated removal of ten oak trees, all under 48 inches in diameter. Replacement totals for the removal of the 12 landmark trees will be at the discretion of the City and will be provided during the review and permitting process.

Species composition of the planted trees should match the species removed at a ratio consistent with the City’s Municipal Code.

A long-term monitoring and maintenance program is further recommended to mitigate for encroachments into the protected zone of regulated trees that would occur with the proposed project and to maintain the health of the trees retained on site. Further deta ils regarding mitigation for planned tree removal is provided in Section 4.1 of this report.

1.2 Assignment
Dudek’s International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborists performed the following tasks:
▪ Assessed and inventoried all regulated trees with protected zones within the survey area and documented species, general health, general structural condition, size, appearance, and presence of pests ▪ Mapped the location of trees using GPS technology as necessary to develop a tree location exhibit and for planning reference
▪ Prepared a tree information matrix that details the attributes of each tree and identifies the species and protected status
▪ Analyzed tree attribute data and coordinated with the project design team to promote tree retention on site to the maximum extent practicable
▪ Evaluated tree impacts based on the project site plans ▪ Prepared this report to document the results of field surveys and impact analyses and provide recommendations for tree protection and impact mitigation measures in accordance with the provisions of the City’s Municipal Code

1.3 Project Description
The proposed project includes construction of a 15-building business park on an approximately 50-acre project site (project site). In addition to building construction, the proposed project would include the construction of parking lots, generally located around each building, and landscaping on each lot . In addition, utility hookups would be installed from existing lines within the streets to the proposed buildings and Academy Drive would be extended to the north from Conejo Center Drive . In 2000, the project site was graded and infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks, and utilities were installed to prepare for future buildings. Grading for the proposed project would require minor cuts and fills to provide level building pads and parking and circulation areas and to level the previously

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 4
AUGUST 2025
graded pads. Project grading would require approximately 156,186 cubic yards of cut and fill , which would be balanced on the site.

The proposed project would consist of a maximum of seven phases, with an anticipated construction period of 12 to 18 months for each phase. It is anticipated that the entire project phasing will be completed within approximately 10 years from the commencement of the first phase.

1.4 Setting

1.4.1 Location
The project site is located in the City of Thousand Oaks, California (City), in Ventura County, approximately 1 mile north of U.S. Route 101 (see Figure 1, Project Location). The project includes the construction of several industrial buildings separated into three clusters: one on the western side of Conejo Center Drive , just northwest of the intersection of Conejo Center Drive and Conejo Spectrum Street; another along the eastern side of Conejo Center Drive from Conejo Spectrum Street up to Rancho Conejo Boulevard; and the third north of the intersection of Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard, extending west to a parcel at the end of Rancho Conejo Boulevard. The approximately 50-acre project site is situated within Township 2 North, Range 20 West on the Newbury Park U.S.

Geological Survey 7.5-minute quadrangle map.

1.4.2 General Physical Characteristics
The project site is consists of undeveloped lands surrounded by commercial and industrial development immediately to the east, west and southeast and land that is owned and managed by the Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency (COSCA) to the north and west of the project site. The majority of the Project site is highly disturbed. In 2000 the Project area was graded, and infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks and utilities were installed to prepare for future buildings. Much of the open space surrounding the Project site burned in 2018 during the Hill Fire; however, recovery is ongoing and the area currently supports minimally disturbed natural and naturalized vegetation.

14782 5
AUGUST 2025
2 Methods
The following sections describe the methods used by Dudek’s ISA Certified Arborists to inventory and evaluate trees in the tree survey area.

2.1 Field Tree Inventory and Evaluation
Dudek’s ISA Certified Arborist Aida Castro (WE -13396A) conducted the tree inventory and evaluation on May 13 and July 10, 2025, to document tree locations and attribute information for all trees within the survey area.

2.1.1 Tree Inventory
The Dudek arborists examined and mapped all regulated trees with protected zones located within the survey area.

Tree attribute data collected during the field survey included species, trunk diameter, tree height, canopy spread in eight cardinal directions, general health condition, structural condition, and presences of observable pests or other tree maladies. Trunk diameters were measured using a diameter tape that provides adjusted numbers for diameter measurements when wrapping the tape around the circumference of the trunk of a tree. Diameter measurements were collected using standard protocol described by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers in the Guide for Plant Appraisal, published by the ISA, and in accordance with guidance given in the Cit y’s Oak Tree Preservation and Protection Guidelines and the City’s Municipal Code.

Trunk diameter measurements were taken at 4.5 feet above the ground along the trunk axis, with a few common exceptions. In cases where the trunk of a tree split into multiple stems at approximately 4.5 feet above the ground, the measurement was made at the location that best represented the trunk’s diameter. Tree height measurements were estimated by the arborist, and crown spread measurements were documented by “pacing off” the measurement based on the arborist’s knowledge of their stride length or visually estimating the canopy width.

Pursuant to the Guide for Plant Appraisal ( CTLA 2020), tree health and structure were evaluated with respect to five distinct tree components: roots, trunk, scaffold branches, small branches, and foliage. Health and structure were graded as good, good/fair, fair, fair/poor, and poor . Good condition trees exhibit acceptable vigor, healthy foliage, minor if any structural issues, and no apparent maladies. Fair condition trees are typical, with few maladies and moderate structural issues, and may exhibit less vigor in foliage and new growth. Trees assigned a po or condition rating by Dudek’s arborists exhibit significant health or structural problems or damage.

Tree locations were documented using an iPhone coupled with an Arrow GPS receiver to improve location accuracy.

Each surveyed tree was tagged on the north side of the trunk with an aluminum tree tag indicating the tree identification number. Dudek used the data collected to create a master tree inventory data set, inclusive of all regulated trees within the survey area.

Individual tree locations are presented in Appendix A, individual tree attribute data and impact determinations are presented in Appendix B and Appendix C, Tree Information Matrix , and individual tree photographs are presented in Appendix D, Photograph Log.

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 6
AUGUST 2025

2.2 Tree Impact Analysis
Following data collection, processing, and analysis, an impact assessment was conducted for each tree in accordance with the City of Thousand Oaks tree protection guidelines. This evaluation considered the proximity of each tree to the proposed disturbance area and building, using the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) standard as defined in Section 9-4.4202 of the City ordinance. In compliance with city regulations, the TPZ is defined as the crown width plus 5 feet, but no less than 15-feet from the trunk of the tree, ensuring adequate root and canopy protection. Trees located within or near the TPZ were assessed for potential impacts, including root zone disturbance, canopy encroachment, and overall health risks. Impact determinations used in this report include the following: Preserved (tree not affected by project), Removal (tree to be removed), and Encroachment (project disturbance would occur within the protected zone of the tree, including pruning to meet local fire regulations). A summary of project-related tree impacts is presented in Section 3.2, and Appendix C provides impact determination status for each tree recorded in the tree survey area.

2.3 Scope of Work Limitations
This report presents tree information as observed in the field. No root crown excavations or investigations, internal probing, or aerial canopy inspections were performed during the tree assessments. Therefore, the presence or absence of internal decay or other hidden or inaccessible inferiorities in individual trees, other than those evaluated with sonic tomography, could not be confirmed.

14782 7
AUGUST 2025
3 Findings/Results

3.1 Inventory Summary
Dudek’s arborists recorded 52 regulated trees with protected zones in the survey area. Of these 52 trees, 32 are protected oaks, 19 are landmark trees, and 1 is a city street tree. Table 1 provides a summary of the species and regulatory status of the trees mapped within the tree survey area.

Table 1. Tree Species Summary
Botanical Name
Common
Name
Protected
Oak Tree Street Tree
Landmark
Tree Total Trees
Heteromeles
arbutifolia
toyon 0 0 19 19
Pistacia chinensis Chinese
pistache
0 1 0 1
Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 12 0 0 12
Quercus
berberidifolia
scrub oak 18 0 0 18
Quercus lobata valley oak 2 0 0 2
Totals 32 1 19 52

As presented in Appendix C, of the 52 total trees, 13 (25.0%) trees exhibit good health;, 35 (67.3%) trees exhibit fair health; and 4 (7.69%) trees exhibit poor health. Of these trees, 1 (1.92%) tree exhibit s good structure; 49 (94.2%) trees exhibit fair structure; and 2 (3.85%) trees exhibit poor structure. Trunk diameters range from 7 inches to 26 inches for single-stemmed trees and from 4 inches to 37 inches for multi-stemmed trees (total DSH). Tree heights range from 2 feet to 30 feet. Crown widths in a single cardinal direction from the trunk to the dripline range from 0 feet to 18 feet.

Of the 32 protected oak trees, 4 (12.5%) trees exhibit good health ; 27 (84.4%) trees exhibit fair health ; and 1 (3.13%) trees exhibit poor health. Of these trees, 1 (3.13%) tree exhibits good structure; 30 (93.8%) trees exhibit fair structure; and 1 (3.16%) trees exhibit poor structure. Trunk diameters range from 9 inches to 26 inches for single-stemmed trees and from 4 inches to 37 inches for multi-stemmed trees (total DSH). Tree heights range from 2 feet to 30 feet. Crown widths in a single cardinal direc tion from the trunk to the dripline range from 1 foot to 18 feet.

Of the 19 landmark trees, 9 (47.4%) trees exhibit good health; 7 (36.8%) trees exhibit fair health; and 3 (15.8%) trees exhibit poor health. Of these trees, 18 (94.7%) trees exhibit fair structure, and 1 (5.26%) tree exhibits poor structure. Trunk diameters range from 10 inches to 21 inches for all 19 multi-stemmed trees (total DSH). Tree heights range from 5 feet to 15 feet. Crown widths in a single cardinal direction from the trunk to the dripline range from 0 feet to 15 feet.

The single city street tree exhibits fair health and structure. The trunk diameter is 7 inches for the single-stemmed tree. Crown widths in a single cardinal direction from the trunk to the dripline range from 9 feet to 12 feet.

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 8
AUGUST 2025
Individual attributes of each tree are presented in Appendix C.

3.2 Project-Related Impacts
There is wide variation in tolerance to construction impacts among tree species, and the response of an individual tree to impacts also varies with age and condition. Impacts assessed for this project include those trees with protected zones within 15 feet of proposed improvements, as defined in the project site plan. The impact discussion in this section identifies all impacts anticipated to result to regulated trees based on an evaluation of tree locations compared with the project site plan. Much of the site will need to be graded to accommodate the construction of buildings and parking lots and the placement of necessary infrastructure (utilities, access roads, fire lanes, etc.).

Trees identified for retention and removal are graphically presented in the Tree Impacts figure included as Appendix B.

Based on the grading plans for the proposed project, a total of 10 protected oak trees and 12 landmark trees will be removed, and 21 protected oak trees and 7 landmark trees will be encroached upon. However, once detailed site plans are finalized and roadway locations are established, any tree with a canopy height of less than 13 feet 6 inches over a roadway will require crown raising to comply with local fire safety regulations. These trees would then be classified as encroached upon, potentially increasing the total number of encroached trees . As of the date of this report, the project will remove 22 trees, encroach upon 28 trees, and preserve 2 trees.

Table 2 summarizes impact determinations for all 52 trees within the survey area.

Table 2. Summary of Protected Tree Impact Determinations Species
Impact Determination
Total Removal Encroachment No Impact
Protected Oak 10 21 1 32
Landmark 12 7 0 19
Street 0 0 1 1
Total Protected Trees 22* 28 2 52
* Tree Nos. 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, and 21 are currently identified as having substantial levels of encroachment. However, preservatio n may be possible through the implementation of the tree protection measures provided within this report.

While the level of encroachment is higher than ideal, these trees exhibit characteristics that suggest they can tolerate some disturbance if appropriate protective measures are in place. Although retention is preferred due to its alignment with munici pal environmental objectives and the site's ecological and visual value, these trees have been conservatively designated for remov al per the city’s consulting arborist’s recommendation.

3.3 Tree Relocation
During the relocation evaluation process, Dudek used a strict set of physical attribute criteria that a tree must exhibit to be considered a candidate for the very stressful relocation process. The success rates for transplanting large oak and landmark trees are relatively low (personal observation ; Dagit and Downer 1997). Transplanting large oak trees places a great deal of stress on the trees due to difficulties that mature oaks have adapting to a new site after losing a minimum of 75% of their root mass. These additional stresses make oak trees more vulnerable to pests and diseases. Although they may live for a long time, large, transplanted oaks typically do not reach equilibrium health and vitality needed for long -term survival. The trees will exist in a declining spiral. A

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 9
AUGUST 2025
great deal of care, time, and attention is required during boxing, moving, storing, and transplanting to increase survival probability. Just as important, they require diligent and regular monitoring and maintenance for the rest of their lives.

In summary, younger, and smaller trees typically have a higher success rate post -transplant. These trees are still vigorously growing and are more adaptable to root disturbance and the transplant process. Trees with a trunk diameter less than approximately 6 inches typically perform better following transplant, and the smaller the tree, typically the higher relocation success and feasibility. Trees exhibiting maladies including declining health, internal decay, cavities, uncorrectable branch architecture issues, co-dominant stems with included bark, and pest and/or disease infections are not considered for relocation. Trees must be in “good” health and structural condition (unless the species is unique or especially valuable where a “fair” condition tree may be considered a candidate) and include an accessible location, no observable soil impediments (rockbound roots, utilities), no overhead utilities, and no observable chronic pest infestations and/or disease infections. A full green canopy may give the appearance that a tree is healthy; however, with the potential presence of internal decay and the stress resulting from the relocation process, the trees may decline, resulting in tree loss and increased hazards, especially in an urbanized setting.

Some trees that are structurally sound and healthy, meeting all the criteria set for these attributes, may be rejected as relocation candidates based on soil issues. For instance, trees that are growing in soil that is highly sandy likely would be rejected due to the difficulty in boxing trees without “losing” the root ball as commonly happens in sandy soil. Similarly, trees in rocky soils may be rejected if “rock -bound” roots are suspected as these trees cannot be boxed cost-effectively. In these cases, the trees would be recommended for preservation in place, if possible.

Based on the above noted factors, none of the impacted trees are considered potential candidates for relocation.

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 10
AUGUST 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

14782 11
AUGUST 2025
4 Mitigation and Management
Recommendations

4.1 Mitigation Recommendations
Removals
The City’s Oak Tree Preservation and Protection Guidelines mitigation requirements for tree removals associated with development projects are summarized as follows:
▪ One 15-gallon oak tree must be planted or donated for each dead or hazardous oak tree removed. ▪ Two 24-inch box trees and one 36 -inch or 60 -inch box tree must be planted for each healthy oak tree removed for commercial, industrial, and new residential development projects. ▪ In the case of removal of oak trees larger than 48 inches in diameter, the applicant is required to obtain the largest nursery-grown oak tree available or plant two 60-inch box trees.

The City does not specify minimum replacement requirements for landmark trees; however, it includes a condition requiring the planting of replacement or additional trees on the subject property to offset impacts associated with tree removal, loss of limbs, or encroachment into the protected zone of a landmark tree. The city will determine and provide specific replacement requirements during the review and permitting process for the removal of landmark trees.

The proposed project would require removal of 10 regulated oak trees and 12 landmark trees . Per the city requirements, Dudek recommends the mitigation shown in Table 3 for oak tree removals associated with the project.

Table 3. Mitigation Recommendations for Proposed Regulated Oak Tree Removals Species
Expected
Removal
Recommended Mitigation Plantings
60-inch box
trees
36-inch box
trees 24-inch box trees
Healthy Regulated Oaks
Less than 48 inches in
Diameter
10 0 10 20
Healthy Regulated Oaks
Larger than 48 inches in
Diameter and Historical
Trees
0 0 0 0
Total 10

0 10 30
As previously stated, the city will determine and provide specific replacement requirements during the review and permitting process for the removal of landmark trees.

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 12
AUGUST 2025
Encroachment and Retained Trees
A long-term maintenance program is required by the City’s Municipal Code to mitigate for encroachments into the protected zone of regulated trees that would occur with the proposed project and to maintain the health of the trees retained on the project site. Based on the site plan, the proposed project will encroach into the protected zone of 21 protected oak trees and 7 landmark trees. Once detailed site plans are finalized and locations of roadways are established, any tree with a canopy height of less than 13 feet 6 inches over a roadway will require crown rai sing to comply with local fire safety regulations. These trees would then be classified as encroached upon , potentially increasing the total number of encroached trees. The total percentage of encroachment into the protected zone of the 28 trees ranged from 0.1% to 23.5%. These trees will require additional tree protection measures during construction. The single city street tree will also require protection measures to be preserved in place during all construction activities. Should any of the regulated trees die as a result of the proposed construction, they shall be replaced in accordance with the City ’s Oak Tree Preservation and Protection Guidelines and Municipal Code .

Appendix E provides tree protection recommendations to mitigate impacts from construction encroachment into the protected zone of regulated trees that would result from the proposed project. The measures included in Appendix E are consistent with the provisions of the City ’s Municipal Code and would help minimize impacts to preserved and encroached trees. Appendix E includes measures to implement prior to, during, and following construction. This includes measures such as exclusion fencing and worker training to avoid direct impacts to trees, and measures such as irrigation and monthly inspections by an arborist to promote the long-term health of retained trees. Dudek also recommends arborist monitoring during construction when encroachments into tree protection zones occur to minimize root disturbance and determine the best course of actions for root pruning, supplemental irrigation, branch trimming, or other measures that would minimize the impacts from ground disturbance or other potential impactful activities.

4.2 Tree Permits
The project applicant will need to submit the applicable oak tree permit application and fee to the City’s Community Development Department. A copy of this report and the final project site plan should accompany the application.

An oak tree permit is required for the cutting, removal, encroachment into the protected zone, or relocation of any regulated oak tree. The Community Development Director may approve, deny, or conditionally approve a request for the removal of three or fewer oak trees that are less than 24 inches in DSH on a single parcel without hearing or notice. Any request for removal of four or more regulated oak trees or any oak tree 24 inches or greater in DSH on a single parcel will be reviewed by the Planning Commission following a public hearing, which will be held in conjunction with the Commission ’s consideration of other entitlement applications for the proposed project. The Commission may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the permit application. The decision of the Commission may be appealed to the City Council (see Section 9-4.4206 of the City’s Municipal Code).

14782 13
AUGUST 2025
5 Disclosure
This arborist report provides conclusions and recommendations based only on a visual examination of the trees within the tree survey area by ISA Certified Arborists and reasonable reliance on the completeness and accuracy of the information provided to the arborist. The examination did not include subterranean or internal examination of the trees.

Arborists are tree specialists who use their education, knowledge, training, and experience to examine trees, recommend measures to enhance the beauty and health of trees, and attempt to reduce the risk of living near them. Although trees provide many bene fits to those who live near them, they also include inherent risks from breakage or failure that can be minimized but not eliminated.

Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the failure of a tree. Trees are living organisms subject to attack by disease, insects, fungi, weather, and other forces of nature, and conditions that lead to failure are often hidden within trees and belowground. There are some inherent risks with trees that cannot be predicted with any degree of certainty, even by a skilled and experienced arborist. Arborists cannot predict acts of nature, including, without limitation, storms of suffic ient strength, which can cause an apparently healthy tree to fail.

Additionally, arborists cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances or for any specific period of time. A tree ’s condition could change over a short or long period of time due to climatic, cultural, or environmental conditions. Further, there is no guarantee or certainty that recommendations or efforts to correct unsafe conditions will prevent future breakage or failure of a tree.

To live or work near trees is to accept some degree of risk. Neither the author of this arborist report nor Dudek have assumed any responsibility for or will be liable for any claims, losses, or damages for damage to any tree, death or injury to any person, or any loss of or damage to any personal or real property.

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 14
AUGUST 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

14782 15
AUGUST 2025
6 References
Dagit, R., and A.J. Downer. 1997. “Status of Transplanted Coast Live Oaks (Quercus agrifolia) in Southern California.” U.S. Department of Agriculture Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-160.

CTLA (Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers). 2020. Guide for Plant Appraisal. 10th ed. International Society of Arboriculture.

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 16
AUGUST 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
3URMHFW%RXQGDU\
2II6LWH,PSURYHPHQWV
 ˘
)HHW
'DWH˛ˆ˘8VHU˛VOXFDUHOOL3DWK˛=˛?3URMHFWV?Mˆ˙?0$3'2&?&RQHMR6XPPLWDSU[0DS˛3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ/D\RXW˛)LJXUH3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ'DWH˛ˆ˘8VHU˛VOXFDUHOOL3DWK˛=˛?3URMHFWV?Mˆ˙?0$3'2&?&RQHMR6XPPLWDSU[0DS˛3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ/D\RXW˛)LJXUH3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ 3URMHFW6LWH

1HZEXU\3DUN4XDGUDQJOH7RZQVKLS15DQJH:6HFWLRQ 6285&(˛86*61DWLRQDO0DS˘ 3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ
&RQHMR6XPPLW
),*85(

CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA / ARBORIST REPORT

14782 18
AUGUST 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Appendix A
Tree Locations
5DQFKR&RQHMR%OYG
&RQHMR
&HQWHU'U
&RQHMR
&HQWHU'U
&RQHMR
&HQWHU'U
&RQHMR6SHFWUXP6W
+LOO&DQ\RQ
)LUH5G
5DQFKR&RQHMR%OYG
&RQHMR6SHFWUXP
6W
&RQHMR&HQWHU'U
&RQHMR
6SHFWUXP
6W
/DZUHQFH'U



˘
ˇ
ˆ
˙˝



 

˘
ˇ
ˆ
˙
˝

 



˘
ˇ
ˆ
˙
˝





˘
ˇˆ
˙
˝
˘
˘
˘˘
ˇ
ˆ
˙
˝




˘
ˇ
ˆ
˙
˝



˘
ˇ
ˆ
˙




˘
ˇ
˙




˘
ˇ
ˆ
˝


ˆ

˙
˝
˘
˘˘
3URMHFW%RXQGDU\
2II6LWH,PSURYHPHQWV
7UHHV
7UHH&URZQV
 ˝˘
)HHW
˝
'DWH˛ˆ˘8VHU˛VOXFDUHOOL3DWK˛=˛?3URMHFWV?Mˆ˙?0$3'2&?&RQHMR6XPPLWDSU[0DS˛7UHH/RFDWLRQV/D\RXW˛$SSHQGL[$7UHH/RFDWLRQV 6285&(˛0D[DU
&RQHMR6XPPLW
7UHH/RFDWLRQV
$33(1',;$

Appendix B
Tree Impacts

Appendix C
Tree Information Matrix
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11 D12 D13 D14 D15 D16 D17 D18 D19 D20 N NE E SE S SW W NW 1 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 11 1 11 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 8 8 10 8 8 9 10 8 Good Fair Oak Encroachment 6.4% 34.20608 -118.936 2 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 12 1 12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 10 10 15 8 10 10 9 7 Good Fair Oak Preserved 0.0% 34.20601 -118.936 3 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 11 1 11 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 15 13 15 9 10 8 10 14 14 Good Good Oak Encroachment 4.4% 34.20616 -118.936 4 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 12 1 12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18 15 13 12 12 10 7 12 10 Fair Fair Oak Removal 47.4% 34.20623 -118.936 5 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 10 5 3 2 2 2 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10 3 3 10 10 0 0 4 3 Poor Poor Landmark Encroachment 20% 34.20629 -118.936 6 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 17 8 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - 12 10 10 5 5 7 7 4 3 Poor Fair Landmark Encroachment 2.5% 34.20632 -118.936 7 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 9 1 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10 10 13 15 12 7 8 13 13 Fair Fair Oak Removal 39.4% 34.20637 -118.936 8 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 10 1 10 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 17 13 13 15 10 10 12 10 8 Good Fair Oak Removal 41.2% 34.20646 -118.937 9 Quercus lobata valley oak 4 2 2 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9 5 5 3 4 2 3 3 4 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.5% 34.2065 -118.937 10 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 13 1 13 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18 9 9 14 12 10 10 12 8 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.5% 34.20654 -118.937 11 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 9 1 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18 8 8 6 10 8 7 9 7 Fair Fair Oak Removal 30.5% 34.20653 -118.937 12 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 13 1 13 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 8 8 13 13 15 14 14 12 Fair Fair Oak Removal 38.9% 34.20652 -118.937 13 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 9 1 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 17 8 7 9 8 7 7 9 6 Fair Fair Oak Removal 100.0% 34.20649 -118.937 14 Quercus lobata valley oak 10 4 3 3 2 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 15 8 7 6 5 6 4 5 4 Poor Fair Oak Removal 100.0% 34.20647 -118.937 15 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 20 10 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 - - - - - - - - - - 12 8 7 8 6 6 8 8 7 Fair Fair Landmark Encroachment 18.9% 34.20744 -118.937 16 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 12 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - 5 5 5 4 4 5 4 6 4 Fair Fair Landmark Removal 100.0% 34.2077 -118.935 17 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8 4 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 Fair Fair Oak Removal 100.0% 34.20768 -118.934 18 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.5% 34.20769 -118.934 19 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 20 20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 Fair Fair Oak Removal 100.0% 34.20768 -118.934 20 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 14 10 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 10 8 7 6 6 7 6 6 7 Good Fair Landmark Removal 100.0% 34.20766 -118.934 21 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 8 3 3 3 2 4 3 2 3 Good Fair Landmark Removal 34.8% 34.20768 -118.934 22 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 20 20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 5 4 5 4 4 6 6 6 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 23.5% 34.20768 -118.934 23 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 16 15 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - 9 6 5 6 5 6 6 7 6 Fair Fair Landmark Removal 100.0% 34.20767 -118.934 24 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 7 6 5 5 5 6 5 6 6 Good Fair Landmark Encroachment 22.5% 34.20776 -118.934 25 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 7 4 4 3 3 3 4 5 5 Fair Fair Landmark Encroachment 0.5% 34.20799 -118.934 26 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 5 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 10.8% 34.2079 -118.934 27 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 5 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.5% 34.20792 -118.934 28 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 5 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.5% No tag, no access 34.20791 -118.934 29 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.5% No tag, no access 34.20793 -118.934 30 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.5% No tag, no access 34.20794 -118.934 31 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 7 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 17.4% 34.20791 -118.934 32 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 7 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 9.9% 34.20792 -118.934 33 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 4 4 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 Fair Poor Oak Encroachment 0.1% 34.20787 -118.934 34 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 6 6 2 2 4 5 2 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 2.5% 34.20788 -118.934 35 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.3% 34.20762 -118.935 36 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 13 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - 6 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.5% miss-tagged as 35 34.2076 -118.935 37 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 4 5 3 5 5 4 3 Poor Fair Landmark Encroachment 19.0% 34.20757 -118.935 38 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 5 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.1% 34.20754 -118.935 39 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 7 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.1% 34.20748 -118.935 40 Quercus berberidifolia inland scrub oak 12 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - 4 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.1% 34.20748 -118.935 41 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 13 5 2 2 2 2 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 Good Fair Landmark Removal 100.0% miss-tagged as 48 34.2009 -118.934 42 Pistacia chinensis Chinese pistache 7 1 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 9 9 10 10 9 11 12 10 Fair Fair - Preserved 0.0% Street tree no tag 34.20671 -118.936 43 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 37 3 16 13 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 25 14 14 17 15 15 17 15 12 Fair Fair Oak Encroachment 0.1% 34.20307 -118.936 44 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 21 10 5 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 15 15 12 12 10 13 12 10 12 Fair Fair Landmark Encroachment 0.1% 34.20302 -118.936 45 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 17 15 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - 10 7 8 7 6 6 8 7 7 Fair Fair Landmark Removal 0.1% 34.20299 -118.936 46 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak 26 1 26 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 30 17 17 17 15 18 15 15 17 Fair Fair Oak Removal 15.1% 34.20298 -118.936 47 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 15 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - 14 5 5 7 6 7 4 5 6 Fair Fair Landmark Removal 18.4% 34.20295 -118.935 48 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 14 5 4 3 3 2 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 13 9 9 8 7 8 6 10 8 Good Fair Landmark Removal 100.0% 34.20128 -118.933 49 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 10 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - 5 3 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 Good Fair Landmark Removal 100.0% 34.20125 -118.933 50 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 13 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - 7 4 3 4 5 4 3 4 4 Good Fair Landmark Removal 100.0% 34.20123 -118.933 51 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 13 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - 6 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 Good Fair Landmark Removal 100.0% 34.20104 -118.933 52 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon 13 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - 6 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 Good Fair Landmark Removal 100.0% 34.20101 -118.933 Individual Crown Dimensions (ft.)
Tree Information Matrix
Tree
No. Botanical Name Common Name Cumulative Stem
Diameter (in.) Stems Height
(ft.) Health
Percentage of
Crown Encroached
Upon
Structure Protection
Type Impact Type Notes Latitude LongitudeIndividual Stem Diameter (in.)

Appendix D
Photograph Log

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-1
JULY 2025

Photograph 1. Tree no. 1

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-2
JULY 2025

Photograph 2. Tree no. 2

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-3
JULY 2025

Photograph 3. Tree no. 3

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-4
JULY 2025

Photograph 4. Tree no. 4

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-5
JULY 2025

Photograph 5. Tree no. 5

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-6
JULY 2025

Photograph 6. Tree no. 6

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-7
JULY 2025

Photograph 7. Tree no. 7

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-8
JULY 2025

Photograph 8. Tree no. 8

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-9
JULY 2025

Photograph 9. Tree no. 9

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-10
JULY 2025

Photograph 10. Tree no. 10

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-11
JULY 2025

Photograph 11. Tree no. 11

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-12
JULY 2025

Photograph 12. Tree no. 12

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-13
JULY 2025

Photograph 13. Tree no. 13

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-14
JULY 2025

Photograph 14. Tree no. 14

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-15
JULY 2025

Photograph 15. Tree no. 15

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-16
JULY 2025

Photograph 16. Tree no. 16

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-17
JULY 2025

Photograph 17. Tree no. 17

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-18
JULY 2025

Photograph 18. Tree no. 18

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-19
JULY 2025

Photograph 19. Tree no. 19

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-20
JULY 2025

Photograph 20. Tree no. 20

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-21
JULY 2025

Photograph 21. Tree no. 21

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-22
JULY 2025

Photograph 22. Tree no. 22

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-23
JULY 2025

Photograph 23. Tree no. 23

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-24
JULY 2025

Photograph 24. Tree no. 24

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-25
JULY 2025

Photograph 25. Tree no. 25

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-26
JULY 2025

Photograph 26. Tree no. 26

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-27
JULY 2025

Photograph 27. Tree no. 27

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-28
JULY 2025

Photograph 28. Tree no. 28

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-29
JULY 2025

Photograph 29. Tree no. 29

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-30
JULY 2025

Photograph 30. Tree no. 30

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-31
JULY 2025

Photograph 31. Tree no. 31

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-32
JULY 2025

Photograph 32. Tree no. 32

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-33
JULY 2025

Photograph 33. Tree no. 33

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-34
JULY 2025

Photograph 34. Tree no. 34

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-35
JULY 2025

Photograph 35. Tree no. 35

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-36
JULY 2025

Photograph 36. Tree no. 36

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-37
JULY 2025

Photograph 37. Tree no. 37

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-38
JULY 2025

Photograph 38. Tree no. 38

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-39
JULY 2025

Photograph 39. Tree no. 39

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-40
JULY 2025

Photograph 40. Tree no. 40

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-41
JULY 2025

Photograph 41. Tree no. 41

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-42
JULY 2025

Photograph 42. Tree no. 42

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-43
JULY 2025

Photograph 43. Tree no. 43

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-44
JULY 2025

Photograph 44. Tree no. 44

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-45
JULY 2025

Photograph 45. Tree no. 45

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-46
JULY 2025

Photograph 46. Tree no. 46

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-47
JULY 2025

Photograph 47. Tree no. 47

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-48
JULY 2025

Photograph 48. Tree no. 48

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-49
JULY 2025

Photograph 49. Tree no. 49

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-50
JULY 2025

Photograph 50. Tree no. 50

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-51
JULY 2025

Photograph 51. Tree no. 51

APPENDIX D / PHOTOGRAPH LOG

14782 D-52
JULY 2025

Photograph 52. Tree no. 52

Appendix E
Tree Protection Measures
APPENDIX E – TREE PROTECTION MEASURES

14782 E-1
JULY 2025
Tree Protection Measures
Dudek recommends the following measures to reduce impacts to the preserved protected tree and maintain its current health status.

Tree Protection Measures Prior to Construction
Prior to any grading activity, preserved trees that fall within 50 feet of construction activity shall be protected by fencing and signage. All contractors shall be made aware of the tree protection measures.

Fencing
Chain link fencing, not less than 4 feet high with tree protection signs shall be erected around all trees (or tree groups) to be preserved on site. The protective fence shall be installed at the Protected Zone boundary of each tree (or tree group), which is defined as five (5) feet beyond the tree canopy dripline ( City of Thousand Oaks: Sec. 9-

4.4202. Definitions). The intent of protection fencing is to prevent root damage and/or compaction by grading equipment. An International Society of Arboriculture ( ISA) Certified Arborist may be required on site if grading activities will occur within the oak tree protected zone. The fencing shall be secured to 6 -foot, heavy gauge t -bar line posts, pounded in the ground a minimum of 18 -inches and spaced a minimum of 8-feet on-center. Fencing shall be attached to t-bar posts with minimum 14-gage wire fastened to the top, middle and bottom of each post.

Tree protection signs should be attached to every fourth post. The contractor shall maintain the fence to keep it upright, taut and aligned at all times. Fencing shall be in place and inspected by the City prior to commencement of any activity on the property. Fencing shall be removed only after all construction activities are complete.

Pre -construction Meeting
A pre-construction meeting shall be held between all contractors (including grading, tree removal/pruning, builders, etc.) and the project arborist. The meeting shall focus on instructing the contractors on tree protection practices and answer any questions. All equipment operators and spotters, assistants, or those directing operators from the ground shall provide written acknowledgement of their receiving tree protection training. This training shall include information on the location and marking of protected trees, the necessity of preventing damage, and the discussion of work practices that will accomplish such.

Protection and Maintenance During Construction
Once construction activities have begun, the protection measures provided below should be observed.

Equipment Operation and Storage
Contractors shall avoid heavy equipment operation around the protected tree. Operating heavy machinery around the root zones of trees increases soil compaction, which decreases soil aeration and subsequently reduces water penetration into the soil. All hea vy equipment and vehicles should, at minimum, stay out of the fenced protected tree zone unless where specifically approved in writing and under the supervision of a Certified Arborist.

APPENDIX E – TREE PROTECTION MEASURES

14782 E-2
JULY 2025
Storage and Disposal
Materials Storage and Disposal: Do not store or discard any supply or material, including paint, lumber, concrete overflow, etc. within the protected zone. Remove all foreign debris within the protected zone; it is important to leave the duff, mulch, chips, and leaves around the retained trees for water retention and nutrient supply. Avoid draining or leakage of equipment fluids near retained trees. Fluids such as: gasoline, diesel, oils, hydraulics, brake and transmission fluids, paint, paint thinners, and glycol (anti-freeze) should be disposed of properly. Equipment should be parked at least 50 feet from the protected zone to avoid the possibility of leakage of equipment fluids into the soil. The effect of toxic equipment fluids on the retained trees could result in tree decline and/or mortality.

Grade Changes
Contractors shall ensure that grade changes, including adding fill, not be permitted within the protected zone without special written authorization and under supervision of a Certified Arborist. Lowering the grade within the protected zone would necessitate cutting main support and feeder roots, jeopardizing the health and struc tural integrity of the tree. Adding soil, even temporarily, on top of the existing grade would compact the soil further and decrease water and air availability to tree roots. Contractors shall ensure that grade changes made outside of the protected tree zone not create conditions that allow water to pond at the base of trees. Water trapped at the base of a tree could lead to root rot and other detrimental tree impacts.

Moving Construction Materials
Contractors shall ensure that care be exercised when moving construction equipment and supplies near the protected tree, especially overhead. Contractors shall ensure that damage to the tree be avoided when transporting or moving construction materials and working around the tree (even outside of the fenced protected zone).

Contractors should flag aboveground tree parts with potential for damage (e.g., low limbs, scaffold branches, trunks) with high-visibility flagging, such as florescent red or orange. If contact with the tree crown is unavoidable, affected branches may be pruned by an ISA-Certified Tree Worker Climber Specialist under supervision of a Certified Arborist and should adhere to ISA standards.

Trenching
Except where specifically approved in writing beforehand, all trenching shall be done outside of the fenced protected zone. Roots primarily extend in a horizontal direction, forming a support base to the tree similar to the base of a wineglass. Where trenc hing is necessary in areas that contain roots from retained trees, contractors should use trenching techniques that include the use of either a root pruner or an Air -Spade to limit root impacts.

A Certified Arborist should ensure that all pruning cuts be c lean and sharp to minimize ripping, tearing, and fracturing of the root system. Root damage caused by backhoes, earthmovers, dozers, or graders is severe and may result in tree mortality. Use of both root -pruning and Air-Spade equipment should be accompani ed only by hand tools to remove soil from trench locations. The trench should be made no deeper than necessary, and when possible, alternatives to trenching should be utilized.

Irrigation
Supplemental irrigation for trees adjacent to construction activity may be necessary during winter and/or spring months. Summer and fall irrigation may be necessary based on variable climatic and site conditions but should be conducted judiciously to avoid overwatering. One irrigation cycle should thoroughly soak the root zones of the trees APPENDIX E – TREE PROTECTION MEASURES

14782 E-3
JULY 2025
to a depth of 2 feet. The soil should be allowed to dry out between watering to avoid keeping a consistently wet soil.

The contractor should be responsible for irrigating (deep watering) the trees. Soil moisture should be checked with a soil probe before i rrigating. Irrigation is best accomplished by installing a temporary aboveground micro -spray system that would distribute water slowly (to avoid runoff) and evenly throughout the fenced protection zone. The area within 3 feet of the trunk should never be s oaked, especially in summer months. Overwatering trees may promote the growth of tree-damaging agents, so proper soil moisture monitoring is critical to prolonged tree health.

For any trees that have been substantially root pruned (30% or more of their root zone), irrigation should be required for the first 12 months. The first irrigation should occur within 48 hours of root pruning. The trees should be deep watered every 2 weeks during the summer and once a month during the winter (adjusted accordingly with rainfall).

Canopy Pruning
The contractor shall not prune the protected tree until all construction is completed unless standard pruning would reduce conflict between the canopy and equipment. This will help protect the tree’s canopy from damage. All pruning should be conducted by an ISA-Certified Tree Worker Climber Specialist under the supervision of a Certified Arborist and should adhere to ISA pruning standards.

Inspection
A Certified Arborist/licensed pest control advisor or their representative should inspect the protected tree adjacent to grading and construction activity on a monthly basis for the duration of project construction. A report summarizing site conditions, observations, tree health, and recommendations for minimizing tree damage should be submitted by the Certified Arborist or their representative following each inspection. Photographs of the protected trees are to be included on a minimum annual basis.

Maintenance After Construction
After the completion of construction activities, tree protection fencing may be removed, and the following measures may be performed to sustain and enhance the vigor of the tree.

Mulch
The contractors shall ensure that a 6-to-8-inch layer of mulch is applied within the tree protection zone. This helps to stabilize soil temperatures in root zones, conserve soil moisture, and reduce erosion. The contractor shall ensure that the mulch is ke pt a minimum 1 foot away from the trunk base to avoid creating conditions favorable to the establishment and growth of decay-causing fungal pathogens. When adding organic mulch under retained trees, it should be certified free of pests and pathogens. Also, the use of redwood chips should be avoided because certain inhibitive chemicals may be present in the wood.

Pruning
Regular pruning of the protected tree is not required. An ISA -Certified Tree Worker Climber Specialist, under the supervision of a Certified Arborist, should only prune the tree to maintain clearance and remove broken, dead, or diseased branches. No more than 15% of the canopy should be removed at one time. All pruning should conform to ISA standards.

APPENDIX E – TREE PROTECTION MEASURES
14782 E-4
JULY 2025
Watering
Once the project site’s existing drainage is modified, soil probing will be necessary to accurately monitor moisture levels. Especially in years with low winter rainfall, supplemental irrigation for the trees that sustained root pruning or altered site dra inage may be necessary. The protected tree should be infrequently watered with deep soaks, rather than frequent light irrigation, and the soil should be allowed to dry out between waterings. The soil should not be allowed to become saturated or stay continually wet, and drainage should not allow ponding of water beneath the canopy of the tree. Irrigation spray should not hit the trunk of any tree. A 30-inch dry zone around the tree trunk should be maintained. An aboveground micro-spray or in-line drip irrigation system should be used in lieu of typical pop-up sprays.

Chemical Applications
If the trees are maintained in a healthy state, regular spraying for insect or disease control is not necessary. If a problem does develop, a Certified Arborist should be consulted, as the trees may require application of insecticides to prevent the intrusion of bark-boring beetles and other invasive pests. All chemical spraying should be performed by a licensed applicator under the direction of a licensed pest control advisor.

Monitoring
A Certified Arborist shall inspect all protected trees retained on -site for a period of five years following the completion of construction. During this monitoring period, if any retained tree exhibits visible signs of decline to the extent that its survival is unlikely, it shall be replaced in accordance with the Oak Tree Preservation and Protection Guidelines (OTPPG) and the City of Thousand Oaks Municipal Code. Monitoring visits shall be conducted quarterly, totaling 20 visits over the five -year period. After each visit, a report detailing site conditions, observations, tree health, and recommendations shall be submitted. Additionally, any tree mortality shall be documented, and if a tree dies during the monitoring period, it must be replaced in accordanc e with the minimum replacement standards outlined in local regulations and this protected tree report.

CDD:420-46/sk/H:COMMON/Planning Commission/Agenda Packet/2025/2025-09-08/07A Conejo Summit 19-70439-DP Attach 6 Tree Report.pdf/pz (FILE ID: 2019-70439-DP)
Conejo Summit Project Consistency with Development Standards

DEVELOPMENT

STANDARD
(M-1; SP 7)

REQUIRED PROPOSED COMPLIES
BUILDING 1A (VTTM 6021 Lot 1)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 102,770 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~ 350 & ~500 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (northeast): ~105 feet
from the centerline of Rancho
Cone
jo Boulevard
Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

On corner lots, no less than 100
feet from the center line of any
public street.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Rear (southwest): ~40 feet
Sides:
(west): 59 feet (along the
curve)
(northwest & southwest):
~125 - ~175 feet from the
centerline of Conejo Center
Drive
Waiver
Required for
the side
(west)
setback at
59 feet.

Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 40.5 feet to top of parapet Waiver Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.
10+-foot-wide landscape
strips are provided along the
property lines adjacent to
Rancho Conejo Boulevard
and Conejo Center Drive.

25.8% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 1B (VTTM 6021 Lot 2)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 98,694 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~230 feet Yes
Front Setbacks
(through lot)
No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (northeast): ~105 - ~
100 feet from the centerline of
Rancho Conejo Boulevard
Front (southwest): ~120 - ~
225 feet from the centerline of
Cone
jo Center Drive
Yes
ATTACHMENT #7(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
ATTACHMENT #7
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
Side Setbacks None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

On corner lots, no less than 100
feet from the center line of any
public street.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Rear (northwest & southeast):
~40 feet
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 40 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.
10+-foot-wide landscape
strips are provided along the
property lines adjacent to
Rancho Conejo Boulevard
and Conejo Center Drive.

10.7% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 1C (VTTM 6021 Lot 3)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 96,906 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~215 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (northeast): ~130 - ~
160 feet from the centerline of
Rancho Conejo Boulevard
Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (northwest &
southeast): ~40 feet
Rear
(southwest): ~40 feet
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 40.5 feet to top of parapet Waiver Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter propert y line
10+-foot-wide landscape strip
is provided along the property
line adjacent to Rancho
Conejo Boulevard.
10% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.

BUILDING 1D (VTTM 6021 Lot 4)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 173,542 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~750 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (northeast): ~115 - ~
180 feet from the centerline of
Rancho Conejo Boulevard
Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (northwest &
southwest): ~40 feet & ~65 -
~85 feet
Rear
(southwest): ~40 feet
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 41 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.
10+-foot-wide landscape strip
is provided along the property
line adjacent to Rancho
Conejo Boulevard.

19.5% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 1E (VTTM 6021 Lot 5)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 168,275 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~350 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (northwest): ~110 - ~270
feet from the centerline of
Conejo Center Drive
Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (northeast &
southwest): ~40 feet & ~40
feet
Yes
Rear
(southeast): ~65 feet
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 41 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.
10+-foot-wide landscape strip
is provided along the property
line adjacent to Conejo
Center Drive.
10% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 1F (VTTM 6021 Lot 6)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 122,285 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~260 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (northwest): ~115 - ~130
feet from the centerline of
Conejo Center Drive
Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (northeast &
southwest): ~40 feet & ~40
feet
Rear
(southeast): ~65 feet
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 41 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.
10+-foot-wide landscape strip
is provided along the property
line adjacent to Conejo
Center Drive.
10% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 1G (VTTM 6021 Lot 7)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 177,212 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~440 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (northwest): 100-~150
feet from the centerline of
Conejo Center Drive
Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (northeast &
southwest): ~40 feet & ~60
feet
Rear (southeast): ~70 - ~85
feet
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 41 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.
10+-foot-wide landscape strip
is provided along the property
line adjacent to Conejo
Center Drive.

12.5% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
No Building (VTTM 6021 Lot 8)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 46,609 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street
frontage
~160 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

No development is proposed Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines
if the building exceeds 25 feet.

No development is proposed Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet No development is proposed Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open
parking and driveway areas shall
be landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.

No development is proposed.

The property will remain in a
natural state.

Yes
BUILDING 2 (VTTM 6021 Lot 9)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 116,490 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~580 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (southwest): ~110 feet
from the centerline of Conejo
Center Drive
Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (northwest &
southeast): ~50 - ~190 feet &
~5 - ~ 90 feet
Rear (northeast): ~60 - ~95
feet
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 40 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.
10+-foot-wide landscape strip
is provided along the property
line adjacent to Conejo
Center Drive.
23% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 3 (VTTM 6021 Lot 10)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 225,088 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~600 feet & ~600 feet Yes Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (north - northwest): 100
- ~145 feet from the centerline
of Academy Drive
Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

On corner lots, no less than 100
feet from the center line of any
public street.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Side (southeast): ~50 - ~130
feet
Rear (southwest): ~100 - ~145
feet
(northeast): ~105 - ~170 feet
from the centerline of Conejo
Center Drive
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 38 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.
15+-foot-wide landscape strip
is provided along the property
line adjacent to Conejo
Center Drive, and a 40+-foot-
wide landscape strip is
provided along the property
line adjacent to Academy
Drive.

34.2% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 4A (VTTM 6021 Lot 11)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 100,047 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~280 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (south): 52 feet (at the
closest point) from the
centerline of the future
Academy Drive. Also 63 – 90
feet from the centerline of
Academy Drive.

Waiver
Required for
the front
(south)
setback at
52 feet.

Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (east & west): ~20 - ~70
- ~105 feet
Rear
(north): ~75 feet
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 40 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.

A 10+-foot-wide landscape
strip is provided along the
property line adjacent to
Academy Drive.

14.2% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 4B (VTTM 6021 Lot 12)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 105,362 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~330 feet & ~400 feet Yes Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (south): 63 feet (at the
closest point) - 80 feet from
the centerline of Academy
Drive.

Waiver
Required for
the front
(south)
setback at
63 feet.

Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

On corner lots, no less than 100
feet from the center line of any
public street.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Side (north): ~55 feet
Rear (west): ~40 feet
(east): 100 - ~190 feet from
the centerline of Conejo
Center Drive
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 40 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.
10+-foot-wide landscape
strips are provided along the
property lines adjacent to
Academy Drive and Conejo
Center Drive.

25.5% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 5A (VTTM 6022 Lot 1)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 239,665 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~115 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (east): 100 feet from the
centerline of Rancho Conejo
Boulevard
Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (south & north): ~40 -
~215 feet & ~35 - ~90 feet
Rear (west): ~50 - ~220 feet
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 40.5 feet to top of parapet Waiver Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.

A 10-foot-wide landscape
strip is provided along the
property line adjacent to
Rancho Conejo Boulevard.

13.2% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 5B (VTTM 6022 Lot 2)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 56,315 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~230 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (south): 54 feet (at the
closest point) from the
centerline of Rancho Conejo
Boulevard. Also 72 feet from
the centerline of Rancho
Cone
jo Boulevard.

Waiver
Required for
the front
(south)
setback at
54 feet.

Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (east & west): ~85 -
~130 feet & ~45 - ~81 feet
Rear (north): ~50 - ~120 feet
Yes
Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 40 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.

A 20+-foot-wide landscape
strip is provided along the
property line adjacent to
Rancho Conejo Boulevard.
17% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 6A (VTTM 6022 Lot 3)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 90,871 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~250 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (south): 100 feet (at the
closest point) from the
centerline of Rancho Conejo
Boulevard. Also 105 feet from
the centerline of Rancho
Cone
jo Boulevard.

Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (east & west): ~80 -
~160 feet & ~5 feet
Rear (north): ~5 - ~140 feet
Yes Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 40 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.

A 20-foot-wide landscape
strip is provided along the
property line adjacent to
Rancho Conejo Boulevard.

18.6% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
BUILDING 6B (VTTM 6022 Lot 4)
Minimum Lot
Areas
20,000 square feet 288,104 square feet Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100-foot minimum street frontage ~500 feet Yes
Front Setback No less than 100 feet from the
center line of any public street.

Front (south): ~110 - ~160 feet
from the centerline of Rancho
Conejo Boulevard.

Yes
Side & Rear
Setbacks
None, except 10 feet when
abutting residential or
commercial zones, and 20 feet
minimum from all property lines if
the building exceeds 25 feet.

The property doesn’t abut
residential or commercial
zones
Sides (east & west): ~135 -
~180 feet & ~60 - ~75 feet
Rear (north): ~75 - ~205 feet
Yes Height,
Maximum (ft.)
35 to top of parapet 41 feet to top of parapet Waiver
Required
Landscaping
Quantity within
Parking and
Driveway Areas
A 10-foot-wide landscape strip
shall be provided along the
property lines adjacent to any
public or private street or alley.
10% percent of any open parking
and driveway areas shall be
landscaped. This shall be in
addition to landscape
requirements for setback areas,
perimeter property line
landscaping and landscape
planters located adjacent to
structures.

A 20-foot-wide landscape
strip is provided along the
property line adjacent to
Rancho Conejo Boulevard.

19.7% percent of the open
parking and driveway areas
outside the required setback
areas are landscaped.

Yes
CDD:420-46/sk/H:COMMON/Planning Commission/Agenda Packet/2025/2025-09-08/07A Conejo Summit 19-70439-DP Attach 7 Project Consistency with Development Standards.docx/pz (FILE ID: 2019-70439-DP) Conejo Summit Project Consistency with Parking Standards Use Square Feet Parking Ratio Required
Parking

WHOLE PROJECT PARKING REQUIREMENT SUMMARY
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone1
671,122 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
1,3422
Business and
professional
offices
80,325 SF
(83,100 SF less
2,775 SF3)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 4 321
Total Required 1,663
Total Provided 1,663
(standard parking spaces)

INDIVIDUAL BUILDING MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS
BUILDING 1A
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
28,552 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
57 Business and
professional
offices
4,815 SF
(5,000 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 19
Total Required 76
Total Provided 78 (standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 1B
1 Sec. 9-4.2105. Permitted use matrix – Non-residential zones; M-1 Zone uses permitted with a Development Permit consistent with these parking standards (included for illustrative purposes): Alcoholic beverage production and storage - no tasting or retail sales; Bakery plants; Bottling plants; Boatbuilding, except ships; Cabinet and carpenter shops; Cannabis test ing laboratory; Carpet cleaning; Creameries, dairy product manufacturing and distribution; Dry cleaning and laundry plants; Electric and neon sign manufacturing; Garment manufacture; Laboratories, experimental; Manufacturing not otherwise listed, which is not offensive or obnoxious by reason of the emission of odor, dust, smoke, gas, noise, or other causes; Machine shops; Motion picture studios; Newspaper and publishing plants; Paint mixing plants, but not including the manufacture of paint ingredients or the use of any boiling process; Paper and paper products manufacturing, but not including pulp manufacturing; Planing mills; Sheet metal shops; Shoe manufacturing; Textile manufacturing; Tire rebuilding, recapping and retreading. 2 The required parking calculation is based on the buildings’ collective square footage resulting in 1,342 required parking spaces as it is greater than the parking calculation based on 985 employees resulting in 493 required parking spaces. See Condition 109 regarding company vehicles. The required parking for the office calculation is not included in this number, rather it is calculated separately in this table.
3 Each building is assumed to have a minimum of 185 square feet dedicated to interior common areas used for corridors, lobbies, stairways, common restrooms, elevator or mechanical shafts, and for any unmanned electrical or mechanical rooms. This reduces the total area dedicated to business and professional offices by 2,775 square feet or 80,325 square feet. 4 Sec. 9-4.2403(d)(1) New multi-tenant buildings. For the purpose of calculating parking space requirements for multi-tenant nonretail business, professional offices and other si milar uses, approved under this Title afte r August 22, 1997, the square footage desc ribed in subsections (26) and (28) of Section 9-4.2402(c) shall mean only the building’s gross leasable floor area. For the purpose of this calculation, “gross leasable floor area” shall mean the area within the total dimensio ns on each floor as measured from the out side walls, but excluding the interior common areas used for corridors, lobbies, stairways, common restrooms, elevator or mechanical shafts, and for any unmanned electrical or mechanical rooms. In order to qualify as a “corridor” under this section, the area shall be a shared interior circulation hallway or common walkway feature mo re than five (5') feet in width with permanent walls on both si des that are constructed from floor to ceiling.

ATTACHMENT #8
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
ATTACHMENT #8
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
Use Square Feet Parking Ratio Required
Parking
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
33,396 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
67 Business and
professional
offices
6,315 SF
(6,500 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 25
Total Required 92
Total Provided 93
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 1C
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
32,400 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
65 Business and
professional
offices
7,315 SF
(7,500 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 29
Total Required 94
Total Provided 95
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 1D
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
58,068 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
116
Business and
professional
offices
4,315 SF
(4,500 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 17
Total Required 133
Total Provided 135
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 1E
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
69,101 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
138
Business and
professional
offices
4,815 SF
(5,000 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 19
Use Square Feet Parking Ratio Required
Parking
Total Required 157
Total Provided 144
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 1F
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
47,924 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
96 Business and
professional
offices
4,815 SF
(5,000 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 19
Total Required 115
Total Provided 106
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 1G
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
45,460 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
91 Business and
professional
offices
4,815 SF
(5,000 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 19
Total Required 110
Total Provided 96
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 2
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
33,748 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
68 Business and
professional
offices
4,815 SF
(5,000 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 19
Total Required 87
Total Provided 88
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 3
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
35,368 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
71 Use Square Feet Parking Ratio Required
Parking
Business and
professional
offices
13,815 SF
(14,000 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 55
Total Required 126
Total Provided 128
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 4A
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
40,167 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
80 Business and
professional
offices
1,615 SF
(1,800 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 6
Total Required 86
Total Provided 88
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 4B
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
30,770 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
62 Business and
professional
offices
1,615 SF
(1,800 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 6
Total Required 68
Total Provided 69
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 5A
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
86,580 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
173

Business and
professional
offices
3,315 SF
(3,500 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 13
Total Required 186
Total Provided 189
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 5B
Use Square Feet Parking Ratio Required
Parking
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
19,265 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
39 Business and
professional
offices
3,315 SF
(3,500 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 13
Total Required 52
Total Provided 53
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 6A
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
25,515 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
51 Business and
professional
offices
6,315 SF
(6,500 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 25
Total Required 76
Total Provided 78
(standard parking spaces)
BUILDING 6B
Manufacturing
Types listed as
permitted in the
M-1 zone
84,808 SF 1 for each 500 square feet of gross floor
area or 1 for every 2 employees on the
largest shift, whichever is greater, plus 1
for each company vehicle, plus 1 for each
250 square feet of gross floor area for
incidental office use.
170

Business and
professional
offices
8,315 SF
(8,500 SF less
185 SF)
1 for each 250 square feet of floor area. 33
Total Required 203
Total Provided 223
(standard parking spaces)

CDD:420-46/sk/H:COMMON/Planning Commission/Agenda Packet/2025/2025-09-08/07A Conejo Summit 19-70439-DP Attach 8 Project Consistency with Parking Standards.docx/pz (FILE ID: 2019-70439-DP)

The Draft EIR (2022-70771-EIR) for the Conejo Summit Project can be found on file in the Community Development Department, City Hall, 2100 East Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Thousand Oaks and at the link below.

Draft EIR (including Appendices A – L):
https://toaks.gov/index.php?section=environmental&projectsection=5&project=41 CDD:420-46/sk/H:COMMON/Planning Commission/Agenda Packet/2025/2025-09-08/07A Conejo Summit 19-70439-DP Attach 9 Draft EIR (2022-70771-EIR).pdf/pz (FILE ID: 2019-70439-DP) ATTACHMENT #9
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
ATTACHMENT #9
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
ATTACHMENT #10
T
he Final EIR (2022-70771-EIR) for the Conejo Summit Project can be found on file in the Community Development Department, City Hall, 2100 East Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Thousand Oaks and at the link below.

Fi
nal EIR (including all Draft EIR files and Revised Appendices A, B, C & O):
ht
tps://toaks.gov/index.php?section=environmental&projectsection=5&project=41 CDD:420-46/sk/H:COMMON/Planning Commission/Agenda Packet/2025/2025-09-08/07A Conejo Summit 19-70439-DP Attach 10 Final EIR 2022-70771-EIR.pdf/pz (FILE ID: 2019-70439-DP) (To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
ATTACHMENT #10
(To the 9/8/2025 PC Packet)
cdd:420-46/sk/H:COMMON/City Council/Agenda Packet/2025/2025-10-21/Shapell/Staff Report-City Council/pz/(FILE ID:
2019-70439-DP)