Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Commissioner Leo?

Here.

Commissioner Oliva? Commissioner Pham? Commissioner Wu?

Here.

Vice Chair Benninger?

Present.

Chair Ramos? Vice Chair Quorum has been reached at 532 with Commissioner Pham and Chair Ramos absent.

Thank you. Can everyone stand for the Pledge of Allegiance? Commissioner Gomez, would you like to lead us in, please? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice. Thank you. Before we begin, I'd like to remind my fellow commissioners to turn off your microphones when speaking and on when you are. And also, while speaking, make sure you're four inches away from the microphone. Thank you. And truly also, when speaking tonight, please make sure that bike's close to you, within four inches of you. Members of the public may attend the Planning Commission meeting, either in person or via Zoom. I now invite the commission secretary to describe how the public can access and participate in this meeting.

This meeting is being live streamed via our portal at www.santa-ana.primegov.com slash public slash portal and on YouTube at www.youtube.com slash 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 837-4755-3481. 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. Enter meeting ID number 837-4755-3481. 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're 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 into the recording, Secretary. All speakers will have three minutes to speak. I will alert you when your time is up.

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

If you're 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 into the secretary. If you're 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're calling in and would like to comment on non-agenda or non-public hearing items, please dial 9 and then 6 to unmute yourself. Chair, Vice Chair, we have one speaker in-house, and we also received three public comments in the form of emails that have been made part of the record.

Thank you. Okay. Calypso, can I have you speak for three minutes, please? Gail, there you go. I'm sorry. And thank you for bicycling in. I saw it.

I'm sorry. I came on my bike and it was a little crazy out there. Planning Commission staff, my name is Gail Levos. I live at Ward 5. And again, I'm here to advise you, maybe you already know, that my position on the One Broadway Plaza. I'm against this 37-story tower being built in classical Broadway Street. And you know I've been coming here for about a year now, saying the same old thing over and over. I was told by council a couple months ago that the first Sunshine meeting that took place, I don't know, maybe the May timeframe, that it was just a rumor. So, you know, I took that information back to my team and we kept monitoring and following through. But it's more than a rumor because the second sunshine meeting is this Thursday. So I was quite taken back that I wasn't the council council that told me this wasn't forthcoming and I'll address it at tomorrow's meeting. But the second sunshine meeting means that he is not going to go in front of you. He has a right to go in front of you at this point. So please, please, I implore you to think carefully before you decide how to move forward with this project. Think of the long-term effects it's going to have on us as citizens. Think about the character of the developer that went above you 25 years ago and is still not built. He's having a sunshine meeting at his place of business, or I'm sorry, his place of business, but the building that he owns, when it should be in a community area, community forum for all of the residents to be part of. I also know that he's not giving the sunshine notices to each individual resident in Willard and Ward 5, which we are deeply affected by that. He's given it to either the apartment agent or the people that manages the apartment, and every single resident of Willard should know of this Sunshine meeting, and he's not doing his part. So I just, again, I'm going to come here until, because they're probably sick of me here and talking about it, but I just care about my city. It's a bad move. It never should have been approved to begin with, but it's going to circle around you pretty shortly. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you. Secretary, we don't have any TVs here or the clock. Thank you. There you go. Do we have any other speakers online or in person?

No additional speakers.

Moving on to the consent calendar. Is there a motion to approve item A, minutes from August 24th meeting and from adjourned regular meeting on August 31st? And B, excused absences?

So moved.

Do I have a second?

Second. I was wondering if we could discuss briefly the main place report. But I would go with the first A and B.

Yes, I'm looking for A and B. We'll talk about C right afterwards. So right now it's A and B is what we're voting on.

Okay.

So for clarification purposes, we're pulling item C from the consent calendar.

I didn't notice until after I read A and B. So I say let's vote on A and B and then we'll do C separate.

I withdraw my request and just go with the first motion, which was to approve A, B, and C. And it was seconded.

Okay. So I guess the motion's been changed to include C with A and B.

Okay, so motion to approve item A, B, and C on the consent calendar. Motion by?

Alan Wu, I'm waiting for a second.

Commissioner Guzman made the motion. I second the motion.

So it's been first and second. We're ready to vote.

I'm sorry, who seconded?

Guzman.

Commissioner Guzman? Aye. Commissioner Leo?

Aye.

Commissioner Oliva? Commissioner Pham?

This is for the business. Aye.

Commissioner Wu?

Aye.

Vice Chair Benninger?

Aye.

Chair Ramos?

Aye.

Motion approved by majority vote with Commissioner Oliva absent.

Thank you.

And for the record, Chair Ramos and Commissioner Pham got here at 540.

Thank you. That concludes the consent calendar items. We are now moving on to the public hearing. I will now review the process for the public hearing so that everyone knows what to expect. Staff will provide a presentation and answer questions from the Commission. The public hearing will be opened. The applicant will be given the opportunity to speak, limited to 15 minutes. Members of the public will be given the opportunity to comment, limited to three minutes. The applicant will be given the opportunity to respond to comments made by the public. limited to five minutes the public hearing will be closed discussion will return to the commission with formal action taken to approve deny or continue review of the application please consider the following suggestions when organizing your comments please state your name you may state your address if you choose state whether you support oppose or neutral to the proposal your statement should include all pertinent facts within your knowledge And please note that decisions on these matters are final unless appealed within 10 days by any interested individual or party. Recommendations on these matters will be forwarded to the City Council at a later date for final determination. We'll now begin with item one. This is the time and place for site plan review number 2026-0004, vesting tentative track map number 2026-0009, and density bonus agreement number 2026-0005 for the property located at East 4th Street, located within the Metro East mixed-use overlay zone. Before we begin, do any commissioners have anything they wish to disclose with regard to this item? See, does there are no disclosures? Commissioner Guzman? Oh, sorry. I thought it came from you. Okay. I think we're getting some audio from elsewhere, but I'll just ask one more time.

Do any commissioners have anything they wish to disclose with regard to this item?

Great.

Thank you, Chair. Good evening, Chair and fellow Commissioners. This item before you is Site Plan Review Number 2026-0004. Density Bonus Agreement Number 2026-0005 and Vesting to the Track Map Number 2026-0009, located at 2030 East 4th Street within Ward 3. The applicant is requesting approval of SPR number 2026-0004, DBA 2026-0005, and TM number 2026-0009 to facilitate the construction of a new 40-unit townhome, three-story townhome for cell developments, which includes four deed-restricted affordable housing units for moderate-income households. And the areas within the Metro East Mixed-Use Overlay Zone, otherwise known as MIMU. Staff is recommending the Commission adopt resolution approving SPR 2026.0004 as conditioned, adopt a resolution approving TM 2026.0009 as conditioned, and adopt a resolution approving one waiver or reduction in development standards as memorialized in the City Bonus Agreement No. 2026.0005 as conditioned. The site is designated under the Journal Plan Land Use Designation as District Centre Medium High DC3. The site is located within the P zoning district within the MIMU overlay zone under the subcategory of Village Centre District. Presently, what exists in on-site are seven two-story office buildings totaling approximately 40,000 square feet, with office vacancy rates at around 43%. Surrounding the site are additional office uses throughout all sites, and the lot size is approximately 79,892 square feet, or 1.83 acres. The site in 1974 was developed with the existing seven two-storey office buildings. In 2007, the Metro East mixed-use overlay zone was adopted, and in 2018, the MIMU was expanded again. On January 5th, 2026, the applicant submitted an SB 330 preliminary application, and on the same day, the applicant submitted a development project review application, DP number 2025, On July 7th, 2026, the entitlement applications SPR number 2026.0004, DBA number 2026.0005, and TM number 2026.0009 were submitted. A little background, the project qualifies under a housing development project under government code section 65589.5, subsection H, and is subject to SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act. The applicant submitted the SB 330 preliminary application on January 5th, 2026, which set forth development standards used to review the project. Non-objective standards adopted after January 1st of 2020 do not apply. The project is limited to five public hearings, including appeals. SB 330 as well prohibits down zoning, housing moratoriums, permit limits, and other actions to reduce housing capacity. Continuing on the project consists of 40 new townhome units, including four designated units to be affordable for moderate income households. The residential units are broken down by the following table. There are eight two-bedroom units that range from 1,211 square feet to 1,297 square feet. There are 16 three-bedroom units that are 1,722 square feet, and there are an additional 16 units that are four bedrooms and 1,813 square feet. The affordable units that are proposed are broken down by the following. There's one two-bedroom unit, two three-bedroom units, and one additional four-bedroom unit. The DBA formalizes the project's affordability housing commitment for four units, which is 10% reserved for moderate income households. Based on the percentage of affordability, the developer is eligible to seek one concession or incentive and unlimited waivers for the project. 10,093 square feet of private and common open space areas are provided through the inclusion of 3,388 square feet of private balconies and 6,705 square feet of amenities and common open space areas throughout the project. 3,210 square feet of that In addition to that, 3,210 square feet is designated as publicly accessible open space, which is located at the intersection of Golden Circle Road and Golden Circle Drive, my apologies, and 4th Street. And there's additional space towards the south of entrance of the development as well that's publicly accessible. In addition to that, for parking, we have a breakdown of the project's parking requirements. For MIMU, the project is required to provide 90 on-site parking stalls. The applicant is proposing 100 at this time. And per state density bonus law, the applicant is required to only provide 76 spaces for the project. They're exceeding both requirements by providing 100 on-site parking stalls. Here's a better breakdown of the parking requirements pursuant to both State Density Bonus Law and the MIMU. So we have 1.5 spaces that are required for the two-bedroom units. That is the same for the three-bedroom units, and then 2.5 for the four-bedroom units. So for State Density Bonus, they're required to have that 76 spaces right there. And then for MIMU, the requirement is a flat total. And so it's 2.25 times 40, and you get 90. Here are some site photos of the existing office developments, the first image is a view from fourth street and golden circle, and then the second image is from fourth looking south from fourth street. Here is a site plan of the area. These areas here are where the pedestrian connectivity is. And then this area down here is where the publicly accessible open space is as well as this area here by the intersection of golden circle drive and each four street. And then vehicular access is taken from the southern portion of the site back here. Here's some project elevations of the development facing forestry and golden circle circle drive, these are the exterior elevations. These elevations incorporate a combination of stucco composite siding Burke veneer metal canopies metal railings bottle windows and concrete flat tile roof. The material color palette consists of neutral and contrasting tones, including whites, grays, and darker accent colors, which intend to create visual variation while maintaining a cohesive overall design. The ground floor of the units are designed with variations of the dark color textures and also provide additional prominent entry focal points for each unit. Towards the intersection between 4th and Grand Circle Drive, the residential units contain metal canopies that support inactive frontage, and the use of durable materials such as the brick accents at key pedestrian level areas further reinforce the project's urban character. Here's some additional interior elevations. These units, this building in particular, are what's facing the interior of the Paseo area. And then here are some project renderings. Here is the view from 4th Street and Golden Circle Drive. And here you see that publicly accessible open space area here. And then here's another rendering taken from the entrance of where the vehicles would enter through the site. And then you have more publicly accessible open space here. The proposed project has been reviewed for consistency with the general plan, MIMU, and applicable provisions of the Santa Ana Municipal Code. Staff has determined that the project satisfies the required findings for site plan review because it redevelops an underutilized office campus with a high-quality residential community that further advances the long-time vision of MIMU, for the MIMU. It also introduces 40 new townhome for sale units, including ownership units for a photo designated to be affordable, together with 10,933 square feet of new private and open space common areas. Additionally, the project creates a pedestrian-origin environment through widened sidewalks, publicly accessible open spaces, enhanced landscaping, and internal pedestrian connections, as well as active street frontages. The site also the project also provides site design is compatible with the surrounding development through appropriate building massing architectural or architectural articulation transition in building heights and integration of open space. Additionally, that project incorporates adequate parking circulation lighting and safety features to support long term operation, while minimizing potential impacts on the adjacent neighborhood. Based on this analysis staff finds that the project is consistent with the intent and objectives of. the MIMU overlay zone and recommends approval of site plan review number 226.0004. As for the density bonus, the project is subject to state density bonus law, government code section 65915, which encourages the development of affordable housing. This state allows up to five incentives and concessions, as well as unlimited waivers, which are deviations from development standards that would help the project be built without significant burden or without detriment to public health. The local jurisdiction is limited in applying its ability to deny the requested concessions and waivers and is preempted from denying a density bonus agreement application. All of these units are proposed to be sold as affordable units to moderate income households earning between 80 and 120% of the area medium income and are subject to a 55-year term affordability. With the requested concession and waivers, the applicant is requesting a waiver that would waive the minimum 10% of the project site area, which is around 6,797 square feet, to be dedicated to publicly open space. Instead, they're proposing 3,210 square feet of publicly accessible open space, which is around 5% of the lot area. Additionally, with 10 of 10 vesting tentative track map number 2026 that 0009 This will sub just subdivide the property into 40 condominium air right units within conjunction with the proposed townhome development. The project satisfies the required findings because it provides a site layout that is safe for vehicular for vehicles and pedestrian circulation. It incorporates adequate utility infrastructure and publicly accessible and private open spaces to serve the proposed development. The site is physically suitable for the proposed residential density and condominium subdivision this project will not conflict with any existing easements necessary for proper public access and public utilities. AND THE PROJECT WILL NOT RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL OR PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACTS AND QUALIFIES FOR A STATUTORY CEQA EXEMPTION TO PUBLIC RESOURCES, PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21080.66, OR OTHERWISE KNOWN AS AB 130. ACCORDINGLY, STAFF HAS MADE THE REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE VESTING TENDER TRACK MAP NUMBER 2026-0009, WHICH COULD BE MEANT. FOR PROJECT AFFORDABILITY, THE PROJECT MEETS THE CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOAL FOR THE ON-SALE, FOR-SALE, ON-SITE FOR-SALE CATEGORY OF THE CITY'S OHOCO, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPPORTUNITY CREATION ORDINANCE. THE SITE PROVIDES FOUR ON-SITE UNITS DESIGNATED FOR HOUSEHOLDS EARNING BETWEEN 80 AND 120% OF THE HOUSEHOLD MEDIUM INCOME, WHICH IS PRESENTLY AROUND $166,300. $166,300 for a four person household. The units themselves will be dispersed throughout the community. And the affordable units will be indistinguishable from the market rate units. The developers housing inclusionary plan has also been reviewed by the city's housing division and approved by the city's housing division as well. The project is consistent with the district center medium high DC land usage designation. It supports the project for supports the general plan of vision for an urban mixed use development by redeveloping and underutilized office campus with housing and neighborhood serving flex commercial space. The project also complies with the DC three maximum development intensity as well or. The proposed density is at 22 dwelling units an acre, with floor area FAR at 1.1, while the maximum is at 3, and the density maximum is at 90 dwelling units an acre for this area. The project also is consistent with the general plan, land use destination, urban design element, housing element, as well as the economic prosperity elements. With the land use elements, the project is compatible with the surrounding development and provides a mix of market rate and affordable housing. The project also provides publicly accessible open space and supports residential development within the MIMU mixed use area. For urban design, the project provides pedestrian oriented frontage facing developments and integrates publicly accessible open space that enhances the public realm and pedestrian activity. For the housing elements, The project is consistent by adding 40 on sale townhomes to the city's housing supply, including four moderate income affordable housing units or the economic prosperity element. The project incorporates flexible commercial space with eight residential units supporting a mix of housing support services and employment opportunities. And these are flex spaces. For CEQA, the project qualifies under a statutory exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.66, enacted through Assembly Bill Number 130, otherwise known as AB 130, in 2025. The project satisfies all applicable eligibility criteria listed in AB 130, and a Notice of Exemption Environmental Review Number 2025-7 will be filed. There are no physical impacts associated with this project as well. With that said, staff recommends adopting a resolution approving site plan review number 2026-0004 as conditioned, adopting a resolution approving best intended track map number 2026-0009 as conditioned, and adopting a resolution approving one waiver or reduction in development standards to be memorialized in the density bonus agreements number 2026.0005 as conditioned. With that said, staff is available for any questions and we also have the applicant available in the audience.

Thank you. Does the Commission have any comments or questions for staff? Commissioner Guzman and I'll come this way.

Thank you, Chair Ramos. This is a question for staff. In terms of the four moderate income units, how is that going towards fulfilling ARENA requirement? How far along are we towards fulfilling ARENA requirement in that category?

Thank you for the question, Commissioner. They would count toward ARENA, and then for that category, It's actually one of the categories that we haven't met for moderate income. So for moderate income households, let me give you the exact number here. We're short 274 units. So these four would contribute toward fulfilling the 274 that remain to satisfy the moderate income category.

Thank you. I don't have any further questions at this point.

Thank you, Commissioner Guzman. Commissioner Lue.

Yeah, I had a question. Could you go back to the slide of the existing property?

The images?

No, no, no, the existing property as is, yeah. So this is going to be this street, as we develop the street. My question is, we just approved a project across the street with a landscape This property has a lot of mature trees, which provide shade, which will help condominiums. Are we making any effort to save some of the mature trees, or are we just going to flatten them? My concern is, and here's my concern, when we do landscape pallets for busy streets, take, for instance, the entry from MacArthur off the 55. And you look across the street, Zesa's now good. The trees are much bigger. The courtyard in across the street has trees, but yet we have nothing else. So the entry's kind of plain, empty. And the thing is, when you look at, we do developments, because this is all going to be housing here. This is all housing. And by the time we're done, it's all housing. And you look at what we did on MacArthur from, say, Bear, see us from high school. Those trees are extremely mature now. They're shade cover. People can walk on the sidewalks and not It fried from the sun. And so my concern is when we do this, we're going to take 20 years for there to be cover for people to walk on the sidewalks. Across the street, we did retail plus apartments for, I think it was Think Together. My concern is, and it's going to be my concern going forward, is we're not replacing the mature trees in the area to provide the shade cover for people just to walk. We want people to walk, and we want bike lanes. We have to make it doable. Last week was not doable, 108 degrees, with no shade cover. Imagine trying to walk that with no shade cover. Now, the Kaiser building is just on the other side of that street. They have mature trees. We're going to have a 40-condo development right there, and the trees are going to be like... It's high. So my question was going to be to the applicant, we need bigger trees or we need to try to save some of these. Because it's not going to fit with what we're encouraging people to do. If the thrust of the general plan is to get people to walk and ride their bikes and we eliminate shade cover, it's not doable. So I just have that question. So you're saying, so I'll let you answer the question because then I'll have a question for the applicant.

Thank you, Commissioner, for the question. So as part of this development, the sidewalk as well as parkway would be built out, and then the parkway would be landscaped with new trees. But the existing mature trees that you see presently would have to be removed to make way for the development itself. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Leal. Do we have any? Go ahead, Commissioner.

We've seen this project before, right?

Really? Thank you, Commissioner. This is the first time this project is being presented before the Commission, but there has been a number of other applications in this general vicinity.

Okay. I thought we have seen this before, because one of the attractiveness of the program is that it's for sale. And in the past, Commissioner Leo has brought up the fact that we have a lot of rental units, but we have very few opportunities for inter-generation building wealth, particularly for affordable housing. And one attractiveness of this project is that it provides us with an opportunity for it. And I thought we did discuss this before because of the affordable housing unit. And that the fact there's three-story townhomes Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Wu. Commissioner Pham.

You know, on the fencing and landscaping plan, it indicates that the public accessible common space, it's fenced in and the rendering shows it like a six foot fence. The legend says that it's going to be publicly accessible from, I think, in the morning to dusk. Other projects we've seen, even in the similar vicinity, the open space were pretty much open. There wasn't a particular fencing and limited access. So I'm wondering why we arrived at that decision to fence it in.

Thank you, Commissioner. One of the earlier projects in the MIMO did have an open space that remained unfenced and then just due to different issues that they were experiencing they ended up fencing in. And then a number of the newer projects that we've seen have provided fencing.

So it does comply with our development code standards to be able to fence in publicly accessible space?

It does as long as the space is made available from I think the hours are from sunrise to dusk, right?

And then typically Are there signage that would indicate to the public that because you know, obviously, visually, if you're gonna walk past this project, and you see a six foot fence, you would assume that this is private, open space, even if there is an egg gate, you would assume is a, you know, tenant accessible gate only. So would there be signage that indicate that this is publicly accessible space from x time, you know, dawn to dusk?

No signage at this point, but that could be something that if the applicant is amenable to that could be added. But just as an fyi the other projects have been approved did not include a condition that stated that they needed to have a sign or anything.

Yeah, I mean, I don't particularly have an opinion on the matter at the moment. But to me, it seems to defeat the purpose of providing openly accessible space. If it doesn't visually indicate that it's publicly accessible. Granted, I understand that, you know, we have to balance that with the actual on the ground issues of, you know, obviously, people taking advantage of open space for other usage other than what was intended for. But I think that's something we should consider. And then this might not pertain to the actual site plan, but it could be on the site plan. The floor plan itself shows condenser units on the second floor of the AC condenser unit. Typically I do see it either on the ground adjacent to the units or for, you know, sound issues or potentially on the top level. My concern is these condenser units are loud, especially in the hot summers. The last week we had, they're going to be running quite often and for it to be in the second floor where the most commonly used space adjacent to, you know, glass, in the actual balcony itself. Obviously, it's the applicant's choice. I'm not sure if there's city guidelines for that matter, but it does seem to be somewhat inconvenient for the future tenants or future homeowners of this unit. I'm wondering what your thoughts on that is.

Thank you, Commissioner Pham. That's a good question. With these sites that are limited in size, often it comes down to compromising the available space that's required by the MIMU, and it comes down to design choice as well. So when staff is working with the applicants to have them comply with the required open space, the required publicly accessible open space, it's a lot for limited sites. So often that results in design choices like this one, where you have to limit the usable open space for things that are like walkable pathways or landscaping. And that really only leaves areas like private patio for the AC condensers. So it's not necessarily something we see across all projects, but it is something we see on projects when it's a limited site and you see constraints.

Yeah, I acknowledge that. To me, this doesn't seem ideal, but obviously it's the choice of the applicant. And then one last thing. This is also a gated project, or at least partially gated. Is there a reason why the gate is located deeper into the site? I think our minimum is 40 feet for a pedestrian gate. Is there a reason why it's... kind of deeper into the into the lot rather than potentially you know enclosing half of the public publicly accessible parking stalls yeah if I could clarify Commissioner Pham are you you so you're talking about the gate but are you asking about why it's not closer I guess to the south oh my Why it's not closer to the entry drive? Because I don't think that's the minimum kind of distance away from the curb cut, right?

You're referring to the gates, though?

Right.

Okay. And why it's not closer to the drive aisle? Right. I see. The entry into the site, it's technically identified in the MIMU public ground plan as a through access. So it needs to continue at some point through the adjacent site. So the parking and the drive out that you see will eventually be like common access to the rest of the site. So there is limitations on when you can do improvements wise, which is why you end up with the design such as this.

And I'm assuming the applicant has proposed a parking management plan for just to make sure those kind of unsecure parking stalls wouldn't be used by other properties. Because I'm sure it's all meant for the tenants, or sorry, all meant for the property owners, right?

There's conditions of approval that include a parking management plan requirement, like any other residential project like this one.

Other than that, I do agree with Commissioner Leo. From the landscape plan and you know the proposed trees looks like they were right directly on top of the location of the existing location, so I was assuming they were keeping that the trees. But if they're not there are a few projects of notice. What comes to mind is the project on harbor that is kind of at the border of Santa Santa and found valley. Where the. The trees were new, but I think they were chosen specifically so that they had a larger canopy, as well as they provide screening for the balconies on the second and third floor. I think something like that is a dual use. It provides shade, but also provides screening, because obviously these balconies are overlooking the public right of way. And, you know, it's not a yard, but people do treat their balcony as a little yard. And having the tree canopy be some sort of screening from the street also adds an element of privacy. So that's something I would love to see this project incorporate if we're not keeping the existing tree. The tree selection ideally would be something that creates a large canopy, but also creates some sort of screening on the street up against these open balconies.

Thank you, Commissioner Fenn. Vice Chair Benninger.

Right now, the rain of numbers, is that January 1st to December 31st or June 30th to July 1st?

The numbers I shared are through the end of last year.

I'm sorry?

Through the end of last year.

Through the end of last year.

Yeah, those were the numbers that were reported to HCD March of this year. So the way the reporting schedule works, we report every March for the prior calendar year to the state.

okay so it is is uh january to december basically basically that's correct okay great um one issue a couple issues one i'm glad that uh commissioner fan brought up the uh the gate i actually like the location i'm glad we're not involving fourth street in entrance and egress but it also tells me is is this a developer planning to developed a lot next to this is that why it says future Future use next to the gate area down there in the small print.

Thank you for the question, Vice Chair. As Pedro was just sharing, the MIMU plan is forward looking. And then as this area continues to develop, part of the plan goals is to break up the large block areas there to create more pedestrian opportunities. So this would be kind of the first leg, if you will, of that vehicle and pedestrian access that if the lot in the future next to it develops,

similar type of connectivity would be required to allow that breaking up of the large blocks and to allow pedestrian access through okay so those 18 parking spaces on that street are not going to be signed or that entrance roadway because it isn't cut off by public everybody gives public parking for anyone correct those would serve as the guest spaces for the development okay but if there's no blocking them off and the develops next to them It could be used by anyone, not just the development.

Well, they would be on private property, so it would be similar to if someone parks their car on your driveway because it's not fenced, you can have them tow it because it's private property. So a similar type of deal here would be guest parking for the development.

Okay. Also, on the numbers we saw for parking, and I get a little confused just looking at two and a half cars, each one of these units have a two-car garage attached to it. So I don't know where that half a car comes up, especially on the four-bedroom units. How is the half a car developed?

Thank you, Vice Chair. So that's just the ratio of the totals. So each of the units would have a two-car garage. Then the half comes in just when you do the math on the total divided by the number of units. So the half comes in because the addition of the guest spaces that are factored into the total.

Because also one sub 1.8 for the less than four for bedroom also. Really what we have is we have 80 80 parking spaces in the garages and 18 outside. That's basically what the parking spaces are for this project, correct?

80 in the parking spaces and 20 as guest spaces.

I counted 18, but my math was wrong. Okay. One question has been brought up that we had someone talk to us a couple years ago about is trash collection and getting a trash truck around this facility. Where are the trash pickups in this project?

The project is proposed to have individual carts, and so the tenants will bring out, the homeowners will bring out their carts from their garage to the driveway.

And they're going to be required to store them on site?

Yeah, inside their garage.

Okay. All right. That's the question. That's the question I have right now. Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Benninger. I also have a few questions and I believe they will be for any staff from CDA that may be present unless planning would like to answer. So one of my questions is how was the affordable level of moderate income decided? Yes, thank you for coming up. My question is how was affordability level of moderate income? So 80% AMI decided for the four affordable housing units that will be available for sale?

Thank you for the question good evening so just to clarify moderate income is 120% am I not 80% and that was decided. The requirement for the inclusionary housing ordinance for a project like this would be 5% of for sale units at moderate income, however, the developer is making use of the density bonus. ordinance. So they're providing 10% of that required moderate income. So that's fully up to the developer. Some developers will do 5% at very low income, but of course, it changes how many units they provide.

Thank you. And then my second question is, can the city's existing downpayment assistance program be utilized to purchase one of these units? So the program as is now and the development as is now?

We do not allow for our applicants to use the down payment assistance program, we would be sort of double dipping into our programs because these units are being sold at lower sales prices. So just to provide some numbers that two bedrooms would be sold and these calculations are as of right now with current rates so they will continue to change. But the prices would be $462,000 for the two-bedroom, $510,300 for the three-bedroom, and $546,600 for the four-bedroom. So they're already at a reduced price. Okay.

And then thank you for the clarification that the program cannot be used to purchase any of the four affordable units, but could the program be used to purchase one of the market rate 36 units? Yes.

Okay.

So the program at the...

Sorry, I should have clarified that.

No, no, thank you. So the program as is right now would help some, could help somebody purchase one of the market rate units?

Yes, that's correct.

Okay. Thank you. And those are my questions for you. Thank you. On housing. And then a question for staff. So I know there's been some conversation on the publicly accessible open space and just wondering what that open space includes as of now. Is it just that are open green space like a... grassy area maybe?

It'll be two sections of the development that have general open areas accessible to the public. So these areas here, I believe there's some benches, some patio, picnic tables seen on the images. There'll be decorative paving, some grass areas, some enhanced plantings.

Thank you. And then just based off the comments I heard, not specific to this project, but I am wondering how we ensure that any publicly accessible open space in any of these developments that we approved. How do we ensure that it is visible that it is open space? So I know staff said that we have approved several projects and we haven't required any signage or anything else that would indicate it's publicly accessible open space. So obviously we voted on that and any of us could have brought it up, but it is a bit of a concern to me in a city that is so park poor that while we're adding a publicly accessible open space, there is no way for the public to be aware of that. So not again, not specific to this project. And I don't know what the commission may want to do what we want to require that this development have signage. And I don't know to what extent we could retroactively require that of all others that we have approved. But I'm a bit concerned that while we have approved them with publicly accessible open space, it's not being made clear to the public. And those are all the questions I have for staff at this time. Thank you. So with that, the public testimony portion of the public hearing is now open. Would the applicant like to speak on the matter?

Good evening, Chair Ramos, planning commissioners. My name is Todd Cottle with CNC Development. We're excited to be here with you this evening to talk about the Aspen Woods. Project. This is a site that we have owned for a handful of years and are excited to be at this phase appreciate working with staff and their time going through the process and being in front of you this evening. staff did a great job in their presentation so don't want to cover stuff that they've already covered before but definitely available to answer any questions we have a number of our design team members with us here this evening but took some notes here when some of the discussion was going on and would like to answer that at this point in time just having some additional knowledge about the project In regards to the fencing with the signage, I think that's a good idea. I think that that makes a lot of sense. That would be something that we'd be willing to incorporate into this development for both of those two locations. I think we had talked about the gating of the community, the future through street, pass through on the southern portion of the property, which we liked, and I think we were fortunate on how this site was configured and laid out, allowed us to eliminate actually one of the existing parking, drive access off of four street preserve the one coming off of golden circle, and I think it works real well with the circulation of the development, you can drive in the. City Council Chambers, The the parking gate drive all the way around and then drive back out in regards to the trees, what is proposed right now is. City Council Chambers, 11 street trees, both on four street and on golden circle, if it would be possible to go back to that that elevation or the existing photos of it and it's a little deceptive or i'm sorry if we go back to the the photos of the of the project. City Council Chambers, existing condition. some of these are a little bit deceptive where some of these trees look like they're actually in the public parkway, where they're actually behind the sidewalk that's out there now. So looked at our existing survey that we have on the building, and this is going to be approximate and not exact, but it looks like there's one of those trees that we see in the upper left-hand corner is actually on 4th Street, that front's within the parkway. It appears, looking at it and and and and looking at it if you'd be going down golden circle, it appears to be maybe two maybe three of those trees are in the parkway as well, everything else is sitting back behind further. uh... closer to the street but still further back behind the property line and so what our plan is uh... the way it's designed now is to replace those with eleven street trees out there we've uh... specified canary pines for the trees that would be on fourth street and then the the street trees that would be on golden circle or the chinese flame tree but that's something that we're completely flexible with working in conjunction with staff in greater detail if we were to switch those out with a different type of street tree we did pull those off the city street tree approved street tree list but but flexible when it would come to that I think we had talked about the parking management plan that we would have that would address if we had vehicles say parking from the surrounding neighborhood at night, through our HOA within within the development they can enforce that. But we're excited to be working with you guys on this project and we've done a lot in partnership with the city over the years, specifically on the rental side specifically within the affordable arena, the ability to provide for homeownership opportunities in the city. and also homeownership affordable is something that's exciting for us as well and working in conjunction, not only with your planning staff and team, but also your housing staff to bring that to fruition. Available to answer any other questions.

Thank you. Do any commissioners have questions for the applicant? I'll begin at the end with Commissioner Guzman and come back this way.

Thank you, Chair Ramos. There's a resident accessible common space between buildings five and four. What do you propose to put in there for the residents? I know that there's balconies, but I'm sure, you know.

There's balconies in there. It's really meant to be designed and intended as a paseo to run north-south through the property, but do have opportunities for seating areas in there, but more of a passive space within those because we do have the front doors of those homes fronting onto that space.

City Council Chambers, Now, in terms of the parking management plan, and I know at least to the Commissioners here raised it the guests proposed guest parking I, how do you I know you. City Council Chambers, said that the ho a fees will probably be used to enforce that parking but what other mechanisms, do you think that you could use in terms of guests. Just to know who is an overnight guest, for example.

So a good question in the past we've used registering your vehicle through the homeowners associations to say you would have a guest that would be staying a little bit longer to register it that way, and then you know ultimate enforcement comes down to. Mayor Mrakas, posting proper signage working in conjunction and and ultimately enforcement, so you have a parking management plan or you do not have your association being active and people. Mayor Mrakas, You know, would learn as people do over time, maybe I could park here and not be not be towed you have to at some point in time and force that as well, but it's it's sharing the information registering your vehicles, though, if you're you're going to have a longer term now I guess a stay with you for a week.

Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Guzman. Commissioner Leal.

So I'm going to leave this up to staff and the applicant, not me. We started to approve stuff on the other side of the street. If we approve this project tonight, let's be consistent. So the canopy looks like the way you want the canopy to look like because we're building the project. I wasn't here when we approved the project at 4th and Cabrillo. Let's make the canopy work for the residents who live there, for the developers, so the street's walkable. Remember, these people, their main park is Cabrillo Park, right? And then they can access the tennis courts a little further up Cabrillo. We're creating a neighborhood. Let's try to create a neighborhood that you'd want to live in. So just make the canopy the same. I'm going to leave that up to you guys.

Common theme as you're going down the street.

Common themes down the main street so that when you drive the street or you walk the street, there's enough of a canopy for people to walk, but also that when you drive it, It looks similar.

You know you're on Forest Street, right? It's like driving around some of the streets with the jacarandas. You know the consistency.

As soon as you cross over the 5, there's big trees on that side. You guys figure out what the trees we used on the other projects. Just make it look so that it works for everybody that lives there. It looks like the neighborhood. We're creating a new neighborhood. Let's create a new neighborhood with similar trees so that it works for the for the owners that buy the homes there. That's all, I'll leave it up to you guys.

Thank you, Commissioner Leo. Commissioner Wood.

How many years have you owned this property again?

We've owned it probably about six years now. And so bought it and intended at the end of the day to look at a redevelopment. But what we kind of went through, through COVID with the office space, the office market, We've seen the decline for this type of space. These are interesting spaces. A lot of the units in there range from 300 to about 1,200 square feet within the building. And so we're kind of seeing that consolidation in the office.

And since you have your design team here, I'm kind of curious about 30 years from now, or 20 years from now, let's say 20 years, as the children grow up, as the pits make their way through the hallways and stuff, And as we have walkability in the area, I'm wondering what is the maintenance plan, what kind of materials are you using on the exterior of your painting and on the apartment to prevent mold on the inside in the kitchen and showers and all that? Will it still look like that in 10, 15, 20 years? Can you just help us out?

Good question. So these are going to be for sale units. So from the interior maintenance, the homeowner, when they purchase the unit, will have a very nice quality unit and hopefully with housekeeping as a homeowner, those are kept up as well. As it pertains to the exterior of the buildings, it's really durability and materials and focus on that up front. So whether that's using stucco materials to cementous siding board as opposed to using wood, looks like a wood material, has the same sense when you're looking at it, but you get the longevity out of it over the years. And then it's also appropriate as you're establishing your homeowners association, that homeowners association is responsible for the exterior maintenance of the building. So having that properly funded, having the correct amount of reserves. So those things can be done over the years as you get 20, 25 years down the road, it's time to redo your roofs. It's time to research slurry, the parking lot time to repaint the building. So you might have a little handbook, like, uh, don't bleach it to death.

And, you know, and, um, um,

know the surfaces are are such that it can be maintained this way there is yeah homeowners get all that information on not only manufacturer with your appliances that you have but types of materials that are using whether you know you should be using this to call for the washing machine and all that so effect okay yeah thank you because there there may be a good promotion for a first-time homebuyer it would be to move in the area and um

if you never own a home or in a townhome, lots of things can happen because it's a big community that has to work together. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Wu. Commissioner Pham?

No, I think you've answered all of my concerns and my questions. I do like the material choice and the architecture. It's very interesting. Yeah, we're excited about it. I appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Benninger.

I do like you designed it on the first floor. It looks like a little storage area. I assume it's for bikes and wagons and all that good stuff and keep it out of the garage.

Yes.

Yeah, that's nice. Nice to include it. Also, Ali, and you may not be able to answer this, but I've had the unfortunate pleasure of replacing a four ton unit in my house and a two ton unit in my condo. And I'm amazed how quiet they are right now to answer your question, the compressors. And that's a good question. Do you have an idea what decimal levels these compressors are?

I don't. Maybe our architect is here. He's holding up his hands as well. They've gotten a lot quieter over the years and a lot more efficient. We've installed the condenser units on the patio in the past a number of times now. One of the things that we like and that actually the homeowners like is the alternative is either on the ground floor or sometimes it's finding the right location or where it's gonna be on site. The other alternative is putting that up on the roof. And what we found from a maintenance standpoint and then, you know, down the road with, you know, owning a home long enough that unit will go out and you'll eventually replace it. You know, the cost to replace a unit on a patio or in an accessible area if it was on the ground floor as opposed to going up to the roof or having to get a crane is much more cost effective from a maintenance standpoint or livability standpoint. But those have gotten quieter over the years.

I'm only smiling because I had to run a crane in order to get the compressor off the roof. Sorry, I don't know exactly what you're talking about.

It's fun to watch, but it's not fun to pay for.

Well, actually, the fun part was keeping the parking space open so I could get the crane in there. That's all my questions. Thank you.

Thank you. So one, I wanted to start off by saying thank you for including four-bedroom units. I know that we don't often see new developments include four-bedroom units, and especially when they're affordable, the number of bedrooms really matters because that will determine whether or not a large family can qualify to live there. So thank you for including them. I know it's one unit, and I typically will ask staff, how was the unit breakdown decided? I know it's a formula, so I do wish there were more that were affordable, and I hope that as you consider new affordable housing developments, you'll think about the large unit size. But yes, again, thank you for that and also for the three bedroom that's being provided at the affordable rate. And then also thank you for being amicable to including some sort of signage that will show that the publicly accessible open space is public. So I will be asking that that be included in any motion we make tonight. And I think that, yeah, that's all for me. Everything else has already been answered. If there are no other questions from the commission, then I think you're good.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you. Does the commission have any last, well, do I need to close the public hearing before we go to? Oh, you're current.

Yes, if anyone else is here to speak on this item.

Thank you. Sorry, I had moved my... Okay, yes, thank you. I think it's a little bit out of order here. But I'll now take any written communication. Oh, recording circuit, do we have any written communication or is there a member of the public that would like to comment on this item?

Chair, we have received a total of two emails in the form of public comment for this item before the 3.30 PM deadline, which has been distributed to the commission and posted online. If you're attending this meeting in person and would like to comment on this item, please fill out our request to speak form and turn it into the secretary. If you're participating via Zoom and would like to comment on this item, please select the hand icon to indicate that you would like to speak. If you're calling in and would like to comment on this item, please dial nine and then six to unmute yourself. Chair, we have a speaker in person and a speaker via Zoom.

Thank you. Our speaker in person has come a few times. So Gay Olivos, would you like to come forward?

You know who I am, so I'm going to introduce myself again. These are pretty for a change. They're very, very beautiful, which is a lot better than the last developer that was here at my last meeting that I saw the box blue thing going on. I like the fact that they are townhomes. People have the opportunity to buy them. And I want to understand that as a townhome versus a condo, I think the townhome, you own the property, where a condo, you just own the building, I think. But I would like that clarified. I think there's a difference between a townhome and a condo. It's purposely set for a reason. Also, there was no mention of what this HOA, what is the benefit of the homeowner? What do they get from it? Is there a pool? Is there a rec room? And then there'll be requirements should the, if I understand correctly, should the sidewalk be broken or should they want to paint their door red, there may be requirements for that. So I think it's very important that we're clear and concise with property owners, what they're getting into when they purchase a townhome. But I love the idea of people being able to purchase homes. But this is more for us as a general. I don't know how, okay. So we're short 274 low income housing. Is that what number you gave? 274 units of some sort? And this developer gave us four. So how many more buildings are we gonna have to build to meet that 270? That's what concerns me. One Broadway Plaza is not offering any. I'll tell you that up front. So how many more buildings? I want you to think about that because they're going to use that as an argument or an approval to build their building. How many more? I think we have to make those developers provide more. I don't know why we say, because we did it for the last time, last developer, that doesn't mean going forward we have to be the same. We can't change it. We have the power to change it. So let's think about that. Also, I don't know how you can say there's no fiscal impact. I have sat here and saw you approve so many residents and apartments down 4th Street. It's wear and tear on the streets. It's wear and tear on the air. It's wear and tear on the sidewalk. It's wear and tear in a police department. It's wear and tear all the way around, just on 4th Street from the 5 Freeway to I think it's Tessin Avenue. So please don't tell me there's no fiscal impact. There's a definite fiscal impact. Not for this, the developer here, but for you in general. So please think about that when you approve this. Thank you.

Thank you. Recording Secretary, are there any members of the public online who would like to comment on this item?

We had Victor Mendez on Zoom. Can you please unmute yourself if this is the item you would like to speak on?

Yes, I just did. Can you hear me okay? Hello?

Yes, yes, we can hear you.

Okay. You know, just a quick comment before you begin my timing. The audio was kind of difficult this today. As compared to the council meetings, it was kind of really hard to hear. And, you know, I didn't change my setting, so I don't know what's going on and. Plus, I mean, your cameras, it makes it a little bit difficult to follow as well, because. All we're seeing is the back of people's hands and things like that. So just some thoughts. I mean, it certainly didn't take away from the professionalism of the meeting, but it just made it a little difficult to follow compared to other experiences. So maybe somebody can look into that. But anyway, so I am president of the Zoo District Neighborhood Association where this development resides. And I think it is a very nice development. Very good repurposed use of an existing office building to turn to something much more productive and I think much more beneficial. And frankly, much more sustainable. So I fully support this development without reservation. And hopefully all these benefits that we're getting down Forest Street can also spill on to the greater needs of First Street. So let's move forward. And I'm sure the developer will be responsible with the construction and development of these properties. I'm looking forward to another great neighborhood springing up in the area and, you know, and continue to move this district forward. The only thing I didn't hear, and maybe you can ask, because I certainly was looking for it and trying to hear for it. I didn't actually hear a specific parking allocation or the number of the spaces they have. And that's a number we always want to look for and understand. Maybe we really can't do much about changing it, but at least we understand what's going on. So if you didn't hear the number of spaces actually allocated, maybe someone should ask that question. And let's get that on the record at least. And yeah, there's always a fiscal impact about these property developments. any property of them, but also let's also look on the other side. There's also economic benefits that come with it, a better tax structure, more taxes, more consumers, et cetera. So it kind of cuts both ways. And yes, there are effects on our infrastructure, but there's also benefits to our economy and to our finances. Okay. Well, thank you anyway for your considerations and have a good night.

Thank you for that. Appreciate it. Is that the last of the online questions?

No additional speakers on Zoom.

Okay. Okay. I'm sorry. Public testimony portion of the public hearing is now closed. Is there approval? Is there a motion on this matter?

Yeah. Carl. Let me take a crack at it. Let me make a motion to adopt a resolution approving site plan review number 2026-0004 as conditioned, as well as adopt a resolution approving vesting track map 2026-0009 as conditioned, and adopt a resolution approving one incentive concession or reduction in development standards to be memorialized in the density bonus agreement number 2026-005 as condition and a condition for the public signage and uh for the open space that's the only additional i think and then you staff you guys figure out the trees i second you second so motion by commissioner leo second by commissioner will

Okay. I have a motion with a first and a second. Commissioner Liu made a motion, and Commissioner Wu has seconded. Any discussion?

Caller question.

Andy, can you do a roll call, please?

Commissioner Guzman? Aye. 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. We're now moving on to item two. This is the time and place for general plan amendment number 2026, APPLICATION NUMBER 2026-03, TRACK MAP NUMBER 2025-04, AND DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT NUMBER 2025-04 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4320 WEST FIRST STREET AND 201 SOUTH MAIN MOUNTAIN VIEW STREET, LOCATED WITHIN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL C-2 AND THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL M-1 ZONING DISTRICTS. Before we begin, do any commissioners have anything they wish to disclose with regard to this item? Great. Seeing as there are no disclosures, the case planner, Nancy Tran, will provide a brief presentation.

Ms. Good evening, Commissioners. Item number 2 is the First Inn Mountain View project located at 4320 West 1st Street and 201 South Mountain View Street located in Ward 1. The applicant is requesting several related discretionary approvals to facilitate redevelopment of the site with a 61-unit for sale townhome development. Requests include a General Plan Amendment Number 202601 to change the site's land use from general commercial GC and low-medium density residential LMR11 to urban neighbourhood low or UN20. Amendment Application Number 202603 to change the zoning from General Commercial C2 and Light Industrial M1 to Specific Development Number SV98. Investing Tenant of Track Map Number 2025-04 to create condominium lots. And a Density Bonus Agreement Number 2025-04 to memorialize the project's density bonus and development standard deviation request. Staff's recommendation includes both an action by Planning Commission and the City Council. First, staff recommends that the commission adopt a resolution approving the requested concession or reduction in development standard as memorialized in Density Bonus Agreement Number 2025-04, subject to conditions of approval. And secondly, staff recommends that the commission recommend to City Council for them to adopt the project's mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program. Approve General Plan Amendment No. 2026-01. Approve Amendment Application No. 2026-03 to establish SD98. And approve Vesting Tenant of Track No. 2026-01, County Map No. 19332, subject to conditions. The subject property has two general plan designations, General Commercial GC on the northern end and low-medium density residential LMR 11 at the south side. And it's zoned General Commercial C2 and Light Industrial M1. Surrounding land uses include commercial, multifamily, single-family and a mobile home park to the north, a public facility and multifamily east, public facility to the south and a public facility to the west. The project site includes three parcels totaling 2.55 acres after dedications. This site shows recent photos of the existing site. The first image is at the corner of First Street and Mountain View facing southeast and the second is along First Street facing south. With respect to the site The property was authorized for wholesale catering supply uses between approximately 1977 and 2025. However, the site operated as an unpermitted commercial food truck commissary with commercial vehicle storage and ancillary food preparation activities. In June 2025, the applicant submitted Development Project Number 2025-17, initially proposing a 60-unit residential project. The project was subsequently revised and now proposes 61 residential units together with associated site and frontage improvements. The project includes discretionary approvals necessary to redevelop the site with a 61-unit for sale townhome community. It includes a general plan amendment, amendment application, vesting tentative track map, and density bonus agreement as previously described. Of the 61 townhome units, three will be very low income affordable units, three will be live work units, and 10 units will have ground floor flex space to accommodate residential or commercial use. Site improvements include approximately 10,000 square feet of open space representing approximately 9% of the site area. This includes publicly accessible raised plaza with outdoor seating adjacent to the live work units, as well as common residential open space areas with seating, barbecue facility, and shade structure. The project also includes full-width street improvements and sidewalks along both sides of Mountain View Street, frontage improvements along First Street, and removal of the existing non-conforming billboard along First Street. This slide compares parking requirements under the city's parking standards for multifamily, the State Density Bonus Law, and proposed SD98 standards. Under the city's conventional multifamily parking standards, the project would have been required to provide 335 spaces. Under state density bonus parking ratios, the project requires 122 spaces. And under the proposed SD98 standards, the project requires 135 spaces consisting of two spaces per residential unit plus guest parking space at a ratio of 0.22 spaces per unit. The project proposes 135 parking spaces, complying with the proposed SD98 parking requirement and exceeding the parking requirement available under State Density Bonus The project is proposing a housing development project under Senate Bill SB330 because it includes residential and mixed-use components with at least two-thirds of the floor area dedicated to residential use. As a housing development project, it is subject to the Housing Crisis Act provisions which restrict new non-objective standards, limits the number of discretionary hearings, and prohibits local actions that would reduce housing capacity. The city deemed the applicant's SB 330 preliminary application complete on July 29, 2025, establishing the project's eligibility and vested rights protections under SB 330. However, the requested general plan amendment and amendment application remain discretionary city actions. If those actions are approved, the project would be required to comply with applicable objective standards of the approved zoning, including approved density bonus deviation. The applicant is requesting a density bonus agreement pursuant to state density bonus law to formalize the project's affordable housing obligations and applicable development standards. The project includes a request for a density bonus and one incentive or concession from the development standard. The project also uses parking ratios allowed under state density bonus law for qualifying affordable housing developments. The reduced parking standards are authorized by the state law and do not constitute a separate concession, incentive, or waiver. Under the Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-1607, Planning Commission action is required for projects that included density bonus deviations, including incentives, concessions, or waivers. This slide illustrates the proposed general plan amendment. The existing general plan designations are general commercial and low-medium density residential. The proposed designation is urban neighbourhood low, or UN20. The UN 20 designation would allow up to 20 dwelling units per acre and would establish a land use designation that is intended to support residential info development, the scale compatible with the surrounding neighborhood context. This slide illustrates the proposed rezoning proposal. The site is currently zoned General Commercial, or C2, and Light Industrial, or M1. The applicant is requesting that the site be rezoned to Specific Development 98, or SD98. The requested zoning action would align with the site zoning with the proposed UN20 general plan designation. The project is arranged as a townhome community with an internal private circulation access from Mountain View Street, with residential buildings, parking, landscape areas, private and common open space, and a publicly accessible plaza near the live work component near the corner of 1st and Mountain View Street. This slide shows the project's primary street facing elevations along First Street and at the corner of Mountain View. Along these elevations, other trees are oriented toward the public street with the corner treatment and liver components intended to create a more active and pedestrian oriented frontage. These are proposed elevations of buildings one, two and three, which are located along the southern property line, each with four dwelling units. This is Building 4 with 10 units, fronting Mountain View Street near the end of the cul-de-sac. This is of Building 5 and 6, located towards the centre of the project site. The buildings mirror each other and have 10 units each and include a mix of side-by-side and tandem parking garages. This is Building 7 with six units, located in the interior of the site and just north of Buildings 5 and 6. These elevations are a building eight which France first Street, the eight units in this building feature ground floor flex space which can be used, either as living or commercial space. And finally, this is the corner building building number nine which has three live work spaces flanked by units with ground floor flex space. The project conceptual landscape plan includes landscape improvements along the public streets and internal to the site. landscaping is intended to provide shade and visual relief enhance public realm and support a more pedestrian oriented environment. The landscape plan also incorporates publicly accessible Plaza at the live work corner and residential common open space areas throughout the property which provides opportunities for seating gathering and outdoor activity. The requested general plan amendment would redesignate the site from general commercial and low medium density residential to urban neighbourhood low or UN20, allowing up to 20 dwelling units per acre to prioritize walkable residential growth. The proposed designation supports redevelopment of an underutilized site for a for sale housing community, expanding home ownership and ensuring architectural scale compatibility. The amendment promotes responsible infill housing diversity, pedestrian connectivity, and neighbourhood compatibility. It's consistent with the area established and emerging residential, commercial, and institutional uses and is near major transit corridor. The project complies with the General Plan Implementation Measure LU1.2 as the applicant would provide an $80,750 community benefit payment and an approximately $100,000 public art in lieu payment to the city. The requested amendment application would rezone the property from C2 and M1 to specific development number 298. The regulations would establish a clear objective regulatory framework for the proposed multifamily residential and live-work development. The proposed zoning would align with the requested UN General Plan land use designation to enable residential infill. The standards are based on the harbor mix use transit specific plan and are tailored to facilitate orderly redevelopment of this underutilized property. The framework ensures that development is compatible with surrounding uses and support general plan objectives related to public health, safety, neighborhood preservation and housing opportunities. State density bonus law is intended to encourage the production and availability of affordable housing. For qualifying projects, the law allows up to five incentives of concessions and unlimited waivers, which are deviations from development standards that would help the project be built without significant burden and without detriment to public health. Local jurisdictions have limited authority to deny qualifying density bonus requests. This project includes three very low income affordable units representing approximately 5% of the 61 unit development. These units would be affordable to households earning between 30 and 50% of the area median income and would remain affordable for a 55-year term. Based on this affordability level, the developer is eligible to seek a 20% density bonus, which would allow up to 62 units, as well as one concession and unlimited waivers. The project provides 135 parking spaces, or approximately 2.2 spaces per unit. This exceeds the 122 spaces required under the applicable state density bonus parking ratio and complies with the 135 spaces required under the proposed SD98. The requested concession would increase the maximum floor area ratio from 1.0 to 1.21. The additional FAR is intended to accommodate the project's habitable area and garage space. The increase is appropriately balanced by the project's articulated building design, family-oriented unit sizes and compatibility with the surrounding residential, commercial and institutional uses. The requested vesting tentative track map would create the condominium lots necessary for individual ownership of the proposed townhome units. It aligns with the UN 20 designation and advances responsible growth through diverse housing and community uses, neighbourhood compatibility and transit oriented infill with this high quality design and common open spaces. The 2.55-acre site is physically suitable for the 61 townhomes and would be served by necessary utilities and infrastructure. The design resolves easements through right-of-way dedication, utility easements, and CC&Rs ensuring reciprocal access maintenance per municipal code section 41-626 with no public right-of-way complex. The project would provide an opportunity to redevelop an underutilized parcel with additional ownership housing, including affordable ownership opportunities. Potential operational impacts would be addressed through conditions of approval, the property maintenance agreement, the Project CC&Rs, and applicable provisions of the Santa Ana Municipal Code. Among other requirements, the Project CC&Rs would be required to include a parking management plan. The vesting tentative track is consistent with the California Subdivision Map Act and Chapter 34 of the Municipal Code. The map will facilitate additional homeownership opportunities and support applicable housing element goals and policies. The project complies with the city's affordable housing opportunity and creation ordinance requirements for for sale housing by providing three on site very low income units for households be earning between 30 and 50% of the area median income. For reference, the current four person household income threshold shown on the slide is approximately $93,050. The affordable units will be distributed throughout the development and would include one three-bedroom unit and two four-bedroom units. The units would range approximately from 1,456 to 1,913 square feet, or about 2,036 to 2,386 square feet with the garage square footage included. And this would include full kitchens, bathrooms, and living areas. The applicant's inclusionary housing plan has been reviewed and approved by the city's Housing Division, confirming consistency with applicable local affordability requirements. The project has been subject to public notification and outreach consistent with CEQA, the City's Sunshine Ordinance and Planning Commission noticing requirements. For the environmental review, a notice of intent was circulated through the Orange County Register and mailing list. Notification was provided to properties within a 2,000 foot radius and the CEQA public comment period and tribal consultations were completed in accordance with CEQA AB52 and SB18 requirements. Two Sunshine Ordinance meetings were held on June 18, 2024 and September 25, 2025. Comments received during those meetings generally related to interest in home ownership opportunities and questions regarding the entitlement process and project timeline. The meeting materials were posted on the city's project website. For this hearing, the notice was published and distributed in accordance with the city and state requirements. The Riverview West Neighbourhood Association was also contacted. An initial study in mitigated negative declaration or ISMND was prepared for the project in accordance with CEQA and CEQA guidelines. The ISMND describes the project and evaluates potential environmental impacts from construction and operation. The ISMND evaluates the project's potential environmental impacts during construction and operation and includes mitigation measures intended to avoid or reduce potentially significant impacts to a less significant level. The environmental analysis concluded that the project would result in either no impact, less than significant impacts, or less than significant impacts with mitigation. Topics of areas included air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, tribal cultural resources, and mandatory findings of significance. With implementation of proposed mitigation measures and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program, all identified potential impacts will be reduced to less than significant levels. A notice of intent was posted with the county clerk on May 5th, 2026, beginning the required 30-day public review period, which concluded on June 4th, 2026. Two comment letters were received. One comment was received, was submitted by the Oneño Band of Indians, a Hashemin Nation, The comment disputed characterization of the site as outside its territory and requested consideration of cultural resources and tribal monitoring. A second comment was submitted by a city resident and addressed park availability, tree canopy, potential heat effects, and other concerns. The city reviewed all comments and written responses to those comments and the responses to those are included in the response to comments document and mitigation monitoring reporting program posted online. Based on the initial study, the comments received, the mitigation measures, staff determined that no substantial new environmental issues have been raised that were not adequately addressed through the environmental review. Based on this analysis, a notice of determination would be filed by the city for environmental review number 2025-47 for the project. The proposed general plan amendment, zoning amendment, amendment application and SD98 actions would not result in a direct fiscal impact to the city's general fund. However, in connection with the requested general plan amendment and amendment application and consistent with the general plan implementation measure, LU-1.2, the applicant will provide an $80,750 community benefit payment and an in lieu public art payment, approximately $100,000. In addition, the project will be required to pay all applicable development impact fees and permit fees at the time of building permits issuance. In summary, staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions. Adopt a resolution approving the requested concession or reduction in development standards as memorialized in Density Bonus Agreement Number 2025-04, subject to conditions of approval, and recommend that the City Council adopt mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program state clearinghouse number 2026050141, environmental review number 2025-047, a resolution approving general plan amendment number 2026-01, an ordinance approving amendment application number 202603 to establish SD-898, and a resolution approving vesting tentative tract map 2026-01 subject to conditions. This concludes my staffer presentation. I'm available for questions.

Thank you. Do any commissioners have questions for staff? I'll begin with Commissioner Wu.

Thank you for doing your homework and bringing back some of the past decisions that were made and laws and all that, pertaining infill housing and inclusionary zoning housing and affordable housing, a whole cohort. It's refreshing to me since 40 years ago, SANO pushed for those kinds of issue and didn't know what it would look like. And I guess that's what it looks like when you include all those things in there that we have today that we didn't have back then. And it's refreshing to see how that manifests itself in terms of this project. Having said that, There are some things that I guess it's aesthetic or it's opinionated. In the areas where it's among the major thoroughfare and in an area where it's adjacent to more low-income and maybe deteriorated kind of zoning, the picture of the townhome Maybe it's not doing us justice. My first reaction was that didn't impress me. But that's not to say it's a negative statement. It's just I'm hoping that we are able to impact neighborhoods, as Commissioner Leo said before, aesthetically, so people could start feeling like a bit of the community. But I could see by the other design in terms of landscaping and all those kinds of things. including larger housing units in there, that there is an attempt to provide affordable housing to families that live in our community. So I'm kind of impressed by that and that you brought up all the ordinances. And just to remind the community, we're under the state mandate to produce more housing, and we've done our share in terms of the rental housing. Now we're focusing on the homes for sale. And in accomplishing that, we don't have any open spaces and land. So it's refreshing to find that we are using the inclusionary zoning and some of these other things to use land that is not fully utilized in turn of providing and meeting our housing need. So I want to thank staff for putting it together with all the little points and, you know, and citation. We need that so the public would understand if we approve this, why we are approving it.

Thank you, Commissioner Wu. Commissioner Pham?

Nancy, can you explain for me, you know, We just saw another project that didn't propose trash enclosures, but this project does. Are there distinctions we need to be aware of why certain developments will provide trash enclosures while other developments have trash cans in the garage and then pull it out on trash days?

Generally, the requirement from Public Works for multifamily, it depends on the units, but they are generally required to have a trash enclosure. I can't speak for the other project, but they may have requested a waiver from Public Works.

So generally, for a project like this, we would see trash enclosures?

That's correct.

And then, you know, The units that are facing First Street, they seem to be elevated a couple of feet off of the right of way. Is that a development standard or is it just existing site conditions? That's the reason why, you know, there's like a plaza that's kind of raised up a couple of feet from the existing sidewalk.

It's a little bit of both. They had originally designed their project based on the harbour specific plan. And the harbour specific plan, there was a requirement for some elevated stoops, if they choose that type of design. And I believe it's also because of the grading of the property.

In general, I think that's a better approach, the way the applicant is proposing the elevated stoop, just because it's, you know, all the Out front entry is facing the street. It's great for package. Amazon can drop off the package. It's a slightly kind of recessed back. So obviously people are walking down the street. They're not going to grab someone's package. So in general, I think all the other developments we've seen does have an elevated stoop, which I think in general is ideal. Other than that, I'm very glad to see a development in this area of First Street. It's been kind of run down for quite a bit of time. Obviously, I think everyone sees the parking number, and it seems a little bit dramatic that ideally there's 300-odd parking that needs to be provided, but now there's only 130-ish parking. You wouldn't recommend this if there was a concern, but were there any concerns during your review of potentially, you know, not having enough parking for this project?

Not from staff and during the sunshine meetings, no one had brought that up.

Okay, so the neighboring residents didn't have any concerns?

No. In addition, they will be repaving Mountain View Street, so once they do both sides of that, there will be additional parking, street parking as well.

Great. And then one other point, I think obviously we don't want to reference other projects, but for this project in general, I do like the approach. I'm not sure if it's input from planning or input from the design team, but the balconies being, for the most part, enclosed with drainage, kind of a little downspout, I think that approach for kind of these type of homes or these types of projects makes sense. because it provides a certain level of privacy especially for units facing the street as well as in the future I think having them slightly enclosed it makes a forbearance maintenance because I've seen some projects with more open balconies and obviously people like to decorate with plants people like to water it without thinking that the water will drip down onto their stucco especially this white stucco building, you know, obviously a couple of rainy seasons down, dust goes down, and then the beautiful white stucco becomes stained with brown runoff. So in general, I would encourage, you know, I like the approach of this project. I would encourage future projects to consider that as a consideration, especially most of these projects do have balconies.

Thank you, Commissioner Pham. Commissioner Liu.

Nancy, do you have an aerial picture of the site and the properties around it? Do you happen to have one of those? I was looking at one. I was trying to figure out how this all connects because we've got this round cylinder. Is that a water? I assume that's water storage. I don't know what that is. Maybe you don't. Yeah, that helps. That one that you just had. So to the right on this picture, those are condominiums as well?

I believe they're apartment complexes.

It's apartment complexes. And the green space, is that open to the public or is it fenced in?

The green space between the projects?

Yeah, where the red dotted line is, you see the green, the corner green space at the top?

Yes, it's open space for that multifamily property.

It's open space, okay. And then behind, we have what apartment complex is? Around the, what is that, is it a water store? I don't even know what it is.

I'm sorry.

The round cylinder thing, what is that, water?

That's the water, that's the public facility.

Okay, and then behind, down below, are those condos, apartments? Apartments. Okay, and then we have the parking lot on the right, on the left-hand side is going to be open, going to be empty for now, right? Correct. And then what are those single-family homes? That's a commercial, that's like a strip mall there on the corner of New Hope and First?

That is a car wash.

Car wash, okay. What I'm trying to do as I deal with the other ones is how do we piece it together so that these people feel like, okay, I'm buying a place as part of a location, but then they see, oh, Now you said the street's going to get paved, Mountain View, so they'll be very happy about that. There'll be additional parking. Question is, this next piece, I assume, currently zoned, what, industrial or commercial or something like that? So you have to assume that that will flip into, once these people, if they get approved, that will flip into more housing, right? To finish the square.

On the other side of Mountain View?

Yeah, on the other side of the mountain, I mean, if you think about it from our standpoint, right, you're talking about adding units here, there's apartments here, apartments here, New Hope is a busy street. We will assume, we can make the hypotheses that that will flip, a residential or something else, unless it's not doable.

It's a public facility, and I believe that... Oh, it's city-owned.

City-owned. So in the past, there's been different discussions of the potential use there, but at this stage, there's no... concrete path of what the city is going to do with it. But it is city-owned.

It's city-owned, so who knows what it could be? It could be a park for all we know. Who knows? Because it's not taxable property now. Okay. I like where this is going, because as Commissioner Fenn said, we're going to start to clean up this little pocket here. So I think it's headed in the right direction. I was just wondering, you know, when you think about landscaping, This could be the end, right? We have other water storage where we have big trees in the water storage area. There's one down Alton and Bear. The trees, the pine needles blow into the houses. Hopefully that's not going to happen here. So just trying to think about how we finish this out, but it sounds to me like the city's going to have to make a decision about that at some point. But I think it's very good what we're doing at this end of town. It needs it. So thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Leo. Commissioner Guzman.

I only have a question regarding the three very low units, which are at 30% to 50% AMI. Is that the minimum that needs to be provided under the state density and the other statutory provisions.

To be eligible for state density bonus, that's the minimum.

It's 5%. Okay. It just seems to me it's a lot lower or a lot more on this project. Not that we're supposed to compare projects, but that was my main question.

Sorry, Commissioner, if I could add to that. Some of the difference that's built into state law has to do with the depth of affordability. City Council Chambers, So prior projects, you may have, you may have seen recently had a different level affordability and this one is being proposed out very low that's why there may be a distinction in the number of units.

City Council Chambers, Thank you. City Council Chambers, I had another question regarding the trash, I know that I there's trash enclosures I can't really tell from the site map where those are and how. How. City Council Chambers, convenient or. Where the trash is going to come in to pick up all these all the trash from these enclosures, so if you can bring it up I it i'm having a really hard time with this site plan actually.

there'll be three trash enclosures dispersing out the site and one here. One right here and one right here.

and and staff made sure that a trash truck can drive through here okay and in terms of the parking does mountain view dead end before we get to the property line where the water facility is is that right it goes straight into the uh so it's a it's a dead end street yes okay all right um yeah no no further questions at this time

Thank you, Commissioner Guzman. Vice Chair Benninger.

Could you please put up again the zoning? Good. Looks like a lot of time was spent on the environmental issue or review. And I don't understand what ISMND stands for, but I can relate to phase one, phase two of environmental standards or reviews that I had to do. In a phase one, basically, you look over the past information and what's been there, any history of any spills, any contamination. If there was some, you could go to phase two, which means you actually end up having to drill to test the soil. This is an M1 area, means it was industrial. Do we know what kind of M1 industrial was on that site in the past?

It was previously used as a food truck commissary.

Okay, so we had no manufacturing per se.

No.

Okay. In their environmental review, what did they look at then?

In the environmental review, there's a number of things that the initial study looks at, a list of things.

And I guess let me ask the question, is that done by an outside consultant?

They did hire an outside consultant, and the city did peer review the findings.

Okay. And they reported their findings, and we've seen those findings? Yes. All right. One other term I didn't understand. When we talked about calculating number of parking spaces, you used the terminology of the FAR. Could you explain to me what that is?

So for the proposed general plan designation, they're requesting a UN20 designation, and the maximum floor area ratio is one.

Thank you. All set.

Thank you, Vice Chair Benninger. I also have a few questions. So we can go to the slide that on the bottom would say slide 56. Thank you. So the second point mentions that in connection with the requested general plan amendment, And consistent with the general plan implement implementation measure the applicant will be provided providing an 80,750 dollar Community benefit payment. And and in the public are payment of approximately $100,000 so is that required because they're seeking a general plan amendment that's correct and how were the amounts determined.

the amounts. So the $80,750 community benefit payment, this is actually the first project that's asking for a general plan amendment since the general plan was adopted. So we were looking at similar projects like the Bristol-related and the Village to see what their community benefit payments were providing. So we were trying to find something that would scale down to this project. And then for the in lieu public art payment, past projects that have provided in lieu art, we've requested half of 1% of the construction cost.

Okay, so to the community benefit payment calculation, there is no internal formula that the city uses up until now, correct?

No, there isn't.

Okay, and then when looking at the related Bristol project, and I imagine the one was the South Coast Village project, I know that for those, the council chose to create ad hoc committees and they then internally determined what amount they wanted to collect. So just in general, not specific to this project, but in general, I am concerned about the fact that there is no specific formula being used to calculate the community benefit. payment amount and that it's just going off some past projects that I think have yeah just with the ad hoc committees things we saw different versions or had we are aware that there were different discussions so I would not say that the best that's the best practice and would like to see a formula of some sort and then with the in the public art payment so you're saying that this was also This amount was also determined based off just looking at past projects? That's correct. And which were the past projects that were considered?

I don't have them. I don't know the exact ones, but I'm just looking at how they were calculated. It was half of 1%.

Okay.

Without going down a list, because I don't have the list off the top of my head, all major projects where the city has required public art, the amount of public art that the city has required has been in the same fraction of a percentage point that it's being applied to this project.

Okay. Thank you. And then, um, also I didn't write down the slide number, but one of the point, one of the, one of the points on one of the slides shared that the one annual band of mission Indians, the Hatchiman nation, um, we're requesting that, or where, We're not comfortable with the city's interpretation that this project, the site that it sits on is outside their territory. And you shared that the city responded and that that response is available online. Can you please share what the city responded?

So what they had requested, they technically missed the deadlines for AB 52 and SB 18 for providing their comments. So this is when they submitted their comments. But they didn't provide any additional information to support it. They just provided a statement. So there was really nothing we could add to it without additional information.

Okay, so I think what the site also mentioned is that what they were requesting was the city, and I don't know if you can go to the slide. I didn't get down the number, sorry. But I think what I wrote, so request consideration of the site's cultural resources and tribal monitoring. So what would that look like?

There is a mitigation in there for that, but it was requested by another tribe that did submit comments during the time period. Sorry, can you restate that? Another tribe did provide, we did have consultation with another tribe, and it does have cultural resource and tribal monitoring with them.

Okay, so is with the Huayna New Band of Mission Indians, Ahchama Nation, the Lardy's are they basically are is this as we look at this project is the city then doing with the city consider the site's cultural resources in tribal monitoring as they may have wanted yes there will be okay so there's no concern so okay so then just to make sure the cultural resources are being considered and the site will be monitored yes Okay, thank you. And then, yeah, those are all my questions for staff at this time. I do have some questions for the applicant. Thank you. With that, the public testimony portion of the public hearing is now open. Would the applicant like to speak on the matter?

Good evening, Chair Ramos, Vice Chair Meninger, and respected commissioners. My name is Jay Aluwalia. I'm representing Strong Properties. I want to first thank Nancy and the staff. We've been working with them on this project for a long time through the elevations for the site plan and some of the challenges that everybody brought up over here today. So we've spent a lot of time trying to work with them and resolve those issues. So that being said, I have my design team here also. So if there are any other questions that I can have my design team come in and help answer, we'll be very happy to do that. Going down some of the questions that were raised through during the discussion over here. So I think from Elevation's perspective, we try to bring a focal point at Mountain and First Avenue with the raised plaza, as you highlighted with the stoops. So I think our goal is to make this, having that focal point brought in there. And as you had brought up, Commissioner Lea, with the landscaping, The site across from us is owned by the city. There's been discussion back and forth, not sure where the city is right now, about putting a park. So originally there was a landscape architect that the city had. So we actually hired the same architect, to your belief, to make sure it all kind of blends in together versus having two architects work on two opposite sides of the street. So if in the future the city does decide to go in that way, we have worked with the architect that the city had originally worked with. Trash enclosures, again, we work with the public work to make sure the trash enclosures are designed and located at the correct location and their size appropriately, and they all have the turning radiuses and all the other requirements to make sure the traffic, the trash trucks can access them clearly and without any issues. You know, as far as, you know, on the affordable unit, so we're proposing 5% very low. I mean, that brings the home prices down to like mid-90,000 range, which is, you know, there's a segment that finds it hard to afford and build a long-term wealth that others can afford. So the idea behind this thing is to bring the prices down pretty significantly in few units, and that helps a segment of the population that otherwise struggles to find affordable housing. And with three and four bedrooms, these are really nice units that these families will be able to enjoy and hopefully keep in their family for a long time over there. As far as the environmental questions are concerned, yes, we did a phase one. There's no issues. It's a food commissary use. A lot of the building was unpermitted. It's been reused there for a long time. It was actually kind of a nuisance for the neighbors. These trucks started like, you know, 2 o'clock in the morning getting ready for the breakfast, and then the trucks came there till late in the night till 2 a.m. in the morning when they were coming after dinner. So there were constant traffic and trash and food that was left on the site. So hopefully all of that issue is gone and now we'll be able to put some residents over there that belongs in more like a residential neighborhood as we see all around over there. So, and as far as calculating the fee, so we've worked with the city. Yes, there's not a formula. The city did work with us pretty strongly on making sure that we were giving a very fair share for our contribution over there. So we're happy to do that. And we believe that adds more to the city and to the neighborhood fund, which is a good thing in the long term for all the residents over here. So again, that being said, if there are any other questions, I'm here to help answer and I have my team here too, if need be.

Thank you. Does the Commission have any questions for the applicant? No, no questions from any on the Commission? Okay. I believe I did have at least one question. Well, one, I want to start off by sharing with you the same way I did with the last applicant. Thank you for adding three and four bedroom units at the affordable rate. Thank you for also providing them at a lower AMI. I know how difficult it can be for families to qualify for any unit, especially if they're a larger family. So thank you for doing that. And then just curious about how you decided the AMI level and how you decided to go with very low versus extremely low.

I think a lot of it goes back to, like I said, we see moderate income housing a lot of different places. You could earn $166,000 or it's pretty high up there. So for a lot of the families, that just kind of seems out of affordable range. So our thought process, being a more family-oriented developer, we're a family-owned business too. So we decided to go on the lower range. So it brings more units available, hopefully, for the lower income families.

Thank you. Well, with that, if there are no additional questions for the applicant, I think we're okay for now.

All right. Thank you so 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 email in the form of public comment for this item before the 3.30 p.m. deadline, which has been distributed to the Commission and posted online. If you're attending this meeting in person and would like to comment on this item, please fill out a request to speak form and turn it into a secretary. If you're participating via Zoom and would like to comment on this item, please select the hand icon to indicate that you would like to speak. If you're calling in and would like to comment on this item, please dial 9 and then 6 to unmute yourself. Chair, we do not have any speakers.

Thank you. Does anybody on the commission have any... Well, with that, the public testimony portion of the public hearing is now closed. Before we take any motions, does anybody on the commission have any final questions? Go ahead, Commissioner Leo. For staff.

Yeah, it's for staff. And so it's a general question because we'll get more of these projects. Are we able to... Are we able to approve permit parking on the street? And I'll use Mountain View as an example. Are we allowed to approve permit parking on that half of the street of Mountain View so that we have questions about how much parking they get, but is there a way when we approve these projects to give them that portion of the street permit parking for the people that live in the complex. Solves two problems. One is some of us may not think there's enough parking. The second thing is then there's guaranteed parking, additional parking for those units because we can assume, I'll use myself as an example, when you have adult kids, there's another car. So I'm just asking generally. I'm not asking about this project. I'm asking generally, are we able to do that? And if we're not, I know that we have a process to get permit parking. It's an onerous process for neighbors, but I'm just asking if that's doable. Not now and in the future. Just asking a general question.

Thank you, Commissioner. In short, no. So the developments that are brought before this commission are for developments on private property and all the parking that's allocated is for that development on private property. If this developer or this development or the people that live here in the future choose to want to enter into a permit parking system, they would have to go through the same process as the other folks do through Public Works.

Thank you. Are there any other questions for staff from the Commission? Vice Chair Benninger.

I'm going to answer kind of my own question, but we just approved rezoning the last meeting we had, and in there was changes for developments like this that are next to industrial processes to ensure a balcony is not facing towards the manufacturing, make sure there's a court area in front. So I'm going to ask my own question saying that really isn't in effect until it's approved, correct?

That's correct.

Thank you. And I have one question to staff. So that community benefit payment, exactly what happens with it?

Can you clarify the question, like what happens with it?

Yes. Where does that money go?

So the city would collect the funds and it would get put into the general fund.

Okay. It doesn't have any, it doesn't go to a specific, anywhere specifically allocated for community benefits of some sort.

It would go into the general fund and then it would be allocated by the city council through the budget process.

Okay, thank you.

Could we put a recommendation to designated for that neighborhood to be using that money?

For neighborhood improvement public art. That could be something I think that if this commission or members of the public want to advocate for during the budget process, let the council know that these fees that were collected from either this project or future one to be allocated

be geographically used where that project took so uh in our process we don't have a way of doing it with the motion of approving the project that's right because i i could remember bob poussevard you know the famous guy for whenever it is a development he tried to get a community center out of it and use that community benefit dollars to like channel into community centers so we don't do that huh

I don't know the particulars of that project, but for different types of projects and of different scale where there's different types of exactions that cities are asking for, there could be geographically requested things. But in this case, the funds that would be collected would just be put into the general fund.

Yeah, that was a method that the former county planner used to get community centers built. But I'm just curious. Thank you.

Thank you. With that, do we have a motion on this matter? Commissioner Leo.

All right, I'll take another crack at it. Let's see if we can do this. I'd like to make a motion that we adopt a resolution approving a concession or reduction in development standards as memorialized in Density Bonus Agreement Number 2025-04 as condition and recommend that the City Council adopt a mitigated negative deck and mitigation monitoring and reporting program environmental review number 2025-47, a resolution approving general plan amendment number 2026-01, an ordinance approving amendment application number 2026-03 to establish a specific development number 98, and a resolution approving vesting tentative track map number 2026-4 as conditioned.

I second that.

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

Commissioner Guzman? Aye. 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. Congratulations. Now is the time for item number three. This is the time and place for general plan amendment number 2024-01 for the properties located at 915, 921, and 925 North Flower Street and 841, 842, 843, 848, and 852 North Garnsey Street located within the professional zoning district. Before we begin, do any commissioners have anything they wish to disclose with regard to this item? Great. Seeing as there are no disclosures, the case planner, Jack Cartlidge, will provide a brief presentation.

And while Jack is loading that up, I want to say this may be Jack's first presentation in front of this commission. So Jack Cartlidge is an associate. Get ready, Jack. Jack Hartledge is an associate planner in our advanced planning section, so he is on CERI's team and helps with advanced planning matters.

Thank you. Welcome.

Good evening. Thank you for having me. The item before you today is an application for a general plan amendment to redesignate the project site at the southeast corner of West 10th Street and North Flower Street. to open space to reflect the intended use of the property as a new public park and update associated figures and table data from the City's General Plan. The project site consists of three properties on North Flower Street, five properties on North Garnsey Street, and portions of existing public right-of-way on both streets. The City is requesting that Planning Commission recommend City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 2024-01. The current general plan land use designation for the eight existing parcels is Professional and Administrative Office, or PAO, and is within the Professional or P zoning district. Portions of the project site within the existing right-of-way are currently undesignated. Surrounding land uses include residential to the north, residential office and a martial arts cultural centre to the east, an office complex to the south, and residences and offices to the The total lot size for the project is 1.2 acres. For consistency with the Parks Master Plan, in May of 2022, the City Council adopted a citywide Parks Master Plan, which identified the project site at the time as a future location for a public park, labeled as the 10th and Flower Street Park. In preparation for this new park, the city later acquired the parcels of the site and demolished existing structures, as created a new terminus or roundabout for 10th Street. Project funding, environmental determinations, and construction contract were all approved and previously awarded by City Council in October of 2024. Project construction started in June of this year and is expected to be completed by March of 2027. For context, here's a site plan showing a visualization for the completed park as well as expected on-site amenities. Site photos of the project site show existing construction activity along with the completed cul-de-sac terminus of West 10th Street. As mentioned, the general plan amendment proposes to designate the entire project site as open space or OS. The proposed OS designation aligns with the new 1.2-acre neighbourhood park currently under construction and complements the surrounding neighbourhood and development. No zone change is proposed as part of this project. The project site is proposed to be rezoned to open space as part of the comprehensive zoning code update. A map is shown here showing the existing and proposed general plan land use designations as well as some context of the surrounding area. In addition to the proposed map change, associated figures and table data within the city's General Plan that make reference to citywide parks or open space facilities are also proposed to be updated as part of this General Plan amendment. These include Figure LU1, Land Use Map, Figure LU4, the Density and Intensity Map, Figure PS1, Public Facilities, as well as Figure OS1, Open Space Resources, and the and also figure CM1, community facilities. And then finally, the last three, figure M4, pedestrian opportunity zones, figure OS2, walking distance to park facilities, and figure UD2, urban design elements. The proposed OS designation supports several goals and policies of the general plan, ensuring that residents have access to a diversity of land uses, including sufficient open space in the form of a neighbourhood park in an area that is currently underserved, thereby promoting equitable creation and distribution of open space. It encourages the positive community interactions and neighbourhood pride, and it promotes a clean, safe, and creative environment for Santa Ana's residents. The specific goals and policy sections are listed here on this slide, as well as the staff report. For environmental compliance, an initial study and mitigated negative declaration was prepared for the project and previously adopted by City Council in October of 2024. The environmental documents identified mitigation measures as outlined in the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program, or MMRP. Potential impacts analyzed would be reduced to less than significant as part of the implementation of the MMRP. And for reference, this report was all, or the MMRP was made part of the awarded construction contract. For public notification and outreach pursuant to CEQA, a notice of intent was circulated via the Orange County Register and mailing list. Public comment period was conducted in accordance with CEQA requirements. And tribal consultation conducted pursuant to Assembly Bill 52. For the project itself with notification, notification was provided to properties within a 2,000-foot radius of the entire project site and on-site with a posted notice, as well as additional mailing to the citywide permanent notification list. Tribal consultation was conducted pursuant to Senate Bill 18, and as of tonight, no issues of concern were raised by the public. As such, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment Number 2024-01 to redesignate the project site to open space and update associated figures and table data for the city's general plan. And also for note tonight, the Planning Commission agenda included a second section to recommend that the City Council approve and adopt the mitigation Sorry, the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program. However, this action is now unnecessary as it's been identified that the City Council previously certified the initial study MND and also adopted the MMRP previously. That concludes the presentation. I'm available for comments or questions. Thank you.

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

Washington Square is pushing for a park in their neighborhood. This is not the park they're talking about, correct?

Thank you, Vice Chair. This is not the location of the park that that neighborhood has been inquiring and asking about. That location is within the boundaries of Washington Square and is closer to 17th. And there's a couple of vacant parcels that are kind of tucked into the neighborhood there. So that's a completely different site.

So then how far is this site away from what's being proposed for Washington Square?

Maybe I can measure it, but I would say half mile to quarter mile. It's walking distance.

Is there a neighborhood associated with this park? In the tribal consultation, what happens with that?

Sir, during that process, the city will inquire through a commission of what tribes are associated with the location of a project site. Then the city is given a list of potential tribes that may have some association with the geography. The city then will send letters to those tribes, letting them know that there is a proposed project. And then it's a description of the project. And then they are invited to consult with the city to provide feedback on what's being proposed within what's considered part of their cultural or historical boundaries. And then through that process, there could be something that's discovered or they could propose a mitigation or something to address any kind of a cultural issue that may arise.

In my life, I've been involved with one of those in which we actually did a soil x-ray of the soil to make sure it wasn't a burial ground. And we did discover some bones that turned out to be horses. Thank goodness. But I don't know if we have any burial sites in the city we need to be sensitive to.

For the consultation, usually it revolves around just that, that whenever there's excavation as part of a development project, if it's within some kind of known site to that group, they'll request that there be a monitor present when the construction is taking place. Should something be discovered, then they can then take over and then collect the remains as per their tradition and custom.

Thank you.

Thank you. I'll comment on this item. So one, I'm really happy to see this before us. I grew up in the Willard neighborhood. I grew up directly across the street. And this has been a vacant site for a very long time. willard neighborhood does not have any park uh my literal playground was city hall because we didn't have a park so this is where i would come play here and in plaza of the flag so i'm really excited about this i want to thank all of the willard residents i have advocated for this for a very long time i think council member hernandez for also getting this here and yeah i'm just really excited that that neighborhood is finally going to have a park and also if you drive by flower there have now been significant improvements to the sidewalk And you can now cross that, you can now cross flowers safely because there was, the nearest stoplights are at Washington and Civic Center. And people have crossed at that middle area for a long time, like since I was five when I lived there. So I'm just really excited that this park is coming and that it's becoming a much more safer area for pedestrians as well. So thank you again to our residents. I know one of the residents here, the only resident here right now, is from the Willard neighborhood. So I'm sure you were a part of the advocacy. So thank you. Anyone else that might be watching. And thank you, staff, for also moving very quickly on this. I know because I've been a part of other park advocacy. I know it can take over 10 years sometimes, like Mariposa Park took, but this one has come together so much faster. So these are some of my favorite items to approve and just, yeah, thank you.

Can I ask, can I?

Go ahead, Commissioner Leo.

Can I ask you a question? First of all, I'm very glad this item's been forced, but like the only park in Willard is really the school playground. And That needs to be used. And I don't know if we have a joint use agreement with the school district to use it, because that is the only park space in the Willard neighborhood. And so to me, giving them another park, another place, maybe it will relieve some congestion at the school, probably not due to the number of units around it. But it's a very good use of a piece of property that's been just kind of empty for a long time. But I was just wondering about the joint use, because I know for me, the only park was

school playground so i'm i'm fine thank you thank you commissioner leo and that park is open at least when i've gone in the afternoon uh and it is very full commissioner guzman uh i too am very happy to see this park here at willard it is actually across the street from washington square uh commissioner benninger um and i i agree with uh chair ramos that just having that crosswalk there is going to make it so much accessible to everybody around that park and i'm really excited to see it i've been driving down flower for a while now trying to figure out what was going to go on there i'm glad it's a park um so i'm i'm happy more than happy to approve this project thank you commissioner fam says we have advanced planning here i um you know

Just because we've talked about other projects and then now we're talking about park, I think it would be interesting, you know, we killed two birds with one stone for future projects. If we were to acquire or we have vacant lots, if we look into potentially maybe a parking structure with a park on top, it will help alleviate parking demands as well as there's still a park on top of a parking structure. You know, obviously we have We're not shy about height in the city, in different areas of the city. You know, two level of parking plus a park on top would kind of serve dual purpose or dual demand that the residents have been asking for. And it doesn't take away from, you know, each other apart from not having enough money to build it. But that's something I think would be interesting for advanced planning. Yeah.

Thank you. Without any other questions or comments, I'm happy to make the motion to approve this matter as recommended. Is there any second? Oh, sorry. I got very ahead of myself. Recording Secretary, have we received any written communication, or is there a member of the public that would like to comment on this item? I see we have one member coming up. You can fill it out then. Would you like to speak?

Chair, just to clarify, I didn't hear you open the public testimony portion.

Okay, thank you. Sorry, y'all. The public testimony portion of the public hearing is now open. Recording Secretary, have we received any written communication, or is there a member of the public that would like to comment on this item?

Chair, we have received one email in the form of public comment for this item before the 3.30 PM deadline, which has been distributed to the commission and posted online. If you're attending this meeting in person and would like to comment on this item, please fill out a request to speak form and turn it into the secretary. If you're participating via Zoom and would like to comment on this item, please select the hand icon to indicate that you would like to speak. If you're calling in and would like to comment on this item, please dial 9, then 6 to unmute yourself. Chair, we have one person.

thank you okay so gailey would you like to sir finally we agree on something thank you this is wonderful um when i purchased my home in willard 25 years ago i was part of the joint use agreement with rob richardson may he bless rest in peace we worked diligently in getting a joint use agreement with willard But that took, I'm not kidding you, seven years. And every time there was a new city council or a new planning commission, we had to start all over again. So it came to fruition, and it's beautiful. They're putting new grass in there. And we have over 10,000 residents in Willard, 10,000. And I see those little kids, you know, just running around. And even the joint use agreement with Willard is a small little park, and it's packed with those little kids just running around. And I'm just thrilled that soon we're going to have a park for the children. They need some place to vent. They need some place to run. So even though it's a small little park, I'm grateful. So thank you very much. And yes, Hernandez was instrumental in moving that forward. Now we have to choose a name. And without the Parks and Recreation Commission anymore, I don't know how that's going to work out. But I put in my comments there, I would suggest Panther Park since it is the mascot of the Willard School. It used to be the Willard Indians when I went there, but now it's Willard Panthers. So maybe Panther Park. Thank you.

Thank you.

Chair, we don't have any additional speakers.

Thank you with that the public testimony portion of the public hearing is now closed and I would like to make a motion to approve this matter as recommended there a second.

Second.

We'll have a second from commissioner goes mine secretary can you please call for a roll call vote.

Commissioner goes man I. Commissioner leo. Commissioner leva. 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 business calendar. Moving on to staff comments.

Thank you, Chair. No comments from staff tonight.

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

I do.

Commissioner Guzman.

City Council Chambers, So tonight we there were two things that kind of popped up that I, I want to. City Council Chambers, follow up with staff or ask questions of staff, the first one was the Community benefit payment, and I know. City Council Chambers, That we have the ability to suggest to the City Council or recommend when and how what's the time and place for that, because I really do think there should be some standards. involved in how that money is used, but I'm not familiar with when is the right time and place for that.

Thank you, Commissioner. And if I say this wrong or the wrong period of time, maybe someone can correct me. My understanding is there's a survey and a lot of outreach regarding the budget process that starts around May-ish every year leading up to the adoption of the new budget in July. I'm not sure if it starts a little sooner than that or not, but During that process is when there would be an opportunity to share with the City Council how these funds should be allocated. If there is a desire that there be a different process in place, that can be something that we as staff can communicate up through our executive team.

Thank you. The second question I had was regarding the public open space and City Council Chambers, The perspective possibility, I know we raised it tonight earlier earlier tonight sorry about maybe having some standards for those so that the public does know that it's public space um that's something that I do encourage staff to consider. City Council Chambers, Adopting at some point, because you know that does when if a tree falls in the forest, no one hears that right it's one of those scenarios if nobody knows it's public space, then. City Council Chambers, it's not an effective use of that requirement, and so I do want to encourage staff to really think about how we're we're going to maybe apply this prospectively to other projects, and I know CNC was very are the applicant today was very open to the signage and all of that, but maybe just have a cohesive policy towards a public open space. City Council Chambers, Thank you.

Vice Chair Benninger?

For Commissioner Guzman, when the related project came through, I was able to successfully, with the help of this group, put on the attachment to the approval that we look at an oversight committee for the $2 million that was going to come in that area so the money could be spent in that area. Council turned that down flatly, which is their right. So I answer your question, when's the right time? Anytime's the right time, and we could add it to Our recommendation to council, if they so choose on it. What I want to comment is a couple of things. One, Saturday I was kind of a little surprised. I was in doing my soccer scoreboard, and they talked about whether we should remember 9-11 with a moment of silence. And suddenly I was the only one in the group who realized that I was the only one old enough to remember when that happened on it. So I was with a young group on it. But I just want to say... Let's not forget those folks. I'm very close to my heart because there was a young lady whose name was Lydia Foster, Lake Forest, and she went to Boston University like my son. And she spent the summer after graduating from Boston University in Boston to enjoy the area before coming home to a job. And unfortunately, she was on flight American Flight 11, which was the first tower struck by that flight, and we lost her. And so I feel very close to realizing my son just two years earlier had done the same thing, graduated from Boston University and then spent the summer in Boston area before coming home to his job in September. So let's not forget those folks that lost their lives on that day. One thing I would like to ask staff to do is to review our policy on the location of air conditioners. When I went through this, my personal house, I was not allowed to put it between the homes because the standard was written in the 80s when they were noisy. And they have improved in sound and location. And if you look at some cities around us, they have revised their location of air conditioners and base it on decimals, which is correct. And because that's why my personal experience, why I know how much quieter they have gotten. So I would ask that one thing of staff is take a look at our standards for air conditioner locations and see if we need to update that. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other comments or questions for staff from the commission? Great. With that, I'll make a few questions. So one, thank you, Commissioner Guzman, for bringing up the signage for publicly accessible open space. So I know that that is something that we require moving forward. And I would like to ask staff that moving forward that is already included in some way. I would also like to ask staff that some sort of policy be created to ensure that signage is always provided. And would also like to see that be provided for all the projects we've already approved. China have been several. That includes some form of open space. So not sure what type of policy that would be or which department it falls under. But would like to see something of the sort. And will also flag for the council member that appointed me so she is aware. And then on the community benefit amounts and where that goes, I'll also flag for my council member that appointed me so that she can figure out what if anything she'd like to do on that end and then lastly well thank you vice chair benninger for your comments and reminding us not to forget and i would also like to invite the public to a grito ceremony happening tomorrow at, I believe, 5 p.m. at the old Orange County Courthouse, being held by Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento to celebrate the independence of Mexico. And thank you to everyone at the city that was involved in putting on Fiestas Patres this weekend. and all the residents that came out. So I hope that everyone has fun celebrating. Oh, and I'll also just share quickly that the Frida Cinema is showing Juan Gabriel's first concert at Villa Artes tomorrow and Wednesday. They have 7 p.m. showings that have sold out, but they added another encore show tomorrow at 4.30. So I hope that everyone finds a way to celebrate. And with that, I just thank you all. The meeting is now adjourned at 8.08 p.m. with our next regular meeting being scheduled for September 20, 2026 at 5.30 p.m. Have a good night.