Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, it's now 527. I'm gonna call a planning commission meeting on Thursday, September 17th, 2026 to order. Taya, could you please call the roll?

Thank you. And now Vice Chair Lin will lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Everyone who can rise.

Ready, begin. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Director Frady, do we have any introductions this evening?

Okay. Do any of my fellow commissioners have any announcements, committee reports? Looks like no. Director Frady, do we have any additions, deletions, or reordering?

Then I'll go ahead and open the public comments for non-agendized items. This would include speaking on any item not listed on tonight's agenda. Taya, do we have any public comments?

Thank you. We'll move on to the consent calendar. So the consent calendar is all the items listed will be enacted by one vote. There's no discussion on these items unless members of the Planning Commission request specific items to be removed from the consent calendar for separate discussion. I'll go ahead and open the public comments on this item. Do we have any public comments?

Thank you. It doesn't look like any of the commissioners want to pull it. And I see Commissioner Pearson has a motion.

Vice Chair Lin is going to second. Can we please set up the vote?

Thank you. Moving on to public hearings for item number two. I'm gonna open the public hearing director Frady. Could you please introduce the item?

Thank you very much for the presentation. Would the applicant like to take a few minutes to speak?

Thank you very much for your presentation. Now we'll open it for public comments.

Thank you. Then I will go ahead and close the public hearing and open commission deliberations. IF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS COULD USE THE REQUEST TO SPEAK BUTTON TO REQUEST TO SPEAK. LOOKS LIKE WE'LL START WITH COMMISSIONER BATTIA.

THANK YOU CHAIR AND THANK YOU FOR CITY STAFF AND THE APPLICANT I had a few questions regarding the classification of, like, the build-out. Is this considered a condominium or a planned urban development? And the reason I ask is usually insurance policies are very, you know, keen on the classification and what that would mean in terms of premiums. I'd like to know whether it's, you know, because it's shared walls, obviously, so is there a HOA master policy that would take in effect? for this type of parcel?

Condominium, so okay. And in terms of the amenities and the parks, are there any play areas for children?

Okay. And it being next to the vicinity of the OCFCD channel, does that play any significance in terms of flood? I don't know how that works, but like flood insurance or is that required?

Okay, perfect. No further questions. John, I appreciate that. Thank you.

Looks like I'm next. So I'd like to talk about the affordable units and the fact that they're for sale. A lot of the for sale communities we've had come up have paid the in lieu fee because they've said it's not feasible to have affordable units for sale, especially in the extremely low category. I assume this will have an HOA fee or a condo fee. Do you know what that would approximately be a month? 347 is the estimation. I think low would be $65,000 a year in income, right, to qualify for one of these units? I believe so. So would they be responsible to pay that 347 a month, the same as every

Okay, and then Irvine will manage the checking to make sure the next person is qualified income-wise for that unit. But does someone help manage people getting mortgages, people having mortgage issues? Because I know making $65,000 a year may be tough to qualify for a mortgage. So I worry, do we have enough applicants that not only qualify income-wise, but also can qualify for a mortgage?

Okay. So what happens to these units if we are not able to find qualified applicants? I'm just wondering if we're building something that might not be useful.

Okay, thank you. Yeah, because I always felt for sale gives people a step up on the property ladder, but we've had so many applicants come through and say it's just not possible to do for sale affordable. And now that you have it, I guess I appreciate that you are including this here.

Thanks. Quick feasibility study question. One of the things you cited was the condo legislation that you're responsible for defects for 10 years as one of the reasons not to do, I guess, a flat-pack five story. These will be condos, right?

Because the initial start, like the $147 a square foot as opposed to the $330 something, you have a lower liability because the starting price is lower. Yeah, essentially. I got you. Okay, that's all. Give someone else a chance. Commissioner Grossman? No, Pearson. Sorry. You're up.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the questions and the answers so far. I've got a couple questions for staff first. In condition 3.48 on the... Park approval for the plan. It identifies an in lieu fee of $1.8 million, and that is sort of conflicting with the actual amount of park dedications for a neighborhood.

It's page six. I'm looking at the conditions of approval, so I'm looking at page six.

The other thing I had for staff was this is a, project in which there's existing structures and site work on and we've got some standard and they're not standard conditions, but the 2.39 through 2.45 I would assume that these conditions were met at the time that I The initial structures were built and the project was developed, and this is calling out for the developer to provide specific services for some of the existing tribes in this

Okay, so it doesn't take into consideration that it was already disturbed in the beginning and foundations were built and structures were built on the site?

Seems like a little bit of redundancy and extra cost for developing product. Question on the DIVs. We've got an excess accounting for 40-some thousand square feet that is not being used. Who retains that, the ownership of that number? Or how does that work? Can it be sold by the current property owner to somebody else?

So KB Homes, when they develop their product and they sell... the individual condominium units, they don't retain that ownership, or do they?

Yes, you repeat. If you could repeat the question.

Okay. What I'm asking is there is an underutilization of impact values. And I'm trying to understand currently they have a certain number of DIVs.

Property is being sold to KB Homes and there is an under use by 43,000 square feet, 44,000 square feet, who retains ownership and are those saleable by the HOA, by KB Homes, or is it retained on the property?

What is the value of 43,980 square feet of DIVs? Do we know?

Okay, so... there is a benefit right now to KB Homes where they would be able to process the sale of DIVs in which they are the owner. And it would not transfer to the HOA?

Okay. That just seems to be an extraordinary benefit to the property owner. I'll go back and rephrase my questions. Obviously, I have to compliment your design team for crossing all the T's and dotting all the I's. You've ended up with a very good project. Question as far as the perimeter walls. What are they made of?

Von Karman, right. Are they planted, or is it just going to be existing concrete block wall walls?

Okay. I'll let you move on and I'll come back.

We'll circle back, okay. Commissioner Grossman.

Thank you, Brett and Chris, and thank you to the applicant. There's a lot I like about the project, echoing Commissioner Stark, the for sale housing, proving that Von Karman can support affordable housing on that street and on that area and in the IBC. I think that's very positive. What I wanted to talk to you about is sort of, I've spent a lot of time on your feasibility analysis. You're asking for a waiver of the density, of the 50 units density. And when I looked at it, it appears to me that the analysis was very binary. It was, what would it be for a tuner in 27 units, which is the 50 dens

Were there economically feasible alternatives that would generate a higher unit count and help the city to meet its density?

Steph, can I ask a question? Do we, as a part of our review, look at any of those alternatives, or do we simply make a binary determination that 50 is economically infeasible?

WELL, JUST AS A MORE OF A STATEMENT OF POLICY AND NOT IN ANY WAY TO PENALIZE THE APPLICANT FOR FOLLOWING THEIR RULES, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD EVALUATE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THAT BINARY APPROACH OF IT DOESN'T MEET, WHICH I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT THE APPLICANT'S FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS DEMONSTRATES. BUT WE'RE NOW LOOKING AT 23.79 UNITS, WHICH IS MORE THAN A 50% REDUCTION. I don't know. I don't in any way mean to impugn the applicant, but I don't know as a third party verified whether there was something in the middle or somewhere in that range that could have satisfied those needs. And I t

No, they're based on the lowest tier of the affordability, right?

And I'm not exactly sure. The individual areas, staff is more, we've identified that they meet sort of the space requirements, the square footage requirements. But from my reading, and please help me to understand why you would disagree, they're not, the size of the square footage, even in the reduced area of the IBC, I don't believe courtyards, frontage area A or frontage area B, are meeting the minimum required square footage. And I'm worried that we don't have enough of a contiguous, essentially open space for the families that would be moving in. And I acknowledge that the applicant has sa

standards under the IBC relevant standards. I understand we've had Fairchild, they requested waivers and those were granted. But we're not doing that here. So are we comfortable? Are we certifying that each of these has met the minimum standards of square footage? I thought it was something like 6,000 square feet individually. I know collectively, aggregate-wise, but there still are individual standards that I'm concerned aren't being met.

I didn't write down the exact line, so I apologize on that. But I believe it was 6,000. I believe there was something around a 6,000 square foot number. And two of the... six areas do meet, one 6,073 and one 6,370, but the other four are less, based on my understanding, which is what I'm trying to see clarification on.

Thank you. Just one last comment, but it's just more of a comment for transparency point. Community Park obligation is being satisfied through a fee of roughly 2.04 million here using the applicable vested valuation of approximately 4.2 million per acre, which is absolutely the applicant's right as per their vested interest, but just acknowledge that this VALUATION OF THE LAND IS AT 9.1 MILLION PER THE TRANSACTIVE LAND PARTS, AND SO THAT I KNOW WE'VE ADDRESSED, WE'VE BEEN LOOKING INTO THIS AND IT IS BEING ADDRESSED, BUT JUST AS A MATTER OF TRANSPARENCY AND POLICY GOING, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AHEAD

Thank you, Commissioner Grossman. Commissioner Del Cusack.

THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU, STAFF AND APPLICANT FOR SHARING THIS INFORMATION. I JUST WANT TO COMPLIMENT THE APPLICANT FOR THE DESIGN OF THE PLAN. I REALLY LIKE THE DECKS THAT YOU INCORPORATE IN THESE UNITS. AT LEAST THE FAMILIES HAVE SOME PRIVATE SPACE TO UNWIND AND GET SOME FRESH AIR. ALSO THE BARBECUES AND JUST TO BUILD COMMUNITY AND THE PING PONG TABLES. I KNOW THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS IN THE IBC. YOU CREATING A COMMUNITY HERE IS SOMETHING I DO LIKE AND THESE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE NEIGHBORS AND I'M JUST GLAD YOU COULD BUILD THOSE CONNECTIONS. I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS MAYBE FOR THE APPLICANT O

So just to confirm, they just have to pay, of course, their mortgage bill and their HOA, right? Yeah.

Excellent. Thank you for confirming that. My next question is, there was an attachment on here. It was a PC attachment 5 involving affordable housing. AND I BELIEVE IT'S IN LIKE PAGE 8 OR 9 TO DISCUSS THE ROLE OF THE CITY IN REGARDS TO THE MARKETING PLAN FOR THESE AFFORDABLE UNITS. SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION, I BELIEVE THIS IS MY FIRST ONE I'VE EVER LOOKED AT FOR SALE AFFORDABLE UNITS. SO I REALLY COMPLIMENT AGAIN THE APPLICANT FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. USUALLY IT'S BEEN LIKE RENTALS OR JUST FOR SALE, BUT CAN THE CITY OR THE APPLICANT LIKE SHED SOME LIGHT ON THE MARKETING PLAN AND HOW

And would they go to the sales center or come here to the city hall? Like, I really like this KP.

And... What is the term of how long these units stay affordable?

And let's say like 10 years along the line after you complete these products, let this buyer decide, well, it's time for me to move. Do they just, does it have to go to like the city or they just go to Redfin or Zillow to like post this? But it's, because it's for 55 years, right? Yeah. It stays affordable?

And for the garages, will they have the option, these buyers, to set up EV charging for their cars?

Excellent. That is great to hear. My last question is, when do you plan to start this demolition of the existing structure and start creating it?

Last thing I'll just compliment. I think it's a great location. These future homeowners could walk to buy groceries, go get a bite to eat, a cup of coffee, and compliment again for all your great planning.

Thank you, Commissioner. Vice Chair Lin?

Thank you, Chair. Thank you to the applicant for this project. One thing that I want to be considerate of, especially when we see housing projects in the IBC, sometimes we see what I feel are incompatible land uses. So I was just wondering if staff, you knew where the nearby warehouses were relative to this housing project.

Great. And this is including anything in the pipeline we have in terms of applications for warehouses that we may have?

Okay, thank you. And just in terms of safety for the families? And then in terms of the nearest grocery stores, are there any other plans for groceries coming in the IBC? And if not, where are the existing ones relative to...

And I've heard, I'm not sure if you can confirm this because it is on the Tustin side, but is there a park coming in near, that would be closer to Bill Barber for these residents?

OK, great. Thank you for that. For the applicant, thank you for utilizing the opportunities for clean energy and helping bring down the cost for the residents there. So what exactly? I think I missed it. Have you implemented to help bring down the energy costs?

That's wonderful. Thank you. I wish we saw that on most of our projects. And then lastly, piggybacking off of what Commissioner Grossman had mentioned regarding the affordable units, what we like to see obviously is some kind of public benefit. And I was wondering what the public benefit was for this project.

Okay. And was that just due to based on the analysis and the costs for the project, there was nothing, I guess, nowhere where the applicant could find perhaps providing some type of public benefit for the city?

Okay. You know, Commissioner Grossman did bring it up. I'd like to ask, you know, if there's anything that could be done to provide some type of public benefit for the city, I think it'd be wonderful, whether it's, you know, adding one four-bedroom affordable unit, if possible. I'm sure you have considered this, and I don't know what other things the applicant has considered in terms of providing something for the city, but it would be wonderful just to have that. for our residents in our city. But thank you so much for the project itself, and that's it for me. Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair. Commissioner Batia?

Thanks, Chair. And, you know, we've heard the public benefit, but I wanted to hear about community benefit. I do know that I think from your first answer regarding a play area for children, I mean, this parcel is going to have 73 bedrooms and 24 bedrooms. It's fair to say it's going to be pretty family oriented. So is there a possibility to throw, I don't know, the park plan was already approved and like a tot lot or some sort of a play area within the open space here, you know, for kids to, children in play. I mean, throw a swing set or a tot lot or something.

I see. Okay. You mentioned the parking spaces. You know, we have 28 guest parking spaces. I'd like to know about, you know, what if an incident happens where I have a garage and I use it as storage and I decide to utilize a parking spot that's dedicated for a guest. There's not that many parking spots for guests in general here, I think, because it's situated in the center. I feel that there should be a system in place, or maybe in the CCNR, maybe you know this, do they have regulations on, you know, an owner like myself parking in a guest parking space, utilizing it where somebody's hosting a

Yeah, no, I think this property would be nice to bait that permit system from the HOA, maybe have a lottery system and have additional permits. There's a lot of spillover from neighborhoods, and they want to borrow parking spots, especially in the ABCs, so I think that would be a good avenue. Real quick on this, and it's more of a real estate question. I know the Fed's raised the interest rates yesterday. Typically, I know KB, for example, Prado is in Cadence Park. They offered a broker co-op. What is typical here? Are you offering a broker co-op to attract buyers?

Right. And then your design studio is nearby, too?

Great, and I'm curious about affordable units. Are they bare bones and you give it that way, or do they have leverage to choose their, you know?

Excellent. Okay. Well, no, thank you for that. I mean, this is akin to the KB Centerpoint in Downey. I'm familiar with that property as well, based on the number of units. I like that location. But, you know, aside from that, the tot lot is something that I'm really steering towards, something for children to play. Last question about school districts. Have the schools been notified and they can handle the capacity for any influx of new students in the area? for the city staff?

Okay, I appreciate that. Thank you so much. No further questions. Thanks, Sean.

All right, thank you, Commissioner. Looks like I'm back up. I'd like to play off of what Commissioner Grossman was asking about the parks. So does the IBC have its own park overlay? They have different regulations in the rest of the city, right, for parks?

So you're researching if the courtyard language was added? If it wasn't, would they have to follow the original park language? And would that allow for courtyards?

Okay. What about having the frontage parks? Are they in the setback for this property? They're outside of the right-of-way. In the right-of-way setback is the same thing? Right. Okay. So how do we go forward if we don't know what I'm not comfortable approving a park plan if we don't know if it's being approved under the right guidelines.

But it doesn't sound like staff has confidence that it was necessarily approved under the right guidelines. Because I think you had applied for this in 2024? Is that when you originally started the clock?

Okay. So I would support a continuance until we sort it out. I don't know how the rest of the commission feels. I'll yield to Commissioner Grossman. You're on the queue.

Thank you. I would very much like clarification on that because while there is a tremendous number of merits, and we've discussed this at length, we have to make sure that all of our T's are crossed. And it does, from my understanding, it does clearly state that there is a minimum size of 6,000 per square foot for each of the individual courtyards. There is some type of if there's connected to, but if there's amenities like sports equipment or taught lots, as Commissioner Bhatia raised, but that's not proposed here. So in that respect, I would support a continuance. I did have two more real qu

I'll leave that up to staff. I don't know what's entailed in researching the requirements. Would that be enough time? I mean, I think staff has already suggested a continuance, so I think that's their...

Thank you. Yeah, I wouldn't want to rush the decision, and I'm going to take the staff's recommendation for continuance.

I think rather than, well, yeah, rather than asking a couple more questions, I think I'd just like to make a motion for continuance. Would that be appropriate? Or was there already a motion? I'm sorry, did I?

You know, I still have a major issue with the 50 tu's per acre that we're asking a deviation from. You know, to go down to 23 is a considerable reduction of what we initially agreed to for the IBC. The justification for the deviation is for sale condominiums versus stacked condominiums, not apartments. And we set a minimum of 50 DUs per acre as something that we wanted in the IBC. Now we're going back. Luckily, we have a no net loss condition, but we're still deviating from the 50 DUs per acre that this planning commission had set as a minimum. And the justification, although it is you know, c

And I guess I would just like to add, I feel like we have a courtyard option in the IBC because we recognized with more density, we'd have to give up something, and that was park. You know, Irvine kind of prides itself on having a wonderful park system, and this is, you know, cutting off at the knees. The closest park is a mile away. I don't see how a child could navigate across all those streets to that park, or Bill Barber, which is 1.6 miles away. Tustin School District, Irvine School District attracts a lot of children in these new developments, and the kids will have nowhere to play. And

I think there's a motion on the table, and I'll second it.

Okay, thank you. Accept the vote, please.

Thank you, Taya. So the next Planning Commission meeting will be held on Thursday, October 1st, 2026 at 5.30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber. It is now 6.45 p.m. I'm going to declare the meeting of September 17th, 2026 adjourned.