Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

3rd of 2026 to order. For the secretary please call roll.

Commissioner Escamilla?

Here.

Commissioner Leo?

Here.

Commissioner Oliva? Commissioner Pham? Commissioner Wu? Here. Vice Chair Benninger?

Present.

Chair Ramos? Present. Chair quorum has been reached at 536 p.m.

Thank you. We will now 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 microphone about four inches away from you. 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 livestreamed via our portal at www.santa-anna.primegov.com slash public slash portal and on YouTube at www.youtube.com slash cityofsantaannavideos. 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 87234011537. 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 share your name for the record. You can also join the meeting by calling 669-900-6833. Enter meeting ID number 87234011537. 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 then 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 a public comment, please fill out a request to speak form and turn it in into the recording secretary. All speakers will have three minutes to speak. I will alert you when your time is up.

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

Chair, we have received a total of eight emails in the form of public comments before 3.30 PM 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 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 you would like to comment. If you are calling in and would like to comment on non-agenda or non-public hearing items, please dial nine and then six to unmute yourself. I will wait a few seconds. Chair, we have one speaker in-house.

Thank you. Gay Olivos, would you like to come up and speak? You have three minutes.

It's me again. My name is Gail Leibovitz, I live in Ward 5, and of course I'm going to come to oppose the one property project proposal that's going to come before all of you after the second Sunshine Ordinance meeting. Although I do respect the gentleman's comments from last meeting, it wasn't this gentleman indicating that the Sunshine Ordinance does work. Apparently some communication worked because I attended that meeting, but It seems the developer didn't get the meeting of the sentient ordinance out to the residents in time. And it's his responsibility, and I want to go on record, to make sure that the citizens surrounding this project are all informed of this meeting. Additionally, he needs to make sure that all his working equipment works. I was unable to access Microsoft Teams, which is the platform he wanted to use, and coming from Microsoft Teams, I know that there's an 800 number that you can call in. He did not provide that information. Again, I want to make sure and go on record that this developer's responsibility is to ensure that all the residents impacted by this monstrous of a building be notified in a timely and consistent manner. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Do we have anyone wishing to provide public comment online? Chair, we do not. Thank you. Moving on to the consent calendar, where we have one motion for all consent items, unless an item is pulled for separate discussion.

I move.

Is there a motion to approve item A, minutes from February 9, 2026, and item B, excused absences?

I move. And I second. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Wu, for your motion. And we have a second from Commissioner Escamilla. Secretary, please call for a roll call vote.

Commissioner Escamilla?

Aye.

Commissioner Leo.

Aye.

Commissioner Oliva. Commissioner Pham. Commissioner Wu.

Aye.

Vice Chair Benninger. Aye. Chair Ramos. Aye. Motion approved by majority vote with Commissioner Oliva and Commissioner Pham absent.

That concludes the consent calendar items. Moving on to the public hearing. I will now review the process for the public hearing so that everyone knows what to expect. Staff will provide a presentation and answer questions from the Commission. The public hearing will be opened. The applicant will be given the opportunity to speak, limited to 15 minutes. Members of the public will be given the opportunity to comment, limited to three minutes. The applicant will be given the opportunity to respond to comments made by the public, limited to five minutes. The public hearing will be closed. Discussion will return to the Commission with formal action taken to approve, deny, or continue review of the application. Please consider the following suggestions when organizing your comments. Please state your name. You may state your 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. This is now the time and place for amendment application number 2026-02 for the property located at 2101 and 2109 East Santa Clara Avenue located within the General Agriculture A1 zoning district. Before we begin, do any commissioners have anything they wish to disclose with regard to this item? Seeing there are no disclosures, the case planner, Nancy Tran, will provide a brief presentation.

Councillor Holland. Good evening, Commissioners. The item before you is Amendment Good evening, Commissioners. The item before you is Amendment Application 2026-02, which is a request to amend the City of Santa Ana zoning map by changing the zoning district designation of two properties located at 2101 and 2109 East Santa Clara Avenue from General Agricultural A1 to Arterial Commercial C5. Staff recommends that the Commission find that the project is within the scope of the 2022 Santa Ana General Plan Environmental Impact Report and is exempt from the further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15061 , as well as adopt an Ordinance Approving Amendment Application No. 2026-02. The subject property's general plan designation is General Commercial, GC. No change to this designation is proposed. In terms of zoning, the site is currently General Agricultural A1, and the request proposes to change it to Arterial Commercial C5. Surrounding land uses include a commercial centre to the north, a drive-through restaurant east, multifamily residential, preschool, kindergarten, and commercial south, the CHP and parking for a multifamily residential to the west. The project site includes two parcels totaling 0.81 acres or 35,400 square feet. To give a clearer picture of the context, here's a current photo of the properties, 2101 on the left and 2109 on the right, taken from the south side of Santa Clara Avenue looking north. With respect to the site background and recent activity, the residence at 2101 East Santa Clara Avenue was constructed at an unknown date and moved to the site in 1967. Around 1957, the main house and garage at 2109 East Santa Clara Avenue was constructed. Up until 1972, the area north was undeveloped until the now commercial shopping centre was constructed. In February 2021, these properties were sold to SRP Stater Brothers LLC. These properties are legal non-conforming as they don't meet most of the development standards for the underlying zone and were constructed prior to 1960. In April 2022, Development Project Review Number 2022-06 application was submitted proposing a 3,975-square-foot McDonald's with drive-through. That proposal will move forward with the zone change and conditional use permit applications in January 2024. However, the applications were withdrawn by the applicant in April 2024 prior to any action by the City Council. The site retained its current zoning designation with no redevelopment. The sites are zoned General Agricultural A1. The proposed zone change to arterial commercial C5 would bring the site in line with adjacent commercial centre to the north and east. This proposed C5 designation would also be consistent with the broader commercial pattern along Tustin Avenue. This slide shows the requested change compared to the existing Looking at the broader context, staff evaluated how this change fits with the General Plan and zoning. C5 is consistent with the General Commercial GC General Plan Land Use Element Designation and Government Code Section 65860, resolving the zoning inconsistency created by the 2022 General Plan update. Beyond resolving this inconsistency, the zoning change also supports compatible corridor serving commercial uses. It's important to emphasize that this particular action does not authorize any development on the currently. Any future development will still be subject to its own review process requiring a separate city review and discretionary actions. The proposed C5 zoning advances several general key plan goals related to responsible growth, balanced land uses, neighbourhood compatibility, and economic development which are listed here. The project is within the scope of the 2022 General Plan EIR. No subsequent or supplemental EIR is required per Guideline Section 15162, as there's no substantial changes to the project, circumstances, or new information. This action also qualifies for a common sense exemption under Section 15061 , as an administrative action maintaining zoning code and general plan consistency. Again, future development is subject to a separate project level CEQA review. Based on this analysis, a Notice of Exemption, Environmental Review Number 2026-05 will be filed for this project. There's no fiscal impact associated with this project. Staff recommends that the Commission consider the following actions. Find the project is within the scope of the 2022 Santa Ana General Plan EIR and is exempt from further environmental reviews pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15162 and 15061 , and adopt an Ordinance Approving Amendment Application No. 2026-02. That concludes my presentation. I'm available for questions.

Thank you. Does the Commission have any comments or questions for staff?

I just want to clarify with some questions regarding this project, because I remember it well. The project was submitted by the developer for a McDonnell addition, but also to expand the corridor in which the trucks that goes to Stigler Brother. Those plans, according to the statement up there, I think, says there's no changes to that development project. a developer that wants to put a McDonald's on there?

No, that application was withdrawn.

Withdrawn?

Yes.

Are they going to reapply?

Not that I am aware of.

Okay. So what we're being asked to do, though, is do some policy change or a system change or an update in terms of our proposal to make that area consistent with our general plan.

That's correct.

Okay. So that's a policy change or?

It's a zoning match change to make it online.

So it's just a clarification, right? Yes. Okay. And in that clarification, then, without a developer, we're being asked today, what is the most productive, what is the conforming use to be to update? And that's the motion that we're making.

Yes.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Councillor Schell. Thank you. Vice Chair Benninger.

Thank you. So just to reiterate so people hear it, there's no plans for McDonald's to go in that location or any other restaurant. This is strictly a zoning change for that land from A1. Since we're looking at zoning, reviewing zoning and bringing the current agenda plan, would this change come to us anyway when we get to the rezoning? Okay. Do we have a problem south of this property? Because on the map you showed, I see an A1 property area of land also. Is that also noncompliant with our general plan?

I can jump in. Thank you, Vice Chair. As part of the proposed zoning code update, we're looking at actually doing away with the A1 zoning district. So as proposed currently and as we're working on it, any property that currently has an A1 zoning district those properties would be rezoned to a different zoning district that corresponds with the general plan land use map.

Very good. Also, I'd like to emphasize, too, if the restaurant is determined or if the applicant wants to put a restaurant, he will need to go through the normal CPU process?

Currently, I believe C5 allows for restaurant uses without a conditional use permit.

So if it doesn't have a drive-in, then they will not need a CPU, is that what we're saying?

That's correct.

So it doesn't need to come in front of this body?

That's correct.

Okay.

Thank you, Vice Chair Benninger. Commissioner Skamea.

Yeah, so this might be overthinking things, but I know that we have a list of kind of exempted commercial properties that then can't be reutilized for housing as housing opportunity sites. We're compliant with all housing element laws and regulations with But now, since this parcel is technically now being added as a commercial parcel, will that also kind of be taken care of with any sort of future action? Or is this now going to be a commercial parcel that doesn't have an exemption on it for housing development in the future? I'm actually kind of okay with the idea of housing onsite, but I just want to make sure that we don't kind of create an unexpected, I guess, land use opening here with this particular decision if we're not also exempting it. process and where that kind of list is. But that's something I think a planning manager might be able to answer.

Thank you, Commissioner. And just for my clarification when providing a response, are you speaking of like loss of residential units?

No. So I remember like there's one process that the city went through maybe about two years ago where there were all the list of the commercial properties throughout the city and they were all basically exempted from housing developments from other state laws that allow 100% affordable to go by right. So we have to actively add those exemptions. So because this parcel was, I presume, not on that list, because it would have been agricultural parcel with residential, it wouldn't have been included in that list. So I'm just wanting to make sure that we don't like create any accidental openings, though it also does, if it's the wish of the body, you know, create an opportunity site for affordable housing as well. Again, just wanting to make sure that we're taking that into consideration.

Got it. Thank you. Yes, about two years ago, the city adopted a local SB11 ordinance that exempted certain properties in the city from streamlined development pursuant to that bill. And since, like you were pointing out, this property is A1, it wouldn't have met the qualifications for streamlining then. We'll look at the map to see if the shopping center to the north was exempted or if not. The way the ordinance was structured wasn't a comprehensive look at all qualifying properties in the city, rather the ones that staff and ultimately city council believed were the most at risk and the ones that we should be looking at preserving the tax base. So we'll look to see if the shopping center to the north was included on that list or not. And if so, we'll see what impacts this would have on it. Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Escamilla. Commissioner Liu. And I have no questions either at this time. Recording. Well, with that, if there are no additional comments or questions from the commission at this time.

On his response, what you're saying is that, Ricardo, what you're saying is that staff need to look into that specific city council motion. regarding trying to preserve some of the housing as a goal, right? But in reference to this specific property, at this time we do not know if it falls under that study or identifies on that list. Is that what I'm hearing?

Mr. That local ordinance wasn't to preserve What that local ordinance did was exempted certain parcels in the city from streamlined provisions from the state. So these were state laws that were passed that superseded local land use controls. And however, it did give local jurisdictions an opportunity to adopt a local ordinance where we could exempt certain parcels, and that's what we did.

And this particular property is on a arterial in which why we're changing from the agricultural use which confirmed through more down the block with the cemetery. But then on Tustin to that corner of Santa Clara, it's been commercialized because you have across the daycare center and someone wanting on an empty lot to put something up. I think at one point it was a fast retail store, like a 7-Eleven or something.

That's right. The proposed zoning district for this site would be consistent with the shopping centre to the north and would be consistent with the adopted land use map in the general plan.

Thank you. Are there any other comments or questions from the Commission at this time? Great. See, and folks can ask more later if they come up. But seeing as there are none now, 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 not received any public comments. 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 into the Secretary. If you are 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 are 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 do not have any speakers.

Thank you. With that, the public hearing is now closed. Is there a motion to approve this matter?

I'll motion to approve.

We have a motion from Commissioner Escamilla. Do we have a second?

I'll second.

I'll take the second from Commissioner Leo since Commissioner Wu seconded earlier. So I have a motion from Commissioner Escamilla with a second from Commissioner Leo. Secretary, can you please call for a roll call vote?

Commissioner Escamillo?

Aye.

Commissioner Leo?

Aye.

Commissioner Oliva? Commissioner Pham? Commissioner Wu?

Aye.

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

Thank you. That concludes the business calendar. We're now moving on to staff comments.

Thank you, Chair. I did have one comment, just to acknowledge the number of public comments we've been receiving on One Broadway Plaza. As was stated at the last Planning Commission, I encourage folks that are paying attention to this project to visit the project webpage, and you'll be able to see any updates on that project related to any meetings, any public hearings that are scheduled in the future. And then you'll also be able to contact the case planner that's assigned to that project. So if you want to be added to a public notification list, anytime there's any change in the status of that project, you'll be notified so you can attend any future projects or meetings for that project. Thank you.

Thank you. Do commissioners have any closing comments or questions for staff? Commissioner Escamilla.

Mr. Yeah, I was just wondering if you could forward me the video for the one Broadway Plaza, oh my gosh, the Sunshine Ordinance meeting. So wherever that is, I just haven't found it. But if staff can forward that to me. Thank you.

Commissioner Lue.

Yes, on that subject, we've had smaller projects that were less contentious that became a notification issue. We may want to make the net a little wider in notifying the public just so we don't get the complaints that, oh, you didn't notify me or you didn't notify my neighborhood association. So we may want to err on the side of caution and just spread it out so that the universe of people that might get noticed through either email or whatever, I know we go through the neighborhood associations, maybe you guys figure out the service area and you do it because we've had less contentious projects with people in here saying, I didn't get notified. I want to say, I can't remember if it was the church or it might have been that one. But, yeah, we should err on the side of caution. It's a large project. We've been through it before with Bristol Related and the Sigriston Project. So a wide net won't hurt anybody. And the more people that at least hear about it, then they can make up their own mind. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Leo. I'm going to go around and then we'll come back to you, Commissioner Escamilla. Commissioner Wu.

I want to widen the discussion between housing and commercial development. One is that we have exceeded and done our job better than most cities in terms of providing housing. And it's not a question of housing versus development because we also need commercial development to bring jobs to support the people that are going to be living in housing. As one of our residents And District 5 pointed out if we have housing, maybe we should target those that are workers at lower end of the income spectrum. Because those are the ones that we do find very few in our development. You know, maybe out of Project 60 we may have four, low income or very low income. And that's not meeting that need. So my question is, is there an inventory we could do on identifiable, so that we're not reactive by what developer want and by development, but we can organize ways of looking at, we're going to make this corridor housing and we're going to provide this much. So we're planning to meet the housing need, but we're also planning to create an economic base to provide And I don't know if we have the budget resources to do that. But if there was a way to do it, I think that would be an organized way. Because I know at the community level, they're probably inventorying vacant lots and remnant properties and thinking that they could do something. But we never get to that discussion unless we have a project specific that we do. And that seemed kind of reactive because you have a battle going on each time you're coming in. rather than coming together as a city and say, yes, we can have a new renaissance in the city where we could have housing for those that need it the most. And at the same time, we can provide jobs for them as well. So I don't know what that will take. I'm just throwing it back to staff to see if there's a way that we can move forward in a way, in a constructive way, in a planning way to kind of look at those kind of things. You have in your general planning process some specific district areas already. We understand that. But I don't know we have such an inventory of vacant properties. And, you know, some properties have been there for decades as an empty lot. And they're kind of a nuisance to neighborhood groups. That, you know, the ones that are between houses, you can't put a 68. unit townhouse there, you know, won't be consistent. So maybe there's some kind of plan to do something about that. And the second part of my comment is that I file a request for public information regarding the former Asuka family farm in terms of any documents related to the sale of that property to build the maintenance that the school district occupy because the family is under the impression that when they sold it, they would have a school name after them, but no school was named after them. So we were wondering from the Japanese American Citizen League and the family if we could have the building name after them or the property name after them. They don't want to own it. They don't want to get it back. They just thought, like, to preserve the legacy of Japanese farming, in this county, that's why we're pursuing it. And I did file, thanks for the information at the last meeting, I filed that paper. At the same time, we're having former school board member, Audrey Noji, talk to the superintendent about it, so that everyone seen at the school district to remember the sale, and they seem to remember some discussion about naming, but we can't find a piece of paper to help staff along in terms of getting the motion to the Board of Education. So I wanted to update staff since I brought that up at the last meeting. And I want to thank staff assistance in this manner.

Thank you, Commissioner Wu. Vice Chair Benninger.

OK, I'd like to agree with Commissioner Leo. I think this project is important, but also it's rather unique with the elevation we're talking about, that if we only stay with the 1,500 feet or what our present standards are, we're really not letting the community know, because the effect will be far further than what that is. So at the next meeting, if we could let the word get out when they're going to have the next chum sign meeting, so people can really have a chance to express their feelings one way or the other on that project. I also just reiterate that nothing has been approved as far as this Planning Commission is concerned. So, therefore, any indication that it is, is totally wrong. It hasn't come to us yet. So, we don't have that given it any approval. With that, I also want to thank you for giving us a copy of the Brown Act. I hope this is ours to take so I can read it at home because it is good that we do review that. Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Benninger. I also have some questions, and then I'll take it back to Commissioner Escamilla. Staff, can you please remind us what the Sunshine Ordinance requires for the Sunshine Ordinance meetings or these community engagement and community information meetings?

Thank you, Vice Chair. So the Sunshine meeting does require a 2,000-foot notification. So folks within 2,000 feet of this project site would have been notified of when the meeting was held, where it was held. also requires that the notice be in two languages and it requires both english and spanish translation at the meetings and that the meetings be streamed and that those meetings be recorded and then ultimately the recorded version of the meeting gets uploaded to a project website that is on the city's web page so for any of the folks out there that are interested about this project and that were not able to attend that meeting The video is posted to the project web page on the city's web page or for the project.

Thank you, and is there a way that staff confirms that those notices were sent with an applicant.

Staff does verify the list that they provide and then the applicant does provide a signed affidavit that all the information is true that they carried out the ordinance as requested or as required, I should say, by the municipal code.

Thank you. And do those notices for any project also include information on the project website?

The notices do provide a map and a description of the project that is consistent with what the project is being proposed.

But do they show that there's a project website? And if not, can we ensure that any project that comes that is coming down the pipeline that has a project website at the time that a notice is being sent, that that website be listed on that notice?

We'll confirm.

And so if it's not listed, is that something that can happen moving forward?

The Sunshine Ordinance does spell out in the Municipal Code what is required, so we'll see what's within the purview of staff to either suggest or recommend these items and what is spelled out in the Sunshine Ordinance in the Municipal Code section as far as what's required. If we do have the ability to request or recommend that this item be included in there, we will.

Thank you. And if your interpretation is that you can't make those recommendations, I think it'd be great if you let the Planning Commission know, so then we can raise that to the council members that have appointed us and that are supportive of greater transparency. Thank you. And then my other request just for the project that was named on Broadway Plaza and any other projects that come to us moving forward would be that I know there have been requests for additional noticing. Well, one, I'll just ask that question a bit more directly. Is that possible to encourage the developer to notice beyond the 2,000 foot radius?

We can recommend, but ultimately it's up to the developer if they want to notice beyond that. However, if the city decides to notice on its own, that would be something that the city would be able to do.

Councillor Osanic OK, so if the developer, is that something that the city can do as of now or is interested in doing, to notice beyond the 2,000 feet of the developer?

We can have the conversation with the developer and then based on what the outcome of that is, staff recommendation on how to proceed. Ms.

Thank you. Thank you, that's great. And then also I was just going to ask that we use other city resources that are available to notice. So I know that there are, I'm on an email list, I think it's from Neighborhood Initiatives where they'll send information on upcoming Neighborhood Association meetings. So I think a lot of residents are a part of that listserv. It'd be great to notice Sunshine Ordinance meetings there as well. So just folks throughout the city are aware, even if they're not within the noticing radius, and would also encourage the city to use social media. So I've noticed that the city will use social media to post about projects once they're approved. But I think in the same way, it'd be great for the city to provide information on upcoming Sunshine Ordinance meetings so that residents can become engaged throughout the process and not hear about a project once approved.

Well, deal.

Awesome. Thank you. Commissioner Escamilla.

Yeah, I was just waiting patiently for the joke of, you know, because it's so tall anywhere the shadow is cast from the building should be notified. So that's what I was waiting for patiently. But on a more serious note, there was a really great discussion I think at the City Council on the proposed changes to First Street. So I think just same points maybe as before that I know this is a Public Works project, but some of the land use changes for like rear loading and kind of alley access I think extremely important to the success of the eventual project there. So whatever early interactions and planning we can do for that, I hope that we're doing that in the background with Public Works.

Thank you, Commissioner Escamilla. Commissioner Wu.

I agree with our chair. But at the same time, I want to note in this specific project that when it did go out to the neighbourhood initiative thing, I observed this We got a phone call and a house call from the Washington Square president and the Willard president consulting with my wife, who is the president of the Artesian Pilar, asking, and they were sharing information about what's going on. I did not listen. I just passed on the message, so-and-so call, so-and-so call about that. And they had a discussion. And I think that one of the comments, I think, from my wife was that neighborhood association presidents should make an effort to get out the information to the resident, which does not mean that it would get out to everyone, because you have owners of property and absentee owners, and you have renters. And you have multiple people within the household, too. So I don't know what the solution is, but I just want to point out that there is an effort to get that. I got it, and I didn't even want it. I got an email regarding it about the Sunshine meeting. because I was going to attend that because I didn't want to be prejudiced in making a decision. I want to hear what the people have to say at the public hearing.

Thank you, Commissioner Wu. Are there any final comments or questions from the commission? Great. Seeing none, our next regular meeting is scheduled for March 9, 2026 at 5.30 p.m., and this meeting is adjourned at 6.13. Thank you.

You made it. You made it.