Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hello it is now 05:30 and I would like to call the planning commission meeting on Thursday 03/19/2026 to order can the recording secretary please conduct the roll call

commissioner Pearson present commissioner jeffs

here

commissioner grossman

here

Commissioner Delacusack.

Here.

Commissioner Batia. Present. Vice Chair Lynn. Here. Chair Stark. Here. We have a quorum.

Now, that's able, if we could please rise and commissioner Delkuszak is gonna lead us in the pledge of allegiance. I'll now open the public comments for non agendized items. This would be include speaking on any item that's not listed on tonight's agenda. Are there recording secretary there any public comments on non agendized items?

If anyone on zoom wishes to speak now is the time to raise your hand. We will take speakers in the chamber first. Chair, we do not have any public comments on non agendized items.

Thank you. Director Freyde, are there any introductions?

No introductions tonight, chair.

What about staff reports?

We have no staff reports.

Okay. Do any of my fellow commissioners have any announcements or reports they would like to share? I personally would like to take a moment to thank Commissioner Pearson. He was the former chair of this commission when I started. And I think he provided a wonderful example of how to lead this commission.

I hope I can lead it in the same way where we try to come to consensus and find common ground for the issues that we see. And, I sincerely appreciate his contributions through his comments. He has a long tenure on this commission. A lot of experience there. And, he also has experience on the other side as an applicant for projects in other cities. So, he brings a wealth of knowledge to us. Thank you, commissioner Pearson.

Thank you, mister chairman.

Director Frady, do we have any additions or deletions?

I would also like to echo your sentiments for former chair Pearson, and we do not have any additions or deletions tonight.

Okay. Thank you. Now, we move on to the consent calendar. Do we have any public comments for the consent calendar? Oh, wait, I'm sorry. Does anyone want to remove anything from the consent calendar? For separate discussion. Okay. Do we have any public comments on the consent calendar?

If anyone on Zoom wishes to speak, now is the time to raise your hand. We will take speakers in the chamber first. Chair, there are no comments on this item.

Thank you. I'd like to open commission deliberations. Do any of my fellow commissioners have any comments on the consent calendar? May have a motion to approve.

So moved. Second.

Could you please set up the voting for us.

I'm so sorry. Commissioner Jeffs, think we're waiting on your vote. Thank you. Chair, the motion has passed unanimously.

Wonderful. Alright, so moving on, I'd like to open the public hearing for item number two. Director Froede, could you please introduce the item?

Thank you. The item before you is tentative trackback, park plan, and master plan for a two twenty one unit residential project located at 2400 Barrancas Parkway in Planning Area 36 Irvine Business Complex. Staff is recommending the Planning Commission continue the public hearing to its regular scheduled meeting of 04/02/2026.

Okay. Is the applicant present? And if they are, would they like to make comments? Okay. Do any of the commissioners want to speak on this item? So, don't close this public hearing because it's going to be continued.

Sorry, Chair. If we could actually open public comments before we move to the dais, please.

Oh, I'm sorry. Are there any public comments?

If anyone on Zoom wishes to speak, now is the time to raise your hand. We will take speakers in the chamber first. Chair confirming there are no public comments on this item.

Okay. Would any of my fellow commissioners like to speak on this item? No? Okay. So it looks like the recommended action is to continue do I have a motion for that?

Mr. Chairman I move that we continue the public hearing on this matter to the regularly planning commission meeting of 04/02/2026. Second.

Chair Stark, the motion has passed unanimously.

Awesome. I'd like to open the public hearing for item number three. Director Frady, could you please introduce this item?

Thank you, Chair. Our next item is a master plan for a new single family residence, and attached accessory dwelling unit with a variance for a reduced front building setback at 16000 Hundred 72 Culver Drive in Planning Area 15 Woodbridge. Presenting tonight is consultant planner Calvin Mignoni joined by planning manager Alyssa Matthews.

Thank you Director Frady. Good evening commissioners. The applicant is proposing to redevelop their property which includes an existing telecommunications building into a new single family dwelling unit with an attached accessory dwelling unit. The project site is located at 16972 Culver Drive, and is nestled within the existing Woodbridge community. Is bounded by Culver Drive to the west existing residential homes to the north and south and a landscape lot to the east access to the site is provided off pebble path with an easement over the landscape lot providing access to the applicant's property while the site has not previously been developed with residential units it is zoned 2.3 medium density residential it is also identified within the city's recent general plan and housing element updates as a site with a realistic capacity for two dwelling units.

The property is unique in several Ways. It was originally developed in the early nineteen forties and was utilized for several decades as a telecom repeater building. The image on the left shows the structure, which is still there today. This image is undated, but it was taken sometime before the late 1970s, early nineteen eighty's when grading and development of the Woodbridge neighborhood occurred the image on the right reflects the existing building this view is from Culver Drive with a building visible between the mature parkway landscaping that buffers Woodbridge from the street. Here's an existing site plan.

It highlights some of the adjacencies and oddities of the property. The subject property, which is hatched in the faint red, is about one tenth of an acre. The western portion of the property includes Culver Drive right of way and has an easement dedication over it for transportation purposes. To the north and south there are single family residential properties that are one and two stories in height. Those units include 110 And 112 Windjammer to the North and 2 And 4 Pebble Path to the South.

To the east of the property is Lot D a non buildable landscape lot which separates the property from Windjammer and Pebble Path spanning across Lot D is a non exclusive easement for ingress and egress to the applicant's site. That is shown in the hatched gray portion of the lot connecting the site to Pebble Path. In the past, site used to take access from Culver Drive. This access point was abandoned a little over a decade ago in favor of the current Pebble Path access. On the site itself you can see the rough outline of the footprint of the existing building which is a little over 1,100 square feet in size.

The applicant is proposing to convert the utility building into an accessory dwelling unit and attached construct a new single family house. The ADU occupies the existing footprint of the utility building is about 860 square feet single story includes its own independent primary entrance and complies with all state laws governing accessory dwelling units. The primary unit is proposed to be two stories four bedrooms two and a half bathrooms it includes approximately 1,800 square feet of livable area as well as a two car garage all required parking is accommodated on the applicants property both within the garage and in available uncovered parking spaces on the subject property here's a perspective rendering showing the proposed house this is looking from the east Obviously, missing within this rendering would be the existing landscaping and walls, which will be preserved and replaced as appropriate. You can see the two story house in the foreground with the attached single story ADU in the background. The new house does incorporate siding and a lattice trellis, which are design finishes that are consistent with the original 1979 site design for the Woodbridge Cottages.

Here is a second perspective rendering. This one is a view from Culver Drive. The proposed development complies with all development standards except for minimum front setback for which the applicant has submitted a variance request city zoning stipulates a minimum front setback of 10 feet the applicant is proposing a half foot setback at the easterly or front property line as I've alluded to the property is quite unique it has a diminished buildable envelope when compared to a typical single family parcel specifically it does not abut a street but is instead enclaved by the adjacent landscape lot Access is provided via an easement which necessitates a prescribed access path to the site. City requirements to provide a two car garage as well as uncover spaces further constrain design flexibility. And the site is encumbered on the western side by a 50 foot minimum setback from the curb of Culver Drive.

As such the strict application of the 10 foot front setback especially on this partial that is frontage deficient and is essentially an interior lot, would severely limit the buildable area on the site. It does not allow for the development of a residential unit that is of a similar size and building height as the adjacent properties. Worth noting that even with the reduced front back, the proposed building setback is more than 18 feet from the nearest drive aisle, as the existing landscape lot does buffer and set back from Windjammer and Pebble Path. We did notice tonight's hearing in accordance with typical city requirements. We received several comments about the proposed development.

Those comments were forwarded to the commission for your review and consideration. At the risk of painting with too broad of a brush, will say that the majority of comments spoke primarily to concerns around the subject property not being part of the homeowners association, subject to the same CCNRs, or under the association and neighborhood rules. They also spoke to concerns about site access, and specifically the use of the easement over the landscape lot to Pebble Path. And there were comments related to privacy and compatibility concerns with the construction of a new two story house. The project is exempt from CEQA as there are several applicable categorical exemptions that exempt the project from further environmental review.

Staff is recommending approval of the master plan with a variance for the single family home and the attached accessory dwelling unit with that I'll close my prepared remarks and I'll remain available for questions from the commissioners or from others

Thank you. Is the applicant present and would like to speak? Would you like to step up to the lectern?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. My name is Scott Piotr. This is my project as both the architect and the owner. And we have a presentation. I have a quick presentation for you as well. Let's see. It works. So, a quick history of

the building, a little bit

of the process I've been through, and then most of the time will be spent during the design. As the staff has pointed out, the project was actually sold, the property was sold by the Irvine Company to then Southern Telephone and Telegraph back in 'forty one. The repeater station was built, we guess, around 1942. It remained in use, and they added a generator building back in 1959, which is in the back of the building. And then also a bathroom with a septic system was added in 1971, which would show up in the picture that you see there.

But obviously timing hadn't happened yet. And it was used as a volunteer meeting place for what AT and T refers to as the telephone pioneers of America, as their volunteer nonprofit group. And they used that facility for about twenty years. The process of the city, I originally went through the preliminary development review process back in '4. At that time I was directed that we would since the general plan update had already included an additional unit, or I should say two units for this property, But the zoning hadn't been changed at that time.

I was going to need to provide a zone change and then an amendment to the master plan that was done in 1979 for the cottage's home phase three around there. What ended up happening is submitted as a general zone change master plan, also right of way vacation address change. And they discovered, decided that really all I needed is a master plan and then a zoning variance. The architectural design, the design restraints are pretty severe as staff has indicated with the existing building where it was and the access easement given where that is. And then the necessity to provide that required garage space and on-site parking, there are not a lot

of moving

components. So architecturally I tried to keep the materials and the architectural detailing consistent with the neighborhood, which I think you'll see in the drawings. This shows a little bit of the existing building before anything else was done. This is what I found when I was inside, all sorts of cable trays in the roof and walls. And this is the design as you saw in the staff report.

And Calvin, if you wouldn't mind putting the vicinity map up there again, just to orient the commission, you can see the cottages, for those of you that are not familiar with, they orient towards the front, and then they have their garage in the back. And so you can see all the way along the culvert there, because you've got too deep what you have, for instance, where my project is, the front door of those two adjacent projects face my project. And then behind them, you've got a driveway that's shared. It would normally be an alleyway, but in effect it's a driveway that serves four units. And you have that repeating up and down culver.

So in effect, what I've done in my design, I tried to face the front door towards my neighbors on Pebble Path there. And then the garage, you know, I don't have a long skinny building with an alley in the back. So in effect, I put the two story volume of the bedrooms like the other cottage homes behind my entry element. But the garage is in effect to the side and it shares the entry statement with the driveway. And so going back to the perspective of the project, you could see the, when it comes up, there, I guess, there we go.

So you see the entry element in gray there, similar to the cottage almost literally right across the green belt from me and then the block in the back would be the bedrooms and the garage. I show the enhanced pavement because it's going to be a shared facility of both the driveway and the entryway. So I want to make it appear as not as a driveway as much as possible. As I get a little echo here. So, you can see in the design typical cottage homes, you've got a front entry element.

You've got the main box, I shall say behind it. You have their enhanced siding in the front. And then the back is really a stucco box. And that's the way it is typically on most of the projects. The upper right hand corner you can see there, that is my neighbor in front right as Pebble Path or Windjammer turns the corner.

And you can see they put the enhanced siding around the corner when it faces the street. So, that's what I've tried to mimic on my to carry the same siding around and not really have stucco anywhere. So, anywhere you look because of the configuration of the building, try to have siding all the way around. This is at the other end of the same driveway at the other end of Windjammer. This is a one story building you can see in the upper right hand corner. And they added a second story that goes all the way to the back. You see they basically made it a stucco box in the back. My house actually less square footage than this. And it's not alone. This is another addition.

In the upper left hand corner you can see it's a one story and you can see the two story addition in the back. The lower left is the rear view of that. But you have consistency in the homes as far as that pedestrian level entryway in the front, which is what we've tried to maintain. This is another one story converted to two story a couple doors down from the first one that I showed you. In the lower right hand corner you see this is one of the typical homes that are long culver like I am. The other, you can see the entry elements with the roof. Sometimes the roof faces the front. Sometimes you have a gable. Sometimes you have a shed. Sometimes you turn the gables 90 degrees.

And then they also use this lattice as an architectural element to identify the entries. This is similar to the colors that I'm proposing, a white with black trim. And the design, this would be from the Culver side. And then from the Pebble Path side, you can see in the upper left hand corner, that's my neighbor at 2 Pebble Path. And the lower left is 4 Pebble Path.

The existing buildings in the upper right and the proposed structures in the lower right. And, again, one of the advantages that I have is I've got trees that are 45 years old now. So, as you can see in the upper right hand corner picture, they had just been trimmed when that picture was taken. But those trees are very, very full trees. So, I think they do a good job of maybe screening the mass of my building, which is further away than the others from the street. In an ideal world, I would have maybe used Culver as my alleyway and had the driveway back there, but that's impractical from a realistic standpoint of using that for access.

So, I have

there's an easement. The association

Sorry has to interrupt, but we need to move towards the end.

All right. Give me about fifteen more seconds.

Okay.

They're concerned that I'm going be using the easement as a driveway. I'm not. I'll only use it for access. I have parking on-site. I asked to be part of WVA's association. They decided, no, it's not worth the effort. But in lieu of even in spite of that I've gone ahead and I met with the architectural committee yesterday and waiting for their response and I'm planning on meeting with the villages or the cottage association to work out all the difficulties regarding that easement. And, I'm available if

you have any other questions. Thank you very much for the presentation and the context. I'd like to open public comments on this item. Do we have any public comments on this item?

If anyone on Zoom wishes to speak, now is the time to raise your hand. We will take speakers in the chamber first. Chair, we do have four in person speakers and one on Zoom. So we'll start with the chamber. I'm going to call Oh, I'm sorry, there was more on Zoom. Three more on Zoom after we address the four in the chamber. So, if we could have a line start in the chamber. We'll start with Donna Hatch, followed by William Saris, Greg Johnson,

and

Carrie Turner please. Each speaker will have three minutes.

Hello. I'm Donna Hatch and I'm president of the Cottages Association. This kind of hit us blindsided actually. We found out about a month ago that this was intended and going to happen. When the initial easement for this property was signed with the utility service back in 2014, we never imagined that this property would turn into something that somebody would build a house on.

Yet it sold shortly after we signed the easement and that was the intent that they would establish a home there. So it's our concern that this home won't be part of either WVA or Cottages Association. It kind of removes any authority we might have while everybody else around the area is adhering to certain standards. We have no authority to say anything about this property. Parking is a premium in that area with a four bedroom home.

My assumption is there could be possible five cars in that place and then you've got an ADU, another vehicle. There's a two car garage and parking for one in the ADU. That means fallout is going to happen on the public street. I'm concerned about that for the rest of the neighbors. Visually, this is a distraction for the neighbors that live there that bought intending that it would remain trees and greenery that they're looking at.

Now they're going to have a house to look at. So that's a real disappointment for those neighbors. I think those are my main concerns, although Mr. Kyodor said that ideally use of Culver would have been the thing to do. He said himself that he would not have purchased this property if it weren't for the easement. And since he's the one that drafted the easement and we believed that it was only going to be used for emergency vehicles with the utility. I'm kind of surprised that he would say that. So those are my comments. Thank you.

Next we'll take William Thorest.

Good evening. A little loud. Good evening. My name is William Sarus, s a r r u s. I live in the cottages around the block from this property.

Is this a timer that I can put on or no? How to push it? No?

Okay.

One thing that has come to my attention on the presentation, the abutting owners of that property are supposed to be given notice. And to me, the mailing that was done by the city is only a constructive notice. I actually talked to the Whimjammer Alleyway tenant. He rents from the actual owner who lives in San Diego County. My opinion is that that owner in San Diego County need to be given actual notice of this hearing, which was not done.

So that's just procedurally well. I sent my comments by email to the Planning Commission. I feel very strongly that that map that you all saw is totally misleading. And whether that was intentionally done or accidentally done, I don't know. But if the members will look at the map, the vicinity map, that is not Windjammer. That is the alleyway. Windjammer is one road over. So it makes it appear that that is a street. It is not a street. It is merely an alleyway.

That's it's very deceptive. And the reason why I got into that in my comment, parking is already bad on path. I attached a picture to, that I took last night, to my comments. You can't park on the alleyway. It's posted by the Irvine Police Department.

It's a violation of fire regulations to have that there. So that leaves this new dwelling which is going to be four bedrooms plus the adjacent property. You're going to have more cars parked on Pebble Path which is already severely limited in its parking. I also wanted to address the easement. That easement was done for the, I'll call it the telephone company at the time.

That was just a relay station which means occasional repairs, maintenance on the relay station. What's proposed is an easement that is gonna be constantly moved used as a driveway. That was not the purpose of that easement when it was granted and I think it's a

mistake Thank you to sir your time is up.

Thank you your time is up.

Alright. The only issue that came up with the what was the address that I do want?

I'm sorry. Have to move on to the next commenter now.

Thank Well, let me just give me ten seconds. A septic tank is in that unit. That was for one bathroom for the utility. This is a two and a half bathroom home.

We need to keep it fair that everyone has an equal amount of time.

You for

your Thank you for

Members of the Planning Commission, you very much for your time. My name is Craig Johnson. I live at 98 Windjammer. I'm directly across the alley Windjammer from the proposed property. I have several concerns with this project moving forward.

One of them is that the proposed windows in the north side of the building face towards my house and it has a direct line of sight between our master bedroom and bath directly into the proposed windows for this project. To us that is unacceptable and a changed condition that we were not anticipating when we bought the house thirty four years ago. Secondly, it's already been mentioned, there is a real concern that they will not be part of the association, they will not be subject to the same rules. That is a very big concern for ours. Thirdly, there's a demolition and construction phase of this project that's going to last probably at least a year.

And I have a lot of concerns about the impact of the the neighborhood and the safety of the neighborhood with numerous contractors coming through there. You're gonna have to do a lot of demolition. You're gonna have to do a lot of probably import as well to build up that site. I think it's gonna be too much of a concern of all of our neighbors that we're dealing with this. And our real concern is that it was never planned for in the original planning.

And I appreciate that the land's there. It's not a real nice thing to look at right now. I don't think the answer is to put a home that's not going to be subject to the same rules as ours. And also, I also would like to mention that in reading to the proposed congressional approval, there's nothing in there that talks about our concerns and how those could be mitigated if in fact you do decide to approve. The letter I sent to the commission had some language in there for specific possible conditions of approval that I think the commissioner commission should consider before approving this project.

Although my preference is that you decline the application. Do we have more time? Okay. The last thing I want to talk about is fact that, you know, we've lived here for thirty four years. It's been the Cottage Homes. We love this neighborhood. And to bring in something outside the Cottage Homes in the area that was never planned to have this, Yes, so we have parking issues. I appreciate that mister Piater is willing to let us use his easement for me to park in that in that space. I will definitely be using that if that becomes the case. I would like to have an extra space to park my own bought my own vehicle.

But I really don't think that that's really what the overall neighborhood wants. And I would encourage you all to take a strong look at how this impacts us as a community and decline the the proposed project. Thank you very much for your time. I will be available if you have any questions.

Next we will take speaker Carrie Turner. Carrie Turner. Okay moving on to our zoom participants. Next we'll take Marcella. Marcella go ahead and unmute.

Thank you Marcella, your time is up. Next we will move on to Ray. Ray go ahead. Next we will take Zoom speaker Christina B. Chair Stark, this concludes public comments for this item.

Thank you. Then I will close this portion of public hearing and open commission deliberations. Please prompt to use the request to speak button if any of the commissioners have questions, comments. We'll start with Commissioner Batya. Thank

you for the presentation. I had a question for the applicant regarding I think this obviously relates to the CCNRs. Obviously, you're not subject to a CCNR. There's reasons for having a CCNR in any community. It's because there's guardrails to have set standards for a community. For one, I want to ask what the sole use and purpose would be for ADU. Would it be for family members? Are you using it for rental income? Are you using it for taking care of elderly? I'd just like to know that first and foremost.

So the answer to the EDU, I would presume that it may end up being a man cave at some point, or it may end up being where my wife and I live.

Chair Stark? Can I take a minute real quickly? Yes, Thank you. I just want to remind the audience there's going to be no cheering, no booing, no clapping. This is a business meeting. We need to be able to conduct business and get items before the Planning Commission so the Planning Commission can take action tonight. So, again, just another reminder, no cheering, no booing, no clapping. This is a business meeting, and we expect you to act accordingly.

Thank you. So, may not be where my wife and I live and maybe my children and grandchildren in the front house, or it may be rented out. And there's nothing to say that a future owner wouldn't rent it out so I don't want to disparage that. What was your other question?

Well, wanted to piggyback off the renting part. Typical standards are if you have landlord, if you're a landlord and you have a tenant in place, handing out a CCNR from day one of lease execution is probably imperative why because it sets standards you have to abide by for the community right so for example smoking you know there's designated smoking areas in certain communities You can have a tenant then comes out there and he's, you know, having cigarette butts all over the place, right? So there's quality measures for CCNRs. And I think I sort of have a problem grasping that there is no HOA involvement in any shape or form for this. So have you reached out to the HOA and worked a deal with them or tried to convey any communication to, you know, reach sort of a broader agreement?

Sure. So answer your question as far as renters, obviously my wife and I are living there we're going to be particular about those kinds of things and we're going to police that. As far as the HOA, we requested to be part of WVA, Woodridge Village, and they basically said no it's not worth the effort. Because I can't be part of the wva ccinars that precludes me from being part of the cottages association. But that doesn't mean that I can't do private covenants with the cottage association and I requested to the board attorney to be able to meet with the board and discuss those kinds of options.

It's not my intent to kind of sneak one in under the wire. If we can come up with mutual agreed rules, I think that benefits both myself and my wife and whatever future homeowners maybe of that home as well as the rest of the neighborhood. I have no problem doing that. I know the city doesn't get in the middle of that, but from a good neighbor standpoint that's my intent.

And Scott, if this could be a question for city staff, if applicant or a future dispute arises, what limitations and exposures does the city have to remedy it? Do they revisit an approval process? It seems like a lot of folks here are concerned about obviously the big aspect of it is being part of the HOA what would what could the city do for future disputes

and I'd just like to jump in here really if there were future disputes that would be a civil matter and not likely an area where the city would intervene.

Okay. And so, Scott, are there any legal disputes currently at this point?

Not that I'm aware of. But like I said, I would like to meet with the HOA to prevent that from happening. And like I said, I'm not adverse to doing a private covenant even though I might not be able to be officially part of their association. I could have the effects be pretty much the same, both architecturally and whatever other covenants or rules there are.

Okay. No further questions thank you for that.

Thank you Commissioner Lin.

Thank you to staff and thank you to the applicant for working together to get to where we are where it's presented to the planning commission for ultimate approval. The staff has recommended that we approve this application and just in reviewing it I had a question regarding I wanted to go over some of the concerns and I think you to the public commenters who took the time to come here it's important to address all the concerns and have your concerns answered and your questions answered. So hopefully we'll take the time to do that because you took the time to even come here today. One question I had was regarding the parking issue. So when looking at an application like this, what are what's the criteria in terms of at what point can we deny an application due to parking concerns or not

so when evaluating a proposal any proposal including a residential one we would look to our code and the code required standards for the number of required parking spaces based on the proposed land use in this instance the proposed land use requires three total parking spaces be provided two of them be provided via a covered garage or carport and one additional uncovered space and the applicant has demonstrated that there is a two car garage as well as space for at least one vehicle uncovered on his property. Okay.

Regarding notifications, I think Mr. Saris came up and did mention, you know, there was a neighbor who perhaps was out of town or doesn't live nearby, lives away from the property. In terms of following the city's notification requirements for the neighbors that are within a certain radius, did the city comply and what what are those requirements

yes we did we did comply with those requirements those requirements require that within 500 feet of the project properties line that all homeowners tenants and homeowners associations are delivered a public mailing notice

500 feet 500 feet

oh we we can't speak out of turn sir Yeah, but you still can't speak out of turn. Calvin, can speak notification process and how owners are notified, please?

Certainly. Yeah. So, the notice is sent to all homeowners and residential tenants that are identified. We rely on our city's GIS database in order to pull and assemble those mailing notices. That GIS database is compiled from the county's data that

populates those addresses. Thank you. I'm sorry to interrupt you.

No, that's okay.

Thank you for that understanding. Let me go through my notes. There was a concern from Mr. Johnson regarding the privacy. I was wondering if the applicant could do something in terms of increasing privacy between that window that faces the master bedroom of the neighbor. Is there something that you'd be willing to consider just to address that concern?

The elevations already show all of the windows that are facing that direction. Part of the cottage's design, I didn't really go into it, because it gave more of a truncated presentation, they have the zero lot line. So there's no windows on one side of the building or if there are, they're high clear story windows. And then the neighbor's private yard is that combined yard between the two neighbors. They call it reciprocal easements. So, in light of that, all of the windows on the north side of my building and on the corner are all clear story windows. They're all six foot high sills or higher. So you can't look out into that and see. I know they live at 98 Windjammer and I know where their master bedroom is. I used to live in the neighborhood.

I was in there for three years. That's how I discovered in the first place. And so yes, we've already designed the windows in a way that there should not be a way for either them to look into our house or the other way around. Thank

you. And ultimately, I think it's important for everyone to understand what we, as the Planning Commission, can and cannot do. Even if, let's say, we all loved the design and we loved the home, we can't base it off of just that. There are parameters, are codes, there are And the applicant has been working with city staff just for perspective. And according to city staff, based on the recommendation, it did meet all the requirements. And they did work with the city. So there are legal parameters that we have to adhere to. And ultimately, decision is ultimately based on that. So I just wanted everyone to have that kind of understanding before we continue with the discussion.

Thank you. Thank you. I have some questions. Is the applicant really able to change plans once they're submitted, change them significantly? That was a concern of the community members.

I'll speak to that. So, all projects will be evaluated against the original entitlement document. So, to the extent that we have development standards that govern certain things, we would absolutely look for consistency and substantial conformance

with those requirements. Aesthetically speaking also?

So, the city does not have strict design guideline criteria's. So, we don't have development standards that regulate the specific design of residential homes.

So, that sounds like an area where the applicant could possibly have an agreement with the HOA to adhere to some of their design concerns. I mean, we're not part of that, but I'm just maybe making a suggestion. Is it still on a septic tank? And if it is, will it be hooked up to city sewer? Yes.

Okay.

Also, there's a building there now. I drove by it today to take a look because it was hard to visualize from the pictures. And it looks really rough. And it does look like the plans would be an improvement on what is there now. Long term, if there's not a house, what would happen to that building? Would it just slowly deteriorate? I mean, maybe I'm speaking to the owner. I don't know. Like, what would your plans be if this wasn't approved? Would the building just sit there?

I mean that's a good question. I don't see another use for the building other than a home.

That's all I have. Jeff, would you like to? That's me. It looks like Commissioner Pearson wants to yeah, too many Jeffs here.

You, Mr. Mike's on. Have Calvin. Alissa, thank you very much for the presentation. I think the applicant did a good job of attempting to justify what he's doing.

It's too bad that that parcel was not part of the original HOA association which creates a little bit of a problem. My question is we've got a master plan that we've approved or that we are intending to vote yay or nay on and a variance. And the variance is an encroachment within a 10 foot setback from an easement area. Is that correct?

Mostly correct just the clarification that I'll add there is that the 10 foot setback is to a landscape lot on a portion of that landscape lot.

So it's parcel

So what we're doing is we're encroaching in the 10 feet from a parcel line that happens to be a landscape lot. So effectively we have a larger setback at that location.

Yes so a couple things in it does not encroach upon the parcel because setbacks are measured from property line back to building so the setback is still entirely on the subject property It is closer to that landscape lot yes.

It's half a foot rather than the 10 foot. Correct. Thank you for correcting me. What other variances or what other items in this master plan were subject to criticism by staff going forward and in review?

Staff evaluated for in totality for compliance with all development standards. That includes things like building height, lot coverage, landscape coverage, building setbacks, any number of requirements that are embedded within our code. And at this time,

the applicant has satisfied all of the requirements other than the variance?

That is correct.

It's a piece of property that is obviously encumbered by access, by a lot of different variables that are out of our control as planners and commission members but I think that for me it would be nice to have a covenant on title that would be close to following the HOA design guidelines as possible. Other than that, I don't have any further questions.

Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Jeff, sorry I missed you. Would you like to speak?

Yeah, thank you. It's alright I get called Jeff all the time. Really appreciate the comments on both sides, just have a few questions. I wanted to follow-up on Commissioner Stark's question around any building restrictions. Not to the current design or the current plans, but going forward. If somebody else were to purchase this parcel, say ten years from now and they wanted to do a remodel, can you provide some color on any city restrictions that would be in place if somebody wanted to add a third story, if they wanted to add additional square footage? What are some of the provisions in place that would prevent it from becoming a total mismatch with the neighborhood around it?

So, any building proposed on the lot would be subject to the city's development standards, and in particular the zoning standards that apply to 2.3 medium density residential projects so as it relates to free rein to design a building they would be limited by the development standards that are there as As is before you, there are significant constraints around those development standards and getting those to work on the site as the variance is necessitated and before you tonight showing it is with severe difficulty that an applicant provide a building plan that complies with all of those standards. A future homeowner would have an ability as property owner to offer revisions to those, but city staff would evaluate those for consistency with the development standards.

Thank you. And then, this idea of a covenant has come up a few times. Do we know if there are any hurdles to establishing a covenant between the applicant and the WVA? It sounds like a big hurdle is admission to the WVA, but is there a hurdle to coming up with a covenant? Is it is that an agreement that can be bound without significant voter oversight or anything like that?

I don't think as staff we're really prepared to answer if there are hurdles to preparing and recording such a covenant. City attorney, do you have anything else to add?

No. This is really not within the city's purview. We don't get involved in HOA matters. So, it sounds like there's a significant dispute between the HOA and the property owner, but that's not really something that we're prepared to opine on.

Understood. And then maybe that's a question for applicant in that case. I'm not sure if this is the first time that the idea has been floated, but is this something that you've proposed to the WVA or that they've mentioned?

No. In fact, WVA turned it down because it's not something that they can annex by board action. It would take a certain proxy vote of the entire nine five hundred units or whatever that are in Woodbridge. But I did have a discussion with the cottage's HOA attorney and I suggested and she suggested that there are some private covenants that we could do there. So that's what I intend to pursue.

Again, you know, these are my neighbors. I don't want to move in and already have target on my back. I'd rather be accepted as friend and somebody that's going to work with them than not. And I recognize that at some point we're going to sell the house. You know, that's the next owner. It may not be nice, right? So, putting something together that would be a covenant that would restrict it is kind of my goal. If we can come up to an agreement on how we can do that, don't have a problem with that. There's not a whole lot more you can do or different than you can do on the site. The site is so restricted that the design is pretty much what you see is about the only option you really have in putting it together.

And then, I assume that if it were an easier process, your preference would be to be part of WVA and subject to their requirements?

I would love to be part of WVA because, you know, the parks and everything were dedicated and built as part of the development of Woodbridge. And they're open to the public. But the pools, tennis courts, private beach club and things like that, we would love to be members of that. But we can't because WVA won't accept us. But that doesn't mean I can't still do a deal with the mass with the cottages association. They don't have the right to give me access to that. But you know, as far as architectural control and other things, I'm in agreement. I don't have a problem with that. And

then, Mr. Pieter, one of the primary concerns that I heard from the folks was about the parking situation, and it sounds like there will be a two car garage and then an additional spot. Can you just provide a little bit of commentary on your plans around parking, vehicle usage, etcetera?

Well, we have two parking spaces that are covered in the garage, and it's an oversized garage. There could still be storage in there as well as two cars and we did that on purpose. We'll end up with crawl spaces in the project because we're going to build it up to the same elevation as the neighborhood. And so there will be storage underneath there so I'm hoping that in perpetuity whoever owns the house would still always be able to park two cars in the garage and then the driveway is large enough for two cars as well. So, we can park four cars on-site without being on the association property or on the street.

Okay, thank you. And then one more question for the city staff. I think in one of the public comments that I read, I didn't hear tonight, but I think it mentioned that there was a concern around an access path to another home. Is that I didn't see anything on that in the city report. Is that a consideration or is that accurate?

There is an access path that is existing. It serves two pebble paths. That access path can be preserved with the easement that's on there. The proposed design does not affect that access path.

The easement with the association requires me to put a two foot landscape buffer between my driveway and that path and that's part of the existing agreement.

Thank you.

Commissioner grosson.

Thank you to the applicant and thank you to staff for your report. My questions are mostly to staff to help guide this decision making. First we have in the comments we' received there was a letter from an attorney. A letter from attorney usually implies some sort of a legal action that may be forthcoming. When the city is being asked to make a decision in light of a potential or forthcoming legal dispute is it not customary that it would be in the best interest of the city to essentially allow the parties to amicably work it out before decisions are made related to a legal dispute.

I''ll just add that there are streamlining requirements for the city does need to move this project along and process it in a timely manner or manner rather. That could take a while we wouldn't want to run afoul of any of those requirements.

Understood. Let me ask a question a little bit. The variances is an important consideration in here. Obviously we all understand that the site is very difficult to design it was a unique property, but is the standard whether it's difficult to design or is it reasonable use what is what is the standard by which we're evaluating here

yeah great question commissioner there are a number of required findings in order to approve a variance amongst those are that the strict application of zoning standards would deprive the property owner of rights afforded to adjacent properties and that the variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege on the property.

You elaborate on that last statement.

On the grant of special privilege or the first? Yes, so it would essentially be that we aren't offering waivers of development standards to provide special privileges to a particular property owner in order to allow for a project.

Talked about functional separation with the land capping in order to justify the variance. Again I' going use the word standard but is that the standard is functional separation from landscaping to have a variance to the 10 foot setback? A 10 foot setback setbacks are there for a reason they' there to protect the property line from the homeowner. Why is functional separation the standard in which you're using in this?

Yeah great question commissioner so it is not necessarily functional separation that is in and of itself the standard The importance of having an approximately 18 foot landscape setback is to highlight that even with the variance and the reduced setback down to one foot, that the subject property provides a dwelling unit that is in line and consistent with the predominant development that's around it. Just help

me understand a different this design is based on the applicants desire for an adu and for a certain sized home. The need for the variance is based upon that design. A different design could be created that would not require a variance. It might not be what the applicant desires and I respect that tremendously. The standard for a variance is based upon the design that the applicant wants or a design that would be reasonable to be on the parcel of land itself? Guess is the question I'm asking.

Yeah, certainly. A design that would be reasonable on the parcel itself. And I think the constraints on this property as it relates to the prescribed access and the 50 foot culvert setback significantly restrict the buildable area of subject site.

No doubt. That's all for my question. Think my final comment to my fellow commissioners is I think this is an item where we have significant levels of disagreement from neighbors from h o a's from the applicant and I sense a willingness from the applicant and from the others to work on this and work on this in a positive and collaborative manner. I believe it would be in the best interest to allow that process to take forth and then once those levels of agreement would be to ask the applicant to return to this commission for consideration. I don' know if it' a proper time to make a motion but I would encourage us to table this and encourage the applicant and the neighbors in the HOA to consider and continue conversations.

You're contemplating a motion to continue this item until they come to an agreement?

I'm contemplating a motion to continue this recognizing staff saying we must do this in a timely manner and I would encourage the applicant and the HOA to work on this in a timely manner and I sense a willingness to do so from all parties but I would like to make a motion to table this until a period of time where the applicant and the HOA have had more time to come to a mutual agreement. If I need to put a specific date we can put a specific date to that because I recall in previous meetings we needed to table it to a specific date. I'm open to discussion on that topic.

I heard two different things from you so I just want some clarification on what the motion is. If the motion is to table it, that means there's no date that it comes back, and we could bring it back at some point in time or not bring it back at all. If the motion is to continue with the item, then we do need a specific date to continue the item, too. So I'm not sure which way you want to go. It Is a continuance or is it a tabling of the item?

Functionally, which what's the difference just setting a date?

The difference would be setting a date. It also impacts noticing requirements. So, we continue an item, we don't have to re notice it. If we table the item, we would have to re notice it when we bring it back.

I think continuance in that scenario would be more than sufficient since the staff has already done notification and the relevant parties involved so based on your explanation continuance is what I would be.

Our next meeting is April 2 would you like to continue it for two weeks or for a month?

I ask the applicant would two weeks be sufficient with the applicant to believe to come to some level of agreement? What would be reasonable to have that discussion? Or the HOA president?

It's been nine months so far. I would love to have it in two weeks if we can do it. And that would keep all the parties to have incentive to meet together quickly and resolve the issues. We may not have the legal language resolved in two weeks, but we can have a letter of intent that might be signed by then. If that answers your question.

My preference, obviously, my intent is to work it out with the HOA anyway. So, if you were to approve it tonight, I'm still going to go out there and work for it. So, it's a matter of whether it saves me a trip back, allowing me to start financing and other issues that I need going on which I cannot start until this is approved. So there are reasons that I would prefer not to do it for obvious reasons. But they also involve time and things like financing that I need to be able to get going on. It's up to

you. Commissioner grozman, would that be enough timeline for feasible development of a covenant for April? Is that going You're be time for

asking one party, and the HOA is a committee. So, as far as I'm concerned, I think we can come up with a letter of agreement that we can both agree to in two weeks. Whether the HOA can muster what they need to do in that timeframe is unknown.

Commissioner Lind?

If at

the end of two weeks we need to continue it for two more, we can do that.

Okay. Commissioner Lind?

Thank you. Commissioner Grossman, I just would like some clarification as to what you're seeking. Just as you propose the motion to continue or to table, I guess what are you seeking in two weeks? What are you wanting to have the parties come to? Just for clarification, because I'm not sure what guidance, you know, we could I think it'd be great to provide some guidance for them. So what is it exactly you'd want to see back when they do return?

Thank you commissioner lynn. Appreciate the language it' not about what I want to see. What we' heard tonight is an application from a very dedicated applicant and we' heard some vehement objections from very relevant parties. We heard from an HOA president I believe was president of the cottages. What I hear is a willingness to work together on a covenant on what those ccrs might be on agreement with those CCR'S on covenants related to future changes the rules and regulations of the HOA.

It sounds like the applicant is willing to abide by the CCRS of the HOA and in that case if there was a covenant and agreement that could be come together I would sense that the opposition would be lessened. What I' seeking is for them to work amicably towards that covenant and agreement so we that would have no opposition and an understanding from our neighbors. If that can' be done then we would need to come together and we would have to make a decision as a planning commission as to whether we would approve it and sometimes those decisions are hard I respect that I' willing to make hard decisions but I believe we have an opportunity within a reasonable and speedy period of time that doesn' overly burden the applicant or the association try to work towards a mutually agreeable goal That's my objective in seeking making a motion to continue this. Let's go with the two weeks and let's see if there is an opportunity unless the HOA would like to a would like to be heard with a different opinion. Please.

It'd be better if you came to the microphone so everyone can hear you. Especially the people at home.

Sorry, I realize two weeks is ideal. We feel like we've been scrambling for the last two weeks to even address this issue once we heard about it. I would prefer a longer time period if that can be allowed so that we can get our ducks in a row and hopefully come to an agreement if we have no other choice but to come to an agreement. So I would ask for a longer time period. We meet as a commission next week so it doesn't give us much time to repair anything and vote on it before then.

Given we meet our next meeting, Stephanie, is when? April 2. April 2. When is your meeting?

We meet next Thursday.

So would your in your opinion with the meeting so maybe the meeting after that from our point of view would be more appropriate would that so our

meeting Yeah what's would

the date after the second I guess is what I'm asking something before

April 16.

That be our April 16, yeah.

Would April 16 be more amenable to you?

That would be. Yeah, if my attorney could join in, because I know we'll be working with her too. But the sixteenth would be better than second for me, for all of us.

From my point of view, I don't know if we need to have an ironclad agreement, but that you've worked together and the applicants maybe made you feel better about his intentions and his ability to fit in and work with the association. I think if we see that you're moving towards that end, it would feel less forced on the community, at least from my point of view, maybe Premiers Grossman's also. So, mean, don't want put too much pressure on the parties, but I think if everybody's working together, you'll eventually get there. I see commissioner Pearson has a comment.

My concern is we're kicking this can down the road and I've heard both property owner questions and comments. I've heard association comments. I'm not sure how the applicant is going we've heard him say that he's amenable to getting together. I'm not sure who he's going to get together with and that there could be desperate different requirements from the property owners that are worried about the aesthetics, the line of sight, the association, long term maintenance, and how the property will look. I'm just thinking that I don't disagree with giving them an opportunity, but I think we're just setting ourselves up for listening to this again.

You don't want to listen to it again?

Don't want to listen to it again?

I Bills

up our meeting, I mean.

You've got a motion.

May I respond briefly to the commissioner? I agree and when difficult decisions need to be made I'm absolutely 100% prepared to make those difficult decisions. I think that it would be we don' need to read we won' t need much more time but let' see what two weeks or four weeks can provide in terms of a collaboration I don' think it' a deep burden upon the applicant and or the community to work hastily and amicably. I'm open to whether it is April 2 or April 16 I have no problem going with April 2 to try and place urgency but I think we would be best served as a committee as a commission to do so.

Your motion is for April 16?

I'm really neutral. I I would like in respect to what I'm hearing from the committee let's push it April 2 and if they feel they need more they can come back and ask continue it again but let's try and create some sense of urgency so my motion is for this item to be continued until our next meeting which is April 2.

I'd like to see we have a second and then go to commissioner Batya before we vote.

Yeah, Noah. I think the crux of it, we just heard that we need a little more time. April 16 would be ample. I think also the applicant alluded to having an alternative CCNR. If that could be at play, we could certainly do that. If there's a 100 pages, hash at it and see what you can mimic. And let's make it April 16 with maybe a possible CCNR.

So is that an alternative motion?

That would be my, I mean,

His to motion is April 2.

Yes, so my alternative is April 16.

Do I have a second on April 2 motion?

I'll second Seth's motion.

And then now we vote on that? Or do we I don't know what to do.

If I could have clarification. We had the word alternative motion thrown out. Is that a substitute motion?

It's a substitute Then motion, I

we would see if there's a second. If there is, we vote on the substitute motion do

we have a second for the substitute motion it doesn't seem that we

do no I'll second it let's just see what people would like I'll second it. If we

Yeah, go ahead.

The HOA just mentioned that they are meeting in about a week. Does this mean that the

first motion, April 2, is out, and now we're going to vote on April

Vote on the second motion, the substitute motion.

Okay so we're voting on Can I ask

do we then return to the original motion? I'm sorry this is unusual for us. That return to the original motion if it's

first, the substitute motion passes, then we don't return to the original motion.

So we need to vote on the substitute And if it doesn't

pass? Then we come

back to the original unless there's another substitute.

On the motion maker for the substitute I did get a second from Mr. Grossman commissioner Grossman so are we okay with that?

We have a motion and

a second. Seconded my motion.

He did second it so we prepared a vote please.

And this is on the substitute motion, Mr.

Chairman? So this is the motion to continue this to the April 16 meeting. So now we need to have a discussion about that before we vote. Right?

I think you can go ahead and just vote on the item.

You can just vote?

Yeah.

Do you want to say something?

I really appreciate. I think it's important that the parties work together. And I think if they can come up with a covenant, that would be wonderful. In terms of what we as planning commissioners are voting on, though, however, and the criteria based on the city codes and the application itself, whether it adheres to those codes, I don't think that necessarily is going to change. So I'd like to open up the possibility where we can move on, have the parties continue perhaps submit to us a letter with that private covenant language or what they have decided.

But in terms of the applicant and the application itself and what we were presented with as a planning commission, I just want to make it clear that I don't think those parameters would necessarily alter. What we're hoping for is the parties to come together to a certain agreement on details, etcetera, perhaps outside the scope of what was presented to us at the Planning Commission this evening.

I think the people that want the continuance want to feel that there's some of the community buy in. And I think that would make some of us more comfortable approving this project. So I think in the spirit of consensus, we should vote on the April 2 continuation and hopefully Chair Starck. I

don't Starck.

I know. I need an assistant to keep track

of this. Yes, Chair Starck.

Sorry. Chair

Stark. Recording secretary, Chair Stark. Sorry. There is an actual motion and a second on the table and we have activated the vote. So if everyone can go ahead and please enter their vote, we'll take care of the substitute motion. Thank you. The substitute motion has passed. Six in favor, Pearson abstaining.

Sixteenth. We'll see everybody back.

Clarification. Pearson has voted dissenting.

Okay. Fair enough. Okay. So now we're going to open the public hearing for item number four. Director Fraide, could you please introduce the item? Okay.

Small break. Okay.

Can we take a quick Thank you.

Do we wanna come back at 07:00?

Yeah. That's great.

Okay. Let's recess until 07:00.

Reset until 07:00, please.

Or do we handle civil disputes? And that's up to them. We could have said

Would everyone please start taking their seats? We're gonna get started.

We've done that before?

I'd like to call the meeting back to order. Please.

Do you do you

understand what I'm saying now?

I think so.

It's different than what we usually do, but we usually have a recommendation to debate. All right. Did I open the public hearing? I don't remember. I'll open the public hearing for item four please. Director Fraide, could you please introduce the item?

Thank you. Item four is a zone change establishing an alternative open space approach for planning area 12 Oak Creek. Presenting is senior planner Eric Martin joined by principal planner Chris Chung.

Thank you and good evening chair Stark. I'll go ahead and get started and good evening again to yourself and members of the Planning Commission. As director of Freddie mentioned tonight Chris and I are presenting a zone text amendment application filed by the urban company to amend section nine dash 12 dash seven of the Irvine zoning ordinance which would establish an alternative open space framework for Planning Area 12 within these zoning ordinance there is a discussion related to how certain planning areas are to meet their open space obligations and for Planning Area 12 the zoning ordinance identifies the existing open space requirements as parcels b one and B 2 and those parcels are required to provide a total of 176 acres of open space that open space is currently also required to remain under single ownership and be operated as a public golf course parcels B 1 and B 2 are outlined in red here and it consists of the Oak Creek Golf Course the boundary of Planning Area 12 or the Oak Creek Planning Area is also outlined here in yellow the open space development requirements that allow the developments of the Oak Creek Golf Course were originally adopted by the city council in 1994 and continue to apply to the subject site via section nine dash 12 dash seven of the zoning ordinance urban company has submitted an application for a zoning text amendment which would add additional language to section nine dash 12 dash seven as mentioned and that section is specific to the open space within Planning Area 12 the proposed amendment would add an optional and alternative open space framework which would then allow decision makers to consider a nature park as an alternative to the golf course which could continue to potentially satisfy the open space requirement for Planning Area 12 should the zoning tax amendment be adopted no action would occur in the short term rather this decision would be made in the future if a development project is proposed specifically the amendment establishes a way for the city to evaluate whether the acreage of a nature park along with associated recreation improvements would be of equivalent value to the existing golf course lands if in the future this nature park option to fulfill open space requirements is pursued the applicant would be required to submit a park plan to the city which would include the items listed on this slide in order for this park plan for the nature park to comply with minimum standards as established in the proposed zoning text amendment it would need to include the dedication of 50 acres of land for a nature park and the construction of extensive recreational improvements within that park The the plan would also need to show connectivity to the Jeffrey Open Space Trail enhanced landscape improvements along Urban Center Drive as well as great separated crossings.

Lastly the applicant would also dedicate an additional three twelve acres of open space land in Orchard Hills and Portola Springs to the city to clarify before moving on I'd like to highlight what the proposed zoning tax amendment does followed by what it does not do beginning with what the zoning text amendment would do it would add language to the zoning ordinance that would allow future consideration of a public nature park and trail system on a portion of the Oak Creek Golf Course subject to review via the park plan entitlement process it also establishes a framework for decision makers to evaluate whether a combination of land education and recreational improvements provided as part of a nature park are of equivalent value to the existing open space obligation which is the golf course what the zoning tax amendment does not do is authorize any development or modify existing requirements for the retention and operation of a property as a golf course it does not change the underlying general plan land use or zoning designations of the Oak Creek Golf Course itself or any other property for that matter in planning year 12, and it also does not change provisions of the 1988 open space ballot measure also known as the initiative resolution 80 eight-one.

In terms of public outreach a notice for this item was published posted and emailed to property owners occupants residents hoa's and other interested parties and through that outreach staff received numerous comments both in opposition to and in favor of this proposal this correspondence has been forwarded to the commission electronically as buzz has been placed on the dais tonight in terms of environmental review the proposed zoning text amendment is exempt from further analysis under c qua for the next steps staff does recommend that the planning commission receives public input and then makes a recommendation to the city council tonight that brings us to the end of staff's presentation next representatives from the Irvine Company will be providing their presentation and in it you may see graphics of a potential park but staff wants to make it abundantly clear that there is no application for for any development on file with the city and these are all conceptual in nature. With that, I'll go ahead and hand it over to Jeff Davis with the Irvine Company.

Good evening chair Stark, members of the commission. I'm Jeff Davis speaking on behalf of the applicant. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to address the commission this evening. We do believe that the item before you is a well considered planning option that will extend universal accessibility, usability and the dedication of additional open space to the city of Irvine. Before I go further however I would like to thank the community that has been engaged with us so far over the last year.

The foundation of our application emerged from their positive collaboration and encouragement as they sought to realize more publicly usable open space in the center part of the city. It was clear to us that residents were calling for a nature park. The request we heard most often was create a place for all of us to enjoy, a public park that lets us interact with nature, and closer to the heart of Irvine. Personally, this has been one of the more satisfactory gratifying master planning programs I've been involved with for my almost thirty years with the Irvine company. But maybe the exception of our involvement with all American asphalt that was another pretty big thing.

We've met with over 3,000 residents to listen to their ideas and thousands more shared their thought online or in mailed in surveys. Later I will invite interpretive planner Jenny rigby to highlight the results of this significant engagement. Before that I would be remiss if I did not share our thoughts as they relate to the policy issues of this zoning application as they are presented. Chief among them is resolution 80 eight-one that was a collaboration between the city, the company and the community that sought to provide permanent protection of open space by means of public ownership unquote. To be clear it is also important to note what 88 did not do.

It did not mention a golf course. It did not define any specific acreages. It did not establish any definitive boundaries. Instead 80 called for the establishment of a network of open space finds linking conservation and open space areas, all of which would be accomplished by, and again I'll quote, an agreement between the city and the landowner prior to implementation. That agreement was adopted subsequent to eighty eight-one and was a memorandum of understanding between the company and the city that included about 176 acres of open space in the Oak Creek community of which about 162 encompass the current Oak Creek Golf Course.

Those acres represent the only land within the MOU that were to remain privately owned. Collectively the policy before this evening is an option to replace 162 acres of privately owned golf course with accessible and usable that is currently accessible and usable for a limited few with over three sixty acres of new publicly owned and publicly usable open space. At least 50 acres though likely to be even larger would be a public nature park in the heart of Urbahi A place that would connect to and expand the Jeffrey Open Space Trail as envisioned in eighty eight one and provide a more passive recreation opportunity in the center part of the city. This policy would also lead to the urban company building the nature park as it did with the Jeffrey Open Space Trail. Additionally three twelve acres in North Urban would be dedicated to the city much of this land being connected to the city's gateway preserve and will expand that publicly owned open space significantly.

I like just to make one more final point on the process. It's important to note here that the MOU and applicable zoning as mentioned by Eric articulate the precise boundaries of conveyance areas and the precise acreage to be offered for conveyance are to be determined by mutual agreement between the city and the landowner at subsequent stages of development. These terms are instructive with respect to our current application to the extent they were enabled the City Council to approve the Jeffrey Open Space Trail improvements in a manner that was far different than the original MOU. In that case by this picture which was one that I smiled at when we had it out of the files was also from a process guided by the community over twenty five years ago. In exchange for the company funding all the improvements that make the trail the special place it is today, the city agreed upon a reduction in the number of acres of open space as specified in the MOU.

The commission might also recall that in your actions most recently for the approval of the Gateway Village the same improvement in lieu of land value was of land with approach was approved for segment four of the Jeffrey Open Space Trail. We believe that the previous investment in consensus building and comprehensive planning and how the newly now nearly completed Jeffrey Open Space Trail were well worth that exchange. It was in that spirit that we endeavor to provide options to the city with significant input from Irvine residents that could deliver Irvine's next great public open space for all to enjoy. With more on that community engagement I'd like to introduce now Jennifer Rigby.

Thank you Jeff. And thank you to the planning commission for the opportunity to speak. My name is Jennifer Rigby. I am an interpretive planner and designer with forty six years of experience both in the field and the studio. Ten as a frontline naturalist, an educator at a nature center, a public aquarium, and a zoo, and thirty six years with the Acorn Group.

Among other projects we planned, designed, and developed the interpretive media at Portola Springs Community Park, Nick's Nature Center, Bolsa Chica Wetlands, and the Bolsa Chica Conservancy Interpretive center. My role with this particular project is as co facilitator of the community engagement process. I work closely with the Irvine Company and SWA Group. We worked hard to create an open welcoming platform for the community members. We encourage feedback at each step and we integrated it into a successive series of drawings.

We began at a dreaming stage, an outdoor open an open ended exploration of what could constitute a nature park. This basic street map was presented as a study area of what could constitute a nature park. We provided an overview of Irvine's open space and images of sample amenities. Community members shared their thoughts on nature trails, bridges, nature centers, botanical gardens, meadows, and woodlands. The first road map, street map image that which I showed evolved into a initial concept map, which again is conceptual only.

By the second round community engagement meetings, we shared this draft site plan and a planning notebook, all based on the community's input. We gathered in small groups and entered an analytical stage. This is when the community members worked in small breakout groups to review each amenity on the basis of form and function. And last, in the third set of workshops, we allowed a draft set of illustrations and ideas to coalesce. This first drawing is of one of the conceptual ideas we had for the Botanical And Pollinator Gardens.

The quotation you see on the left is a direct quote from the worksheets that we asked the community members to respond to at the end of each of our community engagement workshops. The Botanic And Pollinator Gardens are cultivated spaces focusing on native plants that specifically support native populations of bees, butterflies, and other pollinators, as well as wildlife. Creeks and arroyos were another amenity that the community members voiced very strong opinion about. It would follow gentle grade east to west in the nature park as seen in this illustration and create a tranquil backdrop for outdoor gatherings. Its banks lined with riparian woodlands anchored by California sycamore and white alder could provide a shaded canopy and create an experience that mimics the watersheds in the Irvine Ranch open space.

The community was very enthusiastic about considering the cultivation of meadows and woodlands. It could result in California's largest planned seasonal meadow, a vast rolling expanse that serves as vital pollination grounds and a stunning visual centerpiece that could provide deep shade and colorful palettes that would shift with the seasons. We envision oak trees, California sycamores, and other native trees that could provide a defining boundary, shade, and line the banks and mark the transition areas between riparian zones and these drier uplands. The top priority expressed by the residents was an extensive network of new trails interconnected with the regional trail system. The scale of this land could accommodate upward of five miles of new trails.

Safety and continuous travel were paramount to the residents who voiced their opinions. We identified two potential bridges that could be created, one at the trail the rail tracks and the second at Irvine Center Drive. This would also enable us to completely complete the Jeffrey Open Space Trail within the interior residents requested nature trails focus on pedestrian use for hikers and for families, allowing them to safely explore the park. There were three things that I was really struck by in doing the community engagement workshops. And the first is the mix of community members that came from throughout the city and consistently showed up for each workshop.

College students, millennials, young parents, grandparents, and next door neighbors, They all shared a common bond. That bond is the desire to create a nature park that facilitates enjoyment in the natural environment that consists of native plants, native plant habitats, and wildlife such as songbirds and butterflies. There certainly is common agreement among these community members about desired amenities. Their motivations for visiting a nature park may be different, but their vision for the nature park itself and the setting was very similar. South SWA group was able to create these renderings and capture that vision.

Thank you Jenny. Mr. Chairman that concludes our prepared remarks. I think it's probably already on your dais but I do have the community support letters from 72 different residents that are here. I was also impressed that that comes from 23 Irvine villages so both the depth and the breadth of our outreach has been again one of the larger that we've been able to do at least in my tenure at the company and we've been very happy with the support the support we're here to answer questions either now or after the public testimony at the pleasure of the commission.

Yeah. Okay, now I'm back. Thank you for the presentation. Now is the part of the meeting where we open the public comments. Is it safe to assume we have some public comments?

Just a couple.

Or should we just vote?

Should we table it to April 16?

Don't get started with the tabling. How many do we have, Thea?

If anyone on Zoom wishes to speak, now is the time to raise your hand. We will take speakers in the chamber first. Chair Stark, I'm going let the Zoom participants take a minute to raise their hand, but we have over 90 here in the chamber registered, so we'll get started there.

Okay. More than 72. So, my understanding for the comments, we'll have ninety seconds.

That is correct.

We anticipated there would be a lot of comments, so we set the microphone up after ninety seconds. It's going to cut off, which we think is the fairest way to approach that so everyone gets the same ninety seconds, and there's no accusations of favoritism or leaning one way or the other. I would also ask, since we do have so many commenters, please try not to applause and cheer when there's a commenter that you agree with. It is a business meeting, and we would like to get through all the commenters so everyone has a chance to speak. And, you know, tomorrow we're still all neighbors, so I would hope that we could be civil to each other even though we may not disagree on what we're talking about. Alright.

Thank you, Chair. I'm going to go ahead and get started. I'm going to call in groups of five. So please come line up and then we'll go through groups of five. Starting with Ricardo Ramirez, followed by Ryan Bates, Tim Chang, Laura Borda, Austin T.

We all go home? So one more time if they're still here. Ricardo Ramirez, Ryan Bates, Tim Chang, Laura Borda, Austin T. Okay, let's start here. So, the first one can proceed to the microphone. Please introduce yourself before you make your comment.

Good evening my name is Ryan Bates. I'm an Oak Creek resident and a father of two kids sitting right up there who have been fascinated by the proceedings this evening. I love the city and I love the village where I get to live. Like many of my neighbors I care deeply about the legacy we're leaving behind for the next generation. In that spirit I'm here today representing the irvine neighbors for nature a collection of diverse group of residents who enthusiastically support the zone change that allows for the transformation of a privately owned golf course into the city's largest nature park for everyone in our community to enjoy.

The planning process has been productive and purposeful through dozens of hours of community workshops we've seen a sincere commitment to collaboration and listening to the ideas of everyday Irvine residents we want to thank planners Jenny Rigby and Sean O'Malley who didn't just drop a plan they very intentionally engage and incorporated residents ideas into a cohesive vision. The nature park is the culmination of the irvine master plan coming to life the plan bridges the final piece of the puzzle allowing joss to come to the full to its full completion and we believe leadership more means more than prioritizing the common good sorry apologies means prioritizing the common good it is thinking about our children and future generations not just what's best for some individuals today by recommending approval of the items before you tonight you're ensuring that Irvine families have a sprawling natural sanctuary to explore and enjoy for years to come We encourage you to visit our website at irvineneighbors4nature.com, which I've included in one of my attachments.

Thank you. Time is up.

Apologies. Thank you.

Let's please try to hold the applause. Thank you.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Tim Chiang. I'm a longtime Irvine resident. I fully support the amendment proposal about play building a natural park and Oak Creek golf courses and hope you all will move forward making the natural park a reality. Having living in Irvine for thirty years, I have seen our city grow tremendously.

And the reason I support building a new natural park in Central Irvine is because it replaced the private fairway with the public meadows and woodlands that everyone can enjoy. So I also see this new natural park plan is a vital return of the regional master plan vision of balanced development and preserve open space. As a senior, I'm looking forward to having a peaceful escape for trail walks and opportunity to reconnect to the natural work just minutes from my home. So thank you for considering my support and for natural part. I hope this recommendation can put into advance.

Thank you.

Hi. My name is Laura Borda. I have been a Nevervine resident since 2003. I fully support this plan to transform the public private land to a public nature park. The proposed nature park will be available to all people for the recreational use for generations to come.

The expert park planners utilized by Irvine Company have decades of experience that will transform the current golf course to a natural extension of the Jeffrey Open Space Trail with meandering meadows and walking trails through trees and plants that are native to our region. I look forward to having the chance to explore this beautiful park extension when it is fully developed and open for public use. Thank you.

Name is Austin tirebolas I' been in Irvine my whole life growing up and I continue to work in the city as a high school special education teacher and a coach for over twelve years. My parents grew up here as well and I have deep roots and connection to the city. I want to thank the Irvine Company for allowing residents like me to be able to be a part of this process and it's to keep us in mind in every piece of it and you see that in the projection of the nature park and what it could be what it could be moving forward urge that you the planning commission move forward with this so that we can continue to have a voice and the use of an area like this changing it from a private area to public land and as we continue to decide on what that area could look like in the future having a voice for me and future generations is extremely important and that is why I urge you to move forward with this thank you.

Calling the next five in person speakers Natalie Polin, Darby Borda, Ryan Borda, Jen King, Bill Schultz.

Hi, I'm Natalie Poulin and I'm a thirty year resident of Irvine and an active user of our parks and community services and open spaces. And I'm here because I really love this park plan. And I personally most anticipate the botanical garden and the nature trails because I do enjoy using our open spaces but they are further away, they're more an intense level of exercise to go to. And having this park in Irvine means I can have that immersive natural experience closer to home. And it's more accessible to people.

And so I'm really looking forward to that. I think that seeing the native plants throughout the course of the year as the seasons change, I look forward to seeing that. I look forward to my morning walks there, in the summer evening strolls with my family. Sometimes just spending contemplative meditative time alone. It's a beautiful space where you can be in the middle of the city but you feel because of that wonderful landscaping, you feel like you are just in a part of nature and it's far away even though you're in the center of the city. So thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak and I really hope that we can make this happen.

Hello my name is Darby Borda. I've been a resident of Irvine for twenty three years. And so this is not a question of whether change is coming to Oak Creek, but it's a matter of what is the best way and what is the best course of action to make change. Our city is required by the state to plan for new thousands of new buildings or houses to address the housing crisis. And the Irvine company is stepping in with a balanced solution, not just adding housing, but doing it thoughtfully.

Instead of building only high density apartment buildings, their plan creates a mix of homes, including single family homes that better serve the missing middle and better serve our community as homeowners. At the same time, it also adds over 50 acres in public accessible nature park and connects trails from across the city, creating spaces for all of our residents in Irvine, not just the golfers. It isn't about stopping growth, it's about shaping it responsibly, reprioritizing community, accessibility, and quality of life. Thank you. I'm in support of the Irvine Company.

Hello my name is Ryan Borda I grew up in Irvine and I've been fortunate enough to find work and even purchase a home in the same community I grew up in Northwood. This city means a great deal to me and projects like this proposed nature park are exactly what make Irvine such a special place to call home. For that reason I strongly support moving this project forward. I'm an avid runner and use Irvine's trail system nearly every day when I'm not injured. The Jeffrey open space trail is a big part of that routine but it could be more.

That's why I'm especially excited about the planned connection from orchard to quail. Improving this linkage will make a meaningful difference for people like me and many others who rely on these trails for exercise and outdoor access. I also appreciate that this plan enhances the overall experience not just the connectivity. I look forward to enjoying the winding trails and the more natural open feel this park will provide. I encourage the commission to move forward with the nature park. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Hello, my name is Jennifer King. I've been a resident of Northwood for twenty eight years now. I've raised my kids here and I've spent countless hours running the trails, which are so beautiful and so beautifully connected. I am also speaking on behalf of my Reni Irvine resident running friends who couldn't be here tonight. But what an opportunity we have now to move forward with the idea of this nature park in connection with the Jeffrey Open Space Trail.

To have the chance to create a space like this is so rare and I hope that we can take advantage of it. I have to tell you in the entire time that I've lived here I have only been or even seen the Oak Creek Golf Club twice because it's fairly well hidden from view unless you're there to golf or there for some other event. But what a gift it would be to have this nature park that we will all be able to access. Nature and natural spaces are imperative for both our physical and our mental well-being as a city, as a community, as families who are growing through generations. And I have had the opportunity to see the concept plans as they have grown, and I'm so impressed and so excited by the idea of this coming to fruition.

So I highly encourage you to move this forward. Thank you.

Good evening my name is bill Schultz I'm a resident of the Orange Tree neighborhood speaking for many of my Orange Tree neighbors tonight who couldn't be here or are uncomfortable in this environment who do not agree with the master association and like me strongly support this effort. Having had the pleasure of observing and participating in the work that jenny described to you this is extremely impressive. The result you couldn't see it by all the depictions but if you see more of the details is absolutely stunning. I also noticed it affords the community almost twice a little more than twice the the open acres. As I said it' a stunning addition that truly enhances and confirms Irvine' s commitment not just to open space accessible to everyone but also its position as a leading U.

S. City in every respect. I get excited to experience the diversity and the beauty of the park as Jen said we worked with the Irvine company on their feedback sessions for months And, the evolution, again, that Jenny shared and the end result of the proposal is amazing. She talked about the native plant landscapes, the botanical garden.

Thank you. Your time is up. Calling our next speakers, Mike Nystrom, Sean Nelson, Emmanuel Dial, Siwe Quay, Diana Colby.

Thank you chairman stark and commissioners my name is mike nystrom I live in Northwood Point and thank you for all you're doing tonight I know it's going to be an arduous evening for you all I moved to Irvine for the parks the amenities the sense of community and the thoughtful building of our villages and this development and nature trail continues what brought me here I' lived here for twenty five years and I represent several of our neighbors and business owners who are all in strong support of moving forward with this plan. We wholly support the nature trail and I also encourage you to look at the irvine neighbors for nature website for further input on this development. Unlike the small but very vocal opposition we don' have matching shirts we don' have fancy posters but we represent the cross section of all of Irvine were from every village we represent all the demographics and people rarely come out for something there' always opposition but we have seen the careful development and I' been amazed at the thought going into the irvine company planning and the development proposals. I' unjust virtually every day and to see a continuation and a true connection of it would be amazing for our entire community thank you for your careful consideration.

Hello my name is Shawn Nelson. I've lived in Irvine since I was a kid. Some of my favorite memories are just being out in Irvine's parks. That's where I found my most joy growing up we've always done a good job with the green spaces here but I think there's still room for us to do better right now I feel like there's a bit of a gap we have plenty of developed areas but we're still missing a real connection to the natural beauty that california is known for I think we have a great opportunity to bridge that gap by transitioning the Oak Creek Golf Course into the public nature park instead of that space mostly being for a specific group turning into the massive resource for every resident that can enjoy could be very beneficial for our community and for future generations. I want our future kids in Irvine to have some sort of even better opportunities to enjoy the outdoors and perhaps have a better opportunity than I did.

Thank you.

Good evening chair and commissioners my name is Diana Colby. My husband Clark and I are proud business owners here in Irvine where we've invested in owning our building and growing our two companies spectrum e commerce solutions and brand marketing solutions. We've been honored to host several of our irvine city council members for tours and to meet our employers in our building which we own. Our businesses are growing and we are proud to contribute to the economic vitality of the city we care so deeply about. We've seen firsthand that employees who can live here raise their families and enjoy the quality of life Irvine offers our most stable and fulfilled team members that' why spaces like the proposed nature park matter they support not just individuals but the health of our entire community and workforce.

This is about the kind of Irvine we are building for families for businesses and for the future. I hope you will support this nature park vision thank you for your time and your consideration.

Hello good evening my name is Emmanuel d'all thank you for your consideration. As an Irvine resident and local business owner with over twenty years of experience working with organizations, leadership teams, nonprofits, and the community. I'm a proponent for this project as a strategic asset that will strengthen the community, improve quality of life, and support long term economic stability. Projects like this create environments where people want to live, work, and more importantly stay in our wonderful beautiful city. This ultimately benefits the growth and prosperity of local businesses and the broader community. I strongly encourage you to move with this project forward. Thank you.

Calling in our next group of speakers, Kriza Kelly, Farah Kanchar, Jeff Bautista, Mabah Aman, Gigi Larson.

Good evening chair and commissioners m curza kelly I'm multi pruner owning several small businesses here and operating in Irvine as well I highly support the creation of Item 4 and the Ervine's largest nature park I think it matters not just about what it is but it also matters more about what it is not and I think the presenters from irvine company clearly stated that thank you.

Good evening chair and commissioners thank you for your time and continued service to our community my name is ferret kanchar and I' the president of the arab american business chamber and a proud Irvine residence for over fifteen years. My family and I originally chose to live in Irvine because it' a city that truly puts people first especially families and it is intentional about protecting and elevating our quality of life this is that is exactly why I'm here today in strong support of this park it's not just an open space it's an investment in the well-being of our residents our families and future generations. Projects like this are what makes Irvine exceptional they reflect a long term vision that prioritizes people community and the everyday experiences of those who call the city home thank you for your time and consideration.

Planning Commissioners, neighbors, friends my name is Jeff Bautista and I'm the president of the Filipino American Chamber of Commerce of Orange County based here in Irvine I recently wrote a letter in support of this nature park project and in that letter I referenced something in the Filipino culture called the Bayan Nihon spirit and essentially that's a community coming together to build something together for the common good. Obviously this nature park falls within the scope of that spirit. But I'm here tonight to share with you a personal story recently I had two young nieces nine and six immigrate from The Philippines. I was taking them around Orange County and one of them had quipped, well as we were going to the park into the beach, wow we can go to this for free? You see in The Philippines places public places like that are controlled access available to only with those of money or the elite few what what really makes something like a nature park like this awesome is because it reminds us and it reminded me when she made that comment of what makes our country so great compared to these other countries that don't allow that to happen So again, city governments, communities play an important role in keeping that dream alive, and I'm here to strongly support that.

Thank you.

Good evening my name is Mahbah Ahmad and I'm a second year at Irvine Valley College and I serve as student body president at the student government there and I'm here to say that I'm in support with this project specifically because I grew up in Irvine my whole life I actually live on the Jeffrey Roosevelt Street and I come from a low income background and I'm first gen so being a community college students and seeing other students who struggle financially and are looking for a space where they can relax and enjoy and especially some students who don't even have cars, this is a great opportunity for us to take action and to support those communities who don't have the money to enjoy these commodities so I am in strong support and I would love for you guys to consider this project because I've been on the Jeffrey Trail my whole life and honestly expanding that, especially because Irvine Valley College is almost right next to Oak Creek, it would just be a really great opportunity. Thank you.

Good evening esteemed commissioners my name is Geraldine Larson I am a business owner and also the past president of the philippine american chamber of orange county so we have held a lot of our meetings here in Irvine and we're so proud to have our events here because Irvine is known to be beautiful safe and just so well planned I also raised part of my son's childhood here in Irvine, so we played many baseball games at the parks, had a couple of his birthday parties there, and also my nieces went to Irvine School Districts. Irvine is so beautiful, but I don't know if you haven't gone to Irvine Company's events showing the residents, the local community what they're doing with the nature reserve, the nature park. I don't know how anybody can be against it because they have put so much time and effort and diligence in getting the community's input about what they want to do what plans pretty much everything So, we are thrilled to see it come to fruition and have a lot more of our events here. So, we fully support the park, the open space, and I hope you guys vote for it.

Thank you.

Our next five speakers, Maria Dumatol, Jenny Way, Neil Estrada, Bud O'Neil, and Steve Teshiro.

Hello. Good evening. My name is Maria Tumatal. I am a development specialist for a cancer research foundation. Why wouldn't a cancer research foundation support this?

Support the protection of open spaces because access to green spaces are linked to low cancer rates and improve mental health. Also open spaces act as natural lungs for cities reducing pollution related cancer risk and providing tranquil environments. Crucial for healing, reducing stress, and improving physical activity. Thank you so much for this opportunity.

Good evening Planning Commission. My name is Neil Estrada. Been a resident of Irvine since 2004. I've seen the plans that the Irvine Company has, and every year that I've lived in Irvine there's always been some changes but with those changes the city of Irvine continues to be a destination for many residents who want to actually live live in Irvine visit Irvine and for many of us we've actually frequented many of the spaces that irvine companies put together whether the retail shops whether their parks whether communities we live in so in this careful planning that irvine company has put together and put forth I don't see what would be wrong with at least considering natural open space here in Irvine. We have a premier park system, whether it's ranked number one or number two in the entire nation, and a park like this would just add enjoyment to not only my young kids, but to maybe many of yours here as residents of Irvine and the community surrounding Irvine itself.

So, please would have you strongly consider this, and I'm in full support of Irvine Company and the plan to move forward. Thank you.

Hi, everyone. Thank you so much for allowing me to represent our community and all near 1,000 Chinese seniors living in Irvine City. My name is Jenny Wei, and I had a privilege of serving Irvine seniors since 2008. I work for Orange County Chinese Community Service. For many of our seniors, access to a safe, beautiful, and welcome outdoor space is essential for their physical health, emotional well-being, and sense of connection to the community.

A nature park like this, and I I had the privilege to listen to the presentation last Friday, I was just totally touched and this is such amazing plan. And, you know, this park would, I mean, provide a place where our seniors and our children and our families can walk and gather and feel a true sense of belonging in this community. They called home. And this project reflected the kind of care and thoughtfulness that makes Irvin so special. And I special

Thank you. Your time is up.

My name is Steven Cheryl and I was very much impressed with the presentation of the park. Our jury was impressed because of this creative process that was employed. Not was it an exploitive or extractive process trying to exploit the environment, but restoring and promoting ecological and environmental riches and health. And it was something that was not made restricted to only a few people, but all peoples of all ages and backgrounds enriching their lives, not of this generation alone, but all future generations. Thank you.

Our next speakers will be Hema N, Steve Toshiro, Michelle Khan, Marcia Toshiro, Jerry Toshiro.

Good evening all. My name is Hema Nipoletti. I'm here today representing Asian Business Association of Orange County in support of the proposed nature park. Projects like this are incredibly valuable not just for recreation but for the long term well-being of the community. Expanding open space, improving trail connectivity, and creating areas where people can connect with nature makes Irvine an even more desirable place to live and work.

As someone who has lived in Irvine for over fifteen years, deeply invested in the growth of this beautiful city, who runs a technology company, and who is involved in the business community, I can say that access to high quality green space is a major factor in attracting talent and investment. I appreciate the vision behind this project and encourage the city to move it forward. Thank you so much.

Double checking on Michelle Kahn, Marsha Toshiro, and Jerry Toshiro.

Michelle Kahn. No

Michelle?

Marsha or Jerry, would you like to step up to the podium?

Hello, I'm Marcia Teixeiro. We are here on behalf of some people that we know in Irvine. We don't live in Irvine, but we have visited your parks and know about your golf courses and things. So we are very much in favor of maintaining those and keeping those for the residents here in Irvine. We know a lot of nice people that live here, and we like to visit them. And we'd like for them to have it for their families and family members to come. So we hope you'll consider keeping this for them.

Name

is Gerald Tscherrill, retired pharmacist. I've been living in Orange County fifty years. All my families are here. My daughter is in Michigan, they're all around this area. And I think this is

a

you can't miss this opportunity to do the right thing for the future generation. You have this opportunity and for the quality of life for everyone. I strongly support this measure. Thank you.

Next we'll have Kimberly Go, Pumi P, Kim Fraser, Andrew Bowen, Tiffany A.

Good evening. I'm Kimberly Goh. I'm an entrepreneur and I live in Woodbury Village. Irvine has always been a city that thinks ahead and I believe this is one of those moments. I'd love to see the Oak Creek Golf Course reimagined as a nature park a space that any resident can enjoy freely.

A nature park would give families a place to gather, children a place to explore, and neighbors a reason to slow down and connect. No fees, no gates, just green open space that anyone can enjoy. Right in the heart of our city. I understand this is a complex decision with many voices involved. I simply hope that as you weigh those voices you'll consider how many more residents could benefit from this space as a nature park. Irvine has always invested in its people and I hope this will be another example of that.

Hi. My name is Pumi. I lived in Irvine for seven years. And this is my very first town meeting. Yeah, very scary, very wild, rowdy. I really like seeing everybody here and just knowing that everybody here cares and is excited for their own reasons. And I'm also worried about getting jumped in the parking lot, please don't hurt me. But I just got married and I'm hoping to start a family soon. And there's a lot of places to live. Right?

You know California is a beautiful place. But we hope to live in Irvine. We hope to stay here and grow. And I'm not anyone famous. I just teach kids with autism, so it's not anything fancy. But we do hope to afford to stay. And the park looks beautiful and great and I am super nervous and I hope that wasn't nonsense to everyone here. Okay, I'm going to go now. Thank you so much. Bye.

Hello,

I'm Kim Frazier and I'm a Woodbridge resident. I've only lived in Irvine for four years, but I lived close enough for a long time that I could come here and enjoy the wonderful parks that you have. And I think that this is an exciting project because it's a big improvement on what we have already started here. So I was involved in the planning sessions, and I wish that some of the people here that were not involved could have been there because they would realize how incredible this new park will be. So I appreciate your consideration. Thank you very much.

Good evening commissioners. My name is Andrew Boehm. I was born and raised in Turtle Rock back in the 90s and I live in the Oak Creek neighborhood. I've lived in and around Irvine my entire life. As a kid I would play and explore through Bomber Canyon and Quail Hill.

And as an adult I ride my bike every day to work across Irvine's nearly completely interconnected nature trail system. Our access to nature is our city's greatest resource and inviting a nature park into the heart of the city is the greatest possible value proposition for any urban community like Irvine. The only way to reduce car traffic and congestion is to incentivize people into adopting alternative forms of transport. And what better way to achieve that than to complete the bike trail connection from the foothills to the coast inviting cyclists of all kinds to turn their gridlocked car commute into a peaceful cycling adventure through a beautiful restorative world class nature park. You have before you a once in a century opportunity to build something truly beautiful that every community in North America will want to emulate I hope you find the courage to follow through on this project invite native plant species and public pedestrian focused engagement in the heart of Irvine and once again set the gold standard for urban development for the whole world to see thank you for your time and for your consideration

hello esteemed planning commission my name is tiffany aguinaldo and I live in Cypress Village which is the neighborhood next door to the plans for the future nature park my family of three which includes a four year old daughter can't wait to enjoy crossing the Jeffrey Open Space Trail Bridge and maybe one day across from our home to this nature park I would like to share my support for the agenda item for nature park I have spent several hours over the last couple of months along with fellow community members and hosted focus groups with the irvine company and their selected landscape architects on the development and planning for the nature park in Irvine. After hearing the most recent plans as of last week friday I' confident that the irvine company will follow through their plans that are best for the community and for the city I see these plans as a true gift to our city and our community. Thank you for your time.

Our next speakers are Angeline Ahn, Peter Au, Alice Schroeder, John Albertin, Joanne Schleboden.

What was the order again?

Good evening. Now you finally get to hear the other side.

Again, that's just going to prolong the meeting and you're eating into the speakers time.

We're okay with this. Evening. My name is John Alburton. This isn't about rezoning for a 50 acre nature park. This is about rezoning 200 plus acres of permanent open space into the Oak Creek Village.

If you include the driving range which is zoned open space recreation that is 300 plus acres. This permanent open space is either a golf course or is all a nature park it's not a 50 acre nature park and multimillion dollar homes. This planning commission does not have the authority to do this This was voted on by the entire city of Irvine in 1988 and the seven of you do not have the authority to trump the vote of the entire city. This is an absolute abuse of power. As for the irvine company the narrative that they have been presenting to the city lately that they're going to either build 31 housing units on Oak Creek property or if you don't let them do that they will build 5,000 housing units in the area instead.

There's a word for that and that word is extortion. You do not negotiate with extortionists You do not have the authority to do this. You need to stop this in its track immediately put it to a vote of the entire city. This is just plain wrong and everyone knows it including you. Do the right thing and kill this attempt by the Iran company to undo what was negotiated and voted upon in 1988. This property does not need to remain a golf course in purporting.

Thank you your time is up.

Hi everyone. I'm Joanne Slobodian. Thanks for volunteering as we all are. You're being asked tonight to recommend a deal that rewrites the rules on protected lands without saying it gutting Oak Creek's protections and calling it procedural. The irvine company was already paid with development across Irvine in exchange for preserving this land and now they're asking for an alternative instead of what they owe your staff report spells it out a nature park improvements connectivity avocado roads again that is a replacement the urban company values this land at about $230,000 an acre as a golf course while pushing changes that make it worth millions and using that gap to trade away protected Central Irvine open space as neither fair nor the original intent.

I've been asking about the easement since June. I filed public record requests. The city responded, records are being withheld because they would expose the public's agency decision making process and discourage candid discussion and when I asked Eric Martin for the 75% numbers I was told staff is still reviewing it so here's the reality you're being asked to act while the city is withholding facts and still reviewing whether this land is actually owned already owned to already owed to the public If you don't know whether the easement is owed, you don't know what you're voting on. They may say this isn't a land use change, but it is. You're redefining what counts as open space by trading

protected Thank you. Your time is up.

It doesn't work that way. Sorry. Calling

the next speakers, Joseph L. Joseph, Mason Buck, Russell Peterson, Sheila Gilmore, Vasanta Kay.

Good evening commissioners. Joseph from the Filipino American Chamber of Commerce of Orange County. I'll make this short and sweet. I support item four on this agenda. Thank you to the Irvine Company. I was part of the planning process and looking forward for tomorrow and for future generations to come. Thank you very much.

Hello planning commission, my name is Mason Buck, I'm a resident of Cypress Village, and like many people in the city, I rent. I rent because I cannot afford to buy in this city. The median sale price of a home in Irvine is $1,400,000 that's completely unfeasible for someone like me and my wife who've just started out our careers and love this city. The plan the amendment as proposed today I believe the commission should support it's the start of a potential piece of the puzzle to the solution of affordable housing in Irvine.

Excuse me but it's my time.

It is his time and you're being rude to him.

I cannot afford to live in this city. This is the first step in helping ease that issue. I encourage in future in the future that this commission considers affordable options for the development of the Oak Creek area including duplexes triplexes and quadplexes to allow the people who work in the city to actually live in the city as 88% of people who work here don't live here they commute in. So I strongly urge the commission to approve this amendment as written thank you.

Good evening commissioners my name is Sheila Gilmore.

I' been attending with great interest the visionary, envisioning meetings I should say, that the Irvine Company has sponsored in order to put forth their proposal to develop the nature park on the site of the Oak Creek Golf Course. I believe that this is an inspired idea and one that was put together very thoughtfully and very it was very impressive to participate in that process. It

is

in keeping with Irvine's reputation as a city with an outstanding system of parks trails and open space. For many reasons Irvine stands out as a great place to live my partner and I have lived in West Irvine for twenty five years and continue to be impressed with the city's planned accessibility to nature which is nationally recognized. This proposed project which also has a tie in to the Jeffrey Open Space Trail would continue Irvine's great tradition of providing something so needed in our complex world. A place to touch nature and remember our place in it. I hope to see it come to fruition. Thank you so much.

My name is russ peterson. I''ll be honest I''ve been part of the envisioning meetings and I came in very skeptical. The Irvine Company has done some things that I don't totally agree with at times. And so I thought this was just going to be a box that they were going to check off. They got community input.

But the whole process, they really listened to the people. The whole concept changed so drastically, like all the time. What was important? Streams, meadows, ponds, center, amphitheater, you know, everything was considered. They asked the community what was the what's important to you, what's not as important, what would you like to see in a perfect nature center, nature park. I was really impressed. The result was what the proposal is. What else do I have to say? Sorry. I think that's it. Thank you and I support this.

Hi. My name is Basanta Kandesami, and I have been an Irvine resident since 1994. I fully support the proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance. As someone who regularly walks the Jeffrey Open Space Trail, I support the nature park and great separated crossings. However, when the time comes, I urge you to reject any proposal for a single family only development at Oak Creek.

Irvine urgently needs both affordable and workforce housing. Having more housing in Irvine for people who work in Irvine would result in fewer vehicle miles traveled, leading to reduced overall traffic. While workforce housing is essential for professionals such as firefighters, teachers, and nurses, It is equally important that permanent affordable housing is built on-site rather than through in lieu fees. Thank you.

Our next speakers Michael LeBanc, Matt Breton, Ray Perrello, Steve Allison, Paul Vu.

Good evening. I'm Michael LeBlanc. I retired from the Irvine Company in 2017. I worked there thirty six years, so I best Jeff Davis by six years. I hired Jeff and I know the city I know the Irvine company knows how to design parks but this is the planning commission not the parks commission.

What my concern is and there was misstatements made about eighty eight one I worked on the open space agreement and and the resolution 1988 I worked with the city leaders about that what's been glossed over is that when the resolution was a pass overwhelmingly it incorporated an open space dedication program in the general plan that sets forth how open spaces to be protected. It does not allow for substitutions to get park credit to buy out of your open space land dedication requirements. And it was very clear in the general plan that there would be an implementing actions program that would be included in the general plan. You cannot adopt zoning that's inconsistent with the general plan. And that's exactly what you're being asked to do.

Everybody knows this is just a precursor for the residential development that the Irvine company has in mind. I urge you to reject this piecemeal approach. You need to look at the entire plan before you make a decision. You need to understand not only how this open space plan works but how it works for the community that they're representing. And then after you do a full AIR

Thank you. Your time is up. Sir, thank you. Your time thank you.

Once again, I'd like to remind the audience no cheering, no booing. This is a business meeting, and we need to get out of Europe. Hopefully a reasonable hour. Thank you.

Thank you, Jennifer.

Hello, Commission. My name is Matt Breton. I'm the president of the Woodbridge Village Association Board of Directors. You know, Woodbridge is a very close proximity to Parcel Number 8, Planning Area 12, and our residents have concerns what's happening. On behalf of that, I urge you to be opposed to this zone change due to the lack of information in this itself.

First, the appraisal itself. The entire equivalency framework of this proposal is based on a land value of $230,000 per acre. This figure reflects the land use as a public golf course and is in its most restricted form. It does not reflect the true nature of this as a developed land, which is what Irvine Company is planning to do with it. Additionally, from a second point, what is missing is also just as troubling.

There is no impact study. There's no traffic analysis, no parks need assessment, and no study of how converting the golf course would affect residents' quality of life or access to open space. Your staff is saying that no environmental review is required because no physical development is approved tonight. However, this is just a gateway. Also, to not take up too much time, I also wanna close with this. You've heard a lot of residents and even Irvine Company State how people would love to have

a nature park. I think we're

all in agreement. However, what we want to have is not 50 acres of of a nature park within our central area, but a 162 acres. Let's keep this space in the center of our city completely open as it can be a legacy for open space for all of Irvine.

Thank you. Your time is up.

Hi my name is Ray Perello. Thank you first of all for the planning committee members in having the opportunity to speak and be present. I've been an Irvine resident for since 1981 and I've been here before. Rancho Sama King Golf Course was threatened with development. We residents showed up we organized we spoke and we fought.

Here's the difference Rancho Samaquin Land was an open space this is this is Central Irvine Land meant to be preserved not house 3,100 units Oak Creek is already nature why destroy it. Our current community collected thousands of signatures yet the irvine company stopped this democratic process with a letter to the city clerk a private corporation interfering with the citizens initiative is this how a city operates fairly our city should be run by citizens if irvine is run by the residents then put this decision to a ballot. We who live here need to have choice, not be controlled by a corporation. Once this land is gone to rezone 3,100 housing units with a natural preserve, it's done. Please create a ballot as promised.

Let the Irvine

Thank you your time is up.

Good evening commissioners. My name is Steve Allison. I'm a nineteen year resident of Woodbridge also on the Woodbridge Board of Directors. And I just wanted to observe that it seems like this issue has really been dividing our community as it's been developing we've heard a lot of feedback from our residents and neighbors there are concerns about the development that this park plan would then enable And I think that there's a lot of questions that still need to be answered. And in the spirit of compromise and you know developing a really solid plan for the future, gathering more information on what are the impacts on traffic, what are the impacts on Woodbridge schools and Irvine schools, how are we going to meet the demand for retail needs in region surrounding the Oak Park development.

There are these questions that have been coming up and are still relevant. And as President Breton just mentioned, we need to address these before moving forward on this project. So I urge you to take that into consideration and consider more time tabling this issue. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Paul Vu, and I have been an Irvine resident for forty five years. I oppose the zoning request because it is the Irvine Company's first step before they build 3,000 homes on Oak Creek. I oppose building homes on Oak Creek for three reasons. The proposed project will not help with the affordability issue.

Building more homes will worsen the existing traffic gridlock. And third, Oak Creek is already protected open space with resolution 88 dash one. The Irvine Company simply cannot be relied upon to help with affordability since they are the cause of high housing costs in the first place. Several prospective tenants have told me how the Irvine Company has gouged its renters. One potential tenant on disability, needing dialysis, and kidney transplant had his rent increase from 2,900 to 3,300 starting in April, a 14% increase.

Another applicant had their rent increased from 3,500 to 5,000. The company said they will offer low housing with the Oak Creek development, but put a limit of only 2 hundred two year rental vouchers. What will happen in year three? Do the rents then increase to market price? With the newly constructed homes, Irvine Company will most likely set an average selling price according to market to maximize profit. Relying on the Irvine Company to improve overall housing affordably is like trusting a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Thank you. Our next speakers, Jaime Acklander, Jim Foley, Ralph Parks, Art, Barry.

Hello, my name is Jaime, I resident in Woodbridge for twenty years. I to, I oppose this project. Here are my reasons. First, I like the presentation of the Iran company. I love those pictures, those I don't know, Van Gogh pictures that she showed.

I would like to have one in my living room because it has it has no buildings. No buildings whatsoever. But, the truth is that this project is for development. Is that's what the urban company does. And, you know, people like you and like us in the eighties, they approved, they vote for an agreement to have the open space.

And, I'm sure that they have a lot of discussions, and those things take time and it was agreed for, but to kill a project or change it, you know, you can do it just like that with the signature and you can terminate this, but it's not what was people are talking today. We should focus on what the impact of the development will have on us. Cars, schools, people in the Great Park, they have to take the kids to Lake Forest for schools, for some schools. So, we don't want that, and please protect us. You are the people that protect us. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Art Brown. I live in Woodbridge. I've lived there for quite a while. I've been to these meetings at the city hall for the regular.

Most people cover what I've done but the one thing I want to talk about is the traffic issue. As they talk about the 3,000 houses, I live in Woodbridge Irvine Center and jeffrey are a mess several times of the day and they're just I don't know where you guys live but it takes me four traffic lights sometimes to get through them and if you put 3,000 houses right there it's only going to make it worse I've even talked to a cop a cop honestly one time told me that it's so bad sometimes it takes them twenty minutes across town and that's a security issue and the other thing up there on the poster Irvine company says they're gonna put better landscaping on Irvine Center Drive How can they put better landscaping? They're gonna have to get all the landscaping and let the cars go through. So, anyways, I said a lot of people said some smart things here. So, I hope you guys make a smart decision.

Thank you.

My name is Ralph Parks. I am the president of the Orange Tree Master Homeowners Association and co chair of the Committee to Protect All Over and Open Space. I've sent you a couple of letters, including an email today. So what we've known, what we've heard from everyone here is that, yeah, that's a great park that would be beautiful to be built and to have. That only comes with the price of adding 2,000 to 3,000 homes on the remaining parcels around the park.

If you don't give them the houses, they're not going to build that park. The houses to be built are controlled by initiative 80 eight-one. That gives the right of the citizens to vote on whether that land should be developed. Trying to say that you're going to approve this park, Well, they're not going to get it because it requires a vote. In addition, I filed an initiative with the city here in January to actually strengthen that by protecting all Irvine open space, which includes the Oak Creek Park Area.

Urbine company pointed out just last week that the thousands of signatures that we gathered in this petition I' not sure if everybody knows that was quashed because they pointed out that the city clerk committed misfeasance by giving us incorrect information by where to publish that petition. And because of that, it's created a very big mess for the city that they have to clear up.

Thank you. Your time is up.

Our

next speakers will be Laura Cormack, Ben Seville, Linda Smith, Dorothy Solinger, Susie Winoker.

Irvine has developed cramped in high density villages between Sand Canyon and Jeffrey across the whole valley of from Quail Hill to Portola and beyond. The Oak Creek Greenspace Preserve is the only area we have accommodates recreation and nature. TIC wants to destroy the last piece of land that supports the environmental well-being as well as the many species of birds and animals that rely on the centralized area around our neighborhoods that support our natural ecosystem. There's nothing but a valley of boxes to store us in between commuting, working, and consuming. Owning an overpriced box with no parking parking is not what I call home ownership, especially if you are paying exorbitantly high HOA every month dues.

The city council, city leaders, and TIC apparently do not care about the general welfare welfare of the residents of Oak Creek, Orange Tree, Cypress Village, and beyond. The people of Irvine Company are not our neighbors. They don't live here. They don't care that you sit in your car on Sand Canyon, Jeffrey Irvine Center Drive, Barranca, and Alton for thirty minutes to travel less than one mile to get home or go to school or work. Why destroy natural conservation preservation to make way for piling up more people on top of each other? The city council members who elected represented elected to represent the people who live here, not to bow to the whims of the Irvine company.

Nothing Thank you. Your time is up. Thank you. Thank you.

Your time is up.

Ben? Did you call

Greg Smith?

Don't think so. Not yet. We have Ben, Linda, Dorothy, Susie.

Name is Linda Smith. Oh, you already cut me off. Okay. Hi, my name is Linda Smith. I've been a resident of Woodbridge since 1983 I am here to be vehemently opposed to what is before you they do you do not have the right as been presented tonight to take back permanent open space We know and I sat here and I cannot believe even after all my years in Irvine the hubris of the Irvine company to sit here with this bait and switch to give us 50 acres instead of 200.

I personally have received mailings that say to me you can either take this 50 acres and 3,100 homes or 5,000 that is unacceptable you need to return this to the city council and it needs to go to the voters where it belongs thank you.

Hi there, I'm Susie Winoker. When I was first listening to the first 15 people, I just sat in my seat and felt thoroughly saddened, disgusted, and disrespected. Resolution 88 dash one basically says it' to remain open space with the scrivener' error the overlay the everything that the irvine company has tossed out they are master manipulators they they what they're doing to the city of Irvine is scary their legacy should be to leave this in its entirety as a nature park. I'm a golfer. I'd rather be a golf course.

But if they want to give their gift to the citizens of Irvine like one of the speakers said, a true gift would be the 200 acres. Yeah, nature parks fabulous. I went to one of the planning meetings last week. The hydrology of water, the songbirds, all the butterflies, it was so syrupy I I kind of got a little sick to my stomach. It was but it was beautiful. So, anyhow, make it a full nature park. But, definitely, 88 Dash 1 should stand or it should go to back to the voters as I voted in 1988. Thank you.

Next we'll take Catherine O'San, Richard Bell, Cheng Hwa We, Bobby Rush, Doctor. Thomas P.

Good evening. Thank you for being here. My name is Catherine Ossan. I've lived in Woodbridge for over forty years, raised three children there. I'm hiking, running the trails of Irvine every day. What I want to I voted for resolution 80 eight-one back in 1988, and I strongly oppose any change in this zoning amendment. What is important is to keep in mind the numbers. The park the the golf course is nearly 200 acres. The park that they're proposing is a quarter of that. It's beautiful.

The drawings are beautiful. They're sexy. Everybody wants it. They want the open space. They want the trails to continue. What they are not showing you is what's gonna happen to that other 150 acres. How many units they're going to build? How many cars are going to go onto our streets? How much more traffic we're going to have? What it's going to do to our quality of life? Think about that. Don't think about the 50 acre park. Think about the other 150 acres. I strongly oppose this, and I encourage you to oppose it. Thank you.

Thank you each of you for being here my name is bobby rush I've been with irvine since 1980 I live in Woodbridge I love irvine or I wouldn' be here but I'm asking you tonight to think about Walt Disney. When he built disneyland do you think his dream was to have it like it' become? When I came to irvine I didn't expect to be standing here asking you to honor the vote that we voted for prop 88. We voted for you and I'm asking each of you individually as I look at your eyes to think about what you hear and what you feel with integrity to honor the vote that we voted in as much as we voted for you. What do you want for your mother, mother-in-law father-in-law grandparents great grandparents I' a great granddaughter I live here because I want to be safe I live here because it' beautiful I appreciate the butterflies and the trees and all of that good stuff but I know that if you were to allow the destruction of the vote that we voted for you were also putting our police officers and me and every person here in danger because of the increase in traffic I don' need that and I bet you don' want to be driving in traffic either so I say listen to your heart show integrity honor our vote as we' voted for you as well and I' like to keep that honest and simple and honorable.

Thank you.

Chair Stark, Vice Chair Lynn, commissioners, I am Doctor. Thomas Parham. I sat in your seat as a planning commissioner working with Mike LeBlanc, with Jeff Davis,

and other members of the

Irvine Company years ago. I moved and relocated to Irvine back in 1985. I was here when that vote that Mike talked about went on. This for me is a question of integrity. I've stylized a piece of writing in my scholarly work that says life at its best is a creative synthesis of opposites and fruitful harmony.

Big fancy way of saying, sometimes our greatest strength is also our greatest weakness. Sometimes our greatest weakness our greatest strength. What disappoints me as a person who used to live in this city worked at that university for thirty three plus years is a, this feels like bait and switch and betrayal to me from what we voted on as residents back in '88. Secondly, it lacks I think what is the creativity that the Irvine company could certainly utilize. I don't want to argue against open space or this park.

What I want to argue against is the lack of imagination where they could still preserve Oak Creek Golf Course, put the housing in which they desperately need, and also move forward with trying to do it in other parts of the city and not concentrate it where it is. It also, I think, is a question for you as commissioners about whether or not this is about a transactional piece or you want to be transformative leaders.

Thank you. Your time is up.

Next

speakers, Greg Smith, John Evans, Sheila Stewart, Nancy Wang, Eugenia Francis.

Good evening planning commissioners. My name is Greg Smith. I'm a former member of the Irvine City Council and served twelve years on the Irvine Planning Commission. The action you're being asked to ratify tonight is a de facto approval of residential in Village 12. In my thirty plus years of service to this community, no village within the central core of this community has ever been planned on a piecemeal basis.

It's always been looked at as a whole. If I put my planning commissioner hat on tonight and look at what you're being asked to do, my recommendation as a planning commissioner would be to direct or to give recommendation to the city council that this village, Village 12 be considered as a whole and you not reconsider the nature park until you get details on all the Village 12, what Village 12 is going to be. Keep the planning process consistent with our master plan and with our history. Thank you very much.

Good evening. I'm Sheila Stewart. I struggled many years ago to be able to afford to live here. If I were buying today, I couldn't be here tonight as a resident. I couldn't afford myself. I am so honored to be a resident for so many years. And what I love about this area is the beauty. I am a golfer. I can't afford to go to Oak Creek. But if I can, I will and I'm saving up for that and I've met all the people there I've gone to the driving range it's wonderful it is a

privilege to golf it is

a rich man sport but we also have places that we can go that are inexpensive one of the things that' quite clever I have realized is that this open space that was dedicated on your proposition 88.1 it is a way for the city to make revenue and still have an amazing commitment to the plan to have an open space and no one has brought that up this evening that was a brilliant decision the people that work there are wonderful what I' concerned about is the back story that keeps popping up? There was a law that's what we would call it that's what makes us Americans we say what we want we put it on paper it is a rule or a guy it's not a guideline it's a law and that's what people hear that they talked about I wasn't here to vote on it back in the eighties, but we're changing that and you're

Thank you. Your time is up. Thank you.

You guys still awake? The Irvine Company wants us the residents to believe they are benevolent. They are not. They are a for profit organization and have proven themselves to be ruthless. Urban companies working hard to low light the potential village areas they don' care about our quality of life this is a trap and I'm not buying it.

You' all the experts so I'm counting on you to see the loopholes that they' will try to leverage. I noticed all the could' and might' and visions in their proposal. They have done the bait and switch before how is that elementary school in Losa leaflet' coming along? The revamped plan is a wolf in sheep's clothing as mentioned by others they consistently don' t deliver what they promise and are not to be trusted. Their marketing practices are complete propaganda if they were regulated like many industries they would be heavily sanctioned for their half lives the missing middle come on the city needs to reign in this egregious behavior by honoring the 1988 decision by the voters put us to rest once for once and for all.

Send them a message that their misleading tactics won't be tolerated. The only thing good that came out of this whole situation in the last year is my son wrote a kick ass college application about the ethics and behavior of corporations. It was really good. You and the city council have a right and responsibility to the residents do not be fooled thank you.

Good evening council I' Eugenia Francis I' lived here since '76 so I probably have the record tonight. I want to say that I found the Irvine company' presentation extremely deceptive. Loved all of the beautiful watercolors of the nature park I didn't see one rendering of what the housing, the traffic, the parking would look like. However, we spent or the council spent over an hour and a half, I couldn't believe it, looking at mister Potter's house, looking at the easement, looking at the gravel, looking at the entrance. All of this went on forever.

My gosh. That was one one place in Irvine. One. So I want you to exercise the same careful deliberation that you put on this one house that was going into Irvine that would only impact I believe the houses on Sandpiper etcetera. This will impact everyone that lives in Woodbridge.

As far as the urban company benevolent I do believe if they were benevolent all of the acreage would be a nature park and for raising the rents I think we should be gathered here I understand they are gouging their Gelson's. Who's here to protect Gelson's? Maybe we should look into that. Thank you.

Next we'll take Lisa Wood, Chloe Bui, Allen Myerson, Vivek D, Ziliang Chen.

Ready? Good evening. I bet you can't tell what I'm gonna say. My name is Lisa Wood, and I'm a twenty three year resident of the Orange Tree community. In 1988 the people of Irvine voted to protect the Oak Creek property through initiative 80 eight-one a voter approved measure that clearly states that any change to its open space designation must go back to the people for a vote. That protection was not symbolic. It was binding. It was intentional. Yet tonight, this commission is being asked to consider zoning changes to land that the voters placed off limits without their direct approval. That is not what eighty eight one allows.

That is not what the city council committed to when it voted seven to zero to return this issue to the ballot. And that is not what residents were promised. At last night's democrats for greater irvine candidate forum mayor late Larry agron said something simple and true the people will be heard That is the standard. That is the law. And that is the expectation. I urge you to honor eighty eight one, honor the city council's commitment, and honor the voters who decided to protect this land. This decision belongs to the people of Irvine and only the people. Table this item,

put it

on the ballot, let the voters decide.

Hi, my name is Vivek Devraj. I live in Woodbridge and I work in Irvine. As you've heard from others before me, is an obvious bait and switch effort to build a large housing development over the current green space that is the Oak Creek Golf Course. Nobody opposes the idea of running trails. I run every other day. Nobody opposes the idea of parks and open spaces. My two daughters leverage and enjoy the parks of Irvine. This is really to destroy open space and compromise what we enjoy as Irvine residents. My commute home is a three mile drive right up Irvine Center Drive from Spectrum to Yale. It cuts right through this thing that we're talking about right now.

During rush hour, that three mile drive is a thirty minute commute. I cannot fathom what that commute becomes if house 300 houses were to be built in that area. Lastly, and this is more personal to me, but I chose to live in Woodbridge right around the corner from Oak Creek because of the existence of that course. I enjoy the course, the amenities, my daughters enjoy the course. Local schools and colleges practice and play there.

Golf is one of the fastest growing sports in America. It just kills me inside. I know that that's not the point of this, but it just makes me sad if we were to lose that course. If this land is going to be repurposed, as others have said, it should be up to the residents to vote on it. And I think the bait and switches I actually feel really sorry for the people that have been kind of cajoled into this grandiose thing about open spaces because all we'd be doing is losing significant open space. Thanks.

Next we'll take Richard Bustamante, Cheryl Long, Blake Regal, Christina, Susan S.

Good evening, I'm Doctor. Cheryl Long and I'm a retired family medicine physician and I've lived in Irvine since 1980. I want to thank you for all your work in addressing the challenges of the housing supply and affordability crisis that we are experiencing in Irvine. Part of the rewarding work includes the design of associated amenities like the proposed remarkable nature park. Going forward with this park supports a thriving and hopefully a sustainable multi generational community for the future.

As you continue to do so, I'm here to urge you to vote for the proposal added language to the zoning ordinance. However, I am also here to urge you to reject any single family homes only development in Oak Creek. I urge you to negotiate for mixed housing and for the requirement that all new construction requires a 15% affordable housing for those with low income. Many would be very surprised to know that making as much as $94,000 a year qualifies someone for low income housing. Those in need for low income housing include first time professionals these are our adult children who are wanting to return to where they grew up businesses are unable to attract or keep these professionals due to the high cost of housing Additionally, well over 80% of people who work in Irvine commute in from other parts outside the city.

This includes our teachers,

our

nurses, firefighters, and police,

increasing Thank you. Your time is up.

Hi. My name is Blake. I grew up here, and then I left and came back. I live in Woodbridge. I have a wife and four kids, and there's been a lot of great points tonight. I'm not gonna repeat those, but first and foremost, this is an illegal Trojan horse. It is a bait and switch. It was voted on. You guys got to vote on it. Let us vote on it again. On a personal side, I came back to raise my family here, just like the family there on that logo. This is a city for families. That's why I always saw it. And what they are trying to do is an attack on families, and let me tell you why because I live off Irvine Center Drive as well, and when I lived in LA I used to dream of coming back to California, back to Irvine to the streets we have here. Now Irvine Center Drive most of the time of the day is worse than La Brea or La traffic.

It's robbing us of family time. In the in the busy lives of parents and their families, the commute is getting crazy. We cannot take anymore. We cannot take any more building. This is robbing people of, you know, being able to get their kid to practice, being able to get them to get their music classes done. They are not gonna be able to do that. They're spending thirty minutes going each way. Their work commutes are killing them. This is them not being able to read their children a book at school at night. This is them losing days out of the month, weeks out of the years, and I've added up the time. This is going to hurt families. This okay, you can build more homes. Who cares? You're not going be in your home. You're going to be in your car stuck in traffic.

For the the out of respect and dignity of families that the family you see on that symbol there, and the reason why people move here, you cannot let them do this. Let the people vote. Give dignity and respect

to Thank Thank you.

Good evening. I'm Christina Shea, former mayor of the city of Irvine, and I'm very pleased to see all of you this evening. And thank you for being there and listening to our concerns I think Greg Smith really said it well this is piecemeal planning the voters approved open space and part of that open space in 1988 and reapproved in 1991 was to protect Center City Open Space North with open space Bomber Canyon Quail Hill and that has to go back to the voters this concept of this nature park actually when I talk with the erbike company that kind of was my idea I said we should probably have a wildlife park and the idea is great but if you' going to do it it' going to have to be on 170 acres not on 50 acres because what you' not being told is once they get the 50 acres they' going to have to have approvals of up to 5,100 homes and a lot of these homes most of the property we were told is not affordable they said the affordability would be 1,400,000 I think you said that in our meeting I don' see how that' affordable for anybody unless you' wealthy.

At the end of the day I would ask this commission commission to please send this back to the city council and require and demand a vote of the public the vote voters voted on it and the voters need to vote on it to determine do they want this development. Thank you your time is up.

Our next round of speakers include Heidi, Mary Stevens, Shannon Arlon, Frank Lynn, Terry b.

Okay, good evening planning commissioners. My name Heidi and I've been living in the ranch since 1987 and forty six year Irvine resident I'm here because we need to be skeptical of the Irvine Companies nature park pitch their glossy pictures and could be promises look nice but they're not honest we caught tick employees speaking in support of the development at meetings posing as regular residents that makes me question the whole community survey how many supporters were actually paid staff. And the survey skipped the neighborhoods hit hardest. It didn't include The Ranch, Orange Tree, Smoke Tree, and The Meadows, which is right around Oak Creek. That's not real feedback.

Jenny rigby's presentation tonight stated could be over and over with pretty interpretive drawings that conveniently omit the power lines the trails would run under. No mention of the Southern California Edison easements, no hard data from engineers, no real environmental study. We're supposed to decide on wishful thinking instead of solid science and a full sequel review. That's not how we protect Irvine. And let's talk location with thousands of more cars pollution noise and constant clearing under power lines would kill the promised riparian woodlands and pollinator gardens.

Bees, butterflies, and hummingbirds won't survive, won't thrive in that mess. We're calling out the greenwashing. The promised nature park is not a real habitat.

Thank you. Your time is up.

Hello and thank you for your patience with all of this my name is mayor stevens and I've been a resident since 1977 when Woodbridge wasn't built yet ive seen this before I voted in 1988 I was so relieved and then I think I voted again in 1991 for something similar and my neighbors were not fooled by this they even show the incredible high density around the skinny little park and omitting the whole footprint of the place. So, as a community emergency response team leader for the village of Woodbridge I was already concerned about how we might evacuate people around one loop that has seven entrances to three streets that you can't even drive down most of the time anyway. This is not making Irvine a safe city. And, yes, a nature park there, 170 acres of it would be great but we know that isn't it Irvine is becoming very high density the tenements and the warrens in the great park it doesn't really feel like a park anymore and then all the construction at the Spectrum and in the West Side were becoming inglewood even without the airport so I urge you please protect what is still left of our beautiful city that is safe and green and smart and and healthy and don't let this just happen send it back to the council let the people vote on a ballot that clearly states

and thank you your time is

up. Hello.

I'm an Irvine resident of five years. Firstly, just wanted to echo what other folks have said about the use of the space and converting it into a park. It kind of doesn't make sense if you switch a 100% of green space for 30% of green space. I'm not sure how that math adds up personally. And secondly just wanted to mention that I know we've had a few golfers.

I'm learning to play golf I'm not very good but I'm trying and I have frequented Oak Creek and I would just mention that we are pretty short on golf courses in Irvine and you know it is a well used facility is a beautiful facility with you know real grass there aren't that many golf courses that have sorry driving ranges that have real grass so it would be a loss to the community and I feel like there should be a vote and the 18 whatever it was rule should be honored and that's it. Thank you.

Next

we'll take speakers Gloria He, Fred Klein, Zia Zhang, Aurora Winters, Roger Phillips.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Gloria, and I'm 13 years old. My family and I live in the ranch. So let's first start off with the concept of a home. The Merriam Webster dictionary describes a home as a familiar usual setting, a congenial environment, and that it is a place that is the focus of one's domestic attention.

For thousands of people, Oak Creek is that usual setting, where they go to after long days of stress. For thousands of people, Oak Creek Golf Course is where the focus of their domestic attention is. For thousands of people, Oak Creek Golf Course is their home. I've been taking lessons at Oak Creek since I was six years old. Whether it's the brilliant young golfers who spend their afternoons out in the sun at Oak Creek or the second hole bunker that seems to have a magnetic force on my golf ball, Oak Creek is our home.

And if you destroy Oak Creek, you are taking away not just a place to play, but you are taking away our home. Not only does destroying Oak Creek Golf Course destroy a home, you are destroying the hundreds of young golfers' dreams of getting into a good college through the sport of golf, their dreams of one day turning professional, their dreams of following the footsteps of the LPGA professional, Rose Zang, who, like them, practiced at Oak Creek Golf Course. Other courses are simply overcrowded and too far away for most parents to realistically drive every day, and adding 3,100 new cars onto the streets won't help. Committee members, I urge you to reaffirm your commitment to creating homes in Irvine by not taking away the homes of those who practice at Oak Creek, and I urge you to reaffirm your commitment to supporting the dreams of young golfers who practice at Oak Creek and who have nowhere else to go

if you take Thank you. Your time is up.

Brett Klein, forty year resident of Irvine. Appears that the city council appears to be afraid of the irvine company. They delayed the vote on Oak Creek Golf Course and the result was that time it gave more time for the irvine company to come up with propaganda in the Irvine standard and other places saying the only choices voters would have if it came to a ballot would be to vote for their proposal and a park and a so called small housing development or wind up with a huge housing development which is incorrect. The correct choice is that Oak Creek stays open space as agreed to in 1988 if it gets to the ballot. What the irvine council should be afraid of are the voters in Irvine who elected them and the people of Irvine who do not want apartments at Oak Creek or any more apartments in Irvine period.

Hi, Roger Phillips, Vice President of the Orange Tree Patio Homeowners Association. Now, you know, Orange Tree, we have one way in and one way out. It's right across the street from where the housing that the Irvine Company is trying to build would be. You can hardly get in and out of there as it is with the traffic on Irvine Center Drive. And this would be a disaster for all of the people that live in Orange Tree.

This proposal is a devil's bargain. Of course, the first 20 speakers love the idea of a nature park. I love the idea of a nature park too. But we can't give away that 50 acres for 3,000 to 5,000 new homes to be built on Irvine Center Drive it would be a disaster for the city I know that people want to have more housing let it be built on the outskirts of the city where there is plenty of room and good transportation.

Dear members of the commission, my name is Aurora. My family and I moved to Irvine when I was just 12, and it was around that time that I was introduced to golf. Before you knew it, high school was around the corner and golf tryouts too. Unfortunately my strolling about during practice and chitchatting during group lessons proved to be ineffective I unsurprisingly did not make the team the rejection lit something under me you would have seen one more kid run to Oak Creek straight away after school get baked by the sun for hours, hitting and putting. I ate, slept, and breathed Oak Creek.

This is the place that I call home. It is where I learned how to be a team player in a so called individual sport. It was there that I learned how to focus on myself when my friends were getting hangovers. Golf taught me lessons that I would not have learned anywhere else. You'd be happy to know that by the next time tryouts came, I shot the best score on the team, which by the way, hosted our practices at Oak Creek.

As you can see, it is a place where many young people grow, learn from, and experience life that they could not have gotten anywhere else. Everyone here tonight loves Irvine, which begs the question, are these so called park planners the same ones that turned the Great Park into a large park, if not a medium park, from its original plans in order to build more multimillion dollar houses. Members of the commission

Thank you. Your time is up.

Next

we'll take Maxim E, Sui, and Fred. And if there is anyone in the chamber that put their name in the kiosk and I inadvertently skipped over you, also join this line.

For the record, I don't play golf. I oppose this deceptive proposal. It's not about open space. It's about building homes on protected land. We heard many speeches today about parks, open space, and even affordability, but reality is different. How many homes were built over the years, and home prices keep going up. Right now, we have over 160 acres of protected open space. This proposal this proposal reduces it. This is not aiding. This is removing. Let's talk about value. The land worth about $440,000,000 today. After rezoning, it could be worth worth much more, maybe 10 times more. So let's be honest. It's not about parks.

It's about increasing value land value and building homes on protected land. And for those who spoke prior in favor of this deceptive idea, I say this with respect. I feel sorry for all of you. Please look deeper and understand what what is really is going on. I encourage everybody to learn more at protecteveryoneopenspace.com.

Please protect our open space and reject this deceptive proposal. This is deeply concerning that we're still talking about this issue when people promised when city council promised us to have a ballot, and we still haven't produced any ballot yet. And when people came up with a ballot, we got a legal letter, and this is very, very wrong. 88 dash one is the law of the city. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Scott Carpenter and I appreciate everybody paying attention for as long as they can. I'm also one of the co chairs of the Protect Irvine Open Space Committee. There are so many things that I've heard tonight that I would love to dissect individually, but I think the main message is no matter how many wrongs there are it will never make a right it is wrong to violate the results of the 80 eight-one vote it is wrong to to throw away our planning principles as Greg Smith so eloquently said and piecemeal this and just say hey we'll do a nature park and by the way that nature park that looks beautiful but what's behind the nature park what's on the other 120 some odd acres that are there it's wrong to tell citizens who are trying to gather signatures for a voters initiative that, oh, you just published it in the wrong paper. It's wrong for the city clerk to have misled us.

It's wrong to take away our city center open space in the recreational activities that are there. What's next? Golf soccer fields? Baseball fields? Let's take those away. Start building things. But here's what is right. It's right to ask the council to send this back to the voters. It is right to follow the law and recognize that there are some serious concerns about land use it is right for the city and the company to allow the citizens an opportunity to vote on this it's right to allow the vote to happen without pressuring h o a's without pressuring citizens if this is such a great plan.

Thank you your time is up.

I compliment you on your endurance. My name is Barry Whitesides. I've lived in Woodbridge since 1979. I voted on those other elections. I think there's been a lot of, I'll call it, deception.

Misdirection. The title of this thing is an alternative open space framework. What I saw on the slides by the Irvine company were we're going to take this property and make it fungible we're going to move green space someplace else and count it as meeting it. A year ago we had a presentation at the woodbridge village association this proposal but that was one with 3,500 houses that was one that included development and a threat that if you didn't approve it we go with 5,000 but they had this 88 dash one thing hanging them up so what they did is they went to the council the council the city attorney turned it back and said it had to have two bills to be passed one to take off eighty eight one and the other one to allow for the development it didn' t happen they found an end run. They found an end run by telling you that you can approve a fungibility thing and I really think it needs to go back to the city attorney.