The redevelopment of the Property will include the following community benefits:

• Common Area Amenity Owned by the HOA. The developer will construct and dedicate to the HOA a common area amenity. The contemplated amenity for the proposed 46-lot subdivision would include a clubhouse and pool and would be located on land presently owned by the HOA; or

• The proposed amenity for the alternative 42-lot subdivision would include only include a pool which could be located on land presently owned by the HOA or within property where the Coto Valley Country Club and the Former Tennis Academy and Offices are presently.

• Financial Contribution. The developer will provide an unrestricted cash contribution to the HOA of $1,250,000 if it were to build and dedicate a clubhouse and pool or $1,000,000 if it were to build a pool only.

Redevelopment of the Property also resolves, for all time, the anxiety related to the uncertain future use of the buildings as well as existing noise, traffic, and blight concerns.

We contemplate that the Village HOA and the developer will enter into a contractual agreement that will include specific terms such as, but not limited to: maximum number of allowable lots, site plan design, architectural design, timing of the construction of the amenity, and timing of payment of the contribution. In the event that the Project is not approved by the Orange County Board of Supervisors or is defeated in court, the agreement between the developer and the Village HOA will automatically terminate and any changes to the Village CC&Rs will not go into effect.

Further, the agreement between the Village HOA and the developer will require that the developer voluntarily incorporate the relevant terms of the agreement into the Project’s conditions of approval which is subject to review and approval by the Board of Supervisors. The conditions of approval dictate the terms under which the County will allow the development of the site and include specific requirements related to timing of improvements and conditions to issue permits and certificates of occupancy.

Village HOA dues are projected to increase by $22.10 per unit per month from $245.00 per unit per month to $267.10 per unit per month upon acceptance of a new clubhouse, pool, outdoor space, landscaping, and new roads. In addition, 42 or 46 new homes will be contributing to the HOA less the 3 commercial parcels which currently pay the equivalent of one home per commercial parcel. Or in other words, the development of a 42 or 46 unit subdivision would be a net increase of 38 or 42 new homes contributing to the HOA.

The total additional monthly cost to the HOA would be $10,431.20 or $125,174.40 annually.

The Village HOA fee will increase $17.69 per unit per month (or $4.41 per unit less) if a clubhouse is NOT built and dedicated to the Village HOA.

As mentioned above, the developer is committed to providing an unrestricted contribution to the Village HOA of $1,250,000 if it were to build and dedicate a clubhouse and pool or $1,000,000 if it were to build a pool only. This contribution is intended to offset the increased maintenance, reserve and insurance costs to the Village HOA but is unrestricted.

The Village HOA budget analysis can be found in the link here. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Aq1-s7hT2s40-dK3IXfIhVLp0B8bTxtw/view?usp=sharing)

The proposed project area is owned by three independent owners. The 5.99-acre Coto Valley Country Club has been owned by Kenney Hrabik and his family since 2015. The former Tennis Academy has been owned by Coto Valley Tennis Complex, LLC since 2003, and the office complex has been owned by Coto Valley Office Complex, LLC since 1998. The Tennis Academy and Office Complex total 4.20-acres.

No. Our contemplated amendment to the CC&R’s would be specifically drafted so that any revisions to the CC&Rs would only impact the specific lots on which the Coto Valley Country Club and the Former Tennis Academy and Office Complex are currently located.

Our analysis indicates that a 46-lot residential development will have significantly less traffic relative to a fully operational tennis academy, offices and event space. At full capacity, the existing buildings on the property are projected to generate 1,432 average daily vehicle trips. However, a 46-lot, single family home community with a community amenity is projected to only generate 520 average daily vehicle trips.

Presently, the average daily trips related to the use of the buildings is artificially low as neither owner has is operating their property at full capacity. However, if the buildings were to remain, average daily vehicle trips would likely increase significantly over time due to increased commercial use.

A trip generation analysis can be found in the link here (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1X2-NJQcApqBdsG9wSRmIJnVfTvmg32YU/view?usp=sharing).

Wildfire prevention and safety during a wildfire event is major concern in every California community, especially those like Coto de Caza which are located adjacent to natural open space.

We believe that the redevelopment of the Property will not create new or add to existing risks to the community with respect to wildfire. We also believe development of the property will reduce existing wildfire hazard issues.

• Removal of Outdated Buildings. The existing structures on the Property are ±50 years old and, like the majority of the residential buildings in the Village HOA, are not as wildfire resistant relative to modern buildings. New homes today cannot have exteriors built from combustible materials, include interior fire sprinklers, and do not have attics with exterior openings. In the event of a wildfire event, the existing buildings are far more likely to catch fire relative to a modern building and would also provide a significant amount of additional fuel during a wildfire.

• Area of Refuge. In the event of a wildfire with little notice, the streets of a newly constructed subdivision would be, in our opinion, a safer location to seek refuge rather than the existing streets within Coto de Caza. The streets in Coto de Caza are surrounded by fuel such as mature, overgrown landscaping and older structures with flammable exterior materials. However, the golf course would be the safest area of refuge during a wildfire event and could also accommodate a significant number of individuals.

• Event Traffic during a Wildfire. The Coto Valley Country Club often hosts events where the majority of guests are non-residents and are shuttled from offsite locations. In the event of a fast-moving wildfire, it would be critical to have all roads open to accommodate outbound traffic. However, congestion issues may arise as individuals attempt to enter Coto de Caza to pick up their friends or family attending an event within the community. Redevelopment of the Coto Valley Country Club would obviously eliminate this worst-case scenario.

We understand that the threat of wildfire and the safe evacuation in the event of wildfire is a critical issue for all residents of Coto de Caza. Accordingly, we have consulted with retired OC Fire Authority Chief Officer Gene Begnell who also presented at our January 2025 meeting.

In addition, if a project is approved by the Village HOA, the developer will need to study the effects of the proposed project impacts with respect to wildfire evacuation pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Any negative impacts to evacuation will need to be mitigated. However, as all fire experts would advise, early warning, and residents promptly responding to early warnings of wildfire, is the most effective way to prevent harm or injuries during a wildfire event.

A revision to the CC&Rs to allow housing requires approval from 50% + 1 of the TOTAL voting membership of the Village HOA.  50% + 1 is equal to 216 votes.

If the developer and the HOA are able to enter into an agreement with respect to development of the Property, the developer will begin work on its development application, review under the California Environmental Quality Act, and resource agency permitting. Each of these steps will be subject to public disclosure and review.

• Development Application. The development application for the project will be submitted to the County of Orange for review by County Staff. Upon determination that the application is complete, County Staff will hold public hearings to present the project to the County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to receive public comment and either approve or deny the project.

• Review Under CEQA. Concurrently with processing and approval of the development application, the developer will need to study the impacts of the project to the surrounding environment. Impacts to be studied include, but are not limited to: air quality, green house gas, energy, traffic, wildfire, biological resources, cultural resources, hydrology, water quality, geotechnical, noise, and environmental hazards. The environmental impact report will identify potential impacts to the surrounding environment and, if possible, the requirements to mitigate those impacts. The environment report will be circulated to the public and government agencies for review prior to presentation of the project before the Board of Supervisors.

• Resource Agency Permitting. As the Project may impact State and Federal jurisdictional waters, development of the Property would likely require permits, certifications and agreements with various State and Federal agencies including: US Army Corp of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Some (but not all) of these approvals are subject to public review and approval at a public hearing.

The homes have not yet been designed. Based on the current market, we believe the appropriate size home for the 60’ wide x 100’ deep lots would be two story homes, up to ±3,500 square feet and would be priced around $2,000,000.

• It is likely that the Coto Valley Country Club will continue to be utilized as a private events center which would require major capital improvements. In order to justify the cost of the capital improvements, the frequency of events would likely increase. Based on current market trends, labor costs, competition from the Coto de Caza Golf Club, and previous failed attempts, it is highly unlikely that the Coto Valley Country Club would be utilized as a private membership club or restaurant.

• The former Tennis Academy and Offices would likely continue to be used as commercial office space for the near future while the owner analyzes the viability of moving forward with a use that would be permitted pursuant to the Coto de Caza Specific Plan, County Municipal Code, and State Housing Law.

Pursuant to the Coto de Caza Specific Plan, the following uses are permitted subject to a Site Development Permit:

• Retail commercial and service commercial businesses.

• Administrative, professional and business offices.

• Cafes, restaurants, bars and cocktail lounges.

• Day care facilities.

• Art and other galleries, museums.

• Churches, temples, and other places of worship.

• Nursery and garden supply stores.

• Automobile service stations, in compliance with Section 7-9-114 of the Zoning Code.

• Commercial and non-commercial recreation uses, including:

  • Golf courses and associated facilities.

  • Equestrian facilities.

  • Tennis, swimming, and other outdoor recreation uses.

  • Bowling alleys, billiard parlors, card rooms and other indoor recreation uses.

  • Health spas, and athletic research facilities.

• Community facilities.

Pursuant to the Coto de Caza Specific Plan, the following uses are permitted subject to a Site Development Permit:

• Existing multiple-family development in Planning Area 20.

• Country clubs.

• Overnight lodging, including hotels and motels.

• Affordable housing in Planning Area 22.

• Any use that the Planning Commission finds consistent with the purpose and intent of these Community Center/Commercial Uses Regulations.

The Coto de Caza Specific Plan can be found by clicking on this link (https://ocds.ocpublicworks.com/sites/ocpwocds/files/import/data/files/8753.pdf)

Would the development of a senior living facility require approval from the HOA?

A senior living facility would need to comply with the Village HOA architectural guidelines, however, based upon our analysis of the Coto de Caza Specific Plan and the County Zoning Code, a senior living facility, such as the previously proposed 95-unit senior rental community (The Legacy), is a permitted use.

Pursuant to Orange County Zoning Code Section 7-9-98, “A senior living facility may be permitted in any district, planned community, or in any specific plan area zoned for multifamily residential or commercial uses subject to compliance with the applicable standards of the district…”

The Project is located in Coto de Caza Specific Plan Area 20 which is zoned for “community center/commercial uses”.

The Orange County Zoning Code can be found by clicking on this link (https://ocds.ocpublicworks.com/sites/ocpwocds/files/2024-08/Adopted%20Orange%20County%20Zoning%20Code%207-25-24.pdf)

A senior living facility would need to comply with the Village HOA architectural guidelines, however, based upon our analysis of the Coto de Caza Specific Plan and the County Zoning Code, a senior living facility, such as the previously proposed 95-unit senior rental community (The Legacy), is a permitted use.

Pursuant to Orange County Zoning Code Section 7-9-98, “A senior living facility may be permitted in any district, planned community, or in any specific plan area zoned for multifamily residential or commercial uses subject to compliance with the applicable standards of the district…”

The Project is located in Coto de Caza Specific Plan Area 20 which is zoned for “community center/commercial uses”.

The Orange County Zoning Code can be found by clicking on this link (https://ocds.ocpublicworks.com/sites/ocpwocds/files/2024-08/Adopted%20Orange%20County%20Zoning%20Code%207-25-24.pdf)

No. Based upon our analysis of new state housing laws passed by the California Legislature, specifically AB 721, a 100% affordable housing development is a permitted use.

Pursuant to CA Gov Code 714.6 (as amended by AB 721), “(a) Recorded covenants, conditions, restrictions, or private limits on the use of private or publicly owned land contained in any deed, contract, security instrument, or other instrument affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in real property that restrict the number, size, or location of the residences that may be built on the property, or that restrict the number of persons or families who may reside on the property, shall not be enforceable against the owner of an affordable housing development, if an approved restrictive covenant affordable housing modification document has been recorded in the public record as provided for in this section, except as explicitly provided in this section.”