Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Chair, the meeting is not being recorded.

I'd like to call the regular meeting of July 13th, 2026 to order. Would Secretary please call roll?

Commissioner Leo?

Present.

Commissioner Oliva? Commissioner Pham?

Here.

Commissioner Wu?

Here.

Vice Chair Benninger?

Present.

Chair Ramos? Vice Chair Quorum has been reached at 5.32 p.m.

Okay. Can I ask Commissioner Pham to please lead us in Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, before we begin, I'd like to remind my fellow commissioners to turn off your microphones when not speaking and turn on when you are. And place the mic within four inches away from you when you do speak. Members of the public may attend the Planning Commission meeting either in person or via Zoom. I'll now invite the Commission Secretary to describe how the public can participate.

This meeting is being live streamed via our portal at www.santa-ana.primegov.com slash public slash portal and on YouTube at www.youtube.com slash city of Santa Ana videos. If you would like to provide public comment, you may do so in the following ways. Join the meeting via Zoom. Enter the meeting ID number 8399 When the item you wish to comment on is being discussed, please select the hand icon to indicate that you would like to speak. Once called upon, remember to unmute yourself and state your name for the record. You can also join the meeting by calling 669-900-6833. When the item that you would like to comment on is being discussed, press 9 to let us know that you would like to speak. You will be called upon by the last three digits of your phone number. After you are called upon, you may press 6 to unmute yourself. for those who are attending this meeting in person and would like to provide public comment please fill out a request to speak form and turn it in into the recording secretary all speakers will have three minutes to speak i will alert you when your time is up thank you i'd like to say for the record that i joined us at the dais at 5 33 p.m

And with that, we'll be moving on to public comments on non agenda or non public hearing items. Secretary, does anyone wish to speak?

Chair, we have received a total of three emails in the form of public comments for non agenda items before the 3.30 p.m. deadline, which has been distributed to the Commission and posted online. If you are attending this meeting in person and would like to comment on non-agenda or non-public hearing items, please fill out a request to speak form and turn it in to the Secretary. If you are participating via Zoom and would like to comment on non-agenda or non-public hearing items, please select the hand icon to let us know you would like to comment. If you are calling in and would like to comment on non-agenda or non-public hearing items, please dial 9 and then 6 to unmute yourself. I will wait a few seconds. Chair, we have one speaker in-house.

Thank you. I'd like to invite Ed Murashi to come speak. I apologize if I butchered the last name.

Oh, you did perfect. Thank you very much. Good evening, everybody. Ed Murashi, Floral Park on Flower Street. I just, since you're now taking over the historical preservation aspect... what the HRC used to do. I wanted to make everybody aware of a recent change that happened on July 1st with the adoption of the budget. And that is that the fee to put your house on the historical register has gone from $500 to $7,501. And when you think about that, you could say, well, you know, the city's trying to make money on that. Or you could say, you know, they're trying to reduce the amount of work so that you're the planning commission doesn't have this quite as much work to do as the HRC did. Or you could say they're making it commiserate with what it costs the city to do the job. And I'm hoping it's the latter. And because I could say that because I look back 10 years ago and the fee was $5,248. So it's kind of reasonable. But still, the reason the HRC tried to lower the fees over the year was so that you could get more homes throughout the whole city versus just selected areas like Floral Park. And so you could see that when you look at the historic property map that's on the city website. You can see it's nice and evenly divided, mainly down Main Street. Divided and so I was hoping you know you might want to think about things outside the box for example There is a fee that part of that fee of the $7,500 is for the city planners to come out to your house, make sure that you don't have any non-compliances, make sure that the home could be historically registered, and then that's it. And that applies to the 7,500. Well, you could also allow the homeowners to fill in some of the DPRs, fill them out themselves. And so they could at that same time look at your DPR form and go, yeah, okay, this looks pretty complete. So then what we'll do is we'll give you the original base fee, but then we'll charge you per hour up to the $7,500. And then that gives the opportunity for a homeowner that wants to go do their own legwork to be able to do that. And so I'm just throwing that out there. I also want to say that I'll be glad to make myself available if, say, twice a year the city wanted to have a workshop for homeowners to figure out how to fill out these forms. I'd be glad to do it. I did it myself as a homeowner. I filled out all the DPR forms. So Holly had very little work to do when I turned them in. That's it. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you for your comment. With that, we're going to now move on to the consent calendar, where it's one motion for our consent items unless an item is pulled for separate discussion.

I move.

We have a motion to approve item A, minutes from June 22nd, 2026, and item B, excused absences from Commissioner Wu. Do we have a second?

I will second that.

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

Commissioner Leo?

Aye.

Commissioner Oliva? Aye. Commissioner Pham?

Aye.

Commissioner Wu?

Aye.

Vice Chair Benninger?

Aye.

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

Thank you. That concludes the consent calendar items. As there are no public hearing items tonight, we will be moving to miscellaneous items on the business calendar. Item 1. This is the time and place for public facilities naming number 2026-0001 for the Rosita Park located at 706 North New Hope Street. Before we begin, do any commissioners have anything they wish to disclose with regard to this item? Seeing as there are no disclosures, we'll have the case planner, Byron Luck, will provide a brief presentation for us.

Thank you and good evening, Chair Ramos and planning commissioners. Tonight's first item is public facilities naming number 2026-1, a request to rename Rosita Park as Frank and Irene Palomino Park, located at 706 North New Hope Street in Ward 1. Staff's recommendation is to adopt the resolution approving public facilities naming number 2026-1, renaming Rosita Park located at 706 North New Hope Street as Frank and Irene Palomino Park. Frank and Irene Palomino were among the plaintiffs in the 1947 landmark Mendez et al. vs. Westminster et al. school desegregation case, which is widely recognized as an important precursor to Brown v. Board of Education. The Palomino family has a longstanding connection to the surrounding neighborhood, with three generations of family members attending Rosita Elementary School and its feeder schools. Rosita Elementary School is a part of the Garden Grove Unified School District, despite being within the City of Santa Ana's boundaries. The Garden Grove Unified School District conducted a community engagement process regarding the proposed renaming of Rosita Elementary School to Frank and Irene Palomino Elementary School and held a public hearing on June 2, 2026. Survey results showed strong community support However, there were concerns that retaining the Rosita Park name could create confusion. At the June 2, 2026 City Council meeting, staff presented Garden Grove Unified School District's renaming proposal and the opportunity for the city to also rename Rosita Park. The City Council expressed support and request initiation of the park renaming. On June 16, 2026, the Garden Grove Unified School District Board of Education unanimously approved renaming Rosita Elementary to Frank and Irene Palomino Elementary School. They also scheduled a ribbon-cutting ceremony for August 6, 2026, to commemorate the renaming of the elementary school. On this slide is the criterion for which a public facility naming or renaming is appropriate, and the applicable criteria for this proposed renaming for the park is a name that recognizes a person or family who made a distinct, significant contribution to the City of Santa Ana. including past mayors, council members, board of commissioners, officers, or employees of the city. However, not anyone currently holding any such position. Planning Commission is the approving body for this public facilities naming. However, the commission's decision is reviewed by the City Council. The decision may be remanded back to the commission for further consideration, or the council can make its own decisions. Staff's recommendation is to adopt a resolution approving public facilities naming number 2026-1, renaming Rosita Park located at 706 North New Hope Street as Frank and Irene Palomino Park. And with that, that concludes staff's presentation. Staff is here to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Does the Commission have any comments or questions for staff? I'll take a question from Commissioner Wu and then Vice Chair Benninger.

Just as a point of clarification to go over this again so I fully understand. The Garden Grove School District, which has jurisdiction over the elementary school, decided to change the name from Rosita Elementary School to Frank and Irene Palomino School. Am I correct?

Yes, that is correct.

And what was the impetus of that request? Did it come from the residents? Did it come from the city council or the school board or what?

Yeah, so looking into the history of it, it was one of the Garden Grove Unified School District Board Trustees, Walter Munietin, who initiated contact with the grandson of the plaintiffs, Frank and Irene Palomino. So the Trustee Munietin, he reached out to Andrew Palomino, the grandson, and he and they together initiated the request. But originally the request was because there was an article in the Voice of OC recognizing that the plaintiffs in the Mendez et al. v. Westminster et al. desegregation case, most of the dedications focused on the Mendez family. The trustee from the Garden Grove Unified School District, he specifically reached out to...

So that's the school which falls under the jurisdiction of the Garden Grove Unified School District, right? Right. Now, the park is under whose jurisdiction?

The park is under the City of St. Antoinette's jurisdiction.

Okay. So was there any request coming from the community or city council or residents to rename the park?

Thank you for the question, Commissioner. So when the item was discussed by staff at the City Council on the June 2nd City Council meeting, they were met with a lot of support from the City Council, and City Council actually directed staff to start the process to rename Rosita Park.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Wu. Vice Chair Benninger.

Was there any historical significance to the name Rosita, why that name was put on the school and the park?

Thank you for the question, Vice Chair Benninger. So Rosita Park was named Rosita Park because it is located next to Rosita Street. There's no historical significance besides the proximity to Rosita Street. Thank you.

Okay. There is a lot of, one thing I don't understand, I don't know where the confusion will come from because there is a distance between the school and the park. But there's also a library in the park. Is that belonging to Garden Grove or is that Santa Ana's library?

If there's a library in Rosita Park, then it will be the city of Santa Ana's library.

And so with this, we're just renaming the park and not the library?

This request is for the park specifically.

Has planning looked at into what the cost is for the city to rename it?

Thank you, Vice Chair, for the question. We haven't quantified the cost, if any, associated with a name change, considering this was a directive from the City Council.

Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Benninger. Do we have any other questions? We'll go ahead to Commissioner Pham.

Yeah, I think that's probably going to be a cost. Because I'm looking at Google Maps and probably six, eight months ago we installed that kiosk with Rosita Park name on it. So I'm guessing at least the change plate would have to change. I think consistency is good. But then I'm not sure if given the conversation about our budget deficit and this and that, even if it's a minor cost, if it's appropriate. I understand the impetus to make it consistent. But, you know, if the city of Garden Grove wants to make it right, it's their choice. And I would support changing the name. It's just, there's no cost. If it's updating the city's website, things like that, it would make sense to me. But, you know, we just put up that new kiosk. Now we're going to have to take down the nameplate and change it out. I think the cost issue makes me more hesitant. And then the next question is, then do we rename the Salgado Recreation Center into the Rosita's Recreation Center if we're looking for consistency throughout this park area?

Thank you, Commissioner, for the question. At this stage, the request before the commission is only to rename the park, not the recreation center. If that were to move forward in the future, that would be a separate application to rename that public facility. But at this point, it's only the park.

Yeah, that's my only comment.

Thank you. Do we have any other comments? I have just a few questions. So I know we heard Vice Chair Benninger mentioned that there may be a library there. Is that the case?

Thank you, Chair. We are not aware of a library, but the facility that Vice Chair may be referring to may be the Salgado Recreation Center.

Thank you, and then just some clarification on the process that got this item here before us was the renaming of the park something that was also requested by the garden grow school board or was that something that came organically from the City Council.

Thank you chair Ramos so during their. In the garden growth unified school districts. public correspondence with their community. They received support for their renaming for the school, but they also received some concerns that having the school and the park be inconsistent in naming be a concern. So they actually, during their public hearing, they were suggesting to the city if we could consider renaming of our park to to address the concerns that they had from their constituents.

Thank you.

If I can just add to that. We haven't received a formal request from the Garden Grove School District. So the request or the suggestion that the name change be moved forward was something that was discussed before the city council. And then the city is taking direction from that conversation. We have not received anything from Garden Grove.

Thank you i'm supportive of the renaming and think it's I understand why it's been recommended and i'm supportive of it just share some of the same concerns as Commissioner fam. This had city council direction, then i'm sure they will figure out. What the fiscal impacts might be of any go ahead, Commissioner, I have a follow up question just on me.

If. The Planning Commission approved the renaming. You would have to come up with new signage and new dedication and something. I was wondering if we could add to that dedication the history for the Frank and Irene Palomino Park, but also add a land acknowledgement for the native land that we occupy and also to the farm workers in the area, which is the impetus of part of the civil rights movement at the time, you know, with the Mendez versus the Board of Education. You know, just a little line, just added in there, since you're going to do a new plaque anyway or something and rededicate the building.

Is that possible? Thank you, Commissioner.

Should there be a consensus?

That's definitely something that we can include in the report to the city council that that's a suggestion that this body made for the renaming.

You with that if there is no if there are no additional comments or questions for staff, do we have emotion on this matter.

i'll move it adopt a resolution approving public facilities naming or 2026 dash 0001 renaming rosita park.

Frank and Irene Palomino Park Thank You Commissioner Leo and I'll go ahead and second Apologize I strip manager Great we have a motion and a second We have a motion from Commissioner Wu and a second for myself Commissioner Ramos secretary. Can you please call for a roll call vote?

Commissioner Leo Commissioner Oliva Commissioner fan no Commissioner who all right Vice Chair Benninger? Aye. Chair Ramos? Aye. Motion approved by majority vote with Commissioner Oliva absent and a nay from Commissioner Pham.

Thank you. That concludes the business calendar. Moving on to administrative matters. The item up for discussion is the election of officers for the 2026-2027 term, which will take the effect starting the next scheduled meeting. We will now accept nominations for the chairperson. Is there a nomination?

Yes, I would like to nominate our president chair. She's done an excellent job, and I think I'd like to have her in that position for another year.

Thank you, Vice Chair Benninger. Sorry, Commissioner Wu?

I second.

Thank you. I accept the nomination. Are there any other nominations for a chairperson? Great. With that, we have a motion from Vice Chair Benninger, along with a second from Commissioner Wu. Secretary, can you please call for a roll call vote?

Commissioner Leo? Aye. Commissioner Oliva? Commissioner Pham?

Aye.

Commissioner Wu?

Aye.

Vice Chair Benninger?

Aye.

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

Thank you. Thank you all for your vote of confidence. We will now accept nominations for vice chairperson. Is there a nomination?

I'd like to nominate our current vice chair because he has such a nice red shirt with the American flag on it. And he's celebrating the 250th anniversary, which I hope to include some of our history in there. But, you know, look how nice he looks. How can you not re-nominate him? He does such a good job when you're not here.

Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Wu, for your very elaborate nomination of a vice chair. Benninger for vice chair. Do we have a second? I'll second. Thank you, Commissioner Pham. We have a motion from Commissioner Wu, along with a second from Commissioner Pham. Secretary, can you please call for a roll call vote?

Commissioner Liu?

Aye.

Commissioner Oliva? Commissioner Pham?

Aye.

Commissioner Wu?

Aye.

Vice Chair Benninger?

Aye.

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

Thank you. Congratulations, Vice Chair Benninger. That concludes the administrative matters. The elected officers will assume the role starting next meeting, but we're also doing so now. Now we're going to move on to the city session on historic preservation. Principal Planner Pedro Gomez will provide a brief presentation.

Good evening, Madam Chair and commissioners. Just give me a second here. Organize my notes.

Take your time. We moved very quickly on that.

Okay. So, hello again. So staff is presenting the work study session tonight because the Historic Resources Commission was dissolved and the Planning Commission now serves as the city's historic review body. So as a result, you'll begin hearing historic preservation items that were previously considered by the Historic Resources Commission. And the purpose of tonight's presentation is to provide an overview of the city's historic preservation program and to get you familiar with your new responsibilities under Chapter 30. And our goal tonight is not to make everyone a historic preservation expert. Rather, it's supposed to serve as a foundation for evaluating future historic preservation applications and understanding how the preservation fits into the city's planning and development review process. So we'll begin with some background on Santa Ana's historic preservation program, then discuss Chapter 30, the Mills Act program, how exterior modifications to historic properties are reviewed, the Secretary of Interior Standards, and conclude with recent modernization amendments to Chapter 30 that are currently proposed. So what is historic preservation? It's the practice of identifying, protecting, and managing historic resources while allowing them to continue to serve the community. Preservation exists at the federal level, state, and local levels, but each level serves a different purpose. Federal and state programs primarily recognize historic significance, while the city's local program is where preservation decisions are made and historic properties are regulated. Tonight, we're going to be focusing on Santa Ana's local historic preservation program. So why historic preservation? Historic preservation isn't separate from planning. We say that it is planning. So it helps us preserve neighborhood character, celebrate community history, encourage investment in existing buildings, support sustainability through rehabilitation, and strengthen the city's unique identity. Ultimately historic preservation is about managing change and not necessarily preventing change. So here's a brief history of the city's program. It begins as grass root efforts in 1970s when residents organized to save important buildings from demolition. And those early preservation efforts laid the foundation for the city's current preservation program and demonstrated the community's commitment to protecting its history. And here is from 1999 through 2026. Since those early efforts, the city's preservation program has continued to evolve. Some milestones include the adoption of the Mills Act program, becoming certified local government, and I'll explain what that means a little later, establishing a historic preservation element in the general plan, and our preservation continues to evolve as the city's needs evolve. In 2022, the city adopted a dedicated historic preservation element as part of its general plan. This provides the city's long-term vision for preserving historic, cultural, architectural, and archaeological resources, and it also ensures the preservation is integrated into planning, development, review, and permitting, rather than have it be a separate process, which is what it was prior to 2022. And some significant notes. Santa Ana currently has three National Register historic districts. That's our downtown, French Park, and recently Floral Park. And within each district, properties are classified as either contributors or non-contributors to that district. And what that means under Chapter 30 is contributing properties are considered historic properties and are subject to the city's historic preservation regulations. This is important because not every contributor is listed on the local register, but it would be subject to a Chapter 30 review. Historically sensitive areas are different from historic districts. These were introduced formally by the city's General Plan historic element in 2022. Although they were recognized unofficially and were discussed These neighbourhoods retain historic character and have been identified as priorities for future historic resource surveys and preservation planning. So again, they're not designated as stored districts, but they help guide future preservation efforts. And so you can see there's a number of them on the screen here, including some that are kind of well known for having a high number of properties that potentially could contribute for historic listing. So before chapter 30 was adopted Santa Ana protected historic neighborhoods through what's called specific what's called the specific development districts so specific development districts are zoning designations and you've probably seen actually I know you've seen them through site plan review requests to French park. And sd 19 is the designation for French park and sd 40 is a designation for heading your park. And they both established neighborhood specific development standards that continue to complement the city's preservation program today. And then you heard me speak about a certified local government earlier in the presentation so Santa Ana became a certified local government or CLG in 20. or in 2002, excuse me. This designation recognizes the city's preservation program as meeting state and federal standards. So they had to review our ordinance, review our general plan element. It also provides access to grant funding, technical assistance, training opportunities, and closer coordination with the California Office of Historic Preservation. As far as Chapter 30, it's the city's historic preservation ordinance, and it serves as the legal framework for the preservation program. So Chapter 30 establishes the Santa Ana Register, outlines how historic resources are designated, it regulates exterior modifications, and it administers the MILZAC program, and it establishes procedures for appeals and enforcement. Much of what the Planning Commission will review under the new responsibilities originates from Chapter 30. So what is a historic property? Historic preservation extends beyond houses and commercial buildings. So Chapter 30 recognizes buildings, structures, objects, sites, and properties contributing to historic districts, as it was discussed earlier. And this establishes the types of resources that may be eligible for designation and preservation review. So how does a property become historic? Before a property can be designated, it generally must be at least 50 years old, retain sufficient historic integrity, and meet one or more of the designation criteria established in Chapter 30. These criteria recognize both architectural significance and historical significance, including important people, places, events, businesses, archaeological resources, and rare examples of architecture. Staff prepares the evaluation, but ultimately the Planning Commission determines whether the evidence supports the designation. And here I'll go over quickly some of the criteria that's listed in Chapter 30. As discussed earlier, 50 or more years old and meeting one or more of the following conditions listed on the PowerPoint presentation. Here's number four. and then five and six. Once a property qualifies for a designation, it's placed into one of three categories, landmark, key, or contributive. These categories help communicate a property's significance within the city's preservation program. But regardless of the category, all designated properties are protected under Chapter 30. Landmark properties represent the highest level of local significance. They often possess exceptional architecture, historical or cultural value, and may also qualify for listing on the national or California registers. Key properties are significant to the Santa Ana's local history and architectural development. While they may not rise to the level of landmark property, they remain important historic resources to help tell the city's story. And Contributive category recognizes properties that possess local historic or architectural significance, even if they did not rise to the level of landmark or key. And these resources may include representative examples of architecture, historical commercial buildings, or other properties that contribute to the city's historic character. So for the Mills Act program. The Mills Act is California's primary historic preservation property owners voluntarily agree to preserve and maintain their designated historic property, and in return may receive a property tax reduction determined by the Orange County Assessors. Sinan established its Millslake Program in 1999. To participate, a property must already be designated as historic on the local register. Property owners commit to preserving character-defining features, completing an approved work program, allowing inspections, and maintaining the property over time. And staff reviews the applications, conducts inspections, and prepares a historic preservation agreement. The Planning Commission would review that and review the requests and make recommendations to the City And the City Council then considers approval of the agreement, typically on consent calendar. So when is historic review required for modifications to a historic building? Chapter 30 regulates exterior modifications to designated historic properties to ensure changes preserve their character, their historic character. And depending on the scope of work, projects are either reviewed administratively by staff or by the Planning Commission through a certificate of appropriateness. Most routine projects are reviewed administratively. Examples include ordinary maintenance, like for like repairs, replacement of deteriorated materials, and minor alterations that comply with Chapter 30 and the Secretary of Interior Standards. This streamlines review while maintaining the preservation procedures and protections. As far as what would fall under Planning Commission review, it's typically larger and more significant projects that require a certificate of appropriateness. These generally involve additions, removal of character defining features, demolition, relocation or other major exterior modifications. And the purpose of the certificate of appropriateness is to ensure changes remain compatible with the property's historic character. When reviewing a Certificate of Appropriateness, the Planning Commission may approve, approve with conditions or deny a project, just like you would with, you know, land use decisions that are being made as part of your current duties. And the Commission evaluates whether the proposed work preserves historic character while allowing the property to continue being used the way it's historically being used. Now, the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. These are nationally recognized preservation guidelines used throughout the country. The city uses these standards when reviewing certificates of appropriateness under Chapter 30. They provide a consistent framework for evaluating work on the historic properties. The standards recognize four treatment approaches, including preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction. But the vast majority of projects reviewed by the Planning Commission or that would be reviewed by the Planning Commission involve rehabilitation, which allows compatible alterations while preserving the historic character. Some of the core principles that are established by these guidelines emphasize retaining historic character, repairing before replacing, designing compatible additions, and ensuring new work does not permanently damage the historic resource. And when reviewing projects, the Commission may ask questions such as, does the project preserve a historic character? Are important features retained? Is new work compatible and distinguishable? The standards help answer those questions while working together with chapter 30 and the city's historic structure design guidelines. So one of the most common terms you'll hear during the presentation and preservation hearings is character defining features. So these are physical elements that give a property its historic identity, such as original windows, roof forms, siding, porches, decorative details, and sometimes historic site features like walls, fences, or landscaping. And identifying these features help focus preservation efforts on what matters the most. And so there's some examples that are provided on the screen. And these are going to be different depending on what type of architecture, the building is designed in right so craftsman homes have different character defining features in the Victorian home sometimes are similar. The historic structure design guidelines provide more detailed guidance for reviewing work on designated historic properties. They address topics such as compatibility, scale, massing, architectural styles, materials, and additions. And they help staff in the Planning Commission apply Chapter 30 consistently. So this is something that currently exists, it's existed for a while, and it's something that the Planning Commission, or I'm sorry, the Planning staff refers to pretty regularly. And then as far as the current Chapter 30 proposed amendments, Since November 2024, staff has been working with the previous Historic Resources Commission and an ad hoc committee that was established to comprehensively review Chapter 30. The goal was to modernize the ordinance by improving administration, clarifying procedures, streamlining routine reviews, and strengthening preservation tools while continuing to protect our resources. Some key changes to Chapter 30. The proposed amendments establish administrative review as default process for routine modifications while preserving Planning Commission review for major exterior projects requiring a certificate of appropriateness. And additional updates include demolition by neglect regulations, historic property disclosure requirements, updated terminology, and clearer noticing appeals in administrative procedures. So moving forward, as Santa Ana's historic review body now, the Planning Commission is now responsible for the historic designations, the certificate of appropriateness, the Mills Act recommendations, historic appeals, and future amendments to Chapter 30. Staff will continue administrating the program, preparing technical analysis, conducting site inspections, and providing the professional recommendations to assist the Commission. And then as far as next steps, the Chapter 30 amendments are scheduled for the City Council consideration on August 4th, and that is a tentative date. If approved, the ordinance will become effective 30 days after the second reading, and future preservation hearings will be conducted using the updated procedures. That concludes the presentation. Thank you for the time. I'd be happy to answer any questions since this is so new. But as a reminder, and I'm not sure I covered it, staff will be providing kind of more information as items are presented to you. That way you don't feel like you have to remember all of that was covered today because we've covered it so quickly. But as we go through the process, rest assured that staff will be providing that professional guidance and assurance as you kind of get comfortable with these new responsibilities.

Thank you for that presentation. Are there any questions or comments for staff from commissioners? Commissioner Wu.

Thank you for the presentation. It's very thorough. It reminds me of some of the training I had with Neighborhood Housing Services when they were training a second director by going to Chicago, working in preservation there in New York and even the south, having some of those plantation houses. and things you have to go through there technically, you know, material-wise and all that. And looking at the number of houses that are currently being renovated, and they have that historical notice on the outside of the building that's going on in the Floral Park area, it seems that for the dwelling unit, it seemed to be working in term of process. But if what Ed was saying, that Some things could be streamlined. I know that our staff is meticulous in making sure everything is checked and researched so that there's no legal ramification at a later date. So I appreciate that too, but also understand the review process in terms of modernization. But my question really, I'm not that much interested in the housing presentation because you seem to have rules. regulations at multiple levels and all that. I'd like to talk about the historical district designation. Can you go to the slide that Delaney said?

Do you happen to remember what slide number?

You have a slide that, you know, have Floral Park, French Park, and all that listed.

The national districts. Yes, let me get to that.

Yeah, there was a list of neighborhoods in Santa Ana that has been already currently designated. And it makes sense. There's nothing wrong with those designations. But as history would have it, history changes over time and residents change. in the city and their sense of history comes to play. I was at an event this weekend, black and brown in Orange County, and there were many black residents there, remembering growing up in Santa Ana, but they moved out or were forced out, but they are no longer there, and we have a 14% decrease. If one day we recognize, because when I first came to Orange County, there were 13 barrio neighborhoods that were identified by the Jesuit community in terms of organizing. You know, neighborhoods like Artesia Pilar, which we know are now being recognized for its mural and many other things, being the first Chicano in our history. Logan neighborhood, where the city built a freeway through there, but it used to be the birthplace of many people in Orange County, Del High, you know, Santa Anita, and all these neighborhoods. But also there was Southwest neighborhood where you have some of the black churches like Second Baptist and the history of the leaders in the NAACP and other organizations came from that part of the neighborhood to help to build the city and getting Head Start started and all that. So I was wondering if over time should this commission begin to consider other types of historic designation based on, you know, other values other than who was rich to live there and did the developer design for the neighborhood. But to look at other historical factors that deal with social justice, the history of residents that were the majority there that changed. They also were sources of attention. For instance, as more blacks moved in Santa Ana, there was also the birth of gangs, you know, because culturally there was a clash at the time. And we noted that when we applied, because I was on the All-American City Committee, and the one thing that I got the committee to look at is, it's not something that's about us being so perfect. We're not. We had problems with the cruising and the police overreaction to cruising and other factors. But we were working on it. We came together to work on those things. We acknowledged that organizing in the community was a way for people to have a sense of participation. So I'm curious, is there room to look at know i can't help them let me make a joke like in logan okay uh we doesn't need that as a historical district and then you end up finding a house that does not look like a house from floral park or french park you know but it represents the kind of uh working-class residents that do occupy that that that neighborhood and if we doesn't need that house because of the historical value who lived there and the neighbourhood for what its parts had in terms of fighting the World War II and other factors, would that stick to the National Register Historical District thing? And it's just a curiosity. Or that would be something we will work through in time.

Thank you, Commissioner. I think I understand the question. Certainly is part of historic preservation to look into what you've discussed. I think someone doesn't need to go as far as San Juan Caprichonro to look at like the adobe structures that don't look like mansions, if you will, but are significant to the development of the community. So that happens in Santa Ana as well. I can't think of any examples right now, but the city, as we're evaluating our program, are looking into where we can expand our efforts to continue recognizing the important, you know, historical contributions of everyone in our city. So thank you for that noted.

And the anchor for those community where the churches in the neighborhood, you know, that the residents went to. So, you know, that's just a thing that popped in my head in terms of curiosity about what we could do with the historic district, you know. Certainly, it would have to be something that is embraced by the residents in the community, and they have input and all that. But it's just an interesting thing that, you know, there's an opportunity for growth and change.

Thank you, Commissioner Wu. No apology necessary. Vice Chair Benninger.

Just a curiosity, are there any homes right now that are in the process of being recognized that I don't want to lose them in this transition. Do we have any homes right now that are presently applying for historical status?

Thank you, Vice Chair. Yes. In short, yes. There's a few that got caught in that transition that have to be delayed a bit until we can move forward with this process. So, yes.

Basically, how many homes per year on average do seek historical status?

that seek are much more than actually get listed. Listing, we just looked at the numbers.

I take both numbers.

Averaging about maybe eight to 10 listings a year. And then maybe twice as that who are reaching out to us and have properties that are not eligible.

Thank you, Vice Chair Benninger. Commissioner Leo.

Just a couple questions. I'm assuming, and you guys would know better than me, folks in the audience would know better than me, how many of the larger buildings are left in the city that are not designated historical? Are there a lot of, I'm talking about large buildings, I'm not talking about homes. Homes is a different deal. Because I can think of one eyesore that's just down the street here. Nothing's been done with it, but it's been historical. It was built in the 20s, I think it was. YMCA building. Which, unfortunately, is an eyesore. It's not been renovated. The Masonic Lodge was renovated, and we don't get to see it because Scientology owns it now. So I'm wondering if there's any of those. Obviously, for the lawyers in the House, the new federal housing bill should have some money for folks in the city for historical preservation, I would assume. It was a massive federal bill. It covers all types of housing. But I'm wondering if there's... I'm assuming the historical... Commission did their job, and we've got a lot of buildings, buildings designated that there will be a little bit of work, a little bit of work, not for us, but more on the housing side. I would assume more from the neighborhood side. Because the bigger buildings have been designated, so most have been renovated, not all. Because I think preserving those is essential. Being in Orange for as long as I have and dealing with stuff in Orange, we've watched The push and pull, the old St. Joseph Hospital is actually designated, but they don't allow the city in the building because the old hospital functions as offices. And so they do as little as possible. So as we go through the process, just keep us abreast of kind of what direction you want to go in, which other neighborhoods you think might be, because that's a heavy lift education-wise in the neighborhood. I know Floral Park was a heavy lift. So when you go down that road, let us know because we're going to have to reach out to folks and deal with people because I know it's a different avenue for people, especially when someone buys their home. I'm assuming the realtor discloses to them that it's on the registry because I can't imagine going, oh, I want to change some windows and say, oh, I can't do that. So, yeah, just as we go through the process, just keep us abreast. I know it's a process, but it preserves a lot of the city as well. So. Look forward to seeing what comes forward. Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you, Commissioner Leo. Commissioner Phan. I'll just make a few comments and ask a few questions on this. So one, thank you, Pedro, for the presentation. I had a brief one-year stint on the Historic Riches Commission, so I recognize some of my former fellow commissioners. And thank you all for being here. I hope that you all will come routinely to make comments when we are considering Some of these items that would have gone before those for creatures Commission, so I know there was a public comment made tonight that commented on the mills act. Application costs and when I was on that Commission, I remember that was a talking point for that entire year I was there so just had a question on what, if any. jurisdiction, the planning Commission. and formally the Historic Resources Commission had over that application cost. I know it was already approved as part of the budget, so at least for the following fiscal year, I believe that cost would remain as is. But moving forward, what, if any, ability or recommending power does this Planning Commission have over the cost for that Mills Act application?

You can make policy recommendations to the Council just like you would with your authorities' Planning Commission for land use. That's exactly what happened with historic resources. It was discussed through their by-laws. They brought up the topic, discussed it, and what ultimately was presented to the city council was a memo, a memorandum, outlining not just that concern but a series of concerns that the city council took into consideration. And then from there, they chose what to give staff direction on, one of which was subsidizing the program to the $500 for listing fee and then reducing the cost for Mills Act.

Thank you. And as of now, are there any concerns for planning staff that because of that fee increase, we might see less applications receive this fiscal year?

Yeah. I don't know necessarily that it's a concern. I wouldn't say that. But we're aware of the fact that this is going to be cost prohibitive. Because the listing fee was $500, it's much more affordable for people to kind of get over that sort of cost issue. I'd have to take a look to see how many sort of inquiries we've received since the fees have gone up, but I want to say probably not a lot because of the cost, but certainly we're aware of the fact that not as many applications are going to be coming towards us.

I can just add to that, Chair. The fee wasn't necessarily increased. As Pedro mentioned, the fee had been reduced and subsidized, so the fee is just back to what it would have been if it wouldn't have been reduced. And then the fee that is established currently is a full cost recovery model. So I think someone had made a comment earlier about, I think, whether we were making money or just getting the fees back or the cost back that the city incurs in processing these applications. And that's exactly it. This is a full cost recovery model. The city does not make money off of any of these fees to process applications.

Thank you. So just to clarify, when that application cost was at a lower amount, the city was subsidizing the difference?

That's right.

Okay. Thank you. And I think those are all my questions and comments on this for now. But thank you. I'm also excited to see what comes forward, hoping that we receive applications. This is clear.

Thank you, Chair.

Great. With that, that concludes the study session. We'll now move on to staff comments.

Thank you, Chair. Just a couple of comments tonight. We had a pretty good study session. We have a few more lined up. There was one study session that was requested by a commissioner a few weeks ago on the annual progress report as it relates to housing projects. So we have that teed up for August 24th planning commission. And I think you should have all received some comments that were submitted as part of non-agenda items related to the zoning code update. So we do have two upcoming study sessions pertaining to the zoning code update. The first is scheduled for July 27th, and then the second is scheduled for August 10th. And because of the nature and complexity and just breadth of the zoning code update, we thought it better to break the study sessions up into two phases rather than having one. So I'm looking forward to our first congratulations on the two new elected positions, Chair Ramos and Carl Benninger, Vice Chair. I'm looking forward to working with you this next year. And that's it. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have any comments from the Commission to close the meeting? Great. I'll just name a few very quickly. So thank you for providing the dates for the upcoming zoning code update study session that will happen here at the Planning Commission, correct?

That's correct.

City Council Chambers, Thank you, and I did read that non agenda item comment that we all believe all received asking for additional information on the zoning code update, so I wanted to ask if there are any upcoming Community workshops planned to provide additional information to the Community at large.

City Council Chambers, So members of the public would be able to view the zoning code update draft once it's made public so we're looking at that going at the end of this month. And then also they'd have the opportunity to come to the study sessions as well as the public hearings to provide comment and feedback.

Thank you. And will those drafts be made available in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese?

The drafts would be available in English. And then I think depending on how it's uploaded, they'd have the ability to change or toggle between the language settings. But I have to confirm that.

Okay, thank you, I would want to make sure that it is accessible in Spanish and Vietnamese as well, and then I guess just a follow up question, are there any plans to have additional Community meetings outside of the study sessions happening in the chambers.

We have not full Community meetings where we're hosting, but we will be meeting one on ones with different interested parties that had reached out to us to walk them through the updates.

City Council Chambers, Okay, thank you, and would it be possible to have large Community meetings beyond just for the general public to attend.

City Council Chambers, At this stage, we had completed, I think about a year and a half of Community meetings were at the stage for presenting to this body and to the elected officials. City Council Chambers, So we've completed that and like I mentioned anyone that's listening tonight can contact us to have one on ones, and then we can go through the draft with them.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that. And then I also just want to say thank you to my fellow commissioners for your vote of confidence once again in re-electing me as chair. I've been here for five years now, one year as vice chair, one year as chair, and excited to do my second year as chair alongside Vice Chair Carl Benninger. So also congratulations to Vice Chair Benninger on his incoming second term. Would you like to make a few comments, Vice Chair Benninger?

Just echo what what you already mentioned. Thank you for the fellow commissioners for your faith in me. And look forward to coming here. And look forward to it. Thank you.

Thank you. Great. With that, if there are no additional closing comments from the commission, this meeting is adjourned with our next meeting being scheduled for July 27 at 5. 30pm. Thank you.