Calabasas planning commission directs staff to prepare approval resolution for 135‑unit Avalon Calabasas addition

The Calabasas Planning Commission voted July 16 to direct staff to prepare a resolution recommending approval of entitlements for Avalon Calabasas, a proposal by AvalonBay Communities to add 135 units — including 27 deed‑restricted low‑income units — to an existing 600‑unit apartment complex at 3831 Orchid Lane.

The motion, which commissioners moved and seconded during an extended public hearing and Q&A, instructs staff to return a final resolution for the commission’s consideration. Commissioners framed the direction with a set of conditions discussed and recorded during the meeting: the applicant agreed to (1) work with the city to accommodate a Pepperdine shuttle stop on the property if the university is willing, (2) provide tenants written direction that parking is not permitted in the adjacent residential neighborhood, and (3) exclude agave planting from the proposed fitness trail. The commission also directed that staff continue to finalize the draft conditions of approval and findings for the resolution.

The project as proposed would add nine new buildings on the existing Avalon Calabasas campus and 135 new dwelling units; 27 units (20% of the addition) would be restricted to low‑income households. Planning staff described the site as 30.5 acres with roughly 20.5 acres net buildable area and reiterated that the proposal relies on state density‑bonus provisions and the city’s 2021–29 housing element. Staff and the city’s peer reviewers concluded the project falls within the scope of the city’s certified programmatic environmental impact report and that no further CEQA review is required under CEQA Guideline 15183, subject to the project‑level mitigation noted in the staff packet.

AvalonBay’s counsel, Edgar Clodian of Mayer Brown, summarized the applicant’s position: "This project delivers 135 new homes, including affordable homes, all without displacing a single resident, without any significant environmental impact, without eliminating parking, and without compromising fire safety or evacuation capacity." He reiterated operational commitments during questioning, saying the applicant will consider relocating tenants within its portfolio or terminating leases for tenants who choose to leave, and that rent abatement or other accommodations are on the table for tenants who remain during construction.

Residents who live at Avalon Calabasas and neighbors spoke in large numbers during the public comment period. Concerns focused on wildfire evacuation and traffic — several speakers described past fires and locals’ experiences of gridlock on Las Virgenes Road — loss of open space and amenities (tennis courts, walking trails), the size and timing of construction impacts, and tenant notification when residents applied or renewed leases. One tenant said, "This expansion will fundamentally alter the core appeal of our community," and multiple speakers asked whether the project team or city would offer relocation assistance or rent relief during construction.

Staff and the applicant addressed many of those concerns in the hearing. Staff noted that the site and project were included in the city’s housing element analysis and that the city’s programmatic EIR and peer reviews — including transportation and wildfire analyses — supported the finding that the project is within the scope of prior environmental review. On parking, staff and the applicant said the design replaces legacy nonconforming stalls with current‑code spaces (9x18 feet) and cited on‑site and adjacent street parking supply; yet commissioners repeatedly pressed for clarity on usage assumptions and emergency access.

The motion passed on a recorded roll call; commissioners directed staff to prepare the draft resolution and conditions and return the item at a future meeting for final action. Staff indicated the resolution and final conditions will be returned to the commission at a subsequent meeting (the planning director referenced August 6 on the public calendar) for formal commission action and any final edits.

Next steps: staff will draft a resolution and final conditions of approval consistent with the direction given by the commission, incorporating the agreed items and any additional conditions the commission requests. That resolution will be brought back for the commission’s vote; if the commission recommends approval to the city council, the council will then consider final entitlements and the conditions required prior to building permits.