Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

So the time is 05:29, and I'm gonna call the planning commission meeting of Thursday, 05/07/2026 to order. Can the recording secretary please conduct a roll call?

Commissioner Pearson. Commissioner Mansfield.

Present. Mhmm. Pleasure to leave.

Commissioner Grossman.

Here.

Commissioner Delacusack.

Here.

Commissioner Batia is absent this evening. Vice chair Lynn? Here. Chair Stark? Here. We have a quorum.

So everyone that's able, if we could please rise, we'll do the pledge of allegiance. Vice chair Lynn is gonna lead us.

Ready? Begin. Pledge allegiance to the flag

of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands,

one nation, under God, individual, with liberty and best as well.

Alright. So I'd like to open the public comments for nonagendized items. This will be items that not are not on tonight's agenda. Taya, are there any public comments on nonagendized 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, there are no public comments for nonagenvised items.

Okay. Thank you. I will move on to introductions. Director Frady, are there any introductions?

I would just like to welcome our new commissioner, Anthony Mansfield, for his first meeting tonight and wish him luck.

So welcome, Anthony. We'll move on to staff reports. Do we have any staff reports, director Frade?

No staff reports tonight.

K. How about announcements from our commissioners? Do any my fellow commissioners have any announcements or reports they'd like to share? Now we move on to the study session, but I believe we're postponing that.

Chair, we are at additions and deletions.

Oh, I'm sorry.

And I would like to, say that we do have a deletion tonight. We are gonna be deleting item one from the agenda. That's the study session. Okay. We plan on bringing that back at the meeting of May 21.

K. Thank you. So we move on to the consent calendar. All items will be listed will be enacted by one vote. There'll be no discussion of the items unless members of the planning commission request specific items to be removed from the consent calendar for separate discussion. So I'd like to open the public comment for 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, there are no public comments on this item.

Okay. Wonderful. Thank you. So we'll open the commission deliberations. Do any of my fellow commissioners have something to say about the consent calendar?

Chair, I'd like to move to approve the minutes of the April 16 meeting.

I will second that.

Okay. Can we please set up the voting, please?

Chair, the motion has passed unanimously with those present.

Okay. Thank you. So now we'll go on to the public hearings. Item three, director Frady. I'll open a public hearing for it. Director Frady, you please introduce the item?

Thank you. Item three is conditional use permit for a new class 10 wireless communication facility camouflaged as a monopine tree with administrative relief from separation requirements located at 1372 Through 1392 Maga Avenue and 17281 Eastman Avenue in Planning Area 36, Irvine Business Complex. Presenting tonight is senior planner Sherman Jones, joined by principal planner Ann Wu.

Good evening, chairman Stark and members of the planning commission. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to install a new approximately 50 foot tall class 10 wireless facility camouflaged as a monopine tree. The facility will be located on the South side of Magal Avenue between Daimler Street and Eastman Avenue within an abandoned railroad easement previously used by Burlington and Santa Fe Railway Company. The larger parcel is improved with two buildings, parking, landscaping, and an existing 50 foot tall T Mobile monopine train, which was approved by the Planning Commission in July 2009. The property has a general plan designation of urban industrial and a zoned 5.1 IBC multiuse.

Nearby uses include Edward Life Sciences to the north across McGall Avenue and light industrial uses to the south, east, and west. The applicant indicates through its RF engineers a service gap in the Verizon network near McGow Avenue and the surrounding area. The monopine tree will be located within an approximately 512 square foot area enclosed by an eight foot tall concrete wall. The tower will include 12 panel antennas, 12 remote radio units and a four foot microwave dish along with three Ray caps. In addition to the monopine tree, the enclosure would include three cabinets and a diesel standby generator.

The antennas will be painted to match pine needles. All antenna components and support equipment will be treated with exterior coatings to visually blend with the surrounding development, including nonreflective materials that blend with the surrounding materials and colors. The next few slides will be photo sims of the proposed wireless facility. View number one is looking north from Eastman Avenue. The monopine tree would be approximately 400 feet from Eastman Avenue.

View two is looking south along Magal Avenue, and the monoplane is located behind the existing 21 foot tall building. View number three is looking west from Magal Avenue, which is approximately 200 feet from the Magal right of way. As required by the zoning ordinance, the applicant explored alternative locations within the general vicinity that coincided with its coverage objectives. However, property owners at these locations were not interested in leasing their sites for the placement of a class 10 facility for various reasons. The applicant also looked at lower antenna classifications, but the lower classifications did not meet their coverage requirements for Verizon.

The zoning ordinance includes provisions related to separation of class 10 facilities. No class 10 facility is permitted within 2,000 feet of any other class 10 facility. However, administrative relief may be granted to allow a separation of less than 2,000 feet. The administrative relief must be based on technical constraints and must be accompanied by an RF report documenting the need for a lower separation. Colocation on the existing Monopine was pursued by Verizon.

However, the tow the tower cannot accommodate a second tenant as this tower is considered a short site. While the existing facility provides coverage for T Mobile, it cannot accommodate the proposed Verizon antennas due to structural and technical limitations. The project is exempt from CEQA per the class three. A notice of the planning commission hearing was mailed and posted in accordance with city requirements, and staff did receive one phone call from my neighboring business asking about access to their business. With that, staff recommends the planning commission adopt resolution number 26Dash4074, approving the conditions permit with the administrative relief for separation requirements.

That concludes staff's presentation. Staff and the applicant are available for any questions that you might have. Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation. Is the applicant present? Would like to make some comments?

Good evening, chair, members of the planning commission staff. I'm Leticia Smith from SmartLink on behalf of Verizon Wireless, and I'm here to answer any questions.

Okay. Thank you. So I'd like to open public comments on the item. Recording secretary, do we have 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, there are no comments on this item.

Okay. Thank you. And then I will go ahead and close the public hearing and open the commission deliberations. If any of my commissioners would like to ask questions, make comments, please use the request to speak button. We'll start with, commissioner Grossman.

Thank you for the present presentation of the applicant. I just had one question for staff. So in this scenario, we have a shorter a shorter poll, that's already there, and we're we're going to be constructing a larger one. Now would the larger one be able so I understand why the shorter one can't be a co host something that needs to get more coverage and needs to be higher. Will the higher new one from Verizon also co locate for the T Mobile? Like, do we need to have both there, or could essentially the existing one be partnered with the new one that is being built by by Verizon?

Thank you for the question, commissioner Grossman. Let me just clarify that the existing T Mobile site is 50 feet in height, and this proposed facility will also be 50 feet in height. So because of the structure and the technical limitations of the existing T Mobile site, like the distance that's required for the antennas, it would create interference. And so that's why there was no way to add on to the existing site, and that's why the applicant is proposing this new facility.

So this is an interference issue. It's not it's not a height issue. It's not a a directional issue. It's I mean, I I don't wanna get into the absolute technical side of it, but I'm just I guess what I'm wondering is is is technology today does it allow us to colocate so that we don't have two poles versus one pole? Is that is that a feasible option? Maybe the applicant can answer to I don't Sure.

Yes. The the proposed Verizon's facility could be it is collocatable, under $64.00 9 if any other carrier is interested.

And I do wanna add that there was an RF study that was done. And looking at the existing pole, it was considered a short site. And if they wanted to colocate to make it taller so that everything is merged to one pole, there were technical difficulties and the wind, the way it's moving. And we confirmed with our RF consultant if that is considered feasible or infeasible, and they agreed with the applicant study that there would need to be another poll given that it's very short.

Okay. I I I mean, I I I accept that. I'm not trying to believe the point I'm trying to make is that in an ideal scenario, we have one. We're not we're not grouping together. And if when we have to add something, can we remove essentially essentially what what I'm what I'm questioning is is can the T Mobile current poll, not not the service, and it's nothing about the provider, can it be combined can they can their service be added on to the Verizon poll so we only have one poll with the new technology. And that's what I think the Verizon applicant was saying. It is technically possible from their side, but, obviously, that involves a T Mobile applicant. I understand why we need a new one. I'm not not questioning that that topic. So I alright.

Was this something we considered or have discussed with the T Mobile applicant at all?

No, commission. That's not something that staff discussed with T Mobile. And it's staff's understanding that although T Mobile uses the site for their service, they don't actually own the monoplane. It's owned by a third party. So staff did not get into those discussions.

Just just to end, I would encourage staff as we if we in in the future, when we have, this kind of dual, we're creating a a grouping together that's not ideal. If we can try and look at possible solutions when a new poll needs to be constructed that we that we're able to move away some of the existing stuff, existing polls, or existing service providers and combine them just for for for future rep for future reference. I would encourage us to review that.

We'll definitely look into that.

Alright. Thanks, Seth. Commissioner Pearson,

would you like to go? Yeah. You, Sherman and for the presentation. I understand how difficult it is for us, working under FCC constraints, trying to, establish some type of control over the planning of cellular communications. You know, I understand the issue of the structural, nature of the other pole and that, it is very difficult to add components to the pole when it is not structurally feasible.

I do have a question as it relates to the location. It is next to the building 70 feet away from the current monopole. Could it have been moved the entire distance away, which would be another 30 feet or something like that or 40 feet? I'm I'm not sure if it makes a material difference. But, did we ever ask the applicant whether we could cite it at the opposite end of that piece of property?

So, commissioner, let me just make sure I'm understanding the question correctly. So whether the facility could be located here towards the the property line?

Yeah. I I that's my question is could it have been slid down further, to gain a little bit more, you know, separation? Now I don't know visually if that makes a difference with the camouflage and, the surrounding, trees, but I I've only asked that, since that area is open and usable and not necessarily, you know, right at the building edge.

I think in this particular case, I would invite the applicant's representative to come up to talk about whether that was something they considered when choosing this particular location.

Yes. So Verizon's team and the landlord agreed that that was actually the the location that was also kinda, like, out of the way from the operations of the other two buildings and the main the main parking parking locations and all that. So it was better for the landlord to have it where it is.

Okay. So you're you're going based upon the property owner's direction to shelter your communication equipment and, move it behind the building?

Yes.

Okay. My next question, and maybe you can help me, is with the T Mobile and Verizon, are there gonna be conflicts with the frequencies?

No. There is no there is no conflict. There carrier sorry. Every carrier has, their own license FCC spectrum, frequencies. That that's why they can sometimes collocate in the same poll and interfere.

Yeah. Mhmm.

Okay.

My my only real concern on the whole project is the emergency generator, and I presume that it will run, once a week on an automatic basis to test it.

It's not automatic. Someone will come for and test it every fifteen minute sorry. Once a month for fifteen minutes just to make sure that it will kick in if needed.

Is it a natural gas, or is it diesel?

Diesel.

Okay. And I'm Sherman, I'm sure we have in our immense amount of, conditions the ability if it's too noisy to go back and, tell them to muffle the sound. Yes.

There is a condition of approval regarding the noise abatement.

Well, I'd like to thank staff. You know, after many, many years of going through this, you've developed conditions that are very favorable to the city and to, adjoining, you know, users that are in the area. So, I thank you very much.

Yeah. And I will say the chairman was very diligent and asked for a data sheet of the generator, the decibels, and to be sure also that is between the limits of the city. It's, for this industrial commercial manufacturing area and then the times, you know, between 7AM and 10AM, it falls under the, the limits of noise.

Damn. Okay. Thank you, mister chairman.

Thank you, mister Pearson. I don't see any more comments, so I'm open to accepting a motion. Okay. I'm a I'm a motion to You want it?

Oh, you can go ahead.

I'll motion to accept the staff's recommendation and to adopt the resolution on item three.

I'll second.

Can we please set up a vote?

Chair Stark, the motion has passed unanimously with those present.

Oh, thank you. Alright. So, we'll move on to item number four, and I'll open the public hearing. Director can you please introduce the item?

Thank you, chair. Item four is conditional use permit for a new continuing care retirement community located within District 6 Of Great Park Neighborhoods in Planning Area 51, Great Park. Presenting is senior planner, Hernan DeSantos, joined by principal planner, Nick Maloney.

Thank you, director Frady. Good evening, chair Stark and member of members of the planning commission. The pro the proposed project is located in Plan Air 51 on the South Side of Marine Way and at the corner of the future extension of Ada Way. The project site has a general plan land use designation of Great Park and is zoned 8.1 c trailed and transit oriented district. The project will be located on a vacant 17.7 gross acre property within District 6 of the Great Park neighborhoods.

Nearby land uses include the Irvine Transit Station, office and industrial uses, the future Great Park cultural terrace, and future residential developments. Just to provide the commission with a brief, brief background of the project of the Great Park Neighborhoods, in September 2011, city council approved a general plan amendment and zone change that approved the first phase of the Great Park Neighborhoods project, allowing the development of 4,894 dwelling units and over 1,000,000 square feet of nonresidential intensity. In November 2013, the city council approved a general plan amendment and zone change that approved the second phase of the Great Park Neighborhoods project, allowing a total of of 10,556 units and over 4,900,000 square feet on nonres of nonresidential development. Most recently, the city council approved another general plan amendment and zone change to add up to 1,300 dwelling units in the southern portion of Plan Air 51 by converting approved but unused nonresident nonresidential intensity. Additionally, the traffic analysis of disapproval also evaluated an alternative land use scenario for a congregate care retirement community on the project site.

Subsequently, the applicant has submitted the necessary applications for a continuing care retirement community. The proposed project will consist a of a 1,800,000 square foot phased development containing 980, independent living units, 115 assisted living and memory care memory care units accommodating up to a 194 beds, and associated accessory uses spread across five buildings ranging from six to 10 stories in height. This next slide, features conceptual renderings for the project at build out as viewed from Marine Way looking south and from internal central courtyard areas. The project will consist of five podium style five podium style buildings, which shall be interconnected by a bridge system at the third Level and includes a wrap parking structure at the first level with basement parking provided within three within three of the buildings. Additionally, the, contemporary architectural design of the project complements the residential character of the Great Park neighborhoods through the use of varied materials and exterior finishes, including, but not limited to, stone, tile, bricks, stucco, and wood wood composite panels.

The proposed project will feature various amenities for its residents, including, but not limited to, a fitness center, a medical center, swimming pools, barbecues in sitting areas, dog parks, and a shuttle service. Staffing for the project site will be comprised of a total of 450 employees with approximately 235 employees during the day shift and 250 employees during the night shift. Most most on-site employees will work in the health care services and the food and beverage department. Additional staff will be employed in housekeeping, marketing, and administration, and shuttle services. With respect to parking, the zoning ordinance did not specify a parking ratio for congregate care uses and instead required a project specific study.

The applicant's parking study concluded that a parking ratio of 1.1 parking stalls per living quarters would adequately serve the tenants, visitors, and employees of the project. Based on the parking rate, the anticipate the anticipated parking demand would equal to 1,176 spaces, and the proposed project provides a total of 1,203 parking stalls resulting in a in a surplus of 27 stalls excuse me, 26 stalls. Regarding the landscape requirements, the proposed project is required and does provide 15% landscaping, which help feature approximately a 170 a 117 trees along the project site's perimeter and shade trees along meandering sidewalks adjacent to Marine Way and Ada. Additionally, the landscape palette the landscape palette for the project shall be consistent with sustainable guidelines for District 6, which prioritizes drop drought tolerant shrubs and and tree species. With regard to the housing element, state law requires cities to maintain adequate housing sites for unmet regional housing needs allocation or RINA.

The project site is identified in the housing element site inventory to accommodate 53 moderate income units and 481 above moderate income units. The proposed land use did not contribute toward the city's RINA goals and therefore requires findings confirming the site that the site inventory maintains adequate capacity for RINA. After accounting for permitted, entitled, and proposed units, including this project, the city will maintain a surplus of housing capacity, ensuring compliance with state housing law. With regard to traffic, the project is covered by the 2012, excuse me, with regard to traffic and based on the analysis provided. The proposed project does not require any traffic improvements to address levels of service, efficiency deficiencies at intersections or roadways.

Additionally, the project is covered by the twenty twelve second supplemental environmental impact report and was evaluated under this, under the September 2025 EIR addendum number 16 to the Great Park EIR. Therefore, any potential environmental impacts of the project have been analyzed, and all feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated into the applicable resolutions for the project site. Finally, on April 30 on April 30, no notice of the May 7 Planning Commission public hearing was mailed and posted in accordance with the city in accordance with city requirements. To date, staff has received a a total of three comments regarding the project. One comment regarding the potential noise impacts for the project, one comment in favor of the project, and one comment expressing that the project project should look, should utilize local labor forces.

If the commission has any question regarding these comments, staff and or the applicant can provide you with additional information. In conclusion, staff recommend that the Planning Commission adopt resolution number 26Dash4073 approving the conditional use permit or the continuing care retirement community in continue continuing care retirement community in Planner 51. That concludes my presentation. The city staff and the applicant are available for any questions.

Thank you for the presentation, Hernan. Would the applicant like to come up and make some comments or do presentation?

Good evening, chair and members of the, planning commission. My name is Steve Montgomery. I am with Ericsson Senior Living, and we are based in Baltimore, Maryland, and I'm very excited to be in Irvine. One clarification that we did wanna provide after speaking with staff is regarding, one of the conditions, 6.2, definition of facility characteristics. And we have, talked with staff about clarifying some language under that definition, to just be more in line with the nature of how this type of congregate care facility is operated and the regulations that were required to follow by the state of California.

And I'll be happy to introduce that as well. So specifically as it relates to, condition 6.2 facility characteristics paragraph d, I believe the current language in that paragraph d, the base tenant rate for the project shall include the following services, and we are proposing a clarification of that language to read, strike the reference to base tenant rate, and basically state that the continuing care contract as regulated by the California Department of Social Services for the project shall include the following services. And the reason for that clarification is the residents of our these communities are not in a tenant landlord relationship, but rather entering into a contract that is regulated by the state of California. So we would just wanted to be very clear on that nuance that it is not a tenant landlord relationship under which we are providing services for these future residents. Residents.

Okay. Thank you.

And then I'd be happy to answer any other questions you may have.

Okay. Awesome. Thank you. Are there 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, there are no public comments on this item.

Okay. Well, then I will go ahead and close the public hearing and open up the commission deliberations. Please use the request to speak, and we'll start with commissioner Lynn.

Thank you, chair, and thank you for the presentation. This is a very exciting project for our city. There is a need for senior housing and facilities, and so I think this is wonderful, and the renderings are gorgeous. I do have questions regarding just given its proximity to the rail line, are there any mitigation efforts in terms of what to do regarding the sound in terms of

yeah. So, yes, we have initiated we have done a one noise study, and that has identified some measures that would be implemented once we go through the building permit review process with you all after subsequent to all of this. I the specifics on that, I couldn't answer. I'm not an architect, but, we have identified that, and we'll be incorporating it in that subject, of course, the city review and approval of a building permit.

And then in terms of its location, it's near the Irvine Train Station, which is great, especially for visitors. It would are there any proposed bus stops, like OCT bus stops that we know of just for the residents who are there?

Currently, there are no bus stops located along the future extension of Ada.

Proposed that we know of?

I would we would need to speak to Public Works on that. So, yeah, Public Works is working on the current EIR for the under crossing for Ada right now.

Okay. And then when would we know whether or not is is that something public works would pursue with the county to get a bus stop there perhaps?

Commissioner Lynn, typically, we see with bus stops. We see the population come to an area first, and then we see the bus stops populate after that. So we usually see them follow Right. The new residential development. Great. Thank you.

Makes sense. And then regarding the parking, just curious. Are there any EV charging parking stalls?

There will be EV parking in accordance with the your applicable codes. Yes. Okay.

And that's it for now, Chair. Okay.

Thank you. Commissioner Pearson?

Thank you, Hernan. Put the mic back on. Thanks, Hernan. And, Nick, good presentation. You know, for us that are nearing the age that, we could occupy this facility, I think it's, you know, an opportune position to be in in in Irvine.

I did have a couple questions that really related to the condition 6.19 where Heritage Fields needs to make an election of some kind to, go with the alternative care facility. Has that, been exercised? Because I believe right now you have the opportunity to choose, what direction to go in and whether or not Ericsson is, you know, on on the podium. Thank you, commissioner Pearson. Corey Lynch from Five Point, development manager for Heritage Fields.

Yes. Once assuming we have your support tonight, we will be entering into that election to move forward with Ericsson. So we're just waiting for your approvals.

Okay. That that's answers my question. Thank you. Just a little clarification. This is a conditional use permit, which, we are going to make a decision on tonight. And this use permit is in concert with the state of California approving various items of the way they operate. Is that correct?

Yes. You are correct.

So tonight, we don't have we've already approved a vesting tentative track map. We've already approved a master plan, which is now being superseded. Do we are we, in this conditional use permit, taking the information that was in our package that on the design of the facility and the location and everything, is is that gonna be a decision tonight, or will that come back to us? Or do they have a build by right provision on this? Because they've already negotiated a number of things with the city council.

The design that is before you tonight is the CUP. So you're reviewing it tonight.

So we are approving a master plan Equivalent. Yes. That is included in the CUP? Yes. Okay. I just want I got lost. I wasn't really sure.

For this specific zoning district, a CUP stands in the place of a master plan. Yes.

Okay. I I understand that we've got sufficient landscape. I understand the type of facility it is. I mean, sufficient landscape by code. I I'll ask the applicant to you know, given the other amenities that are being provided to the residents, do you need a larger area on the surface for them to

gather? So within the application, I'm not very able to pull the site plan back up. Unfortunately, what is not depicted here is within the in the areas of each of the buildings that are labeled, and we use the nomenclature RB residential building. On the level above the top level above the parking, there will actually be outdoor courtyards that are available for a number of amenities that we're in the process of designing right now that will create additional open space for the residents of this community besides the areas that we have actually own grade.

Okay. So you're you're actually on top of the podium, the parking area, which is below, you're gonna have some type of open courtyard recreational areas for people to gather and to assemble. Yes. That's correct. Okay.

I, you know, I I thought I saw that in the package, but I just wanted to clarify it. We're also making a finding tonight that there is no net loss, that since these facilities do not actually count for our residential identification in the Arena Arena. But we are we have sufficient areas within our city to make up for the loss that that was intended for that property.

Yes. We still retain a surplus.

Okay. But the part of our approval of the conditional use permit tonight is the planning commission making that finding.

Correct. Because this is an identified housing element site.

Okay.

K, mister chairman. I'll I'll shut up for a while.

Alright. Thank you. Feel free to come back if have more. Commissioner Mansfield?

Thank you, mister chairman. First and foremost, I wanna thank mister DeSantis and mister Maloney being here tonight. I think it's a really important project to take care of our retired community. I do have a quick question about condition 6.2, letter d, item four, in regards to the, transportation on and off the facility for the community. About how many shuttles are you gonna be running into the city?

We would anticipate it full build out of this community that would be up to or probably about three shuttle buses of about 15 to 20, person capacity. Those shuttle buses will circulate within the neighboring businesses, areas of interest, and whatnot for the residents.

Fantastic. Thank you very much. No further questions.

Thank you. Commissioner Grossman? Thank

you to staff for for a great presentation and and to the applicant. Very, very, very excited about this this opportunity. So what I would like you to just elaborate for us a little bit on is how the the build out of this is gonna be. You have a 100 and how many was it of the the assisted? 150 on 115 on the assisted living, with up to a 194 beds. Will all of this come, on on track together, or will there be a phasing to this?

So thank you for the question. So we will be there's a phasing exhibit in the package that reflects our intended phasing. We do not build the entire project, any of our projects, all at once. We will build based on market demand. And so you will essentially follow the sequence that's shown on this graphic here.

And I believe the first phase is around a 170 units. The second and third phases, are being done jointly, we've talked to, you know, building officials about how to approach that. It's just somewhere under 300 units, and then we kind of follow from that as the build out of the project. The assisted living and memory care component of it currently is planned in our phase five of the project, which likely being just somewhere near the end of the build out. That is subject to change depending on resident demand and the need for potentially, having those higher levels of care sooner in the build out of the project.

K. And that actually is a perfect transition to my next question, question, which is about about care. I'd like you to elaborate for us a little bit about how you provide care at the facility. And also to staff, always want always concerned about, you know, potential impacts to our to our local public health facilities. Our our first our first responders, 911 calls, tends to be in a in a group that has a higher propensity potentially for for usage. Have we talked to fire police to be able to understand, are they are they fully prepared, or are there any modifications that need to be made? So that's that's for staff, and the the on-site is for the applicant.

Yes. Thank you for the question, commissioner Grossman. Yes. The project was can be accommodated without having any significant impact to police in in any type of emergency services. The certified EIR for the Great Park and also the addendum did generally conclude that the project is in compliance with the existing program policies and procedures and EIR mitigation measures and would ensure adequate fire protection and and emergency services. Additionally, our the Orange County Fire Department did review this project and approved the project with the appropriate conditions.

What were those conditions?

That the applicant submit a fire master plan and and make sure that the as far with respect to hydrants, they submit the appropriate fire alarm master plan, fire sprinklers, and all that in, all those conditions as well.

Okay.

Alright. I'm glad you've done that review. Yeah.

Could you talk about it on that?

And answer your question. So it there's it's a two part answer. So the first part of this is that the the commute proposed community is predominantly independent living. And so what you see here in the graphics and the renderings is to promote that. It is, Ericsson does this.

We have, we operate 24 communities around the country, and the focus on it is that, is independent living. It is creating a physical environment with programming services to allow seniors to flourish, to stay active, to stay engaged in their communities, and with each other. And the, the design of the facilities is done to purposely do that. The res the staff that works there is there to support that growth and development of future development of the residents. And the other piece of that, the second part of that is under the state of California regulations as regulated by the Department of Social Services, and there is a list of activities that are required under licensure with the state.

I can run down those just as an example, ongoing care and supervision, assistance with activities of daily living. That is typically what we see in assisted living. Observation of residents for their physical and mental health and well-being, planned activities, menus, access to health care. Those are some of the fundamental things that we do, but there's a lot more about that. Again, going back to what the focus of this is is to allow seniors to flourish and remain active and not be locked away in their home.

Excellent. Okay. And that you're you're you're doing perfect on transitions to my next next questions. So in in in in keeping with that idea, we have we have a very active senior community in in in the city of Irvine. We've the city Of Irvine as a as a as a government has been has invested in in services and programs and facilities to to to support that community and and and continues to do so. Ericsson works in many other jurisdictions and and is coming into this beautiful master plan community. How does, how will Ericsson partner and work with to make sure that the residents are engaged in our community and also is are you are giving back into our community?

Absolutely. And first and foremost with that is the fact that the residents we, you know, plan on, you know, opening this up to are folks who live in the Irvine area in Orange County. And so, us coming from the East Coast, we're not gonna come in here and pretend we know everything. And a part of this is understanding what is important to the community, whether it's additional services, what are things that we can support, whether they be private initiative or public or government initiatives that are of interest to the residents moving in here, and what things we can do and and help to encourage with our residents in concert with what, you know, initiatives of the city or others may have here. So we are open to all of those ideas.

We have a fundamental basis of what we do, but it adapts to as we go around the country. We're not gonna pretend just because it works well in Baltimore, Maryland. There are gonna be changes and modifications that as we do this elsewhere in the country.

Excellent. Well, I'm just say I'm I'm very excited to have this project in the community. I look forward to you guys being active participants in in in in our civic services, and I'll stop for now.

Commissioner Del Cusack?

Thank you, chair. Thank you to the applicant and staff for this wonderful presentation. Someone who lives near this facility, it's great to hear, because it'd be great to have our family, especially those who are retired or about that age who needs this care, to be nearby. I can imagine, like, I have parents myself, and I have family who lived in similar facilities in the East Coast in the Bay Area. So I I see there's a big need for this here. And to be close to the family, that's excellent.

Couple

questions. In regards to, I think commissioner Pearson mentioned about this, about having an election after Five Point. We'll sell the land to you. You're right, Ericsson.

Is that correct? I'm sorry. What The the

so Five Point is gonna sell the land to Ericsson? Correct. That's correct. Okay. And maybe the applicant or staff could kind of sorry. Maybe Five Point or the staff could elaborate on this. So once once it's sold, are they contributing to the CFDs and the Mello Roos to for the great park?

Yes. They would be contributing to that.

Excellent. No. That that that's great to hear because I know this park is right next door to the future cultural terrace, and I could imagine the seniors going with their grandkids and their families to enjoy that aspects of the park and to have your company contribute to that growth of the park is a good deal. My next question is, as the son and grandson of US Military Vets, like, what is your, approach to, future, tenants or veterans? Like, how you will,

anything you would do? In terms of if somebody was a veteran Yes.

Yes. Is it we Competing the former military base is kind of Sure.

We've not really, talked about that based on the the prior use of this property. But from a, you know, pure marketing and sales perspective, we're looking at this from, again, you know, seniors, a minimum age of 62. Mhmm. And if they're qualified to, you know, move into the into the community, that's our focus on the way. We don't really do we haven't today done any kind of program focused on veterans or things like that, and it's just, you know, wide open in a, you know, very nondiscriminatory basis, I guess.

Okay. So, like, for instance, you would have, a shuttle if they needed, like, access to their VA services and, like That's correct. Yes. We do. Medication. Yes, sir. Oh, good. I'm I'm glad to hear that. And my other question is, this is an incredible project of, like, 10 stories, several phases. Ideal timeline, when would you start to break ground?

Based on current timing of assuming we're successful with your support tonight for approvals, we would be looking probably late second, 2027 to be in a position to break ground. We're in the midst of proactively working on our design for the first phase, and we know we've gotta go through the, you know, permit review process with the city, with you all. And then after that, we will also be initiating a sales and marketing effort, and there are some requirements at the state level that we need to follow before we're in a position to break ground. And we're, you know, shooting right now for that time frame.

Sounds good. And my last question is, you know, you still have to construct this, break the ground and everything. Was, like, an estimate of how much it would probably start for this, continuing care if they enter their contract? Terms of pricing?

Yeah.

It is it's very early in the process to be able to start talking about numbers. Our model is to base our the the price of the units on median home values in the in this market.

Excellent. And that would include all the the meals and all the other That is correct. Shuttle service. Yeah. Excellent. No. That sounds like a great Right. Thank you. Plan.

Thank you

very much, Chair. Alright. Thank you. Mister Pearson?

Yeah. A question to staff. This is the final approval for this. It will not go any further up the food chain?

Correct.

Unless there's an appeal.

Unless there's an appeal. Okay. I wanted to make sure of that. Obviously, to to look at this site, you've done a lot of market research, a lot of, analysis of the demographics of Irvine and approximate locations around Irvine. You know, going back to what Arnes was asking, I do you have an expected timeline of development?

I know you're gonna start out with your first project. You know, you're gonna mark the heck out of it, try to get his try to get it occupied, and then move on phase two, phase three, phase four. Have you looked at, just for my perspective on this, what it's a tremendous capital outlay. When do you believe you're gonna reach the point where you've got a 95% occupancy, of the entire facility?

I will speak based on, our experiences elsewhere in the country with, this our specific product that, we would expect to hit that fairly close with the first phase and then continue through there. We are seeing and I'm speaking again nationally on this, just the, tremendous demand for this type of service based housing. And it's almost in a scenario where we can't build it fast enough. We're not seeing adequate supply across the country on this. Again, as you alluded to, we will build this based on demand.

The overall time frame here could probably be somewhere in this five to six year range. We would I would love to be wrong on that and tell you it's half of that. Then it's just a function of can we build it quick enough? And, again, that's we have done significant research. There's a lot of questions, about this. California for this type of, service based housing has been, there's not a lot of it out here. And so a lot of what we're doing is educating the potential customer as to why this type of, option is, you know, a good idea for folks. But where we have done this elsewhere in the country, we've had significant success with that, and we feel positive about that here.

Thank you. And that's what we're hoping for. You know, we'd like to have it occupied and up and running as soon as possible. For me, it is a beautiful project. Structurally, it fits together. It feels like a community. It will give the residents a feeling of, I believe, belonging somewhere. And I I really applaud Ericsson and and what they're doing. Thank you. Thank you.

Commissioner Mansfield?

Thank you, mister chair. As a as a veteran of the United States Marine Corps myself, there's a great question proposed earlier, which got my got me thinking. The closest, veterans affairs facility is in Santa Ana for health care, but the farthest benefit center is in, sorry. The closest benefit center is in Long Beach. Will your transportation services on-site be capable of delivering any veterans, in the center all the way out to Long Beach?

We would certainly be have the opportunity to look into that, and I I think it's a qualified yes. Again, needing to understand more of the details on that. Wonderful. Thank you, sir.

Vice chair Lynn?

I this is not something we can require, but I did wanna encourage you to look into given Irvine is a very diverse community, there are, you know, so many cultural sensitivities. And I I would encourage you to look into programming as well as food options for our seniors who are perhaps of different ethnicities. And there is a great need. We have a great a large Asian community in Irvine, a large Asian senior community in Irvine. And so just keeping that in mind in your planning and programming would be great.

It's near the top of our list.

Yes. Great. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Commissioner Delcuzak?

Yes. I just had one last question. It's probably for staff. I noticed that the new Ericsson development, very excited about it. It's right next, across the street from the future transit oriented development, the TOD. And I could imagine the seniors over there going to shop, going to dine with their families in the future for themselves to get entertainment. What is the status of that? Is that, has the city taken control of that parcel from 5 Point?

We're almost completed with that land swap. This is kind of the end phases of that. But, yes, we are definitely moving forward, with imagining of the TOD and the crescent in that area. So this is a nice neighbor to that future development.

Thank you. I'm excited that because I understand that's being imagined as Irvine's future downtown and to have the seniors in Ericsson and the people at the park to all, be part of the community. I think that's gonna be the glue together.

Commissioner Pearson?

Yeah. I've I've just got one more question. The fee ownership of the property currently, whose name is that in?

That would be Heritage Fields Del Toro.

So is there a purchase and sale agreement, on the table for execution if this is passed tonight?

There is.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, mister chairman.

Yeah. I would just like to say I do think this is a wonderful addition to the great Park. The newer neighborhoods in Irvine, they're usually filled with families with young kids. So to have that different group of ages within the neighborhood, I think, is important. And I think that you'll have a lot of cross pollination when they go up to the canopy close to the Spectrum, which is a great place to walk around, really easy to get to the Costco, which is right there. So, yeah, I will hardly support this. I'm open to emotion at this point since all the

I'll move that if I can figure out where I am here. I'll move that we adopt resolution number 26Dash4073.

I'll second.

Can can I just clarify? Does that include the incorporation of the applicant's suggested edits to 06/2020?

Including the addendum that was produced clarifying the services provided.

I think that works.

Can we please set up the vote?

Chair, the motion has passed unanimously with those present.

Wonderful. Our next planning commission meeting will be held Thursday, 05/21/2026 at 05:30PM in the City Council Chamber. And it is 06:28, and I declare the meeting of 04/16/2026 adjourned.

I would I was