Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

you you Thank you for watching.

I can hear you.

do do Thank you.

Go. Recording in progress.

Chair, the meeting is now being recorded.

Thank you. I would like to call the regular meeting of August 24th, 2026 to order. Will the secretary please call roll?

Commissioner Guzman?

Present.

Commissioner Leo?

Here.

Commissioner Leyva? Commissioner Fim?

Here.

Commissioner Wu?

Here.

Vice Chair Benninger?

Present.

Chair Ramos? Present.

Chair, quorum has been reached at 5.33 p.m. Thank you. I'm now going to have Vice Chair Benninger lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you.

Before we begin, I would like to remind my fellow commissioners to turn your microphones on when speaking and off when not speaking. And when speaking, please place the microphones about four inches away from you. Thank you. For members of the public joining us this evening, Spanish and Vietnamese language interpreters are available. If you would like to listen to the meeting or provide public comments in Spanish or Vietnamese, please see staff in the lobby to pick up a headset.

Para los miembros del público que nos acompañan esta noche, hay intérpretes disponibles en español y vietnamita. Si desea escuchar la reunión o proporcionar comentarios públicos en español o vietnamita, por favor comuníquese con el personal en el vestíbulo para recoger audífonos.

For those of you who attended tonight's meeting, we have a Vietnamese interpreter to help you. If you want to listen to the meeting or express your opinion in Vietnamese, please meet the staff outside Hang Lang to get the microphone. Thank you.

Members of the public may attend the Planning Commission meeting either in person or virtually via Zoom. I now invite the Commission Secretary to describe how the public can access and participate in this meeting.

This meeting is being live streamed via our portal at www.santa-ana.primegov.com slash public slash portal and on YouTube at www.youtube.com slash cityofsenatanavideos. If you would like to provide public comment, you may do so in the following ways. JOIN THE MEETING VIA ZOOM, ENTER THE MEETING ID NUMBER 83819668615. WHEN THE ITEM YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON IS BEING DISCUSSED, PLEASE SELECT THE HAND ICON TO INDICATE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. ONCE CALLED UPON, REMEMBER TO UNMUTE YOURSELF AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. YOU CAN ALSO JOIN THE MEETING BY CALLING 9 0 0 6 8 3 3. Enter meeting ID number 8 3 8 1 9 6 6 8 6 1 5. When the item that you would like to comment on is being discussed, press 9 to let us know you would like to speak. You will be called upon by the last three digits of your phone number. After you are called upon, you may press 6 to unmute yourself. For those who are attending this meeting in person and would like to provide public comment, please fill out a request to speak form and turn it in to our staff in the lobby. All speakers will have three minutes to speak. I will alert you when your time is up.

Moving on to public comments on non-agenda or non-public hearing items. Secretary, does anyone wish to speak?

If you are attending this meeting in person and would like to comment on non-agenda or non-public hearing items, please fill out a request to speak form and turn it in into the secretary. If you are participating via Zoom and would like to comment on non-agenda or non-public hearing items, please select the hand icon to let us know that you would like to go ahead and comment.

I was at the last meeting and I came again today because I'm confused as to what items are being talked about or being discussed. I was under the impression that an overall review of zoning was being done throughout Santa Ana. I have some particular questions about our property on West Second Street in terms to how it's zoned.

Thank you. So this is not the time for a question and answer. And we are reviewing the zoning code update today. So if your comment is specific to the zoning code update, you might want to make it during that public hearing.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. With that, we will move on to the consent calendar where it is one motion for all consent items unless an item is pulled for separate discussion. Is there a motion to approve item A, minutes from August 10th, 2026, and item B, excused absences?

I move.

Second.

Thank you, we have a motion from Commissioner Wu with a second from Commissioner Guzman. Secretary, can you please call for a roll call vote?

Commissioner Guzman?

Aye.

Commissioner Liu?

Aye.

Commissioner Oliva? Commissioner Pham?

Aye.

Commissioner Wu?

Present.

Vice Chair Benninger? Present. Chair Ramos? Aye. Motion approved by majority vote with Commissioner Oliva absent.

Thank you. That concludes the consent calendar items. Now we are moving on to the public hearing. Before that, I would like to just share an announcement. So I was informed by staff that we will have to conclude today's meeting at 8.30 p.m. as there is a scheduled power outage for 9 p.m. So I share that to let you know that this meeting will end at 8.30 p.m., If the public hearing is not over by then, then this will be continued to a special meeting for next Monday, August 31st. As chair, I will not be rushing through this item. All speakers will continue to have their three minutes to speak. So now with that, I will now review, and I apologize for any inconvenience that that may have caused. We all learned about this just about an hour or two ago. Now with that, I will now review the process for tonight's public hearing so that everyone knows what to expect. Staff will provide a presentation and answer questions from the commission. The public testimony of the public hearing will be opened. This is a city-initiated item, and staff will provide a staff report. Members of the public will be given the opportunity to comment, limited to three minutes. The public testimony portion of the public hearing will be closed. Discussion will return to the commission with formal action taken to approve, deny, or continue review of the city-initiated action. Please consider the following suggestions when organizing your comments. You may state your name and address, that is strictly voluntary. State whether you support, oppose, or are neutral to the proposal. Your statement should include all pertinent facts within your knowledge. Please note decisions on these matters are final unless appealed within 10 days by any interested individual or party. Recommendations on these matters will be forwarded to the City Council at a later date for final determination. Now moving on to item one. This is the time and place for zoning ordinance amendment number 2026-03, zone change number 2026-0004, and general plan amendment number 2026-02 to comprehensively update chapter 41, zoning of the Santa Ana Municipal Code. Before we begin, do any commissioners have anything they wish to disclose with regard to this item? I will disclose that I have had conversations with several stakeholders. I've had conversations with residents from the Cornerstone Village Neighborhood Association, with members of New Song Church, with representatives for the business area over by Santiago and Penn, and with business owners over in the area by Chestnut and the train tracks. Does anyone else have any disclosures on any conversations that have taken place? Great. With that, the case planner, Siri Champion, will provide a brief presentation.

Thank you, Chair. And before Siri begins, I just want to open up by congratulating our community made up of our residents and our business owners, our planning commissioners, and so many others for the hard work and the many voices that have helped shape what we are presenting to the planning commission tonight. This is a zoning code update that has so much new in it that is thanks to the thousands and thousands of voices that partook in this process, whether it's for the first time having illustrations in the zoning code or other things that kind of modernize it, It is a code that's intended to further the city's economic development and housing production goals and many other arenas, streamline the development review process, not just for the community, but also right-size the process to reflect staff resources. So what you're gonna hear tonight is a comprehensive presentation from our team outlining in more detail the themes that I highlighted for you. But again, I wanna thank everyone for coming out tonight and again, share that congratulations that this is truly a milestone that we reached due in part to everyone's active participation.

Thank you and good evening. I appreciate the time of all the stakeholders who have shown up tonight and appreciate the time and attention of the commissioners. I will go ahead and share my screen As mentioned by the Chair previously, tonight the item before the Planning Commission is the Comprehensive Zoning Code Update, which is application number Zoning Ordinance Amendment 202603 and zone change number 20260004. This, as a Comprehensive Zoning Code Update, is citywide. The project involves repeal and replacement of the entirety of Chapter 41 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code which pertains to zoning. It also involves repealing and replacing the city's official zoning map. Tonight's staff's recommendation is that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council adoption of a resolution making findings pursuant to the public resources code relative to adoption of an addendum to the general plan EIR. Also, we recommend that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council adoption of an ordinance to approve zoning ordinance amendment number 2026-03 and Zone change number 2026-04. Begin with sharing the planning context for this comprehensive zoning code update. In April of 2022 the city prepared and adopted the city's general plan which is a broad vision for the city. It's mandated by state law and has been embraced by the city to achieve a vision and a set of values that are important to the city. There are a number of different elements that make up the general plan, including a community element, a mobility element, economic prosperity, public services, conservation, open space, noise, safety, land use, housing, historic preservation, and urban design. And the zoning code touches all of those different elements. We wanted to begin by sharing this concept of a sandbox. So the general plan is the sandbox that we work within as we implement a variety of things associated with the general plan. Some examples of implementation actions include preparation of public realms plans, the climate adaptation plan, the capital improvement plan, our active transportation plan, our retail market study plan, the parks master plan, vision zero plan and the zoning code. These all interact together to achieve the city's vision. In addition, there are regulatory mechanisms that are outside of the city's control that contribute to the quality of our living in the city of Santa Ana. Those include county health codes, air quality management plans, toxic release inventory programs, site mitigation and restoration programs, integrated regional water management plans, which are all related to outside agencies, such as the Department of Toxic Substance Control, Air Quality Management District, Water Quality Management District, and so forth. Zoning itself is an implementation action of the general plan. And it takes the vision, the land use vision of the general plan and applies that vision to parcel specific regulations accompanied by standards that create places that are fundamental to sustaining our economic vitality and our community well-being. Two fundamental components of that include jobs and housing. based on jobs and housing and viable jobs and housing balance, we're able to enhance the rest of our quality of living. Part of what we're doing today is zoning for jobs, including future-oriented, technologically advanced jobs such as water quality management or water quality testing, EV charging, or not EV charging, excuse me, EV engineering, electric vehicle engineering, the healthcare industry, elements of sustainability and resiliency, software development, and so forth. We're also zoning for housing today, which involves housing at all different levels of density and intensity from single family residential homes on the left, higher density homes such as apartment buildings in the middle and higher rise development on the right. These fit in various locations with the city and we recognize that not all development belongs in all places in the city. It's important to note that zoning is not a means for taking property through eminent domain. It's not a means to close businesses and it's not intended to displace tenants. This comprehensive zoning code update being presented tonight is a new approach to zoning that the city hasn't taken before. Elements of a contemporary zoning code presented to you include illustrations and tables. We've never seen that before in our code. Right sizing review processes so that we have staff who can efficiently process applications and meet the needs of the community including the development community. We're introducing a minor conditional use permit which will facilitate and streamline development. We're introducing objective design standards which also streamlines development and reduces the need for negotiation over design concerns relative to housing as well as other types of uses. We're also talking about land use compatibility and coming up with strategies to address where incompatible uses have historically been close to one another. The zoning code also implements a focused growth strategy that was adopted in the general plan whereby development is focused in key opportunity areas and the rest of the city is intended to be preserved and enhanced as it is today. It's also an economic and community development strategy. And finally, it's an opportunity to embrace our heritage and we've incorporated standards relative to heritage and historic properties. Next we'll introduce the land use and zoning map and break it down into different use categories. So first in terms of jobs and employment, we have a handful of different districts that are intended to preserve and enhance our current jobs. We have the light industrial in M1 and the heavy industrial in the M2, both of those appear in the map in gray. We've got commercial districts, C1, C2, and C3 in the red. And we have professional administrative office, P1, P2, P3, and P4 in pinks. These are places where jobs are important to the community and where many of our residents work today. The new provisions for employment-oriented uses include the ability to build on non-conforming lots. This applies citywide, but it's an important note because when it comes to redevelopment of existing properties, we need to be able to build on unusually shaped or unusually sized lots. Specific to the office category, we have expanded and diversified uses and flexible adaptive reuse standards. With respect to commercial, we've got an improved environment for commercial development through parking flexibility, through more signage options, and through nonconformity provisions which enable redevelopment of older commercial developments. Lastly, for industrial uses, we have expanded and diversified set of uses and changes to nonconformities to facilitate redevelopment and continued operations of existing industrial uses. Across all districts, we have new parking standards and new sign standards, which are intended to facilitate development and improvement of our existing employment zones. We're also introducing the minor conditional use permit as mentioned previously. This minor conditional use permit is a staff level discretionary land use entitlement. And we've incorporated many different types of uses that can be approved administratively, which include indoor commercial recreation, adult daycare, large retail establishments in certain zones, artisan crafts manufacturing, vehicle rental facilities, laundromats, and light recycling or processing. It's important to note that these uses aren't approved through a minor conditional use permit in all zones, but where appropriate, they are subject to a minor conditional use permit under the decision-making authority of the director. For housing, we have four main districts. First, we have the majority of the city in the single-family residential zone, which is R1. We have smaller pockets of R2, which is low-medium density residential. our three in the orange rep is the medium residential districts and then lastly we have a small pocket of corridor residential each of those increase in density from seven units to the acre up to 30 dwelling units to the acre New provisions for housing include, again, the ability to build on non-conforming lots. And then more specifically to residential, we have the incorporation of objective design standards, which as mentioned previously, is helpful to the review process because it creates predictability on the part of developers and helps staff to work through the review process with their applicants. Also in terms of enhancing our residential communities, we've incorporated increased lot coverage which is consistent with current demands. We see a demand for less open space on individual parcels of single family residential and demands for more square footage for livable area. In addition, we've added fencing materials that weren't previously allowed and we've added allowances for enhancements to those fences. And lastly, we've incorporated neighborhood serving uses in order to allow residents to be able to operate businesses locally and to serve one another's needs within a neighborhood context. Lastly, on the right-hand side, you can see the adaptive reuse ordinance, which enables the production of housing in districts where the sites are eligible and they can be converted from non-residential uses to residential uses. And the image shows an example of a recent award-winning adaptive reuse project in the city. Then we have focused growth in a set of areas throughout the city which accomplish both housing and jobs. On the left you see the map from the general plan which indicates five focus areas where we concentrate that growth. On the right hand side we see the zones where growth is enabled through the zoning ordinance. These opportunity areas or focus areas were identified during the general plan update process in partnership with the general plan advisory committee and then evaluated by decision makers before adoption. These zoning districts are influenced by past success which we've seen in the Harbor mixed use transit corridor and specific development number 84 also known as the transit zoning code and in the Metro East mixed use overlay. Provisions in these urban neighborhood and district center zoning districts include objective design standards, zero lot lines and maximum setbacks to bring the buildings closer to the front of the property in order to create a walkable and bikeable comfortable environment. It also allows for a mixture of uses including residential and commercial office and entertainment uses. These in some areas would be required to be non-residential on the ground floor to stimulate activity on the ground floor and in other areas it could be wholly residential. Also we've incorporated ways to transition from residential neighborhoods to these higher density areas. So those neighborhoods that have single family residential with small scale houses would see a transition so that there isn't a block wall immediately adjacent to the residential neighborhood and instead there are step backs to transition to the higher density residential and mixed use. Lastly, there are provisions for the mixed use zoning districts as they relate to the public realm. And this slide here is intended to communicate what we mean by public realm plans. There's a dashed line down the center of the sidewalk that communicates the public right of way on one side and the private realm on the other side. And through the public realm plans and the zoning code, we're creating an opportunity for pedestrians to have a wider area to sit, to relax, to find shade, and to enjoy mixed-use environments. Next, moving on to stakeholder input. Early in the process, we heard a variety of feedback from a wide range of stakeholders. During round one, round two, we heard a lot of support for the growth strategy, which included walkable mixed-use transit-oriented areas. And we also heard an important value of preserving existing neighborhoods and the transition between neighborhoods. These are both consistent with the general plan. We also heard concern about the residential industrial interface and existing conditions and historic pollution. We also heard about economic development and feasibility, including concerns about signage and design, the requirements for too much open space and requirements for too much parking, which are very different from the concerns that we heard from residential stakeholders who felt that open space was not enough and parking is not enough in the city. On to land use compatibility. One of the hot topics that we heard about was this residential industrial interface and that's a very important component of the general plan. And so we'll dive in for a little bit into the land use compatibility concerns. The residential industrial interface includes areas of the city where residences are in very close proximity to industrial uses. As you can see on this slide, in some places we have residential neighborhoods right of way for railroad tracks and then industrial warehouses and other types of industrial uses. The city operates within a larger regulatory context, and this slide is intended to communicate that businesses in the middle have to apply for permits from Air Quality Management District, from the Fire Authority, from water and state regulatory agencies, from the Department of Toxic Substances Control, and the Orange County Healthcare Agency. So the city has one role to play in terms of land use and permitting, and these other agencies have roles to play when it comes to the emissions and the operations of these businesses. The comprehensive zoning code retains our current noxious uses ordinance which is an important note for the residential industrial interface. I won't read this slide but essentially where there is a noxious use close to sensitive receptors we require a conditional use permit if that use is allowed. Another important note is that the nonconformity section is unchanged and requires a discontinuation of noxious uses and also has a provision for serial violators. So if a business has ongoing violations of their permits with those outside regulatory agencies, then the city has the authority to enforce those businesses. The comprehensive zoning code includes operational standards in the residential industrial interface that go beyond the standard citywide. These additional good neighborhood, or these additional good neighbor operational standards include limiting hours for exterior noise and vibration, require enclosed operations, which doesn't necessarily mean enclosed within a building, but enclosed on the site so that business operations aren't visible to the surrounding neighbors. It also includes operational standards for air emissions and dust, hazardous materials, waste materials, and truck parking, loading and idling. The strategy for the residential industrial interface also includes a wide variety of non-industrial uses to promote the transition to more neighborhood oriented types of businesses. I won't go over all of these, but the intent is to communicate that there's a wide range of uses that would be allowed beyond the industrial uses in the residential industrial interface. Moving on to the public draft. We published the draft of the Comprehensive Zoning Code to the public for comments on July 20th, 2026. And since that time we've received a significant amount of public input. Comments on the public draft really fall into two main categories, including those related to environmental justice and public health, as well as industrial zoning and flexibility for businesses. On the environmental justice and public health side, we've heard for a change in allowed land uses wanting to see us pull back on the number of industrial uses that are allowed. We also heard about the creation of pollution buffers and we also heard about remediation goals. Remediation is something that's beyond the scope of the zoning code that has to do with historic pollution and the zoning code really looks forward at what we can do to create clean industrial uses that really minimize impacts to surrounding uses. In terms of industrial zoning and flexibility that we heard from the business community, we also heard change the allowed land uses that were included in the draft comprehensive zoning code. We also received comments about adjusting operational standards and creating flexibility for legal non-conforming uses. So we made a variety of changes for the Public Hearing Draft. And I'd like to invite the Planning Commission and members of the public to take a look at a handout that we've created for today. It was posted online and you can also find it online on the Zoning Code Update website. We have a variety of changes that have been made and the handouts are in the back in the foyer along with the agenda for today and then they're also located up front. Key changes with respect to uses include allowing grocery stores in the residential-industrial interface and the flex zoning districts. The same is true for this third one down, retail establishments large. Previously they were not allowed in the residential-industrial interface and now they would be allowed with approval of a conditional use permit. Equipment sales and rental heavy is one thing that we heard from the business stakeholders. And they asked for it to be included in the flex zoning districts. And after consideration we've now incorporated those as an allowed use with approval of a conditional use permit. And in the residential industrial interface there's no change proposed. They would be allowed with approval of a conditional use permit as well. Contractors' yards were shifted from a permitted use to a CUP in both the flex and the residential industrial interface. Data centers were removed from the table. Laundry and dry cleaning plans were shifted from permitted to not allowed in both the flex and the residential industrial zoning districts. Recycling collection facilities were changed from a land use certificate to not allowed in the residential industrial interface. The same is true, sorry, not the same is true for recycling collection facilities large. They are not allowed in the flex and they were changed from a CUP to not being allowed in the residential industrial interface. The same thing is true for recycling processing facilities, both light and heavy, which are no longer proposed to be allowed in the residential industrial interface. Lastly, in terms of uses that were allowed, research laboratories continue to be included, but we removed the allowance for hazardous waste as part of the research laboratory uses. The storage of hazardous materials has been removed. And then with respect to battery energy storage systems, they were changed from a minor conditional use permit to not being allowed in the flex, the residential industrial interface and the M1 zoning district. For freight bus and truck terminals, there was no change to the flex. They are allowed with a conditional use permit. In the residential industrial interface, they were changed from a conditional use permit to not allowed. And there was no change in the M1 or the M2 zoning districts. And then lastly, rail facilities were moved from the table. I know that was a lot to cover but that was a really important component for our stakeholders and so I wanted to take the time to really look at that closely. Additional changes that were made to the public hearing draft include standards applicable to residential development and improvements near the RE. So we have included requirements for the orientation of buildings, for landscaping, and for other aspects of residential development close to the residential industrial interface so that we can create those carbon sinks that we talked about at the last Planning Commission study session. And we also applied additional landscaping requirements for the industrial side in that industrial interface, residential industrial interface. We've also proposed modified operational standards, including clarifications about outdoor business activity. So when the code talks about enclosed business activity, that for the purposes of storage and parking of vehicles, the movement of vehicles and goods, and the temporary staging of materials and goods, those in the current draft would be allowed business activities outdoors, provided that they're screened and meet certain design and development standards. And then lastly, for operational standards, we've extended the hours for business activity outdoors that create noise and vibrations to 6 a.m. rather than 7 a.m. in the morning. Additional changes to the public hearing draft include looking at nonconformities. This was a topic that we heard a lot about from the business constituents. We added provisions for residential development to build at higher density or residential development that was built at higher densities. So in some cases in the zoning code or in the general plan, the density of development went from higher density residential to lower density residential. This change in the non-conformity section allows them to continue as legal conforming uses and not non-conforming. We also remove limitations on restoration after calamities. So previously we had a requirement that no more than 60% of the structure be rebuilt and replaced. And now 100% of the building could be rehabilitated after a calamity. Lastly, we've incorporated provisions for multi-tenant structures and multi-tenant sites and sites with multiple structures. So if there's a nonconformity within an individual tenant that, let me back up. So for multi-tenant projects, if there's a single tenant that's nonconforming, that doesn't render the entire project nonconforming, and that individual tenant space can be re-tenanted. If the entire development that has multiple tenants becomes vacated, then the non-conforming provisions would apply. The same is similarly true for multiple structures. So sites with multiple structures could be expanded, provided that there wasn't a change to the existing non-conforming structure on the site. Another aspect of the comprehensive zoning code update is general plan cleanup. Through the process of looking at the zoning districts, we found that there are a handful of sites in the focus areas and in commercial areas where the general plan doesn't include split designations. And so we're incorporating a general plan cleanup to address those split designations. There are four different sites and six different parcels that are affected by this proposed general plan cleanup. They're distributed as shown on the map on the left throughout the city. And with the recommended action figures, land use element figure LU1 and LU4 would be updated in the general plan. In terms of general plan consistency, the zoning code update is consistent with many different aspects of the community element, including four environmental justice policies. It's consistent with the mobility element in seven different policies. Economic prosperity is consistent with eight policies and two environmental justice policies. With respect to public services, the comprehensive zoning code is consistent with one environmental justice policy. In the conservation element, the zoning code touches on nine policies, including one and one environmental justice policy. And with respect to open space, the comprehensive zoning code is consistent with one policy as well as three environmental justice policies. At the heart of the matter, the comprehensive zoning code update implements these policies that speak to open space, speak to a mixture of compatible, a mixture of uses, pedestrian-oriented uses, compatibility between uses, and the retention of industrial properties. The zoning code update is also consistent with four policies in the noise element, five policies in the safety element, and one environmental justice policy. 21 policies in the land use element, 12 environmental justice policies in the land use element. And the code is consistent with 16 policies in the housing element, four policies in the historic element, and many policies, including 26 in the urban design element, and three environmental justice policies in the urban design element. Again, these policies have to do with airport safety, noise from airports. The land use policies are wide ranging and have to do with development in the city. As mentioned previously, this includes preservation of existing neighborhoods and the enhancement and focused development in the growth areas, as well as retention of the housing and, sorry, as well as retention of the employment zoning districts. In terms of public notification, we noticed in the newspaper, which was the required legal component, importantly though, we also sent over 140,000 postcards to occupants and property owners throughout the city. We sent multiple emails to our stakeholder list and we posted on social media. As a result, we've now had contact quantifiable outreach to or through about or over a million touch points. Lastly, in terms of CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act and fiscal impact. So pursuant to section 15162 and 15164 of the CEQA guidelines, the comprehensive zoning code update and the general plan cleanup do not involve substantial changes to the conditions that were analyzed in the general plan environmental impact report. There were also no substantial changes to circumstances and no new information was presented. The project will not have significant effects that have not been discussed or analyzed in the environmental impact report. There are no significant effects that will be more severe than previously examined. The mitigation measures continue to be feasible. And the mitigation measures included with this addendum are not different from those that were analyzed in the environmental impact report for the general plan update. And finally, there's no fiscal impact associated with this action. Finally, in terms of staff's recommendation, again, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution to make the findings pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and to adopt the addendum to the General Plan Update Final Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report And to adopt an ordinance approving zoning ordinance amendment number 2026-03 and approving zone change number 2026-0004. With that, staff is available for questions and we're here for your discussion. In addition to the city staff, we also have two members of our consultant team here to help with any technical questions. We also have members of staff from the Neighborhood Initiatives and Environmental Services team, the Economic Development Agency, and I believe Public Works is here as well.

Thank you. Thank you. Before I take questions, I would like to just share that, well, one, we apologize that the key revisions made in public hearing draft, the handout that is available up front and in the lobby, was not made available tonight in Spanish or Vietnamese. We apologize for that as we do provide interpretation for those languages. These documents should have also been made available in those languages tonight. If anybody needs any assistance, understanding the document because it was not made available in your language, you may please step over here with staff where they are happy to help you. And these documents will be prepared in those languages and uploaded online after tonight. So again, we apologize for that and thank you for your understanding. And with that, I am now gonna go ahead and take questions and comments from the commission for staff. Commissioner Wu.

In preparation for tonight's meeting, I was kind of curious because something triggered as I was listening from the comments from our first session. from the public, the changes since those that were here when most of this was farmland and unoccupied land to what it is today. And I put myself in the position of remembering the 13 neighborhoods that I came to organize late 1970s, and what those residents told me about their neighborhood. And one that's a strength of the, it seems, of this update is that it responded to what their vision for the future seemed to be. They wanted strong, viable, safe neighborhoods. They wanted jobs. And there was a relationship between those residents that were not allowed to live downtown, nor were they the McFaddens and some of the earlier people with money and influence, but they were the workers that built the housings all around us, that farmed the land, that worked in the factory. And there was a relationship between WHERE THEY LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE GROSSEST STORE DOWN THE BLOCK BECAUSE THERE WAS NO BIG CHAIN STORE. THE CHURCH BULLETIN BECAUSE THERE WAS NO CELL PHONES AND NO SOCIAL MEDIA TO TELL THEM. THEY LEARNED EVERYTHING FROM THE CHURCH BULLETIN OR MEETINGS THAT THE CHURCH LEADERS HAD TO INFORM THEM WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE COMMUNITY. AND THE FACTORIES, LIKE IN THE DELHAI NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY HAD the Domino Sugar Company would provide a lot of jobs, Cherry Taxon, several other sub-assembly type of jobs, that they were able to work, save their money, buy some house, and when their family outgrew that, they rented that house and bought a bigger house. And they keep moving around Santa Ana. And in those neighborhoods, They were built along the railroad track out on the exterior where the freeways were, and the city came to them because they were not allowed downtown. And that relationship between the neighborhood, the factories, and all that kind of worked out. And then the odd thing is that the anomaly, the non-conforming use, which does happen, I think that we're trying to address it because we started with a vision, a seven-year process that resulted in a revision of the general plan that embodied all these hopes and dreams. that we all put in together, including the businesses. Now, is everything perfect? No, but I think there's a way of remedying it. If you read 400 pages of this thing, throughout there, it outlines specifically what happens in the different zones. And then if there's some non-conforming use, there's an administrative process which you can bring it up and kind of deal with it. And I can't speak... enough about the relationship local churches provide in these communities, although they may have somewhat changed now these days. You may have people that were the original congregation, but now they moved to Riverside, but they come back on Sunday. Johnson Chapel is one of those in the Artesia Pilar neighborhood. It's not only the Catholic Church, it's the Black Church that's helped to build the city too. And I think that the update honors that relationship, not specifically for each church, but it honors it in a way that in its only, it recognizes it and it also provide ways of addressing non-compatibility and these kinds of things. So I just want to state that as an observation about the general plan. that it deals with grocery stores, the little store where you don't want to drive to Target or Vons, but you just need some tortillas because you're in the middle of cooking something and you can't get tomato paste, and you'd send your kid riding on a bike or skateboarding over there to buy something from the local grocery store. And in the Delhi neighborhood, that was my wife's family. You know, they had the grocery store across the church in Del High, and there was a symbiotic relationship between the two in the neighborhood. And in those days, the priests held a little more sway over people, and today's generation is a little different because they have social media and other kinds of things to get their information. So the gathering, the... coming together in a neighborhood doesn't seem to be as rich as I've visited these neighborhoods, just driving through and remembering the stories that they told me about... uh... the issues that they were facing with the city in terms of discrimination but they also uh... spelled out ways that they were able to work with the city to make those changes to those uh... situation they also remember making deals with the industries in in their area and were able to work out their differences uh... and and kind of correct some of the problem so uh... and it was done without yelling it was done by getting together and and working out the different things so I'm kind of elated about the attempt here to make it easier for everyone to understand and I counted about 114 responses from the public through going to their website and adding their little comment next to the things that they were concerned about, and the letters that we have gotten, too, which shows some interest and some of it very positive in terms of what we're trying to do. And I'm also grateful to Commissioner Leo in bringing the subject of, and STRESSING THAT WE DO NEED THESE INDUSTRIAL JOBS. THEY'RE THE KIND OF ENTRY LEVEL JOBS THAT WE CAN PROVIDE TO OUR KIDS THAT THEY HAVE A PLACE TO START AND GROW AND THEN MOVE ON. except for some of the kids today are smarter, they know how to use the computer, they're thinking about building their own drone factory and stuff like that because they have the knowledge through the computer to do some other entrepreneurial business, which I welcome that if they do and they get a contract that they will be able to find more jobs in their neighborhood. So I think my question to the staff is, Is that the attempt that we're trying to do in terms of the update, Sari, that you went out, you talked to people, you solicited, you tried to make the changes in response to it, so it wasn't like we don't want to hear from you, you know, go away, so there was none of that, right?

That's absolutely correct. I think it's important to first underline that the outreach really began with the general plan. Over the course of seven years, there was a lot of engagement with the community members and the business community that arrived at the plan that we have now, which we're working to implement through the comprehensive zoning code update.

And I understand that some neighborhood association and some group invited you to come out to their territory, to their place, and to ask questions, right?

Correct. So throughout the process, we have hosted workshops and more formal activities, but we also have had ongoing conversations by phone, by email, Zoom, in-person meetings here at City Hall, and then we've also gone out into the community to meet stakeholders where they are.

so my third question is in those special district to increase density and increase uh housing they follow a pattern of what is already happening in that area so the update to the zoning is to continue to uh let the positive forces continue but having an avenue to deal with other people that may want to come into the area and do something totally different than what is already going on. For instance, around 17th Street, you have the official office, and someone wanted to put a fertilizer factory, would not be conducive. You're right in saying that you're not coming out of the blue to decide that we need to update it, but it follows a pattern of what's already going on.

Correct. I think there was a natural evolution during the general plan update process to identify those areas. They, at the time, were already developing and represented areas of the city that were ripe for redevelopment activities and new development because they're transit-oriented. They're in areas where the land uses were limited not at the highest and best use at that time and so over time they're going to become more and more, more and more developed consistent with the city's vision.

And so, these zoning changes is not specifically targeting an individual property owner or individual business or individual institution, but it follows what already exists there and you're trying to make that into something that can, not you're trying to make something, but you're trying to make the zoning compatible with what's existing there.

Correct, make the zoning compatible with the general plan and making sure that existing developments are compatible within their own sites.

And the last part is, so we're gonna make a recommendation should we arrive before nine o'clock that we forward to the city council which then has the final decision. Hopefully they have read the 400 pages heard all the public testimony and understand also what we've been dealing with over the years, in my case, about the last eight years of watching this process go through and that we can unite the city both businesses and residents along the same line about using this to grow what the general plan has in mind for the vision of Santa Ana, which is a different vision when I arrived here, because in that vision, we weren't even recognized as being included, and then we got the All-American City Award, we started recognizing that we need to deal with issues with the police we need to deal with issues of non-conforming businesses and um you know deal with cruising and a lot of other things uh and so slowly but slowly uh i think the city is responding in different ways to make it better for everyone and then that's that's what we're trying to do in terms of zoning right um so um Those are my question and I'm hopeful that we'd be specific in our observation and objective in terms of us hearing, because we wanted to hear what the community is responding after we get our say. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Wu. Commissioner Pham? Or would you like me to come back to you? Commissioner Guzman?

Thank you, Chair. I have a question regarding the residential industrial interface and the businesses that exist now should the zoning code be adopted as drafted and non-conforming use. So I'm going to walk through it. So if the zoning code gets adopted, some of the businesses there will not be non-conforming, will be non-conforming uses or will their use remain compliant with industrial as it's being zoned? Is that clear?

I'm not sure.

Yes, that's a great question. I appreciate that. And it's a keen concern for many stakeholders. So the answer is that it's mixed. Within the use tables for the industrial zoning district, we see the residential industrial interface. And there are many uses that currently are permitted in the light industrial zoning district. And the residential industrial interface is similar to that. As proposed tonight, though, there are some industrial uses that would be removed. And so those that are removed from the residential industrial interface would become nonconforming.

»» And can you walk me through, so they get grandfathered in, correct?

»» Many people use the term grandfathered, yes.

»» They're nonconforming. »» Yes. »» The existing use is grandfathered until it becomes what? So when does it fall out of their protected non-conforming use status?

Sure. There are a couple different circumstances and I hate to say it, but it does depend. Yes. So non-conforming uses and structures, generally speaking, are allowed to continue through the life of the use or the structure. If they want to make a change to the site, rehabilitate something, that's when we have to look carefully at what they are proposing to do. General maintenance is fine. But if there's rehabilitation that incorporates an expansion, then we run into some challenges potentially. But there are provisions in the code that will allow the expansion that goes along with rehabilitation. It becomes more complicated when we have noxious uses. So a noxious use has less options because with the noxious uses ordinance, if a nonconforming noxious use needs a CUP or a certificate of occupancy for anything other than the change in name without the change in ownership, the nonconforming status is discontinued and they no longer have the right to continue.

So in that area, if there's a change of ownership of the building, it retains its non-conforming use status? Is that right?

If it's noxious, then there's an issue with the change in ownership. But the majority of the time, it would be no problem, and that business could be sold, the property could be sold, and the non-conforming business would be able to continue.

Yeah, I think that's the question I had. Okay, thank you.

And Commissioner, I just wanted to highlight a little bit more examples, because I think it's beneficial for everyone in the audience. So thank you, Siri. So non-conforming is a status. It's a status that a business or a building can be in, right? So a business that, for example, from the proposed use table is removed, then the business then becomes legal non-conforming. If the building is already nonconforming, meaning it doesn't have today's setback standards or today's parking or things like that, development standards, then the building is already nonconforming. So nonconforming can come from virtue of what's inside the building and also how the site was built. Now, coming back to what is nonconforming, I just want to highlight, again, there's a lot of questions about this. It's not amortization. So basically, amortization is a tool that government agencies may give themselves to say, hey, not only are you nonconforming, but we're going to develop a ranking list of the worst businesses, and we're going to one by one go down and work with them to say, your time is up in a certain time period. But that's not nonconforming status. That's amortization. It has a different name. It's defined separately, everything. So I just want to be clear. in the transit zoning code updates from last summer the planning commission and the city council did enact amortization because the issues in the logan and lacey neighborhood are so different in many ways than citywide right you have a checkerboard pattern of land uses and a 157 year history there that complicates the matter whereas here some of the severity of that is not as evenly prevalent in these other areas of the city So coming back to the noxious as well, Siri was correct. If a change in property owner or business occurs, then it loses its nonconforming status, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the business automatically shuts down. What it means is that now it's subject to the noxious uses ordinance, which gives basically three options. Option number one, apply for the required conditional use permit. go through the Planning Commission. It's a discretionary action. The Planning Commission may say yes, but with conditions. Or the Planning Commission may say, not anymore, bad idea, we vote to deny this. And even then, there's appeal rights. Option number two is modify the business to remove the component that is triggering the noxious uses ordinance. So if, for example, you have an auto body repair shop and it has a spray booth, and the spray booth emits into the atmosphere, the auto body shop may say, you know what, I'll just remove the spray booth from my operations. I no longer need this, or I don't want to go through the headache of a CUP, and they may just elect to make that modification to the business. And the third option is actually remove the triggers that are causing the noxious category, which is the emissions part or the storage or the handling part. We've actually had success with auto body shops that had spray booths and working with AQMD to say, hey, you know what? Instead of emitting into the atmosphere, I'm just gonna put double, triple carbon filters on my business. And instead of emitting into the atmosphere, I'll just capture it onsite and dispose of it in a landfill. Right, and so actually that is in many ways an ideal outcome because the business invested in modernizing its equipment and reduced the airborne or particulate emissions into the atmosphere. So as Siri was saying, it's complicated. It truly is business by business and it depends on use and building construction configuration. but the code that's been crafted before you makes sure to be clear that businesses do have rights under non-conforming ordinances, and unless the Planning Commission tonight pivoted and said, we love this, but we also want amortization, there's nothing in the code that would say, and I've said it before and I'll say it again, nothing in the code that says if it gets adopted on day one, the city's gonna go take away their keys.

I think those are all my only questions for now. I may wanna ask additional points based on what comes out.

Thank you. Commissioner Liu?

Thank you. First of all, now that we have, I think, as many documents as we can read, and the full details of the plan, first of all, thank you for the work. I know it took a lot of work. I know there were lots of meetings. I know there's some people who think we didn't have enough meetings. We may have more meetings. This is a long process. The general plan took how long? How many years? Seven years. Seven years. How many years have we been at this?

We're going on three.

Three. So we've sped up a little bit, but it takes time. We're talking about the whole city, not just parts of it. So let me start off with, I think we're getting there. I think we're close, closer than we were before. We need to figure out a way to get to win-win with businesses and with those that are concerned about the environment. I think you've seen the comments from everyone. That's kind of, we're there. I think we need to kind of move it along and kind of maybe there's more meetings that have to take place so that people are comfortable in the direction we're going. People have heard me say before that I'm really focused on economic development. And it's something I want to walk through on some things tonight on so that the public has an idea of kind of what we're thinking about. Because every morning people see cars and trucks leaving the city. Those are residents that are leaving the city, going somewhere else to work, probably spending buying lunch somewhere else or bringing their own lunch. I want to figure out a way, and I think we're getting there, to allowing some of those people to work closer to their home so that we set the table so that jobs that are created are for people who can get closer to their home, i.e., that helps with the environment, less cars on the road, less shorter drive, that kind of stuff. So this is kind of part of my thinking because I just think that we see so many residents leaving the city for work. It's a normal thing. But we can figure out a way to adjust it, and figure out ways we can set the table, because I think there's a lot of businesses in town that would like to hire locally. And our kids, as Alan said, deserve that chance. High end jobs, middle range jobs, whatever it may be, and we have educational institutions, specifically Santa Ana College, that will retrain people who, for whatever reason, lose the skills that they don't need, that they're not using, or that they need new skills. Well, that's one point where I'm kind of thinking about. I think the recent discussion that Commissioner Guzman raised along with what Ali mentioned about noxious uses is that the city has a small piece of the noxious use issue. There are outside agencies that could easily close down businesses if you're not in compliance with AQMD guidelines. DTSC, Department of Toxic Substance Controls. There's plenty of other folks that can shut businesses down that we do not because we don't have that authority. So that's another issue, and that's why I think we're getting closer. But I wanted you to walk me through. I want you to walk me through retail zone, and it's kind of like Harbor mixed use, but let's take 17th Street because there's a hodgepodge on 17th Street. Walk me through, I'll give you something not as complex, but complex enough. So let's say I'm a restaurant owner, but I have a small either cigar lounge or I have a small hookah lounge that's attached to my restaurant. See them all over Anaheim, parts of Lake Forest and elsewhere. Walk me through that process if I'm on 17th and say, I don't know, bush or 17th and i don't know one of those streets where there's a strip mall that we've got now that we could we could we need to revitalize and it may not have parking right there are some strip malls that don't have parking some that have plenty so can you walk me through kind of what the process is for a business owner it's got to go through that through the retail process because we spent plenty of time on the industrial flex last time If you can walk me through the retail so that people have a sense and the public has a sense. Kind of what the city's trying to do with the main corridors. Because the main corridors are where we're going to generate sales tax and jobs. We're not going to interrupt neighborhoods. That's not something we're doing. So kind of walk us through the process. That would be helpful.

Commissioner and commissioners, if you're hearing that static buzzing, just kindly check if your cell phones are too close to the microphones. Okay.

Thank you for that. So to really break it down for our audience members in addition to you as a Planning Commissioner, I think this is a great example of what can be done in a commercial zone. And I am trying to look up quickly the zoning code, but the first step in the process would be to look at whether or not a use is permitted or not. And in this situation, what I hear is it's an existing restaurant looking to add to its business offerings by incorporating a hookah lounge or a cigar lounge to its operations. And I'm having trouble finding it, but I know that we added hookah lounges and cigar cigar lounges to the list of permitted uses. I just don't remember specifically where and with what permit.

So that use commissioner was added to the district center zoning districts? and would be permitted as ancillary to the eating establishment, subject to a conditional use permit. So they need a CUP? They would need a CUP currently, and then hookah lounges currently in the code are prohibited, so this would be a use that is being reintroduced into the zoning code.

And is there, so let's say, is it an 80-20 split between restaurant and hookah lounge, or can it be only hookah lounge, because that obviously brings its own problems? But what I'm asking you, is it ancillary to the restaurant? Because there are plenty in Anaheim, like all over the place. The processes of this, because what I'm trying to figure out is, and I think what the public is gonna try to figure out is, what businesses will be coming? Because we've done our business up here to try to figure out what to do downtown. We've twisted in pretzels to make things work because we needed to. And what I'm trying to say is this zoning code is one that will allow us to make it a little easier. Because there are people in the city that are willing to take a risk. We've seen young people come here and take a risk to open a restaurant. We want to make sure they know what's happening so it's easier for them and not as complicated. And they can email you or do it online. So that's why I'm asking the questions.

So in terms of developing a new use, like I was saying, the first step is to look up whether or not a use is permitted. And in this case, 17th Street is not part of the district center zoning district, so that would not be an option there. The nice thing about the new zoning code is that we'll have a single matrix where you can look up every use that you're interested in developing. You could see where in the city, city-wide, it could be developed. The next step is to look at the standards citywide for parking, open space, other types of improvements that come along with redevelopment. And one of the things that we've done for places like 17th Street is to recognize that there's a lot of existing non-conforming areas. commercial centers that are out there. And so in the non-conforming section, we've incorporated some flexibility so that there's opportunity to become, to come into greater conformance without having to come into full compliance with the new code regulations. We've also incorporated some flexibility to the parking standards so that if you have complementary uses throughout the commercial center, the parking arrangements can reflect that complementary use where some of them are daytime uses, some of them are nighttime uses, and you can accommodate the parking on the site without having to accommodate one parking space for every single square foot or every single seat within the shopping center. So those are some of the things that we would look at. Another thing that we've done that facilitates the redevelopment that you're describing is the allowance for new signage, new sign types that might fit the development better than the current offerings within the zoning code.

That helps and I think What I'm hearing you say is that we have tried to figure out a way where business owners or people interested in opening a business will be able to look at the map and figure out, okay, I can do this here, I can't do this here, because we have non-conforming and really odd stuff all over this city. If you've lived here long enough, you know. Right, I'm always amazed at what 17th looks like. I'm always amazed what behind First Street looks like. Like Chestnut, we've got high rise, basically four and five story apartment complexes that were probably single family homes, right? But those are the ills and the mistakes of people in the past. And so we have to live with what we have. And so I appreciate all the work, I think We're gonna need a little bit more time to digest all of it, but I think that we're going in the right direction and I think the best thing is as long as we have dialogue, we'll figure our way through all of this. But considering that I've got another four years given the general plan, so you know, we're way ahead of schedule on the zoning code. So thank you for now. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Femme or Vice Chair Bennett? Commissioner Femme, go ahead.

In general, these lists of revisions, were they all requested revisions or were there some revisions that were requested during the public hearing and some we were just cleaning up vis-a-vis this newest draft?

The revisions are a combination of things. One is a staff rereading and identifying where we can be more clear, identifying where we have inconsistent information. So it's more cleanup for a lot of the revisions. But I think the more important revisions have to do with those comments that we receive from the public. So those include concerns like the public or the business stakeholders who are concerned about what does enclosed operations mean. And so we clarified language related to enclosed operations. From the perspective of the residential stakeholders, we heard a lot about specific uses that they were concerned with seeing in their neighborhoods. And so we worked on making edits to the allowed uses table and we reflected on what we heard from the business community stakeholders as well to see if there was conflicts or if we had some opportunities to make adjustments that may be amenable to both. And so, for example, we haven't heard anything from the business community that says, no, we want hazardous storage, hazardous waste storage. And so we very comfortably removed that from the list of allowed uses.

I saw that the data center was striked from basically all use within the city. Correct. Is that because it was requested by the public or as a general city kind of direction, we did not want data centers inside the city?

It's something that we discussed as staff and it was something that the community members commented on and asked for. Okay.

And then I, you know, When I reviewed the document, there's a lot of broader kind of general themes that we were moving towards, but then there were also some very detailed changes. One in particular was for residential section that front yard fences over 18 inch will now need to be permitted. So something like that seems like a passing detail, but I think it's very impactful to all the residents within the city. 18 inch is not much. Most front yard fence would be probably three feet, ideally, if they were to put up a front yard fence. So in that case, would it put existing front yard fences in noncompliance? Or is it just new front yard fences that are being brought, that have been put up in newer developments?

Commissioner, that standard is existing in our code today. So anything under 18 inches does not require a permit. Anything over 18 inches would. and then the proposed zoning code continues what we currently practice.

Okay, so it's not a change of, it used to be an, okay. And my other question is, there seems to be a lot of mention of if an existing property, open space doesn't kind of meet the requirement of the new zoning, that if the existing property if a property owner were to add more units onto their property or if there were new alterations to the property, there wouldn't be a kind of look back at, hey, you're missing open space, so you need to provide that open space. Am I understanding that correctly?

The open space requirements apply to residential, generally speaking. There are ways that you can request to develop, not inconsistent, but to reduce the open space provided on site. But I think you're referring specifically to the adaptive reuse section. And one of the things that we've found is that we're not seeing as much adaptive reuse as we'd like because it's very difficult for an existing office building, for example, to provide open space on site. So there might be an opportunity for a roof deck, for example, but there may not be an opportunity for a playground on the ground level. And so by removing these open space requirements in targeted areas, we can achieve housing goals in places where housing is suitable without needing to provide additional open space.

But to promote more development.

Correct.

And then, I'm sorry, but it's very, these are more detailed questions than larger pictures, but it just piqued my curiosity why things are changed a certain way. There was another change. There was a development of front porch or a recess entry used to be at a minimum four feet. Now we've changed it to between two to four feet. It's an intention, meaning, the entry would be max four feet at a minimum two feet. So entries won't be able to be recessed further because the previous language sounds like at a minimum four feet, it could be recessed 10 feet, obviously not, but that's what the language seems to indicate. But now the updated language seems to indicate entry to a development or a home either provide a four foot porch or at a minimum just needs to be recessed two feet from the front plane of the home, is that correct?

That's correct. And the reason for that change is comment received from a stakeholder about concerns related to unhoused persons occupying space in the front of buildings.

That's all for me. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Pham. Vice Chair Benninger.

Thank you. Again, I'd like to re-echo that there's a lot of work with this. I appreciate all the input. A couple concerns that I have and one that I keep hearing from people. Some people get very concerned when they see going from permit to CPU. Could you explain the difference between the two and the cost of getting one versus the other?

Let me make sure I understood. The question is the difference between a permitted use and a conditionally permitted use?

There are some people that when they see the word that I'm gonna have to go from a permit to a CPU, that they're concerned that there's cost, tremendous cost involved, CUP, I'm sorry. There's tremendous cost involved and it's a lot of work that I don't have to do at other cities. I think let's just explain what's the difference between asking for a permit and asking for a CPU, both cause-wise and time.

So I'll start responding to that and I will invite one of the other staff members to add to it if they feel the need. But there are really three different tiers to a use permit. First would be a use by right. Second would be the newly introduced minor CUP or minor conditional use permit. And then the top tier would be a conditional use permit. Permitted by right is for uses that really are ideally suited to a location where a person or a business owner or a developer could come in and apply directly for building permits or a business license, or sorry, a certificate of occupancy and not need additional permits because there aren't anticipated impacts to surrounding uses. then a minor conditional use permit would be for a use type that is good, it's well-suited for a location, but it could be a place that has outdoor seating, for example, where that kind of noise could have an impact on a surrounding property owner. And so with a minor conditional use permit, an applicant needs to come to the city, apply, and then the application is reviewed at a staff level. We notify the surrounding property owners, and then depending on the feedback received from surrounding property owners, we would or would not have a hearing, and then the decision would be made by the staff, by the director. With a conditional use permit, it's the next level up. Come in, apply for a permit. This is for uses that are suited to a site but might have more severe impacts if not conditioned appropriately. And so they come in to apply for an application. It's reviewed by staff. then it would move on to preparations for public hearing, it would come here to the Planning Commission, and then would be considered for approval or not. In terms of timing, we don't have experience with a minor CUP, so I can't speak to how long that average length of time would take. For a conditional use permit, though, three to five months is my understanding of our average right now for a conditional use permit. And so a minor conditional use permit would be less than that. In terms of time and money, of course, the permitted application or the permitted use would be very efficient and not costly at all. a minor conditional use permit because you need to prepare plans, you need to submit for review, you need to produce mailing labels to notify the surrounding property owners. That is more costly but because it's a minor conditional use permit and it can be approved by staff, it's not as time consuming and thereby you save the resource of your finances.

the conditional use permit because it takes longer of course that's the most expensive of the three options so as you have here some companies going from permits to CUP are they going to those companies are they going to have to now apply for CUP

If they're existing without a CUP, they may continue without a CUP. If they want to make a change to their business, then they would need to apply for a CUP because of that change to the business.

Okay. So they're right now existing with permits only. They're allowed to continue to operate. Correct. Not required to go and get a CUP. Correct. Correct. Okay. Go through why the change on laundry and dry cleaning locations. We allowed it before and why are we taking it away?

For laundry and dry cleaning?

Yes, in flex and in the M1, R2 areas.

Laundry and dry cleaning is an industrial use, and it's highly intensive and impactful. And so it's really a use that belongs in more industrial locations that are far away from residential.

But is it because of the chemicals that they deal with? What's the bad cheer? Because I have a cleaner's neighbor house that do dry clean on site, right next to the residential.

Yes, the industrial scale laundries do have an impact through the use of chemicals.

And Vice Chair, I apologize. The use that's listed in the industrial permitted uses table, speaking about dry cleaning facilities, are industrial scale. So they're not the dry cleaners that you see at a commercial shopping center. Rather, they're the larger facilities that have fleet vehicles often that do have a certain level of emissions that are just the nature of the use that are being removed from that list that are not the ones that you traditionally see in commercial shopping centers. Different scale, different use, and called out differently in the zoning code.

Thank you for that clarity, because it really wasn't clear to me what we're talking about, so I appreciate that. Also, I do have concern. These revisions were only released Friday night, is that correct? When were they released in public?

That's correct.

Okay. And I became aware of it a couple hours ago, so I spent the last couple hours reading through them. There's a lot of good parts, and I admit there's a lot of it that are just minor changes. There are some significant changes inside here that what we had from the 21st on it. So I'm a little concerned if the public has had time to see what these revisions have been, and been able to fully respond back to them with these latest changes on it, per se. So I do have a concern from that standpoint. Also concerned too, we're going to be adding a buffer zone between residential and industrial. And in that zone, can you describe what you're envisioning for those companies in that area? Because I know there's concern about things like stacking, working outside, which is no longer allowed in that area. Mainly stacking, what are you envisioning as far as stacking? Have anything outdoors or just strictly a building and a fence?

Let me make sure I'm understanding the question. So first of all, you're asking about the buffer between residential and industrial. And you're asking about stacking on site or stacking of vehicles?

I guess what we're really asking is what do you envision in this buffer zone? That is one area that I end up hearing concerns about expressed to me. Whatever it will be there, it's our property. If it's behind a closed-end fence, what does it matter? So what do you envision in that buffer zone area?

The residential industrial interface is intended to be a continued jobs-rich type of landscape. That could be traditional industrial uses. It could be more contemporary transitioning uses that are flex in nature. Or, as you might recall, I had a list of, I don't know, probably 40 different uses that are being introduced into the residential industrial interface. So it also allows for the transition to more neighborhood-oriented commercial and recreation and entertainment type uses, as well as grocery stores, for example, where there might be a limited number of grocery stores in a neighborhood. The residential industrial interface is a location where that could be developed. In terms of operational standards, the residential industrial interface is subject to a higher level of standard for operations with respect to noise and vibration and screening and I'm trying to think off the top of my head other ones. The emissions, they are intended to be good neighbor policies, though, and so they can continue to operate as an industrial use, but they need to do so in a manner that is appropriate for their location. And then the third thing I was gonna mention is the landscaping piece. So in the residential industrial interface, both on the residential side as well as on the industrial side, we're proposing enhanced landscaping. And the goal with enhanced landscaping is to create those benefits from species of plants that do take in carbon and create a carbon sink.

Correct, good.

The other benefit to the landscaping is noise attenuation and just aesthetics.

I'm all in favor of that. In fact, every time a white pine is planted, we should celebrate because it does the most as far as removing carbon from the air and putting it inside cellulose. We have people from the staff, both from business as well as environmental. I do have a question for our business development. Are they here?

You're asking for economic development?

Economic development.

Economic development. The worst thing that we want to do is hurt the city from economic development. We want to be a place where businesses want to come. Have you reviewed this proposed rezoning and what is your opinion of it?

So, from an economic development standpoint, you know, we find certainty, you know, with the zoning process a huge key. A lot of times when businesses come in, you know, and they're not, some of their uses maybe weren't well defined, You know, it's a little difficult to say, well, what part of the zone, you know, can you operate in? So I think with the zoning code update, we're now providing more certainty, you know, flexibility for different businesses. And I think it's a positive thing. So we're still reviewing a lot of the comments that we received from businesses. And I think the planning staff have adjusted their final revisions for them.

The worst thing we might do is pass something and push everyone to Irvine or Costa Mesa or Huntington Beach of all places. So right now what you've seen on this plan, you would say this would support economic development in the city and that hurt it?

Just like the general plan update, yes. We now have more areas that we can provide different flexibility, different uses. Where it was a commercial zone in the past, now you can have residential and commercial uses. So I think it does add that flexibility.

Because I know, unlike some people think that every business is run by Mr. Scrooge, they're not. There's a lot of hardworking people that have put their whole life and background into businesses. They get them up and growing. The worst thing we want to do is take that away from them. Because that's where our jobs in the future will come from. That's where our tax dollars come from. 100%, yes. Very good. Thank you. You're welcome. I'm all set. Marguerite, I'm going to let you sit there and not get away with it. Can we talk to environmental? I'll be nice. She knows my wife, so one phone call, I'll take care of me. Have you reviewed the proposed rezoning?

Yes, we've reviewed, the team has reviewed the proposed zoning. In fact, the updates that were communicated to the Planning Commission today were in response to some additional listening that we've had. And even this afternoon, we met with other stakeholders, again, to confirm information, to clarify information. and we continue to make ourselves available to neighborhood associations and other groups to ensure that they are clear about what is being proposed. So yeah, Suri and I, today we met with Orange County Environmental Justice, a representative from the Del High Neighborhood Association, and so yeah, we're already working on having subsequent meetings just to make sure residents, particularly in the southeast part of town, understand what's being proposed. Especially with the changes, yep.

It's a little bit off target, but it's still, one of the most embarrassing things I saw in the last six months was what happened with the aerospace firm not knowing what they're dealing with and not being able to tell the fire department what they were dealing with. As a woman, I'm a chemical engineer, I worked for Dow Chemical, I've prepared emergency plans and the like. I don't know, God, why they didn't have information on those chemicals there, and I've talked to Phil Passera, say please to get the fire department to start looking at the plans that our industries have. And that's how we make them safe, is make sure that they think of things beforehand, have items in hand beforehand, know what they're dealing with on it. So if there's anything that we can go out of reviewing this also, is let's get those government agencies to do their jobs on it, including the fire department, look at emergency plans in our various industries, so that we don't have another incident like that. There is no No reason for that incident at all, especially for them showing up with no idea what to do and what they were dealing with. That was absolutely terrible. So anyway, get off my soapbox on that.

Yes, in fact, we've done some research on that internally to be able to identify what are the gaps, what are the other regulatory agencies permitting in these types of facilities, but it's definitely raised a lot of concern from businesses, from community about what types of facilities that are most at risk should we be concerned about. So yeah, we're on that ball already.

If you were to rewrite the plan, give an append and say make a change, what change would you put to this zoning plan?

I think the difficulty and the research that we focused on is getting compliance from the other regulatory agencies because that would empower us to be able to do more enforcement on our part, especially with the noxious use ordinance. So without that happening, there's always gaps. There's complaints that we will get about facility, We know they're permitted by other agencies, we check the databases, there's no action, and so that makes it difficult. So until we get a notification that they got a notice of compliance or they received a notice of violation, then until that point, we start tracking it. So that's what it takes. So I mean, I think we've definitely beefed up a lot of what we have here in our zoning code update, but it really is, you know, the next part of the conversation, like how can we get the regulatory agencies to pay that much closer attention to what they're permitting, especially if they're storing or using a lot of hazardous chemicals, compounds on site that are next to residential.

Very good. Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. My compliments too, as I have spent two hours looking at all the changes from that came out Friday night and got in my hands today. I do like the approach of the vents or the air filters on buildings next to residential areas next to industrial that they're not aimed in the possession of the industry. Hopefully that means not downwind from them. That was one that we always had to be careful in chemical industry about is downwind intake. I'm glad to see it under consideration. I just didn't have a whole lot of time. It was just two hours to go through all the changes. I know there's a lot more that I need to go through with that. So I'll stop right there for a moment. Thank you.

Vice Chair and Commissioners, I wanted to build on a couple of the points that we heard. So when it comes to the comment about we want to make sure we're not going to leak businesses out to our competitor neighbor cities, over the past time that we've been working on this zoning code update, we've actually taken time to meet with economic development and planning staff from neighboring cities, particularly Tustin and Costa Mesa. In Costa Mesa, if anyone's familiar with that, I think it's called like the Sobeca Triangle area between the 405, 55, and 73, they have restaurants, shopping centers, industrial, it's kind of a broad menu of land uses. And in a recent meeting where our planning manager and I met with their director and their planning manager, we asked them, you know, sort of how has this been working out for you? And much to our elation, they said it's been working very well. They do have some industrial businesses that are still there. They're not being amortized out. They're not being forced out, you know, through utility shutoffs or other backhanded means. But they've also seen really nice rise in restaurant openings. In fact, the really trendy East Coast restaurant chain, Halal Guys, when they chose their first location on the West Coast, they went straight to that neighborhood in Costa Mesa because they had created and cultivated a synergy of land uses there that they wanted to be a part of. And that's, in a large way, the sort of approach that's being taken with that residential industrial interface overlay that Siri was describing. It's not intended to be a sort of method by which the city would constrict a lot of industrial uses. Yes, some of them like hazardous waste storage and disposal. I think most business owners would also agree that's not a use they want to be near. But in large part, it's an additive approach where it says, okay, the light, clean, truly light industrial uses may remain. If they now require a CUP, they become nonconforming, but that does not put them on a clock to come in and get a CUP. but we also expand the menu with the 40 or so uses that Siri had up on the screen so that if, as our economic development manager was alluding to, if market changes and natural market and economic forces over time see that there's a market for expanded uses like indoor go-kart racing or breweries next to clean industrial, then that transition can happen without on an individual basis having to come in and apply for a zoning text amendment or a change to the general plan. And that way you set up a situation where if the market bears it, great. If not, as Siri said earlier, you still have some good neighbor operating standards to make sure that God forbid if there is another GKN incident, it's less likely to happen in Santa Ana because the zoning code already started getting property owners and business owners to start thinking about, hey, how do I sort of make sure that I'm conscientious of the fact that I am close to sensitive land uses? And whether it's a non-conforming business or the next owner that comes in, over time you start to see a shift towards that more balanced land use that we're trying to cultivate or at least allow for in the city.

Thank you.

Thank you. So I know we're at about 7.15 and the meeting will end at 8.30. So I'll try to go through my questions a bit quickly so that we can go ahead and start the public hearing. So my first questions are on the residential industrial interface. So one generally is supportive of the residential industrial interface and what it's doing to ensure that there is very little or limited impact to any residential uses nearby that are existing or that may exist in the future. But I do have some questions about how the city chose where to apply this interface. So earlier I shared that I spoke to stakeholders in the area by Santiago and Washington, just north of that, and then over by Chestnut between Standard and Grand. So I know that there are areas there that are M1 with the residential-industrial interface. I was thinking about those areas, but I know that there's others throughout the city as well. But I'm wondering how the city chose to apply the residential and district interface to some of the very unique areas in the city that are right next to a freeway or right next to railroad or train tracks, where we know that there's noise happening 24 hours. So while we're setting operating standards, there's noise that we can't control. So wondering how the city approached that.

Thank you for that. The residential industrial interface is intended to accomplish a lot more than just to mitigate pollution, but it's to create an environment for jobs and businesses that are appropriate for a neighborhood kind of setting. So even though it's close to a freeway, it's an important place to be increasing landscaping, for example. It's an important place to be allowing other uses that are helpful to residents in the area, like the grocery store, for example. It's not just about mitigating the impact of a major polluter like the freeway, but it's about creating an environment that's best suited near residential uses.

Thank you for that further explanation. I'm just, I think when I think about those areas specifically and the new noise standards that are, or the new operational standards around noise, that's where I think it might not make a lot of sense because there is a road or train track, so I don't know what it would look like to And I don't know if this would be possible to select which operational standards might apply to an area based on any unique circumstances that may be there. So there aren't a lot of areas in the city like this, but there are a few where there is no residential neighborhoods directly adjacent or even that close, but they are next to other things that are out of control from the city. So freeways and the train, the freight train, the actual just passenger train. So I don't know if those areas should be M1RII or if they're M1 with then additional operational standards but that consider all those other factors that maybe don't warrant it being fully RI. So, yeah, I don't have a specific recommendation today, but would like to direct staff to think more about that because I want to make sure that while we're also creating opportunities to have grocery stores and everything else that could service a nearby neighborhood, that we're not adding additional restraints to existing businesses beyond what may already exist around them. So that was one note there. Also had a question on the data centers. So I want clarity on what it means when it says removed from table. Does that mean that they are banned or does that mean that there is another approval process not listed here?

That means that they're not an allowed use. So the way our zoning code is written currently and is proposed to continue to be written, if a use is not listed, it's not allowed unless the director of planning and building determines that it's a similar enough use to another use in the table then it could be allowed through a permit. But in this case, a data center is one that couldn't be found to be similar to one of the other uses because it's very unique unto itself. And so it would be a use that is not allowed anywhere in the city.

Okay, I am in agreement with that and just concerned that maybe in the future we may have a planning director that could find a way to argue that it is a similar enough use to something else. So I would also want planning staff to explicitly state that data centers are not allowed per our zoning code and we've seen that done in Alhambra. and there's a few other cities that have set that precedent. So I'm very happy that that is the intention of staff and would just like to ensure that it's explicitly stated so that in the future it's not left to interpretation. also had questions on just a general question on housing so for planning staff or any representatives from CDA that may be present but when we looked at when the general plan was being considered there were growth areas identified throughout the city I think one that people think of a lot is 17 and Grand because it's a very visible just empty area so wondering Just generally for the public and anyone that may be listening at home today, how does the zoning code support additional housing development in the growth areas that were identified in the general plan and knowing that there were five throughout the city? I know that there was a slide that showed two different maps. I don't know if those can be pulled up and if we can zoom in and explain what each one means.

I will share the screen. Thank you. I apologize for this. We're going to move quickly through a bunch of slides. There we go. So the slide on the left is the general plan land use element figure LU5. And it shows the distribution of the focus groups or focus areas within the city. So first we have the Grand and 17th area that you pointed out. Sorry, can we zoom in more with the control plus? Thank you. So first there's the Grand and 17th area that you just mentioned, which is predominantly UN 20 and 30, sorry, urban neighborhood 20 and 30 units to the acre. There's South Main Street, which is urban neighborhood 20. Then there's West Santa Ana Boulevard, which is a combination of different zoning districts, including flex in this area, commercial and residential throughout the length of it. and then, of course, the golf course over in this area to the west of the Santa Ana River. On South Bristol, we have higher density as well. There's some district center at this very south end, and the focus areas include the village-specific plan as well as the related Bristol-specific plan. And then over here we have the Dyer 55 area which is predominantly district center and the flex. And those are reflected in the districts that appear in this map. So the darker purple represents the district center which is allowed higher densities. And then the lighter purple is the urban neighborhood districts.

Thank you for going through that. So staff feels comfortable that the zoning that is being proposed today in those areas will support the growth that was envisioned under the general plan, which includes new housing, both market rate and affordable.

Yes, and I should point out that the zoning code, the zoning map has a one-to-one ratio with the general plan land use designation. So where there was UN20 in the general plan map, it's UN20 in the zoning code.

Sorry, can you explain what that means, what UN20 means?

Yes, sorry. So the general plan land use map has a variety of designations for land use. Those include urban neighborhood districts and the district center districts. And those are correlated directly to the zoning map. So urban neighborhood 20, for example, allows for 20 units to the acre in the general plan. And the zoning district of the same name would allow 20 units to the acre. And so they have a one-to-one relationship, meaning that the same terminology is used in the general plan as is used in the zoning code.

Perfect. Thank you. And then my final question is just, I saw on one of the slides that through the zoning code update, we're also providing more signage options. Exactly what does that mean?

More signage options includes different sign types that we currently don't allow or don't allow in all districts. So for example, a vehicular oriented blade sign is not a sign type that you could build everywhere in the city. Or the same is true for the pedestrian oriented projecting sign. Those aren't allowed throughout the city. And then there are some special areas like on South Main where there are sign types that are suitable for that historic corridor that aren't allowed in other areas of the city.

Thank you, so are we updating our sign ordinance through the zoning code update?

Yes, it's part of Article 3, which is the standards applicable citywide. So there's a whole sign ordinance, a parking ordinance, and other types of standards that are applicable to every district, no matter where you are located in the city.

Okay, thank you, because I did have questions about our sign ordinance, knowing that there are areas just like Historic Main Street and also the downtown area that have a variety of signs for many reasons. And I have recently had conversations with business owners that have told me that they've had a very difficult time getting signs. Have you noticed there are a few businesses in downtown that don't have a sign for that same reason? So I'm happy to hear that this is also going to support our existing businesses and hopefully encourage new ones knowing that. those difficult restrictions no longer or won't exist as they do today. So thank you. Those are my final questions for now. And I'm going to close questions from the commission for now, just to allow the public hearing to begin. And we'll take more questions from us, likely not tonight anymore, but at our next meeting. So with that, I'm going to go ahead and... open the public hearing. So the public testimony portion of the public hearing is now open. Recording secretary, have we received any written communication or is there a member of the public that would like to comment on this item?

Chair, we have received a total of 13 emails in the form of public comments for this item before the 3.30 p.m. deadline, which has been distributed to the commission and posted online. If you are attending this meeting in person and would like to comment on this item, please fill out a request to speak form and turn it in to the secretary. IF YOU'RE PARTICIPATING VIA ZOOM AND WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE SELECT THE HAND ICON TO INDICATE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. IF YOU'RE CALLING IN AND WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE DIAL 9 AND THEN 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. I WILL WAIT A FEW SECONDS. CHAIR, WE HAVE 21 SPEAKERS IN HOUSE AND FOUR VIA ZOOM. Thank you, we'll begin in-house.

I will now go ahead and call two to three speakers at a time, so you may start forming the line. We are gonna begin with, and I apologize if I mispronounce any names, is it Dan Guzman?

Go ahead, you have three minutes. Thank you, Commissioners. Paul Guzman, 2113 North Santa Fe Street, District 3. I take the Planning Department to task. When they split, it has no fiscal up or down. Remember, there's a fiscal zoning cost from existing to any change you make. The city doesn't get money out of the sky. It gets money out of the property owners, like me. So when you say there's no fiscal change, you're lying. The properties that are empty on Grant and 17 lost revenue to the city by the millions. By this change, the property owners will recover. I would never say that. I've been in planning for a long time. I work construction, I work inspection. I work with other cities in some of their planning. You identify the area that's causing the city to service it. And you show what is needed in those areas. You are convinced your property owners that it's best to change the zoning laws to revive that area. 17th and Grant has a lot of problems. Traffic, eight o'clock in the morning to 10 o'clock. Cities, cars all over the place, backed up all the way from 17th and Grant to the freeway. Kids going running across the street to go to school. Those things have to be in that zoning clause. You might have to put a bridge, a pedestrian bridge there. You have to have a traffic light. That's the cost. Property owner might not want to pay it. So you might have to tax me for part of it. But remember, we're not here to stop you. I'm here to give you an idea what the property does need. And that is a dead area, and I am proud that you're looking at it, just with the new planning and new apartments in Santa Clara by Grant. So show me if you did a good job or not. I hope you did, but I doubt it though. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Up next, we'll have Angela Capuccia, followed by Brad Day, followed by Alexander Veyandi. And I apologize if I mispronounce any names.

Good afternoon, I'm Angela Kaposha. Three minutes is not long enough, especially because I didn't know there was an updated draft, and it took me three hours to read the original one. I live in the condos at 17th and Cherry. Everything between Grand, the 55, the 22, and 5 are now single-family homes. That's hundreds of condos and even more apartment units that have now been designated as single-family homes. Why is it when there's such a sizable proportion of the homes is this considered an exception? What implication does this have for homeowners when we go to sell our home? What if something gets destroyed and we need to rebuild? I was very concerned when I saw that essentially I've been zoned to something that doesn't exist. especially because I'm not allowed to park there because I'm not a single family home. It's inconsistent. I also read the new multiple family regulations. There's not a lot of distinction on what qualifies as low income, and there are very few units that are actually reserved for low income in order to be able to be built. We don't need more $800,000 to $1 million condos in this city. We need actual affordable housing. I drive by the one off 4th Street and the 55 every day. I was very excited when I saw it going up. I was really happy and then I saw the prices. That is ridiculous and that is what most of those new builds are going to be. So we have to be careful to make sure that we're keeping affordable housing. Finally, parking does not seem to be considered. Again, I live in a condo with 120 units. I am not allowed to park on the street. I have to pay hundreds of dollars to the city because I am not legally allowed to park on the street. You seem to be building new homes without requiring sufficient parking. They're not going to be allowed to park on the street. They're going to be stuck in the same position that everybody in my condo complex is stuck in. And I know we say we have a parking study going on, but until I see the results of that, we have to live as if we're under the old regulations, which is nobody who doesn't live in a single family home gets to park on the street. Then we have these ADUs with no requirement for parking on site, which just makes the problem worse. And then, on top of that, you're requiring the driveways to be no wider than the garage. So even if a homeowner wanted to solve that issue on their own, they're not allowed to according to the zoning. And then I added this because I didn't realize data centers were even a consideration. So if you need somebody to tell you from the public here that they do not want data centers, I do not want a data center. This is way too dense of a place to have data centers. I have heard horror stories and fights at city councils and planning sessions, and I really hope that we don't have that here. I'm really glad, Chair Ramos, that you're on board with that. But if you needed somebody here to say it, I said it. Thank you. Thank you. Brad Day.

Hi, my name is Brad Day. I live at 2002 North Williams Street, Northeast Santa Ana. I'm here to, I in fact have read a great deal of this almost 600 page document. And the thing that jumped out at me, first of all, I think staff has done a marvelous job. I don't know how you keep all these details in your heads, so thank you for that. In the residential, the updated map is showing a lot of, to echo what she just said, is showing a lot of apartment, 100 unit apartment buildings, condo complexes. They're showing on the map as single family homes. Those aren't single family homes. They are homes that have families in them. They are multi-unit homes. And to classify them as single family is gonna create a lot of problems as you try and manage the residential areas, the parking, as she just pointed out. The area I live, we implemented permit parking out of desperation because we had drug dealing going on in our neighborhood. We had people dropping off old washers and dryers, just leaving them on the corner. All this kind of, it was terrible. It was either we had to move or we had to get permit parking. We got permit parking. Everything cleaned up beautifully. So I guess Those are my two comments. If these new zoning rules don't adversely impact our residential areas, the parking, as you build new affordable housing, if you include in those plans adequate parking, I think that's a wonderful thing. But what we don't need is to add to the parking problem. But the other thing would be, I don't, at first I thought it was a mistake but the the classifying multi-unit buildings as single-family, that's just not right. That's incorrect. So Meredith Parkwood Homeowners Association, which I'm here representing, would be firmly opposed to any new zoning ordinances that allow multi-unit buildings, multi-unit residences to be classified as single family. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Alexander Villandi.

In planning commissioners, I'm Alexander Volandi. I'm an attorney representing some commercial property owners in the city of Santa Ana that have local small businesses as their tenants, got an automobile dealership, oil change facility, smog check facility, and general automotive repairs. I have become a little bit of an expert in the plan over the last two days because my clients reached out to me in particular on the issue of noxious uses. They were concerned, they did get the postcards, they reached out to me and they were wondering if their uses were noxious uses. Because they are concerned that their change, the change to the maps will make some of their facilities non-conforming uses. And Commissioner Guzman, I was hoping when you were asking your questions, I thought I was gonna get an answer where I wouldn't even have to speak. Like I wouldn't have to ask the question. The definition of noxious uses is very, very general with a lot of undefined terms. In the legal professional, lowercase instead of initial cap, hazardous waste. What does that mean in California? In California, hazardous waste can be used motor oil. So, you know, a facility that's just changing the oil in a car. hits one of those prongs for noxious use if you just look generally. So I just want to get some guidance. What does it mean? It's not just smokestacks. It's a metal plating business. It's a chemical manufacturing business. But is it a smog check station? What is a permit? Is it licensing from the state or just a specific type of permit? It's undefined. So we could just get some clarification. As of now, my clients are neutral. If they can be a non-conforming use and not subject to being a noxious use, then they'll be neutral to this. If you come out with some guidance saying these are the types of businesses that are noxious uses and these ones are not, that'll inform their decision as to whether or not they are going to oppose this. So I don't know what the scenario is to publish that. If it's something that I did also submit an electronic email comment as well. We just get responses to where we can get some feedback on that so they know if they can actually be neutral still or if they can oppose. So that's it, thank you.

Thank you. Reverend Holloway followed by James Adams followed by Dale Halvage. Can we have James Adams come forward? The Reverend may have left.

Hello. Good evening. My name is James Adams, and I am the Associate Director of EcoGovLab at University of California, Irvine, working in partnership with my folks in green back here as members of the Cornerstone Neighborhood Association. And tonight I was going to read a prepared comment, but given the changes that were made to the proposed plan, that has sort of changed my priorities a little bit because one thing that I really wanted to say, I'm glad that this meeting is not going to be the end of this conversation and that we will actually have some time to look at this plan and study it and see what these changes mean because I see a lot of good things. that I'm very pleased to see that you have factored into this new proposed plan, but we haven't had the time as a community to go through this plan and these proposed changes and see what kinds of remaining concerns that we may have. And as the commissioners also noted that these changes are not provided in Spanish, which most of a lot of our constituents are Spanish speaking. And so we have not had the proper amount of time to make sure that all the concerns that we've been working on and having our concerns voiced for the past few months participating in this process are going to be incorporated into this plan so that we know for sure that we can support it or be against it. So that is the primary concern. The other thing that I did want to mention is that there's been a lot of concern about the conflict between concerns for the environment and concerns for jobs. And in the past, one of the commissioners had brought up the city of Detroit as an example. And I just wanted to note that folks that are working on environmental and green development in Detroit have called for green transformation as one of the priorities for the development of former heavy traditional industries. That traditional industries should accelerate the realization of a low carbon development, strengthen ecological investment in environmental protection and governance. promote green manufacturing and clean production, build a clean, low-carbon, safe, and efficient energy system, and gradually realize safe carbon reduction. And this is a scholar working in highlights in science, engineering, and technology. So I just wanted to say that we can promote jobs in a way that is also safe for the environment and safe for communities living nearby, and I don't think that we should have those pitted against each other. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll have Dale Helvig, followed by Jaden Marujo, followed by Yesenia Marujo.

Good evening, Dale Helvig, 36-year resident of Santa Ana. In light of the changes, I think this won't be voted on tonight. I don't see how you guys are gonna have time to get through this in the next 45 minutes. With the new single-family resident designation, as another resident mentioned, it incorporates R1, R2, R3, R4, I think, into one category, single-family residence. And I'm wondering if there are any guardrails that are in place that would allow the city to review a project if someone came in and bought two adjacent properties and wanted to tear down those structures and build a 12 unit apartment complex there. Right now, if it's just designated single family residence, it could be any one of those single family residence categories that we have today. So I'm hoping that there's still some guardrails that the city can implement that will address that issue. There was good discussion on the businesses, the rehabilitation, the grandfathering. and all that. And so I was glad to hear about that. But I'm wondering if anybody has a list of businesses that are going to be impacted directly by this issue, especially in light of the fact that if they do sell the property, what the resale value of that property is going to be if someone wants to come in and do another nonconforming issue or whatever. the other thing is i didn't quite pick up on how it was applied but siri mentioned the fact that the noise ordinance was going to change from 7 a.m to 6 a.m and i wasn't sure if that was in the residential industrial rii areas or if it was in residential as well, such that we're going to have the leaf blowers going off at 6 in the morning, construction workers with jackhammers at 6 in the morning with jackhammers right next door to residential areas. So I'm hoping that you guys address what that really entails, that noise ordinance aspect of it. Anyway, that's all my comments. Seeing as how I have 30 seconds, I'll relate something really I find humorous. There's a thing called material safety data sheets for handling chemicals. And if you ever looked up the handling of phosphates, you're supposed to wear rubber gloves, face shield, eye glasses, What's Tide made out of? Phosphates. How many people use rubber gloves when doing the laundry? Think about it.

Thank you. We'll have Jayden Marujo, followed by Yesenia Marujo, followed by Maria Marina.

Good evening, my name is Jayden Marrujo. I live at Cornerstone Village. I am a junior at Century High School. I'm also an intern researcher at UCI Eagle Cove Lab. I'm here to tell you why I oppose the current draft of the voting code update. First of all, it leaves schools like my school unprotected. This is not right. This is a clear guidance California Air Research Board that the homes and schools should be 1,000 feet from polluting businesses. The current zoning code does not provide a 1,000 feet buffer from around Century. Even though Century is near a freeway and a high traffic road, we deserve better. Second, I learned that according to calepa.com, that Cornerstone Village is a 99th percentile in the state for overall population burden. and in the 96th percentile of toxic releases. This is for permitted pollution. Even without breaking the law, existing industries can cause much pollution in the Cornerstone area compared to the rest of the state. and to other areas of Santana. The zoning code needs to not only limit but reduce pollution. It needs to address inequalities within our city. Third, and to really what I just said, I have also learned that there is an individual residential area south of 55 that has been designed, designated flex, which provides many more protections than, rather than residential and industrial interface zones around Cornerstone. The homes in the flex are much fancier than homes in the Cornerstone. This is why the area got better production. In any case, this is unfair. Fourth, I hope that the city of Santa Ana can learn from other cities like New York and Chicago that have ordinary ordinances that limit business permits to polluting businesses. If there is already a high pollution burden in our area, these ordinances address cumulative population. Why can't Santa Ana follow these city's leads? We deserve better than what the current zoning draft provides. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. We have Yesenia Marujo, followed by Maria Marin, followed by Sandra Rodriguez.

Rebecca will now distribute to the Commission a public comment that Yesenia Marujo has provided in person. It will also be added to the public record.

Buenas noches a todos. Mi nombre es Yesenia Marrujo, residente y representante de la asociación del vecindario Cornerstone Village en la ciudad de Santana y asociada de la investigación comunitaria en ECOGA Black de la Universidad de California. Pienso que la votación no se debe llevar a cabo esta noche hasta que la comunidad tenga tiempo para estudiar los cambios que se han hecho esta noche. Tenemos una petición a un cambio. El primero es actualización de la zona actualmente designada como interfaz residencial industrial para reducir sustancias sustancialmente la contaminación permitida. Como mínimo, el área de Cornerstone deberá contar con las protecciones que ofrece la zonificación flex otorgada a una comunidad mucho más prospera situada al sur. Dada la condición de Cornerstone, como una comunidad en una situación de desventaja ambiental excepcional, se requiere protecciones aún mayores que la zonificación flex. El uso futuro del suelo deberá restringirse a empresas verdes y no actual contaminantes. Se ha demostrado que esta vez, en esta forma eficaz de rehabilitar zonas industriales antiguas, extenso de una zona de protección ambiental supuesta cerca de vecindarios Cornerstone para incluir el área situada detrás de la escuela secundaria Century El borrador actual deja en centro y totalmente expuesta la contaminación industrial por un lado de la autopista, designando de todas las operaciones industriales actuales en la interfaz residencial industrial como usos no conformes para impedir ampliaciones y permitir un cambio de zonificación cuando la propiedad cambie de dueño. incluso un proceso de información pública que demuestre el uso proactivo de la ordenanza municipal sobre las molestias públicas para revocar licencias comerciales cuando una empresa incumpla sus permisos de operación. incluso de procesos para la participación comunitaria en toma de decisión sobre el uso del suelo a nivel vecinal. En Cornerstone Village queremos participar en todos los procesos relacionados con permisos comerciales en el área circundante, extendiéndonos al menos hasta la zona que rodea Century High School, Villa Mary School y el área del sur de Madison. Gracias.

Gracias. We will now have that public comment translated into English.

I am Jesenia Marrujo, a resident and representative of the City of Santa Ana's Cornerstone Village Neighborhood Association and a community research associate with the University of California ECOGov Lab. I think that the voting shouldn't be done tonight until the community has had time to study these changes that were made tonight. We have a petition. Change number one, update the area currently designated as a residential industrial interface to substantially reduce allowed pollution. At minimum, the Cornerstone area should have the protections offered by flex zoning given to a much more prosperous community to the south. Given cornerstone status as an exceptionally environmentally disadvantaged community, even more protections than in flex are called for. Future land use should be restricted to non-polluting green businesses, which has been shown to be an effective way to revitalize older industrial areas. extension of an environmental protective overlay near the Cornerstone neighborhood to include the area behind Century High School. The current draft leaves Century fully exposed to industrial pollution on one side where there is also a freeway. Three, designation of all current industrial operations in the residential industrial interface as non-conforming to disallow expansions and allow for up-zoning when the property changes hands. Four, inclusion of a public reporting process demonstrating proactive use of the city's nuisance ordinance to revoke businesses license when business violates its operating permits. Five, inclusion of an ordinance that addresses cumulative pollution such as Such an ordinance can be modeled on ordinances passed by New Works and Chicago and by any state of New Jersey law requires mandatory permit denials if an environmental justice analysis determines a new facility will have a disproportionately negative impact on overburdened communities. And six, inclusion of processes for community involvement in land use decision making at the neighborhood level. In Cornerstone Village, we want to stay in all business permits in the surrounding area, extending at least to the area around Century High School, Villa Middle School, and south of Madison Elementary, thank you.

Thank you. Next up we have Maria Marin.

Todos los presentes necesitamos tiempo para estudiar y analizar los detalles, así como para proponer medidas adicionales que protejan a las comunidades en situación de desventaja ambiental. Afortunadamente, los comentarios que he preparado siguen siendo pertinentes y aprovecharé el tiempo que me queda para hablarles sobre cómo la contaminación afecta la salud de los niños. Como saben, Cali APA cuenta con una herramienta de mapeo que sitúa a Cornerstone Village en el percentil 99 en cuanto a la carga de contaminación total y el percentil 96 en cuanto a emisiones de sustancias tóxicas. Esto se refiere a la contaminación permitida. es decir, legal, incluso sin infringir la ley. Las operaciones industriales existentes en la zona de Cornerstone generan una contaminación marcadamente desproporcionada en comparación con el resto en el estado y en las zonas de Santa Ana. Esto exige medidas especiales para reducir la contaminación cerca de Cornerstone Village y en todo el cuadrante sureste de la ciudad. Porque es tan importante por nuestros hijos. Cada vez hay más estudios que demuestran el grave impacto de la contaminación en la salud infantil. Y esto comienza incluso antes del nacimiento. La contaminación atmosférica puede provocar, por ejemplo, un bajo peso al nacer, lo que significa que el recién nacido corre un mayor riesgo de sufrir problemas respiratorios e infecciones. Los bebés con bajo peso al nacer también tienen un mayor riesgo de sufrir retrasos en el desarrollo y problemas de salud crónicos que perduran a lo largo de toda su vida. La contaminación atmosférica también está fuertemente asociada con el asma y los datos estatales indican que en Cornerstone tenemos tasas excepcionalmente altas de asma infantil. La actualización del Código de Zonificación debe reducir las fuentes de contaminación en la zona de Cornerstone y crear zonas de amortiguamiento eficaces que separen las empresas contaminantes de las viviendas y las escuelas. Las investigaciones de los recursos del aire indican que estas zonas de amortiguamiento deben tener extensión de mil pies. Gracias.

Good evening. My name is Maria Marin Sepulveda, and I represent the Association of Corner Store Neighbors. In first place, I want to say that even though I value a lot of the changes made tonight, I'm very upset about the fact that you did not communicate on time with us for us to make the changes or understand the changes and to be able to come and debate it and prepare our comments in an adequate manner. All the people present, we need time to study and analyze the details, just like we need additional measures that protect communities in a situation of environmental problems. Fortunately, the comments that I have prepared continue being pertinent. I will take the time that I have left to talk about how pollution has affected the health of kids. As you know, Oh, as you know, CalEPA has a mapping tool that shows Cornerstone Village in the 99th percentile for overall pollution burden, and in the 96th percentile for toxic releases. This is for permitted or legal pollution. Even without breaking the law, existing industrial operation in the Cornerstone area cause starkly disproportionate pollution compared to the rest of the state and to other areas of Santa Ana. This call for special action to reduce pollution near Cornerstone Village and throughout the city's southeastern quadrant Why is this so important? Because of our children. Research continues to grow showing how badly pollution impacts children's health. And it starts even before birth. Air pollution can lead to low birth weight, for example, which means that a new baby is a higher risk for having breathing problems and infections. Low birth weight babies are also a higher risk of development delays and chronic health conditions that continue throughout their lives. Air pollution is also strongly associated with asthma, and state data shows we have exceptionally high childhood asthma rates in Cornerstone. And pollution can cause childhood cancers like leukemia. We've seen this ourselves. In 2002, five boys who lived and went to school in the Cornerstone area were diagnosed with the same type of leukemia. The community has not forgotten. We deserve better. The zoning code update needs to reduce pollution sources in the Cornerstone area and create effective air pollution buffers that separate polluting businesses from homes and schools. Research by the California Air Resources Board shows that these buffers need to be 1,000 feet away and that can be enhanced by greening or greenery. which can also reduce air pollution. The zoning code update can do this. Please keep our children in mind and in your hearts, we certainly do. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you. Next up we have Sandra Rodriguez, followed by Isidre Espiritu, followed by Roger Simon.

Hi, my name is Sandra Rodriguez. I am both a board member of New Sound Church in Santa Ana and also business owner for almost 40 years in the heavy industrial due to be proposed M1 with the residential industrial interface. And so I just like to thank commission and staff for taking the time to meet with us individually and answer a lot of the questions. One thing for sure is change always brings uncertainty. So I think you can hear tonight that many people are sharing that, you know, Change is inevitable and we'd like to come to the table to make this process easier. I think our biggest concern both for our church and our business is any future plans that we had in mind as far as development and how the new restrictions would affect that change. So we'd like to respectfully ask to continue the conversation. Of course we have questions and just ask that we cooperatively to continue to serve all the needs of this community. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Isidra Espirito next. Followed by Roger Simon, followed by Dan Schimel.

Buenas noches, mi nombre es Isidra Espirito. A dictated commentario para responder a la presentación de esta noche. Eres libre de expresarte como quieras, pero puedes usar esto si lo deseas. Residentes de vecindario de Pacific Park de Santa Ana, una de las muchas comunidades desfavorecidas de la ciudad. Estoy aquí para expresar mi decepción de la actualización del código de significación de la ciudad de Santana. Hasta ahora, no hemos visto propuestas que aporten beneficios sustanciales a comunidades como la mía. Las actualizaciones que hemos escuchado esta noche son alentadoras, pero necesitamos tiempo para estudiarlas y proponer medidas adicionales de protección ambiental. Quiero destacar que el borrador del código de zonificación publicado en julio de 2026 permite más tipos de negocios contaminantes que los permitidos en el borrador publicado en el otoño del 2025. Esto nos sigue preocupando y queremos tener la oportunidad de opinar de manera muy detallada sobre los usos permitidos. Terminaré señalando que esperábamos que el personal de la ciudad asistiera a la reunión de la Asociación de Vecinos de Cornstor para hablar sobre cómo... sobre cómo el código de zonificación podría brindar protección a tanto a Cornstone como a los vecindarios cercanos con Pacific Park. El personal de la ciudad nunca llegó. Merecemos algo mejor. Queremos justicia en la zonificación. Gracias por su atención. Buenas noches.

Gracias.

Good afternoon, I'm Isidro Espiritu, resident of Pacific Park neighborhood in Santa Ana, one of the more rundown communities in the city. I'm here to express my sadness with the update of the zoning code of the city of Santa Ana. Up until now, we have not seen proposals that substantial benefits to communities like mine. What we've heard today, this night, some of them are okay, they give us hope, but we need time to study them and propose additional measures for environmental protection. I want to also mention that The zoning code published in July of 2026 allows for more types of businesses that do different kinds of pollution than is permitted in the paper published in the fall of 2025, so it increased. This continues worrying us and we want to have the opportunity to have an opinion and have the right tools to be able to do it correctly and about the correct uses that are allowed i will finish by mentioning that we were hoping that the city staff would come to the meeting with the neighborhood association of cornerstone to talk about how the zoning code could bring protection not just the cornerstone but also the neighborhoods that are nearby just like Pacific Park. The staff of the city never came. We deserve better. We deserve and want justice in the zoning process. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you. We have Roger Simon, followed by Dan Schimel, followed by Irma Jauregui.

Good evening, commissioners. I'm Roger Simon. I'm deeply embedded in Santa Ana. My parents moved to the city in 1960. I was... product of Santa Ana Unified Schools from K through 12, received a good education here. My father opened a business in Santa Ana, well actually he moved it from another community to Santa Ana, developed on a piece of vacant land adjoining the Santa Ana Freeway. In 1970 he bought the land, opened the business in 71, selling trailers to the trucking industry. And it's right up in the area where you were talking about. 1300, 1400, 1500 on North Santiago. I came up in the business with dad. We ran it until shortly after he passed away. And currently we have a six-year tenant on the property who is using it for transportation for student unified and other districts, employing people, running late model vehicles. we own the land, we're leasing it to him. in the second generation of ownership and our daughter is looking forward to third generation. Our concern is with the M1RII designation and that implied or not, there could be impacts on value of the property, use of the property long term, which could affect her more than me. I'm 70. It's rental income and my retirement supporting me. It'll be passing on to the third family, third generation. I can identify with a lot of comments that you as commissioners have made. Commissioner Wu with the comment about the neighborhood to the south of us, the mixed use. At the time, Dad purchased his property. The community was proud of that. Mixed use, industry, residential. Commissioner Benninger, I read the 500-page agenda for tonight, and at the back of the table, August 21, key revisions, and looky here on page two, freight, bus, and truck terminal, M1RII changed to not allowed. Well, you know, I've got the promise that it's an existing use, so it's okay, but as a business owner, I take it with a little bit of... Commissioner Ramos, I understand your view up the street there. And Commissioner Leo, I look at your comments about economic development. There's promises that these changes will bring businesses, but some of these changes will also cause businesses to leave. I thank you for your time.

Thank you. We have Dan Schimel, followed by Irma Jauregui, followed by Anthony Aragon. I apologize.

Good evening, Chair Ramos, members of the Commission. My name is Dan Schimel. I'm a resident of Ward 3. I want to start off by thanking city staff, and Siri in particular. I know this is a Herculean task that you all are undergoing, and I really do appreciate all the hard work that's obviously gone into it. I ALSO WANT TO THANK CHAIR RAMOS AND COMMISSIONER FAM FOR YOUR QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE DATA CENTER PROVISION. I HAD A SIMILAR QUESTION COMING INTO TODAY WHICH WAS THE INTENT OF REMOVING DATA CENTERS FROM THE PERMITTED USE TABLE TO MAKE IT NOT AN ALLOWED USE. IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S RIGHT. I AGREE, COMMISSIONER RAMOS, THAT THAT SHOULD BE MADE EXPLICIT. AND SO SINCE THAT QUESTION'S BEEN ANSWERED, I CAN JUST JUMP INTO A PROPOSED SOLUTION. I've included this in written comments that I submitted via email before the meeting today, but I would suggest my two cents. We could accomplish this by one of two ways or both. You could either amend the definition of data center in section 41-1904, to add a sentence stating something to the effect of the director shall not have authority under section 41-1720 to determine that data centers may be allowed in any zoning district that's option one option two you can make a specific finding either in the definition section or elsewhere in the code that the characteristics of and activities associated with a data center are not equivalent to those of one or more of the uses listed in any zoning district as allowable. That would mirror the existing language of section 41-1720 and negate the required findings that the director would have to make in order to allow that use to be deemed similar. I've got a couple minutes left, so I'll use the balance of my time to echo some of the comments that I've heard from the folks back here from Cornerstone. My in-laws, they don't speak English. They don't live in Santa Ana, but they do live in Orange County, and I think if they had changes like this happening in their city, they would certainly want to have the opportunity to review all the materials in their language, in Spanish, you know, before the commission votes. Thank you very much. Thank you. We have Irma Jauregui next, followed by Anthony, followed by Muhammad Ali.

That was lovely. Hello, commissioners and staff. First of all, I want to thank staff. You have done an enormous amount of work, and it's very complex in an old city that's over 150 years old. It is not easy, so I totally understand that. Also, with Commissioner Wu, loving the city and understanding our historic background, how we were built, it is imperative, to my point of view, being a historic minister, to preserve and keep that integrity. I understand the need to have something cohesive, but when we do new projects, planning new zoning, there's some pieces of our history that should, in my opinion, be grandfathered and protected because they represent actually the character of our city. And I'm speaking, of course, of St. Anne Church on South Main, the school and its parking lot that it does not give enough space for services, but the good thing is services are only on Saturday, part and Sunday, and we're very comfortable with the just temporary parking for a short period of time. But putting a new zoning on it, it kind of disrespects, I don't mean to say it that way, but it doesn't reflect what originally was permitted as a church. Isn't there a proper zoning for churches and schools? We have Lathrop. They're not zoned as urban residential, Why should St. Anne's School be zoned urban residential when it's a school and it was permitted over 50 years ago? So certain churches, all churches and schools, whether they're public or private, be given that protection and recognition. Other than that, same thing I would say in Spanish. Thank you so very much. And again, thank you for all the work you do. And I'm totally honored that the staff reached out to me, Ricardo, that I really appreciate that respect and recognition. Thank you again.

Thank you. We have Anthony followed by Muhammad Ali followed by Gay Olivos.

Good evening. My name is Anthony with Climate Action Campaign standing in solidarity with the community of Cornerstone. First of all, thank you for the proposed updates and for all the work that everyone does. The draft proposes, I'm here to ask for a stronger draft. The draft proposes new homes built within 500 feet of residential industrial interface must have MERV 13 air filtration and playgrounds must face inward and away from the boundary to maximize physical building shielding. You would not require a filter in a house if the air outside were clean. You would not tell a builder to point the playground the other way if there was nothing on the other side. This code is about the future. The children at Century High School will have to walk past those facilities every morning and toddlers starting kindergarten will as well. That is their future and this code decides what is standing next to them when they are at school. A 1,000 foot separation is the standard set by the state. Santa Ana has the opportunity to fix this. Cornerstone Village is in the 99th percentile in the state for pollution burden, the 96th for toxic releases. That is legal and permitted pollution. Nobody has to break a law for current and future children to grow up in asthma in these communities. Century High School has no buffer at all. It has industry on one side and a freeway on the other. 500 feet is not a compromise, it is half. In 2020, the Attorney General wrote and said policies LU 3.8 and LU 3.11 set no distance and no standard. He told Senator Ana to establish a separation between industry and the places where people live and learn. He gave the number 1,000 feet. Air Resource Board data shows pollution drops 80% at that distance. We are asking for 1,000 feet. We are asking that it govern where industries can go, not just what home builders have to install. And we are asking for time. Community members need time to study the details of what's been announced. These community members need time to read policy-dense documents that address their concerns. Cornerstone deserves better. Santa Ana deserves better. Thank you all for your attention.

Thank you. We have Mohammed Ali followed by Gay Olivos followed by Jennifer Salas.

Hi, good evening. We have a lot of anxiety over this zone change and I want to bring to your attention We have two properties, the present one is 711 North Fairview. In the past, we had 720 North Fairview, which was impacted by eminent domain by the school district of Santa Ana. They took over my property plus the Otsuka farm. They were going to make Otsuka Elementary School, which never happened. Now back to the 7-Eleven property, I just want to point out that they're going to make this zone change and we've been in business for over 35 years in Santa Ana. And if some public agency comes at a later date and they want to invoke eminent domain, we're going to be in the waters. They would be claiming this zone to be a UN20 zone, whereas we are in a commercial zone. The amount of funds for a residential versus a commercial is very, very different. I also want to find out what this zone UN20 would be defined as and what would be allowed in that zone. We really want to make sure that we are not impacted by some public agency putting eminent domain on our property, which is 7-Eleven. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Gay Olivos next, followed by Jennifer Salas, followed by Brian Hendricks.

Hi, I'm back. My name is Gail Igbos. I live in Ward 5, 1406 North Parton Street, which is a very dense area with pollution. And again, I'm going to say it for the record that I'm only here, I'm not a business owner. I'm 65 years old, born and raised in Santa Ana, and I love her. And I truly... I don't trust, that's what's happened. I don't trust the commissioners, I don't trust the city council on what you're doing with my city. And so therefore I don't accept this comprehensive zoning code update. And I don't know why, I really don't. There's just miscommunication, there's something in my gut that tells me something is not right. And one of the slides that Sherry mentioned was zoning is not eminent domain. It surely is eminent domain. When this same team approved a 40-story tower to be built on Broadway, how can you not say eventually eminent domain will come into place? It's right in front of a school. You're going to have to widen those streets to allow those cars to go by. So maybe that's where the mistrust has begun. I don't know. I'm here against the One Broadway Plaza project. I don't know. I haven't read the entire 400-page document. And I don't know if there's a height limit on any of these buildings being built that this commission continually approves It's just amazing to me how you cannot think eminent domain, like this gentleman said, will not come into play. And why haven't you gone to Cornerstone? Why hasn't this staff gone to corners to listen to those people out there? I've been to a couple of meetings. They come here all the time with their issues, and they get shut down by some of the commissioners here. Stop it. Go hear what they have to say. I'm too concerned about my kids and my grandchildren. I want to leave a better Santa Ana for my kids and grandchildren, and I've said this repeatedly. That's my only reason why I'm here, and it's not happening. I do want economic development. I love Santa Ana. I want her to prosper. But we have to have good jobs so they can afford to have disposable income. So just think about those things. I'm not in agreement with this. I know you have these numbers where you reach all these people. Well, you know what? You had the meetings on Tuesday mornings at 10 o'clock Centennial about, I don't know, seven months ago, I guess. So you're not reaching the people. You're not. Do a better job. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Jennifer Salas, followed by Brian Hendricks, followed by Renee Rowley.

Good evening, I'm Jennifer Salas with UCI EcoGov Lab, working in partnership with the Cornerstone Neighborhood Association. I want to use my time tonight to remind you of the instructions the Attorney General of California sent to the city of Santa Ana in 2020 to ensure compliance with California Senate Bill 1000. A law requiring cities like Santa Ana with many environmentally disadvantaged communities to integrate environmental justice policies in their general guidelines, in turn implementing these policies through zoning codes and other ordinances. These instructions remain relevant after the new information we have received. The letter instructed the city to do the following. First, to affirmatively reduce the health risks and pollution burdens facing environmental justice communities as required by Senate Bill 1000, with special consideration for sensitive receptors like schools and daycares. Two, to establish affirmative requirements for separation between industrial uses and sensitive receptors in the city's disadvantaged communities. Following guidance from California Air Resources Board recommending buffers of at least 1,000 feet, The letter refers to CARB or C-A-R-B research that demonstrates that localized air pollution drops off by about 80%, about 1,000 feet away. Third, to develop detailed plans for specific disadvantaged communities like Cornerstone Village to address the unique challenges of those communities. The letter points to the city of Placentia as a model. Next, to address public safety concerns by improving the built environment, creating an off-street walkway from Cornerstone Village to Century High School would be one way to do this. And last, the letter calls for sustained community engagement in implementing the city's general plan. One-page reports on environmental justice in the city's annual general plan progress reports are not enough. We will also need a clear method and timeline for community engagement built into zoning code implementation. Santa Ana residents deserve more than the current draft that the zoning code provides. We ask that you follow the law and the guidance from our Attorney General. I would also like to comment on the fact that not making the zoning code updates available to the public prior to Friday night is completely unfair to the community members. Thank you so much.

Thank you. We have Brian Hendricks, followed by Renee Rowley, followed by Matt Nichols. I just want to say we will be going a bit over 8.30, just by a few minutes, so everybody continues to have their three minutes of time.

Chair, commissioners, thank you. Brian Hendricks, I'm generally an affordable housing developer in the city of Santa Ana, but I'm representing and helping a friend of mine in the North Santiago a couple times tonight. respectfully request that you consider removing the rii designation from the small block of m1 properties on santiago street just north of washington this has been expressed to staff and the commission this small section of m1 zoning is unique to all other m1 rii designation designations in the city as its direct adjacencies include the five freeway a large sce substation a fueling station business, and the railway. These uses will not change, even in the decades to come. M1 already has appropriate operational standards in place for this important pocket of industrial use, just about the only pocket of industrial zoning remaining in the north part of this city. Considering the adjacent uses, there doesn't seem to be a reason to add additional constraints to the owners and users in this area with the RII designation. It's also important to mention that one of the most recent changes to the draft requires that a contractor's yard under RII designation that now requires a CUP. The previous draft has that as a permitted use. A HUGE CHANGE IN THIS AREA. AGAIN, FOR ALL THESE REASONS, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE COMMISSION CONSIDER REMOVING THE RII DESIGNATION FROM THE SMALL NUMBER OF PROPERTIES ON NORTH SANTIAGO JUST NORTH OF WASHINGTON AND BELOW THE FIVE FREEWAY DUE TO THEIR UNIQUE ADJACENCIES. I'LL USE MY OTHER HALF OF THE TIME. AS I HEAR FROM THE CORNERSTONE GROUP, CENTURY HIGH SCHOOL, THE MINI STREET AREA, HOW UNIQUELY DIFFERENT THAT IS FROM THIS SMALL POCKET. Very dense housing.

You've got schools.

This area, we have a freeway. We have fueling stations. We have an Edison substation surrounding this little kind of triangle teardrop of properties. Again, it's very unique from high-density housing and schools that those conditions don't apply to this area. And I think for this area, no one would have a problem with better landscaping. If this area wants to change, have landscaping improved, I think that would be an easy addition to this area. And then I just also think that the general plan is industrial. Uses such as go-karts, grocery stores, hotels, making it easier for them, but having a contractor's yard, you have to get a CUP. So again, hopefully it would make sense from that section of the city. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Renee Rowley followed by Matt Nichols.

Good evening. As you can probably tell from my English accent, I was born in England and I've lived in Santa Ana since 1985. I love Santa Ana. It has the most beautiful trees and the most really old houses and I really enjoy it here. But I'm probably in the wrong place, actually. I just wanted somebody to listen. I live in Kona Kai Mobile Park. I own a mobile home. And they are giving, I think Santa Ana's been wonderful to me. It gave me a mobile home for 70,000 in 2005. It's now worth 250,000. And I think that they're really good to the poor people that live here. And I'd like to say thank you to the policemen, the police station, the policemen. They've done a wonderful job from 1985 when I used to listen to sirens all night. They've really done a wonderful job as far as crime. What I wanted to say today was they're giving a grant to mobile homeowners of $15,000 to help repair things. You can get it every seven years, and I got it seven years ago. And this time I applied for it, and it took me about a long time. There was like five different departments they sent me to. And then I got through to somebody called David, and he says he's in charge of the grant. and we would be getting a grant on the first of July, and it said first come, first served, and so I called first of July, and they said they're not giving out the grants yet, and they said he's retired, so I don't know who to go to, and because you're on the board and everything, I thought somebody might listen and tell me who to go to. So thank you for listening to me today.

Thank you. And we have Matt Nichols, our last speaker of the evening.

Good evening, Chair Ramos and honorable commissioners. Thanks for keeping the power on. Matt Nichols here with Allen Matkins, represent several stakeholders, industrial stakeholders, including MB Processing, Martin Commercial Group, LBA Realty, and others. We think the July draft had a lot of good in it. There's a few refinements to the August draft released Friday that we recommend and some clarifications. Start with MB. MB, Commissioner Leo, this goes to your defense industry point at the last meeting. MB is a campus at 1244 Hathaway that has, they do defense industry, metal finishing. They've been a long standing business. One of their facilities is a noxious use, under the definition. To remediate that site, they intend to move that noxious use to another building within the same campus, right next door. We had proposed, in a letter we had submitted, a new section 41-1227, This section was intended to allow upgrades or mediation cleanups in the spirit of the zoning code update. The intent is to make the city clear and to modernize and take care of walk-saving businesses. We'd ask the commission to consider 481-1227 in our letter. Also on RII, There was a policy question, Ali, that was raised at the last meeting, which is should RRI apply, as its name dictates, residential industrial interface? Should it apply to other uses like schools and churches or just residential? We would ask the Commission to interpret it by its name to just residential. Schools are separately identified by the code. We also discussed at the last meeting a lot of surplus property, a declining student population. Schools as part of the radius, too broadly a part of RAI. Another point is a major revision in the latest draft is the CEP requirement in the M1 RAI for a contractor's yard. That's problematic. Brian Hendricks pointed that out. A CEP is The RII already imposes additional restrictions for contractors' yards in the RII. The CEP is not necessary. Another point is, this is for LBA, to the extent that we're going to regulate printing, the code is a 10,000 square foot printing shop requirement. We would ask that that limit not be applied where printing is accessory to warehousing. If that clarification would be made, it would be... Very beneficial. And I also want to support the NAOP letter that was submitted today. I think there needs to be a little more time to work through this draft. I just want to support that letter. And again, we don't want to reopen the update totally, just a few refinements. I think the committee did a great job and I appreciate everything you guys have done. Thank you.

Thank you so much. And we actually have one more speaker. I don't have the card. Can I please have Maran Tumajan please come forward? I apologize if I mispronounce that.

For the record, I arrived at 5.30, saw everyone take the oath from outside while I was filling out the card, submitted the card, got lost in the shuffle, I suppose. So appreciate the opportunity to provide public comment on behalf of the Santa Ana Chamber and on behalf of NAOP SoCal, our NAOP members who own commercial and industrial properties here in the city of Santa Ana, and their members who are occupants and tenants of many different types of businesses in Santa Ana. The current plan as presented cannot be supported by the business community. We respectfully request that the Planning Commission continue this item and extend the public comment period for the City's proposed comprehensive zoning code update. Otherwise, we, the business community, oppose the current version of the update. as you know the latest version of this document was released only friday evening stakeholders need adequate time to carefully review the proposed changes understand their potential impacts and provide meaningful and informed comments to the city given the significance of the zoning code update we believe that allowing additional time will result in a more thoughtful and inclusive public process thank you chair ramos and fellow commissioners for your consideration and for your service to the residents businesses and property owners in santa ana thank you

Thank you so much. That is our last speaker in-house. I understand that we may have several speakers on Zoom, and I apologize that we won't be able to take your comments tonight. I hope that you can join us for the next meeting, and if you can't, please send in your comment via email. I'm now gonna hand it over to our city attorney to explain exactly, well, to our staff, they can decide the order, but I know at some point our city attorney will explain exactly how we move forward.

Thanks, Chair. And just because there's still people in the audience, I want to get through this first. I just want to provide a general summary of what we heard tonight, clarifications on how the residential industrial interface properties were designated, clarifications on the reasons for the residential zones. I think there was some confusion there, as well as specific sites like New Song Church and St. Anne's Church. So these are things that will follow up with subsequent meetings. I do want to also clarify we have had some one-on-one meetings with some of the folks that spoke tonight. Cornerstone I know is one of them where we've met several times and we still have a pending invitation for a meeting with them. I'm hoping we can get a meeting nailed down again for another meeting with that and any other group that's interested in meeting between now and ultimately when this goes to City Council. The outreach process won't end just because Planning Commission makes a decision. We're always open to meetings, clarifications, and new ideas. We also heard about impacts to businesses, such as the noxious uses ordinance, the residential industrial interface, as well as last week's text changes that were highlighted in the table that we'll provide more walkthrough on. And then the text clarifications, like what did we mean when we struck data centers from the table, as well as the noise ordinance. I think there was a comment about how does this apply. And again, so for next week's meeting or whenever this gets continued to by the commission, we do intend to provide these clarifications for the commission and everyone in the audience. Thank you.

So I wanted to provide just a quick point of clarification that the motion that you'll be taking right now, if that's your desire, is to continue the public hearing to, and I think the date is August 31st, 5.30 in council chambers, but I also wanted to clarify that in addition to that, what you'd be doing is you would be continuing this meeting to a regular adjourned meeting I'm sorry, adjourned regular meeting. I think you mentioned special meeting earlier. It's not a special meeting for the benefit of the public. What that means, it's an adjourned regular meeting pursuant to, and I'll give you the code sections under the Brown Act. It's essentially a pause to the meeting. What's happening is we'll be basically continuing starting up from where we left off at the next meeting. And that's why it's not a special meeting, it's a adjourned regular meeting. So I just wanted to clarify that you're continuing the public hearing to the date, and so I'll allow you to do that. And then what you'll be doing is you are adjourning this meeting to an adjourned regular meeting pursuant to government code section 54955 and 54955.5. That's the clarification. If you need additional assistance, I'll help you with that.

Thank you. So at this time, I can adjourn the meeting with that language, correct?

You can. And first, you're going to continue the public hearing.

Okay.

You'll take a vote on that.

Does it require a motion?

Yes. Okay. So I'm taking a motion to continue the public hearing. And we need to do it quickly because I have been told that if we're not out of here by 845, the video might not save.

I'd like to make a motion that we continue our meeting on August 31st, given that it would give more time for the residents and businesses to review the documents because we're running out of time due to the outage with Southern California Edison.

And Commissioner Wu, can you clarify that you're motioning to continue the public hearing? Yes. So we have a motion to continue the public hearing.

I will second that motion.

We have a second from Vice Chair Benninger. Secretary, can you please call for a roll call vote?

Commissioner Guzman?

Yes.

Commissioner Leo?

Opposed.

Commissioner Oliva? Commissioner Pham?

Aye.

Commissioner Wu?

Aye. Although I'm ready to vote.

Vice Chair Benninger?

Aye.

Chair Ramos? Aye. Motion approved by majority vote with Commissioner Oliva absent and a nay from Commissioner Leo.

Thank you. With that, this meeting is being adjourned to the next regularly scheduled meeting on August 31st at 5.30 p.m. Just to clarify, to the adjourned regular meeting of August 31st at 5.30, it's a quirky section of the Brown Act, so I wanted to make sure we were accurate. Yes, so this meeting is being, we will see you all on August 31st. Recording stopped.