City Council - Regular Meeting

Commissioner Almendral?

Here.

Commissioner Escamilla? Commissioner Hardy? Present. Commissioner Jauregui? Present. Commissioner Shipp?

Present.

Commissioner Rincon?

Present.

Vice Chair Christy?

Here.

Chair Marashi?

Here.

Chair, quorum has been reached at 4.31 p.m.

I now invite Vice Chair Christie to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Please stand. I would like to remind my fellow Commissioners to turn your microphone on when speaking and off when not. And when speaking, please place the microphone about four inches from your face. Thank you. Members of the public may attend the Historic Resource Commission meetings in person or virtually via Zoom. I'll now invite the Commission Secretary to describe the way the public can access and participate in this meeting.

This meeting is being live streamed via our portal www.santa-ana.primegov.com slash public slash portal and to www.youtube.com slash city of Santa Ana videos. If you would like to provide a public comment, you may do so in the following ways. Join the meeting via Zoom. Enter meeting ID number 82813207067. When the item that you would like to comment on is being discussed, select the hand icon to let us know you would like to speak. You will be called upon by the name you entered. You can also join the meeting by calling 669-900-6833. Enter meeting ID number 82813207067. 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 six 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 into the secretary. 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 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 items, please select the hand icon and unmute yourself. If you're calling in and would like to comment on non agenda items, please dial nine and then six to unmute yourself. I will wait a few seconds. Chair, we do not have any speakers.

OK. Moving on to the consent calendar. One motion for consent items unless an item is to be polled for separate discussion. Is there a motion to approve item A, minutes from January 29, 2026, item B, excused absences, and item C, receive and file certified local government report 2024-2025?

Sure. I'm sorry, just a question. Yes. Is commissioner, is Manny coming? Or is he excused?

He confirmed. He'll be coming.

Okay. Okay, so he'll be here.

So did you want to pull the item and bring it up later? Or just vote on it now? Okay.

He says he will be here, so we don't really have an excuse to absent.

Do we have a motion? I move. Okay, we have a motion by Vice Chair Christie. Do we have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Shipp. Secretary, please call for roll.

Commissioner Almendral?

Aye.

Commissioner Escamilla? Aye. Commissioner Hardy?

Yes.

Commissioner Houdini?

Yes.

Commissionership?

Aye.

Commissioner Rincon?

Yes.

Vice Chair Christy?

Yes.

Chair Marashi?

Yes.

Motion approved by majority vote with Commissioner Escamilla absent.

That concludes the consent calendar. As noted on the agenda, the work study session, which was scheduled to follow the business calendar, However, I would like to take the work study session out of order. Before we move into the business calendar, we will now proceed with the work study session. The item up is the budget workshop for 2026-2027 presentation. Shannon McCarron from Finance and Management Services will now provide a short presentation.

Thank you so much for having us here today. Today I'm going to provide a brief overview of the current year's budget, discuss the budget process and where we're at in the process as of today, and encourage folks to complete the annual community priorities survey. The results of this survey will help city council allocate resources for the 26-27 city budget, which commences on July 1st, 2026 and runs through June 30th, 2027. Similar to other public sector entities, the City of Santa Ana uses fund accounting to ensure transparency and accountability. This pie chart includes all of the city's fund types. On the right-hand side, you'll see that the largest piece of the pie is the general fund. This is the only unrestricted fund that City Council has discretion over. City Council spends the majority of its time prioritizing and allocating general fund resources. Capital project funds are used to build, renovate, and maintain city assets. Funds for road and street improvements are here. Dollars in these funds typically come from grant sources such as Caltrans and the Orange County Transportation Authority. Debt service funds include pension obligation bonds and other city debt. Enterprise funds are designed to be self-sustaining. Revenue collected from these services is intended to cover the full cost of operations. Examples include the water, sewer, and refue enterprises. And a well-known example of other restricted funds is the Cannabis Public Benefit Fund, which was established by City Council to specifically fund youth and enforcement services. Two-thirds of the revenue flows into this fund, while the remaining third stays in the general fund. Youth services include library services and facilities for children and teens, while enforcement services are costs associated with enforcing cannabis business regulations and related public safety enforcement. And finally, examples of special revenue funds include the gas tax fund and other funding sources that have very specific requirements regarding how funds can be spent. As an example, gas tax funds can only be used on road and highway maintenance, local street repairs, and transportation infrastructure. Examples of transportation infrastructure include traffic signal improvements and median landscaping. Overall, the citywide budget increased by 6% this fiscal year compared to last year. Most of this growth is attributed to the capital project fund and mostly due to increased grant funding from the Orange County Transportation Authority. Santa Ana is unique because it has more unrestricted revenue than restricted. This is largely due to the city's 1.5% sales tax. In many other cities, most funding is restricted which means that city council has less flexibility in how the money can be used. Today we will only address the city's general fund. The primary sources of revenue in the general fund are property taxes and sales taxes. For each dollar of property tax that you pay, the city receives approximately 19 cents, with the remaining portion going to the countywide services and schools. If you shop or dine in Santa Ana, you pay 9.25% sales tax, City receives 1% of the normal allocation plus one and a half percent for voter approved measure X. Current year general fund revenue was estimated to be 413.8 million, which was a very small increase of only 1.8% compared to last year. Slower consumer spending and higher interest rates are limiting both sales and property tax growth. To further complicate matters, raising new revenue in California is challenging. Any new tax requires voter approval, and city fees can only recover the cost of providing services. In other words, we cannot generate a profit. The city's general fund expenditure budget as of July 1 2025 was 424 million, which represents an increase of three and a half percent compared to the prior fiscal year. General fund expenditures are rising faster than revenue because costs for Labor health benefits and pensions continue to grow, along with the inflationary increases in goods and services that the city purchases. These are the top spending priorities identified by the Santa Ana community during the last budget process. Over the past five years, these priorities have remained consistent, with public safety and road and sidewalk maintenance continuing to lead the pack. So far this year, we've received nearly 700 survey submissions, far short of the mayor's goal of 10,000. We're asking for your help in promoting the survey. Please encourage family, friends, and coworkers to participate. We welcome input from anyone with a vested interest in the City of Santa Ana. This slide provides some notable examples of how the city has acted on the community's feedback in allocating funds for the current fiscal year. It shows the tangible impact of your input from programs to projects and demonstrates that the city listens and responds to what residents prioritize. In other words, this is how we close the loop on prior year funding decisions, turning survey responses and community input into real investments that benefit the Santa Ana community. Now that the city of Santa Ana is in year seven of the local sales tax, we're proud to share some of the accomplishments made possible by these funds. These projects could not have been achieved without the support of our residents. For context, in November 2018, Santa Ana voters approved an additional one and a half sales tax for a period of 10 years. In April 2029, this rate is scheduled to decrease to 1%, and the tax is set to sunset entirely in April 2039. Measure X is particularly effective because it captures a larger share of sales tax from online sales and relies less on the transportation sector compared to the state of California. This structure has allowed the city to fund key priorities while providing stable revenue to support city services. The next few slides are highlighting the accomplishment I won't read them to you, but they're a great resource and worth exploring at your own pace. It provides detailed information on the city's priorities accomplishment and how Community input has shaped our decisions perfect for your some leisure reading when you have time. We also have the budget book available if you're interested, and that is 1000 pages of leisure reading. Every year, the budget office sets a few key goals. First, we aim to cast as wide net as possible, reaching the Santa Ana community, including residents, business owners, and all stakeholders. Secondly, we work to improve our engagement numbers each year. To help with this, we now keep the budget survey live year-round. In prior years, by the time momentum had built up, it was time to close the survey. The primary reason we're here today is to ask for your help in promoting the survey balancing the city's budget is expected to be particularly challenging this year, which makes Community input more important than ever. The public's demand for services is outpacing the city's legal ability to raise revenue. And finally, the city of Santa Ana provides itself on financial transparency on the city's website, you can find the current fiscal year's budget in detail prior your budgets annual financial reports and much more. We find out, we ask that you take a few minutes to complete the Community priority survey it takes less than five minutes includes only seven questions. And most questions allow open ended responses, so you can share what matters most to you, even if it's not listed as an option. Thank you for sharing time with us today. I'm here to answer any questions you might have.

Does the Commissioner have any questions? Go ahead.

All right, yeah, thank you for that. I guess just a quick observation, at least for me and maybe why I didn't quite share out the survey as much as I did in previous years, it seems to be relatively predetermined like it's and you can almost do like a one for one what is it whatever is at the very top of the list as far as like priorities that's like the top two are the top two the next three it's three and four and then five and six right so it's almost as though most folks either just kind of saw the first two and selected that or not um and it does seem to kind of leave out a lot of areas so I don't know and this is probably way too far down the road at this point to have more of a ranking system and a little bit more broad information even just a little bit of a primer as to where the money is currently being spent versus going out so without you know any of that information and you know that we have here in front of us um you know the residents are doing the survey aren't going to necessarily be you know taking a look at that so that was just the the observations to how the survey was conducted because i do remember in prior years having more information available um as we were doing the survey it does complicate it a little bit but it made it i think a much more robust and realistic reflection of what community needs and desires were versus this, which to me I think still arbitrarily grouped and kind of prioritized certain segments of the budget.

That's great feedback, and that is the, to me, the ongoing debate that we struggle with every year. I think last year we got so many complaints about it, there were too many questions, and it took 12 minutes to complete the survey, and if you make the survey shorter, more people will complete it. And so it's like we go, it's odd and even years. We keep going back and forth. But I agree, it's incredibly hard to get a survey that's going to capture, especially a city as big as Santa Ana, to accurately kind of,

talk about what we do because there's so many pieces of it but i do thank you for your feedback and i agree with you yeah and i don't necessarily think that i don't know if any demographic information was collected at the end either right so it looked like that was just kind of an out so um that again to me is also really important to understand who's answering um and again it probably leads to a lower survey response but better overall data you know and i don't know if In fact, voluntary surveys are even reflective, statistically speaking, of an entire city. So I would wish that we would just spend the time to move towards a scientific survey model to get an understanding of what the average voter, the average resident, because those are two distinct populations. We have a very large undocumented community here that doesn't show up on the voter rolls, but should be reflected, I believe, in a survey of the residents. So that would be my general approach moving forward, is spend the $10,000 that we're still spending on a or however much it is, but doing it from that direction. Ms.

Funny that you say that. We do have the results of a scientific polling survey that I believe is coming to City Council on March 17th, and that is going to be much more broad, comprehensive, and give you much more insights in the survey.

Mr. Love it. Ms.

I'm interested to see if, like, the priorities are different, yeah, if they align.

Any more questions or I have two. Number one is, how long do we have to fill out the survey?

Well, we are going to keep it open. OK. We will kind of, what I don't want to say, close it, but we are going to scoop in and pick up and compile all of the responses in early May so we can share them with City Council. And we're tentatively scheduled for three budget workshops with City Council in May. And at each of those meetings, we will include information on all the community, not only the survey responses we've received, but the feedback we're getting from you all. We're visiting with neighborhood associations, we're attending citywide events, we are coming to city and commission meetings when being asked, and even visiting with area nonprofits to help get the word out. So all of that will be compiled and shared with city council in May.

Okay. And the second one is almost along the lines of Commissioner Escamilla. Are you having any open forum type workshops where people can actually just give an input without just having a predetermined survey like Yeah, absolutely.

Those are the visits with it. nonprofit organizations those are the visits with neighborhood associations city um events are a little bit harder first of all we bribe folks to come to us by we buy things for kids to do and while we can so we can calm the parents into taking the survey and so we found that to be as productive but yes that's what we do if anybody calls us or emails us or reaches out to us and say hey will you come talk to our group we say yes

All right, perfect. Thank you. Well, thank you for your time, Ms. McCarran. Appreciate the very informative presentation.

Thank you for having me.

That concludes the work study session. Moving on to the business calendar session. I will now review the process for the public hearing so that everyone knows what to expect. Staff will provide a presentation and answer any questions from the Commission. The public hearing will be open. 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 the 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 thoughts and comments. Please state your name and address, strictly voluntary. State whether you support, oppose or are neutral to the proposal. Your statement should be including all pertinent facts within your knowledge. Please note the formal action of the historic resource Commission shall become effective after the 10 day appeal period. Unless the City Council holds a public hearing on the matter, then the formal action will become effective on the day following the hearing and a decision by the City Council. An appeal from the decision or requirement of the commission must be filed with the clerk of the council and a copy sent to the planning department within 10 days of the date of the commission's actions. The appeal may be made by any interested party, individual, or group. This is the time and place for historic exterior modification application 2025-05 for the property located at 1015 West River Lane, located within a single family residence R1 zoning district. Before we begin, do any commissioners have anything they wish to disclose with regards to this item? Yes, Vice Chair Christy.

I visited the property on Monday, but I did not speak to any of the residents.

Okay. Commissioner Harrogate.

I also drove by the property, but I did not talk to any of the occupants.

I also drove by the property and didn't meet with the applicants, but I saw the property. Yes, Commissioner Hardy.

And I visited each of the properties we'll be discussing today.

Thank you. The public hearing is now open. Would the applicant like to speak on the matter? What? That's backwards. OK. All right. OK. We're missing a. Yeah. Yes. Oh, there it is. OK. Sorry about that. I was getting ahead of myself. James Williams will now provide a brief presentation. There we go. James, take it away. Thank you, Chair and Commissioners.

The current item is historic exterior modification application number 2025-05 for the house addressed at 1015 West River Lane. The project under consideration is a proposed 160 square foot addition to the rear of the existing semi-detached garage. The EM Crawford house is located in the Fisher Park neighborhood, depicted in this aerial photograph of the site. Constructed in 1948, the property consists of a single family residence and semi-detached garage. is architecturally significant as an intact example of a california ranch style residence in santa ana it was listed on the santa ana register of historical properties in 2020 and categorized as landmark here we have additional photos of the em crawford house its character defining features include but may not be limited to its rough l plan incorporating courtyards and covered porches it's low-pitched cross-hipped roof wide overhanging open eaves and exposed rafters. There do be where do go adobe brick exterior cladding. Multi light metal frame casement windows and what headers over the windows and doors, in addition to adobe brick chimneys property has no identified unauthorized modifications. The project would construct a 160-square-foot rear storage room addition to the rear or north facade of the existing semi-detached garage. It would consist of a three-sided addition with its open side abutting the existing garage and therefore requiring no substantial changes to the historic fabric of the garage. The addition's gabled roof would culminate with a peak reaching just below the existing overhang. Exterior walls would be clad with a masonry veneer that would be painted to match the existing paint colour of the garage and residence. In addition, the masonry veneer would be differentiated from the existing adobe by the dimensions of its simulated bricks. And the addition's exterior would feature two wood doors and a fibreglass sash casement window. Finally, internal ingress and egress between historic garage and the proposed storage room addition will be via an existing doorway that will be preserved, this is a door that's currently to the exterior but following the addition would be between the addition of the garage. And this is the proposed site plan highlighting the proposed rear addition. Behind the garage. And this is a partial. Sorry, this is a floor plan showing the location of the existing garage door and showing how it will provide access to the proposed addition. exterior doors for the addition include a swinging door on the south and a sliding door on the north, the post casement window would be east facing. Here are the existing east and north elevations, the east being the rear elevation, showing the location of the addition. The south and west elevations are not presented because those would not show the location of the proposed work. And here we have the proposed east and north elevations. Note the relatively low height of the addition, which minimizes the addition in comparison to the garage and residence. In addition, there is a rough approximation of the simulated masonry pattern of the proposed veneer. This is intended to show that the appearance of the existing exterior wall and proposed exterior wall would be similar and compatible, but still differentiated by their pattern or simulated pattern in the case of the veneer. As an overview of the project complies with rehabilitation standards one. One through 359 and 10 while rehabilitation standards for and six through eight are not applicable, the work is consistent with the guidance presented in. presented in Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings, last updated in 2017. As a review of the standards found to be inapplicable to this project, please note that Standard 4 applies to changes to a property that have acquired historical significance in their own right. Standard six applies to deteriorated historic features will that would be should be repaired or replaced standard seven applies to chemical or physical treatments and standard eight applies to. subterranean archaeological resources, none of these apply so. So the proposed work is consistent with the applicable rehabilitation standards for the following reasons. First, it will retain the original use and essential form of the property with minimal addition. As such, it conforms to standard number one. It will not significantly alter any distinctive materials, features, or examples of craftsmanship because the project will require only limited interface with the existing building and will not require any demolition. Thus, the project satisfies standards two and five. The project will not introduce any new features that would create a false sense of history, thus making the project consistent with standard number three. The compact plan, low height, and the setback from the character-defining rear courtyard will not impact will allow the project not to impact the essential form or feeling of the adjacent courtyard, nor overshadow the garage. The proposed addition is compatible with the building due to the simplicity of its design and use of masonry veneer to complement the existing adobe. However, the work will be differentiated, as mentioned before, from the historic garage by way of a gabled roof form as opposed to the existing hip. a lower overall height than the historic garage, and the use of the aforementioned masonry veneer, which will be differentiated in the size of the simulated units of masonry. As such, the project is consistent with standard number nine. Should the addition be removed in the future, any means of attachment to the existing garage, such as bolt holes or something else yet to be defined, can be patched and or painted with no discernible change to any of the property's distinctive materials or features. In addition to the previously mentioned design elements, the applicants have volunteered to place a plaque on the addition that reads, quote, this structure addition was erected in 2026 by the current owners and is not original to the property, end quote. The plaque will resemble the materials and overall design standards for plaques for properties listed on the City Register. With that, staff recommends the Commission adopt a resolution approving a Certificate of Appropriateness for Historic Exterior Modification application number 2025-05 as conditioned. Thank you.

Thank you. Does the Commission have any questions or comments of staff? Yes, go ahead, Vice Chair Christie.

Okay, I'm not a builder, I'm just a female, okay? And I'm not into building and trades. But as I'm reading this, there's a delicate balance with the materials that you're trying to preserve Adobe, which as reading this, no two are alike. And on this, you're trying to gingerly say that they're going to have the walls come in, you know, with the extension, and that they're going to be using bolts on this. And those bolts will not impact for attachment, it seems like you're very concerned about those boats going in to, as I'm reading this, and I may be wrong, you know, I'm not a builder, you know, something to me when I was growing up, that's a man's job, you know, and so forth. But anyway, but I'm getting the impression that this is a very sensitive part of the addition And what happens if something goes wrong? How do you repair that? Am I making myself clearer?

Yes, I believe so. Thank you for that question. This is something we wrestled with in reviewing the project. The bolts are only one possible means of affixing the proposed addition to the existing building. We have included a condition in the resolution that ensures that as the project applicant is working out the final means of attaching the building to the existing house or to the semi-detached garage, the final solution to this problem will be done in such a manner that it is sensitive to the structural integrity of the residence. I think the applicant could speak more to this, but as I said, the bolts were not necessarily the final solution for attaching this property. It may be like a semi-freestanding structure with a sealant added in the minimal space that would be left between the addition and the existing structure. In that way, it would not require any sort of physical removal of materials. However, I would like to say that the main issue with the possibility of using bolts, which was the first option that was presented, was Really just the integrity of the adobe that says so you know wondering you know whether or not this was a solution that would you know. Cause any sort of cracking or you know where on the adobe and so we've planning staff have really left this up to people in the building division who are more experts on this and that this is.

So it's new to you too.

Yeah, I really couldn't assess the physical effects of this. But one last thing I wanted to say is if this were proven to be a feasible and structurally sound option, it would cause only minimal loss of the Adobe. And I think that this could be patched. and repaired in such a manner that it wouldn't really be noticeable if it were to come to this sort of means of attaching the building or the addition to the building.

If I may, Madam Vice Chair, I'm sorry to interrupt. Thank you so much for the question. It's a great question. I just want to assure you that this is no different than any conversation that we have for any projects that come through for a certificate of appropriateness, because these homes and the materials are identified as character defining, and it is something that we consider for all of them. There are changes sometimes that happen between when the project is presented to the Commission, and when projects move forward for building plan check and permit issuance. But we ensure that it's consistent with all standards and recommendations to preserve as much of the character defining features as possible. Oftentimes these additions result in removing materials entirely for additions. So this isn't no different than other projects that you've seen. I think the one new thing is that the Verdugo brick is fairly unique, and there's not many examples of that brick, especially given the history of, I don't know if it was confirmed, but possibly being formed on site. But the way you treat the brick and the way we move forward with the addition is not going to be any different than any other home that comes before the commission for a certificate of appropriateness.

Yeah, especially since this property is a landmark. category that they have. And with the significance of this particular brick, it's no longer made, that's for sure, or anyone would have knowledge how to make it that's living today. This is why, you know, it's a ginger kind of situation on the observation. What happens if there is a mistake? How do you go forward? How do you repair it to make it and keep it within the standards of a landmark? And that's what my question. My second question is that you're going to you already have a plaque that's going on that says this is not the original for the for the door. But does the original home have a plaque that says this is landmark property. Yeah, it does. Thank you. That's okay. Okay, that's important. Okay. Thank you, staff.

Are there any other questions or comments? Go ahead, Commissioner Hardy.

So it looks like actually part of the .

It's only going to be the width.

I don't know. You mean the width of the additions wall? Right. .

Oh, by the addition, the original surface won't be impacted at all. So it's just those, the width of the wall. So I was thinking maybe it could be freestanding, the three walls, but there's so many openings that maybe, I don't know, I'm not a structural engineer, maybe that's not possible. But there's an idea right there. All right. Those are my comments.

If I can add to that, the exhibit of the floor plan of the addition to the back of the garage does indicate that the existing opening is nearly eight feet and the width of the addition is 10 feet. So it would be only impacting a small part of the wall on the sides and then the length of the top of the building where it's affixed to the existing garage.

And so you could see how easily it could be removed and all of the original surface would be intact.

Commissioner, how are you?

Yes, I drove by and I couldn't see the property. It has a beautiful landscape of the plants and they're lush and all that. Maybe it's our weather, but you can't really see the property as you drive by because it's covered with all these vines. So maybe just you know, trimming them up a bit because it wasn't that visible, especially a landmark property.

Commissioner, is the suggestion that we add as a condition of approval that the vegetation be trimmed back?

Mm-hmm.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments? Yes. Commissioner Escamillo.

So I just had a quick question on the materials. So have we confirmed that the existing exterior is a whitewash and not like a polyurethane paint or anything? I guess that's my main concern, quite honestly.

Thank you for that question. I do not know. Perhaps the applicant knows and

Okay. Yeah, just because, so what are the main things? So whitewashing isn't just a color and like painting it white. It's a specific type of material that allows the underlying brick to breathe. So without that, there will be long-term structural damage to the structure. So one of the only conditions I'd like to see is to make sure, like as, you know, okay with approving it, but we would want to confirm that it's a whitewash adobe lime that's appropriate to the underlying material so it doesn't degrade over time. And then that's really kind of for the entire integrity of the the break throughout the entire structure. So that would be my condition, but again, I don't know, and maybe we can answer whether that's a true whitewash with a lime base, or are we looking at a polyurethane plastic paint, so.

Thank you.

Any more questions or comments? Okay. The public hearing is now open. Would the applicant like to speak on the matter?

Hello? There we go.

Thank you for the opportunity. We appreciate the commission.

First, I'd like to address Ms. Christie. Yeah. Great question. Thank you. As far as how the building is going to be attached and the sensitivity of the adobe brick. And yes, it is very sensitive. In answer to your question, it can be remanufactured. The original brick, from what I understand, was manufactured on site. using the materials from the earth in that area, which is a sandy consistency. If you picture the building here, which is the addition, and then my structure of the back of the garage, at one time it was a drive-through garage where you could drive into the backyard. There was a previous owner, Crawford, who had multiple cars, and he would drive those through the backyard to the back of the house. But the proposed shed is going to cover that opening. And in answering Mr. Williams, or Expanded on Mr. Williams' thoughts. The new conclusion to not disturbing any of the original garage adobe brick is to have a freestanding structure, like what you were mentioning, and the gap between the structure, shed, and the garage taken up by a four inch, by one half inch, felt material that's used in concrete slabs to take the gap up. So the structure is basically built right next to the garage and just under the eaves with no attachment other than felt and some caulking for irregularities of the brick. And that's it.

as far as the structural aspects of it six by six headers throughout all the openings bolted to the concrete it's not if there's an earthquake that's where i'm going go ahead sorry we are very familiar with this process and very appreciative of the commission on 925 north lowell street a 1928 home was approved to be on the mills act which we got as owners of the property for 22 years We are very appreciative and understanding of how important it is to keep the integrity of these beautiful buildings in Santa Ana. So my husband is a unofficial with the City of Los Angeles, and he does everything to the T as an inspector and has worked diligently with Mr. Williams here. We're very passionate about keeping the building and its integrity and all the things, and that's why we bought the home. So anyway, thank you for that. What else? Was there anything else you wanted to add?

Just a history with our 925 North Lowell home, which was on the historic list. I spent about the majority of our life restoring that home to its original condition. We're very passionate about historic homes and the beauty and the sense of the old school craftsmanship that was put into it. And I consider myself a bit of a craftsman to maintain this home in its original condition and have already taken steps in keeping in line with the beauty and the architecture. It's a lovely home. And we will trim back the vines a little bit.

Without killing the vines. If you see the roots, they are absolutely ginormous. So we're very sensitive to how delicate they are. If you cut into the vine, it can destroy the rest of the arms. So you do trim it back as delicately as we can, but just to keep that in mind. that it's not as easy as it sounds to have the home visible because of that reason.

It just had a big growth spurt with the rains we had. Does anybody have any questions of us?

Yes, Commissioner, ask me.

Just wondering if you can answer that question now as a building inspector. So if it's a regular Home Depot type paint or if it is a blind wash on the exterior of the main structure, again, that's kind really structurally.

What we're going to do is whatever the city would like us to do. Because we want to keep the, we've been asking along this process, what would you like us to do? Go ahead.

You're asking about what finishes on the existing structure? Yeah, on the existing. And again, just to get... It seems to be a, I don't know when it was painted last, modern paint that were put on the structure.

Okay, yeah, so would you be okay with doing like a true whitewash? It would be like a relatively simple, but you would have to scrape off the paint. There might be more additional issues, but...

There would be such amount of damage to try to scrape off the paint to the adobe brick. We are going to have it painted under my oversee in a year or two. where you can see cracks in the paint, that's going to be exposed and the material beneath it, which is the adobe brick, is going to be treated and sealed and then resealed with paint. Right, but I think the. So there's no intrusion of water.

Right, but I think the problem is with the underlying material is like you're supposed to let it breathe with the whitewash so that that cracking doesn't happen. So the cracking, it might be somewhat related to the encapsulation that's happening with the paint there.

I totally, totally agree with And if the previous owners several removed from us had known that process or whatever the they did in the beginning. that's the way to go, so that the brick can breathe I totally agree with that, but we have to deal with what's there now and preserve. Any migration of water that might get into a crack or something like that would damage it over time. It is sensitive, and I'm very sensitive to its sensitivity. Mr. Right.

And I guess, you know, my general observation here is still that the long-term sustainability of the brick will be dependent upon whether or not we can introduce a true, like, whitewash breathable finish. And there are, I think, newer breathable paints that are out there on the market. Mr. Right. Mr. So I don't really have a prescriptive answer, but a willingness to work with staff to make sure that the appropriate paint is then applied.

Yes, absolutely.

For the existing structure or the new shed that's being built?

Oh, I would say to the existing, whatever is consistent with the new structure and like the, oh my gosh, with the new structure and then the restoration of the existing. And again, to me, it's just, if we have a landmark structure that is very specifically being called out for its whitewash adobe as for the rationale for being a landmark, we should do everything we can to preserve the actual whitewash adobe and not just paint it white. That's at least my perspective on the issue, but that's me reading what the description of the property is in its character-defining features. So right now I have a character-defining feature that is the reason it's a landmark, but it isn't actually true. It's just an approximation of we painted it white because it looked white and we thought it was the same material, but now we know that it is not the same material that is in the description of the landmark, oh my gosh, of the property itself in our own historic register. So that's kind of where I'm coming from on this.

I see that. I see your point, yeah. Thank you.

Any other questions or comments of the applicant? All right, thank you very much. Thank you. 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 one written comment that has been distributed to the commission and has been posted on the website. 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 into the secretary. If you are participating via Zoom and would like to comment on this item, please select the hand icon and unmute yourself. If you are calling in and would like to comment on this item, please dial nine and then six to unmute yourself. I will wait a few seconds. Chair, we do not have any speakers.

Thank you. The public hearing is now closed. Is there a motion to approve this matter?

Actually, I wanted to just add a condition, if that's okay to discuss. Go ahead. And again, just maybe something very generally directing staff to work with the applicant to find an appropriate sealer that mimics the, you know, historic character of the whitewashed adobe. And again, just, and I don't aggressive or willing, the commission is to say we should restore the entire home because now it's the one time that's going to be before us probably for the next 20 to 30 years. I don't imagine we're going to have another HEMA on this project. So this would be the opportunity to restore or at least have staff work to restore the whitewash adobe that is one of the only examples of a whitewash adobe structure in the city. I don't know and I'd be looking to my other commissioner to see if there's a willingness to accept the restoration for the entire home versus just requiring it on the addition. Well, why don't you make the motion and we'll see how it goes.

Oh, for the vegetation? Commissioner, if I may interject just for a second. Yes. The action before the commission is the addition. So only the structure being proposed to be added to the garage. So any of the conditions or any of the discussion should be limited to that. So if you, Commissioner Eskamie, are looking for something specific about the material, around ceiling or the material that would be used on the exterior, it would be limited to the addition, not to the broader property or home itself.

Okay. And is there any, I guess, flexibility on, like, again, because we have described this so consistently within the staff reports as a whitewashed adobe structure, when, in fact, I would make the argument that it is not a whitewashed adobe structure. It was built as one, but the current conditions on site are actually different than what is in the staff report. It is a polyurethane. modern plastic seal overlaid on top of an Adobe brick structure. I guess I'm just looking for what do we do now that we have a landmark structure in front of us that we know is out of compliance with retaining its original whitewash characteristics. So what do we do in this particular case when, again, what I'm seeing is a City Council Chambers, Not a violation, but just something that doesn't line up with what the description of the property is in the rationale for it being a landmark structure in the first place, I look for any guidance on this and probably the legal. City Council Chambers, or yeah Thank you very much, if I may.

City Council Chambers, The issue isn't isn't that you bring up a very good technical issue, however, the issue that that we have is going to be just the brown act requiring that the HRC. City Council Chambers, State stick to what's on the agenda that's that's really the actual core issue here. You have significant concerns that are supported by logic. But again, it's going to be what is agendized, which is the HEMA, which is the accessory structure that's being added to the house itself, not the materials on the entirety of the house.

And Commissioner, if I may, I understand your point about the staff report. I think fundamentally, it doesn't change the scope of the work that's being presented. I can tell you, though, that this property is a Mills Act property. So as part of the intention of the Mills Act agreements is to kind of look at these properties periodically, legally every five years. And if it's something that identifies, we know it now, right? And within the scope of the Mills Act agreement to keep it consistent with the standards, it is something that we can take a look at.

No, that works for me. Again, I just want the pathway forward to do the restoration work on the brick. That works for me. So I'm just going to move to approve as is, but there was also another modification request for just the vegetation. Oh.

Mr. Chair, I would argue you had mentioned about the landscaping and the visibility of the structure from And the resolution before you, condition number 7, already addresses the item related to landscaping.

Okay. And so I guess I would move to approve as recommended by staff. And so I'll be making the motion. I'll second.

So we have a first by Commissioner Eskamian, a second by, okay, Commissioner Haurige. Oh, okay. Commissioner Rincon. No. Well, she had her hand up, so. Okay. Secretary, please call roll.

Commissioner Almendral.

Yes.

Commissioner Escamilla.

Aye.

Commissioner Hardy. Yes. Commissioner Haurigu.

Yes.

Commissioner Shipp.

Yes.

Commissioner Rincon.

Yes.

Vice Chair Christy?

Yes.

Chair Miroshy?

Yes.

Motion approved by my, sorry, motion approved unanimously.

Congratulations. This is the time and place for Historic Resource Commission application number 2025-18. Historic Register Categorization Number 2026-01, and Historic Property Preservation Application Number 2026-01 for the property located at 2214 Northwestwood Avenue, located in a single-family residence, R1 Zoning District. Before we begin, do any commissioners have anything they wish to discuss or disclose with regards to this item? Yes, Commissioner Amadoro.

I consulted on this project, so I will need to recuse myself, as same for the next one as well.

OK. Any other commissioners? Yes, Vice Chair. Christy.

I visited the property on Monday, but I did not speak to the owners.

Any other commissioners? Yes.

I just drove by the property, but I did not talk to any of the occupants.

Yes, Commissioner Arne.

Yes, and I visited the property.

I also drove by the property and looked at it, but not talked to the owners. Okay. James Williams will now provide a brief presentation.

Thank you, Chair. The next item on tonight's agenda is a request to place the property addressed as 2214 Northwestwood Drive on the Santa Ana Register and recommend approval of the Mills Act Agreement with the property owner. The M.I. Thompson House is located in the West Floral Park neighbourhood and is architecturally significant as an intact example of a ranch-style residence in Santa Ana. The original building permit indicates the property was constructed in 1963 as a residence and attached garage at a cost of $40,000. Mary I. Thompson purchased the subject parcel from developer Emmett C. Rogers circa 1963. contractor, Frank M. Rogers, completed the residence in September of that same year. Deed documents show that following Thompson's ownership of the property, it was acquired by a series of owners, including David Reich, Dena Jackson Rosler, John Devine, and Steven and Patricia D. Atkinson. In 2025, the property came under the legal control of Michael and Steve Doty as trustees for Patricia Atkinson. Excuse me. Research conducted by staff did not identify any information of consequence regarding the property's current or former owners. The M.I. Thompson House qualifies for listing in the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties under Criterion 1 as an intact example of a ranch-style residence in Santa Ana. The recommended categorization is contributive as it is a good example of its style. The commission may recall that in order for a property to be categorized as contributive, it must contribute to the overall character and history of a neighbourhood or district and be a good example of period architecture. Here we have additional photos of the M.I. Thompson House. Its character-defining features include, but may not be limited to, its wing and gable main façade composition, wood shake roof horizontal lap wood, brick and stucco siding, principally gable on hip roof form, closed eaves, wood sash windows in multiple configurations, recessed front and back porches, and brick planters integrated into the brick external chimney. The property has no identified unauthorized modifications. Upon consideration of the application, it is recommended that the city enter into a historic property preservation agreement subject to completion of future improvements as described in the work plan. Future improvements identified in the work plan during the initial 10 years of the Mills Act Agreement include assess all siding, that's including lapwood, stucco, and brick, for cracking and other damage, and replace or repair in Assess the condition of the windows and replace or repair in kind as necessary. Assess the condition of the roofing and fascia and repair or replace in kind. Assess hardscaping, including the driveway, walkways, and porch and patio steps and flooring, and repair or replace in kind as necessary. And assess the condition of the foundation and repair as All items included in the work plan must be completed with Planning Division staff approval. With that, staff recommends that the Commission adopt a resolution to approve HRCA number 2025-18 and HRC number 2026-1 and recommend City Council authorize HPPA number 2026-1. Thank you.

Does the commission have any questions or comments of staff? Yes, Commissioner Hardy.

Yes. In the description, it says that the windows are generally wood sash multi-pane. I don't understand why the word generally is in there. I mean, either it's one kind of window or another kind of window. So I don't know why that word's in there. Then the other question is that really prominent in the front facade is the newer roll-up garage door. It's very attractive. It has panels and everything. But I'm just really curious, does that get grandfathered in? Is that an alteration that took place at a certain time with a permit? Or how do we judge that, you know? I mean, what was, does it, the same style of garage door that was there originally? How are we supposed to look at that? Do you have any answers for that question?

So I can take that question first. It was assessed not to be an alteration that substantially undermined the integrity of the property. However, I believe it's not entirely unusual that the replacement of a non-conforming item with something that's more compatible with style is something that is, you know, included in a Mills Act plan. So I think that that's an item that could be included in the plan to do. I mean, we don't necessarily know what the original garage door looked like. But I think that's, you know, staff at a future date could determine could find a suitable alternative replacement.

I'm not really suggesting that it be replaced. I'm just um it might be perfectly appropriate i'm just mentioning it because it you know it's really prominent and um i'm just trying to figure out for myself what kind of garage doors are appropriate when you're replacing them and if it's a milzak property and going to be put on the register so i don't know if there's explanation for that or not at this time okay well yeah i think that um it's

Probably it would not be considered appropriate, but in my judgment it wasn't enough to disqualify the property on the basis of integrity.

Thank you.

As far as the windows go, I think I apologize for the indistinctness of the language used in the DPR form. I think what that was communicating was that the windows are wood and generally of a single type, though I think they're a few exceptions, which I hope will be picked up in the photos, but I will take note of the higher level of detail.

Okay, thank you.

Do any of the other commissioners have any questions or comment of staff? Okay. The public hearing is now open. Would the applicant like to speak on the matter?

Hi, everyone. Thank you. My name is Steve Dowd. I live at 2206 North Westwood, and Pat Atkinson and I started this process. Unfortunately, she passed away. I am a fourth-generation Santa Anan. My entire family, myself, and everybody above me, we landed in Santa Ana in 1888. We've all attended Santa Ana High. We were all born at St. Joseph's Hospital. My mother was very involved in Santa and Molly Dowdy. She was on the planning commission. I was on the image council for Santa in the early aughts. And we started with Pat in this journey about September. She took a really bad downturn in kind of October and in November. And after she passed, I continued on with this. So I'm her neighbor and her trustee as well. And they have been a part of our lives for over 30 years, and she was preceded by her husband, one of her sons, and one of her daughters in death. So I know she's looking down right now going, this is just absolutely awesome. And I really appreciate you guys hearing it. And James, I want you to write my obit. You're fabulously like Hemingway over there. I just want to say the House is very unique to our neighborhood i'm a you know i've been in my House I live in backs up to a House of the House across street that I grew up in. So i'm really close to where i've always lived and that House, as well as one across the street or one of the most unique houses in West floral park it's they're absolutely stunning and beautiful. And I think to the question of windows, whoever had the windows comment they're all original windows and they're all the set that you know the ones that pull on the side and have the weights and all that good stuff and so. what's that. Yes, double on their beauty W take the top one, then you can bottom ones up they're just absolutely stunning. As far as the garage door i've been there over 30 years and I know they haven't replaced it since then and it's ways about. 2,000 pounds. It's not one of those light aluminum ones. It's a Detroit U.S. steel type of thing. Looks like a 1970s Cadillac. You should pull it up. So anyway, I just wanted to say thank you. I really appreciate it. It's fascinating to come to this, and I'm so blessed that I was here. So any questions?

Yes, Commissioner. Hi, Steve.

Great seeing you again. Thank you. Your mother, Molly, was really loved and respected in the community. She did so much. I tell you, and this home, you just drive by and you go off. It's like right out of the well kept. And I mean, it's a standout. So and I mean, thank you. And for keeping that image of honest here. in Santa Ana believe me and you know what we had to fight for people even come into Santa Ana and respect and so forth so thank you for continuing the Dolly obsession of historic properties and keeping Santa Ana great and beautiful bless your heart thank you thank you thank you guys

Are there any other questions or comments?

No, just a brief comment. I also met Molly many years ago, and she inspired me, and I know the love she had for the city and our special property, so thank you again.

Any other questions or comments?

Okay.

Thank you. All right. 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 one written comment that has been distributed to the Commission and has been posted on the website. 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 into the Secretary. If you are participating via Zoom and would like to comment on this item, please select the hand icon and unmute yourself. 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 don't have any speakers.

Thank you. The public hearing is now closed. Is there a motion to approve this matter?

Chair?

Yes, Vice Chair Christie.

I move to adopt a resolution approving Historic Resource Commission application number 2025-18 and historic register categorization number 2026-1 and recommend that the City Council authorize the City Manager and the City Clerk to execute the Attach Mills Act Agreement with Michael Atkinson and Steve Doherty as trustee of the Patricia Atkinson Revocable Living Trust for the property located at 2214 Northwestwood Avenue, subject to non-substantial changes approved by the city manager and city attorney.

Do we have a second? Second. Okay, we have a second. Secretary, please call for roll.

Commissioner Almendral? Commissioner Escamilla?

Aye.

Commissioner Hardy? Yes. Commissioner Houdigie? Yes. Commissioner Schiff?

Yes.

Commissioner Rincon?

Yes.

Vice Chair Christy?

Yes.

Chair Marashi?

Yes.

Motion approved by majority vote with Commissioner Almendral abstaining.

This is the time and place for Historic Resource Commission Application Number 2025-15, Historic Register Categorization Number 2026-02, and Historic Property Preservation Application Number 2026-02 for the property located at 2117 North Greenleaf Street, located within the single-family residence R1 zoning district. Before we begin, do any commissioners have anything they would like to disclose regarding this matter? Yes.

I visited the property on Monday, but I did not speak to any of the owners of the property.

Okay. Anybody else? Commissioner Hardy.

I visited the property.

I also drove past the property as well, but did not talk to the owners.

I just liked it. Your neighbors watched me. Just to let you know.

James Williams will now provide a brief presentation.

Oh, yes. I also have to introduce myself because I consulted on this application for the former owner like four years ago.

Okay. James Williams will now provide a brief presentation. Thank you, Chair. Excuse me.

The next item on the agenda is a request to place the property addressed as 2117 North Greenleaf Street on the Santa Ana Register and recommend approval of a Mills Act agreement with the property owners. The EA Noe House is architecturally significant as an intact example of a Tudor Revival style house in Santa Ana. The original building permit indicates the property was constructed in 1925 as a residence and detached garage at a cost of $5,000. The original building permit does not identify an architect or contractor, though a 1925 newspaper article identified Noe as the general contractor of the property. The same article described the property as a residence and garage, brick veneer, shingle, and composition roof. Newspapers identify Noe working as a contractor in Santa Ana since around 1914, constructing mostly single and multifamily residence in various styles popular at the time. These included craftsman, Spanish Revival, and Tudor Revival style homes. He constructed the adjacent properties to the subject property on Greenleaf Street, including 2109 and 2121 North Greenleaf Street. and was listed in a 1919 article in the Register as a builder of fine bungalows, residences, and garages. Nomi lived at the property until 1926, when Joseph B. and Virginia H. Head purchased the property. Soon thereafter, Virginia passed away, but Joseph, their two children, David and Francis, and Joseph's second wife, Lula, lived at the property until about 1962. Born in Kansas, Joseph moved to Orange County in 1905 and eventually owned Arrowhead Laundry at 6th and Porter Streets for 15 years. David fought in World War II in the 11th Airborne Division as a paratrooper, and Joseph's second wife, Lula, taught at Logan School for 20 years before retiring in 1946. During Joseph's ownership of the property, he altered the property twice. In 1933, he applied for a permit to rebuild the chimney, and in 1941, to re-roof the residence. In 1983, M.A. McAlpin owned the property. The current owners, Travis and Charles Allen Walter, acquired the property in 2024. In 2023, the property was added to the National Register of Historic Places as a contributing property to the Floral Park Historic District. The E.A. Noe House qualifies for listing in the Santa Ana Register under Criterion 1, because the property is eligible as an intact example of a Tudor Revival-style house in Santa Ana. It retains most of its original features, and the recommended categorization is contributive because the property contributes to the overall character and history of the neighborhood and is a good example of period architecture. I guess I just gave you this overview, but the Commission may recall that in order for a property to be categorized as contributive, It must contribute to the overall character and history of a neighborhood or district and be a good example of period architecture. Here we have additional photos of the Ea Inouye House. The character-defining features of the property are those of the residence's original construction and those which convey the property's Tudor Revival-style design. These features include, but may not be limited to, its asymmetrical main facade, Brick and stucco siding, steeply pitched cross-gabled roof form, closed eaves with exposed beams, historic glazed wood front door, recessed front porch and uncovered front patio, tripartite window on the west facade, and one-over-one wood sash hung windows throughout much of the property. The property has no identified unauthorized modifications. Upon consideration of the application, it is recommended that the City enter into a historic property preservation agreement, subject to completion of future improvements as described in the work plan. Items included in the initial 10 years of the work plan include the following. Assess the paint and stucco siding for cracking and other damage and replace or repair in kind. Update the driveway gate columns to match the house, including stucco cladding and Tudor Revival-style design elements. Inspect and repair chimney as necessary. Assess the condition of the windows and French doors and repair or replace in kind as necessary. And trim vegetation on street facing sides of the property to maintain a clear view of the property from sidewalk assess the condition of the hardscaping including walkways steps porches and other areas and repair or replace. And in excuse me and inspect the roof and replacing kind of needed. Including an assessment of the condition of the exposed beams, which should also be repaired as necessary. All work contained in the work plan must be completed with Planning Division staff approval. With that, staff recommends the Commission adopt a resolution to approve HRCA number 2025-15, HRC number 2026-2, and recommend City Council authorize HPPA number 2026-2. Thank you.

Does the Commission have any questions or comments of staff? Commissioner Herrigan.

I was just curious of the driveway. Is that a, was that cement filled in for the traditional Hollywood drive?

I'm unaware. That's something I could research, though.

Okay, because it just seemed like there was a, you know how the Hollywood drives have that space, and I just noticed that. I did not drive by the property, so I'm not very familiar with it.

Are there any other questions or comments of staff? I had one question. The main window on the left side of the property, is that the original window? I noticed that it was like split into two with some sort of seam going down the middle. And I noticed for being like in your picture, almost a character defining feature, it struck me odd. Usually it's one piece of glass.

Right. I did not observe that flaw in it. But nothing else in my inspection of the property suggested that it was not original.

Okay, thanks. Yes, Commissioner Hardy.

Yes, I have a comment. Looking at the photo, I do see there is evidence of at one time there was a Hollywood-type driveway. So I don't know if we need to include that in the description somewhere. Because you can see where, I mean, I suppose it's just an odd shape that could have been filled in, but it definitely looks like there was a strip of something there that wasn't concrete at one time. A ribbon driveway situation. So that's just my two cents.

Thank you, Commissioner. Yeah, the DPR form can be amended to reflect that.

Any other questions or comments? Would the applicant like to speak on the matter?

I am definitely not a toastmaster like the prior speaker, so I will be reading from this. uh hello council members thank you for considering our home for historic designation my husband travis and i are grateful to return back to santa ana we previously lived in nearby jack fisher park for nine years and then we moved to dana point during our time in dana point we realized for a host of reasons how much we missed home in santa ana an opportunity to purchase 2117 green leaf came about off market with the caveat that the home needed extensive restoration, and addressing years of deferred maintenance. We closed on 2117 Greenleaf in December 2024 and immediately coordinated construction crews. Some of the preservation work we have completed to date includes a complete and permitted replacement of all electrical and wiring, a complete permitted replacement of sewer lines, a complete permitted replacement of heating, air conditioning, and all ducting, City Council Chambers, The completion of a prior kitchen remodel which secured permitted sign offs interior wall patching plaster repair and repainting exterior wall patching and painting touch ups. City Council Chambers, And some of the preservation work that we had we plan to complete over the coming 12 to 24 months includes exterior brick repair restoration and re mortar. City Council Chambers, repair and repainting of the sagging fencing on three sides of the property. exterior painting of the stucco trim wood windows and driveway gate, modification of the driveway gate pillars from staggered stones to something else that matches the rest of the home, exterior painting of the detached garage and garage doors, and re-landscaping of the front and backyard. We have always loved Greenleaf Street and could see the potential for the home from day one. Having lived through a prior successful renovation, Travis and I are not afraid of renovations and ongoing upkeep. We're up to the challenge to breathe life back into 2117 Greenleaf while preserving a piece of Santa Ana's history. Thank you to James and to the Historic Resources Committee for assisting us with the application process. Thank you.

Have you ever seen the movie Tom Hanks, The Money Pit? Because if you haven't, you need to rent that movie. What you've gone through is about like that. Anyway, does the... Does the commission have any questions or comments of the applicant? Yes, Commissioner Escamilla.

Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to thank you for that exhaustive list, and I think it really goes to the purpose of the Mills Act, is these are very expensive structures to maintain, and I really I think you knocked it out of the park as a toastmaster, you know, to actually show us where the money is going and why, you know, this is an actual investment, not just in your property, but then, you know, in our own kind of collective history. So I really appreciate you listing what the work actually is, because that's really the point of this whole exercise.

Of course. Yeah, thank you. Any other questions or comments? Yes, Vice Chair.

I'd just like to comment on your dedication and welcome back. You can never leave home, right?

Good to be back.

Sweet home Santa Ana instead of sweet home Alabama.

We got the perspective and we're home. We're home for good.

Absolutely. But just, you know, your dedication and thought as far as what you're going to be doing to to keep that house as a Tudor and historic gem here in Santa that you and and your husband should be congratulated for that because of the fact that not very many people that come up here with this is what we're going to do in the mills act are as detailed uh as you guys are and it goes through your thought process of saying we're going to have this money and this is how we're going to make it work and i congratulate you on that thank you thank you

Any other questions or comments?

Great. Thank you. OK, thank you very much. Real quick, there was a comment made earlier about the front window and our line being down the middle. We have these roll-up blinds that roll up from the bottom up. And you might have been seeing the string in the middle. But that big main window, that's still original and one piece of glass.

Thank you very much for clarifying that. Appreciate it. Thank you very much. Thank you. Recording Secretary, have we received any written communication or is there a member of the public that would like to comment on this item?

Good afternoon. Yes, I would like to speak on this. My name is Tim Rush. I'm a former chair and member of this commission. I live in Wilshire Square, and I'm also a founding board member of Preserve Orange County. I just want to touch on the issue that was brought up by initially Irma and subsequently by Janelle with regard to the Hollywood driveway. There is no question when you look at the pictures of this house from the street, Especially when you see closer to the sidewalk, there is the middle section that finishes with a diamond point that's very characteristic of a Hollywood driveway, grass slit between the two windows. ribbons of concrete that led to the garage. When you consider how long the driveway is from the street all the way back to the rear of the property, that bit of grass going up the center does definitely break up the concrete and adds hugely to the visual appearance of that home and was very common for homes of that era. My own house built a hundred years ago this year When I bought it 22 years 23 years ago One of the first things I did was have the most rep put back in the driveway which had been filled in So I do think that that should be made as part of the included as part of the work plan on this property these owners seem Absolutely passionate to do everything they can to make this home not only increase its value, but improve its historic significance. Thank you.

Thank you. Secretary, do we have any other written communication or the member of the public that would like to speak on this item?

Chair, we have not received any communication. 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 into the secretary. If you're participating via Zoom and would like to comment on this item, please select the hand icon and unmute yourself. If you are calling in and would like to comment on this item, please dial nine and then six to unmute yourself. I will wait a few seconds. Chair, we do not have any more speakers.

Thank you. The public hearing is now closed. Is there a motion to approve this matter? Yes. Commissioner Hart.

I can make a motion, Chair.

Okay. Is there a second? I second. Okay. We have a second by Commissionership. Secretary, please call for a roll call vote.

Commissioner Almendral. Commissioner Escamilla.

Aye.

Commissioner Hardy? Yes. Commissioner Jauregui? Yes. Commissioner Schiff?

Aye.

Commissioner Rincon?

Yes.

Vice Chair Christy?

Yes.

Chair Marashi?

Yes.

Motion approved by majority vote with Commissioner Almendral abstaining.

Congratulations. Waiting for our Commissioner to rejoin us. This is the time and place for Ordinance Amendment Number 2026-01 to amend portions of Chapter 30, Places of Historical and Architectural Significance, of the Santa Ana municipal code relating to modification of historic properties demolition by neglect and historic property transfer disclosure. Before we begin do any commissioners have anything they wish to disclose regarding this item. Commissioner Escamillo.

It's not really related to this item, but I do actually have to be out to another meeting at 6.30, so I have to leave shortly. I know that I was involved with the project, and I leave it in the hands of staff. I just wanted to let you know why I had to leave a little early, but I think you all got it.

Any other? Okay. Pedro Gomez will now provide a brief presentation.

Thank you, Chair. Good afternoon, and good afternoon to the fellow commissioners. This next item is for Ordinance Amendment 202601. The amendment proposes updates to Chapter 30 called Places of Historical and Architectural Significance of the City's Municipal Code. Specifically, the ordinance addresses modification procedures, demolition by neglect, and historic property disclosure requirements. Some background. In November 2024, the Historic Resources Commission directed staff to explore updates to Chapter 30. At that time, Commissioners Escamilla, Hauraki, and Rincon were established as an ad hoc committee. Between May and October of 2025, staff in the committee held several working meetings to develop the proposed ordinance language. And a study session was presented to the HRC in November of 2025 to discuss the proposed concepts. The ordinance before you tonight reflects the final version of the amendments for Commission's considerations. The ordinance addresses three main policy areas, including modification procedures for historic properties, the demolition by regulations and historic property disclosure during real estate transactions. Each of these areas is intended to clarify existing regulations and strengthen the city's preservation framework. So as far as modification procedures for historic properties, the ordinance introduces several new definitions to improve the clarity in Chapter 30. the definition of historic property to include the internal setting of a site, not just the building itself. Internal setting refers to the areas outside of the building footprint that contribute to the historic character, and examples of this can include the spatial organization, landscaping, hardscaping, and the relationship to the primary structure. The ordinance also defines character-defining features, which are physical elements that convey a property's historic significance. These are features that are typically identified in what's called the DPR 523 forms and other historic documentation. Added definitions are introduced to help clarify how the ordinance will be applied. For example, on the screen before you we have definitions included substantially visible and substantially obstructed to establish when a modification affects the public view of a historic resource. And routine maintenance is defined to clarify work that does not require historic review. These definitions improve administrative clarity and predictability for property owners and staff. And then the amendments clarify which types of modifications require HRC review versus administrative approval by staff. Major modifications require a certificate of appropriateness from the HRC, which we saw one today for 1015 West River. Examples include alterations to character-defining features or architectural features, building additions, changes to exterior materials, and certain changes to landscaping or site features visible from the public right of way. These projects are evaluated primarily using the Secretary of Interior standards for treatment of historic properties. Minor modifications may be approved administratively through Administrative Certificate of Appropriateness, a new concept that the Ordinance Revisions is introducing. Examples of this include like-for-like repairs, mechanical equipment, solar panels not visible from the street, lighting fixtures, and structural or life safety upgrades. I do want to note that the list generated as far as the proposed ordinance is generated from a resolution that was approved by the Historic Research Commission, I believe 2006 or so. So it is something that the staff has already been implementing as part of administrative work. This just codifies that as part of the ordinance revisions. The ordinance also introduces a routine maintenance exemption, allowing common maintenance activities to occur without historic review. And this change helps streamline minor projects while preserving oversight for significant modifications. The second major component of the ordinance addresses demolition by neglect. Currently, Chapter 30 does not define the concept or establish a clear enforcement framework. The proposed amendments define demolition by neglect as deterioration caused by failure to maintain a historic that results in a loss of structural integrity or historic character. The ordinance introduces minimum maintenance standards for historic properties. These standards require property owners to maintain historic resources so they remain structurally sound and eligible for historic designation. Examples of violations include structural deterioration, failure to provide weather decay of architectural elements, neglect of character-defining features or landscaping. And these provisions help the city to proactively prevent the deterioration of historic resources. When demolition occurs due to neglect, the city may impose remedies. One potential remedy is a temporary prohibition on discretionary planning approvals and building permits for new construction for up to three The duration of the prohibition is determined through an administrative procedural appeal process based on factors such as the degree of the deterioration, owner compliance with the notices, the economic feasibility of repair, and impact to the surrounding historic district if it's applicable. This ensures proportional enforcement and due process for property owners. As far as historic property The ordinance also introduces a historic property requirement, a disclosure requirement during real estate transactions. Currently, Santa Ana does not have a consistent disclosure requirement for historic properties. There's a disclosure requirement as part of the Mills Act agreements because these are recorded on property and as part of a sale, it shows up in the title search. Under the proposed ordinance, owners must disclose historic designation status when a property is sold if it's listed on the city register, listed on the state or national register, or a contributor to a historic district. The disclosure will occur through a standardized city form signed by both buyer and seller. And the purpose is to ensure buyers understand the responsibilities associated with owning a historic property. The proposed ordinance is consistent with the historic preservation element of the Specifically, it advances Goal Historic, or HP-1, which is preservation of historic resources. These policies promote architectural standards and rehabilitation practices, and this ordinance does that. The amendment strengthened the city's regulatory framework for preservation while supporting stewardship of historic resources. The ordinance is exempt from CEQA under common-sense exemption. That is Section 15-061 and 15060 of the CEQA guidelines. And the action establishes the regulatory procedures and does not authorize any physical construction. As far as next steps, feedback from the commission tonight and the public hearing process will be incorporated into the ordinance language for consideration by the City Council. which is anticipated in April or May of 2026, this year. If adopted, the ordinance will become effective 30 days after the second reading. And then overall, these amendments strengthen Santa Ana's historic preservation framework by clarifying the modification procedures, addressing the demolition by the neglect, and improving transparency for future property owners. that the ordinance aligns with the city's regulations and with established preservation practices while still maintaining flexibility and due process. So with that, staff recommends that the Historic Resources Commission recommend that the City Council adopt Ordinance Amendment No. 2601. That concludes the presentation and I'd be happy to answer questions if the commission has any.

Does the Commission have any questions or comments of staff? Yes, Vice Chair. Ms. Comments.

I think this whole Commission needs to thank Commissioner Recon, Commissioner Harkey, Commissioner Escamilla, and city staff because of the fact this was a tremendous amount of work that they did to plug up the holes in Chapter 30 dealing with these issues of historic This is well done, well done, well articulated, and there is no excuse for anyone who has a historic home and is selling that the seller can come, I didn't know. I mean, you know, the buyer would come to us and say, well, they never told us. Okay, now it is. It's listed here, here, here, and here. And just like Irma, as a real estate agent, You know, that should automatically pull up on that real estate agent's listing of that property. This is a historic home. So congratulations. I mean, when I read this, I was just go, wow, look at this. You know, this is a gold medal. Yeah, this is Olympic seasons now. Gold medal work that you guys have done. Thank you so much.

No, kudos to staff because they did the bulk. We just filled in the blanks. They really did the bulk of the work and it protects everybody in general and especially in the disclosure. When you pull title or prelim or property profile, easements and liens and all those things are, so there's clear disclosure. Nowadays we need that so there's a benefit to the owners knowing the precious resources they have in the buyer. And then that way they don't commit to something they were not aware of. And then the city has a responsibility. So I think this brings clarity. But the staff is absolutely the one who put all this together. So thank you, guys. You were tremendously helpful. Yes, Commissioner Hardy.

Just the fact that it's all articulated, the expectations. So I have a question about How come it doesn't mention front yard fences anywhere for like, I don't know if that would fit into landscaping or I guess it's not hardscape, but maybe it is hardscape. I'm just not finding any mention of front yard fences or fences even in any of these areas where there are expectations or Is there a reason for that? Are they covered under something else or are they not?

They are. With the exception of certain zoning districts like SD19 and SD40, Henninger Park and French Park, the fencing is regulated by the city's zoning code. When a fencing application is proposed, it requires a non-fee application to be administratively reviewed by our staff, our planning staff. As part of that process, we do fences are appropriately designed to be compatible with historic resources structures. So it's already kind of reviewed as part of that, but certainly open to consideration if the commission wants to include any language in the ordinance specifically about fencing.

I think that would help articulate the situation to actually specifically I don't know if just the fact it's kind of an overlay or underlay the fact that there's a no free, no fee permit process for front yard fences if that could get like forgotten or overlooked. If it's not specifically in the chapter 30. That's my two cents.

I can add to the response that Pedro provided in if the ordinance is adopted as proposed. One of the elements that it would allow us to do is regulate the internal setting. So it would be all the areas outside of the building footprint, which would include the construction of the fencing.

But it doesn't specifically say that.

It doesn't specifically say front yard.

And it does really, excuse me, but it does actually say a lot of different elements, but it doesn't mention front yard fences.

We can include that in the list of example things that internal setting may include.

I think that's important.

Vice chair, Chris.

I was on the city council. I wrote the fence ordinance along with Lisa Biss. And that as far as height material that is now appropriate for the city. And that was approved during our time because we took that in as far as looking at all the fences because we were the nice committee. neighborhood improvement, code enforcement, of what our cityscape was like with the fences. We had, as I call, north, remember Dallas, north fence? You know, we had those fences, we had all other kinds with spikes and everything else all through the city, and we needed to have to come together as an ordinance of going forward, you know, because you were grandfathers again, unless you sold the property, the new owners had to conform to the new regulation on fences, that it be no more than three, 36 inches, three feet, right, three feet, and the material has to be based on that. So is it just like federal law supersedes state law doesn't city law ordinance comes in to what Commissioner Hardy is asking about placing this into Chapter 30, or do you just want to put asterisks there saying, you know, an asterisk that this is already covered by city ordinance, already approved and in existence regarding fences?

This is already there, so anything related to development is kind of I think such as Commissioner Hardy suggested it's kind of a layering of items or regulations anything related to development, we already have a development code that would regulate it. So such as Pedro mentioned, we have standards, and Vice Chair Christy, you mentioning standards specifically for the development of front yard fences. But when it comes to historic properties, in addition to those standards that apply to front yard fences, there's the additional historic layering component that they would have to comply with the Secretary of Interior's standards for materials and design, whereby the location and then the height would be regulated by the development code.

pinpoint both of them in this. It's already there. But just for clarification, that the city already has it as far as we can say you're you're you're by two, you got double, you know, you got to you already have an existing or everybody has to comply with. So historic properties on fences, forest, I, my little pea bring here. It's already covered, but if you want to add it to existing.

So whether it actually gets mentioned as front yard fences, actually those words in the Chapter 30 under the appropriate areas, I have a couple questions. Would that be under landscaping? Are front yard fences landscaping or are they hardscape?

They're not either of those two.

So they're not either. Now, when we're talking about settings and referring to historic properties, and now we're going to be very explicit about the settings and what needs to be maintained there, is a front yard fence under a setting? So it would be under a setting.

I'm nodding.

If there was some sort of a front yard fence that was historical in some way, that would be included in recognizing it as part of the setting?

That's correct. I'm nodding. I believe our Planning Manager, Ricardo, also mentioned that earlier, that yes, it would. That review, again, is being done today. As part of this, it would just be defined now as a review for internal setting. And we are making it clear that it would be a minor certificate of appropriateness process to review something like that.

Okay, I understand. And I realize that because it wasn't, those words weren't in there anywhere, front yard fences, that it was sort of alluding to the fact that probably it was already covered and So it didn't need to be mentioned, but I wanted to mention it anyway just in case. So then I have another question about SD40. Would the disclosure regulations, how would SD40 be handled in the disclosure? Would it be this not or would it be?

This is pretty clear in saying that it applies to properties that are listed on the local historic register, the state or national, or contributors to a district. If properties in SD40 are not a historic resource or not listed on the historic register, then they would not be required.

So SD40 is not considered a district?

Not officially as far as, no. Ms. No.

Councillor Hutchison, no. Ms. So it still needs to move forward to be adopted as a local district?

Mr. If that's what the residents would like to do, yes. But right now, SD40 is technically a zoning

Okay. And then also in the document, it talks about to be adopted by council as a local district, it would also need to have the guidelines go forward. And SD 40 already has guidelines and a survey. So what's the holdup?

So, Commissioner, I think the essence of your question is, how do we get properties in SD 40 to also be subject to the disclosure requirement even if they're not individually listed yes thank you that's the question so if that's the case in section 30-11 of the draft text could be modified to just say including properties in SD 40. oh that'd be great thank you can we do that if uh it's part of the deliberations your colleagues agree certainly

I think SD40 is the only outlier. All the other SDs are, well, French Park is already a national district where SD40 is Hettinger Park, and it's not even local. But it does have a survey, it does have guidelines, and it is a special district. Well, that's why, you know, is it... So that's why I'd like to include it in the disclosure part of the proposal for the amendments to Chapter 30.

Councillor Hutchison I think that's appropriate. I think that would be appropriate if you're a seller or buyer and you're in a historic district. We have the three. It's full disclosure of where you're buying or selling.

And let me add to that. Over all these years, we have had a lot of problems because there hasn't been disclosure. And it ends up in the laps of the planning department and sometimes city council because it hasn't been disclosed. And there's no way to reach out to 900 properties every time they change hands that they're in an SD that does scrutinize certain levels of changes and alterations and modifications. So I think it's important.

Any other questions or comments?

Just like you mentioned, I think this is a major milestone for historic preservation in the city of Santa Ana. I'm excited to see this. Congratulations to everybody that worked on it. My understanding is up to this point, it's just been the structure that is under the purview of the HRC. And so we've heard a lot tonight and in previous meetings and even by Mr. Rush about the Hollywood driveway, which really up to this point would not be covered under the HRC. That wouldn't be our purview. If somebody wanted to rip that out, there's nothing we could say. So again, that's why I think this is a major change and I'm really looking forward to it. Okay, quick clarification. The script says to open the public hearing and then hear from the applicant and then questions for the applicant. That just doesn't seem right to me. You agree? That is you.

You're the applicant.

Yeah. Okay. So we're going to move right on to this. Is there a motion to approve this matter? And I would love to see you. Okay. All right, make your comment, please.

Okay, I just want to let everyone know that SD40, Heddinger Park, we do have design guidelines that were adopted by Council. I think Pedro helped with these. And there is a demolition permit process within the SD40's design guidelines. And it does mention that... Let's see. That for historic properties, properties that are listed on the register and or I believe Mills Act properties, that the Chapter 30 overrides the SD40 Hedinger Parks demolition process. And I think it's important everybody knows that these things exist and how it's going to work, how it works now and how it might work in the future if these changes get adopted. So Hendrick Park has their own demolition process, permit process.

I have a question. So Mr. Chair and Allie and Ricardo, Pedro, everything that's been discussed as far as what addition should be there, will that be included in tonight? Or does it go back to the committee, you know,

Commissioner that worked on here or can we add that to that tonight yes you may so consistent with practice at Planning Commission agreed yes so you would formalize the sort of recommended edits or clarifications and all that and then staff in their staff report to the City Council document the conversation so that the City Council can get a synopsis of what was discussed tonight and understand the context of what it was brought up in. And then they can consider that in their first reading of the ordinance as well.

Well, then I'll make another comment. So I firmly believe that we should add the thing about the fence. in when somebody makes the motion. Because yes, we do have the main code, but the main code is for when you're installing a fence or you're changing a fence, not if you're removing a fence that was a historic fence. So I think it's worth adding to this. That's just my two cents. Okay. 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 written communication. If you have and you are here present during this meeting in person and would like to comment on this item, 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 this item, please select the hand icon and unmute yourself. If you are calling in and would like to comment on this item, please dial nine and then six to unmute yourself. I will wait a few seconds. Chair, we have one speaker in-house.

Okay. All right. Mr. Rush, would you like to give your comments, please?

Thank you. I have a couple of comments I want to make. The first one I'm going to address is this issue of disclosure between a seller and a buyer. I don't know why there's such confusion over this. It's been on the books since 1984. When the state legislature passed section 1102 of the BNP code, business and professions code, they made it a requirement that a transfer disclosure statement as adopted by the state legislature has to be completed between by the seller to the buyer. And one of the questions in there asks the seller to disclose to the buyer, does the property sit under the jurisdiction of an HOA or any other body, or is it subject in a specific language? I don't have the form in front of me, but very specifically it does address, is it in a historic district, either local, national, state, whatever. It's right on there. It's been the case. It's been the law of the land since 1984. But of course, what we've dealt with in Santa Ana is repeatedly brokers and agents don't want to disclose it. And Irma knows well. I mean, we've dealt with this. They don't want to disclose it. Why? Because they don't want to make a buyer afraid that somehow their property is going to come under any city or government purview as to what they can and can't do about the property. But the law has been on the books. and why the city hasn't used that as an enforcement mechanism against a seller who becomes the buyer, comes in and says, I didn't know anything about it. Well, that's too bad. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. And it's pretty hard, especially after all these decades, that Henninger Park and French Park and all these other historically sensitive neighborhoods that exist in Santa Ana, somehow that would be a mystery to the agent. Horsefeathers I could say something else, but I want to be respectable of all of you folks here so However one of the things that we've talked about and talked about it for years when I was both before and on the Commission and here we are again the easy way for the city to overcome this is simply to have a document recorded for Floral Park French Park, Henninger Park, the three designated, formally designated, historic districts in the city that says, it's simply a document that becomes printed, it's a matter of the public record, and it's printed out with a preliminary title report. And in big, bold, you know, letters, you can say, this property is in a historic district. You are so informed. I mean, the legal eagles in the city can draw up the verbiage that they want, but when the buyer gets a copy of the preliminary title report and every buyer has to sign that they received a copy of it, it becomes pretty difficult then to march into City Hall and say, I didn't know it was in a historic district. Really? Well, how stupid are you? You signed escrow instructions, you signed loan documents, you signed a preliminary child report, and you didn't know? Really, how could that be? Anyway, my second point is with regard to, I think it's slide 35, and I'm gonna ask for another minute, if I may, if you'll indulge me since this is such a significant item. If you could go back to slide, I think it's 35, Pedro?

Just one second, if I may. So again, the Chair is able to provide Mr. Rush additional time. It's just the Chair needs to actually recognize that the additional time will be given.

Yes, we will recognize one more minute.

Okay, thank you. Yeah, I believe it's 35. Notice it says here in the first bullet point, historic property, expanded to include the building and its internal setting. Isn't that a typo? Shouldn't that say external setting? Areas outside the footprint that contribute to historic character.

We included a definition for what internal setting means in the draft ordinance. We included a definition for what internal setting means.

Sorry, just as a

rule of order staff isn't supposed to respond directly to what you do is close the hearing and then if you share the same question you pose well okay um mr chairman i that's my question is that i think that's a typo um because it's misleading and it's internal setting And then it goes on to say areas outside the footprint. That's a non sequitur. It makes no sense. It should say external setting. Because what we're trying, this is about, this of course addresses a very pertinent issue that's important to me. Because we heretofore have not recognized the area outside the footprint of the buildings.

Okay, your time's up, Mr. Rush. Thank you for your comments. Thank you.

And I'm making my comments on behalf of Preserve Orange County, the voice of preservation in Orange County. Thank you.

All right. Let's see. Secretary, are there any other members of the public that would like to speak on this item?

Chair, we do not have any more speakers.

Okay. The public hearing is now closed. Is there a motion to approve the matter? Yes, Commissioner Hardy.

I can make a motion to approve the matter.

With any amendments or just as stated?

I don't know. Oh, yeah, we are talking about amendments. Yeah, so maybe I can retract that motion.

Just go ahead and clarify.

So were we going to make an amendment to include disclosure for SD 40 and to include the words front yard fence or fences under either landscape, hardscape, or setting?

Thank you. We have a motion. Do we have a second?

Question.

Yes, Commissioner Harry.

For clarification for setting, internal setting, is that the internal setting from the property lines into the property? Because landscaping would be that. Clarification what the word internal would be, and that's the assumption because we did talk about it, especially for certain properties that are like landmarks, that even the setting around the building, it does contribute and it is important. So I just wanted a clarification of the word internal setting because the word landscaping is there and if that just to, so people don't think it's just the building, it is also the footprint of the whole physical property, the lot.

Thank you for that clarification. Do we have a second? Go back to. It's not proper. It's not proper, OK. Please restate your motion.

To recommend that the City Council adopt the ordinance approving ordinance amendment number 2026-1 to amend several sections of Chapter 30, Places of Historical Architectural Significance of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, SAMC, relating to modification of historic properties, demolition by neglect, and historic property transfer disclosure with the addition of including the words front yard fence or fences Under either landscape, hardscape, or setting, whichever category is appropriate. And if they're all appropriate, then add the words front yard fence or fences there. And under the disclosure, include SD40.

Do we have a second?

That's to include my, just the clarification of the word internal also, but I will second that.

Okay, so we have a first and a second. Secretary, please call for a roll call vote.

Commissioner Almendral?

Yes.

Commissioner Escamilla? Commissioner Hardy? Yes. Commissioner Jauregui? Yes. Commissioner Shipp?

Yes.

Commissioner Rincon?

Yes.

Vice Chair Christie?

Yes.

Chair Miroshy?

Yes.

Motion approved by majority vote with Commissioner Escamilla absent.

Thank you. That concludes the public hearing. Moving on to staff comments.

uh commissioners thank you for a wonderful meeting tonight uh you may be hearing about a project called one broadway plaza that has been resubmitted by an applicant so firstly this is not a project that would ordinarily come back to you at this commission it would go back to planning commission and the city council but for your overall awareness because i'm sure constituents contact you about a variety of matters City Council Chambers, Just sharing with you that, while the project remains actively under staff review it's not scheduled at any time right now for any public hearings. City Council Chambers, But we do have a frequently updated website, where we have the project information any upcoming dates for Community meetings or public hearings. City Council Chambers, As well as other relevant information, so I encourage anyone who is interested in the project to contact staff for updates or bookmark the project web page. Mayor Mrakas, Again it's not a project that would come before this Commission, but I do believe it's in your interest to just know the status simply because your constituents or neighbors may contact you for questions you can always direct them to us as staff to help respond.

Thank you very much. Mayor Mrakas, That concludes staff comments moving on to closing comments by the Commission let's start at that end Commissionership.

Congratulations to all the participants, but they're gone. And thanks to the staff for the wonderful presentation you guys put together. That's it.

Commissioner Rincon.

Yeah, just thank you to staff for the preparation of the ordinance. It's a lot of hard work, so I know they put a lot of work into it. And, you know, like the commissioner said, we just, you know, a little bit of input. They're the ones that pretty much did everything.

Thank you. Commissioner, how are you?

Same thing. Thank you, staff, for all your work, input, and time to coordinate our schedules because they're all over the place. So thank you, and happy spring to everybody.

Thank you. Vice Chair Christy.

Once again, thank you, staff. We have the top, right? And going there, so thank you so much. And to the commissioners, I want to thank you for all the time that you're spending. and putting in and, you know, really researching a lot of the things that we need to have done in protecting our historic resources here in Santa Ana and so forth. I just have a question. Will we be meeting again as far as dealing with monuments?

Yes, we will. I was going to make that comment

Okay, well, I conclude, but thank you so much.

Commissioner Almadron. Commissioner Almadron, no. And then you and then me. Go ahead.

Okay, I just wanted to congratulate our new register listed properties and Mills Act agreement. Recipients and I want to thank staff for all the work that you've put in to articulating. With articulate better articulate I can articulate but you guys have done it you've done the job to really make it clear, some of the expectations in in the proposed amendments for Chapter 30 so that. All the blanks are getting filled in and people know what's expected of them when they have historic properties and or not. And thank you for our ad hoc committee members who did an excellent job and for the Commission and it's been a real learning experience it's been a lot of it there's a lot of education, if you read through the proposed amendments. You I really appreciate it, thank you.

Commissioner Almendrall.

First, thank you, staff. The presentations were awesome. Working on that, or seeing the work done with Chapter 30 amendments is, that's incredible. I do have one request with the Santa Ana Registered Restored Properties application. If we could update the period of significance windows. It ends, I believe, at 1950. Houses in 1976 are now eligible. Um, and I have applicants that well, it does. I can't I can't write it down in the application. Does that mean I'm just not eligible? No, I just kind of leave it. But if we could change that form at some point, uh, that would be awesome. Um, and this year I was just reminded of this is the 120th anniversary of the burning of San Ash Chinatown. There is a monument on the site. I personally am unsatisfied with that monument, or dissatisfied with that monument. I would like to explore any options to, like, improve or commemorate further that site. Because it's a part of our history that should be known. Not so much celebrated, but known. It's in the core of our downtown, and it's very walkable. And also, it gets tagged a lot, so a little attention to that area would be helpful. Yeah, thank you.

I also want to thank staff for the finance presentation tonight as well as the property presentations tonight. Congratulate the homeowners, the guest speakers, everybody else tonight. And you asked about the ad hoc commission. My pre-meeting with Ricardo Soto, we discussed that. And James Williams is still working on going through some of the material and working out the framework by which we're going to judge the murals and the statues and the things like that. So as soon as he's done with his analysis, he'll be calling us for the next meeting, which should be shortly. All right. The next regular scheduled meeting will be held on Thursday, May 7th. 2026 at 4.30 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 22 Civic Centre Plaza. Meeting adjourned.