Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Commission meeting of 01/27/2026. The time is 06:00. And for tonight's pledge of allegiance, we have commissioner Higuchi.

Please stand and join me in the pledge of allegiance. Ready, begin.

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

Thank you. Please

proceed. Thank you. At this time, we will do a roll call for attendance.

Commissioner Kozak?

Here.

Gullo?

Here.

Chair Pro Tem, sorry Mason? Here. Commissioner Higuchi?

Here.

And Chair Douthat?

Here.

Let the record reflect all commissioners are present. Thank you.

Thank you. Next is public input. At the time, any member of the public may address the Planning Commission on matters which are not listed on this evening's agenda, provided the matter is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. If you are here in person, please fill out a request to speak form and hand it to Vera, we'll invite you up to the podium. If you're watching via Zoom, please raise your hand in the webinar and you will be called on to speak. Vera, at this moment, are there any public comments for items not listed on this evening's agenda?

Chair, there are none. Thank you.

Thank you. The next item in the agenda is the consent calendar item. All matters listen listed under the consent calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion without discussion. Persons wishing to speak regarding the consent calendar matters should file a request to speak form with the Planning Commission secretary. The only item on the consent calendar is the approval of the meeting minutes from 12/09/2025. The recommendation is

that the Planning Commission approve the minutes as provided. Are there any public comments for the consent calendar items?

Chair there are none. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have a motion?

So moved.

Second. Thank you. Eric, I have a roll call vote please?

Commissioner Nguolo? Aye. Kozak? Aye. Higuchi?

Aye.

Chair Pro Tem Mason?

Aye.

And Chair Douthat? Aye. Motion passes five zero. Thank you.

Thank you. The next item on the agenda is a public hearing item. This item was continued from 12/09/2025 meeting for a code amendment twenty twenty five dash zero zero zero two, ordinance number one five seven four, code streamlining and improvement program. The recommendation is the planning commission adopt resolution recommending that the city council adopt ordinance number one five seven four, amending various sections of the article nine land use to the of the Tustin city code to provide clarity and sure consistency of terms and definitions of general general plan 2021 through 2029 housing element programs clarifying the prohibition of short term rentals and ensure compliance with evolving state laws. Tonight's presentation is from Jose Hara.

Take it away.

Thank you, chair Galton, and happy New Year, commissioners. The item before you tonight is request to amend the Tustin City Code part of the streamline and improvement program under the streamline Tustin initiative. This is a city initiated effort. Again, just to simplify and clarify portions of the city's code. A little background.

Many of you may recall a series of code amendments that we've under this Sorry about that. Many of you may recall the series of code amendments we brought forward over the past several years as part of this effort and initiative. And it is something under strategic plan goal to where we developed a you know, it's a programmatic effort that we do to keep the city code clear and aligned with state law and city policy. So tonight amendments we will fall into four main topic areas. The first is the implementation of our programs from the housing element.

And second would be clarifying the city's prohibition on short term rentals. Third would be updating our ADU regulations to reflect recent state law changes. And fourth are just miscellaneous cleanup items that again just to improve clarity and internal consistency. So as part of our housing element program, there are a number of programs within that implementation program. Tonight we are looking at two of them, specifically program 2.7A and 3.13A.

For 2.7A, this relates to qualified employee housing which under state law is housing provided for agricultural employees and their households. So this is not like general force housing which is, you know, this is more specifically tied to agricultural or related work. Under the amendment, employee housing serving six persons or fewer would be treated like a single family home or a use and would be allowed in any residential zones. And also for larger employee housings which would constitute anything up to 12 units or 36 beds would be permitted as an agricultural land use and allowed only in agricultural zones. If you look around in Tustin, we don't have much of agricultural if you haven't noticed but again this is something a commitment within our housing element.

Now we do have I would note on that note that we do have one property that is zoned that would allow for agricultural, but it currently is on the Northeast Corner Of Browning And Bryan Avenue and a electrical substation currently sits there. As far as subprogram 3.13A, this addresses housing for larger households. So the housing element requires that new multi family projects with six or more units to include what is called a large family unit. This would be defined as any type of dwelling with three or more bedrooms. So under this amendment, it would specify that at least 5% of units in qualifying projects must meet the standard.

So again, this is just to ensure that as new housing is built, the city's regulations support a mix of unit types that can accommodate larger families and also, like I mentioned, stay consistent with the housing element commitments that we have. As far as the short term rentals, so currently our city code residential rentals are required to be thirty days or more and shorter stays we kind of interpret them to be more as hotel or motel uses which are not currently allowed in any in residential districts. So however, the code, like I mentioned, does not explicitly explicitly define or prohibit short term rentals. This code amendment is adds a new standalone section within Article nine of the Tustin City Code that clearly defines short term rentals and explicitly prohibits them in residential zones and any zoning district where a residential use are permitted. The amendment also includes definitions for short term rentals and hosting platforms to distinguish this use from those other lodging type uses.

And again the purpose of this change is not to modify city policy but to codify the city's long standing prohibition in the zoning code. And again this is just to provide clarity and for the property owners or any applicants and also strength strengthens the city's ability to consistently and defensively enforce the prohibition. Moving on to ADUs. These amendments are kind of just updates from recent legislation from the state. The First Amendment increases the number of allowable detached ADUs on a multi family property.

Previously these sites were generally limited to two detached ADUs. Under the amendment up to eight detached ADUs would be allowed provided that the number of ADUs does not exceed the number of existing units on the lot. For lots with a proposed or with a lot with a new that are proposing a new development, they would still be limited to two detached ADUs. Second amendment also removes the requirement to replace parking spaces when existing parking is converted or removed in conjunction with the construction of an ADU. And then Third Amendment also establishes a clear process for the review and legalization of certain unpermitted ADUs and junior ADUs that were constructed prior to 01/01/2020.

There's also certain provisions related to health and safety which would still be addressed during that process. And also, finally, state law, I don't hold you guys to noticing but there were some changes in the numbering of it so we are also, and part of this effort, are kind of re numbering to make sure we're consistent with what is in now the government code section. So lastly we have again just a series of general non substantive updates intended to improve the organization and usability of the code. This includes some reorganizing of our sign code section so that master plan master sign plan criterias are grouped in one place and are grouped in one place and also so that it's clear for applicants to find that those standards and and and also for staff. There's also some procedural language so that that we're cleaning up so that code matches current current city review practices, and we are also correcting technical issues such as spelling, grammar, capitalization, and outdated references.

Collectively, again, these changes do not alter the intent application of existing regulations but they enhance clarity, improve internal consistency, and made the code easier to use for applicant staff and also decision makers like yourself. So tonight's code amendment is consistent with the Tustin General Plan land use element specifically. It supports Goal Number two and also Policy 2.2. As chair Douthat met mentioned, this item was continued from the December 9 Planning Commission meeting to tonight's hearing. And as part of that, noticing was complete as required by state law.

And as far as the environmental review, the code amendment is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act also known as CEQA. Again just because it's text amendment and there's no physical development proposed and no potential for environmental impacts. I'll go ahead and defer this slide to our Community Development Director, Alexis Middle.

Thank you, Jose. We're gonna make a slight change to staff's recommendation for your action this evening. A couple of hours ago, staff received a a comment letter that has been provided to you and is made available to the public. The comment letter from the California Housing Defense Fund has expressed concerns over the proposed update, as it relates to accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units. Our attempt at modifications was to be in compliance with state law.

And when you read the letter, you'll see that some of the concerns they expressed are addressed in our proposed actions tonight. However, because we have not had ample time to review this letter, we would like to ask the commission to consider an alternative recommendation this evening to allow staff more time to go through the letter and make sure that we are appropriately addressing and analyzing the comments that have been made. So staff at this time is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt resolution forty five thirty eight recommending that the city council adopt ordinance number fifteen seventy four without the updated ADU provisions. Specifically, recital c will be removed from resolution 40 five-thirty eight and sections 16 through 21 relating to the amendments to the Tustin City Code section ninety two seventy nine will also be removed from the proposed ordinance. After full consideration of the CalHDF letter, staff will return with a standalone update to the city's ADU and JEDU provisions.

We're happy to answer any questions about any of the amendments and certainly about this last minute change this evening. Thank you.

Thank you. So to clarify, that would include for the balance of the items twenty twenty one through twenty twenty nine housing element programs and clarifying the prohibition of short term rentals.

That provision would remain under your recommendation this evening. It would only be the ADU provisions that we would ask to be removed at this time.

Thank you. Well, I'll bring it back for commission questions, comments. Did we have any public comment?

Sure, we have received none at this time. Thank you.

Thank you. And yes, I'll bring it back for commission comments, questions, and concerns. North Commissioner Higuchi? None. Chair Proton Mason?

None.

Chair or commissioner Kozak? None. Commissioner Goel?

Yeah. I have two questions, and I I think I had an opportunity to talk with staff yesterday on this. My thought if we're I appreciate the clarity in specifying more straightforward why no short term rentals or that there are none. I think it might be helpful to the public to specify why. I think a lot of cities around us if you're looking have short term rentals with the goal of making more permanent housing to meet the housing shortage. I might just ask that somewhere in our policy we state the reason why as long as we're going to mandate something happening on private property. And then one question for staff: is there enforcement? I read in there that the short term rental sites upon ask will have to submit something to us but do we intend on enforcing that? Looking at that regularly will there be a cost to us for doing that?

I can answer that, thank you. Yes, with regulation of any type of code there are costs associated with it. That is part of what our code enforcement division does. To the extent that there are administrative sites, sometimes there is some cost offset that's recouped through those. It's never our goal to get to that level. It is always our goal to have good communication with our residents to address issues as they arise. That said, code enforcement generally speaking is reactive. So we would be looking for complaints. For example, excessive noise, excessive parties, things like that. Those are the types of things that would commonly bring a short term rental to the attention of the neighborhood who would call it into code enforcement.

So at the moment, there's not a concentrated effort to eliminate unpermitted short term rentals. We would address it in response to complaints.

No further questions.

Thank you very much. I have a couple quick questions. Do we allow short term rentals if the owner is remaining on-site, as in they rent out one room of their house?

We do not on a short term basis. To the extent that it's above thirty days, that perfectly legal, just like any other. You may own a home and rent it out, but you do it on a long term basis.

Thank you. One more general question that I should know. Pertaining to ADUs, what is the difference between an ADU and a JADU?

So there's two different provisions for ADUs. Typically, would say for junior ADUs they're limited to just converting existing space within a home. So a lot of people what you see they convert their garages and they're actually limited to 500 square feet. So there is a differentiation between standards mostly it being the size of it hence why you call it junior ADU whereas an ADU depending on the number of bedrooms that you have, can go up to 1,200 square feet for a regular accessory dwelling unit.

Thank you. I don't

know if that answers your question. That's a general gist. There's again No,

that was good.

There's a handbook with very details on provisions, but that's the main gist of it.

Sounds great.

If I could just clarify the definition and the distinction between an ADU and a J ADU is defined by state law. So that's not a municipal determination as to what the difference is that is regulated by the state.

Right. Sounds good. Well, I have no other questions or comments. So with that, I will make a motion to approve the recommendation as recently drafted per the slide and per our oral argument.

Second.

That work? Sounds good. And I have a second, so I'll have a roll call vote, please.

Commissioner Zugolo? Aye. Higuchi? Aye. Kozak? Aye. Chair Pro Tem Mason?

Aye.

And Chair Douthat? Aye. Motion passes five-zero. Thank you.

Thank you. Next we're on a regular business which there is none. After that we have other business starting with our community development director update.

Thank you very much, chair. I have a couple of things to share. First is at the January 20 city council meeting, staff with was also authorized to negotiate an exclusive negotiation agreement with Lincoln Property Company for the development of an advanced manufacturing concept with office distribution and retail components at the vacant city owned site North Of Valencia at the 50 5. As proposed, we would expect that that may come to this commission within about a year. Work has also begun in Old Town.

So if you've driven down here, walked down here, bicycle down here, you have seen a lot of activity over the last couple of weeks. So we're very excited for the enhancement projects, which include adding parklets for community gathering spaces and outdoor dining opportunities, reconstructing sidewalks to address uneven surfaces, upgrades to landscaping, raised median signage, right of way indicators to improve the driving, the walking, the bike experience in Old Town. All of this is going to be regularly updated on our website. So I would encourage anyone that wants to stay up to date to keep an eye on it. And then we've also provided the commission flyers that are available at our front counters here in City Hall.

You can scan the QR code and be updated as well. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next, I'll move on to commission comments and reports. Commissioner Hakuchi?

None today.

Mason?

None.

Commissioner Kozak? None for me tonight. Thank you. Commissioner Golo?

I'd like to congratulate Christy Martin, my backfill on the public art commission.

Mhmm.

That's it.

Great. For me, there's a lot of people that are excited about the Old Town improvements. I know that most of the trees are gone, but I know that what is coming is exciting. The only thing that continues to be brought up to me from multiple different people from different perspectives is a need and desire for bike racks in the area. I know that there are some in the plans, some in the works, but there's a heavy emphasis from multiple people that are excited to bike to Old Town.

They just wanna have a place to put their bike. So I wanna make sure that we're keeping that at the forefront of our minds when we're doing that. But this is gonna be a big undertaking for the city, and I think it's gonna look a lot better once we're on the other end of it. It's gonna be a little ugly in the meantime, unfortunately. But like I said, I think it it'll look great when we're on the other side. So with that, the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, 02/10/2026, and I will adjourn at 06:23.